Commons:Categories for discussion/Archive/2014/03
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 March 2014
Category has been replaced by Category:BAM Be 4/4; this category should therefore be deleted. NAC (talk) 10:16, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:BAM Be 4/4. --rimshottalk 19:42, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Category has been replaced by Category:BAM Be 4/4; this category should therefore be deleted. NAC (talk) 10:21, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:BAM Be 4/4. --rimshottalk 19:42, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Delete. Category name is a clear misspelling, and a duplicate of the correctly named Category:Rubin Museum of Art, New York. --Eco84 (talk) 14:09, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Delete. I agree.Wmpearl (talk) 18:52, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted as per nom. --rimshottalk 18:17, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Está vacía y ha sido sustituida por otra Chamarasca (talk) 16:42, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Mundo Gráfico (advertisements). --rimshottalk 18:12, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Está vacía y ha sido sustituida por otra Chamarasca (talk) 16:42, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Mundo Gráfico (bullfighters). --rimshottalk 18:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Está vacía y ha sido sustituida por otra Chamarasca (talk) 16:43, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Mundo Gráfico (composers).--rimshottalk 18:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Está vacía y ha sido sustituida por otra Chamarasca (talk) 16:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Mundo Gráfico (politicians). --rimshottalk 18:14, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Está vacía y ha sido sustituida por otra. Debe ser eliminada para evitar confusiones. Chamarasca (talk) 16:45, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Mundo Gráfico (theatre). --rimshottalk 18:14, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Está vacía y ha sido sustituida por otra. Debe ser eliminada para evitar confusiones. Chamarasca (talk) 16:46, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Mundo Gráfico (writers). --rimshottalk 18:15, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
It was misspelled (I transfered all members to category:Sigrok (with a 'k')) Xofc (talk) 10:20, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
- No discussion, ok to remove it ;) Popolon (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Sigrok. --rimshottalk 19:50, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Category:Demographics of Latvia already exists Voll (talk) 19:48, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted as badly named duplicate of Category:Demographics of Latvia. --rimshottalk 18:10, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Please delete this category. It is a duplicate of Category:Giuliano Amedei. Cf. also [1]. Thanks in advance! Marsupium (talk) 03:31, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's just a variation on the name. I made a redirect. --Sailko (talk) 06:32, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Redirected to Category:Giuliano Amedei, variant spelling. --rimshottalk 20:22, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Should be merged with Category:Wikimedia screenshots. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 08:24, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Emptied into appropriate categories and redirected to Category:Screenshots. --rimshottalk 18:09, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
delete. Iduplicated it without 'windows', for brevity. Danny lost (talk) 14:03, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
- Speedied--KTo288 (talk) 21:23, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Not a good category idea, as this will change over time, and of course, at one time ALL of California was Hispanic majority. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 23:38, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's been five years since I created the category and I have no idea why I did it. It has some relation to w:List of California communities with Hispanic majority populations. Evrik (talk) 14:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
- Its a good idea on the face of it. I think the solution on Wikipedia is to have such places in a list, so they can be added/removed easily. I didnt notice any flaws in it until the categories were discussed at wp.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:26, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, out of scope, per Mercurywoodrose, such information is better kept in a list at Wikipedia. Also, there is no corresponding system for the rest of the United States in Category:Hispanic people in the United States, probably for good reason. --rimshottalk 17:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate of Category:St. Nicolaikirche (Elstorf) Aeroid (talk) 11:42, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Redirected to Category:St. Nicolaikirche (Elstorf). --rimshottalk 17:42, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
empty category Dinosaur918 (talk) 20:45, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, still empty. --rimshottalk 21:34, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Redundant to Category:Atom Zombie Smasher and Category:Flotilla (video game). Sven Manguard Wha? 22:13, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
- How so? Source categories are not the same than topical categories. Jean-Fred (talk) 19:50, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- Withdrawn - Yeah, I botched this one. That wasn't what I wanted to do at all. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- No problem :) Thanks for fixing it! Jean-Fred (talk) 20:21, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
- Withdrawn - Yeah, I botched this one. That wasn't what I wanted to do at all. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:51, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
To be deleted - replaced by Hørbybanen Beethoven9 (talk) 18:13, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I'll put a "bad name" tag on it. It's a former railway line. --ghouston (talk) 05:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
To be deleted - replaced by Løkkenbanen Beethoven9 (talk) 18:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I'll put a "bad name" tag on it. It's a former railway line. --ghouston (talk) 05:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
To be deleted - replaced by Løkkenbanen Beethoven9 (talk) 18:55, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
I'll put a "bad name" tag on it. It's a former railway line. --ghouston (talk) 05:15, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Delete category as redundant. It was a temporary category for sorting out images, all done now. P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:30, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
deleted: INeverCry 06:55, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Delete category as redundant. It was a temporary category for sorting out images, all done now, so no longer needed. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 21:31, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
deleted: INeverCry 06:54, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I was confused - this probably is not part of Spoken Wikipedia which is its own thing. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:15, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
- Moved to Category:Spoken Wikipedia - English - summary videos, but I guess this doesn't change the reason for the nomination. --rimshottalk 21:05, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- Do we really need both (+ Category:Wikipedia article videos in English) for currently only one video? --BR, user.js (talk) 11:49, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
deleted: INeverCry 06:53, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Based on my reading of the Hirtle chart, images of these paper would have had to be PD in Germany by 1996 to be PD in the US (otherwise it is 95 years from publication). As Germany has a life+70 general term, it is very doubtful anything from this paper will be PD in Germany in 1996, and thus not PD here. Masem (talk) 14:28, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
