Commons:Categories for discussion/Archive/2018/08
empty and not respecting Wikicommons criteria Finoskov (talk) 08:02, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- I tagged it with {{Empty page}} to get it deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:46, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Closing: cat was deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:20, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
link to empty category Wojsław Brożyna (talk) 22:05, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Done: Deleted: Broken redirect. --Achim (talk) 11:52, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Created in error - my fault as it didn't match the WP page name. Can we delete the redirect/cat please? Gbawden (talk) 09:27, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
Done: Deleted, you're welcome. --Achim (talk) 15:45, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
123.76.67.125 160.171.80.11 09:03, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- What is being requested here? If its deletion then this looks highly unlikely considering the number of projects this is on. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:53, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Nonsense nomination by anon-ip. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Video sex. 129.45.93.150 22:17, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
Nonsense nomination by anon-ip. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:45, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Typo vgl. Category:Viticulture in Baden-Württemberg Schofför (talk) 15:46, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- No discussion needed. Simply request a speedy deletion. --Sitacuisses (talk) 01:30, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted per Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion: empty category. De728631 (talk) 13:17, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete This category should be deleted. We should not have current/former aircraft categories. Maintenance is difficult (and always bound to be behind the times by some amount). Aircraft images are almost always of aircraft in service, not former aircraft. Use Category:Retired aircraft for images of aircraft in actual retired state. All of the media in this category is adequately maintained under the parent Category:Airbus A320 of Nouvelair. Josh (talk) 16:17, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: Without these categories it is impossible to see the current (or former) fleet of any given airline, which in my view, is a valuable addition to information availability. Otherwise you just see a mass of aircraft listed with no indication of what is in the fleet or not (see EasyJet and Ryanair for instance, where the current/former status becomes obviously important). It is simply not true that "aircraft images are almost always of aircraft in service", look at any of the large current airlines to see that. On the contrary maintenance is not that difficult as changes in aircraft status are not always frequent (7 to 10 years in many cases, as leases expire etc). I contend this is a valuable and useful addition and should be maintained Ardfern (talk) 16:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: In the case of Nouvelair I would contend that it is more informative and valuable to know that only 6 out of 17 Airbus A320 are current, than seeing a block of 17 aircraft with no indication if they are current or not. I would also contend that it is useful to know that Nouvelair no longer has Airbus A321s in the fleet, otherwise the impression would be that they were current. If we want to maintain the aviation files as something informative and a valuable research resource then current/former should be maintained. Ardfern (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete This category should be deleted. We should not have current/former aircraft categories. Maintenance is difficult (and always bound to be behind the times by some amount). Aircraft images are captured at a particular point in time, and thus cannot be 'current'. All of the media in this category is adequately maintained under the parent Category:Airbus A320 of Nouvelair. Josh (talk) 16:23, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: Without these categories it is impossible to see the current (or former) fleet of any given airline, which in my view, is a valuable addition to information availability. Otherwise you just see a mass of aircraft listed with no indication of what is in the fleet or not (see EasyJet and Ryanair for instance, where the current/former status becomes obviously important). It is simply not true that "aircraft images are almost always of aircraft in service", look at any of the large current airlines to see that. On the contrary maintenance is not that difficult as changes in aircraft status are not always frequent (7 to 10 years in many cases, as leases expire etc). I contend this is a valuable and useful addition and should be maintained Ardfern (talk) 16:44, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: In the case of Nouvelair I would contend that it is more informative and valuable to know that only 6 out of 17 Airbus A320 are current, than seeing a block of 17 aircraft with no indication if they are current or not. I would also contend that it is useful to know that Nouvelair no longer has Airbus A321s in the fleet, otherwise the impression would be that they were current. If we want to maintain the aviation files as something informative and a valuable research resource then current/former should be maintained. Ardfern (talk) 17:00, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete This category should be deleted. We should not have current/former aircraft categories. Maintenance is difficult (and always bound to be behind the times by some amount). All of the media in this category is adequately maintained under the parent Category:Airbus aircraft of Nouvelair. --Josh (talk) 16:27, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: Without these categories it is impossible to see the current (or former) fleet of any given airline, which in my view, is a valuable addition to information availability. Otherwise you just see a mass of aircraft listed with no indication of what is in the fleet or not (see EasyJet and Ryanair for instance, where the current/former status becomes obviously important). It is simply not true that "aircraft images are almost always of aircraft in service", look at any of the large current airlines to see that. On the contrary maintenance is not that difficult as changes in aircraft status are not always frequent (7 to 10 years in many cases, as leases expire etc). I contend this is a valuable and useful addition and should be maintained Ardfern (talk) 16:47, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: In the case of Nouvelair I would contend that it is more informative and valuable to know that only 6 out of 17 Airbus A320 are current, than seeing a block of 17 aircraft with no indication if they are current or not. I would also contend that it is useful to know that Nouvelair no longer has Airbus A321s in the fleet, otherwise the impression would be that they were current. If we want to maintain the aviation files as something informative and a valuable research resource then current/former should be maintained. Ardfern (talk) 17:01, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Discussions collected at Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/08/Category:Current Airbus aircraft of Tunisair. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:55, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete This category should be deleted. We should not have current/former aircraft categories. Maintenance is difficult (and always bound to be behind the times by some amount). All of the media in this category is adequately maintained under the parent Category:Airbus aircraft of Nouvelair. --Josh (talk) 16:31, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: Without these categories it is impossible to see the current (or former) fleet of any given airline, which in my view, is a valuable addition to information availability. Otherwise you just see a mass of aircraft listed with no indication of what is in the fleet or not (see EasyJet and Ryanair for instance, where the current/former status becomes obviously important). It is simply not true that "aircraft images are almost always of aircraft in service", look at any of the large current airlines to see that. On the contrary maintenance is not that difficult as changes in aircraft status are not always frequent (7 to 10 years in many cases, as leases expire etc). I contend this is a valuable and useful addition and should be maintained Ardfern (talk) 16:46, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: In the case of Nouvelair I would contend that it is more informative and valuable to know that only 6 out of 17 Airbus A320 are current, than seeing a block of 17 aircraft with no indication if they are current or not. I would also contend that it is useful to know that Nouvelair no longer has Airbus A321s in the fleet, otherwise the impression would be that they were current. If we want to maintain the aviation files as something informative and a valuable research resource then current/former should be maintained. Ardfern (talk) 17:02, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete This category should be deleted. We should not have current/former aircraft categories. Maintenance is difficult (and always bound to be behind the times by some amount). All of the media in this category is adequately maintained under the parent Category:Aircraft of Nouvelair. --Josh (talk) 16:35, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: Without these categories it is impossible to see the current (or former) fleet of any given airline, which in my view, is a valuable addition to information availability. Otherwise you just see a mass of aircraft listed with no indication of what is in the fleet or not (see EasyJet and Ryanair for instance, where the current/former status becomes obviously important). It is simply not true that "aircraft images are almost always of aircraft in service", look at any of the large current airlines to see that. On the contrary maintenance is not that difficult as changes in aircraft status are not always frequent (7 to 10 years in many cases, as leases expire etc). I contend this is a valuable and useful addition and should be maintained Ardfern (talk) 16:43, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: In the case of Nouvelair I would contend that it is more informative and valuable to know that only 6 out of 17 Airbus A320 are current, than seeing a block of 17 aircraft with no indication if they are current or not. I would also contend that it is useful to know that Nouvelair no longer has Airbus A321s in the fleet, otherwise the impression would be that they were current. If we want to maintain the aviation files as something informative and a valuable research resource then current/former should be maintained. Ardfern (talk) 17:02, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete This category should be deleted. We should not have current/former aircraft categories. Maintenance is difficult (and always bound to be behind the times by some amount). All of the media in this category is adequately maintained under the parent Category:Aircraft of Nouvelair. --Josh (talk) 16:35, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: Without these categories it is impossible to see the current (or former) fleet of any given airline, which in my view, is a valuable addition to information availability. Otherwise you just see a mass of aircraft listed with no indication of what is in the fleet or not (see EasyJet and Ryanair for instance, where the current/former status becomes obviously important). It is simply not true that "aircraft images are almost always of aircraft in service", look at any of the large current airlines to see that. On the contrary maintenance is not that difficult as changes in aircraft status are not always frequent (7 to 10 years in many cases, as leases expire etc). I contend this is a valuable and useful addition and should be maintained Ardfern (talk) 16:45, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: In the case of Nouvelair I would contend that it is more informative and valuable to know that only 6 out of 17 Airbus A320 are current, than seeing a block of 17 aircraft with no indication if they are current or not. I would also contend that it is useful to know that Nouvelair no longer has Airbus A321s in the fleet, otherwise the impression would be that they were current. If we want to maintain the aviation files as something informative and a valuable research resource then current/former should be maintained. Ardfern (talk) 17:03, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Rename to Category:Weißenbach (Pielach): There are so many rivers named Weißenbach, so the current name is much too general. Herzi Pinki (talk) 22:05, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thank you for the information. I got the same opinion. --GT1976 (talk) 03:56, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
renamed in consens with creator of the category. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 08:06, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
images in category nominated at Commons:Deletion requests/Raise Issue Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:20, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Why not just let the DR run, if the images are deleted then this will be deleted as empty. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:54, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Files deleted, empty category deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 10:56, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
cinderella 197.157.211.167 09:49, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
Speedy close: Invalid request. — Huntster (t @ c) 15:33, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
merged with Category:Mount Hope Cemetery, Bangor, Maine Effeietsanders (talk) 02:38, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Nothing to discuss. Redirected. --Auntof6 (talk) 03:00, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
There are no pages or files in this category. The article on the English Wikipedia was deleted. Icem4k (talk) 13:12, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Done: No content. --Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:09, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
There are no pages or files in this category. The article on the English Wikipedia was deleted. Icem4k (talk) 13:12, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Done: No content. --Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:09, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
empty category Robby (talk) 06:35, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:20, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
empty category Robby (talk) 06:37, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:19, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Empty category Adavyd (talk) 09:08, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- I have tagged it with {{Empty page}} to get it deleted. @Adavyd: Empty cats don't usually need discussion. You can usually just put {{Empty page}} on them. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:43, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:19, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Empty cat. All files appear to have been copyvio by the same uploader (== creator of the cat itself). DMacks (talk) 15:49, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:25, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Personal category, not needed any longer. MB298 (talk) 06:55, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted with nomination from owner. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:57, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Personal category, not needed any longer. MB298 (talk) 06:55, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- @MB298: This kind of thing doesn't really need discussion. If you empty the category, you can tag it with {{Empty page}} to get it deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:14, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted as G1 by admin Hystrix. clpo13(talk) 15:29, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Bronzefigur vor Brillen Birk 2A02:810C:100:51C:14A7:C737:BA9E:8CDC 16:09, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- What's your proposal? This sounds like nonsense to me and should be closed. --Jergen (talk) 20:06, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Closing nonsense nomination by anon ip. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:39, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Category:Flexible tanks is better. Cjp24 (talk) 20:39, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- Of course, I've renamed it.Avron (talk) 06:17, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Flexible tanks. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:39, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Maps of Château-Chinon (Ville) is better. Cjp24 (talk) 21:54, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Maps of Château-Chinon (Ville) as standard plural form. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:38, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
To be merged with Category:A & G Price locomotives, please NearEMPTiness (talk) 07:23, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- @NearEMPTiness: merge is done, Category:Price locomotives to be deleted.--Pechristener (talk) 19:40, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Done: Deleted. --Achim (talk) 22:08, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Category to be deleted, because of wrong name. The right name is Category:Ipomoea holubii (tangopaso) Tangopaso (talk) 16:03, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Doesn't really need discussion: I tagged it with {{Bad name}}. By the way, shouldn't the good category be a user category (or maybe not exist at all: I didn't know users could make categories for their own things, tagged with their names)? --Auntof6 (talk) 18:18, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Users can make any categories they want, but private categories that don't match commons categorization schemes and with user names attached are private user categories that shouldn't be added to the commons category tree. I've tagged these categories of your appropriately, Tangopaso and removed them from the commons categorization tree. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:46, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Category deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:47, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Author request, renamed KCVelaga (talk · mail) 12:24, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Closing: cat has been deleted. @KCVelaga: the {{Category renamed}} template is available for cases like this, where discussion isn't needed. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:04, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Author request. Moved to other name, this is no longer required. KCVelaga (talk · mail) 00:09, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Also Category:Images created as a part of WB2018IN, no? Any chance you'd agree to just keep these creations in Category:Wikigraphists Bootcamp (2018 India)? Combined, there would only be 10 files in the category... - Themightyquill (talk) 13:33, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Rehman: Please delete this category as well. KCVelaga (talk · mail) 04:19, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Closing: cat has been deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
typo error from my side, please delete Bodhisattwa (talk) 11:52, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
- Tagged with {{Bad name}} to get it deleted. @Bodhisattwa: This kind of thing doesn't really need discussion: you could have used the bad name template yourself. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:59, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- sorry @Auntof6: , my mistake. Many apologies -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 07:03, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Bodhisattwa: No apology necessary. Many people don't know about the other options, so I thought I'd mention it. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- sorry @Auntof6: , my mistake. Many apologies -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 07:03, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
C!osing: cat was deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:29, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Empty. Cannot find any images of this aircraft on Commons. Josh (talk) 19:50, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Tagged as empty to get it deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Close: cat was deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:34, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Nominating for deletion. I created this category to cover all the minor halts, which at the time didn't need diffusing into separate categories. Now that separate categories have been created, they can all be contained within the parent category, Stations of the Talyllyn Railway, without the need to clarify what is meant by "minor". Optimist on the run (talk) 18:09, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Optimist on the run: Since you created it, it might be reasonable for you to empty it. When it's empty, you can tag it with {{Empty page}} to get it deleted, no discussion needed. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:24, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Just done that. I was waiting to see if there were any objections before I made the move. (NB note change of user name). Voice of Clam (formerly Optimist on the run) (talk) 11:29, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Closing: cat has been deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:11, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Self-promotion. out of scope Ronhjones (Talk) 23:21, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Done: Created as advertisement, speedy G10. --Guanaco (talk) 08:35, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
No such movement actually exist, hoax category with fake and empty category Nizil Shah (talk) 09:54, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- It's not empty anymore, but contains media that was placed there either by User:Afia Bi (currently blocked) or by anonymous ip, including Atlas of Gurjaradesh, Category:Gurjaradesh, and Category:Maps of Gurjaradesh. All these categories can be safely deleted as they don't seem to contain anything else, but Nizil Shah, would you mind nominating Atlas of Gurjaradesh for deletion first? -- Themightyquill (talk) 13:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: . I have nominated Atlas of Gurjaradesh for deletion.-Nizil Shah (talk) 06:55, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted category and its sub-categories as empty. - Themightyquill (talk) 16:57, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:06, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Ugh, Ies, next time please create one discussion and link to the rest. This is now a great amount of work to manually close all these discussions you've opened. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:43, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 07:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- No, basic categories may not have a name in the local language. Please read Commons:Categories - "Die Namen von Kategorien sollten in der Regel englisch sein (für Lebensformen sollte der wissenschaftliche lateinische Name verwendet werden)". Exceptions may be made for formal names or when there is no English equivalent, but that definitely doesn't apply to Category:Fledermäuse in Ruhland. You can put German category descriptions on each one which will make them easily found for every local user, even those not familiar with English. There's no need for redirects from "Fledermäuse in (every German bundesland, region, city and whatnot)". Themightyquill (talk) 21:43, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Then I will put the german descriptions and rename the categories next week. Many greetings --06:36, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- And I need a hint or help, please:
- If I rename the categories, every will be seen in the upper category with the new name and can be found by seeking for terms contained in the description. But especially in the upper category Nature of Ruhland by genus or species then a local user and potential contributor cant see the german name of a species. Every here knows, what is "Blaustern", but almost none knows "Scilla siberica". Now every user in that category page can see, which species as subcategories exist.
