User talk:Auntof6/Archives/2024

"rem template that's only for metacats"

Have you considered the possibility that {{By quantity}} shouldn't include the {{MetaCat}} template? In fact, navigation templates should never automatically include {{MetaCat}}. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 03:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@DanielPenfield: There are two types of categories I see using this template.

1. Categories with names like "Foo by quantity": these are metacats and need the metacat template one way or another
2. Categories with names like "4 foos": these are not metacats. I'm replacing the necessary code with better templates for defining these.

I'd be happy to have the metacat template added explicitly on the actual metacats (instead of being added by a template), but that would require also changing the categories of type 1 and that's not in the scope of what I'm currently doing. Are you thinking that just removing the metacat template from {{By quantity}} would make it useable for the categories of type 2? It seems to me that more would be needed. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Your statement	My response
"There are two types of categories I see using this template. 1. Categories with names like "Foo by quantity": these are metacats and need the metacat template one way or another	Have you thought that through? There really shouldn't be "categories of type 1" as nobody should ever place a navigation template on a MetaCat as the primary key for the MetaCat is the navigation--MetaCats do not need additional navigation beyond the primary key.
"Categories with names like "4 foos": these are not metacats. I'm replacing the necessary code with better templates for defining these."	Actually, you're deleting them outright: [1], [2], [3]. I see no evidence of your "replacing" claim.
"Are you thinking that just removing the metacat template from {{By quantity}} would make it useable for the categories of type 2?"	No, I'm stating that nobody should use navigational templates on {{MetaCat}}s as the primary key for the MetaCat is the navigation--MetaCats do not need additional navigation beyond the primary key.

-- DanielPenfield (talk) 07:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@DanielPenfield:

Part 1:

I'm not clear on what you're saying here. Metacats need/have various things, depending on the situation. A category called "Foo by quantity" could have the main category for Foo or a subcat of it. For example, Category:Paintings by museum is a subcat of Category:Paintings by location rather than of Category:Paintings. It could also have other things. See Category:Children by quantity for an example.

Part 2:

As I worked on these, I found that some of them only needed a template removed. I did do a lot of replacing as well, such as this and this, as well as this one where I did both a removal and a replacement. I'm sorry if my edit summaries didn't include enough detail about how I was resolving the issue I was working on.

Part 3:

They probably don't need it, but it also probably doesn't hurt anything. I tend to add navigation on a metacat's subcats instead of the metacat itself, with the possible exception of categories like Category:Structures in Africa by country where the nav template shows (via red links) which countries don't have subcats.

Not sure if this addresses your concerns. Let me know if I can elucidate further. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

So per my deletion request, the template author states "Actually, I did not intend that for metacats. I created it for cats like Category:3 turtles, which I wanted to link to Category:1 turtle and the like...". The {{MetaCat}} addition literally preceded your mass removals by 6 calendar days. User:W like wiki added {{MetaCat}} to {{By quantity}} in this edit on December 21, 2023 and you embarked on your mass removals on December 27. You never should have performed these mass removals and I insist that you undo them forthwith. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 08:26, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@DanielPenfield, Shāntián Tàiláng, and Auntof6: I am really sorry, that obviously my edit was the reason for this misunderstandig. My mistake was, to forgot that the by quantity template is not only used in categories type 1 like "Foo by quantity" (which are metacats) but also in categories type 2 like "4 foos" (which are not metacats). At DanielPenfield: please consider this when you forthwith insist that Auntof6 should do this or that (At this time metacat was included in the by quantity template so she did right when e.g. removing metacat from Category 5 people in the United States which is not a metacat). And there was also not a doc-page provided by template author Shāntián Tàiláng, maybe another reason for the misunderstanding (at least for your deletion request). Maybe I can help to revert some edits!?

