I think both categories should stay, it's not just about the name of the boat! But also the function it performs and also where that is, so Lienden and Rhenen and not just the Rhine! Antoine.01overleg(Antoine)22:28, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Stunteltje and Antoine for your reactions. Let's break this discussion down into parts:
Should this category exists at all, no matter what the name should be?
When the category should stay, what should be the name? Should it have "feather" or "ferry" in the category name?
What should be the parent categories?
Do you agree that these are the questions that we discuss here?
My answers and suggestions: @1) I agree with Antoine: we should have two categories, one for the boat and one for the ferry service. The ferry service will continue (I hope) when this boat will be replaced by another. @2) As far as I can see, "feather" is in Common categories only used in the meaning of the Dutch "vogelveren" (bird's feathers) not as "pontveren" (ferries). So I would suggest to replace "feather" by "Ferry" in the name. @3) I think the current parent categories are OK: Category:Ferries across the Rhine in the Netherlands, Category:Rhenen and Category:Lienden (I removed Category:Ferries of the Netherlands because it is redundant). They together describe what the category is about and what the location of the ferry is.
--JopkeB (talk) 08:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Scope? Is a one-off friendly football match really so relevant as to have pictures of each participant? All images from flickr, which is the appropriate place for such a collection. Delete all. 62.216.208.917:15, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Ferries of" are ships registered in a certain country. "Ferries in" show ships located in a certain country. So these categories cannot be merged. A redirect is not correct. Ferries of the Netherlands can be located in other countries, e.g. at a foreign shipyard. --Stunteltje (talk) 11:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Stunteltje, for your reaction. I checked all the subcategories and none of them was registered outside the Netherlands and they were/are all sailing in the Netherlands. There was one that was renamed later to foreign names (Category:Prinses Irene (ship, 1960)) and might not be anymore "of the Netherlands" after the name change. And there is one (Category:Prinses Juliana (ship, 1909)) that was not even built in the Netherlands. Moreover all the other categories of countries have a redirect to Category in Country X. So I suggest to move all the subcategories to Category:Ferries in the Netherlands and make the redirect. If ever there would be a ferry "of the Netherlands" that is not registered "in the Netherlands" this category can be easily reused again. --JopkeB (talk) 14:12, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The painting I am not sure about. It has the flag of the Netherlands, as has the ship next to it, and it might be on the Zuiderzee or the Waddenzee. The land in the distance may be the dunes of a Waddeneiland. So yes, I would take the risk. Thank you Stunteltje, for your critical remarks. --JopkeB (talk) 09:15, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is not in line with the standard here. You placed the line between only ships now. Category:Ferries by line does not have a country-category and it is very difficult to make one. A line can be driven by a foreign company. And physically can a line exist, driven by many companies. Dover-Calais, for example. Stunteltje (talk) 10:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When I see a photo of a ferry, I would like to know where it is sailing, on which river and between what places. And I would like to see all other photos of that same line. A category with that information would be perfect. So I would like to keep Category:Ferries across the Rhine in the Netherlands and all the lines of ships in it. What standard are you talking about? Many ferries in the Netherlands are categorised on location. How would you be able to keep an overview if you put them all in one category Category:Ferries by line, without a subdivision by country? We do not per se need to know the nationality of the owner, just where the ferry is sailing. And I would be happy to make a Category:Ferries by line in the Netherlands if that would solve this issue. --JopkeB (talk) 15:19, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And how would you know, via the Commons category structure, that Category:Rhenense ferry is about a ferry in the Netherlands, and even better, across the Rhine in the Netherlands? I should not be forced to go to Wikipedia to have an overview of ferry lines in the Netherlands, Commons should on its own have a good category structure with all the information about the images that are in Commons. --JopkeB (talk) 02:50, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose #1 above. "vehicle in country" categories are a subcategory of "vehicle of country". If a vessel is not permanently located within a country, the category for that vehicle should not be placed the 'in country' category. Unless every ferry that has ever been built in, registered in, or owned or operated by the Netherlands or a Netherlands-based entity has never left Netherlands territorial waters and is permanently fixtured within the Netherlands, then the two categories are not congruent and should not be merged. Josh (talk) 07:46, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose # 1: I agree Josh. It's the same case as "trains of" and "trains in" categories (a train built in Germany as a German product might be seen in the Netherlands) or even "flags of" and "flags in" categories. If you want to merge, you have to do it the other way round as proposed: Ferries of the Netherlands include ferries made in the Netherlands as well as ferries seen in the Netherlands. --Eweht (talk) 23:19, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
