Commons:Categories for discussion/Archive/2017/11
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 November 2017
Es geht um die "Category:Biekhofen", die unter "Kategorien" leer ist. Also Unterkategorsiert ist. Es müßte eine "Category:Districts of Attendorn" angelegt werden, in die dann als Unterkategorien "Biekhofen", "Kloster Ewig" und "Burg Schnellenberg" eingefügt werden können. Da ich noch nicht so erfahren bin, würde ich mich sehr freuen, wenn ein netter User helfen könnte. Herzlichen Dank - Gruß Bärwinkel,Klaus Bärwinkel,Klaus (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Done: Cat created, Windhausen disambigd and added. --Achim (talk) 22:07, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
photos are no longer for public use. Photos are being used illegaly. Photos are all rights reserved by owner, no longer creative commons 216.14.49.242 00:07, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Oppose A category may deleted if all images in it are deleted. Until then, it should remain. Rodhullandemu (talk) 00:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Not done: Please use COM:deletion requests to request deletion of files. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 11:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Empty category, and no files are existed. This is Taiwania Justo speaking (Reception Room) 02:31, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- I have tagged it with the {{Empty page}} template, to flag it for speedy deletion. @Taiwania Justo: For future reference, this kind of thing can be handled with that template instead of starting a discussion here. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:50, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Closing because cat has been deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 05:03, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Please rename category, the word "police" is misspelt. Fmvh (talk) 10:33, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- Done --E4024 (talk) 12:21, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Waterloo Regional Police and deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 12:28, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
This should be merged to Category:Cannons in Egypt. BTW "Canon" is something else. E4024 (talk) 07:51, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted in favour of Category:Cannons in Egypt. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:33, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
copyrighted to Sega content Sw0 (talk) 23:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Sw0: So long as there is content, we're not going to delete the categories. If you see copyright violations, please nominate the files for deletion. If you want to nominate many at once, use can check "VisualFileChange" under your Preferences>Gadgets to enable batch nominations. You might want to consult Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Costumes_and_cosplay first. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:02, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Keep Per COM:COSPLAY, costumes and cosplay are not automatically copyright infringements (although it can be a grey area, both for Commons and for the law in general). However, this appears to be part of a series of deletion nominations by User:Sw0 related to Sonic the Hedgehog and Pokémon. They seem to have been kicked off by this: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sw0. In light of that, I'm not sure this is really a good faith nomination. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:18, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Not done: Disruptive edit, no valid reason. --Yann (talk) 16:18, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
copyrighted to Sega content Sw0 (talk) 23:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- I don't think this is a good faith nomination. This appears to be part of a series of deletion nominations by User:Sw0 related to Sonic the Hedgehog and Pokémon. They seem to have been kicked off by this: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sw0. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:21, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Not done: Disruptive edit, no valid reason. --Yann (talk) 16:18, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
copyrighted to Sega content Sw0 (talk) 23:05, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- I don't think this is a good faith nomination. This appears to be part of a series of deletion nominations by User:Sw0 related to Sonic the Hedgehog and Pokémon. They seem to have been kicked off by this: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sw0. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:21, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Not done: Disruptive edit, no valid reason. --Yann (talk) 16:17, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
copyrighted content Sw0 (talk) 23:06, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- All the cat? --E4024 (talk) 08:24, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Per COM:COSPLAY, costumes and cosplay are not automatically copyright infringements (although it can be a grey area, both for Commons and for the law in general). However, this appears to be part of a series of deletion nominations by User:Sw0 related to Sonic the Hedgehog and Pokémon. They seem to have been kicked off by this: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sw0. In light of that, I'm not sure this is really a good faith nomination. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:19, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Not done: Disruptive edit, no valid reason. --Yann (talk) 16:17, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
copyrighted content Sw0 (talk) 23:07, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Per COM:COSPLAY, costumes and cosplay are not automatically copyright infringements (although it can be a grey area, both for Commons and for the law in general). However, this appears to be part of a series of deletion nominations by User:Sw0 related to Sonic the Hedgehog and Pokémon. They seem to have been kicked off by this: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sw0. In light of that, I'm not sure this is really a good faith nomination. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:19, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Not done: Disruptive edit, no valid reason. --Yann (talk) 16:16, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
copyrighted content Sw0 (talk) 23:08, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Sw0: Can you be more specific? I doubt we would delete this whole category. There are some images that I don't believe are copyrighted, such as photos of people at Pokémon-related events where no images of Pokémon are shown. --Auntof6 (talk) 02:13, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
- I don't think this is a good faith nomination. This appears to be part of a series of deletion nominations by User:Sw0 related to Sonic the Hedgehog and Pokémon. They seem to have been kicked off by this: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Sw0. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 12:20, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Not done: Disruptive edit, no valid reason. --Yann (talk) 16:15, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Deletion moved to "Art of Sri Chinmoy" Richard Reinhardt (talk) 17:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Closing: cat has been deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:45, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Rename to Category:Born This Way Ball per the article name in English Wikipedia. IndianBio (talk) 04:07, 11 November 2017 (UTC)---
Moved to Category:Born This Way Ball. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:46, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Should be deleted. Is similar to Category:Dark Leg in another Language Hiddenhauser (talk) 20:07, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- You're right. Indeed "dark leg" is written in Latin script on the images... --E4024 (talk) 08:22, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- The files in it were deleted. Therefore I marked it as empty for deletion. This discussion may now be closed. (If no-one does it, I will do it when I learn how to. :) --E4024 (talk) 11:35, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Both categories and all content have been deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:20, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
This is Commons, not Facebook. It shouldn't be a category in any case. Rodhullandemu (talk) 15:54, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
- We should empty it. --E4024 (talk) 15:59, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Actually, I've just twigged the ages of those involved, and it seems to be receiving attention from a number of IPs. In the absence of a defence, I think I'll deal with this in another way. Rodhullandemu (talk) 18:27, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Strange cat with wrong capitalization. I would delete it. E4024 (talk) 11:56, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
- I boldly emptied the single-item and wrong-titled cat and marked it for deletion. I am closing this discussion. If there is an irresistable desire to have such a cat, it can easily be opened with the "right" title ("location"). --E4024 (talk) 11:04, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Done --E4024 (talk) 11:08, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Löschen - Schiffskategorie, falsch erstellt. Mef.ellingen (talk) 18:30, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
- Ich habe die Kategorie erstellt und dann erst festgestellt, dass alle Schiffskartegorien den Zusatz (ship, year) besitzen. --Mef.ellingen (talk) 18:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
Done: . --JuTa 17:07, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
empty Sixflashphoto (talk) 07:18, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
- Then please mark it as "empty page" for deletion. What are we going to discuss here? :) --E4024 (talk) 07:21, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted in favour of Category:Hayden Falls (Ohio). - Themightyquill (talk) 16:13, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
creator requests deletion - empty category... Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:53, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted per request. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:08, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
العابعلللفغالفالاببلااربغت 129.45.116.43 12:59, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
Closing nonsense nomination by anonymous ip. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:05, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
If she is Mexican we should move the cat to: Category:Mónica Frassoni. E4024 (talk) 12:10, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose She was born in Mexico but she's Italian. More importantly, I can find lots of sources calling her Monica without the stress (e.g. European Parliament) and no sources using the stress in her name: is there any? --Jaqen (talk) 12:55, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
- No idea, I just asked a simple question. It is so easy to close discussions as opening them. BTW, today I added two files to your favourite cat. :)--E4024 (talk) 12:57, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Closing as keep. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:03, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
this cat could deleted (videos from Laos is the right name) Basile Morin (talk) 12:51, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted in favour of Category:Videos from Laos. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Most files in category:Profel United are wrong because this redirection exists. When people want to categorize things as "United States" this is the result. And: "United" isn't always United Profel, it may also refer to Manchester United, United States, and many other things. ProfessorX (talk) 15:39, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- This should be a disambiguation page. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:46, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Done--ProfessorX (talk) 20:25, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Converted to disambiguation page by ProfessorXX. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:43, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
duplicate of Category:Federal Agency for Maritime and River Transport Niklitov (talk) 19:48, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted in favour of Category:Federal Agency for Maritime and River Transport (Russia). - Themightyquill (talk) 16:42, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
I accidentally named the page incorrectly. It should be 'Unidentified people of Peru' instead of the current name. Sincerely, NeoMeesje (talk) 09:39, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Unidentified people of Peru. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:32, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
delete the category Přemysl Otakar (talk) 17:07, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Done: Category:The castle brewery in Litomyšl moved to Category:Brewery of the Chateau Litomyšl. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:50, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Mistake in category name - Yerevam instead of Yerevan Kareyac (talk) 00:10, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
- Moved to Category:Petevani Monument. "Yerevan" is not necessary as we do not have cats with the same name (in other cities). --E4024 (talk) 07:29, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Done. --E4024 (talk) 07:33, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
It is the same terminal with AŞTİ. E4024 (talk) 13:00, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
- Moving Category:AŞTİ to Category:Ankara Intercity Bus Terminal, leaving an RD behind for people who will look for "AŞTİ".
Done. --E4024 (talk) 08:26, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
une sauiosae 105.71.2.27 17:27, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Category:Elias (Swedish singer) and this cat have -AFAICS- exactly the same files. This cat could/should be deleted. (Its name is also wrong: Swedish, not "swedish".) --E4024 (talk) 06:39, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Done: unneeded category. --Guanaco (talk) 10:54, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
"Leadership" is not part of the common name Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 06:25, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- Fixed. Evrik (talk) 16:37, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks Evrik!--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 15:14, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Redirected to Category:Eagle Scout Service Project. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:35, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
This category only has one image, and it's rather pointless. We don't generally categorize by "DD Month" unless the date is somehow relevant. If there's a very large number of files, we might categorize by "DD Month YYYY" but that isn't the case here. Guanaco (talk) 09:13, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- Agree, and Category:George W. Bush by date should also be deleted because it contains only this category. The sole file is already in an appropriate year category. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:29, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted. There is no legitimate reason for categorizing people like this. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:33, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
I don't think we should speculate about the motives behind all simple fixed chairs or short benches and label them as "hostile" just because they don't allow one particular use – doing so would be a quite subjective (i.e. anti-COM:CAT) use of our category system and also go against the original definition of the term hostile architecture. FDMS 4 11:49, 19 November 2017 (UTC) P.S.: I removed some files that did not depict objects on roads and thus definitely shouldn't be in this category.