- This article refers. It appears that the copyright of Völkischer Beobachter is held by the Bavarian Finance Ministry, who own the copyright on works by its publisher Eher-Verlag, and who do defend their copyright vigorously: "The ministry owns the copyright to publications by the Nazi publishing house Eher-Verlag, which include National Socialist newspapers such as the Völkischer Beobachter and Der Angriff as well as "Mein Kampf," and has refused to allow reproduction of the titles. It justifies its decision by arguing that straightforward reprints without critical remarks could be used by neo-Nazis for propaganda purposes. Germany's influential Central Council of Jews has also condemned the republication of the Nazi papers by Zeitungszeugen." Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:24, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted as empty. Ankry (talk) 11:18, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Spelling. "Palestine" has an "e" after the "l". Nyttend (talk) 12:44, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- OK, how to modify?--Ashashyou (talk) 10:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- Misspelled name, no need for discussion. Renaming done. --Pitke (talk) 13:06, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
- Addendum: in future, please use {{Move}} for clear-cut cases such as this. --Pitke (talk) 13:07, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
renamed: INeverCry 06:52, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Category was renamed to "Kiesza" (proper stage name of performer). Rob (talk) 03:25, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
- As this is her real name, it should be kept as a redirect. --rimshottalk 19:28, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Redirect kept, after no objections. --rimshottalk 21:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
replaced by Category:St. Ulrich (Augsburg) which follows the standard naming scheme Neitram (talk) 18:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
deleted: INeverCry 06:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
If the English name for "Porticus" is "Portico", as claimed at the top, we have two problems. : (1) COM:CAT says that category names for common topics should be in English, not Latin or whatever "Porticus" is. (2) We already have a Category:Porticos, so this basically needs to have its contents moved over there, and then we should delete this category. Nyttend (talk) 01:21, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Agree, this should be:
Rename Category:Porticus to Category:Porticos (109 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Porticus;Porticos;r; |
Rename Category:Porticus in Chile to Category:Porticos in Chile (21 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Porticus in Chile;Porticos in Chile;r; |
Rename Category:Porticus in France to Category:Porticos in France (73 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Porticus in France;Porticos in France;r; |
Rename Category:Porticus in Paris to Category:Porticos in Paris (46 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Porticus in Paris;Porticos in Paris;r; |
Rename Category:Porticus in Germany to Category:Porticos in Germany (4 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Porticus in Germany;Porticos in Germany;r; |
Rename Category:Porticus in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern to Category:Porticos in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern (16 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Porticus in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern;Porticos in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern;r; |
Rename Category:Porticus in Ireland to Category:Porticos in Ireland (18 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Porticus in Ireland;Porticos in Ireland;r; |
Rename Category:Porticus in Russia to Category:Porticos in Russia (68 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Porticus in Russia;Porticos in Russia;r; |
Rename Category:Ancient Roman porticus to Category:Ancient Roman porticos (9 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Ancient Roman porticus;Ancient Roman porticos;r; |
Rename Category:Ancient Roman porticus in Ostia Antica to Category:Ancient Roman porticos in Ostia Antica (3 entries moved, 0 to go) Warning: Please add a reason. Warning: Username of requester missing (user parameter). For transparency and to prevent abuse, please add your username.Ancient Roman porticus in Ostia Antica;Ancient Roman porticos in Ostia Antica;r; |
Done with catredirects. Ankry (talk) 07:35, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to be notable 4ing (talk) 19:34, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
- Well, it doesn't need to be notable, but I remember a number of images and categories concerning this editor being deleted as promotional some months ago. I'll try to dig that out. Meanwhile, there's an issue as to whether images of the uploader claiming "own work" are properly licensed. Rodhullandemu (talk) 19:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Delete Same issues as previous discussion Rodhullandemu (talk) 20:02, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
deleted: INeverCry 06:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Please delete. In fact, there are two bridges over The Lech in Schongau, which now have their own category ("Road bridge ..." and "Railway bridge ...") Karl432 (talk) 22:12, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
deleted: INeverCry 06:49, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
A SoundScape is something completely different, see the English Wikipedia article. This is a misnomer that ought to be renamed, perhaps to "Category:Tower of David SoundScape exhibition" or similar but I can't think of an appropriate alternative right now. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 09:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
- Is this even covered by FOP? I imagine it was not permanently situated there, but only for the duration of the exhibition. --rimshottalk 23:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
---Djampa (talk) 08:41, 17 July 2014 (UTC) It appears to be at least semi-permanently situated there (several years). we could also argue that it is a general view of the Tower of David and the artwork is incidentally contained on the photo (the 2007 Copyright Act says: 22 Incidental Use of a Work : "An incidental use of a work by way of including it in a photographic work, in a cinematographic work or in a sound recording, as well as the use of a such work in which the work was thus incidentally contained, is permitted"). I agree to rename it "Category:Tower of David SoundScape exhibition"
Moved to Category:Tower of David SoundScape exhibition. --rimshottalk 08:35, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
I accidentally misnamed this while trying to create Category:Oldsmobile 98 (third generation). Please delete, thanks, mr.choppers (talk)-en- 01:20, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Nominated for speedydeletion. FDMS 4 02:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
redundant to Category:Bahnhof_Kirchweyhe Moneco (talk) 16:29, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, duplicate of Category:Bahnhof_Kirchweyhe. --rimshottalk 16:38, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Wrong name. Should either be "Caves of Oman" (like the other caves-by-country categories), or at least "Sultanate of Oman caves". Nyttend (talk) 12:43, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Caves of Oman, as per nom. --rimshottalk 18:42, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
rename as Wiener Neustadt Island (I instead of i) Eryakaas (talk) 14:51, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Wiener Neustadt Island as per nom. --rimshottalk 18:48, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