@Lalupa: Non capisco. Ci sono delle regole su Commons, talvolta difficili da rispettare (è successo anche a me, ovviamente). Perché ignorare che quest'opera è protetta da copyright? Non vuol essere un attacco personale, ci mancherebbe. Saluti.--Carnby (talk) 06:13, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Misnamed - there is no 1957 3500 called AM101.158. 101.058 was built in 1957 but issued a completion date of March 1958. Started a new category for that car. mr.choppers (talk)-en-03:43, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Would like to see it in another format (definetely not as a category), this status quo is very bad. You ask 100 Million people, you get the same amount of answers of what's weird or not. --Mateus2019 (talk) 16:19, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In this category are a lot of photos that by the letter of the definition do not belong in this category because there are no people on these photos, let alone in a natural position. I would like to remove these photos from this category. Objections? JopkeB (talk) 13:16, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Another alternative cat to develop would be cat Category:Street_scenes_by_country. A lot of photos were found just in Cityscapes plus Streetscape (far to general for local shots, plus where is the plural s?) and have been moved to Street_scenes in Germany, for example. From there still to be sorted by city or innercity location. What do you think about the use of the cat with this name: Street_scenes ? Does streetphotography with people in it go in People of NN, if there is not a special cat by city yet? tx Peli (talk) 12:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There were no objections to removing photos from this category that do not belong in this category according to the definition. I have removed them.--JopkeB (talk) 12:47, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, i agree that these files by Fons are generally overcategorized. Like having sunlight as cat won't help people find a mac bike sign in Amsterdam. I think he should be talked to and asked to use no generals at all but create and use just the most specific cats by location. He should read the notes about overcategoraisation. Peli (talk) 12:51, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, Peli, I was making the changes in Category:Street photography in the Netherlands, and did not expect any changes in this discussion anymore, so I closed it, without looking carefully. I agree that there should be a lot of development in many categories. A definition would already be a great help. Please feel free to start a discussion about a definition, or propose changes to a group of categories, but please, in a seperate discussion, because this one is closed. Ping me, and I'll join such a discussion. And before I saw your remark about Fons, I already made a new item on his talk page about this matter. Thanks for "meedenken"! --JopkeB (talk) 13:57, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
This is not a proper name for a category because it combines three places that don't have any common geographical point. The files in it are images of bridges. I'm not sure if they're all for the same bridge. I doubt that the category name is that of a bridge, but if it is then this is not an unidentified bridge, which is the only categorization for this category. Auntof6 (talk) 06:08, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I found some images of the Yaquina Bay Bridge whose names indicated they were part of this set and were taken on the same dates. Therefore, I moved these images to Category:Yaquina Bay Bridge. Batch uploads of groups of images with no identifying information tend to linger in high-level categories for a long time, and individual images often get placed in different categories. So, my intention for creating this category was to keep these images together, so that someone would eventually identify the bridge, rename this category, and place it in appropriate categories. This category can be deleted, and the discussion closed. Waz8 (talk) 05:12, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominate for deletion. Referred to a fake/fictitious coat of arms. Cats re heraldry are for legitimate heraldry only. Use Category:Special or fictional coats of arms Lobsterthermidor (talk) 11:48, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will always oppose any CfD request for "deletion as empty" when it's done by emptying the category immediately beforehand, then not mentioning or linking the removed content: File:Personal Arms Of Wikipe-tan.png
@Brianjd: I agree, I think how it worked is that nomination for deletion was an after-thought of mine after I had removed the image from the category, not a pre-meditated move. I should have restored the image. I think "Objects in heraldry" of any sort require to have at least one example within the sphere of regulated heraldry, i.e. valid/legal heraldry governed by an official body such as the College of Arms in England. Else we will get "tea-cosies in heraldry", etc. There is already a wonderful variety of objects in valid heraldry, let's not trash the value of those by mixing them with pseudo-heraldry invented by who knows whom. So I would suggest restricting "Category:Wikipedia in heraldry" to membership of "Category:Special or fictional coats of arms" only, as no example as yet exists within the sphere of valid heraldry showing "Wikipedia". Heraldry is not a joke subject, not a collection of mere logos, it is a serious academic topic, governed by heraldic law (in Europe at least, the USA seems to be the heraldic Wild-West). Logos used for marketing or publicity purposes are not "heraldry".Lobsterthermidor (talk) 11:22, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lobsterthermidor It seems like the issue of how to run the CfD has been resolved. I will leave it to users more familiar with heraldry to discuss the broader issue of how heraldry categories should work. Brianjd (talk) 12:24, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