- Keep there are three WP articles about that term and using that category. We can have a sharper definition, but the term and the intentions behind do exist. see [1] (German) about that topic e.g. in Vienna. They don't allow one particular thing, is euphemistic and subjective. These benches and chairs do just allow one single particular use. best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 13:02, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Herzi Pinki: I was not suggesting that this category be deleted (sorry for the ambiguity of the CFD rationale), but that we indeed narrow the scope of the category to street furniture objects like the ones mentioned in the Wikipedia article clearly designed to specifically prevent undesired uses and either simply remove files like the ones below or create separate category trees (benches by length, fixed chairs etc.) for them.
waiting for another opinion can be though. The first image explicitly mentioned here (File:Hostile bench at Spittelauer Platz, Vienna.jpg) does not allow grinding with skateboards. But I now assume, that the cobblestone edge is not well suited for grinding too, so the bench does not prevent anything the cobblestone edge didn't. So no problem to remove this image for the considered category. No need to have an extra category for short, very short and chair sized benches. The second is more dramatic: You cannot put the feet on the other chair, you cannot sit face to face, you cannot hug the other one, it is difficult to support your small child when eating, playing cards is difficult.
.jpg)
_Gray_metal_seats_at_Bahnhof_Neulengbach.jpg)
Restricting the content to streets only does not fit to what the category is intended (your removal of the images above). I consider tram stops and train stations as part of the public space and thus fitting well into this category (like Newspaper vending machines are Street furniture even when in tram & train stations; parks (e.g. File:Moabit Kleiner Tiergarten-017.jpg) literally do not match the term street either.). Hostile architecture is a controversial urban design trend in which public spaces are constructed or altered to discourage people from using them in a way not intended by the owner. So if you don't like the street part, we can generalize to Category:Hostile architecture or better add Hostile architecture as an extra parent category. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:09, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Herzi Pinki: Well, the chairs allow use by two people who know each other as well as two strangers who might otherwise feel uncomfortable facing each other (just a theory, would be interesting to know for sure what the primary motivation for their placement was). While I would endorse moving this category to hostile architecture, the street aspect is not the only one I found problematic about categorising the 5 images above (just the one that was the easiest to explain) – separate chairs or benches with separators seem to have become somewhat of a global standard in public transport stations, so I'm not sure they should really serve as examples of a controversial urban design trend. Also, CCTV, lockable station doors/shutters and the use of wall panels instead of plastered walls, to name a few station-related examples, serve similar purposes (discouraging undesired uses of those spaces, be it homeless occupancy or vandalism) and also once have (had) a more-or-less controversial reception (with the exception of the last one, afaik) – imo we should draw the line at controversial and exclude objects that are not specifically perceived as such. FDMS 4 14:16, 23 November 2017 (UTC) P.S.: What exactly about the first bench prevents skateboard grinding on it?
- I think a move to Category:Hostile architecture works. I'd suggest that "Hostile design" would be more accurate, but "hostile architecture" seems to be the common term. File:Boulons anti-sdf sur un perron (Marseille, France).jpg doesn't qualify as street furniture to me. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:30, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
- Let's go for Category:Hostile design and make Category:Hostile architecture a redirect (or vice versa), as it abstracts also from the building aspect (architecture).
- There are two points you, FDMS4, are complaining about: the street aspect which can be solved by moving the hole stuff to Category:Hostile design (broaden the scope), and second, that we categorize by intentions you cannot see from the pictures. The second one is harder. I do not share the opinion, that if a hostile measure is getting standard, it ceases to be hostile. It still is hostile. The term does exist outside wikiverse, so I do not think there is a problem using it. Restricting to objects that are .. specifically perceived as such does not help much, as perception still can be quite subjective. What about keeping some of the station benches in this category as examples for a general hostile trend, but not to put all the benches in stations into this category? Furthermore I would like to suggest to move some of the images to proper subcategories and consider the whole subcategories as hostile or not, like we already have Category:Skate stops, a category for pee-unfriendly corners like this image (any proposal?), Category:Urine deflectors (see Cliffords Inn Passage, if we collect more), Category:Leaning benches, blocked shelters as this one, keep Category:Hostile street furniture for anti-homeless benches (in french: anti-sdf, sans domicile fixe)?
- see also Category:Exkluderande design, which is a bit different, but should be merged to here. best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 01:14, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Herzi Pinki: Hostile design works fine, as do your subcategory and merger proposals. You omitted the essence of my proposed specifically perceived as such criterion, which is controversial, i.e. objects that are […] specifically perceived as controversial (not saying that the existence of controversy can be determined purely objectively, but it's easier and less subjective than assessing hostility). Using such an inclusion criterion, we could keep for example the first train station benches with separators per infrastructure operator, provided they caused at least a minor uproar. FDMS 4 04:07, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- I think a move to Category:Hostile architecture works. I'd suggest that "Hostile design" would be more accurate, but "hostile architecture" seems to be the common term. File:Boulons anti-sdf sur un perron (Marseille, France).jpg doesn't qualify as street furniture to me. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:30, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Done as proposed --Herzi Pinki (talk) 21:38, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
Marquees (signage), s'il vous plait. The current mix of plural and singular sounds awful. FDMS 4 21:23, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
Moved. FDMS 4 12:24, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
duplicate of Category:Winkelcentrum de Donk Paulbe (talk) 19:09, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oddly enough, both created by the same user, G.Lanting. Was this an accident? - Themightyquill (talk) 10:04, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted in favour of Category:Winkelcentrum de Donk. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:46, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
created in error Finavon (talk) 10:36, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
- I have tagged it with {{Bad name}}, so it should be deleted soon. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:53, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:49, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
It is the same thing with Ankara Intercity Bus Terminal. E4024 (talk) 13:00, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
- Redirect Category:AŞTİ to Category:Ankara Intercity Bus Terminal? I'm not a big fan of acronyms as category names. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:09, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Redirected to Category:Ankara Intercity Bus Terminal by E4024. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:16, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Name change BeckenhamBear (talk) 15:51, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Needs to be St Peter's Hospital, Covent Garden. Needs to lose the full stop after St. See CAT Hospitals in London by name. --BeckenhamBear (talk) 15:53, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Moved to Category:St Peter's Hospital, Covent Garden, as per nomination and British spelling. --rimshottalk 20:18, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Die Kategorie wird nicht weiter benötigt, da sie durch die Kategorie "Werderstraße 7/9 (Wuppertal)" ersetzt wurde Im Fokus (talk) 04:16, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- gelöst als category redirect Werderstraße 7/9 (Wuppertal) --Atamari (talk) 15:26, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Redirected as per discussion. --rimshottalk 20:25, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Die Kategorie wird nicht weiter benötigt, da sie durch die Kategorie "Werderstraße 7/9 (Wuppertal)" ersetzt wurde Im Fokus (talk) 04:18, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- gelöst als category redirect Werderstraße 7/9 (Wuppertal) --Atamari (talk) 15:26, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted as empty, which is probably ok. --rimshottalk 20:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Bitte Löschen, irrtümlich angelegt, es gibt mit »Vienna Stadtbahn type n1« eine besser geeignete Kategorie. Falk2 (talk) 11:29, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted as per nom. --rimshottalk 20:31, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
And its two subcategories (Category:SVG antimicrobials, Category:SVG antivirals created by the same user). Molecules are categorized by their chemical structure, pharmacological action etc. or sometimes by the type of representation of structure (plain structure, 3D models like ball-and-stick, van der Waals/space-filling etc.). IMO there is no reason for creating additional category tree only to categorise molecules by filetype, and existence of such categories can be a pretext for someone to create more in the future. See also Commons_talk:WikiProject_Chemistry#SVG_categories. Wostr (talk) 21:01, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
- Also Category:SVG antiretroviral drugs created from IP. Wostr (talk) 21:04, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted per consensus here and at Commons_talk:WikiProject_Chemistry. Ed (Edgar181) 00:09, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
A category below Category:1830 books shouldn't have a subcategory holding an 1828 book. Instead, categorization could be done along the volumes (1-22, cf. en.wikipedia article); or all media could be joined into a single Category:Histoire naturelle des poissons. Jochen Burghardt (talk) 12:24, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Removing Category:Histoire Naturelle des Poissons from Category:1830 books. Keeping Category:Histoire Naturelle des Poissons (1828) as a subcategory of the former; additional subcategories like Category:Histoire Naturelle des Poissons (1830) may be created as needed. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 13:14, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
The 1835 category shouldn't appear as a subcategory of this category, which is (currently) in Category:1828 books. Instead, subcategories could be built along the volumes (1,...,11,supplement,"1-2", cf. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/bibliography/8133#/summary). Jochen Burghardt (talk) 12:39, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- If you want to do the work to assign each illustration to the volume and year it came from, by all means feel free to do so. We have hundreds of thousands of improperly or roughly categorized images as a result of mass uploads from BHL and Internet Archive, and bringing order to chaos takes time and effort. Think practically rather than technically: a file being in the right source category but wrong year probably won't hinder anyone. Animalparty (talk) 20:40, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Removing Category:Illustrations of British entomology from Category:1828 books. Keeping Category:Illustrations of British Entomology (1835) as a subcategory of the former; additional subcategories like Category:Illustrations of British Entomology (1828) may be created lateron as needed. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 13:31, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I believe Category:Parts can be merged into Category:Components. The latter name is linked to Wikidata and is preferred by Wikipedias. --ghouston (talk) 22:12, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds good, but at present Category:Components is a subcat of Category:Parts (?) ... --E4024 (talk) 07:23, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- That's right. But Parts can go away and Components can take its place. --ghouston (talk) 09:15, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Support Do we need to rename the various "X parts" sub-categories to "X components" categories as well, or just leave them alone? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:58, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- I don't think it matters much. I'd leave them alone. One or the other wordings may seem more natural in some cases (like "body parts" rather than "body components"). --ghouston (talk) 10:17, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- That makes sense to me. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:37, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- I don't think it matters much. I'd leave them alone. One or the other wordings may seem more natural in some cases (like "body parts" rather than "body components"). --ghouston (talk) 10:17, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
I think "part" may be a more general concept than "component". It does have a Wikidata item at d:Q15989253. There are some things in this category, like Category:Fragments and Category:Partial views that aren't really components. --ghouston (talk) 01:27, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