another single word category which is constantly misused by auto-categorizing entities. I think this should be a disambiguation page for other "project" like categories. if turned into a redirect, the redirect target will just fill up with this dreck instead. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 23:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete: The category has no description to explain what the word "project" by itself might mean. Also, all the files in this category need to be hit with a subst: of {{Chc}} as well: They seem to have groups of vague one-word category names, but aren't tagged with {{Check categories}} like they should be. (I don't know why all upload bots don't add this automatically if users don't select categories manually.) --Closeapple (talk) 05:35, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, this upload bot thing sure does produce really bad categorizing. its discouraging. I am not very familiar with how it works, only the results, which are also frustrating and overwhelming.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:20, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
- took initiative and turned it into a disambig page for various "projects", most of them not actual categories.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 08:45, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, this upload bot thing sure does produce really bad categorizing. its discouraging. I am not very familiar with how it works, only the results, which are also frustrating and overwhelming.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 00:20, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
Disambiguated, which should stop the upload bot from adding this category. --rimshottalk 18:11, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Obviamente, tem de ser alterado para Category:Edifício na Avenida 5 de Outubro, 36 a 40. Mesmo que o Commons fosse só para monumentos de Lisboa (dica: não é), há pelo menos outro monumento que também poderia ser identificado como "Edifício na Avenida 5 de Outubro". -- Tuválkin ✉ 01:46, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
- Já está. -- Tuválkin ✉ 13:09, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Empty category since its files were deleted per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:National Anthem of Pakistan. Green Giant supports NonFreeWiki (talk) 11:49, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, still (or again) empty. --rimshottalk 17:33, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Not a useful category as "contemporary" is a relative term. More objective would be a category of living architects, but the similar Category:living people. has been redirected as unmaintainable. We already have architects by century which is more useful, objective and maintainable. ELEKHHT 03:41, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
- delete - as ELEKHH--Pierpao.lo (listening) 06:04, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
- delete. Thank you for warning me, but I had not created this category as such, I had created it as simply "architects". Then somebody renamed it. Then, of course, the broad category "architects" had to be created again... I also created the category: "Architects not in the Public Domain yet", which is useful for us alone to keep track of those architects whose work we are not allowed to upload unless their work is in public display in a country where the "freeodom of panorama" clause applies. I suggest those "contemporary" architects be moved into this other category. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 17:09, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Redirected and merged to Category:Architects not in the Public Domain yet, as per nom and User:G.dallorto. --rimshottalk 17:59, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
The grammar used in the title is strange. Category:Josef Švejk themed restaurants or Category:The Good Soldier Švejk themed restaurants would make more sense. Themightyquill (talk) 10:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Comment A name change is fine by me; not being a native speaker of English one wording means as much to me as the other. I interpreted "to" as meaning "named after". -- Aisano (talk) 21:04, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Aisano. I've completed the move, albeit rather clumsily. Themightyquill (talk) 14:40, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Josef Švejk themed restaurants and pubs as per nom. --rimshottalk 17:50, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
This category requires justification. Most postmarks are already identified by country (old and new) and by current city or commune. Jacquesverlaeken (talk) 17:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- Category:Postmarks by city is empty, which is where these postmarks would go if they weren't uncategorized. I supposed you want that category gone as well? I have notified the creator of the category, which I think wasn't done before. That way we might get a second opinion about this category. --rimshottalk 16:53, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
- If the countries would be clear the uncategorized postmarks could get a better category. But figuring that out can be tricky for occupied cities in a war and similar cases. One example I vaguely recall is Triest, there were two zones at some point in time, and it wasn't clearly Italy, Slovenia, Austria, or independent. Let the collectors figure this out, it's a part of their fun. –Be..anyone (talk) 04:48, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- I strongly repeat that Category:Postmarks by city a useless category. I have created categories by current countries + by previous historical rulers, see Triest for example. It is a pity to see this even on stamps perfectly categorized! Jacquesverlaeken (talk) 17:11, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Moved Category:Postmarks uncategorised by city to Category:Postmarks needing category review, deleted redirect from Category:Postmarks uncategorised by city as well as Category:Postmarks by city. --Achim (talk) 12:31, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
The word is Ohel (built at cemeteries): without it, the category is totally misleading since the phrase "ceremonial hall" says nothing about the graves. Please rename to Category:Jewish ceremonial Ohel in Łomża. Thanks. Poeticbent talk 20:42, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- @Poeticbent: Would Category:Ohel in Łomża work? That would match the other categories in Category:Tombs and graves of saintly people in Judaism (Poland). - Themightyquill (talk) 08:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
- Sure. Please rename to Category:Ohel in Łomża or Category:Jewish Ohel in Łomża, with redirect, whichever works better for you. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 12:50, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Ohel in Łomża. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:09, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Many of the items here are not cities, but other kinds of municipalities (Town/Village/District Municipality and a few odd ones like Resort Municipality and Mountain Municipality and Regional Municipality). Some are not even municipalities; there would see to be overlap with Category:Communities in British Columbia, which is this one's parent. This should be Category:Municipalities in British Columbia and/or culled of its non-city items and those culled should be moved to Category:Villages in British Columbia, Category:District municipalities in British Columbia and Category:Towns in British Columbia. --Skookum1 (talk) 06:20, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
- I have created Category:District municipalities in British Columbia for now, and moved those I am sure that belong there into it. I suppose this CfD is really maybe about whether an intermediary "Municipalities in BC" category as parent for all incorporated communities or if they're just fine in Category:Communities in British Columbia. I'll get around to the Towns and Villages categories as needed; those that were not municipal in nature are now in teh "Communities" category.Skookum1 (talk) 07:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