Or maybe we can use this misunderstanding for an improval instead of just back to the old state. One idea: There is Template:qty group which is obviously exactly for categories type 2. There a navigation whould be helpful! So why not include the by quantity navigation into this template? With this changing many of the edits of Auntof6 where she added the Template:qty group are an improval and no need to revert them!? Just an idea, best Regards --W like wiki ^{good to know} 15:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Regarding Part 3 (no navigations on metacats): @DanielPenfield: What is the problem? I agree with Auntof6: It doesn't hurt anything. And a navigation can also help. Regards --W like wiki ^{good to know} 20:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Navigations by quantity

If someone knows a better place, please move this disussion there, maybe to Category talk:By quantity navigational templates. --W like wiki ^{good to know} 20:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

 moved to Category talk:By quantity navigational templates. Best Regards --W like wiki ^{good to know} 21:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

---

Hello! About paintings you moved to another category

Hello! Happy New Year. I was just wondering about you moving my paintings to a crowded category (per message posted in the Paintings category). That’s why I originally added them to a subcategory. Or what category should be appropriate, since I will be uploading more paintings. Also, another wiki editor moved drawings of mine to a subcategory similar to where I categorized my paintings. Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas (talk) 12:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas: I was working with many files recently. Can you give me the name of one of yours so I have an example to look at? -- Auntof6 (talk) 12:22, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Sure! For instance, this one. File:Catherine of Aragon idealized painting.jpg amongst others. My question wasn’t so much about the actual moving of categories, but more about me knowing where to categorize them in the future into a more proper category. Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas (talk) 12:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

That was in Category:Paintings by artist, which is a metacategory. The only entries in that category should be subcategories with names like "Paintings by John Doe" (or whoever the artist is). No files should be in a metacategory. I moved all the files in it up to the parent category.

You are right that the parent category is crowded, so it's better to put files in a subcategory (just not a metacategory). This particular painting could go in paintings of women, paintings of queens, or a similar category. In fact, since it's already in Category:Oil on panel, it could just be removed from the main paintings category. In general, files showing paintings can be put in categories for the artist, the material used, what they depict, when they were painted, where they're located, and probably other things.

Is there something that the images in your files have in common besides that fact that they're paintings? If they're by the same artist, then you can create a category for paintings by that artist and put them in there. Let me know if I can help further, and Happy New Year to you, too! --Auntof6 (talk) 12:36, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much on clarifying this. I’m still learning, so this helped a lot. One last question… in this case I’m the painter of this and other paintings. So when you suggest to create a category of paintings by artist for these and other paintings I will be uploading, is it appropriate for me to create such a category? Because of conflict of interest? Or are Wikimedia categories different? Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas (talk) 12:48, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas: Yes, creating the category would be fine. That's not the same as writing an article about yourself on Wikipedia. Just be sure not to include anything that looks like advertising. -- Auntof6 (talk) 13:07, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Sure thing! And again, thank you so much. Nice to meet you, have a wonderful 2024. Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas (talk) 13:08, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Queens consort

Haha - queens consort - I had a good giggle over that one. Should have spotted it. Thanks! Storye book (talk) 10:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@Storye book: No problem. Someone who's a "queen's consort" (consort of a queen) would be categorized under Category:Kings consort. Sometimes plurals of multiple-word terms can be tricky: queens consort, kings consort, mothers-in-law, attorneys general, etc. -- Auntof6 (talk) 10:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

And bêtes noires: the group are, the family are, the company are – up with which I shall not put. Pedantry rules, hehe. Storye book (talk) 11:56, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@Storye book: Well, bêtes noires is French, so the rules are different. The usage with group, family, and company is British English, and is just a different way of seeing things. -- Auntof6 (talk) 13:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Nope. I meant that using those singular nouns as if they were plural was a bête noire of mine. A bête noire in English usage means something that irritates one. So my above comment means that I don't like other people saying "the family are" or "the company are". The idea that it is OK grammatically on the grounds of being British English is nonsense.

Verbal common usage is different from Standard English, which is a written convention. In reality, people can (and do) verbalise in whatever manner they like. However, in Standard English there are rules of logic. The reason for that is that we need Standard English where we need clarity, e.g. in science and in law - and also in WP articles, so as not to confuse our international readership. So it is inappropriate to pretend to judge verbal English by Standard English standards. I was making a joke. Therefore, the last part of my above comment is intended to show that I was laughing at my own inappropriate pedantry.