- Agree, “part” has a broader meaning. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:09, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
I'll leave the categories alone, but move anything that's an entity in its own right into Category:Components. The remaining few things can stay in parts. --ghouston (talk) 00:23, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
The chemical en:Cumene is "isopropylbenzene", so "cumenes" and "isopropylbenzenes" seem like synonymous terms. Should Category:Cumenes be up-merged into Category:isopropylbenzenes? DMacks (talk) 05:31, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- "cumenes" was intended for the mono-isopropylbenzenes, isopropylbenzenes for any mono or poly isopropylbenzenes. Rhadamante (talk) 05:58, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- I don't object to a category for monoisopropylbenzenes. Maybe "cumenes" is an ambiguous name for it? For example, how much other substitution would be acceptable? "Ethyl cumene" seems to be a common chemical-name, so it seems arbitrary that a second isopropyl instead of ethyl makes it not-a-cumene. More to the point, en:HMDB says[2] diisopropylbenzene is in the cumenes class and ContaminantDB says[3] likewise about triisopropylbenzene. How about renaming to Category:Monoisopropylbenzenes? DMacks (talk) 06:37, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- Is there a reason we need separate categories for monoisopropylbenzenes and polyisopropylbenzenes? There aren't that many files in these categories that a distinction seems warranted and there doesn't seem to be any strong chemistry-based distinction. I would favor merging into one category (but don't care how it is named). Ed (Edgar181) 11:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- Since there doesn't seem to be any objection, I have upmerged the separate categories into Category:isopropylbenzenes. Ed (Edgar181) 22:18, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Redirected to Category:isopropylbenzenes. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:43, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
We have a Category:Schloss Fürstenberg and a Category:Fürstenberg Castle. They are two entirely different buildings, but the only distinction of the names is that one is in English and the other is in German. We should distinguish them some other way. Jmabel ! talk 04:08, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- We should give them both the same name: "Fürstenberg Castle" (better) or "Schloss Fürstenberg" (acceptable) and then add a parenthesis with the name of the place where they are situated. --E4024 (talk) 11:55, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- That would be fine with me. Should we also have a disambiguation page? - Jmabel ! talk 15:07, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- Why not? Maybe even two, one with the German name and the other with the English name. --E4024 (talk) 15:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- Or just one, with the other name redirected. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:13, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
- Why not? Maybe even two, one with the German name and the other with the English name. --E4024 (talk) 15:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- That would be fine with me. Should we also have a disambiguation page? - Jmabel ! talk 15:07, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguated at Category:Fürstenberg Castle to Category:Fürstenberg Castle (Holzminden) and Category:Fürstenberg Castle (Oberhavel) with a reddirect from Category:Schloss Fürstenberg. -Themightyquill (talk) 13:50, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Categories for stations of Nishi-Nippon Railroad
[edit]According to signboards of Nishi-Nippon Railroad, such as File:Nishitetsu-Kashii Station Sign 2.jpg and File:Nishitetsu-Futsukaichi Station Sign (Tenjin-Omuta Line) 2.jpg. There are no hyphens in station names of Nishi-Nippon Railroad which starting with "Nishitetsu". So I think these categories below should be renamed.
_2.jpg){kind=link}
- Category:Nishitetsu-Fukuoka (Tenjin) Station to Category:Nishitetsu Fukuoka (Tenjin) Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Futsukaichi Station to Category:Nishitetsu Futsukaichi Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Ginsui Station to Category:Nishitetsu Ginsui Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Hirao Station to Category:Nishitetsu Hirao Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Kurume Station to Category:Nishitetsu Kurume Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Nakashima Station to Category:Nishitetsu Nakashima Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Ogōri Station to Category:Nishitetsu Ogōri Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Wataze Station to Category:Nishitetsu Wataze Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Yanagawa Station to Category:Nishitetsu Yanagawa Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Gojō Station to Category:Nishitetsu Gojō Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Kashii Station to Category:Nishitetsu Kashii Station
- Category:Nishitetsu-Shingū Station to Category:Nishitetsu Shingū Station--そらみみ (talk) 00:32, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Comment Although I'm not completely against the idea, I have a feeling that these moves are essentially unnecessary; the railway company uses for example three different wordings for a single station, i.e. Fukuoka-Tenjin, Nishitetsu Fukuoka (Tenjin) and Nishitetsu-Fukuoka (Tenjin). Might be true that station signs show non-hyphenated names, but that doesn't necessarily mean they (non-hyphenated names) are sorely correct or official. Yasu (talk) 14:58, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- I see. Thanks for your comment.--そらみみ (talk) 19:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
- Support: While there does seem to be some variation among even official usage, I think we should go along with the form used in official station signage, i.e. non-hyphenated (Category:Nishitetsu-Fukuoka (Tenjin) Station to Category:Nishitetsu Fukuoka (Tenjin) Station). --DAJF (talk) 03:27, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for your support.--そらみみ (talk) 09:54, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
- Done: According to opinions above and on my talk page, I moved all categories to non-hyphenated version.--そらみみ (talk) 10:18, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
This should be removed - it was only a temporary mess up because of me adding the wrong thing to a campaign. Reosarevok (talk) 10:18, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sure. BTW, I was checking the names of other subcategories, I am preparing a list to standardize them (and link to the village pump for information). There might be one or two name change in the next days.--Alexmar983 (talk) 11:32, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Images from Wiki Science Competition 2017 in the United States. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:58, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Unnecessary, for this just Category:Overhead power lines in Russia should be used.-- Stella Liebeck (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- It's hard to know, Stella Liebeck because someone has removed any images from the category. How many were in there previously? There is a Category:Low-voltage overhead power lines so it could be sub-divided by country if necessary. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:23, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
- I restored the file removed from this category by Stella Liebeck and added a couple more. Up to a hundred others may presently be added, if not more. 194.186.207.222 11:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
No clear reason to delete, and no consensus to do so. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:00, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Empty, made by sock master --Bukhari Talk 11:05, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
DELETED. Taivo (talk) 13:16, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
According to File:Nishi-koyama stn ticket gates - Nov 18 2017.jpg, station name used on information board is "Nishi-koyama Station", but the website of Tokyu Corporation shows the station name as "Nishi-Koyama Station". So I request rename this category to Category:Nishi-koyama Station or Category:Nishi-Koyama Station.--そらみみ (talk) 15:09, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
- Done, as no oppose opinions for 1 month.--そらみみ (talk) 07:59, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
What is this gallery about? Can somebody pls translate it into english? Sanandros (talk) 19:25, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
- v Praze means "in Prague" so I'm guessing that's his plane landing in Prague. Given that he isn't visible in any of the images, it might make more sense to move them to Category:08-8204 (aircraft) and Category:Military aircraft at Prague Ruzyně Airport, or some sub-category of those two. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:37, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
- Yea sounds good. If nobody oposes that desicion then I will delete the cat and move the pics to the suggested cats.--Sanandros (talk) 21:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted as per above. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:04, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I think categories like this and Category:Maps of ongoing conflicts that constantly need updating are a bad idea. These two are already more than a year out of date. Move to Category:Maps of the world showing conflicts in 2016 and Category:Maps of 2016 conflicts? Themightyquill (talk) 07:30, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Moved. - 14:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
- And nobody cared to actually check what was in this category? Most of the content was maps from 2006-2012 that were apparently just cat-a-lotted here by chance, without content specifically about 2016. I moved the world maps to Category:Conflict maps of the world and dated them correctly. I'm eventually going to check through the stuff and move most content to Category:Maps of conflicts, before emptying and speedying this garbage dump. Enyavar (talk) 23:28, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
What is the correct name that we should use here? We have the gallery Aysén Region. E4024 (talk) 09:14, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
- The right shorten name is Aysén Region: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regi%C3%B3n_Ays%C3%A9n_del_General_Carlos_Ib%C3%A1%C3%B1ez_del_Campo but, I don't know how to change the name of this category and all of subcategories named after them --LBM1948 (talk) 11:09, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
- I'll move them for you, and you will carry the files to the new names; OK? --E4024 (talk) 11:22, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Aisén Region. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:10, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
This should be renamed as Category:Girls wearing hijabs, following the example of Category:Women wearing hijabs or both of them should end in singular. E4024 (talk) 08:05, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
- And then another Category:Females wearing hijabs must be made for joining these "female children"! with women. --E4024 (talk) 07:54, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
- No objections? I will soon proceed then. --E4024 (talk) 15:38, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
- An IP -for some reason dedicated only to this issue- made some arrangements without participating in the discussion. I will also try to arrange the area, transparently. If you don't like my edits please tell me. I'm open to discuss every contribution of mine. --E4024 (talk) 11:49, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
- No objections? I will soon proceed then. --E4024 (talk) 15:38, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
DELETED. I agree: boys do not wear hijab. Taivo (talk) 13:48, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
elle devrait être une sous-catégorie de Category:Basilica of Saint Praxedes (Rome), et je ne sais pas faire ! Merci à ceux qui savent de rectifier. ChristianeB (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
Ajouté à Category: Basilica of Saint Praxedes (Rome). Vous devez simplement ajouter le text [[Category: Basilica of Saint Praxedes (Rome)]] a la catégorie. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:27, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Broken category redirects Afifa Afrin (talk) 14:24, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Seems to have been fixed. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:30, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Broken category redirects Afifa Afrin (talk) 14:24, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
Seems to have been fixed. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:30, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Empty category in non English language Afifa Afrin (talk) 14:29, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- Tagged with {{Empty page}}. @Afifa Afrin: Using the empty page template is a better option for this kind of case than starting a discussion. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
DELETED.Taivo (talk) 18:01, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
"Senyera" means flag. This should be RD'ed to Category:Flags. If we are referring to the specific flag of the Autonomous Region of Catalonia, then that would be "La Senyera". We cannot keep a cat titled like this one. E4024 (talk) 08:16, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
- We should also handle Category:Senyeres. If not, let us all open cats for "flags" in our own national/local languages. This makes no sense. --E4024 (talk) 08:19, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Some clarifications. "Senyera" means flag, but it is mainly -almost exclusively- used to refer to flags of Catalan-speaking entities. For instance, Penjàrem la senyera al costat de la bandera dels Estats Units (We hanged the senyera beside the flag of the USA). But it would be odd to say Tenim les senyeres de la Xina, França i Perú (We have the flags of China, France and Peru).