- I like your thoughts about how to subdividing the British Columbia communities. The images should be subdivided same way as the province does (local custom). It sounds uncontroversial to me. Royalbroil 01:20, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
- I believe the disambiguation has happened now. Skookum1, are we okay to close the discussion as completed? - Themightyquill (talk) 17:17, 29 January 2017 (UTC)
Communities sorted by type. Closing as resolved. - Themightyquill (talk) 22:20, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
I see no rationale for this category, I suggest a merging with Category:Judaism in Thessaloniki which has the same scope and then to start working on new thematic subcategories. If youy think otherwise, I would like you to explain which type of distinguishable content each category should use. Kimdime (talk) 16:25, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
- Seems like a bigger issue that just Thessaloniki. I've tagged Category:Judaism in Greece and Category:Jewish community of Greece to try to get additional input. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:25, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
- I think that to merge it with Category:Judaism in Thessaloniki is the best. -- Geagea (talk) 09:18, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
- The same for all the the others in Jewish community of Greece. But leave redirect please. -- Geagea (talk) 09:23, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
- I think that to merge it with Category:Judaism in Thessaloniki is the best. -- Geagea (talk) 09:18, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Done: Moved files, redirect left. Ruthven (msg) 09:34, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Should be moved to Category:2012–13 Butler Bulldogs men's basketball season. So that it is consistent with Category:2012–13 UCLA Bruins men's basketball season.--Chrishmt0423 (talk) 21:43, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
No opposition in over three years. Moved to Category:2012–13 Butler Bulldogs men's basketball season. - Themightyquill (talk) 04:41, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Regional district names are rarely used (except, wrongly, in Wikipedia or pages deriving their information from Wikipedia) as stand-alone region names; this one's name is a combination of two regions, the Alberni Valley and the Clayoquot Sound region. Also, regional districts do not technically include Indian Reserve lands or communities such as Hesquiat or Ahousat. And of what's here, only Port Alberni is a city, "town" is a kind of municipality in BC and should not be used to refer to IR comunities. This category should be deleted and replaced by Category:Alberni Valley and Category:Clayoquot Sound region (corresponding to like-named categories in Wikipedia) or Category:Clayoquot Sound though technically that does not include everything in teh eponymous region.--Skookum1 (talk) 06:27, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
- Upmerge to Category:Alberni-Clayoquot Regional District. We're talking about three potential categories here. Skookum1, if you want to create the parallel region categories, that's fine with me. - Themightyquill (talk) 22:05, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Upmerged to Category:Alberni-Clayoquot Regional District. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:53, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Maitresse vitre turns out to be a little used term.I suggest West facade instead, (categorized under Rose windows) and will break down the parent cat into other branches. Danny lost (talk) 12:45, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
- I created this category, as I usually create for this sort of stained glass windows in French. But as seen the dedicated page on french Wikipedia, I agree with Danny Lost and his proposition.--Fab5669 (talk) 17:08, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
- So, who's gonna push the button? Danny lost (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
- La pertinence de cette catégorie est indiscutable et elle doit être maintenue; autrement autant supprimer une bonne moitié de toutes les catégories de Wikicommons en commençant par celles qui ne contiennent qu'un seul fichier. Finoskov (talk) 22:10, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Contents were moved to Category:West rose window of Cathédrale Saint-Étienne de Metz by GFreihalter in 2017, about 2 years ago. Deleting. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:46, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Luster terminals. Erroneous use of the English term “Luster”. Fredquint (talk) 12:57, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- Manufacturer gave them name "Clampo PRO" 2 or 3 years later after appearing this wrongly named category. Dmitry G (talk) 16:31, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
The previous comment was misplaced, in error.
However, is not "Clamp-connections" - with the hyphen - somewhat of an anomaly in these naming conventions?
Moved to Category:Clamp connections. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:49, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
- This category and the 19 files tagged with it is an incorrect description of those files. They all seem to be part of an alternate design by Felipe Menegaz (talk · contribs) for the Wikproject Brazil page, being tested in his user space.
- Additionally, the 10 files whose names start with "Order of Brazil" are parts of that new page design, and no longer related to their file names. They were originally images that appear relevant to those names, and uploaded by that user, but were overwritten by that user with the irrelevant ones.
- The user has been inactive for six months. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 05:19, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
- @AlanM1: Change the files however you like, that's not relevant to this category discussion. How would you like this category renamed? - Themightyquill (talk) 04:47, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: :
- Ten of the files in this category are named "Order of Brazil - *". I propose they be renamed to "Wikiproject Brazil *"
- The category itself should be renamed to whatever the standard is for a WikiProject's files (e.g. "WikiProject Brazil Files").
- —[AlanM1(talk)]— 10:24, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: :
Moved to Category:Order of Brazil Wikipedia Award - Themightyquill (talk) 23:41, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
Tram routes by number kept, Trams by route number merged (Non-admin close) This discussion is over five years old and there is a clear consensus to retain Tram routes by number and to merge Trams by route number into it. This has largely already been implemented, and only Template:OnRoute needs to be updated. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:09, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
This contains essentially the same stuff as Category:Trams by route number. I don't think both of them are needed, although I don't have an opinion on which one should be kept. darkweasel94 19:56, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
- In my opinion, trams cannot "have" route numbers as in most cases these numbers change frequently. For this reason I support Tram routes by number, altough I do not understand why it actually contains routes and not lines as the parent category does. |FDMS 07:39, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- Agreed on the first account, although categorization must also reflect accidental properties of the depicted subjects — these numbers do change frequently, sure, as also weather does and yet we do have (and you don’t disagree, I’m sure), things like Category:Trams at night or Category:Trams in snow (not to mention even more transitory and not inherent characteristics, such as Category:Trams from above).
- As for "routes" vs. "lines", I chose the former because the latter too often means also other, related, things, such as a special section of a fleet (irrespective of service), a company, or a brand within a company, a model as promoted by a manufacturer, etc., etc. The word "route", while less used than "line", seems to have a much more restrict semantic, the one intended, and is therefore simpler and easier to understand.
