Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/09
Also nominating:
- Category:1822 in Northern Ireland
- Category:1823 in Northern Ireland
- Category:1838 in Northern Ireland
- Category:1907 in Northern Ireland
- Category:1909 in Northern Ireland
- Category:1912 in Northern Ireland
- Category:1914 in Northern Ireland
- Category:1915 in Northern Ireland
- Category:1920 in Northern Ireland
Northern Ireland wasn't created until 1922, prior to this it was part of the country of Ireland. Northern Ireland categories prior to 1922 are misleading, ahistorical and inappropriate. The contents, largely the "Category:XXXX in Belfast", need moving to the appropriate "Category:XXXX in Ireland", unless it's already included there. --Sionk (talk) 19:58, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
@Sionk: Closed (no objections) Josh (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- I notice that there is a template ({{Belfastyear}}) that was simply categorizing all "Year in Belfast" categories under "Year in Northern Ireland". I have fixed it to send pre-1922 categories simply to "Year in Ireland". Josh (talk) 19:03, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- I have kept the nominated categories as redirects for now, mainly so they are not simply inadvertently recreated, but they can be deleted later if deemed unnecessary. Josh (talk) 19:07, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Arbitrary sorting by whim often takes place by users who do not actually know that the hair color is artificial. Can be insulting to living persons so categorized. SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:13, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- "Red hair" is more than enough. Bomb it. --E4024 (talk) 14:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- Any particular reason you went for just the female category and not the male one or Category:Artificial red hair? In any case, if these are kept, there should be no categories in them for individual people (except maybe for categories like Category:Lee Tae-min with red hair), because there's no guarantee that everything in them shows red hair, artificial or not. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:02, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Auntof6: I could see Category:Artificial red hair as being valid. Of course, there should only be contents there that are verified to be artificial coloring, not just ones that 'look' artificial in the image. I suppose one might ask if it is the hair that is artificial or just the red color. Josh (talk) 17:53, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Delete, hair is not female, and it is named in the singular. See also Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/09/Category:Female red hair. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:54, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
 | Category:Female artificial red hair | Merge into | Category:Artificial red hair | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | Category:Male artificial red hair | Merge into | Category:Artificial red hair | |
 | gender and hair color are an unrelated intersection. | |||
 | Josh (talk) 17:53, 12 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
- @SergeWoodzing, E4024, Auntof6, and Jeff G.: Any thoughts on @Joshbaumgartner's proposal? Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes: arbitrary sorting by whim often takes place by users who do not actually know that the hair color is artificial. Can be insulting to living persons so categorized and also impossible to verify in many cases. Red hair OK. "Artificial" not OK. What's so vital about whether or not it's real? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Sbb1413: Sure, that makes sense. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:16, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Do we need this category? We don't have an equivalent female one. The two subcategories are pretty well categorized without this category. If we keep it, I suggest renaming to Category:Men in pornography. Auntof6 (talk) 07:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Conditional on Category:Pornography, Category:Male porn actors and Category:Gay pornography have nothing in common other than happening to involve men to some degree. Overall it just seems like a really awkward category. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:06, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per above Dronebogus (talk) 23:14, 2 July 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with delete opinions. Nobody opposed. Close this please. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 181.43.3.236 (talk) 12:40, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Done: Deleted per above. --Achim55 (talk) 14:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Merge into Category:Hotels in Tatra Mountains. We don't have a "High Tatras" category 129.242.218.51 07:37, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
Closed (no objections) Josh (talk) 19:22, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Uncategorized and broken category redirect. Leonel Небојша Sohns 11:01, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- Delete I have no opinion on the category that it was redirecting to and was deleted, but it is not very likely that people will be accidentally adding a category with a dot in place of a space and will required this redirect to help them out. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 04:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
deleted as empty. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:41, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Rename category to Motorcycle seat. "Saddle" is archaic. Motorcycle seat is the vastly more common term. Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:12, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
- I used saddle because I find this term somewhere (Wikidata or Wikipedia ... I dont'remember). But since English is not my native language, please feel free to change to a more appropriate term. --Civitas13 (talk) 06:23, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support renaming it Category:Motorcycle seats to match the parent category Category:Vehicle seats. Saddles are more associated with pedal bikes and horses. Sionk (talk) 19:44, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
stale discussion. The result was rename Estopedist1 (talk) 18:25, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
created by mistake Epipelagic (talk) 07:50, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- I marked it for speedy deletion. Next time please do not open a discussion, simply ask an admin to delete the wrongly-opened cat. --E4024 (talk) 15:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 15:45, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
Category:Women in the United Kingdom redirects here. That category would be perfectly clear: women who were in in the United Kingdom when the media was taken.
But this category could mean anything: in the United Kingdom, living in the United Kingdom, consider themselves to be from the United Kingdom, born in the United Kingdom, etc.
Example: File:Nude in public.jpg is now in the categories Nude women in the United Kingdom and 21st-century women of the United Kingdom. We do not know where this woman is from, only that she was in the United Kingdom when the photo was taken. I wanted to change the latter category to “21st-century women in the United Kingdom” (which would make the former category redundant), then I found this redirect. Brianjd (talk) 14:13, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- Pinging @Etsidun. Brianjd (talk) 14:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- With natioanility, most people are clearly associated with one country (though this isn't always the case). The "Women of England" category contains English women, for example. But I can't see a rationale for redirecting Category:Women in the United Kingdom to Category:Women of the United Kingdom. There will be some overlap, of course, but in reality surely "Women of the United Kingdom" means "British women", while "Women in the United Kingdom" means women located in the UK when they were pictured. Sionk (talk) 20:00, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
stale discussion. If I see Category:Women by location, then subcategories are predominantly with the proposition "of". Because "of" is semantically wider (and more ambigious) than "in", then I am not sure which one should we prefer--Estopedist1 (talk) 18:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Brianjd, Sionk, and Estopedist1: What should we do with "women of" and "women in" categories? I support both categories with "in" categories under "of" categories. Pinging @Joshbaumgartner since he has worked extensively on people-related categories. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Sbb1413 Using Category:People by country as the high-level index, we should maintain the same structure down through all of the people-country categories as best as possible per the Hierarchic Principle. "Category:People of <country>" is the highest-level people-country format, and cover all people related to a country regardless of that relationship. If only one such category exists for a certain people topic and country, it should use "of". If it makes sense, subs of this can be made such as "in" to specifically cover people physically located within a country, "from" to cover people that were born or originated from that country, and so forth.
