"WP:CFDS" redirects here. For the criteria for speedy deletion, seeWP:CFSD. For this subpage transcluded onto Wikipedia:Categories for discussion, seeWP:CFD § SPEEDY.
Speedy renaming orspeedy merging of categories may be requestedonly if they meet aspeedy criterion, for exampleWP:C2D (consistency with main article's name) orWP: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 atWP:Categories for discussion.
Requests 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 forspeedy deletion (perWikipedia: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 underC2E may also be processed instantly (at the discretion of an administrator) as it is a variation onG7.
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 sectionWP:Categories for discussion#Add requests for speedy renaming and merging here or the pageWP: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 searchWP: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 atWP:Categories for discussion (CfD) in accordance withits instructions.
If you belatedly notice and want to oppose a speedy move that has already been processed, contact one of the admins whoprocess the Speedy page. If your objection seems valid, they may reverse the move, or start a full CFD discussion.
Correction of spelling errors andcapitalization fixes. Differences betweenBritish and American spelling (e.g.Harbours → Harbors) arenot 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 underC2C. If both spellings exist as otherwise-identical category names, they should be merged.
Correction of obvious grammatical errors, such as a missingconjunction (e.g.Individual frogs toads → Individual frogs and toads). This includespluralizing a noun in the name of a set category, but not when disagreement might reasonably be anticipated as to whether the category is atopic 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 atWikipedia: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 appliesonly 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 theprimary 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 atWP: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 ano consensus result, or it is controversial in some other way.
This criterion may also be used to rename aset 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 containsonly 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). When listing the nomination atWP:CFDS, you must manually add all the appropriate parent categories as targets if the member page is not already in them.
A nomination tomerge orrename, brought forward as a fullCfD, 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.
If the category does not match one of the criteria mentioned in C2 or you are in doubt as to whether it qualifies,do not list it here. Instead, list it in themain CfD section.
Use the following format on a new line at thebeginning 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 00:16, 25 October 2025 (UTC). Currently, there are443 open requests (refresh).
Administrators andpage movers:Do not use the "Move" tab to move categories listed here!Categoriesare processed following the 48-hour waiting period and are moved by a bot.
Strong oppose. Nominator does not know history. West Berlin was a separate international entity (and not part of West Germany). East Berlin was part of East Germany.SFBB (talk)23:29, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SFBB, do not remove the speedy notice from the category page until the process is completed one way or the other. The article onWest Berlin suggests that it was essentially part of West Germany. Regardless of that, why does that mean the category should not be renamed to remove the word "hosted"? AsCrowsus explained, no other categories use the format "hosted in". It should be "hosted by" or just "in".Mclay1 (talk)00:03, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mclay1 Of course, West Berlin wasn't part of West Germany...and this was ferociously contested by East Germany and other Eastern block countries. Just read thefirst paragraph ofWest Berlin or abouthow close was East Germany to boycott the FIFA World Cup 1974 just to mention a well-known example. Inhabitants of West Berlin were mostly West Germans (because of ius sanguini and West Germany considering every German: be it for the Sarre, East Germany, or West Berlin to be citizens of West Germany), but in was ruled completely separately from West Germany. Mock federeations were cretead to organize international sports events in West Berlin and so to avoid a boycott by Eastern European countries, and so on.
'Hosted by' would be fine for me as a starting point since SFBB is viewing WB as a national entity. There are discussions elsewhere about that concept but this is just about getting the wording right.Crowsus (talk)00:21, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had chosen for "hosted in" because the situation was extremely complicated and changed over time, and it also varied depending on the sport and the level of pressure exerted by Eastern European countries. As an "umbrella" wording, I think "hosted in" is more comprehensive and accurate than "hosted by", but I would not oppose homogenization. Anyways, this is not a discussion for speedy.SFBB (talk)18:14, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose — As was the case with the recently-moved Skagway categories, the main article clumsily conflates separate topics (a borough and a once-incorporated city turned CDP resulting from the borough's incorporation) which are and would be presented as separate articles everywhere else on the encyclopedia. Yakutat would refer to the community, which is different from the borough (borough,CDP). The lack of willingness to fix this is hardly a justification for only making the situation worse by confusing the difference across namespaces. The nominator's efforts to clean up this category tree has already resulted in a lot of arbitrary categorization as it relates to their perceived definition of various communities. RadioKAOS/ Talk to me, Billy/ Transmissions03:59, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Next Step Thanks for the feedback. Normally, when a speedy is opposed, I moved it to a full CFD discussion but here it sounds like the root concern is at the article level. I just want the category to match the main article, but have no opinion on whether the latter should be renamed or split.
So regardless of what this category name settles on, please include category redirects for all of these changes. The templates for Businesswomen by century are somewhat resiliant, but it would save me a ton of time modifying the template if those redirects remained.SMasonGarrison22:03, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
CheckCategory: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 theWP:CFD process.
