Commons:Categories for discussion/Archive/2017/08
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Categories for discussion.
You can visit the most recent archive here.
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2007 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2008 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2009 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2010 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2011 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2012 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2013 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2014 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2015 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| Jan | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Sep | Oct | Nov | Dec | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2016 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2017 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2018 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2019 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2020 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2021 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2022 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2023 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 2024 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
Archive August 2017
This isn't a given name, these are initials. The only member of this category is someone whose actual given name is apparently "April Jeanette". Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 06:53, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry, there's nothing to discuss here. I marked the cat for deletion and will close this CfD when that is deleted. Everybody in vacations and we cannot afford to lose time for this clear details. --E4024 (talk) 07:18, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: . --JuTa 07:42, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
I've screwed up on this - I created the category "Sebastian Gryphius" on this sixteenth-century printer, but there's already one under this name. The new category has the Wikidata links and the old has a good set of authority control links. Can they be merged? I'm afraid I don't know the procedure here. Blythwood (talk) 10:59, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- no problem for me, with redirection. Cedalyon (talk) 12:54, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: moved & redirected. --Achim (talk) 16:16, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
A category in a local language ... Shitcago (talk) 19:08, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: and empty. --JuTa 20:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Since no languages of Bhutan are written in CJK characters, I think that the left-facing CJK swastika in the title is inappropriate. A better name would be Category:Left-facing swastikas in Bhutan. 84.61.144.101 06:59, 10 August 2017 (UTC) --84.61.144.101 14:30, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
No objections -- sarang♥사랑 07:23, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Comment The user, who created this category, is actually from Germany: de:Benutzer:Sarang. --84.61.144.101 08:13, 10 August 2017 (UTC) --84.61.144.101 09:23, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
No opposition from creator. Moved to Category:Left-facing swastikas in Bhutan. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:04, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Same as Category:Philly naked bike ride? E4024 (talk) 16:23, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Seems to be so, and Category:Pnbr as well. --Achim (talk) 15:27, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- Let's hope there will be someone who volunteers to organize those cats. They say I'm only interested in deleting the pictures of nude bikers. (If I'm not wrong I DR'ed THREE! of them :-) --E4024 (talk) 15:33, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Merged into Category:World Naked Bike Ride, Philadelphia. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
empty category without files, it should be deleted SANCAN112 (talk) 17:16, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Cat and subcat tagged as empty. @SANCAN112: For future reference, cases like this can often be handled with the {{Empty page}} template instead of bringing them here for discussion. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:21, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:16, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Delete as empty category Unikalinho (talk) 04:52, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hi. Look what I did to that cat and next time you do the same, without opening a discussion here. The end. --E4024 (talk) 08:05, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:17, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
This Category should be deleted. Two distinct, long-time magazines are referred to as "The Botanical Magazine", "Curtis's Botanical Magazine" and "The Botanical Magazine" published in Tokyo. The Category does not distinguish which. And the "=" on the end is foolish.User-duck (talk) 17:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted in favour of Category:Curtis's Botanical Magazine (including The Botanical Magazine), and Category:The botanical magazine (Tokyo). - Themightyquill (talk) 09:19, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
مادلين مطر 197.30.0.41 07:43, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- What? What next? What shall we discuss? --E4024 (talk) 08:52, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Must be mischief. I'm removing the tag now. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:42, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Not done: closing this nonsense. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:41, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Category corrected to Category:Road signs in the German language. Fry1989 eh? 19:27, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Closing: deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:58, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Category corrected to Category:Road signs in the German language. Fry1989 eh? 19:27, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Closing: deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:59, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
The court uses Federal Constitutional Court as its English proper name, as do over 220000 Google hits for "federal constitutional court" germany. Per COM:LP, category names must always use the English version where available and commonly used, both criteria seem to be met here. FDMS 4 11:23, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Implemented per above. FDMS 4 12:56, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Does this guy has any relevancy? Sanandros (talk) 19:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
- You can nominated the photos for deletion as out of scope if you wish. At the moment, we have 7 photos of the man, so it makes sense to keep the category. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:20, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- All the files in this category are in use. The person have an article in he.wiki. I suggest speedy close. -- Geagea (talk) 11:55, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Closing as the files are in use so the category is valid. Thanks for pointing that out, geagea. Themightyquill (talk) 17:55, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
This category was based on the misunderstanding that "Endre Lund" is a given name. It is not; "Endre" is a given name, whilst "Lund" and "Eriksen" are sequential surnames. The category should thus be deleted. Morten Haugen (talk) 16:16, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Speedily deleted, it's empty so qualifies and this isn't a useful category intersection to have since there only appears to be one individual who would be in it anyway, even if correct. Rodhullandemu (talk) 16:40, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Delete please, the correct name is Category:National Cultural Sites in Uganda Effeietsanders (talk) 10:08, 29 August 2017 (UTC) Deleted Romaine (talk) 12:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
fnxbxchxvc 160.166.199.152 21:05, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. Not a valid reason. Zhangj1079 (T|C|U) 21:34, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no reason given to delete. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:08, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
No sovereign state called "Khalistan" exists. Utcursch (talk) 04:06, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Closing -- cat has been deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:19, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Moved files to Category:Statues in Tampere. Reason: duplicate category and category names should be in English. Similar structure with similar categories by city in Finland. Htm (talk) 04:15, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
Closing -- cat has been deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:19, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Redundant category: see category: Jacky (given name) Vysotsky (talk) 09:17, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Closing -- cat has been deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:23, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
it seems to be about exactly the same book as each of its both subcategories; unless distinguishing properties can be given for them, all 3 cat.s should be joined into a single one Jochen Burghardt (talk) 14:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- The first book is published in 1598, the second in 1674. Best regards, --JMCC1 (talk) 18:21, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
In that case, I suggest to rename the categories to Category:Mattioli – Opera quae extant omnia (1598) and Category:Mattioli – Opera quae extant omnia (1674). Any objections? - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 19:31, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- OK, --JMCC1 (talk) 06:20, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
BTW: File:Leontodon ssp. and Taraxacum ssp. as L Cichorium Constantinopolis T Dens Leonis Petri Andreae Matthioli Opera quae extant omnia, hoc est, Commentarii in VI 1554.jpg is is the "1598" subcategory, but wouldn't belong to either one, would it? - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 19:37, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- OK, --JMCC1 (talk) 06:20, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Implemented consensus today. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 17:23, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
افلام غرام 129.45.119.132 17:07, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
No reason given for discussion. Closing. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:39, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
4160603947 1.46.140.109 13:27, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
No reason given for discussion. Closing. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:38, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
I created Harry Bullock Webster, linked to en:wiki and with good categorization prior to discovering this category. So I would like to keep the one I made and request this one be removed. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:08, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Just make it an RD to your Category:Harry Bullock-Webster. --E4024 (talk) 07:27, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Ellin Beltz: Any idea why the wikipedia category is at en:H. Bullock Webster instead of at en:Harry Bullock Webster ? Was that his common name? Even the hyphenation seems unclear, since one source hyphenates and the other does not. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:25, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: I did not start the page at H. Bullock-Webster. I found his name all different ways as well! I think perhaps because he worked in several countries, that various "rules of form" were applied to his name, which resulted in the various forms. Truly, either category here would be fine, I'm still finding his images all over the place. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:46, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- @E4024: I don't do a lot with category meta, so I asked for discussion so that I didn't do anything which went against standard practices amongst those who do it far more often than me. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:47, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- No I just felt like lecturing an admincrat!.. :-) Cheers to all. --E4024 (talk) 15:05, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Please delete this doplicate category and sort-out Wikidata. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 22:19, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
Moved everything to Category:H. Bullock Webster to match with wikipedia article. If someone has a good reason to use a different spelling, or to include Harry, this can be discussed again. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:50, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
wrong spelled Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:09, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted. @Villy Fink Isaksen: In the future use the {{Bad name}} template on the incorrectly spelled category, e.g {{Bad name|Category:1891 paintings by Peder Severin Krøyer}}. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
empty category SANCAN112 (talk) 22:02, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted as empty. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
empty category SANCAN112 (talk) 22:03, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted as empty. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
There were elections in Lower Saxony in 2014, but no state elections. This category should be deleted. Robert Weemeyer (talk) 09:34, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- I have really no idea, why I'd created this category. I suppose that there were some files in it at that time when I made some maintenance in "wanted categories", but I have forgotten the context. No problem with deletion. --Tine (talk) 10:11, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted. Deletion of empty category supported by creator. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:20, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Mistake category, please delete Niklitov (talk) 22:25, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted. Deletion proposed by creator. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:19, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
should be renamed to a more meaningful name Jochen Burghardt (talk) 22:33, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Do you want to include the other subcategories of Category:Collection de la BMR? --Auntof6 (talk) 00:28, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Oops, I wasn't aware of them. If they follow a sensible naming scheme, it might be ok, but the schema should be explained somewhere, preferrably on each subcategory's page. I was unable to figure out where the name 'P 2306' originated from. Couldn't all subcategories be renamed to reflect the title (and maybe author and year) of the book they are about? Are all these data unknown? - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 08:43, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
To answer your question: yes, all these subcategory names appear to be concerned in the same way. (However, I don't yet know how to include them here formally, let alone how to achieve this in an efficient way.) - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 09:08, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Cette catégorisation correspond à l'indexation utilisée par la bibliothèque municipale de Reims depuis plus de cent ans. Le livre dont les images sont extraites est à retrouver dans la bibliothèque sous la cote P 2306. Il est effectivement possible d'ajouter dans chaque catégorie le sens de cette numérotation. Cordialement Garitan (talk) 13:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. I understand your motivation for the namining now.
However, I think it is not useful with respect to the purpose of the commons categorization system. For example, Category:P 2306 apparently holds media about a book of en:Étienne Dolet (I took that from the description at File:Dolet BM R 07663.jpg), but it doesn't appear below Category:Étienne Dolet. More important, nobody who searches for a book from Dolet would look into a category named "Category:P 2306". Also, other copies of that book might exist in other libraries - consequently, they wouldn't appear below Category:P 2306, but somewhere else.
Instead, I suggest that one category should be devoted to one book (rather than to a particular copy in a particular library), and the categories should be renamed to reflect the book title (and, where needed for distinction purposes, author and/or year). Best regards - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 11:39, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- If we keep the numbers, I would suggest using something like Category:Bibliothèque Municipale de Reims, P 2306. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:48, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with that. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 06:03, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: I'd like to close this discussion with result "consensus: prefix category names below Category:Collection de la BMR with 'Collection de la BMR, '". However, there are 182 subcategories, at most a dozen of which already have reasonably understandable names. I have no idea how to rename the remaining c.170 ones efficiently. Do you have experience with tools (like AWB) that can do this? Moreover, when I rename a category, in fact a new one is created, and I have to issue a {{speedydelete}} request for the old; this doubles the work needed per category move. Do you have suggestions about these issues? - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 18:08, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if AWB can help automate the move part, but it could help put speedydelete tags on the old categories afterward. That's assuming we don't want to leave the redirects. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:05, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- I agree that we have consensus to rename but I'd really prefer not to see the acronym BMR, if possible. If we can spell it out, it's clearer to everyone. Either Category:Bibliothèque Municipale de Reims, ..." or Category:Collections of the Bibliothèque Municipale de Reims, ..." like Category:Collections of the Louvre?
- I'm afraid I'm not much help with the mass renames either, but Ruthven is really good at it. Do you have the time, Ruthven? Please and thank you. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:17, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Done: Renaming on its way. PS: see Category:Collections of Musée Saint-Raymond by inventory number for a reference of the same kind of naming. Ruthven (msg) 18:50, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
should this not be moved to Police Tactical Unit as en wp has en:Police Tactical Unit Sanandros (talk) 02:02, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Support Moving Elite police units to Police tactical units.--Melbguy05 (talk) 13:58, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Moved from Category:Elite police units to Category:Police tactical units--Melbguy05 (talk) 07:30, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
The Danube bike path (commonly referred to as Donauradweg in Germany and Austria) constitutes roughly two thirds of EuroVelo 6 – it isn't synonymous with EuroVelo 6 in Germany since it actually runs through 8 different countries and doesn't include the entire German section of the EuroVelo 6. I suggest redirecting this category to EuroVelo 6 and categorising its current members solely into the appropriate country subcategories. FDMS 4 22:05, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
Implemented per above. FDMS 4 20:52, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest renaming this category to Category:Images from Geograph Britain and Ireland. This is really two changes. The first is to match the name of the project, which changed from "Geograph British Isles" to "Geograph Britain and Ireland" several years ago. The second is to remove the unnecessary words from the title, simplifying it and making it consistent with other categories in Category:Image sources.
This change is of some significance since this category contains over 4% of Commons' files. Happily, the category is mostly applied by {{Geograph}}, so the number of actual edits required is small.
If the second part of this change is approved, I'd propose also renaming Category:Images from the Geograph Channel Islands project to Category:Images from Geograph Channel Islands and Category:Images from the Geograph Deutschland project to Category:Images from Geograph Deutschland for consistency. bjh21 (talk) 11:23, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- I support this reasoned and sensible suggestion, with the additional proposals. Beorhtwulf (talk) 23:25, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
No objections even though I advertised this on COM:VP, so I think that's some kind of consensus in favour of 
Move for all three categories. I'll set about implementing it. --bjh21 (talk) 19:01, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Duplicate of/ conflation with Category:Memorial seats.
