<!-- PLEASE DON'T CHANGE THE FOLLOWING LINE, AS IT BREAKS TWINKLE'S CFDS MODULE -->
<!-- PLEASE DON'T CHANGE THE FOLLOWING LINE, AS IT BREAKS TWINKLE'S CFDS MODULE -->
<!-- PLACE NEW NOMINATIONS AT THE TOP OF THIS LIST, BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- PLACE NEW NOMINATIONS AT THE TOP OF THIS LIST, BELOW THIS LINE -->
* [[:Category:Trudeau political family]] to [[:Category:Trudeau family]] – C2B: dab isn't needed here. [[User:Omnis Scientia|Omnis Scientia]] ([[User talk:Omnis Scientia|talk]]) 14:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
* [[:Category:Longitudinal study]] to [[:Category:Longitudinal studies]] – C2C: I think that this category needs to be renamed to match the sibling category Cohort studies [[User:Smasongarrison|Mason]] ([[User talk:Smasongarrison|talk]]) 14:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
* [[:Category:Longitudinal study]] to [[:Category:Longitudinal studies]] – C2C: I think that this category needs to be renamed to match the sibling category Cohort studies [[User:Smasongarrison|Mason]] ([[User talk:Smasongarrison|talk]]) 14:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
* [[:Category:Kings of Araucania]] to [[:Category:Kings of Araucanía and Patagonia]] – C2C: consistency with [[Kingdom of Araucanía and Patagonia]] and [[Araucanía]]. [[User:Lucjim|Lucjim]] ([[User talk:Lucjim|talk]]) 14:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
* [[:Category:Kings of Araucania]] to [[:Category:Kings of Araucanía and Patagonia]] – C2C: consistency with [[Kingdom of Araucanía and Patagonia]] and [[Araucanía]]. [[User:Lucjim|Lucjim]] ([[User talk:Lucjim|talk]]) 14:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Revisionasof14:56,14July2024
"WP:CFDS" redirects here. For the criteria for speedy deletion, see WP:CFSD.
This page has a backlog that requires the attention of willing editors. Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared.
Speedy renamingorspeedy merging of categories may be requested only if they meet a speedy criterion, for example WP:C2D (consistency with main article's name) or WP:C2C (consistency with established category tree names). Please see instructions below.
Please note that a speedy request must state which of the narrowly defined criteria strictly applies. Hence, any other non-speedy criteria, even "common sense" or "obvious", may be suitable points, but only at a full discussion at WP:Categories for discussion.
Request may take 48 hours to process after listing if there are no objections. This delay allows other users to review the request to ensure that it meets the speedy criteria for speedy renaming or merging, and to raise objections to the proposed change.
Categories that qualify for speedy deletion (per Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, e.g., "patent nonsense", "recreation") can be tagged with the regular speedy tags, such as {{db|reason}} with no required delay. Empty categories can be deleted if they remain empty 7 days after tagging with {{db-empty}}. Renaming under C2E may also be processed instantly (at the discretion of an administrator) as it is a variation on G7.
To oppose a speedy request you must record your objection within 48 hours of the nomination. Do this by inserting immediately under the nomination:
Oppose, (the reasons for your objection). ~~~~
You will not be able to do this by editing the page WP:Categories for discussion. Instead, you should edit the section WP:Categories for discussion#Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here or the page WP:Categories for discussion/Speedy#Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here (WP:CFDS). Be aware that in the course of any discussion, the nomination and its discussion may get moved further down the page purely for organizational convenience – you may need to search WP:CFDS to find the new location. Participate in any ongoing discussion, but unless you withdraw your opposition, a knowledgeable person may eventually bring forward the nomination and discussion to become a regular CFD discussion. At that stage you may add further comments, but your initial opposition will still be considered. However, if after seven days there has been no support for the request, and no response from the nominator, the request may be dropped from further consideration as a speedy.
Contested speedy requests become stale, and can be untagged and delisted after 7 days of inactivity. Optionally, if the discussion may be useful for future reference, it may be copied to the category talk page, with a section heading and {{moved discussion from|[[WP:CFDS]]|2=~~~~}}. If the nominator wants to revive the process, this may be requested at WP:Categories for discussion (CfD) in accordance with its instructions.
If you belatedly notice and want to oppose a speedy move that has already been processed, contact one of the admins who process the Speedy page. If your objection seems valid, they may reverse the move, or start a full CFD discussion.
Correction of spelling errors and capitalization fixes. Differences between British and American spelling (e.g. Harbours → Harbors) are not considered errors; however if the convention of the relevant category tree is to use one form over the other then a rename may be appropriate under C2C. If both spellings exist as otherwise-identical category names, they should be merged.
Appropriate conversion of hyphens into en dashesorvice versa (e.g. Category:Canada-Russia relations → Category:Canada–Russia relations).
Correction of obvious grammatical errors, such as a missing conjunction (e.g. Individual frogs toads → Individual frogs and toads). This includes pluralizing a noun in the name of a set category, but not when disagreement might reasonably be anticipated as to whether the category is a topic or set category.
C2B: Consistency with established Wikipedia naming conventions and practices
Bringing a category into line with established naming conventions for that category tree, or into line with the various "x by y", "x of y", or "x in y" categorization conventions specified at Wikipedia:Category names
This should be used only where there is no room for doubt that the category in question is being used for the standard purpose instead of being a potential subcategory.