- How / where can I create al local help table with german and latin names for this category and link it in the category description? E.g. as a subpage, a kind of Help page or ?
- Although Commons is not a dictionary, we need photographers as local contributors, and I hope and want to reach some here and give them an orientation, what is existing (and can stated as category for uploads) and what is new (and needs a new category if uploaded).
- By the way, I think I will give Einglish descriptions to the categories, too.
- Thanks for help and many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:32, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help, Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR. I don't see why you can't create a gallery page at the genus level with Latin names and German common names for species. It would, however, be an enormous amount of work for you. Each genus and species should link (throug wikidata) to the German wikipedia article with that information anyway. So anyone can search for the German vernacular on commons and find it via the category descriptions you are adding, or, if they want to browse via German vernacular, are better off browsing via wikipedia. You could help by ensuring that all the commons categories are properly linked to their German articles via wikidata. - Themightyquill (talk) 17:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for your answer and hints, I must think it over. For an overview whats local existing (species as subcategories by name), a list (e.g. names in the upper category, if thy were in german) was better. A gallery is more demonstrative, a table could be sortable by german or latin names and contains pictures, too. If a gallery page could contain a table with pictures and names, I would prefer that, but I dont know, if it were tolerable.
- Wikidata is rather new for me and I had to lern, but I know it casually. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 18:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help, Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR. I don't see why you can't create a gallery page at the genus level with Latin names and German common names for species. It would, however, be an enormous amount of work for you. Each genus and species should link (throug wikidata) to the German wikipedia article with that information anyway. So anyone can search for the German vernacular on commons and find it via the category descriptions you are adding, or, if they want to browse via German vernacular, are better off browsing via wikipedia. You could help by ensuring that all the commons categories are properly linked to their German articles via wikidata. - Themightyquill (talk) 17:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- No, basic categories may not have a name in the local language. Please read Commons:Categories - "Die Namen von Kategorien sollten in der Regel englisch sein (für Lebensformen sollte der wissenschaftliche lateinische Name verwendet werden)". Exceptions may be made for formal names or when there is no English equivalent, but that definitely doesn't apply to Category:Fledermäuse in Ruhland. You can put German category descriptions on each one which will make them easily found for every local user, even those not familiar with English. There's no need for redirects from "Fledermäuse in (every German bundesland, region, city and whatnot)". Themightyquill (talk) 21:43, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Cat has been moved. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 17:08, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:47, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Cat has been moved Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 17:07, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:06, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:32, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:31, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:30, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Moved to Category:Alleys in Ruhland Many greetings--Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 17:48, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:07, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:30, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:30, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:19, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:37, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:37, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:20, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:36, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:21, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:35, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:21, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:35, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:21, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:35, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:34, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:34, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:34, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Moved to Category:Summer aspects owing to Pimpinella saxifraga at Geschwister-Scholl-Weg Ruhland, see Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/08/Category:Alte Stadtansichten von Ruhland. Many greetings --07:12, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:22, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:33, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:32, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:31, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:31, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Moved to Category:Social services in Ruhland, see Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/08/Category:Alte Stadtansichten von Ruhland. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 17:17, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:08, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:09, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:09, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Moved to Category:Urban development in Ruhland, see Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/08/Category:Alte Stadtansichten von Ruhland. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 16:36, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:09, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 10:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:10, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:52, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:10, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:52, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:10, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:52, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:51, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:51, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:51, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:50, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:50, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:50, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:49, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:49, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:49, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:12, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:48, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:48, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:48, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:47, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:13, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:47, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:14, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:46, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:14, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:46, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:14, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:46, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:14, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:45, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:14, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:45, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 07:21, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:44, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:44, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:44, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:15, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:43, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:42, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:42, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:41, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hippophae rhamnoides in Ruhland]], see Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/08/Category:Alte Stadtansichten von Ruhland. Many greetings --
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:17, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:41, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:17, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:40, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:17, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:39, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:39, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:39, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:18, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:38, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:19, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:38, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:37, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- „Nachtwanderung in Ruhland“ is the name of a regularly local event. Not moved. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 16:25, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:21, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for possible alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 09:36, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 08:55, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:25, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 08:54, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:26, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 08:52, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:26, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 08:51, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:26, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 08:50, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
I would suggest to rename this category to "Bars in Amsterdam" as that's a more appropriate term for most of these kind of places in Amsterdam. Paul2 (talk) 01:00, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 08:20, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Appropriate how/why? - Themightyquill (talk) 21:34, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- In the Netherlands, the term "pub" is only used for an English/Irish style bar. There are a number of them in Holland, but most places are called bar or cafe, which is the general designation. Bar would also better fit with the other category names. Paul2 (talk) 07:08, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- Appropriate how/why? - Themightyquill (talk) 21:34, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Fair enough, and we already have Category:Bars in the Netherlands and Category:Bars in the Netherlands by municipality. And we can't call them "Cafés" even if that's more common in the Netherlands, because Cafes on commons is reserved for coffee houses. Category:Cafés in the Netherlands must be very confusing for Dutch users! =) - Themightyquill (talk) 17:58, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oh, I see that category Cafés in the Netherlands for the first time now... but that causes a problem, because there I see not just "coffee houses" (which in Dutch would be "koffiehuizen", usually visited by elderly immigrants), but also a lot of cafes in the sense of a bar.... the problem is, cafe and bar are often used interchangeable in Dutch... one could make a distinction whereby a cafe opens earlier and serves coffee and tea, while a bar opens late and serves just alcohol, but in practice it's hard to distinguish places in that way. So what to do? Paul2 (talk) 04:15, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- There's no great solution (see the linked discussion about pubs for more confusing regional differences.) I think leaving the "cafes" category alone for now is probably best - categorization is in English, so we'll use "cafes" in its English rather than Dutch sense. Moving Category:Pubs in Amsterdam to Category:Bars in Amsterdam seems to make sense now though. We can put a link to Category:Bars in the Netherlands in the category description of Category:Cafés in the Netherlands too. - Themightyquill (talk) 17:44, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- Okay, agreed. Paul2 (talk) 02:00, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- How do we proceed? I have no experience with renaming categories here... Paul2 (talk) 07:12, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
- There's no great solution (see the linked discussion about pubs for more confusing regional differences.) I think leaving the "cafes" category alone for now is probably best - categorization is in English, so we'll use "cafes" in its English rather than Dutch sense. Moving Category:Pubs in Amsterdam to Category:Bars in Amsterdam seems to make sense now though. We can put a link to Category:Bars in the Netherlands in the category description of Category:Cafés in the Netherlands too. - Themightyquill (talk) 17:44, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oh, I see that category Cafés in the Netherlands for the first time now... but that causes a problem, because there I see not just "coffee houses" (which in Dutch would be "koffiehuizen", usually visited by elderly immigrants), but also a lot of cafes in the sense of a bar.... the problem is, cafe and bar are often used interchangeable in Dutch... one could make a distinction whereby a cafe opens earlier and serves coffee and tea, while a bar opens late and serves just alcohol, but in practice it's hard to distinguish places in that way. So what to do? Paul2 (talk) 04:15, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Paul2: We just needed to leave it some time, in case anyone had a dissenting opinion. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:43, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Bars in Amsterdam. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:43, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:23, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:25, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 08:53, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:26, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 08:53, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:26, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 08:48, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:27, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 08:47, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
This German language category should have an English name acc. to Commons:Categories Ies (talk) 06:27, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Basic categories may have a category name in local loanguage. This category contains photos of local objects and needs a german name which can easyly be founded by every local user, even if one is not familiar with English, Commons or looking for alternative names as Redirects. Many greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 07:25, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
Seems to be redundant with Category:Fire departments --Reinhard Müller (talk) 18:36, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Since there was no comment in more than a week, I would appreciate if some native English speaker could at least confirm that "Fire brigade" and "Fire department" are the same thing in British and American English. --Reinhard Müller (talk) 09:06, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
The two category trees are now merged. --Reinhard Müller (talk) 06:16, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
We have Category:Aerial photographs of Tyne and Wear. This seems to be a duplicate. Jahobr (talk) 23:57, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- TWAM seems to refer to the holder of the photos (Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums) rather than the subject of the photos. The note in the category says "Some images are outside of the Tyne and Wear area". Since we don't have a Category:Aerial photographs by source, I would lean toward deletion, but at very least, it should be renamed Category:Aerial photographs from the Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums. - Themightyquill (talk) 05:54, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
Renamed Category:Aerial photographs from the Tyne and Wear Archives and Museums - Themightyquill (talk) 11:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Manal benchlikha 196.91.83.198 21:39, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done: Nonsense – nothing to discuss. --jdx Re: 15:03, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
The category name should be translated to English. Jochen Burghardt (talk) 15:34, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- Or upmerged and deleted: Google translate says the name means "C language". --Auntof6 (talk) 19:10, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- In this case, I agree to merge it into Category:C (programming language). - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 22:30, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Redirected to Category:C (programming language) in case of future searches. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:49, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
The the video game console design is copyrighted, making this a derivative work. I eat bananas 101 (talk) 21:19, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- In this case, you should discuss the individual images, not the category as a whole I assume. Elly (talk) 21:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- But please don't. Commons:Derivative works#Isn't every product copyrighted by someone? What about cars? Or kitchen chairs? My computer case?
- In this case, the console itself is probably considered utilitarian as a housing for components that make up a computer. You can't play with the console. I suppose you could play some form of hacky sack with it, but that would be incredibly dangerous. The controller is probably no more copyrightable than a mouse or keyboard. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 05:11, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Alexis Jazz: :@Ellywa: But I believe that the Gamecube has no other utilitarian other than playing video games, so technically it's a toy and toys are copyrighted. Feel free to keep these files on wikipedias that allow local files as part of the fair use policy if you want. I eat bananas 101 (talk) 19:30, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- @I eat bananas 101: at any rate, we would have to have this discussion on the copyright village pump and not here because there are many more game consoles. Toys are copyrighted generally refers to toys that can't be "used": stuffed animals, model cars/planes/castles/boats, things like that. Also items of which a considerable part is a creative work in its own right: RC cars, Furby, an illustration on a kite.
- A single-color kite, for example, probably won't be eligible for copyright. Neither is a baseball bat. Game consoles are neutral to what software you load on them. A GameCube could be used for, well, games, but you could equally load Dora the Explorer on it and try to learn something. Or watch a movie. I don't know if there ever was an internet browser for the GameCube, but technically it should be capable.