In addition, senyera is used for the Catalan flag, but also to the Valencian flag, the flag of the Balearic Islands and some local flags. Some people would not consider estelades as proper senyeres, but others would.
That said, cultural and political connotations affect the use of senyera. I live in Valencia and here the senyera by default is the Valencian one with the blue part (and with the crown, but they are cheaper without crown, so, well, not all flags are perfect). Some people would use senyeres to express a political opinion, different versions expressing different views.
To resume, in my opinion a senyera is a subclass of flags. I think the the category should be named in plural (senyeres).
By the way, there's a municipality in Valencia province called Senyera. B25es (talk) 09:08, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
- I learned something from your talk, the use of bandera-senyera; thus something I already suspected was confirmed. However that is related -mostly- to my Catalan learning process. If you notice your own talk, you yourself referred to "la senyera", didn't you? I will beg your pardon, in advance, not to give you a wrong impression: I'm not criticising nor -God save me- "insulting" you, but I have to confess I see you a little confused. While we are talking about this project, realised in English, you come and go between the two languages. What I'm trying to express is, more than the defence about using one or another "specific" Catalan-language word here, which is totally justifiable, you're telling me things we could discuss at the Catalan WP or Catalan-language version of Commons. Having said all these stupidities of mine, I acknowledge and appreciate your courage to have accepted the wrongness of having opened this cat in the first place. [I think that the category should be named in plural (senyeres).] Well, therefore I understand you are ready to "sacrifice" the cat. Am I wrong? --E4024 (talk) 11:45, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, you did nothing wrong. I'm sorry, I wasn't offended. Flags in Valencia have been -and to some extent, still are- a highly charged political issue. But in general terms a senyera is a flag with four red bars on a yellow field and maybe some other artifacts, that has been originated from the Catalan-Aragonese vexilological tradition. It's tricky (the flag of Foix, in my opinion, is not a senyera, but the flag of Sagunt would be) but can work. And thanks a lot for your interest! B25es (talk) 06:36, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you. Now, are you going to take the files in this cat to Category:Senyeres, and so we can delete the empty cat? --E4024 (talk) 13:42, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, you did nothing wrong. I'm sorry, I wasn't offended. Flags in Valencia have been -and to some extent, still are- a highly charged political issue. But in general terms a senyera is a flag with four red bars on a yellow field and maybe some other artifacts, that has been originated from the Catalan-Aragonese vexilological tradition. It's tricky (the flag of Foix, in my opinion, is not a senyera, but the flag of Sagunt would be) but can work. And thanks a lot for your interest! B25es (talk) 06:36, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- Done. Closing. --E4024 (talk) 13:46, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Groups by number should use digital numbers instead of long-form numbers in their names. Category:Groups of twenty-eight should be Category:Groups of 28. This would better match most other number-based categories and would make it possible to access with templates (one could easily categorize in [[:Category:Groups of {{{1}}}]] in a template where parameter 1 is a number. This would also be that much easier on non-English speaking users. Josh (talk) 23:11, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds like a good plan in every way. Support. --Pitke (talk) 23:30, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Support Another argument: both spellings are allowed. However, an important argument in favor of numeric notation is accessibility for non-English speakers. Because Commons is used for all language versions of Wikipedia, and in many countries English is not spoken or not spoken well. However, the numeric notation can be more easily understood by all. Greets Triplec85 (talk) 07:24, 27 March 2022 (UTC)
Proceeding to make the aforementioned changes as there is no objection or further discussion at this time. Josh (talk) 17:38, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
Incorrect name - created in error Dan arndt (talk) 01:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- I've tagged it with {{Bad name}}. @Dan arndt: For future reference, this kind of case can be handled by using that template instead of starting a discussion. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:41, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
DELETED -- Taivo (talk) 09:20, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
There is already a Category:Iftar. Unnecessary new cat with wrong capitalization. Please merge this in there. E4024 (talk) 07:57, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- Iftar الإفطار is a general word denoting breaking of fasting. Muslim fasting is not restricted to Ramadan. Other common fasting days are Mondays and Thursdays; Ashurahعاشوراء day; Arafahعرفة day ; 13th,14th, 15th of hijri months. Plus fasting for other sunnah as Kafart Half yamin كفارة حلف يمين. Ramadan Iftar is the only one nearly with specific traditions as eating in gathering. Iftar is a noun not a verb so first letter is Capital. As far as i know. Hope this explain.--Ashashyou (talk) 10:06, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- Your info is not valid for English. In English there is only one "iftar". Secondly, in English nouns do not begin with capitals, that is German. --E4024 (talk) 11:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for correcting the capitals. However, English dictionaries mention that "Iftar" is breaking of fasting of Ramadan, and nearly all mention that it is derived from the Arabic word "Iftar" meaning breaking fasting. That is to say it includes Iftar of Ramdan fasting and Iftar of Non-Ramadan fasting. Ramadan fasting has specific traditions, so it need to have a separate category other than the word Iftar general category. So as not to prevent any confusion between Ramadan iftar and other iftars of Non Ramadan fasting (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasting_in_Islam#Days_for_fasting). I think having a specific category is better.--Ashashyou (talk) 19:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
- Sorry but you only confirmed my stance. This is the Commons in English. Indeed you are a little confused about this Ramadan iftar-iftar thing. Let me explain: You have made this cat but you have not added it to Category:Iftar. This shows a clear confusion by itself. Secondly, you have made a cat on "Ramadan Iftar canons" (sic, you mean "cannons") but instead of making it a subcat of Category:Ramadan Iftar, you have made it a subcat of Category:Iftar. This is exactly what we call "Bu ne perhiz bu ne lahana turşusu"! :) I'm sure like many people in Egypt you may also speak Turkish and understood the joke...
- OTOH, you have placed the said cat under Cannons or Canons of or in Egypt. Look, all of those cannons may belong to Egypt but still you cannot place an "Iftar cannons" category within an Egyptian cannons category; because Egypt is not the only country that traditionally uses iftar cannons. Syria, Iraq, Jordan they all use these cannons; also my country, Turkey uses iftar cannons. This is an Ottoman tradition. Therefore, if those cannons you use belong to Egypt, you can place each and every cannon under a cat for Egyptian cannons, but you cannot place the "iftar cannons" cat altogether under "Cannons of/in Egypt". If there is anything that you cannot understand or do not agree with, please tell me. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 11:56, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- As you said all photos currently in the "Iftar cannons" category are from Egypt. The tradition was started in Mamluk Egypt (before Ottoman Empire), at the time of a Mamluk Sultan - i think al-Ashraf Shaban - when his army was trying a new canon and fired it at the time of Iftar. Afterwards it became a habit that was propagated to many areas. I promise to make a subcategory for "Egyptian Iftar Canons" if any other photos of Iftar canons from other countries was added. If you think it is proper to add a subcategory inform me.--Ashashyou (talk) 16:00, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- I am sorry i can not follow you. I know some Turkish words but not sentences. Please Do whatever is needed. I have corrected the categorization of Ramadan Iftar cannons to be included in "Ramadan Iftar" Thanks.--Ashashyou (talk) 16:03, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
- Ashashyou you have added Category:Ramadan Iftar canons (sic) to Category:Ramadan Iftar canon at Cairo Citadel (sic) and Category:Ottoman Egypt; while the Category:Ramadan Iftar canon at Al Rehab City (sic) is, of course, under both Category:Ramadan Iftar canons (sic) and Category:Cannons in Egypt. You understand the problems? Sorry, but you really don't understand. "With all due respect" (please read the preceding quotation as bolded, I don't like to use bold letters in speech) what you should better do is to learn a bit more about categorization in Commons before creating more and avoidable work burden to your colleagues here. Ah, before going to Syria in civil war to take a pic of the Ramadan cannon I observed in Damascus during several Ramadans (or "Ramazan"s as we say) I'd prefer to go to Egypt, visit the pyramids, and check how many of those cannons you put into the same sack are really Ramadan cannons. --E4024 (talk) 10:55, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks for correcting the capitals. However, English dictionaries mention that "Iftar" is breaking of fasting of Ramadan, and nearly all mention that it is derived from the Arabic word "Iftar" meaning breaking fasting. That is to say it includes Iftar of Ramdan fasting and Iftar of Non-Ramadan fasting. Ramadan fasting has specific traditions, so it need to have a separate category other than the word Iftar general category. So as not to prevent any confusion between Ramadan iftar and other iftars of Non Ramadan fasting (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fasting_in_Islam#Days_for_fasting). I think having a specific category is better.--Ashashyou (talk) 19:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
- Your info is not valid for English. In English there is only one "iftar". Secondly, in English nouns do not begin with capitals, that is German. --E4024 (talk) 11:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
- We only have "Ramadan iftar" (?) images. I cannot see any other "iftar" files. Therefore I'm boldly upmerging this to Category:Iftar because it is taking too much time, and "Please Do whatever is needed" means the cat-opener consented. Closing. --E4024 (talk) 13:33, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
- Done --E4024 (talk) 14:00, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
This cat must be moved to Category:Liyakat Medal. E4024 (talk) 14:45, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- It has been opened by the same user who also opened Category:Imtiyaz Medal and while both Ottoman Turkish words are written and pronounced with a y before the (first) a, one cat follows this rule and the other does not. Transliteration of words written in Arab script during Ottoman times is a complicated issue. It is better to use the contemporary form of the words in Latin script, so as to at least make it easier for Turkish speaking people to reach at these cats. Therefore, instead of moving "Imtiyaz" to "Imtiaz", let's move this cat to Category:Liyakat Medal. (The word liyakat is commonly used in contemporary Turkish.) --E4024 (talk) 14:51, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- Done Moved. --E4024 (talk) 05:59, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
Should it not be "Cat:Transportation of ..." instead of "Cat:Transport of .."? Sanandros (talk) 22:12, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
- Probably not, since it's part of a tree of categories starting at Category:Transport by freight. This category should be consistent with all the others. --ghouston (talk) 00:58, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- I agree with User:Ghouston. I've seen other transport vs. transportation discussions around Wikimedia projects, and the consensus is that "transport" is simpler and more universal. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:49, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
No consensus to move, and it matches the parent category. - Themightyquill (talk) 22:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Need delete for rename category's 'Category:4th Guards Kantemirovskaya Tank Division Recon Company' Nickel nitride (talk) 04:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Nickel nitride: Would a redirect be useful? - Themightyquill (talk) 13:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 22:07, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Comment faire pour que ces photos apparaissent dans les moteurs de recherche comme google, yahoo....? merci P. hynece (talk) 21:09, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- Well, first, rename to make it a biographical category. The only English-language reference I can find calls him "Chaweye Balla Arabé." German wikipedia uses de:Bala Arabé and French wikipedia uses fr:Balla-Arabé. I might recommend Category:Chaweye Balla Arabé with redirect from those other names.