This criterion should be applied only when there is no ambiguity or doubt over the existence of a category naming convention. Such a convention must be well defined and must be overwhelmingly used within the tree. If this is not the case then the category in question must be brought forward to a full Cfd nomination.
This applies only if the related page's current name (and by extension, the proposed name for the category) is:
unambiguous (so it generally does not apply to proposals to remove a disambiguator from the category name, even when the main article is the primary topic of its name, i.e. it does not contain a disambiguator); and
uncontroversial, either because of longstanding stability at that particular name, or because the page was just moved (i) after a page move discussion resulted in explicit consensus to rename, or (ii) unilaterally to reflect an official renaming which is verified by one or more citations (provided in the nomination). C2D does not apply if the result would be contrary to guidelines at WP:CATNAME, or there is any ongoing discussion about the name of the page or category, or there has been a recent discussion concerning any of the pages that resulted in a no consensus result, or it is controversial in some other way.
This criterion may also be used to rename a set category in the same circumstances, where the set is defined by a renamed topic; e.g. players for a sports team, or places in a district.
Before nominating a category to be renamed per WP:C2D, consider whether it makes more sense to move the article instead of the category.
This criterion applies only if the author of a category requests or agrees to renaming within six months of creating the category.
The criterion does not apply if other editors have populated or changed the category since it was created. "Other editors" includes bots that populated the category, but excludes an editor working with the author on the renaming.
This criterion applies if the category contains only an eponymous article, list, template or media file, provided that the category has not otherwise been emptied shortly before the nomination. The default outcome is an upmerge to the parent categories, where applicable. Nominations should use {{subst:cfm-speedy}} (speedy merger) linking to a suitable parent category, or to another appropriate category (e.g. one that is currently on the article).
Admin instructions
When handling the listings:
Make sure that the listing meets one of the above criteria.
With the exception of C2E, make sure that it was both listed and tagged at least 48 hours previously.
Make sure that there is no opposition to the listing; if there is a discussion, check if the opposing user(s) ended up withdrawing their opposition.
A nomination to mergeorrename, brought forward as a full CfD, may be speedily closed if the closing administrator is satisfied that:
The nomination clearly falls within the scope of one of the criteria listed here, and
No objections have been made within 48 hours of the initial nomination.
If both these conditions are satisfied, the closure will be regarded as having been a result of a speedy nomination. If any objections have been raised then the CfD nomination will remain in place for the usual 7-day discussion period, to be decided in accordance with expressed consensus.
Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here
If the category and desired change do not match one of the criteria mentioned in C2, do not list it here. Instead, list it in the main CFD section.
If you are in any doubt as to whether it qualifies, do not list it here.
Use the following format on a new line at the beginning of the list:
To note that human action is required, e.g. updating a template that populates the category, use:
* NO BOTS [[:Category:old name]]to[[:Category:new name]] – Reason ~~~~
Remember to tag the category page with:{{subst:cfr-speedy|New name}}
A request may be completed if it is more than 48 hours old; that is, if the time stamp shown is earlier than 01:18, 13 July 2024 (UTC). Currently, there are 154 open requests (refresh).
Question: Should these be at "in the Southland Region" or "in Southland Region"? Southland Region has one piece of running text, "A map showing population density in the Southland Region at the 2006 census.", which suggests the former, and three pieces of running text which suggest the latter: "Southland Region and the Southland Regional Council were created in 1989", "Southland Region covers 31,218.27 km2" and "Southland Region had a population of 97,467 at the 2018 New Zealand census". This contrasts somewhat with the usage at the article Canterbury Region (see above), but is the same style (whichever one it is) preferable for both regions? Ham II (talk) 10:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move to full CfD. Indigenous peoples is the pertinent article (note the plural), and the first endnote there says that most style guides recommend a capital "I" in running text. The category's current scope is conceptually shaky, conflating as it does people indigenous to the Americas with ones from the Basque Country; it should probably be reserved for capital-I Indigenous peoples, which means only the first group. The idea of animal breeds originating from people has a problematic ring; is there a better way of expressing this? Ham II (talk) 14:13, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please look at the siblings for other LGBT fooian male occupations. There's no other example of Fooian men occupations. Mason (talk) 12:33, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Omnis Scientia: shouldn't the standard be the other way around? These seem to be about princes and princesses of a country indeed, in contrast to "barons of" categories which you nominated at full CfD. Marcocapelle (talk) 02:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Marcocapelle, I'm not fully sure. The naming is uneven in all these categories. But for princes and princesses, I would say "Fooian princes" is the better form since there are also sovereign princes such as the Prince of Monaco and many more throughout history. Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:41, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The usage of "prince" in Prince of Monaco is quite exceptional, in contrast to the usage of the word "prince" as "male member of the family of the monarch". In both cases they are princes of a country though. What otherwise would they be a prince of. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose all of them. Nationality =/= Country. First, a prince of Bohemia, of Austria, or of Bavaria were all considered to be German princes (during the HRE), while it would be difficult to argue that the prince of Bohemia, or of Austria are princes in Germany. Second, one could have been a princess in Denmark, or of the Netherlands, while being of French or of German nationality. I'm pretty much sure that searching a little bit, many of those cases would arise.SFBB (talk) 23:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Check Category:Empty categories awaiting deletion for out of process deletions. In some cases, these will need to be nominated for discussion and the editor who emptied the category informed that they should follow the WP:CFD process.