- -- Tuválkin ✉ 13:32, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- Although consensus already seems to be reached in this CFD: I appreciate the existence of in snow and at night categories, because snow and night are characteristics that can be assigned to files at first sight in most cases. However, I dislike categories such as at 02:46 (time) or – to be honest – also Number 8 on and by route number, as I cannot figure anybody visiting Commons to find a category page presenting him/her f. ex. trams with the characteristics mentioned above, which I can with in snow and at night. In other words: In my opinion, not every attribute of an image or a movie should have its own category, not even in a "perfect Commons" with an infinite number of files. |FDMS 21:24, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- People who want to find clocks showing a particular time will find Category:Clocks by time useful. People who want to find an image of Vienna tram number 655 will appreciate being able to use a category intersection tool on Category:Vienna tram type ULF B and Category:Trams with fleet number 655, etc. etc.; it doesn't hurt to categorize by these attributes, although nobody is forcing you either. darkweasel94 21:31, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- Although consensus already seems to be reached in this CFD: I appreciate the existence of in snow and at night categories, because snow and night are characteristics that can be assigned to files at first sight in most cases. However, I dislike categories such as at 02:46 (time) or – to be honest – also Number 8 on and by route number, as I cannot figure anybody visiting Commons to find a category page presenting him/her f. ex. trams with the characteristics mentioned above, which I can with in snow and at night. In other words: In my opinion, not every attribute of an image or a movie should have its own category, not even in a "perfect Commons" with an infinite number of files. |FDMS 21:24, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Yes! -- Tuválkin 09:38, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Clocks by time is definitely useful, on one hand because for photos of clocks time is more important than for photos of trams, on the other hand because time subcategories are necessary for the Commons clock. In my opinion by fleet number makes more sense than Number 6 on, as the numbers displayed on vehicles/trams can be kind of random and also change very frequently; as a consequence the category intersection f. ex. of Trams in Vienna and Number 6 on trams would lead to very unpredictable results, which would not be the case with Trams in Vienna and Trams with fleet number 6 (altough there might be different vehicles with the same fleet number in Vienna or any other city). |FDMS 08:52, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Category:Number 6 on trams (under Category:Number 6 on vehicles), as well as all the existing such categories (from 1 to 31, higher numbers lacking enough items), are split into Category:Trams with fleet number 6 and Category:Trams on route 6. There are a few rare instances where it is neither (convoy order number, etc.) — those remain in the upper category. With millions of uncategorized items, seems frivolous to complain about “excessive” detail in categorization. -- Tuválkin ✉ 09:38, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Clocks by time is definitely useful, on one hand because for photos of clocks time is more important than for photos of trams, on the other hand because time subcategories are necessary for the Commons clock. In my opinion by fleet number makes more sense than Number 6 on, as the numbers displayed on vehicles/trams can be kind of random and also change very frequently; as a consequence the category intersection f. ex. of Trams in Vienna and Number 6 on trams would lead to very unpredictable results, which would not be the case with Trams in Vienna and Trams with fleet number 6 (altough there might be different vehicles with the same fleet number in Vienna or any other city). |FDMS 08:52, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- For me, the connection between is on line/route 40 and has a 40 on it is not obvious enough. In fact, I neither like on line/route nor with fleet number because in my eyes all items (subcategories + pages + media files) of a non-meta category should be related to each other in any way and there are better solutions than category intersections. WP:I just don't like it! However, please note that as long as nobody is forcing me to use these category structures I'm not going to complain. FDMS 4 09:34, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- I put that one into Category:Tram line 40 (Vienna) because it is part of a series of shots taken one after the other. File:Wien DSC 3955 (2251896480).jpg shows that this is indeed a tram of line 40, and obviously that it also has a 40 on it (as per the very definition of line 40!), it just can't be seen on DSC 3964. If that were not the case I would not have put it into the category. I remember that elsewhere you spoke out against having a category for every single tram in Vienna, and I mostly agree because where such categories exist (e.g. Brno, San Francisco) that makes it actually harder to find good photos of a given type. But people who want to find a photo of a specific tram should be able to, even without Special:Search to search in the descriptions. I think the "trams with fleet number x" solution is a very good one. However, all of this seems kind of off-topic in this CfD. darkweasel94 10:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- I agree with categorising it in Tram line 40, but see problems with making Tram line 40 a subcategory (or subsubcategory) of Number 40 on vehicles. I spoke out against creating subcategories for every tram because I assumed that being able to view all media files for a specific tram is nothing we have to provide as only very few people might request such a collocation. However, if we have categories for exactly that purpose (Trams with fleet number) I think it might be better to have Trams in [city] by fleet number and create categories like Tram 4005 in Vienna (although that sounds like it's a tram that was already in service on several networks) and make them a subcategory of and only of Trams in Vienna by fleet number (not Vienna tram type E2). Having to use category intersections is neither really (new) user-friendly with FastCCI nor Special:Search and currently at Category:Trams in Vienna nothing indicates to users that categories for fleet numbers exist. Of course this has nothing to do with the category being discussed. FDMS 4 13:16, 13 March 2014 (UTC) P. S.: I think there are better filenames than Wien DSC [numbers] …
- I put that one into Category:Tram line 40 (Vienna) because it is part of a series of shots taken one after the other. File:Wien DSC 3955 (2251896480).jpg shows that this is indeed a tram of line 40, and obviously that it also has a 40 on it (as per the very definition of line 40!), it just can't be seen on DSC 3964. If that were not the case I would not have put it into the category. I remember that elsewhere you spoke out against having a category for every single tram in Vienna, and I mostly agree because where such categories exist (e.g. Brno, San Francisco) that makes it actually harder to find good photos of a given type. But people who want to find a photo of a specific tram should be able to, even without Special:Search to search in the descriptions. I think the "trams with fleet number x" solution is a very good one. However, all of this seems kind of off-topic in this CfD. darkweasel94 10:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- For me, the connection between is on line/route 40 and has a 40 on it is not obvious enough. In fact, I neither like on line/route nor with fleet number because in my eyes all items (subcategories + pages + media files) of a non-meta category should be related to each other in any way and there are better solutions than category intersections. WP:I just don't like it! However, please note that as long as nobody is forcing me to use these category structures I'm not going to complain. FDMS 4 09:34, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- The difference between these two categories was intended to cover a separation in categories pertaining to a specific tram route (details of the intrastructure, signage, maps and diagrams, etc.) against to its subcategory — one showing vehicles on its service. There is however not yet enough detail in categorization to make it work as intended. -- Tuválkin ✉ 13:32, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- I do understand that you meant this to be the same thing as the difference between Category:Trams and Category:Tram transport, but we simply don't (yet?) have the rest of the category structure for that. I think meta categories should collect categories that we already have, not that we might have at some point in the future ("tram route 7" vs. "trams on route 7"). darkweasel94 13:39, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- That’s right. So, I don’t disagree with the proposed merging; and I agree with FDMS that it is better to keep only Category:Tram routes by number and delete Category:Trams by route number. -- Tuválkin ✉ 18:43, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- A very engaging and productive discussion, which makes me support the proposition to keep Category:Tram routes by number and merge Category:Trams by route number. --Nabak (talk) 23:55, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
- That’s right. So, I don’t disagree with the proposed merging; and I agree with FDMS that it is better to keep only Category:Tram routes by number and delete Category:Trams by route number. -- Tuválkin ✉ 18:43, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- I do understand that you meant this to be the same thing as the difference between Category:Trams and Category:Tram transport, but we simply don't (yet?) have the rest of the category structure for that. I think meta categories should collect categories that we already have, not that we might have at some point in the future ("tram route 7" vs. "trams on route 7"). darkweasel94 13:39, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
As an experiment, I decided to split the two concepts, with Moscow trams being the testing ground. So now there are:
- Trams in Moscow by route, a subcat of Trams in Moscow, which only contains photos of trams on a particular route;
- Tram routes in Moscow, a subcat of Tram transport in Moscow, which contains a) the respective "Category:Trams on route N in Moscow", b) categories for stops and/or loops on that route, c) some other stuff which doesn't show any trams but is related somehow to that route. There are few such things as yet (ex. 1, ex. 2, ex. 3), but the fact that they exist shows that there is a reason to maintain the "Tram route"/"Trams on route" dichotomy.