See also:
Andy Mabbett (talk) 10:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- I wouldn't mind conflating them, but as far as I can see at a quick glance, these are all benches (also the term used on most of the subcats) so I would think we should redirect Category:Memorial seats to Category:Memorial benches rather than vice versa. But I won't contest it if there is a strong consensus the other way. - Jmabel ! talk 14:54, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- They are not all benches. See File:Chester Cathedral, memorial chairs and plaques.JPG and possibly File:Brian Saunders Memorial Seat - geograph.org.uk - 39413.jpg. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:55, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Keeping memorial benches as a sub-category of memorial seats to allow for non-bench memorial seats. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:01, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
This looks more like the "tags" thing, so that it can be reached easily in internet searches, than a cat name. E4024 (talk) 13:22, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- There's only one file here. I suggest recategorizing it, possibly to Category:Politicians of Spain, and deleting this category. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Why not? But what is the Argentine connection? --E4024 (talk) 14:39, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Whatever the intended purpose of the category, it has ceased to function that way. The only image was of Spanish politicians. Category deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:07, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Give an explanation of 'extra parameters', or delete the category Jochen Burghardt (talk) 06:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- The category creator, Foroa, hasn't contributed in years. Unless someone can figure out the significance of the category name, we should delete. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:33, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:17, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
it is empty and should be deleted Cosal (talk) 11:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- It's not empty: there are three files in it (in addition to all the empty subcats). --Auntof6 (talk) 06:03, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
No longer empty. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:29, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Shangri-La, the Thomas Mungall residence in Victoria Parade is the finest example of Art Deco residential architecture in Rockhampton and deserves to be Heritage listed when lesser examples are. What can be done about this? 101.177.188.236 03:08, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Heritage listing is not a matter that can be decided within Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. If you feel a building should be listed on the Queensland Heritage Register, you need to propose it to the Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage Protection following these guidelines. I hope this points you in the right direction. Kerry Raymond (talk) 03:18, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Discussion out of scope for commons. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:49, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
It is common term of various rivers in Macedonia and in other Slavic countries, so we need disambiguation page for this Ehrlich91 (talk) 09:37, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Ehrlich91: That makes sense. How would you disambiguate it? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:44, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: We can start simply by disambiguate all possible categories that have this name on Commons, which is three Category:Mala reka (Bosilegrad), Category:Mala Reka (Radika) and Category:Mala Reka (Treska).--Ehrlich91 (talk) 10:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ehrlich91: Works for me. If you put the images currently in Category:Mala Reka in the appropriate category, I'll make the disambig page. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:19, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: I change categories of all images that depict something meaningful and that I know exact location of them, such previous mentioned rivers in Macedonia. Those pictures now uploaded from Panoramio bot, I don`t have any information about which river/lake/place in which country, so I don`t have any idea what category to use. --Ehrlich91 (talk) 20:26, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ehrlich91: Works for me. If you put the images currently in Category:Mala Reka in the appropriate category, I'll make the disambig page. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:19, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Ehrlich91: All the images in the category have GPS data attached, so you can locate each one on a map. I don't really understand which river category is which though. - Themightyquill (talk) 15:38, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: I really don`t have so much time and basically these images are probably from rivers in Serbia, and I don`t have any idea or information how many rivers in Serbia are named with this name and if these images are from one or many other rivers. --Ehrlich91 (talk) 18:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguated. -Themightyquill (talk) 22:51, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
This category should be renamed "Don Khon", as this is the used name nearly everywhere, in particular on the wiki-sites (see discussion page) Basile Morin (talk) 10:04, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
These 3 categories should be renamed as follow :
- Det Island -> Don Det
- Khon Island -> Don Khon
- Som Island -> Don Som
Even if Don in Lao means Island, the spread names of these places are Don Det, Don Khon and Don Som.
Like in Thai, where Ko means Island, all the islands of Thailand are refered on Wikimedia with their current name, for example Ko Samui is not called Samui Island.
Don Det, Don Khon, and Don Som are all parts of the category Si Phan Don, which means Four Thousand Islands in Lao. However this category is not called "4000 Islands" here, neither on Wikipedia, this archipelagoe is just called Si Phan Don.
All the Wiki-site pages mention Don Det, Don Khon and Don Som with their used names. Below are a few links :
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Det%E2%80%93Don_Khon_narrow-gauge_railway
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si_Phan_Don
- http://wikitravel.org/en/Don_Det
- http://wikitravel.org/en/Don_Khon
- https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Don_Det
- https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Don_Khon
- https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Si_Phan_Don
Surprisingly, the right names are mentionned in English in the descriptions of each category by the creator, which is a good start to rename these categories. Basile Morin (talk) 10:04, 27 August 2017 (UTC) All the travel guides also call Don Det, Don Khon and Si Phan Don litteraly with their spread names, like for example the Lonely Planet : https://www.lonelyplanet.com/laos/southern-laos/don-det-and-don-khon
Locally, the people in Si Phan Don themselves call their villages Don Det, Don Khon or Don Som in full in the everyday life, and not only "Det", "Khon", or "Som" (that could be easier, since they all know they live on an island, they could avoid the precision, but no).
Since these islands are getting better known, it seems important to fix the names of the categories early before they get bigger. --Basile Morin (talk) 10:04, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
No opposition in over a month. Moved to Category:Don Som, Category:Don Khon and Category:Don Det. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:29, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
should be joined into its parent category (no distinguishishing property apparent) Jochen Burghardt (talk) 05:22, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Deleted in favour of Category:Historiae Animalium Liber IV. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:20, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Shouldn't this be "Category:Text logo images that should use vector graphics", with a space? I think someone named this category by analogy with the {{pd-textlogo}} template, but categories and templates don't have the same conventions. Apocheir (talk) 17:47, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, of course. Please repair it! -- sarang♥사랑 20:13, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Done: redirected. -- User: Perhelion 09:12, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
There is no other "local food cat" in Commons. I just opened Category:Cuisine of Konya, but all these files belong to Category:Etli ekmek indeed. E4024 (talk) 11:29, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- User:Zcebeci, in another discussion on some other wrongly-opened cat you just reminded me that this is a voluntary work; but the truth is, volunteering should not be taken as I do what I want and some volunteers are obliged to correct my mistakes. You should better look for similar cats when you intend to open a new cat; after all, we are trying to standardize things here. --E4024 (talk) 11:33, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- I propose to move this cat to Category:Food of Konya, which will also host the cuisine cat. Indeed all but one of the files here must be recategorized by a "volunteer". File:Mevlana Candies - Mevlana Şekeri.jpg would be only file to leave in the new "Food of Konya" cat; because factory-made candies are "food", not exactly "cuisine". --E4024 (talk) 11:37, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with E4024 for moving this cat to Category:Food of Konya with subcategories Category:Etli ekmek and Category:Mevlana candies(talk) 11:41, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- We can make a Category:Mevlana candies when he have more pictures of those candies. (You could also bring some real ones for sharing with Commons colleagues. :-) Category:Etli ekmek is under Category:Cuisine of Konya where it should continue to stay. Please note the differences between "cuisine" and "food". One of them is this: You may eat "etli ekmek" in a Konya Meram Restaurant in Ankara or Athens but it continues to be "Konya cuisine". You can also take your Mevlana candies to China if you wish so, and they continue to be "Konya food". But if you make them in a candy factory in Beijing, ... eh? Whatever... Closing. --E4024 (talk) 08:01, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- Done. --E4024 (talk) 08:43, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Empty category for an album which never had any article in any Wikipedia IndianBio (talk) 05:45, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
I marked it as empty for deletion. Indeed you could do the same and economize a discussion. Closed. --E4024 (talk) 09:09, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Two mensajes por 200.89.86.42 21:50, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
No explanation for discussion. Closing - Themightyquill (talk) 06:56, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
This category should be a disambiguation as there is at least one cemetery in Florida with the same name. Some files (if not all) from this category should be moved to Category:Eastern Cemetery (Minsk). Jarash (talk) 21:33, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguated. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:07, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
wrong spelling Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 12:29, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- We cannot discuss an emptied cat. If the cat was wrongly named and you emptied it, you should simply mark it for speedy deletion and not open a discussion here. (If you have doubts on anything you should discuss it before emptying the cat.) This discussion may be closed. --E4024 (talk) 12:42, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Done --E4024 (talk) 12:44, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Delete for unused obsolete category. Xeror (talk) 07:29, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Delete.It is not necessary at present. You may delete it. That's fine for other empty categories to be deleted.（現状では必要ないと思うので、削除していただいてもかまいません。他の削除依頼中の空カテゴリもそれでよいと思います。）--Itasan Returns 06:40, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Done: Empty. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:41, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Wikimedia Labs is no longer named that way. It has been rebranded to Wikimedia Cloud Services and Tool Labs is not wikitech:Help:Toolforge. Therefore this category could be renamed to Commons Toolforge bots to match the rebranding IMHO. —MarcoAurelio 10:40, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
- Support per rebranding. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:10, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- Support - please also (or alternatively) merge with the duplicate Category:Commons toollabs bots. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 00:09, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Done: . --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:44, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
it is empty and should be deleted Cosal (talk) 13:37, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- Well, it was empty because you emptied it. Now that I put the file back into the category it is not empty anymore. Why did you remove the file and why should it be deleted? --Rudolph Buch (talk) 16:12, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- Because categories should contain more than a single image. --Cosal (talk) 14:24, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Cosal: According to which rule? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Done: category stays. No need to delete ist, beause it is used with sense. --Emha (talk) 11:10, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
I think it's obsolete. Jungle fan (talk) 13:16, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: empty category is empty. --Emha (talk) 11:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Category seems to be created/designed for Fenerbahçe SK promotion. E4024 (talk) 08:38, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- I don't see the problem. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:09, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- Are you a Fenerbahçe fan? :) --E4024 (talk) 14:49, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- I enriched the cat with elements that could be more important and relevant than others. My work finished this discussion. It may be closed. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 09:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Done: per discussion. --Emha (talk) 10:59, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
delete, the only item that was in it belongs into Category:HB-QFI (aircraft) Novarupta (talk) 17:21, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: empty category. --Emha (talk) 10:58, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
This seems superfluous. We have categories for each color of background: Category:Images by color of background Guanaco (talk) 21:12, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, the backgrounds under Category:Images by color of background aren't all solid. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:39, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- I suppose we could do Category:Solid blue background as a subcat of this and Category:Blue background, etc. It would be a lot of effort to do effectively, and it may be messy given the large number of overlapping subcats Category:Blue background and others have. I'd say it's not worth it. Guanaco (talk) 08:09, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: per discussion. category was empty, too. --Emha (talk) 10:56, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
This category is redundant to Category:Front views of dog heads and Category:Side views of dog heads Guanaco (talk) 23:11, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Agree. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:40, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- But which one do we keep? We do have Category:Animal faces and Category:Side views of animal heads but we don't have Category:Front views of heads. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:29, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- I think we should keep Category:Front views of dog heads (subcat of Category:Animal faces) and Category:Side views of dog heads (subcat of Category:Animal faces and Category:Side views of animal heads). "Dog faces" would be a parent of both, but it adds unnecessary complexity to have this category with only two possible children. For some other species, it may be better to use a "faces" category because their face can't be seen from the side. Guanaco (talk) 06:41, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- But which one do we keep? We do have Category:Animal faces and Category:Side views of animal heads but we don't have Category:Front views of heads. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:29, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Done: per discussion: deleted the dog faces category and sorted the files in the other ones. --Emha (talk) 10:53, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Shouldn't this be named something similar to Category:Spodiopsar cineraceus (eating), as to follow other categories. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 02:25, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- I am Nmspec who made this category. I assumed "Spodiopsar cineraceus as predators" a name as the place to accumulate the media of the hunting by the gray starling. As the image that a gray starling eats fruit, there is a thing eating a persimmon in "Category:Spodiopsar cineraceus", and I have some similar images in my local disk. I supporse the media eating fruit does not include in this category. I think that hunting like an ancient mammoth hunter vs. eating a piece of meat and vegetables quietly at a restaurant should be the other category. Though there are a lot of categories having the opposite phrase "as prey", why will "as predator" be avoided? If caused by the nuance of the word "predator" has, I am not a daily life English speaker but a mere Japanese, so I am not able to judge which words are appropriate. I think that I would like the naming along the purpose mentioned above by daily life English speakers. --Nmspec (talk) 11:19, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with Nmspec that "as predators" is not the same as "eating". The bird might be photographed eating berries, but we wouldn't say that it preyed on the berries. We could also have media that show the predation behavior but not the subsequent eating of the prey. If we don't like the phrase, we could use something else with the same meaning. For example, we have Category:Pandion haliaetus with prey and other subcats of Category:Birds with prey: maybe "with prey" would be better? --Auntof6 (talk) 05:37, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Josve05a and Nmspec: Are you both alright with moving Category:Spodiopsar cineraceus with prey ? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:00, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- It's OK with me. As far as I watch images of Category:Birds with prey & Category:Insects with prey as sub-position of Category:Predators with prey, I can judge those situation is similar to images of "- as predators". --Nmspec (talk) 16:32, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Josve05a and Nmspec: Are you both alright with moving Category:Spodiopsar cineraceus with prey ? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:00, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with Nmspec that "as predators" is not the same as "eating". The bird might be photographed eating berries, but we wouldn't say that it preyed on the berries. We could also have media that show the predation behavior but not the subsequent eating of the prey. If we don't like the phrase, we could use something else with the same meaning. For example, we have Category:Pandion haliaetus with prey and other subcats of Category:Birds with prey: maybe "with prey" would be better? --Auntof6 (talk) 05:37, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Spodiopsar cineraceus with prey. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:10, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
I just opened the Category:Food ingredients of India. At the Category:Food ingredients by country, all countries, all national cuisines have similar cats. For some reason, Indian, Chinese and Vietnamite cuisines were different. Now there are only two out of order. This cat should be accommodated. E4024 (talk) 08:32, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Food ingredients by country is a mix of two things: food ingredients that are located in a country (which could be used for any kind of food prepared there) and ingredients for the cuisine of a country (which could be getting used anywhere in the world where that cuisine is prepared). See the two cats for Brazil as an example. Based on the category name, Category:Food ingredients by country should contain only the former. We could have a separate category for the latter. The two categories you mention for India would then be in separate categories. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:47, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- I would propose upmerging to Category:Food ingredients of India which I think it redundant with this category. If we want Category:Food ingredients in India this could be created. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:51, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Upmerged to Category:Food ingredients of India. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:16, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure if I'm inventing things in this summer heat; but I cannot understand why a battle is categorized under a person. As a soldier/guerrilla, should Ché not be under the battle cat? Or what? People in the Southern Hemisphere? E4024 (talk) 07:51, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Was Che someone who fault in the Battle of Santa Clara? Or was the Battle of Santa Clara an event in Che's life? Surely not all the images of the battle will feature Che, so Category:Battle of Santa Clara shouldn't be a sub-category of Category:Che Guevara. And not all the images in Category:Che Guevara have anything to do with the battle of Santa Clara, so Category:Che Guevara shouldn't be a sub-category of Category:Battle of Santa Clara. Our system of hierarchy simply doesn't provide an easy solution to this problem. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:42, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
Closing stale discussion. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:22, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
Overlapping or duplicating categories of the same software (under different names).