- Then, add relevant categories such as Category:1925 births, Category:1991 deaths, Category:Politicians of Niger, Category:Men of Niger and Category:People by name, etc. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:29, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello, athers names chare par english ant geman wiki are not rigth because this wiki took thier sources from published texte realised in africa without any concordances. And you can see even the dates of missions in army are differentes from those sources. How shoul I convience them that the rigth name is : Balla-Arabé (with the hyphen). See this links of the son of Balla-Arabé who is in armey too : https://scholar.google.fr/citations?user=dYEIx_IAAAAJ&hl=fr Somes sources came from Niger State people, but they use to neglect the hyphen, they are wrong.
Thank P.hynece
- Well, at very least, redirects should be left from other incorrect spellings if they are more common than the correct spelling. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:06, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
- I renamed the category. BrightRaven (talk) 10:00, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
What is a diaphragm arch / arc diaphragme and what are all these flying arches doing here? Andy Dingley (talk) 01:02, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- As I can see, flying arch is a type of arch bridge. As regard diaphragm arches, maybe the mentioned articles describe elements of a vault or ceiling, while the Commons category contains rather free strut arches with similar function (cs:Prampouch, de:Schwibbogen (Architektur)) - what is the right English equivalent of that term? Maybe, the Wikidata item and interwiki should be split to two items. --ŠJů (talk) 10:00, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Andy Dingley: I'm a bit confused. You started a discussion today, but you declare yourself as {{Retired}} since 2015-11-03. --ŠJů (talk) 10:08, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- The description at diaphragm arch says it's a wall-bearing arch, but that's not a phrase I can find online in any other context. Does that mean a diaphragm arch, like a flying arch, doesn't support any vertical load, but simply bears horizonal weight to keep walls (or hills) from collapsing inward? Is that the connection - they are both two-sided arch buttresses? - Themightyquill (talk) 11:26, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- It's an arch to support a divider, either a floor, ceiling or a low wall that subdivides a ceiling vault. But it supports some weight upon it.
- The others are flying arches, a symmetrical form of flying buttress, which are there to oppose a horizontal inward thrust from another wall. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:16, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- The description at diaphragm arch says it's a wall-bearing arch, but that's not a phrase I can find online in any other context. Does that mean a diaphragm arch, like a flying arch, doesn't support any vertical load, but simply bears horizonal weight to keep walls (or hills) from collapsing inward? Is that the connection - they are both two-sided arch buttresses? - Themightyquill (talk) 11:26, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
- The English article en:Flying arch has no interwiki, and refers only specific bracing of railway cuttings, and counts the arches as bridges. There is no indication that this term can be analogue of cs:Prampouch / de:Schwibbogen (Architektur). --ŠJů (talk) 17:28, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
@Andy Dingley and Themightyquill: Category:Diaphragm arches split to Category:Diaphragm arches and Category:Schwibbogen (architecture). The correct English term for Schwibbogen was not found (proved) in this discussion. --ŠJů (talk) 18:33, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Andy Dingley: Are we okay to close? - Themightyquill (talk) 13:43, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
My dictionary of architectural Terms (Bildwörterbuch der Architektur, Koepf/Binding, Kröner 2005) says (translation by me): Schwibbogen (Schwebebogen), an arch to transfer horizontal shear between two buildings, mostly crossing small lanes. Given Translations: en: pier arch, straining arch; fr: arc-boutant, arc diaphragme; it: arco rampante, fornice, cavalcavia; sp: arco de tensión Maybe this helps to clarify? --Herzi Pinki (talk) 15:24, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
As it often happens , architectural terms can have several meanings in a language when they have only one in another. A diaphragm arch seems to be quite the same thing as the french "arc diaphragme" and therefore, can't be an arch spanning between two buildings as the Schwibbogen does. I can't speak german well enough to understand clearly the german article about Schwibbogen. But are we sure that Schwibbogen covers these 3 meanings : diaphragm arch, flying buttress (arc-boutant in french) and what could maybe translated as "arc monumental" in french for the iranian en:kucheh? why are there only photos of Kuchehs in the german wikipedia article? Anyway, the image in the wikimedia infobox should perhaps be removed because as the arch does not bear any vault or any ceiling , it can give a wrong idea of what a diaphragm arch is according to the english and french definition--Pimprenel (talk) 17:56, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
The relevance of this category can't be denied anymore as it is now quite clear that a diaphragm arch and a "Schwibbogen" are different things. I have compared Herzi Pinki translation of his dictionnary with the online version of Oskar Pfeiffer und Helga Zoglman: Kunstlexikon in de:Schwibbogen (Architektur),and in my opinion Schwibbogen is only an arch between two buildings. We also have this kind of arch in the south of France but I have been unable to find what it is called. Can we close the discussion now ?--Pimprenel (talk) 18:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks, Pimprenel for the reminder. I don't think the category needs to be merged or deleted, but we do need a clear and accurate category description. It seems to me that the English wikipedia article is quite different than the French one. I think a clear description at Category:Schwibbogen (architecture) is also necessary. We don't want to have this discussion again if we can avoid it. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:32, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- I think Pimprenel has now made the distinction quite clear with category descriptions. I'm ready to close, unless anyone has objections. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:51, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
The problem seems to have been resolved, so seeing no objections, I'm closing discussion. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:49, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Redundant with Category:Facilities in the interiors of schools, no? Themightyquill (talk) 17:51, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
Category:Rooms in school buildings is empty. It should be deleted. Mateussf (talk) 19:03, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
I can't figure out what happened to the images there, so there's not much I can do about it. I'm going to redirect to Category:Facilities in the interiors of schools. - Themightyquill (talk) 07:18, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
This category doesn't seem necessary. "Named places" is vague, even if described in the category description. I think it can be deleted. All entries are already in appropriate categories such as regions or valleys of Pennsylvania. Auntof6 (talk) 02:30, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
- Couldn't agree more. Do we have any "unnamed places" cat for any place in the world? --E4024 (talk) 08:10, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
- I don't see any. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:40, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
- This is a duplicate of Category:Regions of Pennsylvania, with an unclear name and less content. The exception is Category:Susquehanna Valley, which remains in "named places" but has been moved to the Category:Eastern Pennsylvania category of "regions". Peter James (talk) 18:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- Delete it, IMHO. --E4024 (talk) 07:51, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
Deleted as redundant as per consensus. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:39, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
Another of the so many wrongly-opened cats by User:Pivox. This should merge into Category:1960 coup d'etat in Turkey. Pivox, even if you changed your user name please help to clean the mess. E4024 (talk) 11:27, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
- Aktarılsın Pivox (talk) 12:37, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
(pictogram voting merge). Incnis Mrsi (talk) 15:16, 3 February 2018 (UTC)- Both of them? Are you joking or trying to destroy Commons? What do you mean with "keep"? --E4024 (talk) 08:43, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
- @Pivox and E4024: This is not a vote or a shouting match. Give an explanation of why one category is better than the other. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:00, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
- Redirect to 1960 coup d'etat in Turkey, a descriptive name. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:15, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- Incnis Mrsi thanks for your opinion and also thanks for your kind translation. However, as the part translated by you is not the original shape of the page, you should also do some striking in the page so that newbies learn how to act and also people who read the discussion without examining the history of the page will not be confused by my reaction above. (BTW of course I did not shout, I never shout.) --E4024 (talk) 07:46, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Merged. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:44, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
Commons is not a meme directory, even if the contents of the category were "memes". Jon Kolbert (talk) 22:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
- Excuse me? Are you merely objecting to the name of this category? Or are you objecting to the commons having any images described as images of "sexy librarians"?
- If your concern is merely that you don't think categories should contain the word "meme", is there a reason you haven't suggested an alternate name?