America does have parallels. When I was diving with some Smithsonian profs who were writing a fish book, we had plenty of deck time to talk. They were of course well-educated, but they would way "I don't got" instead of their traditional "I don't have". That phraseology arose when the British usage of "got" replaced "have" in the US as a single word, and not as a phrase. In British verbal English it's "I haven't got". It was interesting to hear that the Smithsonians knew very well that it was grammatically nonsense, and that they would not use it in their formal journal articles, for example. In their words, they "knew it was wrong, but hey, everyone says it now". "Don't got" is now in all the British TV dramas, which, for me at least, is tiresome. Let the Americans say it, but for us "haven't got" makes sense. "Got" in British English always meant "in my possession", "acquired" or "become" - a bit like the American "gotten", except that "gotten" doesn't mean "in my possession". It is sometimes said here (joke alert) that the UK needs an Academie, like the French one. Storye book (talk) 16:13, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@Storye book: Yes, I'm familiar with all that. I teach English as a second language, and I often have to explain to my students why they hear people speaking in ways that are different from the "correct" way they are learning. Sometimes it's because words follow rules from other languages (like bêtes noires, which is from French and follows the French rule of adjectives matching the gender and singular/plural of the noun they modify), sometimes it's due to differences in varieties of English (Brits say "the team are" because they look at the team as a collection of individuals; Americans say "the team is" because they see a team as one entity), sometimes it's because casual speech is different from formal speech, and sometimes it's because the other person doesn't know the "correct" way. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with you except for the statement that "the team are" is British English. It is common usage now, in the UK, and I must tolerate it, but according to Standard English (OK, the written version - but it's a basis for the verbal) it is not British English; it is an error, like mispronouncing "mischievous" as "mischeevious" In Standard English it is clear that "the team are" is a logical error because "team" is a singular noun. I think we need to differentiate between linguistic usage founded in linguistic roots, changing linguistic environments and downright creativity - and linguistic usage founded in poor literacy. People who say "the team are" will also write "the team are", and will find it difficult to comprehend that "team" in that context is singular. Storye book (talk) 09:36, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@Storye book: OK, I see. Thanks for the insight. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for that conversation. It was fun. Storye book (talk) 11:02, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) as a native English speaker (from the U.S., but spent a few years of my life in the UK): collective nouns are tricky on both sides of the pond. For a company, the U.S. consistently uses singular ("Microsoft is") but the UK tend to lean the other way ("Microsoft are"). Even in the U.S., athletic teams tend to be treated as plural, especially when the name is grammatically plural ("The Texas Rangers are") but sometimes even when it is not ("The Seattle Kraken are"). I can't imagine anyone saying "The Green Bay Packers is", but I have (at least in the U.S.) heard "Manchester United is". - Jmabel ! talk 17:57, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Category:CatAutoTOC generates standard Category TOC

This is showing up in Special:UncategorizedCategories. Looks like it's yours, and you probably have a better chance of categorizing it correctly than I do. - Jmabel ! talk 17:49, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Jmabel: It looks like Clay fixed it. -- Auntof6 (talk) 00:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Ah, cool, added a parent I was unaware of. - Jmabel ! talk 03:17, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages are just terms

Hi. I am of the belief that disambiguation pages are just terms, not specific to some other classification. As if they are specific they are not so much disambiguation, as then we are starting a very weird path to a vague sort of classification. Here I am talking about something like Category:Disambiguation categories of artists. How can we sort and justify like that?  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:18, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

I probably wouldn't have created that (in 2021) if there hadn't already been similar categories. For example, the one for populated places (created in 2016) and the one for churches in Sweden (created in 2009). It helps people find links to specific kinds of things they'd like to disambiguate.

I believe that the subcats of each of these categories are also in the main category, so they aren't removed from the main list. If that's not the case, it can be made so. -- Auntof6 (talk) 11:00, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

I have thrown a conversation into VP to address.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Category:Photographs_by_date_by_country

Photographs by date by country has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Josh (talk) 16:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

«Вікі любить Землю» 2024 в Україні проходить з 1 по 31 липня!

Доброго дня!

Ви брали участь у конкурсі «Вікі любить Землю» в Україні раніше, тож приносимо вам важливу новину — Вікі любить Землю повернувся! Цього року конкурс відбувається протягом липня.

Як і в попередні роки, долучитися до змагання можуть усі охочі — як професійні фотографи, так і аматори. Головне, щоб ви любили Землю і розділяли ідею конкурсу — представити природно-заповідні території України за допомогою світлин під вільними ліцензіями. У Вікіпедії та Вікісховищі конкурсні фото будуть доступні тисячам людей.