Both English and Norwegian Wikipedia currently have an article named "GNOME Character Map", while "Gucharmap" is a redirect. WubTheCaptain (talk) 08:45, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, but catalan, german, spanish, slovak and vietnamese ones have Gucharmap as you can see here. Addittionally, in their homepage, the program it's called Gucharmap, and it's furthermore defined this way:
gucharmap is the GNOME Character Map, based on the Unicode Character Database.
- Paucabot (talk) 09:34, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
English wikipedia may call it en:GNOME Character Map but I see no evidence to suppor that it changed its name from Gucharmap. All evidence suggests the name is still Gucharmap. Redirecting to Category:Gucharmap. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:01, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Shouldn't this be merged with Category:People of Korea? 188.117.175.81 12:11, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- Rather not: Koreans as an ethnic group are a different topic than Korean citizens. We have many well-established categories with the same distinction, e.g. Category:Russians vs. Category:People of Russia or Category:Germans vs. Category:People of Germany. Keep. --Rudolph Buch (talk) 16:05, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Rudolph Buch: You plan is to have every ethnic Korean living in Korea categorized by both Category:Koreans and Category:People of Korea? Them same for ethnic Germans in Germany? And ethnic Russians in Russia? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:36, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- Themightyquill, Category:People of some country is usually a subcategory of Category:Some ethnicity, so there´s no need for double categorization. Personally, I would prefer to define it as a topical category, not as an umbrella category - but most of its sister categories are of the umbrella type, so we should not change just one of them. --Rudolph Buch (talk) 10:28, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Rudolph Buch: You plan is to have every ethnic Korean living in Korea categorized by both Category:Koreans and Category:People of Korea? Them same for ethnic Germans in Germany? And ethnic Russians in Russia? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:36, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
I agree with the anon ip that this is weird, but I don't see an obvious better solution. I've added Category:People of Korea to Category:Koreans (which is not accurate some of the time) and added a description to Category:Koreans. But there's no consensus to merge. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:31, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Although the cat has a proper description I'm not satisfied with it. E4024 (talk) 07:27, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- We all know (something I use when I am not sure if what I know is correct) that "Roma people" are called so since political correction was invented. Before that, they were Gipsies in English, Çingene in Turkish, Gitanos in Spanish etc. This cat is presented as a subcat of Category:Roma people in Spain. In both (mother and son) cats we see similar people. Some cantoras, flamenco stars etc. One of them is Manitas de Plata. He is a member of this cat, but also of Category:Roma men in France. I cannot understand this. If this "Gitanos" is a subcat of Category:Roma people in Spain, Manitas de Plata could not be in the French cat. Or when Spanish "Gitanos" move to Paris for some reason, they change ethnicity? I think we should re-consider having both cats, "Gitanos" and "Roma people" in -not only Spain- all countries. In Turkey, when I was a small kid, my city had a shantytown that we called "Çingene mahallesi": Now there is no such city quarter, and the people of that "mahalle" live among us, anywhere, go to university, have a deputy in the parliament etc and they are called "Roman". As we do not have two cats for this people in Turkey, neither we should have them in Spain. Am I wrong? --E4024 (talk) 07:39, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- While "Gitano" in Spanish can be used generally for all the Roma and Sinti, I think that in this category and in English and "Gitane" in French, it means the branch of the Roma associated with Spain, Portugal and Southern France. I have also seen them called Calé. Hence, a Roma in Spain from Romania should not be classed here, a speaker of Erromintxela should not as well. However Gipsy Kings and Manitas de Plata should, even if they are French, but Django Reinhardt shouldn't because he is a French Roma from a different branch.
- I have added Gitanos to Roma people in France and Portugal. --Error (talk) 23:38, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- I see that you know a lot on this subject and admire your knowledge. Therefore maybe you can reply me to the question: Why do we call "Çingen, Çingene" in Turkish all the Gipsy people? I have no doubt the words have a common etymology with Gitano. On the other hand, while we Turks call our Gipsies "Roman" (officially/correctly) and the other way colloquially, they also name themselves "Kale". Are these similarities a coincidence? The "Gitane music" is from Spain, Portugal and Southern France only? While I learn more I get more confused... --E4024 (talk) 06:02, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- @E4024: See en:Romani_people#Exonyms for a clear explanation. "Rom" means man or husband in the Romani language. There is no connection with Romans - that's just coincidence. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:01, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Friends, Romans, countrymen, I added a pic on top, from Kadıköy, Istanbul. --E4024 (talk) 15:47, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
No consensus for change. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:41, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
It's an undefined category and you also can't get it by the title or the cats. Sanandros (talk) 08:15, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- BTW, is this a proper name? --E4024 (talk) 08:19, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
- Background
Task Force Tips, Inc is a business the creates an manufactures fire equipment, notably, the nozzle tips that allow firefighters to react to changing fire conditions immediately. The company is both a manufacturing business and a museum of firefighting equipment. Thus, it's similar to:
- c:Category:Fire engines by brand
- Other equipment companies
Not to mention that it's a museum, i.e., c:Category:Firefighting museums in the United States. So, what's the question? There are plenty of categories that match this type of listing and each of the images has been categorized into the other categories to which the display images below, i.e., Seagrave Fire Apparatus, Fire Helmets, etc. I become confused and dispirited by the few (yes, only a few of questions like this that come up. No, there are not a lot of categories to place the image topic, e.g., Task Force Tips into. It's not just a company of ladders or of just hoses but, it's seems to be the predominate fire nozzle company in the US and possibly the world. --Chris Light (talk) 15:25, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
- I would suggest Category:Task Force Tips for the company and its products, with a sub-category Category:Task Force Tips Fire Museum for the museum and its collections. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:56, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Created subcategory at Category:Task Force Tips Fire Museum. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:20, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
recommend move and redirect to Category:Bristol, Kenosha County, Wisconsin because the village and former town are unlikely to be substantially different on Commons --Closeapple (talk) 06:14, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- Support as nominator: The village of Bristol was formed in 2009 and within a year annexed substantially all of Town of Bristol, Kenosha County; some annexed into Kenosha earlier and Pleasant Prairie, but 90% of the original square township fell to the village in 2010, and the town went defunct. (You can see a map of the current situation at en:File:Kenosha County Wisconsin Incorporated and Unincorporated areas Bristol Highlighted.svg to see the result.) Because Commons usually bases geographic categories on current boundaries, it's likely that Commons will ever distinguish between between the former town (Wikidata:Q4968770) and the current village (Wikidata:Q3709271). --Closeapple (talk) 06:23, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- I am sorry. I was going by the Wikipedia article Bristol (village), Wisconsin which I'll attach to the category, even if it ends up being deleted. Thanks, Kalbbes (talk) 14:05, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- Support Villages and towns are very different in Wisconsin (cities/village are an urban unit of government and towns are the rural unit of government between the cities/villages). But in this case of a village annexing almost the entire town causes this redirect makes sense. I'm a Wisconsin native/resident. Royalbroil 01:58, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
No opposition, lots of support. Moved to Category:Bristol, Kenosha County, Wisconsin. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:25, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
This category should be renamed "Don Det", as this is the used name nearly everywhere, in particular on the wiki-sites (see discussion page) Basile Morin (talk) 09:58, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
These 3 categories should be renamed as follow :
- Det Island -> Don Det
- Khon Island -> Don Khon
- Som Island -> Don Som
Even if Don in Lao means Island, the spread names of these places are Don Det, Don Khon and Don Som.
Like in Thai, where Ko means Island, all the islands of Thailand are refered on Wikimedia with their current name, for example Ko Samui is not called Samui Island.
Don Det, Don Khon, and Don Som are all parts of the category Si Phan Don, which means Four Thousand Islands in Lao. However this category is not called "4000 Islands" here, neither on Wikipedia, this archipelagoe is just called Si Phan Don.
All the Wiki-site pages mention Don Det, Don Khon and Don Som with their used names. Below are a few links :
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Det%E2%80%93Don_Khon_narrow-gauge_railway
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si_Phan_Don
- http://wikitravel.org/en/Don_Det
- http://wikitravel.org/en/Don_Khon
- https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Don_Det
- https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Don_Khon
- https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Si_Phan_Don
Surprisingly, the right names are mentionned in English in the descriptions of each category by the creator, which is a good start to rename these categories. Basile Morin (talk) 10:00, 27 August 2017 (UTC) All the travel guides also call Don Det, Don Khon and Si Phan Don litteraly with their spread names, like for example the Lonely Planet : https://www.lonelyplanet.com/laos/southern-laos/don-det-and-don-khon
Locally, the people in Si Phan Don themselves call their villages Don Det, Don Khon or Don Som in full in the everyday life, and not only "Det", "Khon", or "Som" (that could be easier, since they all know they live on an island, they could avoid the precision, but no).
Since these islands are getting better known, it seems important to fix the names of the categories early before they get bigger. --Basile Morin (talk) 10:00, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
No opposition in over a month. Moved to Category:Don Som, Category:Don Khon and Category:Don Det. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:29, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
This category should be renamed "Don Som", as this is the used name nearly everywhere, in particular on the wiki-sites (see discussion page) Basile Morin (talk) 10:02, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
These 3 categories should be renamed as follow :
- Det Island -> Don Det
- Khon Island -> Don Khon
- Som Island -> Don Som
Even if Don in Lao means Island, the spread names of these places are Don Det, Don Khon and Don Som.
Like in Thai, where Ko means Island, all the islands of Thailand are refered on Wikimedia with their current name, for example Ko Samui is not called Samui Island.
Don Det, Don Khon, and Don Som are all parts of the category Si Phan Don, which means Four Thousand Islands in Lao. However this category is not called "4000 Islands" here, neither on Wikipedia, this archipelagoe is just called Si Phan Don.
All the Wiki-site pages mention Don Det, Don Khon and Don Som with their used names. Below are a few links :
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don_Det%E2%80%93Don_Khon_narrow-gauge_railway
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Si_Phan_Don
- http://wikitravel.org/en/Don_Det
- http://wikitravel.org/en/Don_Khon
- https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Don_Det
- https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Don_Khon
- https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Si_Phan_Don
Surprisingly, the right names are mentionned in English in the descriptions of each category by the creator, which is a good start to rename these categories. Basile Morin (talk) 10:02, 27 August 2017 (UTC) All the travel guides also call Don Det, Don Khon and Si Phan Don litteraly with their spread names, like for example the Lonely Planet : https://www.lonelyplanet.com/laos/southern-laos/don-det-and-don-khon
Locally, the people in Si Phan Don themselves call their villages Don Det, Don Khon or Don Som in full in the everyday life, and not only "Det", "Khon", or "Som" (that could be easier, since they all know they live on an island, they could avoid the precision, but no).