- Otherwise, do you think you could offer a substantive, policy based explanation as to why we should not carry images described as images of "sexy librarians"?
- Geo Swan (talk) 23:27, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
- I Support the deletion of this cat and the out of scope files that make it up. "Sexy librarian meme"? I never understood very well what "meme" means in English; in my native tongue, the word is used for tits or nipples (elements that help to be sexy :). I believe there is no "librarian" figure here. If the librarian does not have anything like a book, newspapers, book files etc around, how do we understand he or she is a librarian? If we need sexy librarians, we should picture a lady in some decollete and/or mini skirts sitting on books, for example; or a male librarian, a handsome guy carrying books "topless". Then I would consider those as pictures of "sexy librarians". --E4024 (talk) 07:42, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- As with our nominator, if the concern over the category is just its name, then please suggest an alternate name.
- Since I am working on a draft of a wikipedia article on the topic of the sexy librarian, I really can't understand how anyone can argue images that could illustrate that article are not in scope. Even if, for the sake of argument, I choose to add that coverage to an article related to librarians, rather than create a standalone article, the images would still be in scope.
- As for your question as to how we know the women in these images are supposed to be seen as sexy librarians? The photographers explicitly characterized them as sexy librarians.
- E4024, should we delete all categories using words you «never understood very well». Or should you look it up instead? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:18, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
- Regardless of whether we should have this category or not, I don't think "meme" is the right word. It fits under Category:Stock characters so Category:Sexy librarian (stock character) or Category:Sexy librarian archetype would be better. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:52, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
- Sounds reasonable -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:18, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
- Keep No policy-based rationale for deletion. — Jeff G. ツ 00:58, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
- Call for closure. It has been half a year, and nominator still has not seen fit to return to explain the policy basis for this nomination. Geo Swan (talk) 19:22, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Jon Kolbert: RSVP. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 01:28, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- Il me semble que des commentaires supplémentaires sont voulus de moi. Ce n'est pas seulement le nom qui cause des inquiètes, c'est l'idée de cette catégorie. On n'a pas une Catégorie:Beaux bateaux, car c'est subjectif comme nom. Je me sens un peu comme M. Zuckerberg quand il a décrit comment Facebook fonctionne a Congrès... mais ces images ne sont pas un "meme" - faire référence à ici pour des exemples de memes. La catégorie est inexacte et en mauvais goût, j'attends plus de jugement des personnes impliquées dans l'entretien de cette catégorie. Jon Kolbert (talk) 17:29, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
- I ran Jon Kolbert's reply through google translate. He seems to be saying the current title is "inaccurate" -- but has continued to not reply to my request of November 17th that he offer an alternate title.
- He also claims the title is in bad taste... at least that is how google translate translates him. Bad taste? Then how come scholars, who are actual librarians, have written about this meme/archetype/stock-character/whatever in scholarly journals, without making any claims it is in bad taste?
- Geo Swan (talk) 23:41, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
- "La catégorie est inexacte et en mauvais goût" does not refer to the title but to the essence of the cat, as "inaccurate and bad taste". I speak very little French, even less than Google, and it is crystal clear. Regards. --E4024 (talk) 06:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry, I should have asked for an explanation of the policy basis for this nomination from @Jon Kolbert: in English. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Jon Kolbert: you list yourself in your user page a native English speaker; you nominated this CfD in English; this discussion has been held in English so far; this cat name itself is in English — and why on Earth did you switch to French when you come here to clarify your position as asked? This is anything else than a mean spirited way to try to confuse the matter? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:18, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin: I wrote "RSVP", which I believe originated in French. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 00:25, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
- That’d be a witty ripost but borderline uncivil in this context. Glad you didn’t say q.e.d. or etc., though, or else he’d have replied in Latin… -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:34, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin: Non intellego hic iocus. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 11:33, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Alexis Jazz: Sorōrem tuam. (I did’nt use any translation software, so this is probably not correct.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 11:53, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Tuvalkin: non sequitur. Translation software is improving these days, but it still can be hilariously (or horribly) incorrect on occasion.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 15:46, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:18, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
- Second call for closure. Nominator Jon Kolbert still has not offered a substantive policy basis for this nomination, or an alternate category name. Geo Swan (talk) 19:17, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- Third call for closure as above. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 00:12, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep I would have considered a suggestion for an alternative name, but since Jon Kolbert can't be bothered to suggest one I'd say just leave this as it is. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 11:33, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
- I agree. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 11:54, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment perhaps some explanatory text could be added, to address part of Jon Kolbert’s concern that membership is too subjective, saying something to the effect that included files should only be those intended to illustrate the meme or stereotype, according to their original titles or descriptions, not just anything that looks like it might belong.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 15:59, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Odysseus1479: I'm sure you're familiar with {{Sofixit}}. :) — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:04, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- If I actually knew anything about the topic I might do so, but I only feel qualified to make a tentative suggestion. Moreover others might regard it as no more than the proverbial rearrangement of deck chairs on the Titanic.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
- Excuse me, Odysseus1479, if you can see something meaningful in Jon Kolbert's stated concerns, would you lay it out for me? I've done my best to find something substantive, and haven't found it.
If you were just being polite... did you see where they responded to a request to explain themself more fully with a reply in French that practically everyone else found cryptic? Geo Swan (talk) 00:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Geo Swan: I was addressing the part of the objection that said the category is too subjective, that the meme is ill-defined. Not being at all involved with social media, I have little idea of what qualifies as a meme in that context; I just thought an explanatory note might help clarify the category’s scope.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 01:34, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- @Odysseus1479: I'm sure you're familiar with {{Sofixit}}. :) — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:04, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.: this one just won't die. Do you know where we keep the wooden stakes? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 01:22, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- YACfC Yet another call for closure. Geo Swan (talk) 04:15, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
@Geo Swan and Jeff G.: If we are to close, are you all okay with a move to either Category:Sexy librarian (stock character) or Category:Sexy librarian archetype? - Themightyquill (talk) 08:46, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Odysseus1479: Same? - Themightyquill (talk) 08:47, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, and I would prefer the former; “archetype” implies to me something more universal, the kind of psychological symbol that appears across cultures and times. I suppose there might be some kind of archetype to be found behind the character, if one digs deep enough, but this manifestation at least belongs to modern Western popular culture.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 09:07, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- Both renames are reasonable suggestions. For closure? I will agree to anything reasonable. Geo Swan (talk) 10:47, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: Support Category:Sexy librarian (stock character) - Alexis Jazz ping plz 11:18, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: Support closure and either name. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:17, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- Fifth call for closure Geo Swan (talk) 02:56, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- sixth call for closure - If you object to the name then suggest something better ... if it's not the name that's the problem then why are we here ?, I have a lot of respect for Jon but IMHO this is an absurd nomination. –Davey2010Talk 03:26, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- Is it probable that the CfD is not closed due to the lack of consensus? I do not see any. --E4024 (talk) 03:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- I count 5-6 supports for keep/closing and 2 for deletion .... consensus is blindingly obvious here. –Davey2010Talk 16:23, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- E4024, let me be frank. This discussion has been open for an extraordinary fifteen months, without you or Jon Kolbert making a meaningful effort to respond to questions about your position.
- Is it probable that the CfD is not closed due to the lack of consensus? I do not see any. --E4024 (talk) 03:35, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
- Why shouldn't we regard your decision to not offer meaningful replies to the questions placed to you as a tacit acknowledgement that the pair of you found you are unwilling or unable to try to offer meaningful replies to the questions placed to you?
- Genuine consensus depends on a fair, thoughtful meaningful exchange of views. I try to enter every discussion with an open mind over whether the other side may be correct, after all. I think I do an okay job at that.
- Sadly, often consensus is interpreted differently here. There are plenty of discussions here, where a bunch of individuals baldly state their views, ignoring the counter-arguments of the minority position, and called it a "consensus" because their position outnumbered the minority position. Over on en.wiki I wrote an essay Every question, every disagreement, is a teachable moment. In my opinion, if you hold a majority view, even an almost overwhelming majority view, there are still good reasons for trying to engage with those with the minority view. First, how are they going to learn what is wrong with their counter-arguments, if you don't explain it to them; second, there is a possibility they might be right, after all.
- I am not a mind-reader, so I can't really know what motivates you and Jon Kolbert. I'll state what it looks like though. It looks like the two of you assumed yours would be the majority position, which you could state, baldly, while ignoring the counter-arguments, and, counting on being in the majority, never have to look closely at your position. However you were then surprised to find you were in the minority position.
- In my opinion, when someone finds they don't have a counter-argument to a reasonable, substantive challenge, they should openly admit that.
- I try my best to do that, and I think I do an okay job at that.
- Jon Kolbert, I think I should feel entitled to expect the project's administrators to set an example of good behavior, so I think you should also be setting an example of collegiality. Maybe you thought, back in 2017, that you really could voice good counter-arguments, if only you had more time. Okay, say that. However, why shouldn't I think you are failing to honor your obligation to set a good example of collegiality by your silence here?
- E4024's comment, above, seems to imply that when no administrator closes a discussion, consensus can be stalled by those in the minority view refusing to answer meaningful good faith questions, and, simultaneously not acknowledging that they are unwilling or unable to answer those good faith questions. I am going to suggest, however, that when those in the majority have tried hard to work towards a consensus, and the minority view goes AWOL, it is perfectly appropriate to regard their silence as a tacit acknowledgement they have no meaningful counter-arguments, and their earlier objections are now moot. Geo Swan (talk) 01:56, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Seventh call for closure. Name of category is fine. Abzeronow (talk) 17:14, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Delete Useless and now empty. --Yann (talk) 11:28, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- It’s empty because you emptied it yourself, even from this photo, about which the model/photographer herself wrote publicly that she «Can't help feeling a bit like a sexy librarian». ’Nuff said. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 11:53, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- Yann, I restored this category to File:This woman was trying for a sexy librarian look (3708132070).jpg and explained why on the image's talk page.