- To understand what is utilitarian, it may be easier to look at what isn't. A stuffed animal is not utilitarian: it serves no purpose that couldn't also be fulfilled by a pillow. A Playmobil plastic castle is not utilitarian because it serves no purpose that couldn't also be fulfilled by a molten Playmobil plastic castle. For an RC car, the shell is generally copyrightable. If you remove the shell though, everything that is left will generally be considered utilitarian.
- The electronics inside a game console will never be eligible for copyright "because toy". The housing is usually also utilitarian: it protects the electronic components inside and holds them together. You can't sell a game console without the housing! Well you could, but you will have to handle a lot of RMAs. That would be a terrible design choice.. The colors and shapes of a stuffed animal of plastic castle serve no purpose other than to appeal. The shell from an RC car could be replaced by a single-color rectangular block without making any difference to how it drives. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 21:08, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Any potential problem seems to be with the images, not with the category itself. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:46, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Non Engliah Category Afifa Afrin (talk) 03:55, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Also empty, so I've tagged it with {{Empty page}} to get it deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:09, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted as empty by Auntof6. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
This catagory should be empty, empty catagories should be deleted I eat bananas 101 (talk) 00:47, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- It's a category redirect, which is allowed to be empty. A bot regularly cleans out redirected categories, so they are empty most of the time. They can stay if they are terms that someone might reasonably be expected to use, like this one. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:29, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- Strong keep Its a highly common term. Note that there is a discussion about moving all "Automobiles" categories to "Cars" at Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/07/Category:Automobiles. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:24, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
No reason to delete a redirect. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:44, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
This category is heavily overcategorised. The main problem is Category:Ships by name by type whose children are often used alongside "Ships by name". See e.g. Category:City of Kingston (ship, 1884) (Ships by name + Steamships by name), Category:MTS Viscount (tugboat, 1977) (Ships by name + Tugboats by name) or Category:Thassos III (ship, 2008) (Ships by name + Ferry ships by name). When I tried to diffuse the main category and resolve the overcategorisation, I was reverted with arguments like "We've always done it like this. Category:Ships by name must be present and anything else is unimportant." [1] In my opinion these are invalid arguments and a policy like COM:OVERCAT should not be ignored. A discussion I started at Category talk:Ships by name did not gain track, so I brought the issue to this board. De728631 (talk) 12:08, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
As I see it, there are three options:
- "Category:Ships by name" is properly diffused into "Ships by name by type" using only "Steamships by name", "Hovercraft by name", "Tugboats by name" for indicidual ships where applicable. I would favour this option because it is the logical way following a well-defined category tree.
- We lift "Category:Ships by name by type" to the same level as "Category:Ships by name" making the two independent of each other. This would allow for having all ships names in one central category but would also duplicate many "by name categories" in the type branch.
- A precedent is created by consensus allowing COM:OVERCAT to be disregarded in this case, so both "Ships by name" and "<Type> by name" can be added to individual ship categories. De728631 (talk) 12:08, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Commons was created to find immages to illustrate articles as simple as possible. Users without much knowledge of ships will use the shipname. Users who know that (modern) seagoing ships are identified by their IMO number, just as European inland water ships are identified by their ENI number, and will look for that numbers. These numbers don't change during their lifetime. That's why the Categories Ships by name, IMO-number and ENI-number are created. The other ship categories are more for specialists, so I opt for your lifting "Category:Ships by name by type" to the same level as "Category:Ships by name" making the two independent of each other. --Stunteltje (talk) 13:39, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- We could create something like Category:Ships by name (flat list) without subcategories, if we wanted. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:08, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- I really don't see why we can't just make this a special case situation where the current setup is fine, just as with Category:Aircraft by registration (this same issue was discussed at Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/04/Category:Aircraft by registration with no consensus). It's worked without any real issue for this long, no reason to go stir things up needlessly. — Huntster (t @ c) 08:56, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- Works well this way. It is also helpful for finding ships which share the same name which might otherwise be split across other specialist categories. So in this way it may reduce mis-categorizations. Rmhermen (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Huntster: Category:Ships by name (flat list) is the way you make a special case where there is no sub-categorization. Is there any reason not to use that? - Themightyquill (talk) 22:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: Whatever works. I've honestly not seen that format before, and thought it seemed like an unnecessary step. — Huntster (t @ c) 23:00, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Huntster: Category:Ships by name (flat list) is the way you make a special case where there is no sub-categorization. Is there any reason not to use that? - Themightyquill (talk) 22:31, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
- Be sure to change the instructions in the "How to create a ship category" box, section C "Useful elements to add to the category description", which specifically instructed everyone to add every ship to this category in addition to being split out in other subcategories based on type, builder, year, etc. Looking at it, this was long-standing practice. I've never seen the "flat list" naming before, though using the "non-topical/index" tag on such a category does make some sense. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
- Late comment: I fail to see how this was a consensus to do anything to the category and I also fail to see why adding the secret code (flat list) improves the system at all. And how is this new category helpful if it is hidden by default? Rmhermen (talk) 05:46, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
- Be sure to change the instructions in the "How to create a ship category" box, section C "Useful elements to add to the category description", which specifically instructed everyone to add every ship to this category in addition to being split out in other subcategories based on type, builder, year, etc. Looking at it, this was long-standing practice. I've never seen the "flat list" naming before, though using the "non-topical/index" tag on such a category does make some sense. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Moved contents to Category:Ships by name (flat list). I editted the infobox as you suggested, Clindberg. Thanks for the suggestion. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
The two things in this cat are a category for videos about Sinterklaas and an individual video that was taken on 5 December 2010. The Sinterklaas subcat doesn't seem to belong under a specific date. As for the individual video, I haven't seen that we have month-day cats for videos, so I think the individual video should be recategorized by year, or by year and month, whichever is the usual practice, and this category deleted. Auntof6 (talk) 23:02, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: I see that a few more individual videos have been added to this category, but that doesn't change anything in my opinion. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:53, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Agree. There is no achivement in (over)categorizing such files by day (hour, sec.?). The same goes for Category:Vladimir Putin on December 5, Category:5 December in Ternopil Oblast and many more useless overcategorizations following a similar pattern. --Jotzet (talk) 12:43, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Closing: category has been deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:15, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
Empty category. Solomon203 (talk) 13:31, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Closing: category has been deleted. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:17, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
I suggest disambiguation but I'm not sure where to, maybe Category:Treasure Island (fictional island). Category:Treasure Island (disambiguation) should be moved here. There appear to already be incorrect images and people could easily expect islands with treasure. I assume Auntof6 (talk · contribs) has already cleared out incorrect images given that they created a DAB. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:51, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed - Category:Treasure Island should be the disambiguation page. Category:Treasure Island should be renamed Category:Treasure Island (R.L. Stevenson), or Category:Treasure Island (book) - there are a lot of fictional treasure islands. -- Deadstar (msg) 12:02, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- And some real ones as well. Maybe I should have taken this through RM on WP first as I'm not convinced this is the primary topic, even on WP. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:51, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- We can change it here independently of whatever they'd like to do on WP anyway :) -- Deadstar (msg) 11:53, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- My point is that if it is disambiguated on WP, then it will be uncontroversial here but even if a move request is rejected there, we can still disambiguate it here. Commons categories are generally have a higher bar for PRIMARYTOPIC than WP, for example w:Worcester/Category:Worcester, England and w:Perth/Category:Perth, Western Australia. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:16, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- Ready to act on this? Can we agree to put the disambiguation page at Category:Treasure Island, and decide on a category name for the book (Category:Treasure Island (R.L. Stevenson) might be clearest)? -- Deadstar (msg) 08:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Isn't "Treasure Island (novel)" the usual disambiguation, see w:Category:1883 British novels. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:38, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I like that one. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:52, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Perfect. So Category:Treasure Island (novel) for the book, and move everything from Treasure Island to there, and all from "(disambiguation)" to "Treasure Island". Happy to do it, but the two of you probably know better than me :) - let me know if I need to take action (per above). Let's close this one! Thanks people. -- Deadstar (msg) 18:04, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I cleared out 2 images for Bridlington and 1 for Florida. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
- Perfect. So Category:Treasure Island (novel) for the book, and move everything from Treasure Island to there, and all from "(disambiguation)" to "Treasure Island". Happy to do it, but the two of you probably know better than me :) - let me know if I need to take action (per above). Let's close this one! Thanks people. -- Deadstar (msg) 18:04, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- I like that one. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:52, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Isn't "Treasure Island (novel)" the usual disambiguation, see w:Category:1883 British novels. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:38, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- Ready to act on this? Can we agree to put the disambiguation page at Category:Treasure Island, and decide on a category name for the book (Category:Treasure Island (R.L. Stevenson) might be clearest)? -- Deadstar (msg) 08:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
- My point is that if it is disambiguated on WP, then it will be uncontroversial here but even if a move request is rejected there, we can still disambiguate it here. Commons categories are generally have a higher bar for PRIMARYTOPIC than WP, for example w:Worcester/Category:Worcester, England and w:Perth/Category:Perth, Western Australia. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:16, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- We can change it here independently of whatever they'd like to do on WP anyway :) -- Deadstar (msg) 11:53, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- And some real ones as well. Maybe I should have taken this through RM on WP first as I'm not convinced this is the primary topic, even on WP. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:51, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
The result was moved to Category:Treasure Island (novel) and Category:Treasure Island (disambiguation) to Category:Treasure Island. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:51, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
should be joined into Category:Subsets and/or Category:Inclusion (set theory) Jochen Burghardt (talk) 11:55, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
No objection - joined into Category:Subsets where appropriate (many of the 13 images were miscategorized, as they didn't illustrate set-theoretical inclusion at all) - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 12:57, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
Currently, we have Category:Mappings - functions, Category:Mappings, Category:Functions (mathematics), and Category:Morphisms, while in mathematics there are only two different concepts, viz. "function" (in set theory) and "morphism" (in category theory). At English wikipedia, there were some dissucions of "mapping vs. function" and "set theory vs. category theory" in 2011 and 2013 at en:Talk:Map_(mathematics), but they didn't lead to a clear result.
I suggest to keep only Category:Functions (mathematics) and Category:Morphisms, to dispatch the contents of Category:Mappings - functions and Category:Mappings appropriately, and then to delete the latter two.
Note that currently Category:Functions (mathematics) is both a sub- and a supercategory of Category:Mappings - functions, indicating the conceptual confusion.
Jochen Burghardt (talk) 12:21, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- That's theoretically fine by me, though what's the proposed parent category for Category:Functions (mathematics) and Category:Morphisms? I only ask because Category:Mappings has a wikidata link to en:Map (mathematics) which suggests both functions and morphisms might be subcategories. Thanks. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:10, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think "function" in set theory and "morphism" in category theory aren't really different things, they are merely two different ways to look at the same mathematical object. The "wave" / "particle" dualism in quantum physics may be close to an analogy. So I wouldn't suggest to have a common supercategory just for both Category:Functions (mathematics) and Category:Morphisms, as there is none just for Category:Electromagnetic waves and Category:Particle (resp. Category:Particle physics). However, probably not all mathematicians would share my opinion. - More generally, I prefer to have shorter paths in the Commons Category tree, and hence to avoid intermediate categories with only a few entries (such as Category:Mappings would be).
- On the other hand, keeping Category:Mappings as a common supercategory of Category:Functions (mathematics) and Category:Morphisms would be the minimal invasive change to the current categorizations.
