This category is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
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)[reply]
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.
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. </rant>
A fine rant, and I wholly agree. -- Black Falcon(talk) 02:03, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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. --BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (contribs) 03:29, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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. – FayenaticLondon 12:53, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]