源義信, This is was done by our infamous friend "Betabum" (A.K.A. "Musée Annam"), initially I thought you were him until I noticed how competent you are, this type of incompetent categorisation is his signature style. While he does a lot of good edits I'd advise you to closely watch his edits as he randomly categorises things in ways that don't make sense, he doesn't know how to properly upload files (either license or the fact that you can't overwrite a file with a completely different image). -- — Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 10:57, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
May I ask if the contents of those articles about political parties of Vietnam he created or edited are real or he made them up? I have noticed that there are a large number of flag files and articles on Commons and on Wikipedia in many languages, but I honestly cannot tell how reliable they are. On the one hand, there is not much information about these parties, and on the other hand, the massive editing done by a large number of his accounts makes it difficult for me to figure out the edition history of these pages.
@源義信: , "Annam Digital Library (An-Nam Điện-số Thư-quán) hay Annam Museum (An-Nam Bác-vật quán) là trang lưu-trữ các kiến-thức "uyên-bác" liên quan tới An-Nam-quốc và các nước lân-bang từng được thêm vào Wikipedia mà tôi từng chạm-trán". - Thành viên:Lệ Xuân, he is a clown 🤡. But in all seriousness, regarding the flags I had to double-check everything and found that with political parties he was largely reliable. For example, a flag attributed to the Cần Lao Party he added was often deleted because it was unsourced, but later I found an academic source backing it up. But regarding historical flags of Việt Nam... Not so much, Musée Annam (powerword: Ngọc Gao; known at the Enwiki as "Unserefahne", at the Viwiki as "C" and has two (2) whole sock categories here) is officially considered to be a long-term abuser and he's globally banned 🚫, but here at the Wikimedia Commons I would describe him as being "simply sloppy" (for example this very category), well, no... "Sloppy" isn't perhaps the right word, "incompetent" is more accurate. He actually has an understanding of Classical Chinese and can consult primary sources so some of his additions to Vietnamese history are actually quite valuable, a lot of his uploads equally so. The main issue I have with his content is sourcing, I would describe his style of editing as "Just trust me, bro!!!"-style editing where he will add information and won't provide the sources to back this information up, sometimes he does add sources but then when you look into those sources they are either based on incorrect information or they don't back up what he says at all. Still, at times he does add sources which are reliable and whenever he adds something I believe that it should be scrutinised rather than blatantly deleted, otherwise you'll get situations like going from this... to this. 😑😑😑
When I started getting interested in Vietnamese topics I started because I uploaded a document where the depicted coat of arms of the State of Vietnam was different from Wikipedia's, then I started doing research into historical coats of arms and emblems of Vietnam and expanded it to include flags and seals only to find out that a lot of the time a flag or coat of arms was historically uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons (99% (ninety-nine percent) of the time by Musée Annam) and then deleted because he was the one who uploaded it. I can say what my largest frustrations with this user are, it isn't that he constantly calls me "a stupid dog from the Netherlands" then tells me to "go fuck your mother" and "commit suicide", nor that he relentlessly sexually harassed user "Lệ Xuân", I think that both she and I have laughed quite a bit at those immature antics, no, it is mostly 3 (three) things. (1): He often doesn't provide sources for his claims. The whole reason he keeps saying all those things above to me is because at the English-language Wikipedia article "List of flags of Vietnam" he removed a flag claiming that it was a fantasy, I asked him for a source and from that point onwards the verbal abuse started, that's it I asked him for a source that proved that the flag he added years ago wass fake, this lead me to make a section debunking his claims with reliable sources, because more often than not he doesn't invent his claims but he's copying wrong (sometimes academic) information. (2) Something I like to call "Musée Annamisms", for example he was born in the Province of "Hadinh" when I saw you on my watchlist yesterday you added an image to symbols of "Angiang", bullshit like this. It's not wrong, such spellings are rarely used (but not never), but these should be redirects, not main titles. And most frustratingly of all (3): he has an ARMY of haters that will delete anything he adds. My main frustration with him isn't even him, rather it's the Deletionists who just tag everything he does for deletion without thinking about it.
