This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archives |
---|
As user categories are used slightly differently than general categories, user cats should have their own criteria for speedy deletion. However, we should not attempt to overload the CSD criteria with things similar to what can be found at Wikipedia:Overcategorization.
The following is the proposed text for addition to CSD:
For any user categories that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:User categories for discussion.
Looks pretty good. I might add that user categories populated solely by userbox templates should be treated as empty, and be speedyable (regardless of if the template was deleted) after 4 days, and possibly add in a speedy rename criteria such as "Uncontroversial renames to conform with currently established naming conventions" - That would allow alma mater cats and other such obvious renames to be speedied. Also might want to change #4 to say divisive or inflammatory. I can just see someone arguing that the category they made was only 1 of the two, so it wouldn't be speedyable. VegaDark 09:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I just noticed: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Category:Wikipedians_born_between_1995_and_1999. Perhaps I should add something about this in the speedy criteria? - jc37 10:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
After reading the discussion above (again), I think we should fall back a bit and re-group. Though we have a speedy section on the UCFD page, it really doesn't get used much, because (though we've discussed it several times in the past), no one is really sure what should be listed there.
I've struck out U4, since it's the one that seems to evoke the most concerns. It can always be part of some future discussion.
The following 2 are obvious:
In addition to these, there have been a few discussions that have had consistant results: Sporting group fans; alma mater cats; languages to default to their iso code; -N (native) used on any cats except spoken languages should be deleted; all zero level cats except english should be deleted.
I'll see about writing up "something" of a speedy listing criteria. - jc37 06:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok, after spending some time at CSD, The only real "additions/differences" are:
Thinking about making this a subpage of this page, and adding the category CSD as well, and then providing a link from the main page. - jc37 07:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that this page be moved.
I think the reasons are obvious? : ) - jc37 17:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Similar to Pomte's comments above (and being a little snarky), won't that seem unwise when the only categories left are ones such as Category:User de and Category:User en? Ben Hocking ( talk| contribs) 14:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that the UCFD archives are ordered reverse chronologically. Is there any particular reason for that? I honestly have no strong preference one way or the other, but I found it to be a bit curious. – Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:Categories_for_discussion#Merge_UCFD_here.2C_redux_redux.-- Aervanath ( talk) 17:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
This page has now been merged with the main CFD page, and is no longer active.-- Aervanath ( talk) 05:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archives |
---|
As user categories are used slightly differently than general categories, user cats should have their own criteria for speedy deletion. However, we should not attempt to overload the CSD criteria with things similar to what can be found at Wikipedia:Overcategorization.
The following is the proposed text for addition to CSD:
For any user categories that are not speedy deletion candidates, use Wikipedia:User categories for discussion.
Looks pretty good. I might add that user categories populated solely by userbox templates should be treated as empty, and be speedyable (regardless of if the template was deleted) after 4 days, and possibly add in a speedy rename criteria such as "Uncontroversial renames to conform with currently established naming conventions" - That would allow alma mater cats and other such obvious renames to be speedied. Also might want to change #4 to say divisive or inflammatory. I can just see someone arguing that the category they made was only 1 of the two, so it wouldn't be speedyable. VegaDark 09:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
I just noticed: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Category:Wikipedians_born_between_1995_and_1999. Perhaps I should add something about this in the speedy criteria? - jc37 10:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
After reading the discussion above (again), I think we should fall back a bit and re-group. Though we have a speedy section on the UCFD page, it really doesn't get used much, because (though we've discussed it several times in the past), no one is really sure what should be listed there.
I've struck out U4, since it's the one that seems to evoke the most concerns. It can always be part of some future discussion.
The following 2 are obvious:
In addition to these, there have been a few discussions that have had consistant results: Sporting group fans; alma mater cats; languages to default to their iso code; -N (native) used on any cats except spoken languages should be deleted; all zero level cats except english should be deleted.
I'll see about writing up "something" of a speedy listing criteria. - jc37 06:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Ok, after spending some time at CSD, The only real "additions/differences" are:
Thinking about making this a subpage of this page, and adding the category CSD as well, and then providing a link from the main page. - jc37 07:44, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that this page be moved.
I think the reasons are obvious? : ) - jc37 17:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Similar to Pomte's comments above (and being a little snarky), won't that seem unwise when the only categories left are ones such as Category:User de and Category:User en? Ben Hocking ( talk| contribs) 14:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I noticed that the UCFD archives are ordered reverse chronologically. Is there any particular reason for that? I honestly have no strong preference one way or the other, but I found it to be a bit curious. – Black Falcon ( Talk) 06:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
See Wikipedia_talk:Categories_for_discussion#Merge_UCFD_here.2C_redux_redux.-- Aervanath ( talk) 17:42, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
This page has now been merged with the main CFD page, and is no longer active.-- Aervanath ( talk) 05:09, 5 April 2009 (UTC)