On a side note: I created {{Trams by route}}/{{Trams by line}}, which can be handy for "Trams on route X in Y" categories. For "Tram route X in Y", there wouldn't be any particular parent categories as yet except "Tram routes in X". However, Tuvalkin has created Commuter routes №10 & Number 10 on things, which would be the right (grand)parent categories for "Tram route 10 in X", and this pattern can be extended. -- YLSS (talk) 23:20, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The two categories now seem to have the same set of subcategories. Looks like merging is a good idea. No active discussion in 4 years. Only remaining question is which is the preferred category to merge the other one to? Then we can do so and close this discussion. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 23:20, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 | Category:Tram routes by number | Merge into | Category:Trams by route number |
|---|
@Infrogmation, YLSS, Tuvalkin, Darkweasel94, FDMS4, and Nabak: Very minor difference between the two:
- Category:Tram routes by number indicates the topic is 'tram routes' sorted by 'number'.
- Category:Trams by route number indicates the topic is 'trams' sorted by 'route number'.
- Content sub-categories are named Category:Trams on route 47 and the like, indicating it contains 'trams' defined by being on a particular 'route number', which is match for Category:Trams by route number.
- If the contents were Category:Tram route 47 or such, then it would be a match for Category:Tram routes by number, but his is not the case
Thus I propose that both be merged into Category:Trams by route number Josh (talk) 20:15, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
- In my opinion, both should be kept as soon there will be enough categorized media to justify both. But go ahead, merge and delete at will — cats will be recreated when needed, and then it will be plus two, not just plus one, admin edits to be counted. And everybody happy. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:00, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
- Wait, though: What will be the topical parent cat of Category:Tram route signage once Category:Tram routes by number is deleted? It certainly does not fit directly under Category:Trams by route number… -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin: On your first point, I agree, once Category:Tram route 47 and such exist, then Category:Tram routes by number would have a purpose, and should be created. But Category:Trams on route 47 belongs under Category:Trams by route number and not Category:Tram routes by number. On your second point, good catch, Category:Tram route signage is not a 'by number' category and therefore does not belong in either Category:Tram routes by number or Category:Trams by route number. It is an intersection of Category:Tram-related signs and Category:Route signs so they are the correct parents. Josh (talk) 18:45, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
I protest against this closure. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 22:38, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
Flogging redirected to Flagellation, Flagellation moved to sub-category of Whipping - (Non-admin close) This was all implemented a year ago, referencing this this CfD, but the CfD was never closed. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:50, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Not the most pleasant of topic-areas, but with Category:Flogging, Category:Whipping and Category:Flagellation we have (IMO) too many categories with too much overlap, and no clearly indicated structure, whereas for example en-wiki just has en:Flagellation which covers flagellation, whipping, flogging and lashing without distinction.
At the moment there is little way of telling where a particular image might be found, or where it should be put. Some clear structure and guidance would be useful.
(Note that some of the categories also have "in art" and "BDSM" segregations (which probably ought to be made systematic in any final structure)).
- Category:Flagellation has rather little in it directly, but Category:Flagellation in art is quite a full category. But as a word 'flagellation' is pretty uncommon (apart from the special area of Category:Self-flagellation. For most of these pictures, I suspect it's not most direct word and not the word most people would immeditately reach for.
- Category:Whipping has quite a lot in it, and seems the much more direct term. But is it broad enough to cover the whole subject?
- Category:Flogging - should this be a sub-category of whipping, indicating use of a multi-stranded whip? (But is this image flogging, or does the word 'flogging' imply a formal punishment beating?)
- Where should an image of school beating (sometimes also called 'flogging') like File:'February - Cutting Weather - Squally' - George Cruikshank, 1839 - BL.jpg be filed? This was the one that led me to this unsavoury subject. (Also File:Illustration from Apollo's Marsdrager.jpg, File:Koerperstrafe- MA Birkenrute.png, en:File:Bonner's.jpg, File:1849 - Karikatur Die unartigen Kinder.jpg, File:Cruikshank - Old Blucher beating the Corsican Big Drum.png -- are these flogging? Technically "birching", perhaps; but that seems too technical for people to find and use) Plus what to do with eg Category:Caning, which is in the same area of corporal punishment?
- Perhaps a new category Category:Corporal punishment should be created, that would collect this and Category:Caning and Category:Spanking, but not the rest of Category:Physical punishments ? Or perhaps that would just be an unnecessary extra level, if somewhere else could be found to put the images in the paragraph above.
Some sort of clearer, more specified structure would be useful. How should this material be organised?
I guess I'm heading towards
- Category:Physical punishments
- Category:Corporal punishment
- Category:Caning
- Category:Spanking
- Category:Whipping
- Category:Flogging
- Category:Self-flagellation (also under Category:Whipping)
- Category:Flagellation of Jesus Christ (under the 'in art' category)
- Category:Flogging
- Category:Corporal punishment
- with parallel 'in art' and 'BDSM' categories; and retire Category:Flagellation.