- The current Category:Women of the United Kingdom is valid as it is. It is also valid to have Category:Women in the United Kingdom redirect here, until such time as the contents of the "of" category that are specifically of women depicted physically within the UK are diffused to the "in" category (and it then would be its own category, not a redirect, under the "of" category). Josh (talk) 08:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
We can make this a subcat of Category:Wood shavings or simply merge in; why do we need a foreign name for something universal? E4024 (talk) 15:39, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. Could any French user solve this CFD? Eg @Yann, VIGNERON, and Thibaut120094: ? Estopedist1 (talk) 18:38, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
If these girls become older they enter into the "Category:Reading women in art". One of these must be renamed: either "reading" before or after, but in both. E4024 (talk) 03:02, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- I probably created this category because I saw "Category:Females reading in art". --Mjrmtg (talk) 09:43, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- If you are a native speaker please spend some of your volunteer time here to harmonize all those cats with one "correct" style. --E4024 (talk) 13:52, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
stale discussion. The nominated category is logical subcategory of Category:Females reading in art. We need concrete proposals what should be renamed--Estopedist1 (talk) 18:43, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: E4024 (talk · contribs) (unfortunately inactive since 2021) is correct here, in that the Universality Principle would dictate that it should be one format or the other. A more recent CfD at Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/11/Category:People by posture has settled on "<people> <activity>" being the preferred format and this should be applied to people reading categories (in fact I believe it is pretty close to implemented there already). Unless there is something else specific to discuss, this can be closed as resolved. Josh (talk) 21:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
this is a mixture or a general category Gelobt sei Jesus Christus and a by country category Roman Catholic Church in Germany. Images contained might origin from all (former) German speaking countries. So either split this category by country, or do not assign it to a in Germany root category. Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:21, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. @Herzi Pinki: can you say what is approximate translation of "Gelobt sei Jesus Christus". I guess it is not a proper noun Estopedist1 (talk) 19:16, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
As the upper category Category:Unicode/Glyph (naming currently discussed) is supposed to contain Unicode characters from unidentified blocks while "Specials" refers to a specific block (see Category:Unicode FFF0-FFFF Specials), this is an intersection that is by definition empty when understood correctly. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- My opinion: Let’s recategorize the contents of this cat and delete it without redirect when it gets empty. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:52, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, Taivo, that was quick. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:27, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Uncategorized and broken category redirect Leonel Небојша Sohns 16:01, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- Leonel Sohns, Please be more careful... Geo Swan (talk) 16:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- Before it was broken category redirect. I didn't know that you will also create the page 'Category:1928 in the Northwest Territories'. --Leonel Небојша Sohns 16:08, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
- Category:1928 in the Northwest Territories was clearly missing from Category:Northwest Territories in the 1920s, and there were clearly images that were in Category:1928 in NWT that should have belonged in Category:1928 in the Northwest Territories. So, your claim you had no way of knowing I would create the target of the redirect? Do you really think it does not show carelessness, on your part? Cheeses K. Reist, it only took me a minute to create the missing target. Geo Swan (talk) 16:23, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Closing: redirect is no longer broken. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:02, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Please see Category talk:Ecology in art. We have a cat farm, similar cats being added to certain files. I am sure categorization around environment/ecology (and "art") can be made simpler. E4024 (talk) 20:13, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. Enwiki says that en:ecological art and en:environmental art are different concepts Estopedist1 (talk) 19:19, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Unused and empty category. Request of own uploader. Ecummenic (talk) 03:36, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
deleted as empty. -- Túrelio (talk) 06:53, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Should be deleted, not a real thing Elisfkc (talk) 02:58, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 07:19, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Should be deleted, not a real thing Elisfkc (talk) 02:58, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 07:19, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Should be deleted, not a real thing Elisfkc (talk) 02:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 07:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Should be deleted, not a real thing Elisfkc (talk) 02:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- Already empty? Why not ask an admin to delete it, instead of opening a non-discussion... --E4024 (talk) 03:01, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm trying to establish a better precident for this one and the ones around it, because someone keeps trying to make the "Disneyland Montréal Park" and other related pages (other Montreal Disney stuff and other fake locations) on multiple Wikiprojects. Basically, I'm trying to salt these categories. --Elisfkc (talk) 03:22, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 07:18, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Other “nude” categories are subcategories of corresponding “nude or partially nude” categories. This category used to follow this rule, but now it is a redirect to the corresponding “nude or partially nude” category, which makes no sense! Brianjd (talk) 11:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- Pinging @Blackcat. Brianjd (talk) 11:52, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Brianjd: Actually you're right. For me it can be turned around the redirect. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 13:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- I think we'd rather move the files in the correct subcategory instead of deleting it. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 21:30, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Brianjd: Actually you're right. For me it can be turned around the redirect. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 13:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
A dog type nureongi does not exist. See also the recent comment on English wikipedia. Christian Bolz (talk) 08:15, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I also made that comment in German here. --Christian Bolz (talk) 08:17, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. @Christian140: both discussions are still unanswered. Because the topic is suspicious and we have only one suspicious (?) file in this category (File:Dog Meat.jpg) we can upmerge the sole file and delete the empty category Estopedist1 (talk) 19:24, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
If her name is Ülkər Umudova, why do you write it differently here? In Azerbaijan they use the Latin Alphabet as far as I know. From calling your language "Turkish" in the past you came to not only use a new denomination for it and a "somehow special" Latin Alphabet, but now you also write proper names of Azerbaijani people in English media "differently". Why? In Wikidata we have the female given name "Ülker" and I added it to her. Do we also need to make "Ülkər"? And what about "Ulkar", where does her name appear as Ulkar, other than here, and why? E4024 (talk) 13:13, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi. Because in official profile in FIDE - Ulkar Umudova.--Nicat49 (talk) 14:08, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- Not impressed. I am making a general inquiry for the good of Commons. Do people from Azerbaijan have two names in Latin script, one at home and the other at FIDE (or whichever other site)? Why? And why would we not use their original names? --E4024 (talk) 14:16, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
stale discussion. I am not familiar with Azerbaijani transliteration, but maybe user:Mardetanha can help?--Estopedist1 (talk) 19:28, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
redundant category Nathan A RF (talk) 16:27, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
deleted as empty. -- Túrelio (talk) 15:44, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Categories containing images of Quranic verses
These two categories contain images of individual verses of the Qur'an uploaded by a user who has been absent from Commons for at least six years (and, incidentally, from the Urdu Wikipedia for five). While it is clear that the text of the Qur'an is public domain worldwide (as evidenced by its presence on the Arabic Wikisource), it is unclear whether these raster renderings of each verse are also necessarily public domain.
In the case of the latter of these categories, the source given (which has since moved to this URL) does not provide a license for the images, nor for any other textual items, rendered as images or otherwise. (The only licensing information of any sort hinted at anywhere on the website, after a trip to the Wayback Machine to identify a broken link, is a CC-BY-NC license on the MP3s hosted therein.) In the case of the former of these categories, it is not clear whether in fact all 6,236 images subcategorized therein are renderings by said user, and a complaint to this effect was made about five years ago on the uploader's talk page.
If there is in fact a problem with the uploads of these verse images, then the other uploads of this user (which, judging from the user's total upload count, is few in number) may also need to be checked. --Mahir256 (talk) 21:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
- I don't see any additional creativity present in the rendering of the text over and above the text itself, so I don't think there is a copyright problem here. – BMacZero (🗩) 02:55, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
- There is a categorization problem here and around (Urdu verses). 186.174.89.102 17:00, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
Kategorie Oscillator_(Tool) löschen, weil doppelt Ralf Pfeifer (talk) 04:45, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Ich habe die Kategorie "Oscillator (Tool)" angelegt, da ich für 6 Bilder und einen neu erstellten Artikel trotz Suche keine Kategorie gefunden habe. Inzwischen bin ich auf die Kategorie Oscillating_multi-purpose_tools gestoßen, die bereits Bilder enthielt. Alle meine Bilder habe ich inzwischen auch mit dieser Kategorie gekennzeichnet.
Die Kategorie Oscillator_(Tool) ist damit redundant und kann wieder gelöscht werden. Ralf Pfeifer (talk) 04:51, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
If a "Dargah is a shrine built over the grave of a revered religious figure, often a Sufi saint or dervish" why is it a subcat of "Sufi mausoleums"? That means the two are the same thing. Also they have nothing special that separates them from "türbes". I am more than bored and tired trying to cope with cat farms made by either "devote moslems" ? who try to show their identity in each and every page of Commons and/or -probably- people who wish to call everything related to Islam with separate names. Islamic dress, islamic hat, islamic pants, Islamic tea or coffee... :) If this is a türbe/grave why is it also under a certain "ribat" which is defined as "fortress"? Ah? The graves for people considered to be religiously important are called "türbes" (or dargahs as I learn here), if they are the name of one same thing why do we have them both? BTW what about mausoleums? Was Mausoleus a moslem? AFAIK no. Therefore (hence) we have "türbe" and no need to put them under mausoleum. Am I wrong? Please do not complicate everyday more and more the categorization of anything related to Islam. I try to simplify them, as an "ant", I get deleted one cat every week or fortnight, everyday the "bees" add 10 others... Stop it. Please. E4024 (talk) 19:44, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
- Aye, the Tower of Babel strikes again, but it is an inevitable inconvenience when a religion is practised in hundreds of different cultures and languages. en:Ziyarat#Terminology lists a nice overview of the many terms referring to a Muslim's burial site. Türbe seems specific for the Ottoman sphere of influence, so I would not propagate that to other parts of the Islamic world, such as South Asia where dargah is the common word, or maqam in the Arabic world. The categorisation under Ribats is bogus, I've removed that. I think specifying the relevant location in the category description would already help a lot, i.e. a "Dargah is a South Asian shrine built over the grave of a revered religious figure, often a Sufi saint or dervish". Personally, I think it would make life so much easier to rename all of them to [Category:Islamic tombs in <insert place of interest here>]. --HyperGaruda (talk) 06:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Wrongly titled and IMO unnecessary. Could we distance ourselves a bit from female bodies please? Heads, feet, fingers, toes... E4024 (talk) 03:00, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- I do not know about feet and toes - but heads seem to me rather an important category. Especially when a lot of female representations don’t put the head or face in the center. For the sake of equality it is possible to open a parallel category for men instead of deleting this category. what do you think? Chenspec (talk) 06:58, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- This might be okay if each image focused on the head (not bust-length even, just the head), but many of the images currently here do not. See, for example, this, this, and this. If we include every image that contains a girl's head, we'd be including almost every image that has a girl in it. Aside from that, I agree that we should have parallel male categories for this kind of thing. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:12, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- Okay, so I suggest two things - filter the images in the existing category so that only relevant images remain. At the same time open a category similar to men. Sounds good? Chenspec (talk) 19:37, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- That would help. Also, many in Category:Girls heads are also in many other categories. Examples:
- File:Dziewczynka grająca w grę edukacyjną.jpg is in 10 other categories in addition
- File:Flickr - DVIDSHUB - Combined Task Force Lightning focus on women and girls health education (Image 1 of 8).jpg is in 25 other categories in addition
- File:Flickr - DVIDSHUB - Operation First Call.jpg is in 21 other categories in addition
- File:Happy face makes us happy.jpg is in 17 other categories in addition
- Is having so many categories for one image helpful? I guess there is no limit for those who feel these categories are necessary. Krok6kola (talk) 21:16, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- As long as the categories aren't redundant, it's okay. However, that's outside the scope of this discussion. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:36, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Look, I made this - Category:Male heads Chenspec (talk) 06:23, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Chenspec: Okay, but it's usually better not to take action until there's a decision as to whether we want this kind of category at all and, if so, how they should be organized. This discussion has been open only a couple of days, and other people could still comment. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, I got the impression there was an agreement - next time I will wait before taking action. Chenspec (talk) 08:58, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Chenspec: Okay, but it's usually better not to take action until there's a decision as to whether we want this kind of category at all and, if so, how they should be organized. This discussion has been open only a couple of days, and other people could still comment. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:29, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Look, I made this - Category:Male heads Chenspec (talk) 06:23, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- As long as the categories aren't redundant, it's okay. However, that's outside the scope of this discussion. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:36, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- That would help. Also, many in Category:Girls heads are also in many other categories. Examples:
- IMO "portrait" already means "head image"; but many times I am wrong as a non-native speaker. --E4024 (talk) 13:27, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- At the least, that's not how "portrait" is used here. I think the meaning here could be explained as an image whose purpose is to show a person (not an image that just happens to show one). However, Category:Portraits says "A portrait is a painting, photograph, sculpture, or other artistic representation, in which the face and its expression is predominant," although Category:Portraits by view of subject and its subcats have categories for bust length, half length, three-quarter length, and full length. The last two of those don't show the face as predominant. --Auntof6 (talk) 14:06, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- And I became a Commoner with the hope to improve my English... :) --E4024 (talk) 14:37, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- At the least, that's not how "portrait" is used here. I think the meaning here could be explained as an image whose purpose is to show a person (not an image that just happens to show one). However, Category:Portraits says "A portrait is a painting, photograph, sculpture, or other artistic representation, in which the face and its expression is predominant," although Category:Portraits by view of subject and its subcats have categories for bust length, half length, three-quarter length, and full length. The last two of those don't show the face as predominant. --Auntof6 (talk) 14:06, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
- Also have a look at Category:Girls' faces please. No, not for the correct use of apastrophe but for the abundance or redundance of cats about girls, women, females. Leave these people in peace please, no need to examine their bodies so closely. Delete several "female cats" for the sake of Commons. E4024 (talk) 18:29, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
- I agree completely. I was unclear in attempting to make this point above e.g.File:Flickr - DVIDSHUB - Combined Task Force Lightning focus on women and girls health education (Image 1 of 8).jpg This image is about the health education of women and girls. Among the 25 categories it is in: *Category:Females with blue background, *Category:Girls with black hair, *Category:Front views of girls, *Category:Girls' clothing, *Category:Girls heads, *Category:Groups of females looking at viewer, *Category:Two girls, *Category:Female brown eyes, *Category:Girls' hair, *Category:Girls in the foreground, *Category:Girls' faces, *Category:Girls' hands, *Category:Purple clothing, female, *Category:Colorful clothing, female, *Category:Girls with bracelets, *Category:Girls looking at viewer, *Category:Portrait photographs of girls and notably no categories having to do with health or education, Category:Spin Boldak District, Category:Kandahar Province or any other aspect other than cats related to the gender of the girls in this photo. Krok6kola (talk) 19:01, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Arbitrary sorting by whim often takes place by users who do not actually know that the hair color is artificial. Can be insulting to living persons so categorized. SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:13, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- "Red hair" is more than enough. Bomb it. --E4024 (talk) 14:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- Any particular reason you went for just the female category and not the male one or Category:Artificial red hair? In any case, if these are kept, there should be no categories in them for individual people (except maybe for categories like Category:Lee Tae-min with red hair), because there's no guarantee that everything in them shows red hair, artificial or not. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:02, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Auntof6: I could see Category:Artificial red hair as being valid. Of course, there should only be contents there that are verified to be artificial coloring, not just ones that 'look' artificial in the image. I suppose one might ask if it is the hair that is artificial or just the red color. Josh (talk) 17:53, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete, hair is not female, and it is named in the singular. See also Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/09/Category:Female red hair. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:54, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
| | Category:Female artificial red hair | Merge into | Category:Artificial red hair | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | Category:Male artificial red hair | Merge into | Category:Artificial red hair | |
| | gender and hair color are an unrelated intersection. | |||
| | Josh (talk) 17:53, 12 October 2020 (UTC) | |||
- @SergeWoodzing, E4024, Auntof6, and Jeff G.: Any thoughts on @Joshbaumgartner's proposal? Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes: arbitrary sorting by whim often takes place by users who do not actually know that the hair color is artificial. Can be insulting to living persons so categorized and also impossible to verify in many cases. Red hair OK. "Artificial" not OK. What's so vital about whether or not it's real? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:16, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Sbb1413: Sure, that makes sense. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:16, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
All pictures depicts Nina Stiller, all of them have 'Nina Stiller' as author. Probably copyvio of photographers rights. Piastu (talk) 16:41, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- That would be an issue for the files, not the category. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:14, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
- Yes if all the files are deleted then we can delete this but otherwise this topic exists on 2 Wikipedias so its very unlikely we would delete the category as not notable. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, files marked as copyvio, Piastu (talk) 15:14, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 07:20, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Do we need this cat? We also have "Category:Bassists with double basses" and in fact "people" are also musicians. I never saw a taxi driver with a double bass. OTOH, as in many other parts, we have different naming styles like "double bass" and "double-bass" side by side. Singular and plural at the same cat tree is another issue to make disappear... E4024 (talk) 01:49, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- I agree, there is no obvious reason for having multiple categories for people posing with basses. Most other instruments have a "People with instrument" or "People playing instrument", but in this case there is already a large category tree for "bassists with various basses". I can help in moving the files to the correct category. Toresetre (talk) 20:37, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks in advance. --E4024 (talk) 22:29, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Can this be renamed to Category:Fairhaven, Saskatoon? I just removed several files that referred to other places called Fairhaven. This page could be replaced with the contents of Category:Fairhaven (disambiguation). Auntof6 (talk) 04:12, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Support even Wikipedia has a disambiguation at the base name and this isn't a particularly important topic so it could probably just be boldly moved. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:19, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Moved: King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Can this be renamed to Category:Walla Walla (tribe)? I just removed files that were actually for the city in Washington, which is probably the primary meaning anyway. This page could be replaced with the contents of Category:Walla Walla (disambiguation). Auntof6 (talk) 04:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support even Wikipedia has a DAB here and this doesn't seem to be a particularly important topic so could just be boldly moved but move to Category:Walla Walla people per Wikipedia. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:21, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Auntof6 and Crouch, Swale: Support the original proposal of Category:Walla Walla (tribe) as that is what it is and it better fits the '(dab)' category naming scheme of Commons. Enwiki has their own article names for their own reasons. Josh (talk) 19:42, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
- I agree with Joshbaumgartner and Auntof6. – BMacZero (🗩) 23:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Renamed to Category:Walla Walla (tribe), Category:Walla Walla (disambiguation) moved here – BMacZero (🗩) 03:02, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Hair is not female, and the cat is named in the singular. See also Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/09/Category:Female artificial red hair. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:56, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- Yes! You never see female hair when you enter a bathroom, only male hair! :) No, that, of course, is just a joke. I agree with Jeff, we should not make "female hair" etc. If so necessary "man's hair", "women's hair" etc but frankly I see no reason for this kind of "segregation cats" as we are not a marriage catalogue. (Even if we were hair colour should not be a reason of preference. :) --E4024 (talk) 18:02, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support per Jeff G. and E4024 - Both cats should be merged into one. –Davey2010Talk 22:22, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
- Support what? Jeff G.’s nomination doesn’t recommend any particular action (and E4024’s comment seems to be suggesting that all categories for human hair colours should be deleted). --Zundark (talk) 13:21, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Rename to Category:Female humans with red hair, just to be clearer, even if that name is a bit long-winded. (Similarly for Category:Female blue hair, Category:Male red hair, etc.) --Zundark (talk) 13:21, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Zundark: Sorry I was not clear four years ago. I think renaming to Category:Females with red hair is sufficient, as all who edit here are humans. And so on for the males and the other hair colors (and baldness). I am trying to research for a potential article on the red-headed stepchild trope, and these cats could help illustrate it. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
The Chagos Archipelago is functionally the same as the British Indian Ocean Territory; technically it is different, but it only serves to confuse people. Regular images are put into this category when it should be in BIOT. See also for a similar discussion. I proposed that we merge most of this category to Category:Geography of the British Indian Ocean Territory and the rest we parcel out, as that is pretty much what the category is. Zoozaz1 (talk) 02:10, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. @Zoozaz1: good notice! Per enwiki en:British Indian Ocean Territory, I rather support the merging. But we probably need more input here Estopedist1 (talk) 12:29, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Uncategorized and broken category redirect. /Leonel Sohns 17:56, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Leonel Sohns: , right. But no need to open a CfD. Open a speedydel. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:28, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
- Closed with the deletion of the category -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:31, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Been "discussed extensively" (to quote from a log, see also [1]), yet recreated by an IP on 7 August 2020, and is filled with, em..., strange content. Siberian Republic (?) Tatarstan (?), Kaliningrad (?), Caucasus Emirate (?!). Since temporary sysop protection did not prevent dubious recreation, I propose to delete category and prevent its creation indefinitely. Seryo93 (talk) 11:19, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support Not a particularly useful category, considering the only occupation AFAIK right now is in Crimea, and one subcategory of images is not enough to justify this category. Zoozaz1 (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. I am not oppose to delete this 1-member category, but I just implied that the nominated category fits well into Category:Occupied territories by country Estopedist1 (talk) 12:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Keep There are now sufficient members to justify retention.
- Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
- stale discussion. I am not oppose to delete this 1-member category, but I just implied that the nominated category fits well into Category:Occupied territories by country Estopedist1 (talk) 12:40, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Keep If there are territories in the world that are under (or have been under) occupation by Russia, then this is a valid category for those territories. If there are other territories being included here that shouldn't be, that would be a matter of discussion for those specific categories and not an issue for retaining this category. Josh (talk) 20:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Useless category. Solomon203 (talk) 12:16, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
deleted as empty. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:36, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Please delete, I made this duplicate category by accident, oops :) NeoMeesje (talk) 20:50, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
- It's a duplicate of this Category:Black and white photographs of walking people NeoMeesje (talk) 20:52, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Not done: converted to a redirect category. --ƏXPLICIT 07:22, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Not taken by a BH photographer, similar images available on google, check here [2] and [3]. File was first published on 28 January, and was later available on BH with watermark after seven days C1K98V (💬 ✒️ 📂) 09:43, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- File:Photos-Celebs-grace-the-trailer-launch-of-the-film-Haunted-Hills-1.jpg
- File:Photos-Celebs-grace-the-trailer-launch-of-the-film-Haunted-Hills-2.jpg
- File:Photos-Celebs-grace-the-trailer-launch-of-the-film-Haunted-Hills-3-480x360.jpg
- File:Photos-Celebs-grace-the-trailer-launch-of-the-film-Haunted-Hills-4.jpg
- File:Photos-Celebs-grace-the-trailer-launch-of-the-film-Haunted-Hills-5-480x360.jpg
- File:Photos-Celebs-grace-the-trailer-launch-of-the-film-Haunted-Hills-6-480x360.jpg
- This is a discussion for the files not category, if all the files end up being deleted then this can be deleted as empty. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:15, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
- All but 1 of the files have now been deleted. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:45, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: All files are deleted so no need for the category. --MGA73 (talk) 11:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
created by mistake instead of Category:Charles Emmanuel Le Clercq Ecummenic (talk) 21:09, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: author request. --ƏXPLICIT 07:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
,kjhbnjhgbjuyhg 2601:240:8480:AC60:1D3D:F8CD:719B:E923 12:58, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Not done: nonsense request. --Minoraxtalk 06:15, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Actually, there is no need for discussion, I request the deletion of this category. There is already one here Category:BEML Mosbatho (talk) 15:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Marked as {{Badname}}. – BMacZero (🗩) 03:17, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Uncategorized and broken category redirect. /Leonel Sohns 15:35, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
- I've tagged it with {{Empty page}} to get it deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:19, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
deleted as empty. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:52, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Totally wrong. A mess left by a former user. I already opened this discussion on a parallel cat related to this "nonsense" (sorry). The nonsense is so big that it is under Category:soups! We all know very good that it is not good to make "apples and pears" cats. I will empty this and try to arrange everything else around here. No objections please. (I am not asking help, only do not come with obstructions, that is enough. "Snake soups and stews" can be divided easily into two, pork, even more easily; although I do not normally eat either this or that. Once I tried a turtle and I still repent. :) E4024 (talk) 17:53, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
- There is a category (with several sub categories) such as Japan that have been there since 2010. I'd reccomend nominating the categories there first since WP's criteria for categories is generally tighter than here. Per Commons:Rename a category#Subject identification deletion probably makes sense unless these 2 topics have something significant in common, since anything that is a soup or stew can be in both categories. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:50, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, if something may be considered both a soup and a stew it can be present in both cats; that does not justify nor require having a "this and that" cat. That is totally unnecessary. E4024 (talk) 13:18, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
piraeus prefecture no more exists must move to regional unit WIJIDE (talk) 21:05, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
- @WIJIDE: which name do you suggest?--Estopedist1 (talk) 07:43, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
must renamed to Victoria(metro station) isap no more exist WIJIDE (talk) 22:24, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
- I am OK with replacing ISAP with something else, but just (metro station) is not enough: Queen Victoria was popular and there are multiple metro station named after her, including Category:Victoria tube station and w:Victoria metro station (Kolkata). Perhaps (Athens metro station) would be more relevant — NickK (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
stale discussion. I just mention that Category:Victoria (metro station) is missing--Estopedist1 (talk) 12:59, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Move to "Victoria metro station (Athens)" instead to match with the English Wikipedia title. --Minoa (talk) 17:07, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unfortunately, I have had to close the discussion as stale, and decide that the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around.
The main reasons are to match the naming format at Train stations in Greece, as well as the naming format on the English Wikipedia.
In this case, the category will now be called Victoria metro station (Athens). --Minoa (talk) 00:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
in metro maps named Irini WIJIDE (talk) 22:26, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. Runner1928 (talk) 15:10, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
- Again, station sign (Irini) vs English Wikipedia (Eirini). Which one do we prefer? — NickK (talk) 20:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
moved to Irini as per http://www.stasy.gr/index.php?id=52&no_cache=1&L=1&id=52&no_cache=1&selectedstation=20 .--RZuo (talk) 12:29, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
in metro maps named Iraklio WIJIDE (talk) 22:27, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
- The station sign says Iraklio indeed, however, English Wikipedia opted for en:Irakleio station. Which one should we prefer? — NickK (talk) 20:39, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. @NickK@WIJIDE: these are very rare cases, when we do not follow enwiki solutions. Hence - Keep Estopedist1 (talk) 13:07, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- stale discussion. @NickK@WIJIDE: these are very rare cases, when we do not follow enwiki solutions. Hence -
- I am proposing "Irakleio metro station" because that is the current name of the metro station, and that reduces confusion with the separate suburban railway station of the same name. --Minoa (talk) 00:43, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I have had to close the discussion as stale, and decide that the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around.
The main reasons are to match the naming format at Train stations in Greece, as well as the naming format on the English Wikipedia.