Загальний формат конкурсу такий же, як у минулі роки. Стежте за новинами проєкту у Facebook, Instagram або в блозі. Також ключова інформація буде з'являтися на сторінці у Вікісховищі.

Важливо! Цього року з міркувань безпеки до участі у фотоконкурсі приймаються лише фото, зроблені до 31 березня 2024 року (включно) для звичайних фото та до 23 лютого 2022 року (включно) для знімків з дронів та інших літальних пристроїв.

Рекомендуємо уважно ознайомитись з правилами конкурсу та звернути увагу на вимоги щодо якості фотографій. Цьогоріч мінімальна роздільна здатність фотографій, які приймаються на конкурс, становить 2 Мп.

Сподіваємося на вашу участь у липні! -- Оргкомітет «Вікі любить пам'ятки». 03:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Category:Smoking_(activity)

Smoking (activity) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Josh (talk) 12:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

«Вікі любить Землю» 2024: декілька днів до завершення української частини конкурсу!

Вітання!

Нагадуємо, що конкурс «Вікі любить Землю» 2024 в Україні триває вже більше трьох тижнів і до його завершення залишилось декілька днів. У вас ще є можливість завантажити свої унікальні фото української природи до 31 липня включно.

Вже майже 65 учасників та учасниць завантажили майже 4 000 світлин.

Важливо! Цього року з міркувань безпеки до участі у фотоконкурсі приймаються лише фото, зроблені до 31 березня 2024 року (включно) для звичайних фото та до 23 лютого 2022 року (включно) для знімків з дронів та інших літальних пристроїв.

Ви також можете подати свої фото для міжнародної спеціальної номінації «Права людини та довкілля», яка має на меті збільшити доступ до знань про захист довкілля та вплив людини на природу. Детальніше читайте тут.

Статті у Вікіпедії можна допоповнювати не лише фотографіями, а й відео. Для цього також проводимо окрему спецномінацію, де відзначаємо відеоролики, які зображають пам’ятки природи України. Відео цього року можна завантажувати як звичайні фото, вони будуть враховані на спеціальну номінацію автоматично.

Просимо уважно ознайомитись з правилами конкурсу та звернути увагу на вимоги щодо якості фотографій.

Приєднуйтеся та отримайте шанс на перемогу!

Більше інформації про конкурс читайте тут. – Оргкомітет «Вікі любить Землю».

Message sent over by Aafi on behalf of OlesiaLukaniuk (WMUA) through MassMessage. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:49, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

cranach

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AChrist_on_the_Mount_of_Olives_MET_MM1761.jpg&diff=884624151&oldid=881510606

please consider that we always have one separate category strings for the artist and one separate string for the museum to find the files and not to hide them. To sort after museum is only a second sorting and not instead of categories by the artist. Oursana (talk) 02:54, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Oursana: I'm not sure I understand. If the image is in Category:Prints by Lucas Cranach (I) in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, then it's under categories for both the artist and the museum. Can you explain more what your concern is? -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:00, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

with Prints by Lucas Cranach (I) in the Metropolitan Museum of Art the file is not really in both, because you have to go to all museums to find a file, therefore please always use two seperate category strings for artist, for museum, for item (agony in the garden). My concern is not to hide the files. With prints exclusively sorted into cats "prints by artist in museum x" you have to search many museums to find a file. Therefore they must be in two category strings, as "prints by artist in museum x" is not really for both, the sorting is in packages by museum. This is common practise on commons and I ask you to keep the seperate strings. This extra category string is very necessary and helpful and there is no argument to delete them, like you did with the above shown example. For prints with up to 20 and more identically versions the exclusive sorting by museum, seperates the many versions of the same print, which you cannot spread over the museum's categories, they must also be together in the artist's cat as a second and main category string. --Oursana (talk) 03:22, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

@Oursana: I think I understand your concern, but I don't completely agree with it. If you look in Category:Prints by museum by artist, you will see many categories like this, so it is common practice.