Does this make sense ? Jheald (talk) 15:03, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm a bit late to the discussion, but note that there is also Category:Beating, which could arguably include whipping/flogging, but may also include spanking, caning, etc. and may be such a vague category as to not be useful at all- there are already out of place files such as File:Flagellum-beating.svg, and it's not hard to imagine image dumps or keyword tags flooding the category with beating hearts, beating drums, fist fights, victories, etc.--Animalparty (talk) 02:52, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
- Category:Flogging and Category:Flagellation are definitely redundant. But the wikipedia article is at en:Flagellation, and we have Category:Flagellation in art, Category:Flagellation of Jesus Christ, and Category:Self-flagellation, so I'm tempted to keep flagellation and redirect Category:Flogging. Also Category:Floggers seems ambiguous, referring to both a Category:Cat o' nine tails, a person doing the flogging, and some kind of airplaine. I'd suggest we turn that into a disambiguation page and move images of the whip to Category:Cat o' nine tails. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:18, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: Side note...sad that I cannot locate an image of a caricaturized version of a MiG-27 attack jet holding a cat o'nine tails in its hand about to strike some enemy target. Josh (talk) 18:47, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
- Category:Flogging and Category:Flagellation are definitely redundant. But the wikipedia article is at en:Flagellation, and we have Category:Flagellation in art, Category:Flagellation of Jesus Christ, and Category:Self-flagellation, so I'm tempted to keep flagellation and redirect Category:Flogging. Also Category:Floggers seems ambiguous, referring to both a Category:Cat o' nine tails, a person doing the flogging, and some kind of airplaine. I'd suggest we turn that into a disambiguation page and move images of the whip to Category:Cat o' nine tails. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:18, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
- Kept (Non-admin close) This discussion has been open for over five years, and there is no consensus for either deleting the category or for any specific replacement name. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:41, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
Luster terminals, Erroneous use of the English term “Luster”. The term “Luster terminals” results from using a direct “transliteration” of part of the German term of “Lüsterklemmen“ (or “Leuchter klemme”), meaning “Chandelier terminals”, into a similar English word with the American spelling of “luster". Also, (while I do not speak German) I note that Google Translate gives “chandeliers” as an English translation of the German word “Lüster”, and vice versa. However, the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) gives the definition of “lustre” (or luster”) as • A gentle sheen or soft glow: • (E.G. the lustre of the Milky Way.) This definition in the OED (and other dictionaries) in no way relates to the items presently being illustrated in this Category of “Luster terminals”. They would all appear to be best described, in English, as “paired screw terminals” – and most of them are “multiple paired screw terminals”. Hence, I suggest that, under the existing Category of “Electrical connection terminals”, there be created a new category of “Screw terminals”. Then, under that new Category of “Screw terminals” there be created a further new Category of “Paired screw terminals”, to which all items in the existing Category of “Luster terminals” be transferred. The existing Category of “Luster terminals” should then become a “redirection” to the new Category of “Paired screw terminals”. Fredquint (talk) 12:58, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- What about renaming? --1-1111 (talk) 21:41, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
In Commons:Rename a category it states:- "Controversial fixes: where a category name has been in use for a long time or a lot of items, or where the naming policy is unspecific. Any category that has a corresponding Wikipedia article which has had a naming controversy over that article definitely falls into this lot."
There is no Wikipedia article entitled "Luster terminals". However, there is a Wikipedia article entitled "Screw terminal, which references several images in the Category currently called "Luster terminals"!
Since this Category was created by 1-1111 on 23 February 2010 (which is relatively recent) and I have now created a Category of "Screw terminals" as a sub-set of "Electrical connection terminals", I invite 1-1111 to make the renaming change to "Paired screw terminals" as a subset of "Screw terminals".
However, I note that the Category now named "Luster terminals" appears under "Electrical connection terminals" and also under "Clamp-connections" - which is, itself, a sub-set of "Electrical connection terminals"!
I suggest that, where the conductor being terminated (fixed) is contacted directly by a screw, it should come under the Category of "Screw terminals" - or the proposed sub-set of "Paired screw terminals". However, where the conductor being terminated (fixed) is contacted a plate forced upon it by a screw - or other means, it should come under the Category of "Clamp-connections" - which I note was also created by 1-1111, on 4 March 2010. (By the way,is not "Clamp-connections" - with the hyphen - somewhat of an anomaly in these naming conventions?)
- Is the better name "set of overpass terminals"? Those terminals are storage of electrical continuation junction instruments, which may be called as cartridge or series. Dmitry G (talk) 12:50, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
- Luster terminals, Erroneous use of the English term “Luster”. The term “Luster terminals” results from using a direct “transliteration” of part of the German term of “Lüsterklemmen“ (or “Leuchter klemme”), meaning “Chandelier terminals”, into a similar English word with the American spelling of “luster". Also, (while I do not speak German) I note that Google Translate gives “chandeliers” as an English translation of the German word “Lüster”, and vice versa.
- Well, my logic suggests, that root of this argumentation might be found in construction of chandeliers: manufacturers equipped boilers, alarms, doorbells and other appliances by electrical connection terminals, but manufacturer's terminals on chandeliers are missing, cause various countries have different regulations of wiring. I mean, portable electrical appliances could be connected to mains AC through standardized to large-coverage area plugs, but ceiling lighting devices are falling out of these rules due to small amperage and insignificance. However, wiring regulations in Germany and other west countries are brought to the point of absurdity, that is why terminals for chandeliers are highlighted into individual section, despite such terminals might be used to many low-power appliances. Dmitry G (talk) 13:24, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
The question has been asked "Is the better name "set of overpass terminals"? Those terminals are storage of electrical continuation junction instruments, which may be called as cartridge or series. Dmitry G (talk) 12:50, 10 April 2014 (UTC)"
My answer would be "No" - (It is completely unclear to me as to what "set of overpass terminals" means, since in English the main meaning of "overpass" is "A bridge by which a road or railroad passes over another.")
There can be no denying that the items concerned are "Terminals", since they are each designed to terminate two wires. However, they might also be termed "Connectors", since they each connect two wires. Since they come as "pairs" of screw terminals connected together to allow connection, the term "Paired screw terminals" (or even "Dual screw terminals") would seem to be appropriate.
Certainly the term "Luster" terminal is inappropriate in English, whatever the appropriateness of a similar sounding word in German may be.
- (While some examples of these terminals may have "A gentle sheen", this is simply an accident of their manufacture and in no way describes their function.)
I contend that it is equally inappropriate to call them "Light fitting terminals" (Leuchteklemmen ?), since they are not restricted to use with only such equipment.
The contention
- "terminals for chandeliers are highlighted into individual section, despite such terminals might be used to many low-power appliances"
is not a valid argument. It may be that in a particular jurisdiction it is a requirement that such terminals be used for the particular purpose of connecting Ceiling Light-Fittings. However, because this may be true in one area, it is certainly NOT true throughout the whole world. I cite the commentators own contribution of "WAGO 224 terminals for chandelier.JPG" as an example in this matter. (The commentator has also contributed in this category an item which he has entitled "Screw terminals for 6mm wires.JPG".)