In this case, the category will now be called Irakleio metro station, and that reduces confusion with the separate suburban railway station of the same name. --Minoa (talk) 00:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
We also have a "Category:Interiors of bakeries", which is a subcat of this. For me this much is incredible; sometimes our categorization seems like science-fiction. Please let us have "one" cat for "bakery"+"interior". E4024 (talk) 03:03, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
- Was working on it now. I propose it to be unified to "Category: Interiors of bakeries", and have "Category:Bakery interiors" be a redirect. All other interior cats seems to use the "Interiors of X" format; see (Category:Building interiors by building function). This is presently the only one that doesn't that I can see. Thoughts?Morgan Riley (talk) 03:07, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
- Probably I am the only interested party and give you my OK. Please go ahead without losing time (most CfDs never attract the attention of anybody) and do as you proposed. --E4024 (talk) 03:19, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
- That is also acceptable to me. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:15, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
- I may be at fault for the duplication. If I am, I apologize. I agree the categories should be merged. עדירל (talk) 21:19, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
I merged Category:Bakery interiors into Category:Interiors of bakeries. – BMacZero (🗩) 03:21, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
I do not understand a reason for this category in comparison to Fra Angelico. Files should go to the main cat Oursana (talk) 09:59, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Oursana: in December 2020 the redirect was made. It seems to be a solved question--Estopedist1 (talk) 07:46, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Can we delete this one? I cannot find confirmation of this Hans Caspar Hirzel. Please see Hans Caspar Hirzel. -- Deadstar (msg) 11:06, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
- Update: I have moved it to Category:Hans Caspar Hirzel (1746-1827), a person who is mentioned elsewhere. This cat could be deleted as no longer required. -- Deadstar (msg) 11:27, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Deleted by Yann 17:05, 22. Dez. 2021. GeorgHH • talk 13:17, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Subject : Hoax. Sammyday (talk) 13:56, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 07:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Uncategorized and broken category redirect. /Leonel Sohns 15:50, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
- Redirect is fixed and links to the correct one. Thanks for reporting. Ismael Olea (talk) 18:34, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
- categories are also already added. I guess that the discussion can be closed--Estopedist1 (talk) 07:48, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Redirect fixed to Category:Edificio de viviendas de Ramón Zapata. GeorgHH • talk 13:37, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Athens Airport-Kiato the previous correct name, Athens airport-Aigio is now in operation, but the more correct name is Athens Airport-Patras railway(the finally destination which is under construction) WIJIDE (talk) 01:23, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. @WIJIDE: enwiki article is under en:Piraeus–Patras railway Estopedist1 (talk) 13:16, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Keep as is. All 4 interwiki links use a version of "Piraeus-Patras". Place Clichy 18:57, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Sepolia (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: moved to Category:Sepolia (metro station). --Minoraxtalk 06:22, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Kallithea (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:03, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. @WIJIDE: no oppose being in the line with subcategories in Category:Athens Metro stations. But to be noticed that variant <Foo metro station> is also widely used in Commons Estopedist1 (talk) 13:48, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I have had to close the discussion as stale, and decide that the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around.
The main reasons are to match the naming format at Train stations in Greece, as well as the naming format on the English Wikipedia.
In this case, the category will now be called Kallithea metro station. --Minoa (talk) 00:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
KAT (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:04, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Obvious technical problem (lacking a space), renamed — NickK (talk) 13:15, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Maroussi (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:05, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- I suggest moving to "Category:Marousi metro station" instead. I think all the Athens Metro stations should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of Line 3 east of Halandri). --Minoa (talk) 03:58, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I have had to close the discussion as stale, and decide that the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around.
The main reasons are to match the naming format at Train stations in Greece, as well as the naming format on the English Wikipedia.
In this case, the category will now be called Marousi metro station. --Minoa (talk) 00:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Monastiraki (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:06, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I have had to close the discussion as stale, and decide that the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around.
The main reasons are to match the naming format at Train stations in Greece, as well as the naming format on the English Wikipedia.
In this case, the category will now be called Monastiraki metro station. --Minoa (talk) 00:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Nea Ionia (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:07, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Move to "Nea Ionia metro station" instead. There are no other metro stations of the same name. --Minoa (talk) 17:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I have had to close the discussion as stale, and decide that the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around.
The main reasons are to match the naming format at Train stations in Greece, as well as the naming format on the English Wikipedia.
In this case, the category will now be called Nea Ionia metro station. --Minoa (talk) 00:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Neratziotissa (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:08, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- C'est une bonne idée Quoique (talk) 14:00, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose: User Rb244 moved the page while this discussion took place. However, I still oppose the move because Suburban Rail trains serve this stop. --Minoa (talk) 23:19, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Petralona (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:08, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Thissio (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:09, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: I think all the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around. One of the main reasons is to match the naming format at Category:Train stations in Greece. --Minoa (talk) 09:18, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I have had to close the discussion as stale, and decide that the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around.
The main reasons are to match the naming format at Train stations in Greece, as well as the naming format on the English Wikipedia.
In this case, the category will now be called Thiseio metro station. --Minoa (talk) 23:53, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Agia Marina (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:10, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Not done: already deleted. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Agia Varvara (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:10, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Not done: already deleted. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Nikaia (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:10, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Not done: already deleted. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Korydallos (metro station) same to other stations WIJIDE (talk) 11:11, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose: I think all the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around. One of the main reasons is to match the naming format at Category:Train stations in Greece. Minoa (talk) 09:14, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I have had to close the discussion as stale, and decide that the Athens Metro station categories should be in the format "[Name] metro station", "[Name] metro station (Athens)", or "[Name] station" (in the case of multimodal interchanges), and not the other way around.
The main reasons are to match the naming format at Train stations in Greece, as well as the naming format on the English Wikipedia.
In this case, the category will return to their original name. --Minoa (talk) 00:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
See also: Category talk:Pedestrians by country. - @Hiddenhauser: this question should be discussed at parent categories. But eg enwiki has definition (unfortunately unreferenced):
"A pedestrian is a person travelling on foot, whether walking or running. In modern times, the term usually refers to someone walking on a road or pavement, but this was not the case historically."
- keep @Hiddenhauser: Es macht keinen Sinn, diese Kategorie nur in Deutschland in Frage zu stellen, wenn sie in über 60 anderen Ländern so gepflegt wird, siehe Category:Walking people by country. Also sollte die Diskussion (wenn überhaupt) über die Hauptkategorie laufen.
- Einen Unterschied gibt es jedoch wohl:
- "Pedestians" als "Fußgänger" (Fußgängerzone, Gehweg etc) und
- "Walking people" als die "Aktivität" (Laufen), siehe Category:People by activity (theoretisch auch auf einem Laufband im Fitnessstudio oder Fußsoldaten bei einer Militärparade und somit verschieden von Pedestrians).
- @M2k~dewiki: Kannst du dazu noch etwas beitragen?
- Gruß Triplec85 (talk) 22:45, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
- Das ist jetzt Eineinviertel Jahr her. Kann ich mich nicht mehr dran erinnern aber wenn es tatsächlich einen Grund für die Kategorie gibt ist die Sache für mich erledigt. --Hiddenhauser (talk) 20:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
- Pedestrians can "stand" or "rest". Walking people "walk" in the picture (= activity). --> different --> keep -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 07:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
- Das ist jetzt Eineinviertel Jahr her. Kann ich mich nicht mehr dran erinnern aber wenn es tatsächlich einen Grund für die Kategorie gibt ist die Sache für mich erledigt. --Hiddenhauser (talk) 20:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
No action required GeorgHH • talk 22:03, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Should we better upmerge this into Category:Hairdressers? E4024 (talk) 20:56, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- No objection'. Nightscream (talk) 21:55, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- I boldly did it. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 03:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
- Done E4024 (talk) 03:14, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
The move is wrong. See https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/19/02/gc62-turkey-statement.pdf for example. More are coming. E4024 (talk) 22:41, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Also see this: https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/new-permanent-representative-of-turkey-to-the-united-news-photo/1180598128.
BTW not all permanent representatives are even "resident" in Vienna, but accredited from elsewhere. The move was wrong. Ask an admin to revert everything, please. Not pinging. --E4024 (talk) 22:45, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- Usually the terminology is 'Permanent Representative' (e.g. vis a vis UN; whereas the representative of an IO would be a 'resident representative') but MS Representatives at the IAEA appear to be generally called 'Resident Representatives'. Quick search on google and the IAEA website shows thousands of hits, and the terminology is used consistently on their Flickr feed from which we draw their pictures. See e.g. also the biography of the previous acting DG on the IAEA website to name just one example. So, I disagree, I considered this move carefully and think it is correct. -- B2Belgium (talk) 22:54, 19 September 2020 (UTC) P.S. Note that the caption of the picture you linked to refers to 'Permanent Representative of Turkey to the United Nations' (not IAEA).