I did check out his edits at the Mandarin Chinese-language Wikipedia and noticed that they were largely the same as in other languages, filled with antiquated terms, he might use a translation machine (he claims to be fluent in Russian and Spanish, but as someone who speaks Spanish and had a Russian ex that taught me quite a bit of the language, I can safely say that he speaks neither). Usually you will recognise his socks at the Wikimedia Commons because of their unorthodox categorisation such as the category nominated here, he has an extremely basic understanding of English, possibly none (that he uses a translation machine) and he once bragged to me that all of my edits were useless because "he had people who speak English look at them" implying that he doesn't speak the language.
Lệ Xuân and I had to clean up a lot after him but we usually didn't tag his useful contributions for deletion. My main advice to you would be be skeptical about everything he does, but don't automatically assume that he's wrong. He is valuable because often he finds primary sources nobody else does and adds them, I also didn't report his "Betabum" sock at the English-language Wikipedia because he added lots of valuable articles about South Vietnamese artists, I had hoped that his works wouldn't get deleted, but then he fell into a honey pot 🍯 again and outed himself, even a noob that was new at Wikipedia immediately could tell that he was a Musée Annam sock, it is literally impossible for him to flow under your radar, so you'll probably encounter him plenty of times on your watchlist.
Addendum, also I usually call him "Musée Annam" because it's the most easily identifiable name for him. To be fair, it's also the first sock of him I encountered as user "Artix Krieger" asked me to investigate him, but overall the name fits, one (1) it is an implication that a lot of his contributions are essentially "to build a museum dedicated to Annam" (Việt Nam before 1945), he also pushes the name "Annam" a lot, like he had a sock called the "Annam Digital Library" and the only thing that sock did was just randomly add a category called the "Annam Digital Library" to files at the Wikimedia Commons without much context, claiming that "The Annam Digital Library is a youth project for the youth of Vietnam to rediscover their culture" and he added basically any category he ever worked with to it, it was completely random. I honestly still have to laugh whenever I think about it. He also pushes the names "Annam" and "Imperial Annam" wherever possible. He also has uploaded countless of valuable works that have either disappeared from the internet or from private collections to the public domain, so he earned his "Musée" moniker. He has a different username (two (2) here in fact) at different Wikimedia websites, at the English-language Wikipedia I will usually call him "Unserefahne" (German for "Our flag") and he usually edits articles related to Vietnamese flags, but I've fixed those articles and have done a lot of trouble debunking a lot of his claims there. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 08:41, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Voorstel: hernoem deze categorie naar Category:Herdenking April-Mei stakingen in Hengelo, 2022 (met een redirect). Redenen: 1) De foto's zijn alleen van de herdenking in Hengelo in 2022. 2) Als bovenliggende categorie is Category:2022 in Hengelo, Overijssel toegevoegd. Dus het is van tweeën één: òf die Hengelo-categorie wordt weer verwijderd, zodat deze categorie ook voor soortgelijke herdenkingen in andere jaren/plaatsen gebruikt kan worden, òf de Hengelo-categorie blijft en deze categorie wordt hernoemd. JopkeB (talk) 03:44, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ik zie je punt. De bedoeling van het aanmaken van deze categorie is dat er een verzamelplek is voor (komende) foto's van herdenkingen van de April-Mei stakingen. Niet alleen die in Hengelo. Dan zou dus de bovenliggende categorie 2022 in Hengelo, Overijssel verwijderd kunnen worden. Mx Lucy (talk) 16:54, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This category has been kept as a main category where later on images of other rememberances of the April-May strikes of 1943 can be stored. There is a new subcategory for the rememberance in Hengelo, 2022, for the photos that were in the main category. --JopkeB (talk) 06:20, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
I'd prefer just Brandon Lewis, I reckon this one is primary, the other one can take a disambiguation tag. If not, "(politician)" is preferable to "MP". LookLook36 (talk) 20:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
looks like it. if you google ( Brandon Lewis -mp -parliament -minister -secretary ), plenty of people share the same name. it's possible more Brandon Lewis will get their cats in future.