- What about waiting a few weeks for other points of view? If you agree, and if no one else speaks up, I'd prefer to omit Category:Mappings, and to keep Category:Functions (mathematics) below Category:Basic concepts in set theory, and Category:Morphisms below Category:Category theory. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 12:17, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- That works for me. If there's a need for some other way to connect them, we could include links in the category descriptions. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:15, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
No objection - implementing suggestion of 24 Aug 2018. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 12:19, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
On the Spanish, English and German wikipedias it has been deleted per promotional and non relevant association. en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Federation of Great Towers. Triplecaña (talk) 14:37, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- "Operating" that category serves at most the purpose of promoting this ominous society. --Jotzet (talk) 15:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete No use in keeping that category. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 08:07, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
No opposition. Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:45, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Following the usual pattern on commons, Category:Programming languages should have several classification subcategories, such as Category:Programming language by name (already present), Category:Programming language by paradigm (could be the obtained from Category:Programming paradigms by renaming), and possibly Category:Programming language by application domain (not quite sure; could be obtained from Category:Domain-specific programming languages), and others (e.g. by year of introduction) if needed. A category named "XXX classification" doesn't make sense, since all commons categories serve to classify their contents; therefore this category should be deleted. Jochen Burghardt (talk) 15:26, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- I agree that the Category:Programming languages must have several subcategories of classification. --Allforrous (talk) 00:36, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Delete Category:Programming language topics too, for much the same reason. These are both just superfluous containers for a loose grouping, when they could be placed directly into Category:Programming languages Andy Dingley (talk) 16:23, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- Another excessive one is Category:Substring. See Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/08/Category:Substring Andy Dingley (talk) 10:18, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- I just commented there. - We should stick to the >2weeks limit recommended at Commons:Categories for discussion#Closing a discussion in any case. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 16:29, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
No objection for >4 weeks. Implementing my above suggestions of 29 Aug 2018. -- Jochen Burghardt (talk) 10:56, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Categorize into "Category:Sportspeople by country" or into "Category:Sportspeople from Germany" ? Louis.attene (talk) 09:44, 5 August 2018 (UTC) Hi, i'm in doubt about what in topic: we have to categorize all the "DDR" sportspeople into the "Germany sportspeople" categories or, separately, like a country? If you look at Sportspeople from West Germany, you'll se that West Germany is considered like a country and not part of the "German" category. But for the DDR nation is different.. I think that we should consider DDR like a separate country because of the situation before 1989, but there should be a lot of work to do to implementate this. What do you think about it? I don't know if it's been already discussed about this topic. Sorry for my "not perfect" english. I'm italian.--Louis.attene (talk) 09:45, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- Given that Category:Sportspeople from the Soviet Union is in Category:Sportspeople by country, former countries could go in Category:Sportspeople by country. But there's the difference that the USSR doesn't fit inside any existing countries. We could also make both GDR and West German sportspeople subcategories Category:Sportspeople from Germany. Category:People of the German Democratic Republic and Category:People of West Germany are both in Category:People of the history of Germany. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:00, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Louis.attene: Can we put Category:Sportspeople from the German Democratic Republic and Category:Sportspeople from West Germany in Category:Sportspeople from Germany? That would seem to make sense. And for example, if there is no Category:Badminton players from West Germany, the images of a West German badminton player could just go in Category:Sportspeople from West Germany and Category:Badminton players from Germany. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:09, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Themightyquill: OK, but no difference in terms of threatment betwenn GDR and FRG, for the love of logic :)--Louis.attene (talk) 06:50, 2 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Louis.attene: Can we put Category:Sportspeople from the German Democratic Republic and Category:Sportspeople from West Germany in Category:Sportspeople from Germany? That would seem to make sense. And for example, if there is no Category:Badminton players from West Germany, the images of a West German badminton player could just go in Category:Sportspeople from West Germany and Category:Badminton players from Germany. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:09, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
Made parallel inside "Germany" parent categories as much as possible. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:58, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Unique geographical name - Motovilikhinsky District. Need remane and merge with Category:Motovilikhinsky District Niklitov (talk) 17:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
- Done. --A.Savin 23:46, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
closing as done. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:41, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
"Great Britain" is not a good category for an architectural element. "United Kingdom", with sub-categories for its constituent countries, would enable co-ordination with other UK architectural categories. Motacilla (talk) 22:57, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- I agree. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:58, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Before I created this category I looked for some examples of herring-bone masonry in Ireland but could not find any, so I decided to name it Herring-bone masonry in Great Britain. But it's quite ok for me if it is changed for Herring-bone masonry in the United Kingdom.--Pimprenel (talk) 16:57, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
No opposition. Moved to Category:Herring-bone masonry in the United Kingdom. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:45, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Delete as ambiguous and redundant with Category:Information graphics. Themightyquill (talk) 17:48, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- A redirect should solve that without discussion. --Jotzet (talk) 12:05, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Redirected to Category:Information graphics. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:52, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
DAB to Category:Three Crosses (monument) this is an overly generic name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:00, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed. It's quite likely that other images of three crosses will appear. Let's avoid confusion. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:49, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
No opposition in months. Moved to Category:Three Crosses (monument). - Themightyquill (talk) 21:40, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
Should this be merged with Category:Temples in Tamil Nadu? Auntof6 (talk) 07:11, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
- I would say so. It's in Category:Religious buildings in Tamil Nadu (and potentially Category:Temples in India by state or territory, so I think Category:Temples in Tamil Nadu is the one to keep. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:22, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
No opposition. Merged to Category:Temples in Tamil Nadu and deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 22:13, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Besides having an ungrammatical title, the scope is at best too broad and at worst unclear. The parent category is for the embassy in Berlin, but this cat doesn't specify that. Auntof6 (talk) 07:09, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- What do you propose to do with the files? Tyler de Noche (talk) 23:00, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Tyler de Noche: You seem to have found a solution, although it looks like a bot has undone some of your changes. I'll try undoing the bot changes and see if it undoes them again. --Auntof6 (talk) 00:17, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted in favour of Category:Social events sponsored by the Embassy of the United States in Berlin. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:57, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Can we move this to Category:Orbital Top View of Moon Earth Model or something similar? Themightyquill (talk) 06:43, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- Change name: I get now where the original name comes from, but at first I had no idea what it was until I browsed the contents. A more readable name would be a big improvement. Josh (talk) 16:15, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Orbital Top View of Moon Earth Model. If someone comes up with a better name, feel free to move it again. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:25, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Why does this category combine winter and mountains? Shouldn't they be separate? Auntof6 (talk) 20:25, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- Agree, it's an intersection that only opens a can of worms we could do without. Rodhullandemu (talk) 20:32, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Per other discussions-Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/01/Category:Spring 2018. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:26, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- The wikipedia article is at en:Cold-weather warfare. I would sugest we follow that lead. There is surely something specific to warfare in snow (etc) that could be categorized at commons. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:41, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
No opposition in a month. Moved to Category:Cold-weather warfare. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:22, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
This and all sister categories (they run up to 1944) should be spelled out in full: e.g. "Category:The Illustrated London News 1842", like the parent category, Category:The Illustrated London News. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:46, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Pigsonthewing: I can't remember if it was me who come out with that nomenclature, but in any case it was something provisory. Please do as you believe should be done.-- Darwin Ahoy! 12:13, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- I agree with spelling them out. @Ruthven: Would you be able to help with this mass move? Thanks! - Themightyquill (talk) 20:23, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Done: Per discussion.
NB: I modified Template:ILNyear accordingly and renamed the categories in Category:The Illustrated War News. Ruthven (msg) 10:32, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
Redirected to Category:Daniel Dahm. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:27, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Category:Daniel Dahm already exists --PJ Geest (talk) 16:43, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- Redirect to Category:Daniel Dahm Unless there are multiple Daniel Dahms. Crouch, Swale (talk) 13:12, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Crouch, Swale: I don't see any other Daniel Dahms, but wouldn't it make sense to delete rather than redirect? Two will only confuse things. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:48, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
- Redirects are cheap though, however its annoying that the software currently treats category redirects like separate pages, however we should fix that instead. However I don't really object to deletion if Themightyquill thinks it should be. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:55, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
Moving to "Church of the Holy Sepulchre", no need mention name of Jerusalem. N. Wadid (talk) 06:13, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete This is not the single Church of the Holy Sepulchre. There several other Church of the Holy Sepulchre. See Category:Holy Sepulchre churches. Tm (talk) 06:17, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose per User:Tm. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 14:54, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Leave as it is. Certainly not delete. This is certainly the main one, which is why Wikipedia has it at the unqualified title, but on Commons we need to qualify more. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:49, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Agree One in Jerusalem should be titled without place designation, it's sort of "place-zero" church, all others should have place suffix --Santasa99 (talk) 12:46, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose Whether it's the most important Church of the Holy Sepulchre is less important than whether it's likely to be confused for another church when categorizes an image. In this case, I think the likelihood of confusion/miscategorization is fairly high. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:49, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. ℯxplicit 04:29, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Unclear scope and definition. What is the purpose of this category? Category:Natural beauty has already been deleted three times, and this name makes even less sense. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:27, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. The creator can turn it into a personal gallery page if desired. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:08, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete, too subjective to be useful. - Takeaway (talk) 23:17, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. ℯxplicit 04:42, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Should this category be deleted? Currently no content. Another Believer (talk) 01:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- It now has two images. =) - Themightyquill (talk) 14:02, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Kept: category is now populated. ℯxplicit 04:45, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
Redundant with Category:Provincial halls of Thailand Bujo (talk) 19:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted Category:Provincial halls of Thailand in favour of Category:Provincial halls in Thailand. Parent category is Category:Halls in Thailand. - Themightyquill (talk) 12:55, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Category only contains one file. Mr. Guye (talk) 03:01, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted as empty. - Themightyquill (talk) 12:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Landscapes of Château-Chinon (Ville) is better. Cjp24 (talk) 21:56, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed. Move to Category:Landscapes of Château-Chinon (Ville). - Themightyquill (talk) 13:36, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Landscapes of Château-Chinon (Ville). - Themightyquill (talk) 12:51, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Delete category and all contents, per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Katie Chan photographing Peter the WikiPlatypus 2014-07-30.JPG. ", the Platypus toy is not released of copyright. See COM:TOYS." Andy Dingley (talk) 18:13, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- File:Peter the Platypus by the pond in the Barbican Conservatory 01.jpg
- File:Peter the Platypus by the pond in the Barbican Conservatory 02.jpg
- File:Peter the Platypus by the pond in the Barbican Conservatory 03.jpg
- File:Peter the Platypus watches the fish in the Barbican Conservatory 01.jpg
- File:Peter the Platypus watches the fish in the Barbican Conservatory 02.jpg
- File:Peter the Platypus watches the fish in the Barbican Conservatory 03.jpg
- File:Peter the WikiPatypus promoting the England and Wales vs the Rest of the World cricket match 01.jpg
- File:Wikimanía 2014 Londres 22.JPG
- As demonstrated by the linked deletion request, any comment I make here is irrelevant as the discussion will not be closed based on consensus but on the opinions of amateur copyright lawyers. I'm not really sure why Commons even bothers with deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 05:24, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Having said that though, File:Wikimanía 2014 Londres 22.JPG is very clearly de minimus and it's inclusion here suggests the nominator hasn't actually applied any thought to the individual images nominated. Thryduulf (talk) 05:28, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- I imagine the decision will be made on consensus among amateur copyright lawyers. (Thank goodness we don't have to hire professional lawyers for every copyright infringement deletion request.) That said, this particular amateur copyright lawyer agrees with your assessment of the one image as de minimis, though it should probably be removed from the category since the platypus is clearly not the focus of the image. - Themightyquill (talk) 22:30, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Based on past experience, decisions on commons are not made based on the consensus arrived at in deletion discussions, whether by copyright lawyers of any sort or otherwise. I can't immediately find the links, but one relevant discussion clearly concluded that the image was not a copyright violation but was deleted on those grounds. Another was closed as keep after discussion but then deleted by another administrator anyway with no discussion and no explanation beyond "copyright violation". Thryduulf (talk) 09:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- As for the category - that depends whether categories are only meant to represent the main focus of an image or all aspects of an image - the platypus is clearly part of the image even if just an incidental part. Thryduulf (talk) 09:42, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- I imagine the decision will be made on consensus among amateur copyright lawyers. (Thank goodness we don't have to hire professional lawyers for every copyright infringement deletion request.) That said, this particular amateur copyright lawyer agrees with your assessment of the one image as de minimis, though it should probably be removed from the category since the platypus is clearly not the focus of the image. - Themightyquill (talk) 22:30, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- It could also be cropped out pretty easily while still retaining the quality of the photo and the primary subject. Maybe that's best to avoid these kids of discussions in the future. - Themightyquill (talk) 17:58, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 12:48, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
empty category; name inconsistent with similar categories (see Category:Aerial photographs by country by year) Mindmatrix 14:00, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
- It's no longer empty. I agree it shouldn't be in Category:Aerial photographs by country by year, but that doesn't mean we can't categorize by decade. In some ways, it might make more sense than having one or two photographs for each year in some countries. - Themightyquill (talk) 17:39, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
- I agree, but in that case the category should be moved to a title consistent with similar categories, perhaps Category:Aerial photographs of Iran in the 2010s or Category:2010s aerial photographs of Iran. Mindmatrix 18:25, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