- "Emine Birnur Fertekligil, the ambassador, permanent representative of Turkey in IAEA": https://rosatomnewsletter.com/2015/02/18/akkuyu-npp-project-was-assessed-in-vienna/ (5th line) E4024 (talk) 23:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm referring to the official terminology used at the IAEA (see e.g. for Emine Birnur Fertekligil here (one of many)). I don't think that a Rosatom newsletter in very poor English is a convincing counterargument. -- B2Belgium (talk) 11:23, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- "Emine Birnur Fertekligil, the ambassador, permanent representative of Turkey in IAEA": https://rosatomnewsletter.com/2015/02/18/akkuyu-npp-project-was-assessed-in-vienna/ (5th line) E4024 (talk) 23:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
stale discussion. I haven't checked Google hits, but user:B2Belgium seems to be convincing. I guess that keep--Estopedist1 (talk) 13:52, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
unsharp, definition-less, almost empty category about a potentially huge number of objects. Remaining entries should be moved to some mountain category and this cat should be deleted. Herzi Pinki (talk) 06:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. Delete per @Herzi Pinki Estopedist1 (talk) 14:04, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
useless duplication of Category:Yr (rune), convert to redirect Herzi Pinki (talk) 07:27, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Oppose: Not useless at all: This is clearly a subset of Category:Yr (rune) with restrict semantics and usage period and area, and with its own upstream nexi (e.g. Category:Death symbols) which do not apply to Category:Yr (rune). (That said, the set of files that are currently categorized as Category:Todesrune needs to be reevaluated: Some need to be moved up to Category:Yr (rune), and the opposite is also true.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 18:49, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- So Category:Yr (rune) is the symbol and Category:Todesrune the usage of that symbol (restricted to death symbols by not to nazi era). So double categorization as e.g. by User:Wolfmann is the way to go? --Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:15, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Herzi Pinki: Yes, it is (Yr (rune) ⊃ Todesrune), and no, it’s not (as per COM:OVERCAT). -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 17:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
- So Category:Yr (rune) is the symbol and Category:Todesrune the usage of that symbol (restricted to death symbols by not to nazi era). So double categorization as e.g. by User:Wolfmann is the way to go? --Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:15, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Netherlands is not participating in 2020 :( Eissink (talk) 11:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: author request. --ƏXPLICIT 07:26, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Netherlands is not participating in 2020 :( Eissink (talk) 11:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: author request. --ƏXPLICIT 07:27, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Merge with Category:John Deere forest harvesters Вадзім Медзяноўскі (talk) 14:54, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: per Вадзім Медзяноўскі. --MB-one (talk) 10:46, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
Redundant category. Category name is limited in scope and somewhat ambiguous; the replacement category, Category:North Luzon Expressway (Bocaue–Marilao–Meycauayan segment), is much better and unambiguous in naming, and more comprehensive. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:30, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- Note: All photos have been transferred to Category:North Luzon Expressway (Bocaue–Marilao–Meycauayan segment) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:08, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for your messages and good afternoon from hereat Bulacan; it is blue sky and perfect scenery; thanks for your hard works in making the photos better arranged in Better Category, salamat po Cheers and sincerely yours Judgefloro (talk) 08:32, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Note: All photos have been transferred to Category:North Luzon Expressway (Bocaue–Marilao–Meycauayan segment) JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:08, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Done deleted by Materialscientist -- Common Good (talk) 07:03, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Suggest renaming to Category:Wikipedia user scripts for distinction from scripts used by bots, for example. See also Category:User scripts. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:41, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. @1234qwer1234qwer4: enwiki has also en:Category:Wikipedia scripts Estopedist1 (talk) 14:06, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
See also: Category talk:Pubs in Dublin. Problematic and old (over 3 weeks) requested move:
Nominator's (user:Laurel Lodged) rational: This category to be moved to category:Pubs in Dublin (city), because: "To disambiguate the city from the surrounding county". Date: 2020-08-30
The parent category's name is category:Dublin which matches enwiki main article, but enwiki en:category:Dublin is DAB. Estopedist1 (talk) 06:25, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: If enwiki is DAB then Commons should follow suit. Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support per nom but the base category, Category:Dublin should be moved first (with Category:Dublin (disambiguation) moved to the base name) but we shouldn't move this on its own without moving the whole tree. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:53, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support - have been working on this a lot over the last 9 months on both Wikipedia and Wikimedia. user:Laurel Lodged originally moved the the article from en:List of pubs in Dublin to en:List of pubs in Dublin (city). I would have preferred if that was just kept as simply Dublin (referring to the county) and the various categories with the pubs moved to specify the council area. This would be in line with the general trend of moving things into the separate council areas. I do not necessarily agree with that either as it doesn't seem to be done consistently with other counties but its at least approaching consistency.Financefactz (talk) 17:47, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Note that there are several other cities called "Dublin" such as Dublin, Ohio so we should use something like Category:Dublin (Irish city) even though the WP category is for some reason only disambiguated with city we shouldn't put it at a partly disambiguated title. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:51, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- Do discussions in Commons ever actually result in action being taken? Laurel Lodged (talk) 10:24, 12 February 2022 (UTC)
Istnieje inna kategoria dotycząca tego obiektu (kaplicy w Kalwarii Zebrzydowskiej): 'Pilate's City Hall chapel in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska'. Ta nazwa lepiej odpowiada polskiej nazwie: Ratusz Piłata. Poza tym nazwa kategorii 'Ecco Homo...' zawiera błąd: powinno być 'Ecce Homo...' Proponuję połączenie obu kategorii w jedną oraz dodatkowo rozszerzenie nazwy kategorii docelowej do: 'Pilate's City Hall and the Holy Stairs chapels in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska' ponieważ te dwa obiekty choć mają różne numery identyfikacyjne w wykazie zabytków, są położone tak blisko siebie, że fotografie ogólnego widoku przedstawiają je razem (Święte Schody prowadzą do Ratusza Piłata)
There exist another category with respect to the same object (chapel in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska): 'Pilate's City Hall chapel in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska'. The latter name is closer to the Polish name: Ratusz Piłata. Besides, the category name 'Ecco Homo..' is misspelled, it should be named 'Ecce Homo...' I suggest merging both categories into one. Additionally, I suggest expanding the target category name to: 'Pilate's City Hall and the Holy Stairs chapels in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska' because the two objects, though of different ID number at the list od monuments, are located so close one to another that the photos presenting a general view generally include both of them (the Holy Stairs lead to the Pilate's City Hall)
Sorry, I'm new here and I'm not sure which language I can use here... Pliszka (talk) 07:00, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- stale discussion. @Pliszka-GP:
do we have the other category in Commons? I cannot find it.Mistake "Ecco Homo" is obvious. I guess that this object hasn't well-established English name. What is the correct Polish name? Estopedist1 (talk) 14:48, 22 December 2021 (UTC)- @Estopedist1 I guess you've already found the mentioned other category. This object, like many other objects in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska, has a unique name, even if it is related to well-known scenes from the Gospel. The Polish name 'Ratusz Piłata' witnesses also Polish culture of XVII-XVIII century and its exact meaning is 'Pilate's City Hall' (and not 'Pilate's Palace', as some people could say). However, the name 'Ecce Homo' is easily brought to mind as you see the facade of the chapel, with the scene of Christ in red robe between the Pilate and the soldier, the scene depicted in many paintings entitled 'Ecce Homo'. But the chapel is related to more than this one moment, here the pilgrims are encouraged to meditate two Christ's visits to Pilate's palace and all interrogations, and these scenes are depicted inside the building on large paintings. So the name 'Pilate's City Hall', being the exact translation of the Polish name, is more appropriate. Pliszka (talk) 15:24, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/09/Category:Ecco Homo Chapel in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska. Reasons for discussion request Proponuję połączenie tej kategorii i obecnie istniejącej kategorii 'Ecco Homo Chapel in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska' w jedną, ponieważ dotyczą tego samego obiektu (po polsku: Ratusz Piłata). Proponuję dodatkowo dodatkowo rozszerzenie nazwy kategorii docelowej do: 'Pilate's City Hall and the Holy Stairs chapels in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska' ponieważ te dwa obiekty, choć mają różne numery identyfikacyjne w wykazie zabytków, są położone tak blisko siebie, że fotografie ogólnego widoku przedstawiają je razem (Święte Schody prowadzą do Ratusza Piłata)
I suggest merging the category with the already existing category 'Ecco Homo Chapel in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska' since they present the same object ('Ratusz Piłata' in Polish). Additionally, I suggest extending the target category name to: 'Pilate's City Hall and the Holy Stairs chapels in Kalwaria Zebrzydowska' because the two objects, though of different ID number at the list od monuments, are located so close one to another that the photos presenting a general view include both of them (the Holy Stairs lead to the Pilate's City Hall) Sorry, I'm new here and I'm not sure which language I can use here... --Pliszka (talk) 07:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Agree Tak, powinno się je połączyć. Yes, they should be merged. --Fundacja Nomos (talk) 14:16, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Why is "Park" capitalised? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:55, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Move to Category:Park «Loga» per Wikipedia, otherwise Support Category:Loga (park). Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Started an RM on enwiki, since the name is clearly inappropriate. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Possible outcome there is rename to "Loga Park". 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:38, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
- @1234qwer1234qwer4: the Wikipedia article has now been merged with "Loga Park" so should we move it to Category:Loga Park and just close this? Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- @Crouch, Swale: Makes sense to me. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 09:12, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- @1234qwer1234qwer4: the Wikipedia article has now been merged with "Loga Park" so should we move it to Category:Loga Park and just close this? Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:53, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Possible outcome there is rename to "Loga Park". 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:38, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Started an RM on enwiki, since the name is clearly inappropriate. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:24, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
The result was move to Category:Loga Park. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:19, 6 October 2020 (UTC)
Es gibt auch eine Kategory Focke Garten, Bremen. Ohne Wiki Box aber mit mehr Bildern unter Gardens in Bremen. Hiddenhauser (talk) 13:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Agree to merge. New caption: Category:Focke-Garten, Bremen (German spelling) or Category:Focke Garden, Bremen (English spelling), not Category:Focke Garten, Bremen --Romwriter (talk) 16:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Done. All files moved to Category:Focke-Garten, Bremen. --Uwca (talk) 06:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Done: fixed. --JuTa 12:35, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
No indication of notabilty. He is a veteran. He was in a photo with one famous person. Paulbe (talk) 22:44, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- If so then File:Geoff Evans, Angelina Jolie (15631315120).jpg probably needs deleting first but then the question is if we allow a category for a non-notable person if they are in a picture of a notable one? Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:58, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Delete I'm fine with non-notable people getting Commons categories when the need genuinely exists, e.g. Category:Lane Rasberry. When there are just two photos from a single session, with the category unlikely to ever grow, we don't need a category for that. In the proposed Commons:Category inclusion criteria, a category can gain inclusion either by being inherently notable or by having enough in-scope images to justify its existence; here neither criterion is met. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:17, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
- it appears he has taken on a new role as ceo of "Disaster Relief Australia" https://disasterreliefaus.org/governance/ .