but maybe we can hold this off until 2024. who knows if this guy might become PM or home/finance/foreign secretary. he would then surely dominate this name. XD
Oppose I think that in a "retirement home" the residents/inhabitants can do a lot themselves. If they need (extra) help/care, they can ask for it, but most of the time they won't. In a "nursing home" the care given to the inhabitants is much more intense; they need nursing every day, several times a day. So, there is a difference and I would like that to be reflected in different categories. Perhaps we could make the descriptions more clearly. --JopkeB (talk) 18:49, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
second JopkeB. nursing home is more specific, where caregivers take care of often but not always demented or paralysed people. RZuo (talk) 15:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The first: nursing home (Q837142), Einrichtung zur Betreuung pflegebedürftiger Menschen, Behindertenwohnheim, Behindertenheim, Altenpflegeheim, Altersheim, Altenheim, Pflegezentrum
and the later: retirement home (Q22908), Wohneinrichtung zur Betreuung und Pflege alter Menschen, Altenwohn- und Pflegeheim, Feierabendheim, Altersheim, Betagtenzentrum, Seniorenresidenz, Seniorenwohnsitz, Seniorenheim, Seniorenstift, Altenwohnheim
I think in cases of doubt, like this one, we on Commons follow the English meaning of words. So:
For nursing home (Q837142): nursing home, long term residential care facility. Nursing homes are used by people who do not need to be in a hospital, but cannot be cared for at home.
For retirement home (Q22908): retirement homes, housing facility intended for senior citizens, residential homes for senior citizens. A retirement home differs from a nursing home primarily in the level of medical care given.
I withdraw my nomination I now understand better the difference. Can someone please check the wikidata definitions (esp. the German ones) and eventually reorganize the category trees under both root categories. In detail it is difficult as you have to consult the organizations' homepages for each image. best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 13:15, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK, Herzi Pinki. Since you are speaking far better German than I do, I suggest you try yourself to adjust the German Wikidata definitions. At first sight the category trees under both root categories look good, but I did not look into the grandchildren. Maybe the definitions could be worded a little more sharply, with links to each other and an explanation. JopkeB (talk) 14:50, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
acc. to [1]:
Allgemeinsprachlich wird Altenheim als Bezeichnung des Oberbegriffs für jede Form der stationären Fremdversorgung im hohen Alter gebraucht. Fachsprachlich ist das Altenheim dagegen das mittlere Glied zwischen Altenwohnheim und Altenpflegeheim in einer nach dem Schweregrad der Hilfe- und Pflegebedürftigkeit der Bewohner differenzierenden Dreigliedrigkeit stationärer Altenpflegeeinrichtungen:
Altenwohnheim – Der Bereich Wohnen hat hier das größte Gewicht – andere Leistungen werden nur in geringem Umfang angeboten. (the focus is on dwelling, additional services are not essential (except maybe pools, tennis courts, etc.))
Altenheim – Hierbei besteht eine (noch) geringe Pflegebedürftigkeit, das selbstbestimmte Leben überwiegt. Dienstleistungen wie Säubern und Aufräumen im Zimmer, Speisenversorgung werden regelmäßig in Anspruch genommen. Die Bewohner führen keinen eigenen Haushalt. (focus on self controlled living, few care service. But there are services that replace the leading of a household.)
Altenpflegeheim – Die stationäre Pflege ausgeprägt pflegebedürftiger Menschen steht in diesen Einrichtungen rund um die Uhr im Vordergrund. (the focus is on care 7/24)
while the first will match retirement home and the last will match nursing home, what should be the category for the stuff in between?
acc. to [2]: Assisted living facilities, memory care facilities and nursing homes can all be referred to as retirement homes. (???) thus nursing homes is a subcategory of retirement homes.
