User:BrownHairedGirl/sandbox4

Request for comment on speedy renaming of sub-categories after CFD

{{rfc|policy}} <-- implement when it goes live

When a category is renamed or merged at WP:Categories for discussion (WP:CFD), should that be grounds for speedily renaming its subcategories at WP:Categories for discussion (WP:CFD/S)?

The current guidelines do not address this issue. If there is a consensus to use CFD/S as a followup in this way, then it should be documented in the instructions at CFD/S. Otherwise the practice should be explicitly deprecated in the CFD/S instructions.

Background

When a category is nominated for renaming or merging, then per WP:CFD#HOWTO it must first be

1. Listed at the CFD nomination
2. Tagged with {{subst:cfr|new name}} (renaming) or {{subst:cfm|merge target}} (for merging), and then listed in the CFD nomination.

This can be done in one step using WP:TWINKLE, which also notifies the category's creator.

Unless both requirements are met, a category is regarded as not having been validly nominated. In that case, the discussion may be relisted after the omissions are remedied, or closed as "no action".

Nominating multiple categories

In some cases, renaming a parent category will make sense only if its subcategories (or siblings) are renamed, to ensure consistency. If so, then normal practice is to also list the subcategories. That ensures that the category names remain consistent.

When there are few subcategories, it is not terribly hard to tag and list them all at CFD. WP:CFD#HOWTO explains the process, which must be done manually, since TWINKLE does not handle multiple categories. There is a bit of a learning curve, but the process is similar to nominating multiples article in one deletion discussion, per WP:MULTIAFD.

Problem with multiple categories

When there is a large list of subcategories, the process of listing and tagging all the categories can be daunting.

A technically proficient editor will find it easy enough using to use WP:AWB to generate the list of categories, then a text editor with regular expressions (regex) to generate the list of changes, and finally AWB again to tag the categories. With practice, even sets of hundreds of categories can be listed and tagged in a few minutes. [ Examples here ]

A good example is Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_1#Churches/Church_buildings. Because this renaming was contentious, it was necessary to tag and list every category that would be renamed.

However, most editors lack access to AWB, and even fewer editors are proficient in using both AWB and a text editor with regular expressions. For other editors — probably the overwhelming majority — the job is tedious and slow. The few minutes with AWB+regex can easily become hours without those tools.

A workaround

To sidestep this problem, some admins have accepted nominations which list a parent category, and note in the nomination that all subcategories are included. This workaround has been used in several cases in recent years. [Examples here].

For example, following two full CFD discussions on renaming "Visitor attractions" to "Tourist attractions" at 2015 Aug 21 and 2015 Aug 30, many lower-level categories have been accepted in batches for speedy processing (e.g. [1]).

Another example is 2016 Sept 14 where 17 categories for "São Paulo (city)" were tagged, and this was taken as sufficient to process another 43 speedily.[2]

In such cases, if the CFD discussion is closed in with a result of "merge" or "rename", some admins suggest that the sub-categories are then nominated at CFD/S under the WP:C2C criterion ("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").

Tagging the higher-level categories alone may not draw sufficient attention to establish consensus. In the above examples, the nominators therefore drew attention to the actual contents within the hierarchy by tagging and listing a reasonable selection of well-populated subcategories.

However, this workaround has not been agreed in any formal proposal, and remains undocumented. Diverging views on this use of C2C came to a head in a recent case in which this use of CFD/S was challenged, and after a bit of a drama, both admins involved agreed this RFC to resolve the issue.

Arguments for and against

Arguments against using speedy for sub-categories

BHG to insert something here