- Beside, "He... founded Homes for Heroes in 2013 to support homeless veterans and their families, and has been appointed to 2 terms on the Prime Ministerial Advisory Council on Veterans Mental Health".
- as such, i suggest this cat can be kept.
- @Paulbe, Crouch, Swale, and King of Hearts: if you dont object, this cfd can be closed. RZuo (talk) 07:52, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- I think so, its been open yearly 3 years, possibly just remove the category completely or move the images up to Category:Soldiers of the United Kingdom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 07:55, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No serious information or link. Even not the century. No sign of notabilty. Paulbe (talk) 23:02, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Looking for Charles Lambert in WPs I could only find Charles Saint Lambert. I guess no relation. We do not need a cat for him then. People who look for this Charles Lambert at Commons will reach at the pic as his name is on the title; no problem. Delete. --E4024 (talk) 23:10, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Speedy deleted 17:05, 22. Dez. 2021 by Yann. GeorgHH • talk 22:12, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
Out of scope promotional personal cat not used Wilfredor (talk) 02:36, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
- Delete Empty --DannyS712 (talk) 03:35, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Per DannyS712, empty. --NoonIcarus (talk) 10:43, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
Marked for deletion. – BMacZero (🗩) 03:26, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
Uncategorized and broken category redirect. /Leonel Sohns 17:59, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
deleted as empty. -- Túrelio (talk) 06:40, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
Uncategorized and broken category redirect. /Leonel Sohns 17:59, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
Speedy delete obviously. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 10:58, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
Deleted. -- CptViraj (talk) 13:30, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
As with many categories of "the Americas" that have been deleted, it is not meaningful to categorize yoga under "America". If we can't identify exactly which country the contents are for, they can just go under Category:Yoga. Auntof6 (talk) 23:19, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
- Maybe we should ban opening cats from "the Americas" (a.k.a. South America; yes, of course it's just a joke. We cannot be serious all the time. :) Delete this cat. (BTW Brazil does not begin with Y.) --E4024 (talk) 01:29, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Whatever you do, please don't recat these as "Yoga", which is a main category mainly about the spiritual side, and should contain no images directly. "Yoga in <name of country>" is possible for some images, as is "Outdoor asana", "Asana class", and so on. Specific asanas should be categorised for the asana shown, e.g. "Trikonasana". Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:56, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry for noticing this rather late. This is actually part of the "Yoga by country" series, where there is also a "Yoga in the United States" category: clearly, these two should be merged, leaving a redirect. There is a separate "Yoga in Brazil" so we definitely do not need an "Americas" to conflict with that.Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:29, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
- Is Canada part of the US? If not... E4024 (talk) 12:48, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Nominated cat is empty; created new cat for Yoga in Canada. -- Túrelio (talk) 20:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Is the London Bedford House more significant than the other buildings named Bedford House, like Category:Bedford House, New York City and Category:Bedford House, Bootle? If it is not, it should be renamed Category:Bedford House, London, and Category:Bedford House should become a disambiguation page. Geo Swan (talk) 06:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
- Support per nom, no clear primary topic and its only a redirect on Wikipedia rather than a separate article and there is also one in Iowa. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:00, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Done, Category:Bedford House is now a dab. – BMacZero (🗩) 03:31, 24 June 2021 (UTC)
There are two categories for the Martello Tower in Aldeburgh, this one and Martello Tower Aldeburgh. Dicussing how to reorganise this, Estopedist1 suggests the Category name "Slaughden Martello Tower" as this is the name recorded on the historic building register https://historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1269724. But Slaughden no longer really exists - it was a small fishing settlement that was lost to the waves of the North Sea many years ago, and only the tower remains. Most sources refer to it as the Aldeburgh tower, and it is within the parish of Aldeburgh. So I would suggest either "Aldeburgh Slaughden Martello Tower" or "Slaughden (Aldeburgh) Martello Tower", with the two existing catetgories becoming redirects. Kognos (talk) 10:18, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
parslinja Marismiglans (talk) 12:09, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
marismiglans Marismiglans (talk) 12:13, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
unhelpful, info pollution Estopedist1 (talk) 06:03, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
parslinja Marismiglans (talk) 12:09, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
marismiglans Marismiglans (talk) 12:13, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
unhelpful, info pollution Estopedist1 (talk) 06:03, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Shouldn't that category start with Christine if the person is transgender to female, a la Chelsea Manning? 92.236.0.141 13:01, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
Deleted category Estopedist1 (talk) 07:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Uncategorized and broken category redirect. /Leonel Sohns 15:48, 24 September 2020 (UTC)
- If "H. Raja" is the name of a person and they are notable/have several images we should have a separate category for them, if not then it should be deleted. I'm not sure why this redirects to the surname since Category:Raja (surname) would surely be appropriate if we did have such redirects which we shouldn't anyway. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Leonel Sohns and Crouch, Swale: we should almost always use not such abbreviated names, although enwiki en:H. Raja uses it at the moment. One image is added. The redirect to Sharma is invalid, but to be noticed that his full name is category:Hariharan Raja Sharma--Estopedist1 (talk) 05:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- OK, I've converted the redirect into a separate category though we might need to see if we need to move it (and the Wikipedia aricle) to the full name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 06:20, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Leonel Sohns and Crouch, Swale: we should almost always use not such abbreviated names, although enwiki en:H. Raja uses it at the moment. One image is added. The redirect to Sharma is invalid, but to be noticed that his full name is category:Hariharan Raja Sharma--Estopedist1 (talk) 05:54, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Disambiguation category linking to the same category twice, and nothing else. Matthias Winkelmann (talk) 16:44, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
- Now Fixed - well spotted! If the UK government didn't make mistakes there would be no need for ones like this. @Matthias Winkelmann: Best Wishes S a g a C i t y (talk) 16:51, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank! Good thing I was too shy to merge them. Never would have thought these numbers aren't unique --Matthias Winkelmann (talk) 23:19, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
I cannot understand this cat. It has images like city council meetings or bilateral high-level visits between countries. Not a clear soup... E4024 (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
- I created this category in 2013. There were many government meetings in Category:Meetings because there was no more specific category, but they were obviously related to government. I anticipate that there would eventually be subcategories for different types of government meetings. (Local council meetings, legislatures, cabinet meetings, summits.) In the meantime, this category will allow people to find those kinds of meetings so that they can be categorized further. (When I originally created it, I put it in Category:Meetings by type but someone moved it to Category:Meetings by subject.) --Closeapple (talk) 03:21, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
I agree with User:Reaper35 that this category is useless (Category talk:WebM videos). The categorisation offers no benefits that the file extension itself does not already provide. If we draw an analogy from images, it is discouraged or actually prohibited to categorise by JPG or PNG (see the notes on Category:JPEG files and Category:PNG files).