-- confused Herzi Pinki (talk) 17:29, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, wenn ich deutsch antworte. Allgemein: Das Wort "alt" wird derzeit prinzipiell vermieden. Der Fond Soziales Wien unterscheidet zwischen "Wohn- und Pflegehäuser mit Schwerpunkt Pflege" und "Wohn- und Pflegehäuser mit Schwerpunkt Wohnen", analog spricht die Caritas von "Langzeitpflege" und "Betreutem Wohnen". Meiner Meinung nach entspricht das nursing home dem Pflegeheim (hier ist Pflege includiert) und das retirement home dem betreuten Wohnen (wo es Barrierefreiheit in Bad und WC etc. aber keine Pflege-Betreuung gibt). Wie schon oben angesprochen gibt es da kein schwarz-weiß, sondern eine breite Grauzone mit einem abgestuften Angebot, zB Betreubares Wohnen / Betreutes Wohnen / Pflege. Ich würde aber bei den 2 Kategorien bleiben. Der Trend geht derzeit zahlenmäßig stark in Richtung Pflegeheime (>> 50 %). Friedl 11 (talk) 19:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, ad (1) Alternativer Lebensraum: ja, sehe ich als Betreutes Wohnen, ad (2) Anpassungen: Wikidata ist mir ziemlich fremd, ich werde es versuchen, bitte Dich aber drübezuschauen ..., (3) Retirement homes in Carinthia werde ich mir anschauen, (4) die 50%-Aussage von mir bezieht sich auf die Anzahl von Betten (Pflegeheime sind meist groß) --Friedl 11 (talk) 06:20, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Acc. to definition, Retirement homes are not medical buildings. Check and reassignment now done for Carinthia, one federal state of Austria. Other administrative entities still missing this check. Still some open questions @JopkeB: best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 08:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, I am afraid that I am not an expert for nursing vs. retirement homes at all. At best I am a one-eyed in the land of the blind of categorizing on Commons and I know a little bit of many subjects. I think the two subjects (nursing homes and retirement homes) are two different kind of homes, perhaps it's a spectrum. Retirement homes are more residential buildings (often with extra services like meals, cleaning and social activities, and perhaps a nurse for emergency cases) and nursing homes are closer to hospitals in terms of nursing. I suggest only to add both categories when you really cannot make a choice, otherwise choose one of them. JopkeB (talk) 13:38, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Several users tend to want to rename categories as soon as the actual entity is renamed. However, older media files created prior to the renaming in the real world, are historically associated with the old name. It is recommended to keep the category with the old name and create the category with the new name as a superior category. --Clusternote (talk) 08:02, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Roundels" are the symbols, which are used by nations to mark their military aircrafts. Not every roundel is round. The current image file:F-FDTL.png is the official symbol on East Timorese military aircrafts as can be seen here. --JPF (talk) 06:14, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To distinguish the saint from others called "Martha" and the opera, I suggest to move this to "Saint Martha". Opening this request as there are a lot of subcats etc. I've found that the category naming of saints is inconsistent (sometimes it has Saint, sometimes it does not), I would suggest to add it in this case. -- Deadstar (msg) 10:37, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support yes. Make "Martha" a disambiguation category afterwards (Saint M., M. (given name), Ships named M., ...). Proceed similarly with other Saint categories that don't yet have "Saint". Enyavar (talk) 06:37, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know the concept of intersection in mathematics ? For example, the intersection "Cuteness∩Couples" means, its all elements are belong to both the set "Cuteness" and the set "Couples". Thus, if you create a new category Category:Cuteness couples that is equivalent to "Cuteness∩Couples", its definition is mathematically clarified. --Clusternote (talk) 11:33, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I question the practicality of this category. The other categories in Category:People by quantity may be meaningful, but looking at the files in this category, it doesn't seem terribly useful to me. It's used arbitrarily. Of course we have millions of images where there are no people to be seen - why add a few hundred of them to this category? We probably have tens or hundreds of thousands of images of buildings without people, so what's the significance of having, for example, File:AppuldurcombeHouseExterior.jpg and File:048 2015 07 12 Am Markt 1.jpg in this category? (For the latter, it's not even true, there's a person at the very left of the image). Why add File:Gods own country.jpg to this category, but not tens of thousands of other landscape pictures? - I think that the category could be meaningful if used in a very restrained way, that is, only for places and situations where it's uncommon and significant, something special, that there are zero people. But maybe we don't need it at all? Gestumblindi (talk) 20:34, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
either Delete or make it a {{Catcat}}. everything under Category:Empty that can fit a person inside, like empty bus, unoccupied new building, uninhabited island... would fall under this "0 people". rather useless cat. RZuo (talk) 15:49, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Gestumblindi: I agree that this category seems at first impractical, but that there may be a meaningful purpose for a category for images that specifically show an absence of something (in this case people). Of course, as currently set up as a quantity category, it clearly is not limited to such a purpose and strongly invites any file not depicting any people to be categorized here. Topical categories are supposed to categorize files based on what they depict, not on what they do not depict. Thus, if we are to retain this category, it should first be specifically defined to the limited scope appropriate, and should be renamed to reflect this limited scope (Category:Absence of people?) Josh (talk) 18:07, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, a category for something like "absence of people where people usually are expected" could make more sense, but maybe would still be difficult to handle... Gestumblindi (talk) 01:19, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We don't need a category for "zero animals" or "zero buildings" so I don't know what zero people accomplishes. No one is going to be looking for images of no persons. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Remove Category:Train halts; there are indeed a lot of photos showing empty halts, but not all, and theoretically they do not need to be empty (then there should be a Category:Empty train halts).