Since these islands are getting better known, it seems important to fix the names of the categories early before they get bigger. --Basile Morin (talk) 10:02, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
No opposition in over a month. Moved to Category:Don Som, Category:Don Khon and Category:Don Det. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:29, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
now obsolete category. Cameron Kay (talk) 12:37, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- I moved the images, but is UAE Cement Manufacturer an old name of Category:JK Cement Works ? If so, I'd say it makes sense to leave the redirect. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:34, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Closing. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:23, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Delete for unused obsolete category. Xeror (talk) 17:43, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- This category is not unnecessary because there are some files that can be categorized in this (File:Emblem of Takamatsu, Kagawa.svg, File:Takamatsu Kagawa chapter.JPG, File:Flag of Takamatsu, Kagawa.svg, File:Flag of Takamatsu, Kagawa.png, File:Fire.hydrant.cover.in.takamatsu.city.jpg and historical symbols: File:Manhole.cover.in.takamatsu.city.jpg, File:Emblem of Mure, Kagawa.svg, File:Flag of Mure Kagawa.JPG, File:Aji Kagawa chapter.JPG, File:Flag of Aji Kagawa.JPG, File:Konan Kagawa chapter.JPG, File:Flag of Konan Kagawa.JPG, File:Emblem of Kokubunji, Kagawa.svg, File:Flag of Kokubunji Kagawa.JPG, File:Shioe Kagawa chapter.JPG and File:Flag of Shioe Kagawa.JPG).--庚寅五月 (talk)
There were at least four files in this category that were removed without explanation prior to the nomination. I've returned them, and I'm closing discussion. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:18, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
A category that collects only private works. Such a person does not exist in Japanese Imperial Family. It is suspected that it was created for the purpose of slandering the Imperial Family of Japan, in particular Emperor Showa. M-sho-gun (talk) 08:28, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
I will ask you to delete this category and all the files contained in it.--M-sho-gun (talk) 08:31, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Keep. Hitohito and Hirohito are two different people and that's the confusion that their names almost sound similar and that I made Hitohito myself. Please respect that. And it doesn't slender with the Japanese Imperial Family unless it serve as a purpose to be a member of an Emperor. Another thing, my grandmother made the toy. It's under CC-BY-SA 4.0 because I am the one that owns the toy and I came up with the idea of Hitohito two years ago. Where else would I upload them? Flickr? Honestly, I feel like I should be treated with disrespect with this behaviour and I suggest you leave the Hitohito plush toy by itself for my user page. Thanks. Gar (talk) 14:49, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- @M-sho-gun: You might propose deleting these images as out of scope, but so long as they exist, it makes sense to keep the category. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:17, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Images still exist months later. Closing discussion. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:54, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Non-notable person, doesn't need own category, see also Commons:Deletion requests/Guy Lebègue. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. Per nom. Bios deleted on en and fr wikis. --Randykitty (talk) 20:57, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue is sufficient. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- The cat is empty, BTW. --E4024 (talk) 14:54, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Only because p199 removed Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:06, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Un intervenant dit : Non-notable person. Il y a de nombreux articles ouverts dans COMMONS dans ce cas, par exemple Category Anne Fulda.--Cordialement, Kasos_Fr, (talk) 08:25, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Not the same thing: there are articles on Anne Fulda on the French and English wikis. The corresponding articles on Guy Lebègue have been deleted after community discussions for lack of notability. Even if the cases were comparable, on enWP we call arguments like this "en:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS" (on the frWP: fr:WP:PIKACHU)... --Randykitty (talk) 08:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Dans l'article sur Creator, il est dit : Anybody who is an author or creator of works hosted on Commons and meets notability requirements for Wikidata items, Commons categories. Il n'est pas imposé que l'individu ait un article biographique dans une quelconque encyclopédie Wikipedia!--Cordialement, Kasos_Fr, (talk) 15:02, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Not the same thing: there are articles on Anne Fulda on the French and English wikis. The corresponding articles on Guy Lebègue have been deleted after community discussions for lack of notability. Even if the cases were comparable, on enWP we call arguments like this "en:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS" (on the frWP: fr:WP:PIKACHU)... --Randykitty (talk) 08:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Un intervenant dit : Non-notable person. Il y a de nombreux articles ouverts dans COMMONS dans ce cas, par exemple Category Anne Fulda.--Cordialement, Kasos_Fr, (talk) 08:25, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- Only because p199 removed Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:06, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- The above by User:Kasos fr is interesting. If it is not a violation of any policy I'd say let's keep the cat. It is the least we can do for a good contributor of Commons, as Monsieur Guy Lebègue, just before his 80'th birthday. I'm afraid we are disencouraging Mr Lebègue, who has contributed with a hundred or more quality pics to Commons, with these never-ending discussions. This is my final statement. I the undersigned, having duly examined... --E4024 (talk) 07:16, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Kasos fr: I think you may have misunderstood. Commons:Creator says "Who should have creator page: Anybody who is an author or creator of works hosted on Commons and meets notability requirements for Wikidata items, Commons categories or for Wikipedia articles." (Qui devrait avoir une page créatrice: Toute personne qui est un auteur ou créateur d'œuvres hébergées sur Commons et répond aux exigences de notabilité pour les articles Wikidata, catégories communes ou pour les articles de Wikipedia.) It's stating who should have a {{Creator}} template, not who should have a personal category. And the requirement is 1) anyone who has works on commons AND who meets the notability requirements for a wikidata item, a commons category or wikipedia articles. If this was a rule rather than a proposed guideline, it would only suggest that Guy Lebègue should not have a "creator" template if we delete his category. It certainly doesn't suggest, the opposite, that the fact that he has a creator template justifies him having a persion bio category. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:11, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- @E4024: Commons categories are not rewards, they are designed to arrange useful content. If Guy Lebègue is a commons user, he can set up his own user category. If he is not a user, I seriously doubt he cares if he has a personal bio category as a parent for Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue (which I think should stay). - Themightyquill (talk) 08:11, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep If we have Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue than I would keep Category:Guy Lebègue as otherwise regular categories get wired. --Jarekt (talk) 18:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- I don't see the problem. We have plenty of categories named "Photos by John Doe" without a corresponding category "John Doe". --Randykitty (talk) 19:02, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- I restructured the categories a bit, so no more Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue and all the content of that category ended up in Category:Guy Lebègue, which has much more parent categories. --Jarekt (talk) 19:04, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- I don't think this resolves the problem. All those same categories could just as well fit in a category called Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue without a Category:Guy Lebègue. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:10, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- (ec)Seems rather illogical to me, "Photographs by Guy Lebègue" (like is done for dozens of other such cats) makes much more sense, because that is what is in the categories: photographs. A category "Guy Lebègue" gives the impression that it contains stuff about GL, which is incorrect. As an aside, the box at the top of the cat contains a link to "authority control", but the only reason that Wikidata item exists is because there's a category "Guy Lebègue"... --Randykitty (talk) 19:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
- I second the comments from User:Randykitty. Category:Guy Lebègue is for pictures of the actual person, whereas Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue is for his work. No need to have a corresponding category (i.e. there is Category:Photos by P199, but not Category:P199). He is not notable, so he doesn't need his own category.
Furthermore, the changes that User:Jarekt made today do NOT follow category logic and rules. I will revert.--P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
No good reasons supplied to justified this category's existenced. Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:37, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Bridges "on" isn't a usually better denomination to define a category of bridges that cross a river; in Commons for example now we have Category:Bridges over the River Thames but also Category:Bridges across the River Severn (on en.wiki it seems to have no clear preferences, see please en:Category:Bridges in England by river) Threecharlie (talk) 08:28, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, Threecharlie, according to Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/06/Category:Bridges over the Medway we have no preference for over or across, but "on" is far less common. Take your pick. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:30, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: "Over" seems be much more prevalent than "on" or "across". Moved and redirected. --Rodhullandemu (talk) 14:22, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
I am renaming this cat as Mehter. "Janissary marching band" is a historical description. Every city in Turkey has a mehter and this cat is only related to a "former country". Do we have a problem with the Republic of Turkey here? I hope not. E4024 (talk) 14:53, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
- Done without objections. Closing. --E4024 (talk) 08:27, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Individial people must have relevancy to have an onw category. So I propose to delte this cat. Sanandros (talk) 06:41, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- I don't think that's actually a rule, Sanandros, though perhaps it could be made a rule. On the other hand, we have a substantial number of photos of this man, so perhaps it makes sense to group them together. I'm fairly neutral. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:13, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Converted to a hidden tracking category for confusion-reduction only, per my closes on the discussions linked above. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 07:05, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
In 2015 the Burundi province has been split, see Category:Provinces of Burundi and Category:Provinces of Burundi (before 2015). I suggest this category to be renamed to Category:SVG locator maps of Provinces in Burundi (before 2015) (location map scheme). The same goes for the contents. Wikiwerner (talk) 18:03, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
I ended up updating the files, so moving the category is no longer necessary. Pikne 15:17, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Category is no longer needed. Zhangj1079 (T|C|U) 14:24, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
@Zhangj1079: closed. The redirect to Category:Toronto Waterfront WaveDecks is created.--Estopedist1 (talk) 08:11, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
unnecessary category level Physanto (talk) 16:58, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Empty. Waiting to be deleted--Estopedist1 (talk) 08:16, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Deleted. Taivo (talk) 08:58, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
Merge request - this category and Category:Noobz are about the same films and should be merged. I am just not sure what name to use as the word "Noobz" exists outside the film, but just barely. DGtal (talk) 08:41, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
- I wonder if the word "noobz" without a disambiguator would be used by vandals to insult people by adding them to the category. I'm not sure how likely it is though. --Closeapple (talk) 06:34, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- I doubt it will happen very often. DGtal (talk) 06:01, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: per discussion. --ƏXPLICIT 00:25, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
this category is unneeded and may later be recreated. --ISIL-KP (talk) 21:32, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: by Taivo. --ƏXPLICIT 00:27, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
this category is empty and will stay empty David Van Dusseldorp (talk) 06:33, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 00:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Category moved to Category:Road signs in the Swedish language. Fry1989 eh? 18:51, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Please discuss at Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/08/Category:Road signs in Hebrew language. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:16, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Done: already redirected. --ƏXPLICIT 00:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Category moved to Category:Road signs in the Catalan language. Fry1989 eh? 19:53, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Why? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 03:47, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: already redirected. --ƏXPLICIT 00:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Category moved to Category:Road signs in the Portuguese language. Fry1989 eh? 19:20, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Please discuss at Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/08/Category:Road signs in Hebrew language. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:18, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Done: moved to Category:Portuguese language road signs by Túrelio. --ƏXPLICIT 00:28, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Category moved to Category:Road signs in the Latvian language. Fry1989 eh? 19:31, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Please discuss at Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/08/Category:Road signs in Hebrew language. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:18, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Done: already redirected. --ƏXPLICIT 00:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Delete for unused obsolete category. Xeror (talk) 07:22, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 00:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Delete for unused obsolete category. Xeror (talk) 07:25, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- This category is not unnecessary because there are some files that can be categorized in this (File:Emblem of Edogawa, Tokyo.svg, File:Edogawa Tokyo chapter.JPG and File:Flag of Edogawa, Tokyo.svg).--庚寅五月 (talk) 16:11, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- File:Edogawa Tokyo chapter.JPG is superseded by File:Emblem of Edogawa, Tokyo.svg and will possibly be removed. 2 files are too few for a subcategory, or otherwise every district, city, town, village needs an additional subcategory of such kind and there will be thousands of subcategories need to be created. --Xeror (talk) 18:15, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: per discussion. --ƏXPLICIT 00:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Delete for unused obsolete category. Xeror (talk) 07:26, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- This category is not unnecessary because there are some files that can be categorized in this (File:Emblem of Musashino, Tokyo.svg, File:Flag of Musashino, Tokyo.svg and File:Manhole.cover.in.musashino.city.jpg).--庚寅五月 (talk) 16:15, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Again, 3 files are too few for a subcategory. And more than thousand of subcategories need to be created for every city, district, town and village for one flag and one emblem. --Xeror (talk) 18:19, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- It is not necessary to create this type of categories when there are only minimum number of files (two of a emblem and a flag) that can be categorized about a municipality. But if there are more files, it is useful to create this type of category to indicate that (see also Category:Symbols of cities by country).--庚寅五月 (talk)
- Again, 3 files are too few for a subcategory. And more than thousand of subcategories need to be created for every city, district, town and village for one flag and one emblem. --Xeror (talk) 18:19, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: per discussion. --ƏXPLICIT 00:31, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Delete for unused obsolete category. Xeror (talk) 07:32, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- This category is not unnecessary because there are some files that can be categorized in this (File:Emblem of Machida, Tokyo.svg, File:Machida Tokyo chapter.JPG, File:Flag of Machida, Tokyo.svg and File:Machida-town Tokyo chapter.png).--庚寅五月 (talk) 16:15, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Same argument as above. Two of the four files are superseded by the other two, and will possibly be removed. --Xeror (talk) 18:21, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- In addition to the above, File:Tokoyo Metoro Machida City Country Sign3.JPG, File:Tokoyo Metoro Machida City Country Sign3.JPG, File:Tokyo Metropolitan and Machida City Country Sign 1.jpg and File:Tokoyo Metoro Machida City Country Sign2.JPG seems to be able to categorize. Incidentally, File:Machida-town Tokyo chapter.png is not duplicate file because it is a former emblem of this municipality.--庚寅五月 (talk)
- Same argument as above. Two of the four files are superseded by the other two, and will possibly be removed. --Xeror (talk) 18:21, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Done: per nomination. --ƏXPLICIT 00:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
should probably be renamed '... 1912' ---> '... 1612' ? Jochen Burghardt (talk) 06:17, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
In this case, the distiction to Category:Quinti Horatii Flacci emblemata is unclear; both cat.s should possibly be joined. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 06:21, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- I've fixed the typo and moved the category to Category:Quinti Horatii Flacci emblemata (1612). Whether or not it should be upmerged to Category:Quinti Horatii Flacci emblemata is unclear to me. I don't know what Category:Emblemata - imaginibus in aes incisis, notisque illustrata (1607) is about or why it's a sub-category of Category:Quinti Horatii Flacci emblemata. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:44, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Done: by Themightyquill. --ƏXPLICIT 00:33, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
The relation with Category:New Year's Eve food is not clear; possibly for this reason similar images are distributed among these two categories, while some of them are present in both cats. Something could be done to clear this mess. E4024 (talk) 10:43, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- With or without relation to this, a cat for "New Year dinner tables" could help. I was looking for that cat to add to this file and noticed the confusion. I hope I am not the only confused user. --E4024 (talk) 10:46, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
FYI, I recategorized the cuisine one from Category:New Year celebrations to Category:New Year's Day, because the cat name didn't indicate that it was specifically for celebrations. As for resolving the possibly duplicate cats:
- I think "food" is a better term to use, because "cuisine" sounds more like the entire food culture of a whole country or culture. The things here seem like individual foods that are traditional for New Year's.
- The category needs to specify the intended scope. Is it foods that are traditional for New Year's? Food that happened to be photographed on New Year's? Ideally, thae scope should be indicated in the category name.