- You recently closed the discussions of several other images that were in this category. You closed them as "delete", but I couldn't help noticing you did not offer a closing statement, explaining your closure.
- Did it occur to you that your comment here would seem like it was based on a gut feeling, not based on actually thinking about relevant policy issues? So, if you thought there were policy based reasons for your position, would you consider returning here and making an effort to voice that policy based position?
- Since the normal procedure for relatively prompt closure seems to have broken down here I am going to wait a reasonable period of time, and if no one offers a reasoned policy-based response, I am going to place a {{Move}} template on the category page, with a reason field saying something like:
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&diff=342284107&oldid=342218641){kind=link}
.jpg&diff=342285375&oldid=272258035){kind=link}
- Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/11/Category:Sexy librarian meme was opened almost a year and a half ago. IMO policy based arguments have been made to either keep or rename the category. IMO, arguments for outright deletion were weak, seemed like they were based on "gut feelings". The minority who favoured deletion seem to have opted to not make the effort to explain themselves further, when asked civil good faith questions.
So, I suggest the category be renamed Category:Sexy librarians (stock character), a new name with support at the discussion.
- Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/11/Category:Sexy librarian meme was opened almost a year and a half ago. IMO policy based arguments have been made to either keep or rename the category. IMO, arguments for outright deletion were weak, seemed like they were based on "gut feelings". The minority who favoured deletion seem to have opted to not make the effort to explain themselves further, when asked civil good faith questions.
- Pinging Jon Kolbert, E4024, Themightyquill, Jeff G., Tuvalkin, Alexis Jazz, Odysseus1479, Davey2010, Abzeronow, Yann Geo Swan (talk) 22:17, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- +1 -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 22:20, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- +1 - This has baffled me and if Yann has deleted more images then they need to restore all images and redo another DR, You can't go against consensus just because you don't like the image,
- The category was serving a purpose before Yann's intervention and given there's policy based reasons to keep the images as well as the cats I see no reason to delete neither. –Davey2010Talk 23:09, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- Sounds fine to me; the plural is an improvement to the proposal of last October.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 23:58, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- +1. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 05:08, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- +1. Solution works. Abzeronow (talk) 16:15, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
- Pinging Jon Kolbert, E4024, Themightyquill, Jeff G., Tuvalkin, Alexis Jazz, Odysseus1479, Davey2010, Abzeronow, Yann Geo Swan (talk) 22:17, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Eighth call for closure Geo Swan (talk) 05:55, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
- Closed as keep per discussion above Gbawden (talk) 14:49, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
Done: Moved to Category:Sexy librarians (stock character). --Achim (talk) 14:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC)
| Rename Category:Statues of Peace by Kim Un-seong and Kim Seo-gyeong to Category:Statue of Peace (4 entries moved, 0 to go) (Requested by Garam) Statues of Peace by Kim Un-seong and Kim Seo-gyeong;Statue of Peace;r; The Statue of Peace is official name. And all this stautes don't create by Kim Unseong and Kim Seogyeong. |
- Support The category was moved by User:Morio. -- ChongDae (talk) 00:36, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- Comment Hmm, please let me know if I did any problematic edit (move) before. Although I have no idea about it, some mistakes can happen in my thousands of edits per year. For now, I am a bit perplexed by your reason to support. So, I would like to request to reveal the intention of this comment. When I move a category, I always intend to conform to the commons' policies (refer to my explanation below about the edit pointed out this time). Thus, if there is an error in one of my edits, there is inevitably a high possibility that I made same mistakes in other categories. Therefore, your advise would be very helpful for me to make better edits. --Morio (talk) 09:50, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- Comment It was one of my edits on/under the Category:Allegories of peace. There are many categories that have the names "Statue of Piece" (refer to the Category:Statues of peace). So, regardless of its official name, it is necessary to consider distinctions according to the policy Commons:Categories, I think. About the edit (move), I thought the original name (Category:Statue of Peace) was not enough to guess the subject, and then moved it to be able to be distinct from others (refer to the policy Commons:Rename a category). The edit (move) was due to that simple reason same as usual of my edits. Anyway, I have no intention of sticking to such simple edit, so I will cast no vote on this, leave judgment to the administrator and obey the conclusion at all. In case of the conclusion that such edit was inappropriate, it would be helpful for my next edits.
- Leaving that aside, the comment "all this stautes don't create by Kim Unseong and Kim Seogyeong" sounds reasonable to me, and I think it is better to change the category name if there is a more appropriate name (again, I think it is better to keep consistency with other categories in the Category:Statues of peace). thanks, --Morio (talk) 09:50, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Morio: See en:Statue of Peace. The "Statues of Peace" is official name, and it is distinguishing statue name. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 08:53, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply. I would like you to read my comment above carefully and consider it based on commons policy. It doesn't matter whether the name is official or not on this matter. Several other statues share the same name "Statue of Peace" and they also have categories in Commons. I think you can understand the situation easily by referring the Category:Statues of peace. thanks,--Morio (talk) 10:12, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- But other statues no have any main article in Wikipedia, unlike "Statue of Peace" (not "Statues of Peace"). Thanks. --Garam (talk) 16:28, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for your reply. I would like you to read my comment above carefully and consider it based on commons policy. It doesn't matter whether the name is official or not on this matter. Several other statues share the same name "Statue of Peace" and they also have categories in Commons. I think you can understand the situation easily by referring the Category:Statues of peace. thanks,--Morio (talk) 10:12, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
- I'm concerned about your reply does not get the point. The problem is there are some other categories which share the same name in Wikimedia Commons. So, we wouldn't be able to distinguish between them if applying that name to only certain category. If there are no other category (like the article situation of EN Wikipedia), this problem would not occur, I think. I would like you to understand the situation of Wikimedia Commons. Again, although I don't object to move the category back, I think it is necessary to consider conflicts with the naming policy of Commons' categories. Actually, I have made a mistake recently in similar situation (Category:Things named after Avalon). So, there is a similar naming discussion there.--Morio (talk) 04:21, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
Done: The category has been moved back to its official name. --jdx Re: 12:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Copyright problems. Uploader tries to prove his notability with these, but apparently many of these contain copyrighted elements so that they should be removed from Commons. Kotivalo (talk) 08:53, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
- Kotivalo, I think what you really want to discuss is not the cat but the files in it. If you believe any of them should better be deleted for this or that reason, please take those files to Commons:Deletion requests. Leave the cat to complete its natural span of life. (In other words, if it is empty some day, it will be deleted.) --E4024 (talk) 09:03, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Discussion about files not the category. Problem arised here: Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#User_contributions_for_ErkkiJarvisalo Estopedist1 (talk) 12:02, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Can somebody tell me why these pics are categorized with Semyon Zwigun? Sanandros (talk) 19:38, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- Because «Будівля Другої чоловічої гімназії, у якому навчались: …С.К. Цвигун…» --Mayyskiyysergeyy (talk) 21:59, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
- Google says that Zwigun studied there but that's not a reason to categorize these pics there. These schools existed before he went there to school and continue to exist after he went there to school.--Sanandros (talk) 20:04, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
- Where from did this hybrid transcription come? Even envisaging a Germano-Austrian takeover of Commons, he would be then “Semjon”. And in English he is certainly not “Zwigun”. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:26, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
- The most common English name seems to be "Semyon Tsvigun". I'd propose a move there. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:24, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Stale. Renamed per CFD and per enwiki Estopedist1 (talk) 20:27, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
Was this cat made for Scott Peterson? E4024 (talk) 12:22, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- And Category:Salespeople from the United States why is it not in this cat? Are there no salespeople in other countries? --E4024 (talk) 12:24, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- I am opening Category:Saleswomen. --E4024 (talk) 07:27, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- I also opened Category:Salespeople by country. Please join the discussion ASAP, if not I may open too many new cats. (I concede they will not be so specific or detailed as the cats defining naked or semi naked women in Commons... BTW do we have a cat on "Naked or partially naked sitting women with hair behind left ear"? :) --E4024 (talk) 07:41, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
- Isn't it redundant with Category:Vendors? - Themightyquill (talk) 16:25, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
- Comment This might be a controversial take, but IMO Category:Vendors should be gotten rid of outright. Since the term "vendor" can mean a few different things that have nothing in common with each other. For instance, it can mean "a business that supplies, provides and usually sells goods or services." Which both has nothing to do with salespeople and is to general of a definition/term to be useful. the term salespeople doesn't have that problem though. So, salespeople should be the main category for a "person whose job it is to sell things" and vendor should be redirected to it. BTW, doing that would also allow for a better division of by gender and by type (or subject) categories also. --Adamant1 (talk) 02:55, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: it is very economy-specific discussion, but eg en:vendor (= seller) is a standalone article, and en:salespeople is redirected to "sales". Seems to be overlapping concepts. If no objections, we probably should solve this discussion per user:Adamant1?--Estopedist1 (talk) 19:17, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
@E4024, Themightyquill, and Adamant1: I would like to reopen/continue this discussion:
- It is indeed confusing: there are (at least) two categories for occupations related to sales, without an umbrella category, while for me (and probably a lot of other editors and visitors of Commons) it is not important what the sales method is:
- Category:Sales occupations - Note: This category is not only about retail occupations, but for all kind of sales occupations, throughout the whole chain, from raw materials to end products and services, also business-to-business.
- Category:Retail occupations - Note: this category should not only be about selling, but also about purchase/buying of products to sell, management, accounting, etc.