Categorize the files better, remove them from this category. (If an image has a human on it, we usually give it subcategories of Category:People with objects; if no humans are visible, such images may be categorized in the object category itself.)
Is there a difference between "Oreo cookies" and "Oreo brand sandwich cookies"? Are there oreo cookies that aren't sandwich cookies? Famartin (talk) 00:12, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(i know the creator of this cat. s/he wont respond. also s/he creates lots of often oddly named cats.)
i guess, s/he might want to use this for Oreo brand oreo cookies, that is, to distinguish the real oreo brand produced by nabisco, from the copycat versions by other factories, one of which even has its own enwp article Domino (cookie). oreo has become a generic name for this "white cream between two dark chocolate cookies" cookie, just like Post-it Note becomes the generic name of all little sticky pieces of paper.
in that case, i suggest the cat tree be reorganised like this:
"oreo cookies" as a generic name of these cookies, regardless of the brand or producer
"Oreo (brand)" for the nabisco brand of cookies (all files of the brand, including logos, ads, packaging, data...)
"Oreo (brand) cookies" or "Nabisco Oreo cookies" for nabisco Oreo-brand cookies (files of the actual cookies)
"oreo" redirects to "Oreo (brand)". "oreos" redirects to "oreo cookies".
Done: deleted as poorly defined; all images in this category were also already in the parent Category:Oreo cookies. --P 1 9 9✉01:17, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Is there any reason why very category around uses the official name "German Democratic Republic" but this category is not? GPSLeo (talk) 18:15, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Something totally different: Where should Protest signs be categorized when they are handled in preparation or aftermath of protests? --Enyavar (talk) 13:30, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Stale discussion without any obvious consensus. The linked talk page also does not have any consensus regarding the relationship between demonstrations and protests. So the only way to solve the big problem is to keep the Demonstrations and protests category, along with separate Political demonstrations and Protests categories. The main category will continue to cover stuff common to both demonstrations and protests, while the new subcategories will cover topics specific to demonstrations and protests, respectively. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 10:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Yes, therefore I proposed to merge the shorter and less precise Category:Congo at the Olympic Games into Category:Republic of the Congo at the Olympic Games. In fact it all was just about one single cat Category:Congo at the 2018 Summer Youth Olympics, by error created and now found at Category:Republic of the Congo at the 2018 Summer Youth Olympics. Now that Category:Congo at the Olympic Games is completely empty, it doesn't really matter if to change it to a category redirect or to merge it or to delete it. I propose to simply make a category redirect.ThomasPusch (talk) 20:05, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sbb1413 That's fine, I just wish when folks raise a CfD they would do so before making the changes. But this is not the first or last time for this. Josh (talk) 20:06, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
name of the category in singular, should be in plural;
is this category precise enough to exist in Commons? What should be included here? Every category about compound that is classified as VOC (which would be define as...? definition of VOC is not very helpful here)? Right now there are two files in this category (both not used and of very low quality).