2x category (Bridge No... & Bridge in...) Zelenymuzik (talk) 07:14, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
- It seems there are multiple bridges in Karlštejn, so I'd suggest we delete Category:Bridge in Karlštejn in favour of Category:Bridge No 11615-1 in Karlštejn, even if it's not a beautiful name. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:43, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Deleted ambiguous Category:Bridge in Karlštejn. - Themightyquill (talk) 12:46, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Should be plural: "Yorkshire terriers" Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:06, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Support move. This clearly doesn't match standard category naming rules. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:26, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- On second look, none of the categories in Category:Dog breeds by name are in plural form. Do you think this applies to all of them, Pigsonthewing? - Themightyquill (talk) 22:01, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
Not done: Ruling for breed categories and similar is to use singular. A breed is more than just the animals of its population. --Pitke (talk) 11:18, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
This category has arbitrarily replaced the Beechcraft aircraft by airline category (and is only one of a number that have been similarly treated). The by airline approach is in extremely widespread use (and within this by operator cat) and I can see no good reason for its replacement. In my view the by airline cat should have been retained and moved to be a subcat of by operator. A consistent approach is required and when the by airline cat is so prevalent it seems foolish to replace it, particularly on an arbitrary basis and without discussion. Ardfern (talk) 01:21, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- What is the difference between airline and operator in this use? --Auntof6 (talk) 02:59, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment @Auntof6: "by operator" includes all types of operators, such as military and other non-airline operators. Several of the operators of the ~25 listed in the nominated category are military or government operators, so do not fit in a "by airline" category. Note the higher-level Category:Aircraft by operator. Category:Aircraft by airline
iswas (Ardfern (talk · contribs) has apparently noted that Category:Aircraft by airline was a redirect and has since populated it) a redirect to this category. Josh (talk) 06:05, 27 August 2018 (UTC) - Comment Too right, and would never have felt the need to do so but for your arbitrary and unnecessary deletion of 'by airline' cats. Ardfern (talk) 22:33, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- Comment @Auntof6: "by operator" includes all types of operators, such as military and other non-airline operators. Several of the operators of the ~25 listed in the nominated category are military or government operators, so do not fit in a "by airline" category. Note the higher-level Category:Aircraft by operator. Category:Aircraft by airline
- Keep and add a "by airline" category if you really feel the need. A "by operator" category should exist capable of handling all operator-specific categories. In those cases where there are sufficient airlines to warrant a separate index exclusive to airlines (not to mention enough other types of operators to make it worth separating them out), then that separate index can be created and stand on its own (e.g. a "by airline" index). This separate category can be a subset of what is in "by operator", but "by operator" should remain as an index of ALL operators regardless of the type of operator. This way users are not forced to parse exactly what type of operator they are dealing with to find media or categorize images quickly and accurately. Josh (talk) 06:05, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- My objection here (and with regard to multiple other cats) is that the wholesale changes were being made on an arbitrary basis by an individual without any discussion or consensus. Personally I don't really mind either way as long as it is consensus driven, given the amount of work that a move to 'by operator' would mean. Clearly it is all being metacat and indices driven rather than anything else. Having two very largely duplicate cats would be a nonsense. Happy to go with consensus approach one way or the other. Ardfern (talk) 15:59, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
- As you suggest above I would propose separate 'by airline' indices are created as a subset of 'by operator' indices. This seems a reasonable solution allowing both approaches to be in place. As a result I would ask that the Beechcraft aircraft by airline cat that you 'gutted' is restored as a subset of Beechcraft aircraft by operator. Action on other cats you have similarly treated would now be necessary. Ardfern (talk) 12:31, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
- Support Ardfern, by airline should be reinstated and be placed as a subcategory of by operator. Bidgee (talk) 12:38, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ardfern, Auntof6, Bidgee, De728631, and Uli Elch: Sounds like there is agreement on the main points here, with some hashing to be done on the details. It seems that really it is just a question of exactly how to implement it that remains to be decided:
Options for implementation of "by airline/operator" indices | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
I know there has been some emotion expressed around these cats but I would really like this to be an objective consensus on which scheme to go forward with. I've done my best to list the pros and cons of each scheme, including a couple that may have no support at all. If there are some other options to consider or criteria that should be evaluated, by all means, they can be added. Respectfully, let's leave any personal issues aside and just get a consensus on which way to move forward. I look forward to your constructive input. Thanks! Josh (talk) 10:21, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
Support Option 1, 2, or 3B. Option 1 seems to best meet the criteria and be the most elegant up and down the aircraft category structure, but Option 2 is not far off. Option 3 seems ripe for overcat violations, endless diffusion issues, and generally muddy indices, so I am not crazy about it. Option 3B meets the criteria better while maintaining a natural flow to the index. I am opposed to Options 4 and 5 as both fail several criteria and do not seem to have the support of any of the participants thus far (AFAIK). Josh (talk) 10:21, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- I would support Option 3 even on the risk of introducing overcat. The reason is that "by operator" is a neutral parent container for "by airline" and "by military". Also "by airline" should not just be a subcategory of "Airliners" because many airliners have military derivatives, and small airlines may not use airliners at all but just large executive aircraft (Beech, Cessna, Dassault Falcon, etc.). So the sorting criteria should be on the kind of operator. De728631 (talk) 11:07, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- @De728631: Interesting input, thank you. I would agree that overcat is a minor consideration and can be waived for indices. A few questions:
- 1) I do agree with you 100% that not all airliners are used by airlines and airlines do not only use airliners. The same is true of military or any other kind of aircraft, the aircraft function and operator type are not 100% analogous. In all honesty, I have thought on that more than a bit. To be really correct about that, we should have Category:Aircraft by operator with children Category:Airliners by operator and Category:Aircraft by airline and the intersection sub-cat of these called Category:Airliners by airline...but I can hear the screaming already about the name of that one, not to mention it would take a bot task to implement. Without opening that can of worms, and just sticking with Category:Aircraft by airline to encompass that, would you not list it under Category:Airliners? Or do we go ahead and name it correctly so that the distinctions can be made for these cases? Or do we just leave it in the parent index and not list an index under Category:Airliners for now? Open to ideas!
- 2) As you state, in this case the sort criteria is the kind of operator, so maybe it makes sense to call the parent Category:Aircraft by type of operator. That way it would be clear that it is not a list of operators itself, but instead is diffused by type. What do you think?
- 3) Where would one go to find a listing of all operators, regardless of type of operator? Would you be okay with a Category:Aircraft by operator (flat list) for users who want to see all operators listed?
- Thanks again for the excellent input. I've added an Option 3B with some minor tweaks to build in your comments and meet the most criteria possible. Do you think that would satisfy your concerns, or do you have some more tweaks you would make? Josh (talk) 12:59, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- @De728631: Interesting input, thank you. I would agree that overcat is a minor consideration and can be waived for indices. A few questions:
- Option 3B looks like a runner (I think). Grateful if someone could confirm that it means retention of the 'by airline' approach and an end to arbitrary deletion of 'by airline' cats and replacement with 'by operator'. I hope this can be confirmed so that I can get on with the real work - still over 100k files to be classified folks. Ardfern (talk) 21:09, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Ardfern: it doesn't look like option 3B retains the "by airline", I do think Josh as added far too much detail and options that it takes time to digest. I'm going to be refraining from making a view until I have the time to study each in greater detail. Bidgee (talk) 04:32, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Ardfern: I can confirm that Option 3B does retain "by airline". All "Aircraft of Airline" categories would be under "Aircraft by Airline" which would be under the parent index "Aircraft by type of operator". They would not be listed separately under that parent, so they would only go one place for most levels. There might be a flat list but this would stand separate and would only be for the main Category:Aircraft and maybe some of the larger manufacturers or classes. I have tried to be detailed so that when we implement we don't immediately find ourselves back again with different directions. I know you have been wanting me to reinstate some more airline cats and I am looking forward to doing so just as soon as we wrap this discussion. Josh (talk) 07:51, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- Option 3B looks like a runner (I think). Grateful if someone could confirm that it means retention of the 'by airline' approach and an end to arbitrary deletion of 'by airline' cats and replacement with 'by operator'. I hope this can be confirmed so that I can get on with the real work - still over 100k files to be classified folks. Ardfern (talk) 21:09, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Bidgee: Good thinking, I knew I probably hadn't got the right hang of this. I find all this category speak very confusing. If 'by airline' is not retained, then the proposal is useless. Ardfern (talk) 04:40, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Bidgee and Ardfern: To be clear, Option 3B DOES retain the 'by airline' categories! I think in the interest of keeping the listing from getting too long, I wrote "Categories:Aircraft by operator type", so operator type would include "airline", so these categories would be Category:Aircraft by airline, etc. whatever is appropriate, but obviously, 'by Airline' would be the most often present! Sorry if it was not clear, but if there are any other questions, I'll be happy to clarify! I've added them more explicitly so everyone can see they are there for sure! Frankly, I would assume any scheme that did not include something 'by airline' would be a non-starter. Josh (talk) 07:32, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
- I have just added Category:Beechcraft aircraft by airline into the new Category:Beechcraft aircraft by type of operator. If this is the proposed way forward across the board then I am all for it. Presumably it applies equally to cats like 'Aircraft by operator', 'Boeing aircraft by operator' etc. It is great that it negates the need for big catch-all by operator cats like these, thus reducing duplication and work (no double entries for 'by airline' and 'by operator'). Let me know if this interpretation is wrong. I have to say that it is rather like what I was originally proposing (that 'by airline' be a subcat of 'by operator'), but tweaked in a more generally acceptable way apparently. Good job. Ardfern (talk) 05:47, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- I have tried the approach in Category:Aircraft in Netherlands service by type of operator. Obviously you need to decide what to call the cat re aircraft in military service, otherwise perhaps you could have a look and see if I have implemented the right approach (when you get time. Ardfern (talk) 06:31, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Ardfern: It looks fine to me. I second the motion that it is great to have an agreeable way forward and appreciate everyone bringing it to a conclusion. Military, government, and other operator cats can be fleshed out as we go forward. I have been creating those groups even if they have one cat at the moment (these numbers will rise as members are identified and categorized). At any rate, 'by type of operator' can hold them all. There are some cases where I have moved the 'by operator' category to 'by type of operator' in accordance with this CfD, but do not have every individual operator yet diffused into the appropriate cats, this will take a bit to do. Josh (talk) 15:36, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- I have tried the approach in Category:Aircraft in Netherlands service by type of operator. Obviously you need to decide what to call the cat re aircraft in military service, otherwise perhaps you could have a look and see if I have implemented the right approach (when you get time. Ardfern (talk) 06:31, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
- Please stop making moved such as this, the discussion has not yet concluded. I work and don't have 24/7 week to play with and not only that we yet to have a finalised consensus. Bidgee (talk) 13:42, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
@Ardfern and Bidgee: Closed (seems like a solved issue after several months of going forward with proposal 3B) Josh (talk) 00:25, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
DAB to Category:Bark (botany), there is some discussion about if needed and what sub categories this should also be done with. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:46, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Are there other meanings this is getting confused with? --Auntof6 (talk) 16:38, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- I also don't understand the rationale. It seems unlikely to get confused with Category:Dogs barking, though we could link to that category, just in case. Then again, there is a dab page at en:Bark. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:07, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sorry I forgot to link the discussion, it was here, and note that the WP article at w:Bark (sound). Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:40, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- I also don't understand the rationale. It seems unlikely to get confused with Category:Dogs barking, though we could link to that category, just in case. Then again, there is a dab page at en:Bark. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:07, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Auntof6 and Themightyquill: as I noted "Bark" is a DAB page on Wikipedia and there are numerous other uses of "Bark" here so I'm not sure why this is controversial, can we just move this and create a DAB at Category:Bark? Until I converted Category:Barking into a DAB it was a redirect to the town in London. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:12, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the edits to Category:Barking which undoubtedly make sense. I'm still not totally convinced by the need to DAB Category:Bark unless inappropriate media is ending up there, but given the dab page on wikipedia, I don't feel so strongly as to object if you're determined to make the change. - Themightyquill (talk) 15:00, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
- I agree with you that the noise is usually "barking" but indeed given the other uses and the DAB on Wikipedia which is usually in its self enough to justify a DAB here. Anyway while I didn't find any incorrect images its entirely possible for it to collect them from the sound or even the other places. In addition I'd point out this comment about Category:Barques. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:30, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the edits to Category:Barking which undoubtedly make sense. I'm still not totally convinced by the need to DAB Category:Bark unless inappropriate media is ending up there, but given the dab page on wikipedia, I don't feel so strongly as to object if you're determined to make the change. - Themightyquill (talk) 15:00, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Moved, consistent with Wikipedia and unopposed in over a year. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:56, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
I am confident that most of the painters in this category were of normal size. Should be "Painters of minatures". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:15, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- I support renaming. It could be the wording Andy suggests, or "miniaturists" like Category:Miniaturists by country and its subcats. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:38, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hahaha! I agree on changing, but I have no preference between "Painters of miniatures" and "Miniaturists." - Themightyquill (talk) 20:12, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Miniaturists also work in other media; think "artists" vs. "painters". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:59, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Nonsense! Johnbod (talk) 22:39, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- Good point. Then "painters of miniatures" is probably the best (since "miniaturist painters" sounds awkward). The existing "miniaturist" cats should probably be either renamed to match (if they're all painters) or recategorized (if other media are included). --Auntof6 (talk) 23:26, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Miniaturists also work in other media; think "artists" vs. "painters". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:59, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Miniaturists do NOT "also work in other media", under that name; this category is just for painters. If changed, it should indeed be "Painters of minatures". Vast numbers of our users will not understand "miniaturists", and "miniaturist painters" does not just "sound awkward" is but is not English at all. Johnbod (talk) 22:39, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Painters of miniatures per consensus. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:20, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Already present standard Category:Judaism in Pisa DnaX (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:04, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
Should be deleted, copyrighted character —SpanishSnake (talk | contribs) 02:11, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Category with only one image in it, in which the frog only appears on a sign in the background with an imho dubious de minimis claim. Also, there's a version of the same image with the frog cropped so even if we lost that image entirely, it wouldn't have been much of a loss. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:50, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Having had a subcategory (Category:Kekistan) since 31 December 2017, Category:Pepe the Frog should be kept even if there is no image in it. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. --Tibet Nation (talk) 22:26, 22 December 2019 (UTC)
Kept, contains another cat Kekistan, which also contains files in scope.--Roy17 (talk) 02:20, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
This is pretty much a catch all category for all PNG maps of Europe. It's never going to be complete and hinders better catogrisation of images. If a bot could move all these images into the parent category, then they could be categorised into more appropriate categories.