By the way, we should probably do something to get these categories out from under the January category, because some new year days aren't on January 1. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:15, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Indeed New Year's Eve is 31 December, right? --E4024 (talk) 12:13, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- It is in the Gregorian calendar, but the new year is observed on other days in some calendars/cultures. For example, Chinese New Year is later in January or in February (the Gregorian date varies). --Auntof6 (talk) 14:58, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- I was only trying to draw a line between a "Western" dinner and the following day's "lunch". (Of course if stomachs are not aching... :-) We have several confusions here. --E4024 (talk) 15:01, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- It is in the Gregorian calendar, but the new year is observed on other days in some calendars/cultures. For example, Chinese New Year is later in January or in February (the Gregorian date varies). --Auntof6 (talk) 14:58, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Indeed New Year's Eve is 31 December, right? --E4024 (talk) 12:13, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- We now have Category:New Year's Day food and Category:New Year's Eve food as subcategories for western celebrations. I'd say leave Category:New Year cuisine as a generic category under Category:New Year celebrations. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:39, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
No consensus to move. - Themightyquill (talk) 12:41, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Its name was changed to Globe Life Park in Arlington in February 2014. Therefore, I propose the category be renamed likewise and replaced with a soft redirect to the new category. This has been the practice for other renamed Major League Baseball venues, such as Jacobs Field and SkyDome. Waz8 (talk) 15:56, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Since there has been no opposition, I am requesting the move via CommonsDelinker. Since it is a non-controversial move, this probably would have been appropriate, initially. Waz8 (talk) 01:58, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Move has been completed, and I have cleaned-up category remnants. Waz8 (talk) 00:24, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Done by Waz8. – BMacZero (🗩) 20:46, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
Please see below. E4024 (talk) 08:07, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- This is a direct translation from the Catalan term "Pais Valencià", however, Google Books searches do not present many references to "Land of Valencia" in English. (More possibly you find a ref to "Valencia, land of wine".) I believe we should rename all the cats with "Land of Valencia" to something more conventional and acceptable in English. Your opinions? (Note:Please also see the TP of the cat.) --E4024 (talk) 08:11, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Maybe "Valencian Community", as on English Wikipedia? --Auntof6 (talk) 06:13, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Why not? --E4024 (talk) 14:41, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Land of Valencia isn't the direct translation of "País Valencià", that translation would be "Valencian Country". Land of Valencia has been the translation used in english by the Valencian Government since the 80's. It was even used in a publicity campaign led by Julio Iglesias. You can also check Here.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 07:56, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- It's good to have Valencian-speaking friends participating in the discussion at last. Without looking at those links, I need to know if "Land of Valencia" is a common name in English, or not. What the Valencian Government does is not so important for us... --E4024 (talk) 08:01, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Ah, and Mr Iglesias should first of all recognize being the father of that young man, whose name I forgot and who looks so much like him -como dos gotas de agua-. No? (This is just a joke to cool down. :) --E4024 (talk) 08:04, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- Your links:"Cuadernos de Turismo", in its English version uses "Country Valenciano"! "ScienceDirect" prefers "region of Valencia"? Maybe I see the texts differently down here in Ankara. --E4024 (talk) 08:11, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- "Cuadernos de Turismo" might use "Valencian Country" (which is a literal translation of "País Valencià") and "Science direct" might use "region of Valencia", but both sources explain the use of "Land of Valencia" in papers quoted in their text, like that White Paper on Valencian Tourism published by the government itself. In short: "Land of Valencia" is the name in English for that territory (Region of Valencia, Valencian Country, Valencian Community). All the other names are just literal translations of the Spanish/Catalan denominations.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 12:33, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
- ¿Y por qué no "Land of Castile and León", " Land of Andalusia"? ¿Land of "dieciséis comunidades autónomas y una comunidad foral (Navarra), además de Ceuta y Melilla, cuyos estatutos de autonomía les otorgan el rango de ciudades autónomas" que conforman el Reino de España? "... the name in English for that territory" (these territories). Y ¿"Land of Spain"? Quizás mejor "Land of Iberian Penisula", que así no aparece España.
- Me parece ¿poco serio? que "the use of "Land of Valencia" in papers quoted in their text, like that White Paper on Valencian Tourism published by the government itself" tenga mayor relevancia que todo el bagaje documental legal, que me ahorro citar, y permita concluir: In short:....
- Buscando y rebuscando en cualquier papel publicado por cualquier departamento de cualquier consejería, casi seguro se encuentra algo similar, que permita cualquier justificación ¿artificial?, sobre todo si se busca esa justificación.--Galopax (talk) 20:05, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- If there is a consensus to use "Land of Castille and Leon" or "Land of Andalusia", then ahead with the change. For any other case, Other stuff exists.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 16:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
- "Cuadernos de Turismo" might use "Valencian Country" (which is a literal translation of "País Valencià") and "Science direct" might use "region of Valencia", but both sources explain the use of "Land of Valencia" in papers quoted in their text, like that White Paper on Valencian Tourism published by the government itself. In short: "Land of Valencia" is the name in English for that territory (Region of Valencia, Valencian Country, Valencian Community). All the other names are just literal translations of the Spanish/Catalan denominations.--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 12:33, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
I agree Valencian Community is the proper name of this region, hence this is the term used in the English wiki. Regards, tyk (talk) 09:28, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
- Category:Basketball players from Valencian Community, myself, and several other neutral users are ready for a move to Category:Valencian Community. Moltes gràcies. --E4024 (talk) 18:05, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
Being from the Land of Valencia myself, I found that expression very user friendly. For those out of context, during the 1970s and 80s there was a furious debate about the name of the place: País Valencià (Valencian Country) vs Reino de Valencia (Kingdom of Valencia). The unlikely winner was Comunitat Valenciana (Valencian Community), a name nobody liked in the beginning, but that being official, is widely used. The Estatut d'Autonomia mentions all three names, by the way, what will not avoid your being insulted when using the wrong name among the wrong people. So, it's great to have Land of Valencia around! As neutral as I can imagine.
The main problem with the Land of Valencia is that many places here have no picture in Commons. That's what Commoners in the Land of Valencia worry about. I remmember having a conversation about Vilanova de Castelló/Castelló de la Ribera/Villanueva de Castellón (yes: a place in the Land of Valencia with three opposed names). Our conclussion was that as far as they where uploading pictures, any name would do (in fact, I have found even one picture with the name in Castilian Spanish). So I don't find any use on all this discussion but wasting a time we need for other things, such as improving lists of Valencian monuments, which is what I'll do this morning. B25es (talk) 06:48, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry for wasting your time. I do insist we must rename this cat and all its offspring. --E4024 (talk) 16:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Not done: kept as is. --JuTa 13:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
This CfD is about 10,473 images that this category currently includes and that are inappropriately mass-categorized as "politicians" and "unidenfied". Apparently these are images for which uploader hasn't checked whether subject is unidentified, whether it needs to be identified or whether it's a politician. These are images from three Flickr streams, namely EU2016 NL, EU2016 SK and EU2017EE.
There are 1) images like this, that don't depict any persons, 2) images like this, where no single person prominently is the subject, that is worth identifying, or is not even identifiable, 3) images like this, where individuals are actually already identified in file title and description, and 4) images like this, that were mass-categorized as "politicians", but are not politicians. These streams also include lots of images of civil servants, diplomats, journalists etc. Even if some person prominently is the subject, identifying one might not be necessary (e.g. some non-notable clerk, photographer). So keeping these images in a category that indicates necessity to identify, or that subject is "politicians" or any people, is wrong and misleading.
Two possible solutions are:
- just remove all images from this category, without moving to any other category, because at least one correct topic category is already present (EU council presidency related or more specific), or
- sort images between three Flickr streams, and move them into categories like "Images from EU2016 NL Flickr stream to check" (similar to this), which can be tagged as {{To check category header}} and where uploader can further specify what exactly is expected to be checked.
--62.65.58.165 13:47, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment And a third would be to categorize like me and others suggested in Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_65#User:Tm_careless_categorization and Commons:Deletion requests/Eesistumise kaasamisüritused. It seems that despite every move, categorization, your never satisfied, like i and others did with around 6000 other images of this flickr streams.
- As someone behind a anonymous IP, someone that started editing with this IP a little more than a month ago, and still claims to know in depth and that never claimed that (...) was an inexperienced user and that "Per en:WP:SOCK an abuse is to mislead or to deceive, and on the other hand, possibly having had different address, or possibly having had a registered account and editing without being logged in in itself is not an abuse. I never claimed that I was an inexperienced user." you are confirming that you have an estabished account and still prefer to edit will logged off. That admition has let me, Tuvalkin and other users (like saying that you are "obviously a long term user acting anonymously and quite probably sockpuppeting") wondering what are your real motives to edit as an IP and not with your main account. This is really fishy, to say the least. Tm (talk) 18:50, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Let's stay on topic. Getting personal here is as unncessary as it was before.
- What are you refering to by "third" solution? The only suggestion at COM:AN by others (i. e. Fæ) was pretty much the same as the solution no. 1 above, I quote: "can be dropped without any harm". This was before you introduced your own "solution" by moving all these images from "Politicians of Europe" to here, which only added the "unidentified" part of the current confusion. As described above, it's still wrong and misleading, so obviously I'm not satisfied, and I doubt that anyone else is.
- It's true that some recent uploads from these streams are properly categorized by now, mainly by me, and after taking the issue from user talk to COM:AN, partly also by you. Though it's more like 1000...2000 images, not 6000, recent stream has only around 3000 images in total, and the total of the given category has stayed some above 10,000. But other recent uploads still end up inappropriately mass-categorized and older ones have been over a year or so.
- What makes me wonder the most here is your stubbornness to keep using given category for careless mass-categorization. You are not even trying to address the actual issue, nor are you trying to explain why the above solutions wouldn't be superior to current situation, even though the latter of the two even concerns your probable will to have some sort of maintenance category. 62.65.58.165 20:25, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- First it seems that even after this category was discussed in Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_65#User:Tm_careless_categorization, and no one took the first option, as you are trying to make it appear, and was closed your trying a second round.
- In this second round, you really continue to love to distort, misquote and hide what other users tell. First, quote the all context and not what suits you. What Fæ said was that "It would be refreshing if rather than threats and gripes, there were positive suggestions about how mass categorization of these batch uploads could be realistically automated. If categorization in this area is too complex for automation, I suggest simply stripping the categories en mass, and leaving them in a to-be-sorted maintenance cat." What do you think that this catgory that you want to empty is? This is a category maintenance, category created by me, by his suggestion. Take care that after i created this category no one else aswered that discussion dispite your attempts at restarting that discussion
- Also you conveniently left out that Fæ said about you that he "never feel obliged to respond to IP addresses when they are obviously a long term user acting anonymously and quite probably sockpuppeting" when talking about you, someone that already admited that is someone with a main account, and so your actions can and were legitimately question to what are your motives in your editions and what are you hiding behind your IP and your refusal to log in to your main account.
- Also you misquote the numbers of files, as usual. The three streams have in them a total of 14073 files (2016 Slovak EU Council Presidency flickr stream with 4 911 files; 2017 Estonian EU Council Presidency flickr stream with 3 079 files; 2016 Dutch EU Council Presidency flickr stream with 6 083 files)
- The total is around 6000 as to that total you have to add the total of several thousand files from Category:Photos from European People's Party, uploaded and categorized by me in the last couple of years and several others, leaving around 6000 files properly categorized by me in this last couple of years from this flickr streams.
- Even if you leave out it still 3610 files properly categorized, not the 1000-2000 as you claimed. In this case you did not knew my previous work, but dont try to correct others when you dont have the all picture.
- So it wasnt you that categorized the greater part, as you claim. You categorized at most around 500-800 files, and me alone categorized namy more in this last year, besides other users making proper categorizations, way before you appeared. So dont try to claim to you what you clearly did not made.
- And so the maintenance category, this Category:Unidentified politicians of Europe is created and so your last actions, after a previous discussion, make me ask what are your real intentions in continue to attempt to empty this category and refuse to lon in to your main account and edit behind an IP, and continue to refuse to answer to what are your motives, when asked by three users, trying to deviate from answering straight forward what is your manin account. Tm (talk) 20:58, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Pardon, but here you did exactly what you accuse me of: you distort. Yes, generally speaking Fæ tells that to-be-sorted maintenance category is an option for batch uploads (i. e. option no. 2 at the top). But what's relevant here, looking at given images Fæ noted that images are "already added [to] one other meaningful category" (i. e. EU council presidency category) and so politicians category "can be dropped without any harm" (i. e. option no. 1 at the top). It's unlikely that "Unidentified politicians of Europe" is what Fæ meant by a maintenance category. Firstly, that sort of categories are in topic tree (not maintenance) of the category system and secondly, it's hard not to notice that given category is misleading.
- As for an irrelevant personal attack, I've no idea why would I quote that. The part where I'm accused of having no positive suggestions has been proven wrong repeatedly, the first thing I did after running into this issue was to come to you with a suggestion, not a suggestion about better automation, but still a positive suggestion. And I haven't admitted anything about "a main account", other than what's obvious: I haven't had the same IP address since beginning of times. I don't think that sort of questioning without certain other suspected account being involved editing related talks or files is legitimate at all. It's instead harassing.
- Pardon, when did I misquote numbers before? And here I'm obviously talking about images from given three Flickr streams and obviously about the categorization work that has been done since the issue was brought up. Since you told about "satisfying" me with categorization work, then how could it be otherwise. Over a past month about what I said (1000...2000) have been categorized. Only European People's Party images that have been included in given category recently, were the 2 images that I removed today (the rest are in another category, an actual maintenance category), this adds pretty much like nothing to numbers. In relation to given issue, this number, whatever it's claimed to be, has little relevance, of course.
- Previous discussion that you refer to didn't settle this thing in any way. As I understand at COM:AN they just didn't care enough to do anything about it, but it was more or less agreed that what you are doing with this category is problematic, even by Fæ (as above). 62.65.58.165 22:13, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- As it seems that you continue to distort what me and other said, i will repeat again to see if you understand.
- 1- This category was previously discussed as said above in ANU, and no one discussed after i created this category. Your attempt to continue this discussion, when no one continued with the previuos discussion and so didnt went the way you liked, in other venue is disruptive to say the least. Attempting to remove images from this category in masse, without categorying them properly, is vandalism.