I don't think using this category to contain other chemical compound categories would be useful. Nearly every low molecular weight organic compound (hundreds of categories, certainly) could fit that criteria. But I think this category could be useful in terms of categorizing files related to air quality. I've added a few more images to the category based on a quick search, to show how this category might look if properly utilized. I think it would be reasonable to Rename category to the plural Category:Volatile organic compoundsor perhaps, to emphasize a focus on the air quality aspect, to Category:Volatile organic compound monitoringwithdrawn per Leyo's comment below. Marbletan (talk) 17:22, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Infrogmation: The word "cobblestones" is an attempt at a literal translation of the European term, which includes a surface made of pieces of paving (from various materials), but not a cast pavement (asphalt, concrete etc.). It should mean a paving from wooden cubes ("wooden cobbles"), but not a floor from wooden boards (planks) or flat parquet blocks. According to my dictionary, the word paving should have a narrower meaning than pavement in this sense, but is it really so? Could "wooden paving" be more fitting? Are you sure that the term "wooden cobbles" is not used for this historical type of paving? You can find some occurrences by Google. --ŠJů (talk) 21:30, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I'm sure that this is not the actual term. (Trying to accurately categorize images on Wikimedia helped inspire me to get into 19th and 20th century street furniture history and terminology.) In recent decades "cobblestone" seems to have informally become a generic term used by non-experts for non-continuous types of pavements, especially historical - but in many cases that is not the correct term, either historically nor by modern people who work professionally with these materials. (Eg, brick streets are not "cobblestones", nor are stone sett pavements... but for now let's deal with wooden blocks and such.) Let's try to use accurate terms in Wikimedia. Wooden block pavement (or wooden block pavers) would be the term for square or rectangular types. (See also en:w:Nicolson pavement, though I'm not sure if that term was much used outside of the USA, so I think it better to keep to the general term). -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:13, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have created Category:Wooden block pavements. Other subcategories, such as geographic, might be created if someone found that useful. Main point is that this category name seems to have been created from a mistaken understanding of terminology. (Cobblestones eg are by nature irregularly shaped and sized, rather the opposite of wooden blocks. I suppose it might be possible to make imitations of cobblestones out of wood, but I see zero photos of that here.) Since the existence of "wooden cobblestones" is hypothetical at best, and the name as applied mistaken or misleading, I suggest moving the media in this category to "Category:Wooden pavements" (or relevant subcategories of this if wished). -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:43, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the last proposal presented above by Infrogmation. Keep the current category as a redirect to "Wooden (block) pavements". --Enyavar (talk) 10:54, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Antoine.01
overleg(Antoine) 22:28, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Done: Speedied (C2). —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:18, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
Not done: misguided deletion request. --MB-one (talk) 18:59, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Info: Original Cfd-notice at Category:Streets in Sebnitz has been withdrawn three days ago by Rigorius, so this seems to be resolved. Thus I will close the request here. --Kleeblatt187 (talk) 18:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
Delete self promotion --Gymnicus (talk) 10:26, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
Support speedy deletion. Taylor 49 (talk) 22:00, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Oppose #1 above. "vehicle in country" categories are a subcategory of "vehicle of country". If a vessel is not permanently located within a country, the category for that vehicle should not be placed the 'in country' category. Unless every ferry that has ever been built in, registered in, or owned or operated by the Netherlands or a Netherlands-based entity has never left Netherlands territorial waters and is permanently fixtured within the Netherlands, then the two categories are not congruent and should not be merged. Josh (talk) 07:46, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
Comment @Multichill: Please bracket closed CfDs with {{Cfdh}}/{{Cfdf}} instead of {{Delh}}/{{Delf}}. This way automated processes such as archiving and maintaining the current discussion list will function correctly. Thanks! Josh (talk) 08:07, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination I now understand better the difference. Can someone please check the wikidata definitions (esp. the German ones) and eventually reorganize the category trees under both root categories. In detail it is difficult as you have to consult the organizations' homepages for each image. best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 13:15, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
_-_A_Dutch_Ferry_Boat_before_a_Breeze_-_BHC0772_-_Royal_Museums_Greenwich.jpg){kind=link}
Question @GeneraleAutunno: What do you suggest merging it into? Josh (talk) 19:11, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
See also: Category talk:Congo at the Olympic Games. 
Rename category to the plural Category:Volatile organic compounds .jpg){kind=link}