Category:SVG maps of Europe has an extensive tree of sub categories parallel to Category:Maps of Europe. I don't see much benefit of doing the same for PNG or JPG files.
Rob984 (talk) 15:20, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
A better way to categories the subcategories (which are all Category:PNG maps of [country name]) would be, instead of:
- Category:Maps of Europe
- Category:PNG maps of Europe
- Category:PNG maps of [country name]
- Category:JPG maps of Europe
- Category:JPG maps of [country name]
- Category:Maps of Europe by location (meta)
- Category:Maps of Europe by country (meta)
- Category:Maps of [country name]
- Category:Maps of Europe by country (meta)
- Category:PNG maps of Europe
We'd have:
- Category:Maps of Europe
- Category:Maps of Europe by location (meta)
- Category:Maps of Europe by country (meta)
- Category:PNG maps of Europe by country (meta)
- Category:PNG maps of [country name]
- Category:JPG maps of Europe by country (meta)
- Category:JPG maps of [country name]
- Category:PNG maps of Europe by country (meta)
- Category:Maps of Europe by country (meta)
- Category:Maps of Europe by location (meta)
Category:PNG maps of Europe and Category:JPG maps of Europe could then both be deleted and the files in those categories moved into Category:Maps of Europe (where they would then hopefully be diffused into more appropriate categories).
Rob984 (talk) 18:07, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
- I agree, if you think it is better. I created this category to sort maps of europe.--Hiddenhauser (talk) 10:58, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Personally, I don't think we should be categorizing maps by file format at all. We'd also need to create Category:GIF maps of Europe. I might be okay with Category:Vector image maps and associated categories. What exactly does PNG vs JPG vs GIF tell you about a map, without actually looking at it? I'd say very little. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:10, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- I agree but there's already sub-categories for 6 countries. Basically I want to merge the 400 files in Category:PNG maps of Europe back into Category:Maps of Europe (where they can be diffused into more relevant categories), and then create a meta category (Category:PNG maps of Europe by country) to categorise the 6 country specific sub-categories.
- Category:SVG maps of Europe is already a thing, but it has an extensive tree of sub categories so isn't a "catch all" category like Category:PNG maps of Europe currently is. It needs diffusion but at least this is possible.
- Rob984 (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
- Personally, I don't think we should be categorizing maps by file format at all. We'd also need to create Category:GIF maps of Europe. I might be okay with Category:Vector image maps and associated categories. What exactly does PNG vs JPG vs GIF tell you about a map, without actually looking at it? I'd say very little. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:10, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
- I guess I don't agre with the existence of the sub-categories, and your proposal would, I suspect, encourage the creation of more similar categories. I'd rather upmerge them all. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:47, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
If anyone still cares, I say vector subcats ONLY. NO jpg, png together. This category system is has a big enough data integrity problem without adding additional categories. When I see things like Portraits of females full length facing right with dogs, I give up! Peacedance (talk) 19:29, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Upmerged to Category:Maps of Europe per discussion. Rob984 (talk) 10:08, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
We have already had Flags of the Confederate States of America for many years; unclear how the scope of this one (itself an orphan) is different. Perhaps there should be separate categories for contemporary or official (national, state, military) CSA flags and later unofficial “rebel flags” that allude to them, but that should be explained or both cats will become ‘mixed bags’. —Odysseus1479 (talk) 02:18, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- The category is redundant. Evrik (talk) 21:17, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Done: already merged. --ƏXPLICIT 03:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
The name is not wrong, it is only another name schema. XRay talk 10:05, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- The category was deleted in favour of Category:Norderney, Birkenweg 6. I have no preference as to which name is best, but a redirect seems to make sense if it is known by two names. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:22, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
Done: already deleted by Krd. --ƏXPLICIT 03:25, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Delete: Empty category. Randykitty (talk) 23:53, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Not empty now, although there's only one entry. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:42, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
Not done: no longer empty. --ƏXPLICIT 03:28, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
The term orchard is not used for vegetables, only for fruits and nuts. This cat and its similarly-named subcats should be either renamed or merged to the parent (vegetable gardens). Auntof6 (talk) 08:50, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, perhaps you are right, at least in the use of Commons. However, I believe that the concept can be refined, differentiating vegetable gardens or orchards from orchards or fruit plantations. Look at the etymology of orchard from this Collins definition:
Old English orceard, ortigeard, from ort-, from Latin hortus garden + geard yard2 See: [2]
- Maybe we could look for another alternative name to the incorrect 'Vegetable orchards' in which to differentiate those small home gardens, where there is hardly any room for trees. It would be great if you could think of something and you could give me an alternative. If you find it, please rename the category yourself or tell me how I can help you (to the best of my ability ...;-)--Latemplanza (talk) 09:15, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
Please, see too: 'orchard' in spanish as 'Huerto hortelano'
- Meiby, really: In english 'hortelano' is named 'gardener' ...Sin embargo, en español, hortelano es el que cuida un huerto, y jardinero el que cuida un jardín, and I can not find that subtle difference in English. Houston, we have a problem --Latemplanza (talk) 09:30, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
--Latemplanza (talk) 09:30, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hay palabras que no se traducen exactamente del español al inglés, o del inglés al español. Lo se, porque enseño el inglés a personas cuyo lengua materna es el español. Also, the etymology of a word doesn't always tell you how it's actually used. The English word gardener is used for people who take care of various types of plants, including food plants, flowers, or ornamental plants, and garden can be used for any of those (unless the area of planting is big enough to be called a farm). I would say "vegetable garden" is the closest term, but let's see if anyone else has other ideas. --Auntof6 (talk) 09:58, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I still think that objectively you have all the reason in the world. I have also seen that there is the category: kitchen garden ... But I still think that the limitations of the English language culture can not determine or distort thirty or forty centuries of Mediterranean culture. Anyway, I've also summoned a couple of specialists at your level (I'm just a child with uncomfortable questions, I'm afraid). Let's see if, as you say, among all you find a category that defines this garden, family, small, Mediterranean and taken by Rome to the European Septentrión, which hardly fit any trees and has nothing to do with a French garden, or English.--Latemplanza (talk) 11:04, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hello Latemplanza and Auntof6 what a nice, tasty discussion. I just hope you won't throw tomatoes at me after reading my opinions
- It seems that English farmers (and maybe not only farmers) called "garden" to any pieces of vegetables cultivated lands, no matter the size. Not my opinion!
- ...English-speaking farmers traditionally referred to their vegetable plots as "gardens"... and go on ... In English whether in common parlance or in anthropological or historical scholarship, husbandry done by the hoe is customarily called "gardening" and husbandry done by the plough as "farming" regardless of the scale of either.
- Then, according to that traditional definition, our mediterranean "huertos" could be called "market gardens" and fit, properly subcategorized, in Category:Market gardens. But then, I had a look at the kitchen garden and I'm not so sure, though those kitchen gardens seems to be a bit too neat and snobbish for the mediterranean versions. What do you think? Anna (Cookie) (talk) 17:31, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- Obrigado Anna ...Well, I do not know. I assume that the Category: Vegetable orchards is nonsense. But I do not lose hope that among all of us we will find an English name for these recollect orchards as little husbands next to the Huertas Ladies (be they of the Priest, or of the Joy ...)
- Hello Latemplanza and Auntof6 what a nice, tasty discussion. I just hope you won't throw tomatoes at me after reading my opinions
- We can wait to see if from here to Monday someone comes up with the spark. And if the light does not appear ... I'm worth the garden that has the most votes. For the moment I abstain because they are all so specific and inappropriate as not very suggestive.
- Neither does it seem important to find the "quid", but it's funny, it's not the first time that I find myself in these blind alleys... --Latemplanza (talk) 17:51, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
- proposals and options (you can add yours)
Auntof6... he indicates as vegetable garden guideline.
Anna... market gardens (as mediterranean "huertos") and vegetable plots (parcelas de vegetales)
Google gives the following results (raised in the singular):
- mediterranean traditional garden (huerto tradicional mediterráneo)
- horticultural garden (jardín hortícola)
- small home gardens (pequeños huertos domésticos)
And... Choose-it!
- Anna he recibido estas anotaciones que pueden resultar interesantes, creo:
Regarding apples, one of the commonest fruits grown in Britain, there is a difference between an orchard, a space where apples are grown on a large scale (ie, for sale) and an apple garden, which contains a number of apple trees for local consumption. Orchards could also be called plantations, although we would normally associate plantations with “exotic” crops such as coffee, tea, sugar, and tobacco, etc. Allotment, huerto alquilado, o huerto urbano is (usually) public land divided into strips and leased to “tenants” for personal use. Large country houses (manors) had kitchen gardens or a cook’s garden which would have included a vegetable patch, a herb garden and some fruit trees. The kitchen garden at Windsor during Queen Victoria's reign occupied 12,5 hectares. Kitchen gardens would normally be protected by walls or hawthorn (majuelo o espino albar). In this context, another interesting variation is the slip or slip garden, often located outside the kitchen garden, used for fruit bushes and vegetables such as artichokes, rhubarb, horseradish, as well as melons. And, of course, the herbarium or physic garden (hortus medicus) and garden of simples (from the Italian giardino dei simplice). Finally, if we talking about what my uncle had at the bottom of his garden where he grew odds and ends, that’s a vegetable patch or vegetable plot. Another aspect would be greenhouses and conservatories (a space with a glass roof and walls, attached to a house at one side). As far as Wikipedia categories are concerned, I take it that we’re talking about the kitchen gardens, vegetable gardens and fruit gardens and, in some cases, the market gardens, belonging to stately homes and botanic gardens, ie, places of encyclopaedic relevance.'
- Me parece sugerente eso de «giardino dei simplice», que imagino pudiera asociarse al huerto de mi abuelo e incluso al huerto del tío/uncle del anónimo informador. También me parece esencial en un repositorio de imágenes, es decir iconográfico, diferenciar en categorías las plantaciones, los jardines botánicos, los “hortus conclusus” de la hagiografía cristiana, y los huertos medicinales/boticarios, y por supuesto los jardines imperiales de relevancia enciclopédica, con o sin huerto. And I write everything in Castilian, because if I pass it through the translator, although it is quite serious, weird things come out and what is more important: there are no terms that in Spanish something that is not in English does not seem to exist.--Latemplanza (talk) 10:18, 13 August 2018 (UTC)
- Sí, el bendito translator suele ser un trabalenguas así que creo que, mientras no llegue alguien que no domine el castellano -y sospecho que tu informador anónimo lo domina-, podemos apañarnos en nuestra humilde lengua.
- Sí, el bendito translator suele ser un trabalenguas así que creo que, mientras no llegue alguien que no domine el castellano -y sospecho que tu informador anónimo lo domina-, podemos apañarnos en nuestra humilde lengua.
A ver, tenemos
- Category:Allotments -> Category:Allotments in Spain
- Category:Kitchen gardens
- Category:Market gardens
- Category:Vegetable gardens
- Category:Herb gardens
Además de
Como ves hay de todo. El asunto era cómo llamar a esos huertos mediterráneos (o sin ser mediterráneos) que se dedican al cultivo de hortalizas solamente ¿Era eso? Anna (Cookie) (talk) 04:55, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
- Muchas gracias Anna, vamos aprendiendo. Iré vaciando las categorías mal nombradas con orchard y repartiendo su contenido en las que aquí has reunido.--Latemplanza (talk) 11:11, 14 August 2018 (UTC)
Delete this category and subcategories, Reasons:
- I agree with Auntof6, I don't know any vegetable orchards (I define orchards as a group of trees in a garden or other plot of land). Fruit and nuts may grow in orchards. Vegetables are growing on soil -not on trees- in vegetable gardens or other categories named by Anna (Cookie).
- All of the subcategories are empty.
JopkeB (talk) 11:00, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Conclusion:
- On 4 January 2020 this category had only one file and no subcategories. I changed the category of the file to Vegetable gardens.
- Now the category is empty. I suggest to make a redirect to Category:Vegetable gardens and close this discusion.
JopkeB (talk) 08:37, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- Concur with JopkeB. - Jmabel ! talk 18:39, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
Conclusion: make a redirect to Category:Vegetable gardens and close discussion. I performed this. JopkeB (talk) 04:33, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
{{SI|Corresponding category is empty.}}
deleted as empty. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Delete as result of over-catergorisation. It's more helpful to have all maps of countries shown within Europe alone (not within the EU) in one category—Category:Locator maps of countries of Europe (green and grey scheme). Maps of the countries shown within the EU are in the sub category—Category:Locator maps of countries in European Union (green and grey scheme). Rob984 (talk) 18:56, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
Same goes for Category:Locator maps of countries of European Union (grey scheme). Rob984 (talk) 21:36, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed. It might be different if these maps had some kind of outline of the European Union or something else specifically relevant to the EU, but they don't as far as I can see. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:48, 27 September 2018 (UTC)
Redirected to Locator maps of countries in European Union (green and grey scheme). --Soumya-8974 (he) (talk • contribs) 12:57, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Do we need two categories, in order to split a small category Jacob's ladder (electrical), into "<subject>" and "videos of <subject>"? This category has no other parents, so it gives no navigational function. Anything it does can be done just as well by a filename extension or media-type. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
- I have moved some video categories from the individual files to this category. That seems to address the issue. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:19, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
- No, that is what has caused the issue.