- You claim that " it was more or less agreed that what you are doing with this category is problematic". Where on 3 other users? Daphne Lantier only asked if your concerns where valid or when Fae said "this case about uploads from last year, so it does not seem especially urgent", suggested for the creation of a maintenance category that was created? Or are you talking about a administrator that asked for my block when he has a previous history of overtuned blocks against me and previous personal insults? This discussion stopped when i created this category and no one responded so this was closed previously to satisfaction and not as you claimed that at "COM:AN they just didn't care enough to do anything about it".
- 2- As you claim to be a long term user you should know that there are dozens of categories like this one created for several unidentified subjects (for example "unidentified locations in", "unidentified automobiles) and are maintenance categories, so this is a maintenance category, unlike what you say.
- 3- About number of images categorized you were the one that distorted the numbers, be it the numbers of a year\year and half ago (around 17000) or a month ago (12000) and know (10500), and that between a month ago and today you are ignoring the fact that more than 4000 were categorized by me in the last month (from ne uploads and hundreds older), when you categorized at best 500-880 and still claim to have the biggest partis a distortion of facts. If those dont fit what you said, tough luck to you.
- 4- About why the reason you dont log in, it is for your conscience. When me and two other users say that your reasons are fishy at best, as someone said if it If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.. And with that i will follow the quote of Fae and i will "never feel obliged to respond to IP addresses when they are obviously a long term user acting anonymously" for unknown and fishy reasons and so will not dignigy you with any more time.
- The maintenance category is created, so your new attempt of opening a closed discussion is irrelevant and unnecessary. Tough luck, tavarich, but you will not catch me this time. Tm (talk) 23:58, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- Interpreting the COM:AN discussion outcome the way you do, and seeing a linkage between Fæ's suggestion and what you did, is ill-natured, or at best wishful thinking. Daphne used word "if" in a simple conditional sentence saying to you that if you do this then you should also do that. One didn't say "if" to question whether concerns were "valid". I don't see why would anyone question it, since there are clear examples. Fæ's quote that you now provide is only to show that at the time one didn't notice recent uploads that were there. Relevant part of one's quote is given above. As for another admin's input, I agree that we don't really know if one assessed the given case. There really was no other outcome from that discussion.
- I honestly don't know what is this number 4000 about. All I know is how many images this category included about month ago (though, proving that now may be tricky, as is you claim about how many images there were a year ago) and how many new images have been added in a meanwhile. And as said, whatever the number is, it doesn't make the current situation better.
- I would say it's more like for your conscience why you keep harassing me by trying to make me look bad by repeating words like "duck" and "fishy" without being given any actual reason to be suspicious.
- I think I've made the case clear by showing why current categorization (even if considering given category as a maintenance category) is in no way appropriate, and by showing what would be more adequate approach. Let's seek for other opinions now. 62.65.58.165 06:50, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Words like ill-natured and similars from the parts, and suspicion of each other's goodwill do not help to create an objective discussion. Otherwise it is nice to read the arguments here. --E4024 (talk) 06:56, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
kept. Normal category for unidentified subjects, no need to do anything. Taivo (talk) 07:53, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Is this category really required. It is very similar to Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard which has been deleted. I don't think there needs to be a category for what images have been 'Uploaded from Korean Wikipedia using UploadWizard'. It is completely meaningless and ambiguous. There are over 3,000 images in this category and it will infinitely grow. Pkbwcgs (talk) 12:31, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- I'm tracking this for User:-revi/kowiki which is from Campaign:ko. Removing {{Uploaded from Korean Wikipedia}} will remove the category, so it's not true that 'it will infinitely grow'. — regards, Revi 12:33, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
- @-revi: Can we upmerge to Category:Files moved to Commons from ko.wikipedia? Does it matter that they were transferred using uploadwizard? - Themightyquill (talk) 08:45, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- It’s not ‘transferred’ as in “file in Korean Wikipedia is moved to Commons”: it is user who visited Commons through ko:백:파일 올리기 (Campaign:ko), which is the landing page for Korean Wikipedia sidebar ‘upload file’. — regards, Revi 08:47, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- Themightyquill Talkback. (See above) — regards, Revi 14:19, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
- It’s not ‘transferred’ as in “file in Korean Wikipedia is moved to Commons”: it is user who visited Commons through ko:백:파일 올리기 (Campaign:ko), which is the landing page for Korean Wikipedia sidebar ‘upload file’. — regards, Revi 08:47, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Not done: per discussion. --ƏXPLICIT 13:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
I migrated all images to Category:SŽ series 713/715 so this one can be deleted. 2A00:EE2:500:7500:9C5A:D85:2277:A86C 15:26, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- I have created a redirect for now, so there are no empty categories within the parent categories. But I don't know enough about those very vehicles to tell whether or not it was useful to combine those categories. --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 17:45, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hi again. It was useless to have separate categories for SŽ 713 and SŽ 715, because it's a train which consists of two halves, and one car (the one with engine) is numbered 713 and the other one (the trailer) is numbered 715. --2A00:EE2:500:7500:E1DC:1FD1:D0BB:F73A 15:16, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Appears to be satisfactorily resolved. – BMacZero (🗩) 02:27, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
I migrated all images to Category:SŽ series 713/715 so this one can be deleted. 2A00:EE2:500:7500:9C5A:D85:2277:A86C 15:26, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- I have created a redirect for now, so there are no empty categories within the parent categories. But I don't know enough about those very vehicles to tell whether or not it was useful to combine those categories. --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 17:46, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hi again. It was useless to have separate categories for SŽ 713 and SŽ 715, because it's a train which consists of two halves, and one car (the one with engine) is numbered 713 and the other one (the trailer) is numbered 715. --2A00:EE2:500:7500:E1DC:1FD1:D0BB:F73A 15:16, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Appears to be satisfactorily resolved. – BMacZero (🗩) 02:29, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
I moved all photos to Category:SŽ series 813/814 so this can be deleted or redirected 2A00:EE2:500:7500:9C5A:D85:2277:A86C 15:51, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- I have created a redirect for now, so there are no empty categories within the parent categories. But I don't know enough about those very vehicles to tell whether or not it was useful to combine those categories. --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 17:47, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hi again. It was useless to have separate categories for SŽ 813 and SŽ 814, because it's a train which consists of two halves, and one car (the one with engine) is numbered 813 and the other one (the trailer) is numbered 814. --2A00:EE2:500:7500:E1DC:1FD1:D0BB:F73A 15:18, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Appears to be satisfactorily resolved. – BMacZero (🗩) 02:44, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
I moved all photos to Category:SŽ series 813/814 so this can be deleted or redirected 2A00:EE2:500:7500:9C5A:D85:2277:A86C 15:51, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- I have created a redirect for now, so there are no empty categories within the parent categories. But I don't know enough about those very vehicles to tell whether or not it was useful to combine those categories. --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 17:47, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hi again. It was useless to have separate categories for SŽ 813 and SŽ 814, because it's a train which consists of two halves, and one car (the one with engine) is numbered 813 and the other one (the trailer) is numbered 814. --2A00:EE2:500:7500:E1DC:1FD1:D0BB:F73A 15:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Appears to be satisfactorily resolved. – BMacZero (🗩) 02:45, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
I moved all photos to Category:SŽ series 311/315 so this can be deleted or redirected 2A00:EE2:500:7500:9C5A:D85:2277:A86C 15:53, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- I have created a redirect for now, so there are no empty categories within the parent categories. But I don't know enough about those very vehicles to tell whether or not it was useful to combine those categories. --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 17:48, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- Looks OK, neither has an article on sl, but template links to 311/315, 813/814 and 713/715. --Sporti (talk) 12:57, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
- Hi again. It was useless to have separate categories for SŽ 311 and SŽ 315, because it's a train which consists of four cars, and two cars are numbered 311 and two are numbered 315. For the same reason I had combined SŽ 713 and SŽ 715 into SŽ 713/715 and SŽ 813 and SŽ 814 into SŽ 813/14. --2A00:EE2:500:7500:E1DC:1FD1:D0BB:F73A 15:13, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
- Looks OK, neither has an article on sl, but template links to 311/315, 813/814 and 713/715. --Sporti (talk) 12:57, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Appears to be satisfactorily resolved. – BMacZero (🗩) 02:45, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
I moved all photos to Category:SŽ series 311/315 so this can be deleted or redirected 2A00:EE2:500:7500:9C5A:D85:2277:A86C 15:53, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- I have created a redirect for now, so there are no empty categories within the parent categories. But I don't know enough about those very vehicles to tell whether or not it was useful to combine those categories. --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 17:49, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
Marked as {{Badname}} – BMacZero (🗩) 02:29, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Its name was changed to Guaranteed Rate Field in October 2016. Therefore, I propose the category be renamed and replaced with a soft redirect to the new category. This has been the practice for other Major League Baseball venues, such as Jacobs Field and SkyDome. Waz8 (talk) 01:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- Since there has been no opposition, I am requesting the move via CommonsDelinker. Since it is a non-controversial move, this probably would have been appropriate, initially. Waz8 (talk) 02:01, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
- Move has been completed, and I have cleaned-up category remnants. Waz8 (talk) 00:26, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Move completed. – BMacZero (🗩) 02:33, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
If these statues are in the city of Nevşehir, this cat cannot be a subcat of Hacıbektaş Museum, which for its turn is under Hacıbektaş, the cat for a district of Nevşehir Province. If these statues are in the city of Nevşehir they must have a different categorization, and if they are not, then the cat must have a name that shows where they are (district of Hacıbektaş, not the city of Nevşehir). E4024 (talk) 06:33, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Today it has been three months since I opened this discussion and still the user who opened the cat has not opined anything. --E4024 (talk) 13:45, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
- I didn't get what we should discuss. You can put any name you prefer, doesn't matter for me--Rapsar (talk) 16:19, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Stale discussion. @E4024: In 2018, user:Themightyquill redirected the nominated category to Category:Statue of Haji Bektash Veli, Hacıbektaş. Is this CFD solved?--Estopedist1 (talk) 22:38, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
Redirected to Category:Statue of Haji Bektash Veli, Hacıbektaş Themightyquill (talk) 22:45, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
There is not even one "market" in the cat. Only the Category:Dried fruit and confectionery stalls in Mercat de la Boqueria approaches to be some sort of a "dried fruit market", although, in the end, it is only a part of the La Boqueria. All these files show either an open air stall (stand) or an individual shop. No market here, therefore no need for a category with this name. E4024 (talk) 12:09, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- Suggestion: Let's move it to Category:Dried fruit shops. Afterwards we can make cats like Category:Dried fruit shops in Armenia, Category:Dried fruit shops in Spain etc, as subcats to this, following the example of Category:Dried fruit shops in Turkey which already exists. --E4024 (talk) 12:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- We have Category:Fruit stalls. Can we make Category:Dried fruit stalls as a sub-category? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:09, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Stale discussion. I support user:Themightyquill solution which means that Category:Dried fruit markets to be renamed to Category:Dried fruit stalls. The nominated category's files depict stalls not shops--Estopedist1 (talk) 22:47, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Dried fruit stalls. -- Themightyquill (talk) 22:54, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
Category has been moved to Category:Road signs in the Hebrew language. Fry1989 eh? 18:43, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
- Both are awkward, aren't they? Wouldn't Category:Hebrew-language road signs be better? Same for the other parallel categories. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:58, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- Well my intention was the proper grammar for the category. A possible alternative could be that we include the language in both English and its native spelling. For example, "Road signs in the Portuguese language - Português" Fry1989 eh? 21:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Fry1989: Yes but Category:Hebrew-language road signs is also gramatically correct, more concise, and doesn't sound so awkward. There' no need to mix native language names here, that I can see. We don't do it elsewhere. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:14, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
- Prefer Category:Hebrew-languague road signs and this format should be copied. "XYZ in the ZYX language" is awkward. Wikimandia (talk) 04:52, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Road signs in Hebrew for consistency with Diagrams in Hebrew. The same for other members of Road signs by language, do the same as Diagrams by language has. And also, admonish a user (unknown to me) who brought all this definite-article mess. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- We have very little consistency in this tree. The parent category Category:Signs by language uses the (gramatically incorrect) form "X language signs" (e.g. Category:Hebrew language signs. Most of the sub-categories of Category:Images by language are in the form "Things in language" (e.g. Category:Charts in Hebrew) with the only exception being Category:Banners by language (e.g. Category:English language banners). Yet the parent category of Category:Images by language is Category:Texts by language which uses the form "Language text" (e.g. Category:Hebrew text clear enough for Hebrew but in some cases may confuse language with nationality). Other categories like Category:Films by language also use "X-language films" (e.g. Category:Hebrew-language films). - Themightyquill (talk) 08:55, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- I think it's best to name categories as XYZ objects in ABC, where ABC denotes a language. Although ABC XYZ objects is more concise, it leads to confusion between country and language, e.g. French signs could be signs in France or signs written in French. In the unlikely event that a language has the same name as a country, name it XYZ objects in the ABC language. (Is there any?) ABC language XYZ objects is unnecessarily long for most languages.--Roy17 (talk) 22:34, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- I agree that both "<subjects> in <language>" and "<language>-language <subjects>" are both relatively clear, though I prefer the latter. One issue with the former is that, when we start adding locations, it becomes rather awkward and the order is less obvious. e.g. I'm not sure that Category:French language signs in France would be better off as Category:Signs in French in France (or Category:Signs in France in French ?) - Themightyquill (talk) 07:18, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- (I am not a native speaker.) Adverbs follow the order of "manner, place, time", so it could be Signs in French in France in the 1890s for example. But if we use modifiers, it could be 19th-century French(-language) signs in France.
- I did not think of the problem of multiple adverbs in the first place. Now as I see it, I feel that <subjects> in <language> is better than <language>-language <subjects>, but <language>(-language) <subjects> in <country> is better than <subjects> in <language> in <country>. I come up with the following suggestions in order of my preference:
- parent cat: <subjects> in <language>. subcats: <language> <subjects> in <country>.