If one examines the devices pictured in this category today (ignoring the items actually pictured in association with light-fittings or in groups of not more than three pairs, (which could be so used) one finds that 8 out of the 18 have nothing to do with a lighting fixture.
- (I admit that I have included in this count two examples of multiple numbers of these pairs of terminals as manufactured which could be cut into smaller numbers of units for use in light-fittings.)
The German description of one of these pictures is "Diskreter Experimentalaufbau mit Lüsterklemmen" which is translated by Google Translate as "Discreet experimental setup with screw-type terminals". Google translate also tells me that "Paired screw terminals"/"Dual screw terminals" would be translated into German as "Gepaart Schraubklemmen"/"Dual Schraubklemmen", which in my view would be preferable to “Lüsterklemmen“.
(Previous comments are mine.)Fredquint (talk) 03:13, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
- Well, the word "pair" doesn't give understandable name. "Pair" might also mean, that we are talking about connection of 2 wires, despite one cartridge contains 12 terminals and modern appliances with metal body must be connected throug 3 or more wires cause of obligatory ground wire (1st safety class). The most suitable name is cartridge of universal outboard terminals. Dmitry G (talk) 19:26, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
At least it seems that there may be some agreement that "Luster Terminal" is NOT appropriate term to use in English, whatever the appropriateness of “Lüsterklemmen“ is in German.
The term which I suggested included the word "paired" (not "pair" - see below). While, if one believes that " "pair" doesn't give (an) understandable name", the term cartridge of universal outboard terminals is virtually incomprehensible and is actually incorrect on at least three points, quite apart from the fact that it does not include the word "screw".
In the OED, the noun "Cartridge" is defined asː-
- (1) A container holding a spool of photographic film, a quantity of ink, etc., designed for insertion into a mechanism. (Synonyms:- cassette, magazine, cylinder, canister, container, capsule, case, pack, packet, package)
- (2) A casing containing a charge and a bullet or shot for small arms or an explosive charge for blasting. (Synonyms:- bullet, round, shell, charge, shot, casing)
The adjective "Universal is defined asː-
- Relating to or done by all people or things in the world or in a particular group; applicable to all cases
The adjective "Outboard" is defined asː-
- (Of an electronic accessory) in a separate container from the device with which it is used
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
The term "Outboard" is incorrect, as the words "modern appliances with metal body must be connected through 3 or more wires, because of the obligatory ground wire" illustrate (even if only obliquely) that many appliances contain, within their construction, groups of three (or more) of these paired screw terminals and, hence, the units concerned are not always (universally) "outboard".
To sum up the aboveː-
- These items are not used "universally" - as "outboard" terminals - since other devices are often used instead,
- their use is not always as "outboard" terminals - since they are often included by the manufacturer as part of a complete device,
- the use of the term "cartridge" is unnecessary - and, probably, a misuse of the word and
- the word "screw" is not included in the proposed term.
We are "are talking about connection of (at least) 2 wires" but not by means of one screw terminal. We are talking about the connection of at least two wires, but via a combined "pair" of "screw terminals". The confusion alluded to certainly could arise if the term "Paired wire terminals" were used. However, by using the term "Paired screw terminals" both of the adjectives "Paired" and "Screw" qualify the noun "Terminals". Even if it were written "Paired screw-terminals", the adjective "Paired" is still the qualifier of the Adjective-Noun compound of "Screw-terminals". ("Paired-screw terminals" makes it even clearer that a "pair" (or "pairs") of terminals (of the "screw" type) are referred to.)
The noun "Pair" is defined asː- A set of two things used together or regarded as a unit and the Adjective "paired" is defined asː- Occurring in pairs or as a pair. (E.G. "a characteristic arrangement of paired fins")
- (I now do not consider "Dual" to be a suitable term, since it is defined asː- "Consisting of two parts, elements, or aspects". Hence "Dual" implies "separation" whereas "Paired" implies "conjunction" (joined together).)
I note that a local supplier refers to these items as "Screw Terminal Strips" (http://search.jaycar.com.au/search?w=terminal%20strips&view=list) I also note that these items are referred to as "Terminal Blocks" at http://www.allelectronics.com/make-a-store/item/tb-20/20a-12-position-terminal-block/1.html
If one searches for "Terminal strip" or Terminal block" on ebay, both these items and "Barrier strips" are accessed.
Items called "Barrier terminal strips" or "Barrier strips" do not yet have a separate section in Wikimedia Commons and now appear under "Clamp-connections" - of which they are a specialized case. Hence, there is (perhaps) a case to create a separate Category (under "Clamp-connections" ?) entitled "Barrier terminal strips" (Obviously, there is no need for a "Barrier" unless two or more terminals are grouped together in a "strip".)
However, once again I question the use of the hyphen (-) in these descriptions. Fredquint (talk) 13:09, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
- The word "pair" could be discussed from various angles: pair means "two" of the same unit; but one wire from power cable and second wire from applience don't form pair. The same to shoe: dress shoe and boot are not pair even being in the same packaging or/and shelf. Thinking deeply from position of electrical engineering, metal core of those terminals are solid bridge with clamping screws between two wires. Dmitry G (talk) 20:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
However, a "pair of scissors" or a "pair of pliers" are actualy two parts working together as a unit - and one part is useless without the other.
Also, I repeat, we are NOT talking about "Wires", we are talking about "Terminals" - Paired Terminals, connected by a "solid bridge" (Actually, a solid tube.) Fredquint (talk) 08:28, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
| Category:Luster terminals | Move to/Rename as | Category:Screw terminal strips |
|---|
- @Fredquint, Dmitry G, and 1-1111: Unfortunately the electronics industry is not nearly as good at providing standard names for things as we would like it to be, but references on manufacturers' sites often use simply 'terminal strip' (they may also use 'Luster' as some customers may search for that). The current contents are all screw contained, so "screw terminal strips" is a very clear way to call the category. Josh (talk) 20:38, 4 October 2019 (UTC)