Category talk:Residential condominiums in Miami

Why was this category created by a BOT?

This is what the history says:

(cur | prev) 07:57, 22 November 2011‎ Cydebot (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (124 bytes) (+124)‎ . . (Robot: Moved from Category:Condominiums in Miami, Florida. Authors: The Bushranger, Hmains, Xnatedawgx, Cydebot)

So, It looks like back in 2011 a group of editors decided that all condominiums in Miami are residential, and that there is no need to have a method to group other types of condos on Wikipedia. I am only speculating because there is no link to this hypothetical discussion.All we know is that user:The Bushranger, user:Hmains, and user:Xnatedawgx edited the original category. Comments? Ottawahitech (talk) 13:21, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

@The Bushranger, Hmains, and Xnatedawgx: Since all of you are wp:categorians I wonder why you have not responded. Why was this category moved from Category:Condominiums in Miami, Florida by a Robot? How can I find out? Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 14:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)please ping me

• I only have an idea why a bot was used. This is typically a result of a discussion on the Categories for Discussion forum. The closing administrator may use a bot to make the changes decided upon. Nothing stopping one from creating other category branches if warranted, documented and part of a viable tree: enough articles, enough parent and child categories and so on. Hmains (talk) 03:34, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@Hmains: Thanks for responding. I followed the red-link from Category:Condominiums in Miami, Florida and discovered the following:

07:58, 22 November 2011 Cydebot deleted page Category:Condominiums in Miami, Florida (Robot - Speedily moving category Condominiums in Miami, Florida to Category:Residential condominiums in Miami, Florida per CFDS.)

I assume that wp:CFDS does not involve any discussion since it is a speedy (?). Does this mean that an admin decided to delete this category without involving the community in this discussion? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:54, 6 September 2016 (UTC)please ping me

@Ottawahitech: Speedy CFD renamings happen after being listed at WP:CFDS, unless anyone objects within 2 days. (Often they are left there longer before they are processed.) To find the nomination for recent renamings (in which the category page gets moved), check the date and time that the category page was tagged for renaming. Then check the page history of CFDS and look at a version shortly after that time, to see the rationale given for the renaming.

For older moves it is slightly more complicated, as the old category page was deleted rather than moved. The timing can vary but if you look at a version of CFDS a day before the move was processed, you will probably find the nomination. – Fayenatic London 14:54, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london: Thanks for responding.Let me try and push my luck with more questions: Shouldn’t the larger wikipedia community be more involved in CFDS discussions? You say the proposed deletions/ renaming / etc. are “listed”, but is there a notice posted on the category in question itself? Is notice provided to the category creator (as is the custom in wp:article space)? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2016 (UTC)please ping me

@Ottawahitech:Yes, the category page must be tagged. CFDS criteria are narrow, and are narrowly interpreted, so CFDS is only used for "technical" nominations which the nominator probably thinks would not be of interest. As for notifying the category creator, it is good practice but optional. Some editors, even CFD regulars (see Johnpacklambert's page for a recent example), bristle at being asked to do so. I sometimes do it if I think the page creator might (i) mind, or (ii) learn from it. – Fayenatic London 16:22, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london: Thank you for being so generous with your time here. I do not comprehend how a move from Category:Condominiums in Miami to Category :Residential condominiums in Miami can be classified as a “technical move”. (for those following this discussion who are not familiar with the concept of condominiums please see this: Talk:Condominium/Archive 1#Terrible Ottawahitech (talk) 14:11, 14 September 2016 (UTC)please ping me

@Ottawahitech: Well, here's the nomination, added by The Bushranger. If any of the member pages are non-residential, then I suggest that the old category could and should be re-created as a parent category of the residential one. IMHO it does make sense to have categories for residential condos, as sub-cats of "residential buildings". – Fayenatic London 22:07, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

@Fayenatic london: Is there a definition anywhere of "technical" nominations. I may be wrong but it appears that those who are tasked with doing these types of speedies are abusing their power(?). For those interested in this discusion here is another example of a wp:CFDS: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 June 17, where a category which was speedily renamed/deleted in 2011 required another recent discussion which resulted in renaming it back to the original name. Ottawahitech (talk) 19:47, 17 September 2016 (UTC)please ping me

@Ottawahitech: As for "definition": the speedy-renaming criteria for categories are part of the general speedy deletion criteria page at WP:CSD, and the relevant part is transcluded for reference at CFDS. "Technical" was my own word, which I introduced here in an attempt to explain why there are speedy criteria at all; the point is to avoid clogging up CFD discussion pages with relatively minor cases. Nobody is tasked with doing speedies; anyone may make a speedy nomination. If nobody opposes it then after two days any admin may implement it, usually by listing it for bot processing. You can see from the history of WP:CFDW and the negative-number edits at WP:CFDS which admins help out in practice; they are generally admins who are well-experienced in CFD casework, so should spot any nominations which ought to be challenged. Sometimes a nomination is justified by one of the criteria, but may go against other criteria, like the case you mentioned; the admin might not notice this, or may go ahead and implement it anyway if s/he concludes that it is desirable to give precedence to that criterion in that case. – Fayenatic London 13:29, 18 September 2016 (UTC)