User talk:Cyde: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
:Yes, indeed, and CFD#7 says such renamings must conform to MOS:DASH—did you see [[MOS:ENDASH]]#'''En dashes in page names'''? The reason behind this is that category names containing a hyphen can always be typed easily on any device, but this is not true of category names with an endash which cannot be typed as easily or even at all on some devices. It would therefore be helpful, especially for those readers whose devices are not endash-friendly, to have the old category name [[:Category:Andorra-France border crossings]] as a redirect which is easier to type. [[Special:Contributions/194.158.79.70|194.158.79.70]] ([[User talk:194.158.79.70|talk]]) 23:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC) |
:Yes, indeed, and CFD#7 says such renamings must conform to MOS:DASH—did you see [[MOS:ENDASH]]#'''En dashes in page names'''? The reason behind this is that category names containing a hyphen can always be typed easily on any device, but this is not true of category names with an endash which cannot be typed as easily or even at all on some devices. It would therefore be helpful, especially for those readers whose devices are not endash-friendly, to have the old category name [[:Category:Andorra-France border crossings]] as a redirect which is easier to type. [[Special:Contributions/194.158.79.70|194.158.79.70]] ([[User talk:194.158.79.70|talk]]) 23:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
::And did you see the reasoning on the CFD page, which states that categories don't conform to the same redirect guidelines as articles? Readers type in article names; they don't type in category names. --[[User:Cyde|<font color="#ff66ff">'''Cyde Weys'''</font>]] 23:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC) |
::And did you see the reasoning on the CFD page, which states that categories don't conform to the same redirect guidelines as articles? Readers type in article names; they don't type in category names. --[[User:Cyde|<font color="#ff66ff">'''Cyde Weys'''</font>]] 23:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
:Despite the differences, I don't see a real problem in following speedy CFD [[CFD#Speedy_criteria|criterion 7]] and [[MOS:ENDASH]], and making a cheap redirect from the old category name that can be easily typed by everybody; based on my own experience and that of others, readers certainly do type in category names. |
:Despite the differences, I don't see a real problem in following speedy CFD [[CFD#Speedy_criteria|criterion 7]] and [[MOS:ENDASH]], and making a cheap redirect from the old category name that can be easily typed by everybody; based on my own experience and that of others, readers certainly do type in category names—that's partly why I'd like it undeleted. |
||
:Also, for copyright compliance, what happened to the non-empty history of the category? It hasn't been attributed at all in the new category, either in an edit summary or elsewhere; the [[WP:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License|CC-BY-SA 3.0]] and GFDL require the new category to have proper attribution. If you won't undelete the old category name, could you at least cite the history, e.g. on the talk page of the new one or via the edit summary of a null edit, please? [[Special:Contributions/194.158.79.70|194.158.79.70]] ([[User talk:194.158.79.70|talk]]) 01:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC) |
:Also, for copyright compliance, what happened to the non-empty history of the category? It hasn't been attributed at all in the new category, either in an edit summary or elsewhere; the [[WP:Text_of_Creative_Commons_Attribution-ShareAlike_3.0_Unported_License|CC-BY-SA 3.0]] and GFDL require the new category to have proper attribution. If it were undeleted and made into a redirect, the history would be available in original form without further work. If you really won't undelete the old category name, could you at least cite the history, e.g. on the talk page of the new one or via the edit summary of a null edit, please? [[Special:Contributions/194.158.79.70|194.158.79.70]] ([[User talk:194.158.79.70|talk]]) 01:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 01:15, 6 October 2009
Cyde's talk page Leave a new message
Archives
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
10
11
12
Gibraltar Spain border crossings
Is there any point in a category for this as there is only one of them. --Gibnews (talk) 18:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Probably not? Be bold and get rid of it. --Cyde Weys 19:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
CFD cited by Cydebot not found?
Where was the CFD cited by this edit? I can't find any CFD related to this particular change or to any more general discussions about this sort of change. - 194.158.79.70 (talk) 19:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
That was a speedy CFD, so there was no discussion per se. It looks like the only thing that was changed was the dash, I guess to bring it more in line with how other categories are named? It's an extremely minor issue. --Cyde Weys 17:41, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- I've looked into this, and I am really very sorry to say it appears you / CydeBot have not followed the speedy CFD process correctly and the current results are wrong:
- But from speedy CFD#7, and the settled consensus it cites, you should have redirected the old category, instead of deleting it.
- Could you undelete and redirect the old category, please? Thank you. 194.158.79.70 (talk) 15:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Did you see Wikipedia:CFD#Redirecting categories? This category merits neither of the criteria for having a category redirect, so I think I'll leave it deleted. --Cyde Weys 19:29, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, indeed, and CFD#7 says such renamings must conform to MOS:DASH—did you see MOS:ENDASH#En dashes in page names? The reason behind this is that category names containing a hyphen can always be typed easily on any device, but this is not true of category names with an endash which cannot be typed as easily or even at all on some devices. It would therefore be helpful, especially for those readers whose devices are not endash-friendly, to have the old category name Category:Andorra-France border crossings as a redirect which is easier to type. 194.158.79.70 (talk) 23:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- And did you see the reasoning on the CFD page, which states that categories don't conform to the same redirect guidelines as articles? Readers type in article names; they don't type in category names. --Cyde Weys 23:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- Despite the differences, I don't see a real problem in following speedy CFD criterion 7 and MOS:ENDASH, and making a cheap redirect from the old category name that can be easily typed by everybody; based on my own experience and that of others, readers certainly do type in category names—that's partly why I'd like it undeleted.
- Also, for copyright compliance, what happened to the non-empty history of the category? It hasn't been attributed at all in the new category, either in an edit summary or elsewhere; the CC-BY-SA 3.0 and GFDL require the new category to have proper attribution. If it were undeleted and made into a redirect, the history would be available in original form without further work. If you really won't undelete the old category name, could you at least cite the history, e.g. on the talk page of the new one or via the edit summary of a null edit, please? 194.158.79.70 (talk) 01:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)