- I agree with Adamant1: there should be one main category for "persons whose job it is to sell things", no matter how and where they do it (in shops, on the street, on markets, door-by-door, by telephone, online, or whatever other method), and no matter how active or passive they sell products. Subcategories may be about these differences. Do you agree? If yes, then we can move forward and discuss what the name of that main category and the category structure should be. --JopkeB (talk) 08:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Category:Salespeople can be a subcategory of both. We might change the description to: "Person whose job it is to sell things directly to (potential) customers". (The job of people who are involved in for instance marketing or making and publishing advertisements, is also to sell things, but I would not categorize them as Salespeople, only as "Sales occupations" or "Marketing occupations".) @E4024, Themightyquill, Estopedist1, and Adamant1: Please let us know whether you agree or would rather do it differently. JopkeB (talk) 09:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- @JopkeB and Adamant1: That makes sense. "Vendor" could include someone who owns a store but doesn't work there - people that would be better categorized as business people. Salespeople would only be the people working there. -- 07:08, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- Conclusions so far
- Questions:
- What is the difference between Category:Salespeople, Category:Sales occupations, Category:Retail occupations, Category:Vendors and related categories?
- How should these categories be related? What could be an umbrella/common parent category for all involved categories?
- Answers:
- Salespeople = Persons whose job it is to sell things directly to (potential) customers
- Sales occupations: for all kind of sales occupations, not only retail, not only who actively acquire clients - this means that we should adjust the current description
- Retail occupations: for all kind of occupations in retail, not only sales
- Vendors has multiple meanings:
- a business that supplies, provides and usually sells goods or services
- could include someone who owns a store but doesn't work there; should be business people or Category:Shopkeepers
- salespeople.
- Proposals
- Add or adjust the descriptions mentioned above to the categories involved.
- Split Category:Vendors into two new categories: Category:Vendors (salespeople) and Category:Vendors (business). Keep Category:Vendors as a parent and for general subcategories like Vendors by country and Fireworks vendors.
- Make a new subcategory Category:Sales occupations in retail.
- Keep Category:Sales occupations as the parent.
@E4024, Themightyquill, Adamant1, and Estopedist1: Do you agree? Do you have adjustments, additions? I'll implement these proposals within a month if there are no reactions. --JopkeB (talk) 05:24, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
- @JopkeB: Thanks for this. A) What's the difference between Category:Vendors (salespeople) and Category:Salespeople ? B) What goes in Category:Vendors (business) aside from Category:Shops? C) Category:Retail salespeople might work better than Category:Sales occupations in retail. -- Themightyquill (talk) 08:18, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Themightyquill , good questions. To answer them: first a definition of vendors (derived from w:en:Vendor): Vendors sell goods or services to any other entity, that is to other businesses, to consumers and/or to government.
- A) The difference between Vendors (salespeople) and Salespeople? I wouldn't know. I now think Category:Vendors (salespeople) is redundant, Category:Salespeople is enough. It can be a subcategory of Category:Vendors.
- B) What goes in Category:Vendors (business) aside from Category:Shops? My answer: Vendors also might be wholesalers or street or market vendors without a shop. Vendor is an umbralla term, while shops are rather specific and usually only focus on consumers. I think Category:Wholesalers should be a subcategory as well. But I now think the splitting is not necessary anymore, now we skipped Category:Vendors (salespeople), and so Category:Vendors (business) is not necessary anymore also.
- C) Would Category:Retail salespeople work better than Category:Sales occupations in retail. It might, it is shorter, and I think shorter is better, unless there is loss of information. For now I do not see a need to have subcategories about different types of sales occupations in retail. So for me that is OK.
- So my adjusted proposals are:
- Add or adjust the descriptions mentioned above to the categories involved, including the (new) one for Vendor.
- Category:Vendors will be the umbralla category for all types of businesses and people who sell goods and/or services, no matter to who.
- Category:Salespeople will stay for persons whose job it is to sell things directly to (potential) customers. Category:Vendors and Category:Sales occupations will be parent categories (but not the only ones).
- Make a new subcategory Category:Retail salespeople for people who sell things and/or services directly to consumers.
- Do you agree? Do you have other/better proposals? JopkeB (talk) 09:58, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Themightyquill , good questions. To answer them: first a definition of vendors (derived from w:en:Vendor): Vendors sell goods or services to any other entity, that is to other businesses, to consumers and/or to government.
- @JopkeB: Thanks for this. A) What's the difference between Category:Vendors (salespeople) and Category:Salespeople ? B) What goes in Category:Vendors (business) aside from Category:Shops? C) Category:Retail salespeople might work better than Category:Sales occupations in retail. -- Themightyquill (talk) 08:18, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
- @JopkeB: That sounds reasonable to me. Thanks for your work on this. -- Themightyquill (talk) 14:40, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Themightyquill. I'll wait another two weeks to see whether there are other opinions and then I'll make the changes. JopkeB (talk) 14:50, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
| This category discussion has been closed. | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Consensus | Resolved without objection | |||
| Actions | See adjusted proposals Done | |||
| Participants | ||||
| Closed by | JopkeB (talk) 15:17, 2 September 2023 (UTC) | |||
shouldn't it just be 'Videos from China"? the distinction PRC/China doesn't seem to made everywhere else Vera (talk) 11:41, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
- Well, there is a Category:Videos from China. This seems to have been used to differentiate between videos made before and after 1949. Whether that's a valuable distinction, I don't know. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:15, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
- Merge them. I believe videos are being categorised by their locations, rather than the states that have controlled the territories in history. For example, a video taken in Japanese Korea would still be categorised as videos from North/South Korea, even though they were part of Japan at that time and N/S Koreas didnt emerge until late 1940s. And this would be a video of China that doesnt belong to either ROC or PRC.--Roy17 (talk) 14:11, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Stale discussion. @1Veertje and Themightyquill: Solution per user:Roy17, ie to be merged in favor of Category:Videos from China. But should we merge also Category:Videos from the Republic of China (1912-1949)?--Estopedist1 (talk) 20:03, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
- I say yes. I just checked another example: Category:German Democratic Republic doesnt have its own cat of videos either. Roy17 (talk) 16:05, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
- But we do have Category:Photographs of German Democratic Republic. =) -- Themightyquill (talk) 23:32, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
- I plan to merge everything related to China to "Videos from China". As for Videos from the Republic of China (1912-1949), I think it's better and neater to sort them into "Videos of YYYY from China".--Roy17 (talk) 12:26, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Category:Videos from the People's Republic of China is redirected to Category:Videos from China.
Category:Videos from the Republic of China (1912-1949) is retained for videos from the Republic of China before it lost mainland and relocated to Taiwan in 1949.
Category:Videos from Taiwan should be used for videos from Taiwan, which is de facto synonymous to the "Republic of China" after 1949.--Roy17 (talk) 19:12, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
I'd like to request the removal of this category. Since the change of focus and terminology in the KDE community (2009) KDE is not a software, so "KDE 5" has not meaning. What most people want is KDE Plasma 5 (I moved the existing images in the "Screenshot of KDE Plasma 5" category or other specific categories), and having this category is confusing. Please delete it. LTosky (talk) 16:41, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
- But we have categories Category:KDE 4, Category:KDE 3, Category:KDE 2, Category:KDE 1. Sasha1024 (talk) 21:50, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
- (sorry for the delay) We do, but things change. In 2009 the KDE community redefined the name of KDE (even if the discussion started in 2006). So while there was a desktop called KDE 1, KDE 2, KDE 3, and briefly (until 4.4) also KDE 4, starting from 2009 the desktop has been Plasma; first Plasma 4 and no Plasma 5. There has never been anything called KDE 5, you won't find such terminology on any official material on kde.org.--LTosky (talk) 22:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Stale discussion. Enwiki article is under the name en:KDE Plasma 5 (Commons equivalent Category:KDE Plasma 5). Renaming seems obvious, but I think that redirect from the nominated category should be retained--Estopedist1 (talk) 19:06, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
Renamed. The consensus seems clear for renaming to Category:KDE Plasma 5.Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 23:53, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
Way too detailed category for a city with 1 College This user is creating a lot of detailed categories for Lake City, Florida that are unnecessary like Category:Cuisine of Lake City, Florida, Category:Religion in Lake City, Florida, Category:Credit unions in Lake City, Florida, Category:Cinemas in Lake City, Florida ... Mjrmtg (talk) 23:47, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Mjrmtg: anonym (Special:Contributions/104.243.167.50) all creations are here. Some of them are already empty:
- Category:Columbia County High School
- Category:Universities and colleges in Lake City, Florida
- Category:Florida Gateway College
- Category:Melrose Park Elementary School
- Category:Elementary schools in Lake City, Florida
- Category:Hotels in Lake City, Florida
- Category:Bank buildings in Lake City, Florida
- Category:Towers in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:High-rises in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Government buildings in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Government of Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Alexandria City Hall (Louisiana)
- Category:Commercial Building (Alexandria, Louisiana)
- Category:Education in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Universities and colleges in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Louisiana State University at Alexandria
- Category:Economy of Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Commerce in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Hotels in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Bentley Hotel (Alexandria, Louisiana)
- Category:Judaism in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Synagogues in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Jewish Temple synagogue (Alexandria, Louisiana)
- Category:Kent Plantation House
- Category:Religious buildings in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Churches in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Emmanuel Baptist Church (Alexandria, Louisiana)
- Category:St. Francis Xavier Cathedral (Alexandria, Louisiana)
- Category:Houses in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Arna Wendell Bontemps House
- Category:Transport buildings in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Missouri Pacific-Texas Pacific Railroad Station, Alexandria, Louisiana (HABS)
- Category:Sports in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Sports venues in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Stadiums in Alexandria, Louisiana
- Category:Bringhurst Field
- Category:Alexandria National Cemetery (Louisiana)
--Estopedist1 (talk) 13:49, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
- The only ones I see as problematic are grouping categories for things the community has only one of: Category:Universities and colleges in Lake City, Florida, Category:Train stations in Lake City, Florida, Category:Universities and colleges in Alexandria, Louisiana, Category:Stadiums in Alexandria, Louisiana - Themightyquill (talk) 09:40, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
- I made this nomination back in 2017, the user had made categories so detailed that there were several categories with a lot of 1 ofs. I removed them from those categories and several categories were then deleted for being empty. Please go ahead and delete the other categories that have 1 ofs in them. --Mjrmtg (talk) 10:36, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted single-item categories and category trees. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)