- parent cat: <language>-language <subjects>. subcats: <language> <subjects> in <country>.
- parent cat: <language>-language <subjects>. subcats: <language>-language <subjects> in <country>.--Roy17 (talk) 19:47, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- I agree that both "<subjects> in <language>" and "<language>-language <subjects>" are both relatively clear, though I prefer the latter. One issue with the former is that, when we start adding locations, it becomes rather awkward and the order is less obvious. e.g. I'm not sure that Category:French language signs in France would be better off as Category:Signs in French in France (or Category:Signs in France in French ?) - Themightyquill (talk) 07:18, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- I prefer the third option as most consistent. The others change according to parent or child category. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:02, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
- Not all adjectives are demonyms, such as Yiddish and Urdu. Look at Category:Categories by language for examples. It's quite understandable to omit -language for these. And if we do that, we might as well omit it for all languages, because the context is clear enough such that people understand German signs/books/newspapers in France refer to stuff written in German but not maybe made in Germany or artifacts from Germany. So I'd prefer #2.--Roy17 (talk) 00:03, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
- I disagree. Yiddish and Urdu are logical exceptions because there is no possibility for confusion. There's no reason to extend that logic to other language adjectives that are also nationality adjectives. And there's no reason not to use the system that is both most consistent and leasy ambiguous. Themightyquill (talk) 08:49, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Done: moved to Category:Hebrew language road signs by Túrelio. --ƏXPLICIT 00:28, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
Re-open The scope of the discussion expanded beyond the original category, and remains unresolved. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:50, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
- Is this now fixed by Iketsi? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 10:44, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yes. –Iketsi (talk) 14:21, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: Is the current state satisfactory? – BMacZero (🗩) 02:33, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
- Yes. –Iketsi (talk) 14:21, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- @BMacZero: Sure, looks fine to me. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:23, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
- And how about CFD tag on Category:SVG by language? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:54, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
- What is the final naming scheme then?--Roy17 (talk) 09:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Roy17: "Foo-language somethings in Someland" for picture categories. Categories of non-picture images such as screenshots, illustrations and SVG files have not fully transitioned yet. --Iketsi (talk) 12:40, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Iketsi The problem is that Category:SVG by language is also nominated, and the tag also links to this page. If this discussion also affects these master categories, then I'm afraid that title should be changed. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:18, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: You mean the title of this discussion? I'd like to see the categories under Category:SVG by language renamed soon. --Iketsi (talk) 01:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- Under this schema, Category:English SVG? Category:German SVG? Category:French SVG?... Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- "Category:English-language SVG" to set the correct expectations for other "by language" categories, and to group them in autocompletions. --Iketsi (talk) 15:36, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
I suggest to discuss this major change via COM:VP, otherwise this CFD won't be closed forever (happy for this panorama)? Support Probably a bot need to rename those categories, and edit in those categories to follow your idea. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
- "Category:English-language SVG" to set the correct expectations for other "by language" categories, and to group them in autocompletions. --Iketsi (talk) 15:36, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- Under this schema, Category:English SVG? Category:German SVG? Category:French SVG?... Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: You mean the title of this discussion? I'd like to see the categories under Category:SVG by language renamed soon. --Iketsi (talk) 01:24, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Iketsi The problem is that Category:SVG by language is also nominated, and the tag also links to this page. If this discussion also affects these master categories, then I'm afraid that title should be changed. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:18, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Roy17: "Foo-language somethings in Someland" for picture categories. Categories of non-picture images such as screenshots, illustrations and SVG files have not fully transitioned yet. --Iketsi (talk) 12:40, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
The nominated category is deleted. It seems that we can close this CFD, after re-opening by user:Themightyquill?--Estopedist1 (talk) 08:11, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
Moved to "X-language Y" -- Themightyquill (talk) 13:42, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
For legal reasons Gibooks (talk) 23:27, 23 August 2017 (UTC) [[[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Watercolor_paintings_by_Jorge_Blanco_Mena_(Artistmena)]These photos were uploaded for info purposes but not for commercial ones. The licence is not the licence we wanted for them. We are the legal owners of them and that´s our will.--Gibooks (talk) 01:05, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- You uploaded them. You wrote to the OTRS people. You granted an irrevocable license that allows commercial use (Commons doesn't accept any other sort). So in what sense is the license "not the licence we wanted for them"? - Jmabel ! talk 04:29, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- I did not write for OTRS people, I did write to you. Anyway, even my will is not enough to do this one, because there are another three heirs apart from me, so if they are not agreed with this process, You and I cannot give any commercial licence to these photos.
They were agreed to give me a freeway if these pictures are showed in informative way not in a commercial way. By the way, there is no contract between us. You got no evidence who am I or whatever serious legal agreement. But we want to solve this matter in good faith, so try to change the licence into a non commercial one. Then, all the legal heirs will be OK with you.
- Hello- I´m another heritor and legal owner of the images. I´m against you Wikipedia can use these photos to commercial goals. And you are not entitled to do that. I never give you that permission and you need the permission of all of us, not just from one. You are going to have problems if you go on so.
--Ludolfo (talk) 12:07, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Stale. @Gibooks, Jmabel, and Ludolfo: not discussion about the category (CFD), but discussion about files (DR). Discussion takes places at Category talk:Watercolor paintings by Jorge Blanco Mena (Artistmena), or at concrete, problematic files Estopedist1 (talk) 08:53, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
Unsubstantiated categorization, fails to satisfy the principle of selectivity (COM:Categories#Principles): The category name should be unambiguous and not homonymous. Sealle (talk) 11:24, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- Just for clarity: "kommunalny" is just an adjective, a part of the bridge name. MBH (talk) 11:55, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Sealle: Can you please clarify your concern with this category? I don't see it as being homonymous with anything. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:07, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- The seeming similarity between these names is circumstantial and co-incidental. The word Kommunalny does not seem to be a proper noun and probably cannot serve as an attribute to bring them together. Sealle (talk) 09:29, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Sealle: Can you please clarify your concern with this category? I don't see it as being homonymous with anything. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:07, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Stale discussion. @Sealle, Themightyquill, and MBH: what about a disambiguation page Category:Kommunalny Bridge? Same solution in ruwiki ru:Коммунальный_мост--Estopedist1 (talk) 22:16, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1 yes, it's a good solution. MBH 13:01, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- Closed Kept, the category is now a disambiguation, and seems appropriate. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:32, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
What's the definitionof tuning ak? Sanandros (talk) 19:40, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
- I would suggest a move to Category:AK customization or Category:Customized AK rifles. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:25, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: per Category:Customized vehicles, I suggest the latter variant--Estopedist1 (talk) 09:02, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
This has been sitting without resolution for far too long. It seems there is no objection to a move to Category:Customized AK rifles, so that is where I will put it. - Jmabel ! talk 00:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
See also: Category talk:Cardo. It looks like there is some confusion about the only 2 (two) files that make up this cat. E4024 (talk) 06:39, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- The first file (File:Acelgas crema.jpg) was uploaded by User:Tamorlan. Described as "Acelgas con salsa de nata y almendras" in Spanish and "Mangold mit Sahnesauce und Mandeln" in German, this file was in Category:Chard based food until I took it from there, because the vegetable on the plate did not look that much as "Acelga" but more like "Cardo" (both in Spanish) to me. Now (after the latest edit on the cat) I incline to revert my edit. The other file (File:Tapa de cardo.jpg) was uploaded by User:El Pantera, who also made the cat that we are discussing now. On the file there is a written explanation like "Cardo de penca relleno", from which I understand there is a confusion. Please see the definition of "cardo" in RAE's Spanish dictionary: "Planta anual, de la familia de las compuestas, que alcanza un metro de altura, de hojas grandes y espinosas como las de la alcachofa, flores azules en cabezuela, y pencas que se comen crudas o cocidas, después de aporcada la planta para que resulten más blancas, tiernas y sabrosas." I understand from this definition, we can have "Penca de cardo" but not viceversa. Es así, hispanoparlantes? Penca is easier to translate but someone should tell us what Cardo is in English. User:Arnaud Palastowicz has written "Thistle" on the cat's TP. Therefore he can help to solve this enigma. I want to take the opportunity to ask friends (including myself) that before using "local" names in our own languages for plants that can be found in a wider geography, we should make more search for finding out if an English equivalent exists. Of course if "Cardo" is the name of a vegetable "dish" of Spain or elsewhere, that is another thing. Still we should know, and have the correct cat of the plant/vegetable/whatsoever, with which this dish is made, placed there. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 07:01, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- As E4024 states, "Cardo" in Spanish is a general term for similar plants. In the case of my picture, the term "cardo de penca" could help identify which plant it comes from (in the dish it is fried, so impossible to guess). About the category, I'm not sure if there is an English equivalent to "cardo" --El Pantera (talk) 13:13, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- I emptied the cat. Let's delete it until someone comes with better information and solutions. No need for a single-item cat. --E4024 (talk) 07:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
- As E4024 states, "Cardo" in Spanish is a general term for similar plants. In the case of my picture, the term "cardo de penca" could help identify which plant it comes from (in the dish it is fried, so impossible to guess). About the category, I'm not sure if there is an English equivalent to "cardo" --El Pantera (talk) 13:13, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
- Related issue: Please see File:Penca de plátanosen el Mercado Medellín, Colonia Condesa.jpg. (There is a typing mistake in the file name, I asked it to be moved.) As we see here, in Colombia(n Spanish) "penca" has a very different meaning. "Penca de plátanos" should be a "cluster of bananas", I guess. (I know "muz hevengi" in Turkish, but this one I found out by Google.) In Chile it is a bright green "plant" (sic) that is made into salads, very possibly it is a kind of "thistle" but not the same colour as those in Spain (pink). Therefore as long as they are not "cuisine" terms (dish/plate names) we should avoid the use of a plant's local name as a cat. Of course we can do that when we have the correct mother cat (with the English name of the plant) and people can understand what we are referring to in a cat name like "X in Spain". (We understand what X means because we have a mother cat with a plant name in English.) Chatting too much and doing little work? Sorry. --E4024 (talk) 08:12, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
- Waw! The cat we were discussing has been deleted and now it's the name of a place, and it looks like we're (we were :) discussing that place when indeed we're (we were :) discussing food! If anybody wishes to continue passionate discussions, we can consider Category:Dandelion as food, because that's also "cardo" (sic) no? --E4024 (talk) 07:13, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
- FYI, I have just had to move two images out of this category to Category:Jerusalem Cardo. "Cardo" in this case is the name for an ancient Roman north-south-oriented main street. --HyperGaruda (talk) 21:53, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
I suggest to transform the nominated category into a disambiguation page. Irrespective of the situation in enwiki, where en:cardo is reserved to Ancient Roman concept (Commons equivalent Category:Cardines). Objections?--Estopedist1 (talk) 08:30, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- Support: disambiguating is probably the wisest option here. HyperGaruda (talk) 12:09, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
Looks like there was consensus for a disambiguation here, but this was never closed. @Estopedist1, @HyperGaruda (or really anyone else), feel free to turn this into a disambiguation. - Jmabel ! talk 00:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
The only thing in this category is another category, which is itself empty. Furthermore, the purpose of these two categories is unclear. Is this category meant to house an image of both an elementary school and a primary school together? Or an image of a school that serves both elementary and primary grades? Or an image of either an elementary school or a primary school in isolation? Either way, I don't think these two categories are serving a useful purpose, and I recommend that they be deleted. Neelix (talk) 16:55, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- Agree. You could handle this with {{Empty page}} instead of a discussion. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:43, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Neelix and Auntof6: I suggest Merging the following:
- Indeed elementary and primary are pretty much synonymous, both refer to Primary education. I think it is confusing to keep separate categories for the same concept. The English Wikipedia handles this in a similar way, see w:Category:Elementary and primary schools. Place Clichy 16:15, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
- For the reasons I have provided above, I don't think "Elementary and primary schools" is a good category name for the Commons; it's just too ambiguous. I would prefer go by the precedent set by the English Wikipedia articles than the English Wikipedia categories. The articles show that many regions do not treat elementary school and primary school as synonyms, but rather consider primary schools to comprise grades 1-3 and elementary schools to comprise grades 4-6 (or similar). Neelix (talk) 01:43, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Neelix: The problem with this logic is that we cannot really have a Primary schools category that would comprise grades 1-3 schools everywhere and an Elementary schools that would comprise grades 4-6 schools everywhere. We have to face the fact that schools are not organised the same way everywhere, and adapt.
- Looking briefly at the English Wikipedia articles you refer to, I see that definitions given are virtually identical, and that the difference seems to be British English vs. American/Canadian english, rather than a difference in age:
- en:Elementary school : Elementary school is a school for students in their first school years, where they get w:primary education before they enter w:secondary education. The exact ages vary by country.
-
- en:Primary school : A primary school (or elementary school in w:American English and often in w:Canadian English) is a school in which children receive primary or elementary education (linked to w:Primary education) from the age of about five to twelve, coming after w:preschool and before w:secondary school. (In some countries there is an intermediate stage of w:middle school between primary and secondary education.) [...]
- Primary school is the preferred term in the United Kingdom, Ireland and many Commonwealth nations, and in most publications of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
- Elementary school is preferred in some countries, especially in the United States and Canada.
- In the United States, "primary school" may refer to a school with grades Kindergarten through second grade or third grade. (K-2 or 3). In these municipalities, the "elementary school" includes grade three through five or grades four to six.
- en:Primary school : A primary school (or elementary school in w:American English and often in w:Canadian English) is a school in which children receive primary or elementary education (linked to w:Primary education) from the age of about five to twelve, coming after w:preschool and before w:secondary school. (In some countries there is an intermediate stage of w:middle school between primary and secondary education.) [...]