- Why do we need a separate category for videos of the same topic as the parent category? Andy Dingley (talk) 20:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
- Not that this decides the discussion, but I want to note that it does have other parent categories: Category:Videos of plasma physics and Category:Videos of electromagnetism. Without this category, I expect these 5 videos would go in both those categories. - Themightyquill (talk) 21:03, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- That's how it was before the aforementioned changes I made. Still not sure how it's now a problem. --Auntof6 (talk) 21:17, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Categories added (or restored?) since the CfD. Yes, clearly the images belong in them - but why do we need a whole extra catgeory to do so? Andy Dingley (talk) 21:29, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Isn't it fairly common to put videos for a topic in a separate category? Even more so if there are multiple videos of the same thing. --Auntof6 (talk) 23:02, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Stale discussion. The result was keep. The nominated category has five videos Estopedist1 (talk) 16:56, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
DAB to Category:Harvard, Worcester County, Massachusetts, I move was declined on WP, but "Harvard" redirects to Harvard University also in Massachusetts. There is a risk of images being added here. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:55, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Greetings! I do see your point, but believe that this is not necessary in practice. As I live close to both the town and the university, I visit the relevant Commons categories several times per year. To my recollection, I have never seen either category containing images of the other. However, I suppose it is possible, and perhaps others have been patrolling the categories. with all best wishes, Daderot (talk) 18:14, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Incorrect pages can be added at any time, it just depends on who or what bot happens to be adding them, see Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/08/Category:Harlequin. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:41, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose for exactly the same reasons the enwiki move was declined. This doesn't seem like a particularly likely error to make. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:07, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
Stale discussion. No consensus to disambiguate Estopedist1 (talk) 19:48, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Merge to Memorial gardens, there's no real difference that I can see, except the name. Redirect accordingly. Rodhullandemu (talk) 15:16, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed, they're clearly synonymous. Category:Garden of Remembrance might be created as a disambiguation page, though it's not absolutely necessary. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:05, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
stale discussion. Merging in the favor of Category:Memorial gardens Estopedist1 (talk) 20:04, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Should be deleted, copyrighted character —SpanishSnake (talk | contribs) ping me plz 02:13, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- I do not believe all of the files in this category should be deleted. Notably, I would keep File:Metalist Trollface Ultras (6483669795).jpg and File:Sean Plott.jpg per de minimus. All the other files in this category could be deleted. File:Internet-Meme auf einem Straßenschild.JPG might not even be a piece of art created by WIKImaniac themselves. The grafiti is a fairly simple copyright infringement. File:I Am A.jpg is an edge case, and I am neutral on it. The category page itself can stay as long as it contains three or more files. ~Mable (chat) 07:56, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- I think deletion of the files on the basis of copyright is certainly a possibility, SpanishSnake, so please nominated them for deletion. But Maplestrip is right that it probably makes to keep the category as long as the images exist. The category doesn't break any copyright rules. - Themightyquill (talk) 14:07, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
A new deletion request page was created here. I believe this discussion can be closed? ~Mable (chat) 08:50, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
Not discussion about the category (CFD), but discussion about files (DR). Discussion takes places at Category talk:Trollface, or at concrete, problematic files Estopedist1 (talk) 20:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Speedy delete Unnecessary intersection index, not really used, doesn't serve a purpose at this point Josh (talk) 08:43, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Deleted as empty. -- Túrelio (talk) 21:34, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
This category itself is fine, but the categories within it have two different schemes by which they are named. It would make sense that one scheme or the other be applied to all. Following is a summary of the two main schemes found in the category:
Qty | Format | Examples |
---|---|---|
92 | By Proper Name | Category:Aircraft of the Afghan Air Force, Category:Aircraft of the United States Air Force |
42 | by generic name | Category:Aircraft of the air force of Bulgaria, Category:Aircraft of the air force of the United Kingdom |
2 | other method | Category:Aircraft of Belgian military forces, Category:Commemorative Air Force |
By proper name seems to be a better method. It is more intuitive, especially for users to type in while uploading images, as it requires less deep understanding of how the category name is structured. It also uses the name broadly used in the world to refer to the organization. The generic name method has advantages in that it has a standardized look and it is easy to reference the country's name from the category name, but in essence we are then inventing our own title for these organizations. Both have their merits and limits, but either way, we ought to pick one to go with. Josh (talk) 18:10, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Resolved Estopedist1 (talk) 21:38, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
- Category:American Airlines Current Fleet
- Category:American Airlines Former Fleet
- Category:Nouvelair Current Fleet
- Category:Nouvelair Former Fleet
- Category:Tunisair Current Fleet
- Category:Tunisair Former Fleet
- And all the other airlines with 'Former Fleet' and 'Current Fleet' trees that are similarly problematic.
- They prove almost impossible to maintain. While I am sure you are very dedicated to this particular topic and earnest in your efforts to maintain these categories, it is simply impossible for one person to maintan the curent status of the thousands and thousands of airliners of the world. Without a dedicated group to work on this and clear processes and standards it is a hopeless endeavor.
- Media is easily sorted incorrectly. An image of an airliner at work is always an image of an aircraft in service, even if that aircraft is retired after the image is taken. When sorting a photograph, we sort it on the basis of what is in the photograph, including the time of the photograph, not on the future state of subjects in the photograph. Refer to Category:Retired aircraft.
- "Current Fleet" and "Former Fleet" are malformed category names. They should not be upper case and do not match the 'Aircraft of Operator' name format.
- Commons is not the appropriate place to maintain data such as current fleet status of the world's airlines. That is best done on Wikidata and presented on Wikipedia.
- Most of these categories use a space for a sort key. They are not meta categories so should not use this. I've noticed a lot more categorizing being done with a space to raise peoples' pet projects to the top of a category list, but this is wrong and needs to stop. Sort correctly within parent categories and reserve the space key for meta-categories (X by Y cats).
Delete All of these should be deleted. Their content is best managed in the parent non-current/former categories.Josh (talk) 17:08, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose. This would be a significant reduction of available information. I don't think you need to add every instance of current/former airline fleets for discussion, there would be many hundreds. You have established the principle of what you are saying with Nouvelair and I have responded to the discussion there. Ardfern (talk) 17:17, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Ardfern: It has been done to several airlines and it needs to stop. Almost every image in the 'former' categories is in the wrong place because it doesn't depict a former aircraft it depicts one in current service. This is the same reason we don't categorize aircraft by whether they are in production or out of production. If you can clear this up and ensure that the 'former' categories only hold images of aircraft in a retired or post-service state, and the 'current' categories only hold images of aircraft in active service, then okay, maybe this could work. See Category:Retired aircraft for details of how that can work. Josh (talk) 17:36, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure you haven't got the meaning of former and current mixed up in this context. Former aircraft of Tunisair, for instance, means aircraft no longer in service with Tunisair (although they could be in service with another airline (with which they would be current)). Current aircraft of Tunisair, for instance means aircraft currently in service with Tunisair (although they could have been previously in service with another airline (with which they would now be former)). Current and former fleet aircraft refers to aircraft in each specific airline. As a result the former categories (by airline) only hold images of aircraft no longer in that specific airline fleet, while the current categories (by airline) only hold images of aircraft currently in service with that specific airline. By this definition I think you will find that the images are by and large correctly classified and that the information as a result is useful and valuable. Hope this clarifies. Ardfern (talk) 17:53, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Ardfern: I get perfectly what you are going for, it is simple enough, but I'm saying it just doesn't work. The aircraft to the right is not a former Tunis Air plane, it is photographed as a current aircraft. Of course it has since been retired, but that is of no consequence to the image itself. It is the same reason images in Category:Retired aircraft don't include pictures of them flying around. Indeed the plane to the right has been retired, but this image of it does not belong in Category:Retired aircraft, just it doesn't belong in Category:Tunisair Former Fleet since it is photographed as part of its current fleet. Josh (talk) 18:02, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure you haven't got the meaning of former and current mixed up in this context. Former aircraft of Tunisair, for instance, means aircraft no longer in service with Tunisair (although they could be in service with another airline (with which they would be current)). Current aircraft of Tunisair, for instance means aircraft currently in service with Tunisair (although they could have been previously in service with another airline (with which they would now be former)). Current and former fleet aircraft refers to aircraft in each specific airline. As a result the former categories (by airline) only hold images of aircraft no longer in that specific airline fleet, while the current categories (by airline) only hold images of aircraft currently in service with that specific airline. By this definition I think you will find that the images are by and large correctly classified and that the information as a result is useful and valuable. Hope this clarifies. Ardfern (talk) 17:53, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
::: It does work if you don't allow yourself to be caught up in semantics. The aircraft in question is no longer in the Tunisair fleet and so is indeed a former Tunisair aircraft. At the time of photographing it was in the fleet but now it isn't, therefore it is former. It seems perfectly obvious and sensible to me and the best way forward in allowing researchers etc to see current and former fleets. Ardfern (talk) 18:21, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Per Ardfern (talk · contribs) it makes sense to discuss the Nouvelair categories here in one discussion place. I have therefore folded them into this discussion. To that end, here are the comments made on those entries: Josh (talk) 18:28, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: Without these categories it is impossible to see the current (or former) fleet of any given airline, which in my view, is a valuable addition to information availability. Otherwise you just see a mass of aircraft listed with no indication of what is in the fleet or not (see EasyJet and Ryanair for instance, where the current/former status becomes obviously important). It is simply not true that "aircraft images are almost always of aircraft in service", look at any of the large current airlines to see that. On the contrary maintenance is not that difficult as changes in aircraft status are not always frequent (7 to 10 years in many cases, as leases expire etc). I contend this is a valuable and useful addition and should be maintained Ardfern (talk) 16:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- While knowing what aircraft are in service with an airline is indeed very valuable information, Commons is not the place for that. Instead, Wikipedia and Wikidata are far better suited to hold this information. Commons categories are for curating media, not maintaining data like current fleet status. Josh (talk) 18:28, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: In the case of Nouvelair I would contend that it is more informative and valuable to know that only 6 out of 17 Airbus A320 are current, than seeing a block of 17 aircraft with no indication if they are current or not. I would also contend that it is useful to know that Nouvelair no longer has Airbus A321s in the fleet, otherwise the impression would be that they were current. If we want to maintain the aviation files as something informative and a valuable research resource then current/former should be maintained. Ardfern (talk) 16:59, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose: Without these categories it is impossible to see the current (or former) fleet of any given airline, which in my view, is a valuable addition to information availability. Otherwise you just see a mass of aircraft listed with no indication of what is in the fleet or not (see EasyJet and Ryanair for instance, where the current/former status becomes obviously important). It is simply not true that "aircraft images are almost always of aircraft in service", look at any of the large current airlines to see that. On the contrary maintenance is not that difficult as changes in aircraft status are not always frequent (7 to 10 years in many cases, as leases expire etc). I contend this is a valuable and useful addition and should be maintained Ardfern (talk) 16:41, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Unmanageable, unmaintainable category. Commons is a repository, non an historical archive. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 08:01, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete I think, that over time this information will become outdated if no one controls it, so we shouldn't have to use these categories. --DS28 (talk) 07:08, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
This category discussion has been closed. | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Consensus | No consensus | |||
Actions | none, but any categories not maintained can be referred to CfD for deletion | |||
Participants | ||||
Closed by | Josh (talk) 05:25, 22 December 2022 (UTC) |
This was debated in Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/04/Category:Ireland and I moved it, however there has been some debate about how to implement the change across the sub categories, see my talk page. I thought the categories could be split on an as/when basis but it was pointed out that the country needs the categories more. The countries of Europe still uses plain Ireland so they currently can still be found via that. Crouch, Swale (talk) 14:01, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- Hello. What is happening with this. There are multiple threads opened on this topic; including the vilage pump, mover's talk page and key template involved. None of these threads seem to include a proposal on a solution. The first and priority problem that needs (IMO) to be addressed is the fact that Template:Countries of Europe (derived presumably from Module:Countries/Europe) no longer links to the correct subject. If that issue cannot be addressed, then -frankly- the previous change should likely be reviewed. At least until a longer-term solution can be found. Otherwise, in honesty, the cure proposed in the previous discussion is proving significantly more impactful than the (relatively) minor symptoms it was proposed to address. For myself I do not have enough experience with the syntax in use in Module:Countries/Europe to being to offer a solution. (FYI - I opted to stay out of the original discussion. On the basis that similar and endless proposals and a decade of debate on the EN WP nearly precipitated my departure from the project. But I had hoped that someone had considered at least the initial technical implications to this move. If that hasn't been the case, and if there are no solutions forthcoming, then the outcome and actions arising from the original move may need to be revisited). Looking forward to Guliolopez (talk) 23:00, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
- I started this discussion as the discussion wasn't going far on my talk page and the VP didn't get anything. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:58, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
- Maybe the countries of Europe template can be temporarily changed to link to categories for both Ireland and (the) Republic of Ireland. Something similar was done with the French region nav template when the regions were getting redefined and renamed. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:31, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Auntof6: , I had created this and this template just because sometimes the sports nationalities don't match with the administrative borders.... -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 08:24, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- I have (I think) fixed this issue with the Countries of Europe template (so that it links to the category [now] associated with the state, rather than the category now associated with the island [but previously associated with the state]). Other issues (significant ones) still remain however. Namely that Category:Republic of Ireland remains woefully under-populated - given that ALL of the sub-cats have remained as they are. And, as noted above, we have a situation where (in an apparent attempt to solve a relatively small categorisation problem), an even bigger categorisation problem has been created. If no solutions can be offered or implemented then I, for myself, will be recommending a reversion of the change. As, in my view, and (seemingly the original proposers view) the current situation is worse than where we were before.... Guliolopez (talk) 23:44, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with the split between Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland; the name Ireland related only to the Republic was problematic (i.e. the Ireland rugby union national team represents the island, not the republic); Ireland alone can be used for cultural issues (ie Poets from Ireland, no matter whether they come from Belfast or from Dublin). .. SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 08:22, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Guliolopez: Does your change take into account the "the" in "in the Republic of Ireland" ? It doesn't seem to be working... - Themightyquill (talk) 11:06, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- Themightyquill. Probably not. Where are you seeing a problem? (FYI - Mine was a very quick fix. To account for the most obvious of problems. Specifically that some templates, like the top-level Template:Countries of Europe, were left pointing to the categories relating to the island rather than those relating to the state. I'm not familiar enough with all of the derived templates [or the syntax involved] to propose solutions to all of them. Short of rolling back the move.) Guliolopez (talk) 11:40, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I'm not seeing it actually work anywhere. Category:Automobile driving in the Republic of Ireland for instance. I notice that in Module:Countries/Europe, "Czech Republic" is followed by qid = 'Q213', the = true, }, but Ireland is not. I have no idea how that module works so I'm not going to touch it. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:46, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Ladies and gentlemen, I just noticed something that is not good. The category Ireland (island) redirects to Ireland. We must keep separated the island from the administrative entity known as Ireland (or Éire, or Republic of Ireland or whatever). Thus:
- Ireland (island) becomes Ireland and the current category Ireland becomes Republic of Ireland (but I'm dubious: at UN the country's common name in English is Ireland, not Republic of Ireland)
- The category Ireland (island) is restored and it contains both Ireland and Northern Ireland which, in turn, will contain all that must be necessarily categorized (for administrative, political, etc reasons) under the categories that identify the country; under Ireland (island) will be categorized all that related to the whole Ireland (language, culture, all-Ireland sports like rugby union and league, etc.