I propose we delete this cat and Category:Ogv videos Category:MPEG videos. RZuo (talk) 08:48, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose deletion / Keep the cats, some browsers can't deal with some of those formats, so the distinction helps with backward compatibility. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:36, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- What's the point? Having the category will make browsers deal with some of those formats? A webm file would not be dealt with before the cat is manually added and that will suddenly magically change after something like special:diff/470015817?--RZuo (talk) 10:38, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose For now, currently the search function is somewhat broken, it does not allow to distinguish between Ogv video, Ogg-vorbis audio, and something like Speex inside an Ogg container. It makes it easier to find something, one is looking for. Currently these categories are hidden (and I would argue that they should remain so). However, once there would be a good search feature, that would allow to search by the type (and preferably by the codec inside of the type). Then this category would become redundant, and could be removed. P.S. This proposal was made within a day or so after I have began adding these categories to my videos and also to other videos I come across of, did my actions trigger this request or was this just an accidental convergence? ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 12:31, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- What is the category for "Ogg-vorbis audio"?
- What is the category for "something like Speex inside an Ogg container"?
- Right now to find a file in a specific extension xxx, the technical way is to search "filemime:xxx". It's also possible to search "intitle:xxx". I dont know where are those specific files you talk about, please answer the first two questions. I dont see other files under Category:Xiph.Org Foundation. There're only ogv videos. Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2020/01/Category:Images_by_file_format shows no such cats exist for any other formats in the OGG family.
- Yes your edits were annoying and let me notice this manually maintained cat that does nothing but duplicates the file extension.--RZuo (talk) 20:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- There are no categories for other media, and I currently do not have energy to take on the task to create the whole category tree. The reason why I have started adding Ogv category was because I needed to search for ogv files, and it was anything but trivial to do so. Did you know tha Uplod wizzard actually renames OGG video files into .ogg (or at least it did when I tried it out)? And technically it is a perfectly acceptable extension for them. So no, there is no way to currently search for that. I do agree with you, however, that the category is not a perfect solution, and that is why my opposition is temporary, until we will have a way to search by the container (not just extension) and hopefully also by codec. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 01:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- As I've said, you wanna find something in ogv, you can do special:search/intitle:ogv, and add any other restricting conditions or keywords as you like. See mw:Help:CirrusSearch. So this function you want is fulfilled and Category:Ogv videos is not needed for this. With the presence of this cat you're just using other cirrussearch commands like insource:"ogv videos" or incategory:"ogv videos".--RZuo (talk) 12:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, I'll bite. Please find me OGV files which are titled with an .ogg extension with a Special:Search. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 14:20, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- Define "OGV files".
- Otherwise, a file that ends in ogv is ogv file, in ogg is ogg file.
- https://wiki.xiph.org/MIME_Types_and_File_Extensions there's no such thing as OGV file with ogg extension.--RZuo (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
- I do think that we can achieve a compromise if we at this time delete the category, but then if I will get a time to start creating a category tree for Theora+Vorbis in Ogv, Theora+Opus in Ogv, Theora with no audio in Ogv, etc, then the current categories need to be restored per request. The problem, of course, would be that this will swamp everybody's watch-list by first removing the category, and then restoring it. As I do want to create the category tree at some point in the future, I think that this compromise is silly, but I would accept it as a very bad half-way measure where everybody is annoyed, but nobody is more annoyed than another person. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 06:56, 8 November 2020 (UTC)
- Ok, I'll bite. Please find me OGV files which are titled with an .ogg extension with a Special:Search. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 14:20, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- As I've said, you wanna find something in ogv, you can do special:search/intitle:ogv, and add any other restricting conditions or keywords as you like. See mw:Help:CirrusSearch. So this function you want is fulfilled and Category:Ogv videos is not needed for this. With the presence of this cat you're just using other cirrussearch commands like insource:"ogv videos" or incategory:"ogv videos".--RZuo (talk) 12:09, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- There are no categories for other media, and I currently do not have energy to take on the task to create the whole category tree. The reason why I have started adding Ogv category was because I needed to search for ogv files, and it was anything but trivial to do so. Did you know tha Uplod wizzard actually renames OGG video files into .ogg (or at least it did when I tried it out)? And technically it is a perfectly acceptable extension for them. So no, there is no way to currently search for that. I do agree with you, however, that the category is not a perfect solution, and that is why my opposition is temporary, until we will have a way to search by the container (not just extension) and hopefully also by codec. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 01:10, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- Keep, it's handy categorisation for searchability, it's actually a shame that we don't have a more detailed categorisation system that categorised every little thing, while Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons (SDC) can theoretically solve this, destroying existing category infrastructure doesn't benefit the project. I don't see what problem deleting this category would solve. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 19:22, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- These cats are redundant. There's no need for these just like there's no need for Category:JPEG files for jpegs because the file extension is self explanatory.--RZuo (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
- Partial Support, Delete Category:WebM videos only, as it's redundant as Special:Search/filemime:webm works. Keep other categories until the filemime search works for those.--BevinKacon (talk) 14:31, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
- @BevinKacon You could still use intitle search. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:25, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
- one more reason to delete this redundant cat: in addition to filemime:webm, you can also search like this
haswbstatement:P1163=video/webm. User:SchlurcherBot is adding media type (P1163) values systematically. RZuo (talk) 09:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Category:WebM videos per BevinKacon and RZuo. Unneeded since you can search by the webm mimetype. Nosferattus (talk) 01:48, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as Special:Search works just fine for file type-based search TheImaCow (talk) 13:39, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete but more info and integrated search features for searches. One can use the Videos category to show only videos in petscan results (see here and there are similar tools that may be worth considering here). When deleting this cat, please make all of its contents are somewhere in the Videos category. --Prototyperspective (talk) 14:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Turning my delete vote into a Keep until petscan can be made to show only videos. It can't use an intersection with the Videos cat because there are too many subcats / levels of subcats. Is there an issue for that at petscan or is there a way to make it show only videos that I don't know of? Prototyperspective (talk) 22:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Turning my delete vote into a
- Comment I routinely add this category to WebM videos that I upload and I have also added it to other files. I now see this conversation, so I'll stop adding it to others' uploads, but this is a four-year discussion and it really needs to be closed so that there is clarity about what should happen. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
Remove, spelling mistake should be 1945 in IJmuiden Milliped (talk) 11:21, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Done: author request. --ƏXPLICIT 07:29, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Delete: There's only a single castle in Lefkada, that of Santa Maura, so the category is pointless. Constantine ✍ 19:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Cplakidas: Don't make changes to categories that you want to discuss before the discussion has been resolved such as emptying the category; it makes it very hard to other users to evaluate your proposed changes. In this case I think the category should be kept because it is needed for structural reasons - for example, without it, Category:Santa Maura Castle cannot appear in Category:Castles in Greece by location. The existence of the other categories in Category:Castles in Greece by location justifies the existence of this one as long as there is any content for it. – BMacZero (🗩) 23:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
Catalonia 5.62.49.21 19:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
Nonsense.--RZuo (talk) 10:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Kategoria pozostaje pusta, a jej zawartość dublowałaby kategorię docelową Mariochom (talk) 20:02, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
- @Mariochom: the nominated category is redirected to Category:19th-century graves in Włocławek. But Category:Graves and Category:Gravestones are not synonyms--Estopedist1 (talk) 08:07, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
forgot to add the text (province) behind Utrecht, please delete Willemnabuurs (talk) 06:46, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Deleted. Taivo (talk) 11:41, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
These photographs do not show Lingwood Meadows. They show part of my land which is not meadow land. I do not want unsolicited photographs of my land on the internet. 95.146.116.216 11:45, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
- The photographs were taken by me from a public road of land designated by Natural England as Lingwood Meadows Site of Special Scientific Interest. I am not aware of any rule against taking photographs from public roads and I believe that the category is reliably sourced and correct. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:34, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
Keep: No valid reason for deletion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
