Template talk:Category redirect

This template was considered for deletion on 24 December 2023. The result of the discussion was "modify".

Skip to table of contents

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Categories This template is within the scope of WikiProject Categories, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of categories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Redirect This page is within the scope of WikiProject Redirect, a collaborative effort to improve the standard of redirects and their categorization on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Note: This banner should be placed on the talk pages of project, template and category pages that exist and operate to maintain redirects. This banner is not designed to be placed on the talk pages of most redirects and almost never on the talk pages of mainspace redirects. For more information see the template documentation.

Template:Category redirect is permanently protected from editing because it is a heavily used or highly visible template. Substantial changes should first be proposed and discussed here on this page. If the proposal is uncontroversial or has been discussed and is supported by consensus, editors may use {{edit template-protected}} to notify an administrator or template editor to make the requested edit. Usually, any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes or categories. Any contributor may edit the template's sandbox. Functionality of the template can be checked using test cases.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be auto-archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 5.

Category:Wikipedia soft redirected categories which are double redirects

Does this category need creating? It is populated by this template — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:06, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(1) why such a short title? Surely we could come up with a longer, more convoluted and pedantic title! (2) if any double-redirected categories exist, they should be corrected promptly by RussBot, so this category should almost never be needed. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 11:31, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks quite succinct to me :) Which word could you take out? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you asked ... [[:Category:Wikipedia soft Double-redirected categories which are double redirects]]. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My thought process with adding the double-redirect checking to this template was that it mimics Category:Wikipedia non-empty soft redirected categories, which is also fixed by RussBot. I seem to have forgotten to actually create the template;  Self-trout for that. I think creating Category:Double-redirected categories and updating the template's call is a good way forward. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:43, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While we're at it, looking at Wikipedia category cleanup, we should probably also rename:

1. Wikipedia categories needing cleanup → Categories needing cleanup
   • I see that dated subcats are maintained by AnomieBOT, so probably not worth the upstream & downstream bother
2. Wikipedia non-empty soft redirected categories → Non-empty soft redirected categories
   • to match Non-empty disambiguation categories

~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  19:18, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Double-redirected categories is now blue and Category:Wikipedia non-empty soft redirected categories is now at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2024 September 15#Category:Wikipedia non-empty soft redirected categories. Best, HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 03:33, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found some in that category last night and fixed them manually, beating the bots because of ambiguity. R'n'B were you aware that RussBot has competition on this task from JJMC89 bot? see [1] – Fayenatic London 09:19, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not a competition! :-) —R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:53, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template causing self-link

The current version of this template usually causes a category page to link to itself. I preferred the previous situation when it did not do this, as extra effort is now required to review backlinks after category moves, e.g. Special:WhatLinksHere/:Category:Polish_LGBT_actors.

In contrast to the above example, Special:WhatLinksHere/:Category:Polish_LGBT_politicians and Special:WhatLinksHere/:Category:Violence_against_LGBT_people_in_the_United_Kingdom do NOT include a self-link, and I have no idea why. These occasional omissions result in a risk that an editor scanning backlinks will overlook one that needs updating, if there happens to be one category page in the list and it's NOT the category being checked. – Fayenatic London 15:00, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2024_September_11#LGBT_nominations_which_were_opposed_at_CFDS has a long list of "LGBT" categories that were renamed and redirected to "LGBTQ". Checking "what links here", the vast majority do link to themselves.

In this talk page's history I noted a few more exceptions that did not, which had no distinguishing features.

Then I tried doing null edits on the ones that DID self-link, and the self-link then disappears!

@JJMC89: would it be possible, please, after your bot creates a redirect at the old category page, for it to perform a null edit in order to purge the self-link caused by the initial save of this template? That would simplify the review process. – Fayenatic London 13:37, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Null edits shouldn't change anything at the time the redirect is created since it is already doing actual edits (e.g., Special:Diff/1247381908). — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:02, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basic parser functions now resolvable

@HouseBlaster: fyi I saw Proposed deletion as of today in Wikipedia soft redirected categories which are not resolved correctly, so I made {{Resolve category redirect}} able to resolve {{#time:j F Y}}, etc. Now {{Category redirect}} just needs to recognize it as a successful follow.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  12:18, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Resolved on its own apparently...   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  12:46, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Tom.Reding!! HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 17:24, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Magic word to remove from Special:UnconnectedPages

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add __EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to the code. According to wikidata:Wikidata:Notability/Exclusion criteria, these categories should not be added to Wikidata, so there is no point in tracking them there. Solidest (talk) 00:32, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Solidest:  Done. If an enwiki category redirect is being used as a real category on another Wikimedia project, should the enwiki category redirect be removed from the Wikidata item? HouseBlaster (talk • he/they) 00:46, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. If enwiki is the only sitelink, then yes — Qitem should either be merged with the target of the redirect (if the concepts are identical enough), or nominated for deletion (if merging isn't feasible). If the sitelink-redirect is not the only one, then technically and according to the policy, it should also be removed. But in practice, this is not enforced. Personally, I don't think they cause any harm — instead, they're often useful. I'm considering starting a discussion to allow them to be used as sitelinks in category items, while still keeping them ineligible for standalone notability as the only sitelink. But for that, it's probably necessary to first request a magic word for redirects on Phabricator, so that bots and gadgets on Wikidata can more easily recognize them. Solidest (talk) 00:58, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template-protected edit request on 13 August 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "Note: This category should be empty." to "Note: This category should be empty and WP:C1 does not apply." BodhiHarp (talk) 19:56, 13 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: Are people confused by the lack of this text? Please link to a discussion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:38, 14 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Template:Category Redirect" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:Category Redirect has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 § Template:Category Redirect until a consensus is reached. Estopedist1 (talk) 11:55, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Template:Cat red" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:Cat red has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 § Template:Cat red until a consensus is reached. Estopedist1 (talk) 11:56, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Template:Category move" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Template:Category move has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 20 § Template:Category move until a consensus is reached. Estopedist1 (talk) 11:57, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]