What cannot be done is assuming that the Republic of Ireland is the whole island of Ireland like is it now on Commons. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 11:04, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
- Hi Blackcat. What you describe (Category:Ireland (island) for the island, and Category:Ireland for the state) was the way it used to be. Following Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/04/Category:Ireland, this arrangement (a longstanding status quo) was changed. To what we have today. Which, whatever about the imperfect nature of what went before, has left all kinds of other inconsistencies. Without a concerted effort from someone to identify and fix the problems (NOT IT!), or to revert the change (which was progressed without full consideration on the impacts), I'm not sure there will be a natural resolution.... Guliolopez (talk) 00:04, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
- Hello @Guliolopez: , that discussion summarizes the very flaw of Commons: mirror on Commons the dynamics of en.wiki. Commons is a multinational project that incidentally uses the English language. Someone instead thinks that is the media extension of en.wiki and attempts to transfer here the (sometime bad) habits from there. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 09:46, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Maybe we should file a bot request of see if someone with AWB can move/split the various categories. Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:35, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
- Hi to all, @Crouch, Swale: , @Guliolopez: , @Blackcat: , i'm gonna need to work with the Category:Motorsports in Ireland. First i'm gonna to verify if there's something abouth Northern Ireland into it. When i'm done this work and i found no problem about what mentioned in the previous statement, i would move the entire category to a new one: Category:Motorsports in the Republic of Ireland and put that into a brand new one: Category:Sports in the Republic of Ireland by sport. Do you think it should be a proper job? Important: i don't wanna move the category Category:Sports in Ireland by sport for any reason (i.e. rugby and other sports that i don't work with usually and/or that i have a minimal knowledge of can be a problem). Thanks--Lou6977 (talk) 13:58, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Lou6977: Your recent edit added some pings, but I don't think those people will get them. That's because pings only work if you add a signature timestamp (such as the usual four tildes) in the same edit as the ping. At least that's how it used to work: if it's different now, let me know. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Auntof6: , previously i forgot to "ping" you too bu you are the only one which replied haha. Watching my signature i see no difference from yours and i get your last ping. Did you get mine, now?--Lou6977 (talk) 08:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Lou6977: Sorry for the late reply, but yes, I did get this ping. :) --Auntof6 (talk) 06:18, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Crouch, Swale: , @Guliolopez: , @Blackcat: , now should work--Lou6977 (talk) 09:02, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- Yes in most cases there should be a "Foo in Ireland" containing "Foo in the Republic of Ireland" and "Foo in Northern Ireland" an obvious exception is if a category is a proper noun such as Category:Flag of Ireland since that's its actual name even though its only for the ROI (although we don't currently have a category for it at the moment anyway). Is it possible to create a script of even have a bot helping with these splits? Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- I get stuck very soon with Category:Rally Ireland :D but i think i can manage it. Another thing: in the Template:Countries of Europe i think we have to delete "Ireland" in the code because it's not a country but a geographical entity only, not political. --Lou6977 (talk) 21:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- You don't need to "delete" Ireland from the code, because it will properly select "Republic of ireland" first if it exists, before pointing to "Ireland" if it exists, and if you use the "all=*" parameter, the first listed item is "Republic of Ireland" (but you can create both where needed). So there's no ambiguity at all, name the categories properly, and if you have both make "Republic of Ireland a subcategory of "Ireland" (and not the reverse!).
- This is not specific tyo Ireland but happens in frequent cases of homonimies where we need to distinguish them, either by containment (where it makes sens), or by a disambiguation page (containing no member page but only links in the wikicode to the separate entries (with names disambiguated by some conventional suffix)...
- So a good solution to the debate is to make "Ireland" always an disambiuation page, and use "Republic of Ireland" and "Ireland island" (and no confusion will ever be possible).
- Note that "Republic of Ireland" is also an official terminology (the long form) even if it is frequently abbreviated to "Ireland" in most cases, including in sports (like rugby with unified teams, but not in the Olympic games where "Republic of Ireland" is used and there's no unified team because Northern Ireland is represented by the United Kingdom), or culture, or many historic official usage when it was a single entity, or in modern usage for many topics in economy, politics, events). In all formal documents of the United Nations and the European Union and all treaties, the long form is always used to name the parties, but this does not exclude them of speaking about "Ireland" as a whole, notably for the questions related to recent conflicts (that people in the two parts no longer want to see coming back: they want now good relationship but don't want the restoration of a physical border on land and constant controls, that would be caused by a "hard" Brexit). verdy_p (talk) 06:39, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- Yes in most cases there should be a "Foo in Ireland" containing "Foo in the Republic of Ireland" and "Foo in Northern Ireland" an obvious exception is if a category is a proper noun such as Category:Flag of Ireland since that's its actual name even though its only for the ROI (although we don't currently have a category for it at the moment anyway). Is it possible to create a script of even have a bot helping with these splits? Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Auntof6: , previously i forgot to "ping" you too bu you are the only one which replied haha. Watching my signature i see no difference from yours and i get your last ping. Did you get mine, now?--Lou6977 (talk) 08:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Lou6977: Your recent edit added some pings, but I don't think those people will get them. That's because pings only work if you add a signature timestamp (such as the usual four tildes) in the same edit as the ping. At least that's how it used to work: if it's different now, let me know. --Auntof6 (talk) 08:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
@Crouch, Swale, Guliolopez, Blackcat, Lou6977, Auntof6, and Verdy p: Closed (subsumed into Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/02/Category:Ireland vs Republic of Ireland category scheme) Josh (talk) 18:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
Propose to rename to Category:Dove (toiletries): the current name is ambigous. GZWDer (talk) 00:44, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- A name change sounds reasonable. I believe there is a line of books on tape called Dove. Maybe something like "Dove (toiletry company)" or "Dove (Unilever brand)" so that it could include the things that don't actually show toiletries. --Auntof6 (talk) 01:03, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
- Juiced lemon created this category and they prefered to accept the corresponding names of en:wp. And at en:wp the corresponding article was indeed originally named Dove (brand) before it was moved to Dove (toiletries) as there appear to exist two brands of this name, the other being Dove (chocolate). Hence, I would support a rename to Category:Dove (toiletries) as proposed. --AFBorchert (talk) 06:00, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
stale discussion. @GZWDer and AFBorchert: solution per enwiki, ie moving to Category:Dove (toiletries). But I guess at the moment the nominated category consists of files about two brands? If so, the moving of files into the new category is not trivial--Estopedist1 (talk) 19:40, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Moved. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:30, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Can we get rid of all these? There are 43 categories here all created for just two files. The files are both in 43 categories. None of the categories has any other files, and it is unlikely they will have enough to justify them as subcategories of Category:Cladograms of Anatidae. If we somehow collect say 15 or 20 more cladograms that include a small duck genus, we can then create a subcategory, right? Until then these two files will be adequately categorized in that parent category. This is a bizarre use of the category system. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 01:05, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Ruff tuff cream puff: New cladograms are published so frequently that for any given taxon there are many which include it. Given this and the fact that the phylogenetic hypotheses depicted in the cladogram cannot be copyrighted, it is more or less inevitable that any given taxon will eventually accrue a large number of freely licensed cladograms. In light of this, it is easiest to simply categorize the cladograms as they are encountered. As more and more are uploaded it gradually creates a "cladogram of cladograms" wherein one may find the previously published topologies of any location within the tree of life. There's nothing weird about that. It's a natural outgrowth of the hierarchical way cladograms themselves are structured and the nice synergy this has with the way Wikimedia categories work. Abyssal (talk) 01:28, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for explaining that. It's just that there aren't usually so many categories created in advance and then left unused. A lot of these from the plant categories have been deleted because they aren't being used yet and have become clutter. They will work well when more files are uploaded and have that nice hierarchy. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 18:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
- OK. I'll try to upload some more of cladograms for these. I've got a half dozen or so papers sitting on my hard drive I can base new images on to flesh out the categories with. Abyssal (talk) 01:19, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for explaining that. It's just that there aren't usually so many categories created in advance and then left unused. A lot of these from the plant categories have been deleted because they aren't being used yet and have become clutter. They will work well when more files are uploaded and have that nice hierarchy. Ruff tuff cream puff (talk) 18:46, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
stale discussion. @Ruff tuff cream puff and Abyssal: Upmerge and Delete. The affected files to be upmerged into some higher rank (above genus), compare eg Category:Cladograms of Arthropoda--Estopedist1 (talk) 20:15, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
Deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Considered the same category as Category:PNR Metro Commuter Line, and must be merged. TagaSanPedroAkoTalk -> 22:51, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- The english wikipedia article is currently at en:PNR Metro Commuter Line and lists the "South" version as an old name. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:35, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message and diligence in the Categories; I respectfully submit to your sound discretion to pick the one Category and merge the photos thereto, since the 2 Categories deal with the same things; at age 64, I am faced with the record one month+ cloudy skies due to monsoon rains, let's see the sun;
- Query: First, after uploading 1.02 million photos in Commons, let me tell thee that I never had any listening to any photography seminary or teach-ins here; I repeatedly voiced that for me, 3-5 pm sun with blue or little white clouds is the best for landscapes and sceneries of roads, schools, landmarks and churches; I am not referrring to Balite Drive or the like gloomy must photos in heavy clouds to depict the scene as in horror or memory lanes; my question, is: what is the consensus or average and general like of photographers here in Commons as to what is the best, cloudy to gloomy or sun with blue sky and a little white clouds; Second, I am trying my best to finish the only nearest to my place Bulacan, landmarks and churches remaining, that is - Las Piñas, Parañaque, Pasay, Dasmariñas-Silang Cavite, Taguig City, Dasmarinas including their imporant Barangays; sincerely, Judge Florentino Floro, Florentino Floro Judgefloro 14:00, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message and diligence in the Categories; I respectfully submit to your sound discretion to pick the one Category and merge the photos thereto, since the 2 Categories deal with the same things; at age 64, I am faced with the record one month+ cloudy skies due to monsoon rains, let's see the sun;
Deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Speedy delete unnecessary intersection index Josh (talk) 07:26, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
Stale discussion. @Joshbaumgartner: because of the subcategories, the deletion is not trivial. Could you explain the situation?--Estopedist1 (talk) 21:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: On re-think, I agree with you, it is not trivial, and in fact 'by by' categories are without their value, so withdrawing the proposal for deletion. However, the category should be renamed to Aircraft by country of location by operator to match the rename of the parent ('country of location' was deemed better than 'location country'). Josh (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Procedural close, category is already deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2024 (UTC)