I think the category Category:Prints by Lucas Cranach (I) in the Metropolitan Museum of Art needs to stay, but maybe the files in it can be in subcategories of Category:Prints by Lucas Cranach (I). For example, there could be Category:Religious prints by Lucas Cranach (I). That doesn't currently exist, but it could be created. That would make it easier to find the print you want. -- Auntof6 (talk) 03:29, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Commons practise are at least two category strings, therefore I am not against a museum's cat but for an extra cat string by artist, like you propose now and have to do also for non religious files. Category:Prints by museum by artist does not proof anything.Oursana (talk) 09:32, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Friedrich III (1463–1525), the Wise, Elector of Saxony (MET 46.179.1)

It is common praxis in the arts to have the artist's name included in the cat naming, which is more important than the museum. Furthermore one should only create necessary cats, so cats for every painting are not necessary Oursana (talk) 20:39, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

@Oursana: Okay. I was copying a naming convention I saw on other categories, but I can see how the museum's identifier could become an issue if the painting ever changes hands. In this case it helps differentiate this painting from other paintings of the same subject by the same artist, but maybe there's another way to do that.

I'm not sure what determines what cats qualify as necessary. I often create cats for paintings (and other things) where there are multiple files. It gathers everything for an item together and allows categorization to be done on one item, the category, instead of on multiple files. When creating such categories, I have often found that not all the files for an item were categorized the same.

All that being said, feel free to rename the category if you see fit. -- Auntof6 (talk) 21:36, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

Category:Tollbooths_and_toll_gates

Tollbooths and toll gates has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Cryptic-waveform (talk) 13:09, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Вікі любить пам'ятки 2024 в Україні / Wiki Loves Monuments 2024 in Ukraine

Привіт!

З 1 по 31 жовтня запрошуємо до участі в українській частині міжнародного фотоконкурсу «Вікі любить пам'ятки», метою якого є фотографування пам'яток історико-культурної спадщини України. Зі списками пам'яток можна ознайомитися тут.

Окрім основних номінацій у конкурсі є дев’ять спеціальних номінацій та відзнак: «Відео», «Війна руйнує пам'ятки», «Елементи екстер'єру», «Єврейська спадщина» (включаючи караїмські), «Інтер'єри», «Німецька спадщина», «Польська спадщина», «Фотоплівка» та «Визначні місця Харкова».

Важливо! Через російське вторгнення в Україну також довелося змінити умови: у більшості випадків тільки роботи зняті до 30 червня 2024 року включно будуть прийматися на конкурс. Тільки фото інтер'єрів памяток можна подавати без обмеження за датою створення.

Приєднуйтеся!

Ви отримали це повідомлення, оскільки Ви брали участь в одному із фотоконкурсів «Вікімедіа Україна» чи допомагали (наприклад, редагували файли з цих конкурсів). Якщо Ви не хочете більше отримувати повідомлень про конкурс «Вікі любить пам'ятки», додайте свою сторінку користувача до відповідної категорії чи напишіть Оргкомітету. Дякуємо!

You have received this message, because you had uploaded pictures to one of the contests of Wikimedia Ukraine or helped (for example, edited files from these contests). If you do not speak Ukrainian, but you are interested in the contest, you can check out our page in English here. If you do not want to receive messages related to Wiki Loves Monuments — add your user page to this category or write to the Organising team. Thank you!

Мирного неба!

З повагою, Оргкомітет «Вікі любить пам'ятки» 16:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Category:Paintings of paintings of Saint Catherine of Alexandria in the Metropolitan Museum of Art

Category:Paintings of paintings of Saint Catherine of Alexandria in the Metropolitan Museum of Art is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:

How to ask for speedy-delete of an empty category

English · español · français

When you want to ask for speedy-delete of an empty category, best practice is to mark it with either:

{{SD|C2}} ("unuseful empty category") if it would be OK to re-create it in the future, given that appropriate content becomes available

{{SD|C1}} ("improperly named category") if it is an inappropriate category name that should not be reused (e.g. typos).

"C1" and "C2" come from Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion. You could also use of the following:

{{badname|current category name}}

{{speedy|empty, misspelled category name}}

The above templates (SD, speedy, Badname) expand to full speedy deletion requests.

In particular, this is better practice than just blanking the category page. Blanked categories end up on Special:UncategorizedCategories, which is largely handled by non-admins who cannot delete the categories in question.

Thank you. (This is a standardized talk page message)

If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted).
All your uploads, including deleted ones, are listed in your upload log.
If you need help, please read our frequently asked questions or visit the help desk. Please do not remove this message from your talk page. You may set up archiving instead. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

---

Prototyperspective (talk) 10:29, 13 October 2024 (UTC)