Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/05/Category:Brooks
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
There's no functional difference between a brook and a stream and I can't see any reason to have a separate category for brooks; additionally, it's an overloaded term and has attracted some images that don't belong in it anyway. Upmerge to Category:Streams. Rodhullandemu (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
- in general a few abstract terms should be preferred to multiple more concrete terms (if any). Especially in a multilanguage and multicultural project like Commons, it is difficult to base categorization on terms that are more or less exchangeable (in some languages). This said
Support --Herzi Pinki (talk) 06:14, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- The same is equally true of Category:Creeks, no? I don't disagree with merging, but I'd think a redirect should be put in place. Perhaps we could delete Category:Brooks and create a redirect from Category:Brooks (watercourses) or something? Incidentally, if we're going by definition instead of by name, Category:Arroyos seems to be redundant with Category:Ramblas (watercourses). - Themightyquill (talk) 10:07, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
So when does a stream become a river? All these terms are a bit ambiguous. I'd be content to keep the Brooks category but rename it Category:Brooks (watercourses) as Themightyquill suggests. Sionk (talk) 22:29, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
- Support Yes I'm not sure when a stream becomes a river, but that's no reason not to merge steams and brooks, which are unquestionably the same. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:27, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Comment Stale discussion. Current usage seems to be for streams with the word "Brook" in its official name. I suggest leaving it so. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:24, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
Is this discussion closed? OK if I make categories for 'Brooks in Massachusetts' with at least 15 entries, and 'Brooks in Connecticut' with at least 18 entries? Faolin42 (talk) 23:05, 8 October 2024 (UTC)