- The difference you mention between earlier and later grades is only referred to as a possibility, in some US municipalities only, rather than the norm. Please also note that there is currently no Category:Primary schools in the United States that would make this difference useful, and that all relevant schools in the US are under Elementary schools in the United States.
- For these reasons, I think that it does not really make sense to keep two separate hierarchies. Although not perfect, I think it is a lesser evil to merge them in a single Category:Elementary and primary schools. Similarily, Schools by educational level contains categories such as High schools and secondary schools (NOT Category:High schools on one side and Category:Secondary schools on the other), and Universities and colleges (NOT Category:Universities and Category:Colleges).
- To be clear, I do not advocate at all any renaming of individual categories such as Elementary schools in Canada or Primary schools in the United Kingdom. They would all be subcategories of the mother category, respecting the vocable used in each country. Place Clichy 14:31, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining your reasoning further, Clichy. You have convinced me that it would be good to merge the broad categories Category:Elementary schools and Category:Primary schools. Nonetheless, Category:Elementary and primary schools is not a good place to merge them, again for the reasons I outline above. The categories Category:High schools and secondary schools and Category:Universities and colleges provide a poor precedent. I know that Wikipedia's policies do not apply to the Commons, but the reasoning behind WP:AND applies well here; using the word "and" in the title introduces ambiguity because the word "and" can be used in a variety of ways. It is especially confusing in the case of the categories we are discussing because the word "and" is normally used in Commons category titles for a very different purpose. Consider Category:Men and women, a category where you can find images of men with women (not men or women); or Category:Green and red, where you can find images of the color green with the color red (not green or red); or Category:Apples and bananas, which includes images of apples with bananas (not apples or bananas). In the case of Category:Elementary and primary schools, however, we would not be suggesting (and could easily be taken to be suggesting) that the images in this category are solely those that depict elementary schools with primary schools; we would mean elementary schools or primary schools, or that elementary schools are primary schools. I would be glad to see Category:High schools and secondary schools renamed Category:Secondary schools, and have the merger you suggest take place at Category:Primary schools. What are your thoughts? Neelix (talk) 19:21, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Neelix: I see your point. Then, Category:Elementary or primary schools is probably a better name to avoid this confusion. Seeing that the mother category id called Primary education, other options may be Primary education schools, Schools of primary education or just Primary schools.
- I do not think that we should discuss here the renaming of Category:High schools and secondary schools or Category:Universities and colleges into, for instance, Universities or colleges, because they have large already established sub-category trees, such as High schools and secondary schools by city (13 categories), High schools and secondary schools by country (73 C), Universities and colleges by country (167 C), Alumni by university or college by country (74 C), University and college buildings (18 categories, 50 files), Sports in universities and colleges (13 C, 6 F) etc.
- Also, and is also used in many cases in the same meaning : Diseases and disorders, Monuments and memorials, Gardens and parks, Military units and formations etc.
- The term High school is well established and understood everywhere in the world, and replacing it everywhere with just Secondary schools goes a bit far and is not really necessary, even though we say w:secondary education. There has already been a lot of back-and-forth renaming of Commons categories between Junior high schools, Lower secondary schools, Middle schools, Gymnasiums etc. Having a wider inclusive name is safer and avoids future conflicts in many cases.
- Here, I suggest the target category be named Category:Elementary or primary schools or Category:Primary schools. What is your preference? Place Clichy 13:09, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- That all makes sense to me. My preference is for Category:Primary schools and to mention in a comment near the top of the page that "elementary schools" is often used as a synonym. It would also be good to add a definition of the term there now that we have had this discussion. I think we have reached an agreement! To sum up, 1) Category:Elementary and primary schools should be deleted, and 2) Category:Elementary schools should be merged into Category:Primary schools. Is this your understanding as well? Neelix (talk) 13:19, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- OK for me. Your summary is good. Place Clichy 16:03, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- That all makes sense to me. My preference is for Category:Primary schools and to mention in a comment near the top of the page that "elementary schools" is often used as a synonym. It would also be good to add a definition of the term there now that we have had this discussion. I think we have reached an agreement! To sum up, 1) Category:Elementary and primary schools should be deleted, and 2) Category:Elementary schools should be merged into Category:Primary schools. Is this your understanding as well? Neelix (talk) 13:19, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining your reasoning further, Clichy. You have convinced me that it would be good to merge the broad categories Category:Elementary schools and Category:Primary schools. Nonetheless, Category:Elementary and primary schools is not a good place to merge them, again for the reasons I outline above. The categories Category:High schools and secondary schools and Category:Universities and colleges provide a poor precedent. I know that Wikipedia's policies do not apply to the Commons, but the reasoning behind WP:AND applies well here; using the word "and" in the title introduces ambiguity because the word "and" can be used in a variety of ways. It is especially confusing in the case of the categories we are discussing because the word "and" is normally used in Commons category titles for a very different purpose. Consider Category:Men and women, a category where you can find images of men with women (not men or women); or Category:Green and red, where you can find images of the color green with the color red (not green or red); or Category:Apples and bananas, which includes images of apples with bananas (not apples or bananas). In the case of Category:Elementary and primary schools, however, we would not be suggesting (and could easily be taken to be suggesting) that the images in this category are solely those that depict elementary schools with primary schools; we would mean elementary schools or primary schools, or that elementary schools are primary schools. I would be glad to see Category:High schools and secondary schools renamed Category:Secondary schools, and have the merger you suggest take place at Category:Primary schools. What are your thoughts? Neelix (talk) 19:21, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
- For the reasons I have provided above, I don't think "Elementary and primary schools" is a good category name for the Commons; it's just too ambiguous. I would prefer go by the precedent set by the English Wikipedia articles than the English Wikipedia categories. The articles show that many regions do not treat elementary school and primary school as synonyms, but rather consider primary schools to comprise grades 1-3 and elementary schools to comprise grades 4-6 (or similar). Neelix (talk) 01:43, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
- just noting that even US fed and local govts are well aware of the definition of "primary school" and use the phrase occasionally. examples:
- RZuo (talk) 12:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
Per the above consensus and given elementary school now redirects to primary school, I'm closing this discussion as redirect Elementary schools and Elementary and primary schools to Primary schools. While I'm aware that Neelix is a notorious figure in the whole Wikimedia, I don't consider his notoriety in this closure. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 04:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Delete for unused obsolete category. Xeror (talk) 19:46, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment It looks like you recently moved File:Flag of Pee Pee Township, Ohio.svg from this category to Category:Flags of municipalities in Ohio. Note that, in Ohio, cities and villages are municipalities, but townships are not. If it's a problem that only one file was in the township category, I'd prefer that we merge the two categories into something more inclusively named, like Category:Flags of cities, villages, and townships in Ohio. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 05:48, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
- Your suggestion makes sense to me, Mxn. I notice, however, that the parent category is Category:Flags of cities, towns and villages in the United States. Can't we use Category:Flags of cities, towns and villages in Ohio? Surely "towns" includes townships, no? - Themightyquill (talk) 06:24, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: That might work in some states, but in Ohio, "town" is an informal way of referring to a city or village, not a township. – Minh Nguyễn 💬 09:23, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
- Your suggestion makes sense to me, Mxn. I notice, however, that the parent category is Category:Flags of cities, towns and villages in the United States. Can't we use Category:Flags of cities, towns and villages in Ohio? Surely "towns" includes townships, no? - Themightyquill (talk) 06:24, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Mxn: Okay, so an Ohio township is neither a city, a village, a town nor a municipality. This is why we should be using Category:Populated places and Category:Flags of populated places instead. I have no great solution. I've restored two images to this category while it's under discussion. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:39, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
Closing this as "keep", because discussion is stale (over five years since the last comment!) and nothing seems actively wrong here. Feel free to start a new CfD if someone really thinks it is important that something change. - Jmabel ! talk 00:47, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
I looked at the category with a view to revive and populate it. I took as example Category:Multiculturalism in Australia. The subcats were like Cathedrals in Australia, Mosques in Australia, Synagogues in Australia. We have all those cats also for Turkey but to make a "Multiculturalism" cat with all that? Why do we have the "religion in this or that country" categories? To boast with "multiculturalism" for having temples of different religions, for a huge country/continent like Australia, or Canada or United States is more than -sorry- ridiculous, looking from Turkey. If you visit the Bosphorus, you will see that in the small vicinity of Ortaköy in the European side or in Kuzguncuk, in the Asian side, you have a mosque, one or two different churches and a synagogue, within meters or steps to each other. Shall we make a Multiculturalism in Turkey category or we install the WMF Multiculturalism Awards and give the first one to Turkey? I don't know why, but very frequently I have a feeling WPs and regrettably even Commons is used for open or implicit national propaganda. I hope I'm not turning this into a forum-type chat, if so, please forgive me; but please also try to understand. E4024 (talk) 15:34, 15 August 2017 (UTC) Note: This discussion is intended for Multiculturalism in Turkey and elsewhere.
- For the moment I placed Category:Polonezköy into Category:Multiculturalism in Turkey, so that it will not be deleted for empty while we discuss if we develop this cat or delete those few others about Canada, Australia, United States (lately TV news referred a lot) etc. --E4024 (talk) 15:54, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- I would agree that the sub-categories (and many of the pictures) in the Australian category are misplaced. The same is not true for the other multiculturalism by country categories. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:12, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- @E4024: In the picture that I have uploaded, there are elements from different cultures. Spice's labels are written in Greek and there is a Brazilian flag behind. It's more by the definition of Cultural mosaic rather than the perspective of political philosophy. Cosmopolitan might be a better word to describe the picture. Also it seems to be a similar picture on the Category:Multiculturalism in the Netherlands. What about to change the category to Multiculturalism in Istanbul? It's the first time that I am participating in WP's discussion and I m really enjoying it :) Please let me know about your opinion now and I can expand my thoughts and arguments better, if needed. Savinos (talk) 18:51, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
- The reason I opened this discussion was not that much about Turkey but more about the other countries, mainly. If the cats are to stay, I will develop the Turkish one. Our sephardic communities, still in several parts, Izmir for instance, Levant christians, our Armenians, the revival of Greek community in Northern Aegean islands (Gökçeada), Hatay, the city of civilizations etc are more than enough to make Turkey a multicultural country and society. We do not even need to mention the Ottoman past, neither its bright days nor the final decline with foreign interference and local uprisings. Today's Turkey still deserves those concepts -if not more than- at least as much as those mentioned and other countries. --E4024 (talk) 06:31, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Savinos: I'd say Image:2016 0421 Leidsenhage 10.jpgbelongs in Category:Turkish culture in the Netherlands but not in Category:Multiculturalism in the Netherlands. I don't think multiculturalism is a worthwhile category scheme if it only encaptures the same thing as Category:Foreign cultures by country. It's worthy if it depicts a conscious embracing of foreign cultures, as a matter of public policy. All countries have minorities cultures, but not all countries support multiculturalism. Your photo would fit more easily under Category:Greek culture in Turkey or Category: Greeks in Istanbul. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:46, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Delete this absurd category. A village of Poles, a neighborhood of Armenians, a town of Greeks and, of course, the omnipresent Jews… now we can add Kurds, Bulgarians, Bosniaks, Roma, Arabs, Assyrians, Caucasians (shut up Uncle Sam, I’m speaking of people from the Caucasus!) and, last but not least, various tribes among the majority Turkic populace. If applied consistently, it could eventually consume all of Turkey. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:22, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Incnis Mrsi, when you say "Delete this absurd category", you mean all similar cats, right? If we decide not to have these cats we should not have them for Australia, Turkey, Russia, wherever... --E4024 (talk) 07:53, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- I mean only categories build on the recipe “bring anything related to minorities together”. My opposition shouldn’t be implicitly expanded to categories possibly showing things narrowly related to multiculturalism (imagine: a Christian grills şiş kebap of pork and talks to a Jew who drinks vodka, and we also see a mosque in the background). Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:48, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- A Christian spiedo-grilling two muslim Turks would not serve then, I understand. --E4024 (talk) 08:52, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- I mean only categories build on the recipe “bring anything related to minorities together”. My opposition shouldn’t be implicitly expanded to categories possibly showing things narrowly related to multiculturalism (imagine: a Christian grills şiş kebap of pork and talks to a Jew who drinks vodka, and we also see a mosque in the background). Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:48, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
- As I suggested above, the category is less appropriate for examples of multiple cultures than it is useful for photos depicting multiculturalism (or opposition to multiculturalism) as a conscious policy or practice. It makes sense to group together photos of an explicitly named Multicultural Festival or a Multicultural Centre, or some protestor with a sign reading "Down with multiculturalism." - Themightyquill (talk) 11:26, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Stale discussion. Currently the nominated category has three subcategories and all of them are neighborhoods of Istanbul. These subcategories doesn't belong to here. I suggest to remove these three categories, and empty category to be deleted. If "in scope"-content will come (see comments by user:Themightyquill, then the nominated category to be re-created--Estopedist1 (talk) 22:59, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
| This category discussion has been closed. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus | ? | |||
| Actions | Moved items in the category to better ones and deleted it. | |||
| Participants |
| |||
| Closed by | --Adamant1 (talk) 03:47, 1 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
Redundant to Category:Cement manufacturers (created 1 year earlier). But we can also consolidate both categories into "Cement companies". Cameron Kay (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Cameron Kay: Do you have a preference? Category:Cement manufacturing companies? - Themightyquill (talk) 08:24, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Cameron Kay and Themightyquill: I suggest to use Category:Cement companies which mirrors enwiki solution en:Category:Cement companies--Estopedist1 (talk) 19:01, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
| This category discussion has been closed. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus | Move things to Category:Cement companies | |||
| Actions | Things have been moved | |||
| Participants |
| |||
| Closed by | --Adamant1 (talk) 03:39, 1 July 2024 (UTC) | |||