Category talk:All Websites articles

Speedy renaming opposed, March 2019

 * Category:All Websites articles to Category:All WikiProject Websites pages – C2C, consistent with parent cat Category:WikiProject Websites and because it contains cats as well as articles. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:11, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Category:Websites articles needing attention‎ to Category:WikiProject Websites articles needing attention‎
 * Category:Websites articles needing images‎ to Category:WikiProject Websites articles needing images‎
 * Category:Websites articles by importance‎ to Category:WikiProject Websites articles by importance‎
 * Category:Websites articles without infoboxes‎ to Category:WikiProject Websites articles without infoboxes‎
 * Category:Websites articles by quality‎ to Category:WikiProject Websites articles by quality‎
 * Category:Websites articles by quality and importance‎ to Category:WikiProject Websites articles by quality and importance‎
 * Does Category:All Websites articles contain cats as well as articles? Here's its category tree:
 * I agree with inserting "WikiProject", but "articles" appears correct. – Fayenatic  L ondon 16:32, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I was basing it on the parent in its category tree, not its children. UnitedStatesian (talk) 17:22, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Actually it contains category talk pages, as they are added through a project banner. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:20, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Most categories below the main WikiProject Foo articles category do not use "WikiProject" (see e.g. subcats of Category:Wikipedia 1.0 assessments, Category:Articles needing attention, Category:Wikipedia articles with an infobox request, etc.). WikiProject assessment categories also typically use "articles" instead of "pages", even when the category contains non-article pages (e.g. Category:Category-Class France articles). -- Black Falcon (talk) 03:29, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Both of which are problems to fix, not emulate and "enforce". So, support, and do more similar renames. Agree it is not a speedy.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  12:49, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Problems. These will soon be removed as stale: the opposes are well-founded, so this will clearly not proceed as a speedy.  Feel free to make the proposal at a full CFD discussion.
 * In theory I agree wholeheartedly with @SMcCandlish that the current convention is wrong, and that all Wikiproject assessment categories should be renamed to CategoryWikiProject Foobar articles by quality, Category:C-Class WikiProject Foobar articles, etc etc. In theory.
 * However, in practice, this would be an absolute nightmare to achieve, because it could not just be done by the existing CFD bots.
 * Every WikiProject banner template would need to be modified
 * Every Category header would need to be modified to reflect the new naming convention. Those headers use a variety of templates, some generic and some custom, and some just use manual links.
 * That is a big job for each and every WikiProject. And there, at a guess ~ 2,000 WikiProjects, some with up to 50 assessment categories.  If we assume an average of 20 assessment cats per project, then that's somewhere 40,000 categories which will need attention.
 * Putting that lot through CFD would break CFD. The small number of admins who process WP:CFDW couldn't possibly take that on.  It needs a separate process, with custom bots on the job.
 * So I want to give notice that I will oppose this vigorously if it appears at CFD. It needs to be decided at an RFC, and implemented in a structured way by dedicated bots.
 * (Also pinging @ Armbrust, @Black Falcon, @Fayenatic,UnitedStatesian). -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:32, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * A fine rant, and I wholly agree. -- Black Falcon (talk) 02:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I only nominated these seven (and will only take these seven to full CFD, if I get to it) because "websites" is ambiguous, in the we have Category:Websites that is an article category, not a talkpage category used by a WikiProject, so this is one where I think the addition of "WikiProject" is more important. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:59, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * @UnitedStatesian, my rant above was about SMcCandlish's idea of changing the naming convention.
 * I'd be happy to support renaming these as an exception, for the reasons you set out. But it's not speediable, so does need a full CFD.  You can open a full CFD whenever you like. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 03:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's viable, and perhaps useful, to rename this particular set. I also agree that we do not want or need to implement this across all WikiProject assessment categories. I have renamed such categories for a couple of WikiProjects or task forces in the past, and it requires a surprising amount of work to category pages and templates. – Fayenatic  L ondon 12:53, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
 * How is "websites" more ambiguous than any other topic (e.g. we have Category:France articles by quailty in spite of Category:France being an article category)? -- Black Falcon (talk) 02:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
 * How is "websites" more ambiguous than any other topic (e.g. we have Category:France articles by quailty in spite of Category:France being an article category)? -- Black Falcon (talk) 02:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)