Commons:Categories for discussion/2024/05

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Category:Nations[edit]

After going through the Wikipedia articles related to nations, it becomes clear that the term "nation" is ambiguous and somewhat complicated. A nation could mean the people of a country or an ethnic group. Since specific categories exist for countries and ethnic groups, I don't think this category is necessary. It can be converted into a disambiguation page linking to Category:Countries, Category:Ethnic groups and Category:Nationalism. The category Category:National institutions is mainly concerned with countries and territories only, so it can be categorized under Category:Countries and territories. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 13:50, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some "nations" categories, like Category:Celtic nations and Category:Germanic nations, can be easily recategorized under Category:Cultural regions. Although I had created the Category:Chinese nation category, I have now found that the category is not feasible, as we can put the categories under Category:Han Chinese people, which is overcrowded with the categories of individuals. Those categories on individuals should be moved to Category:Han Chinese people by name. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 13:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The more I think about nations and ethnic groups, the more I confuse the two terms. However, when I research the Wikipedia articles on Nationalism and Types of nationalism, I realize that nations may or may not be ethnic groups. Still, all ethnic groups can be considered as nations in some way. We can create Category:Stateless nations for nations/ethnic groups without their own countries. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 09:16, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Support @Sbb1413: I couldn't agree more. "Nations" is such a broad term and used for many disparate things, that so long as those things have more specific terms to refer to them (country, ethnic group, etc) your idea for a dab is spot on. Pretty much any large group of people which share a common and identifying element across them can be considered a 'nation'. It is right not to confuse this with countries, which are specific legal entities, though they can be formed around a specific nation. It doesn't help that in English, "national" serves essentially as the adjective form for both nation and country. Josh (talk) 20:48, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Support I pointed out on the related discussion the issues arising with the gargantuan concept of sovereign state, which happened to engulf all the terms "nation", "country" and "sovereign state" itself. As I see it, stateless nations may bridge national realities between ethnic groups, categories such as Khoisan, and sovereign states. They are often cross-border national, historic communities. Iñaki LL (talk) 21:04, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Desembargadores estaduais from Goiás[edit]

De que se trata? 186.175.135.50 18:54, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Se trata de uma categoria de multimídias de desembargadores estaduais (juízes de segunda instância) do estado brasileiro de Goiás, visto que alguns assumiram o governo estadual ou possuem artigos próprios na Wikipédia lusófona. Emerson Júnior GSF (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Debe ser en inglés!.. 186.175.135.50 22:30, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
O nome não possui variável na língua inglesa, portanto, não, não deve ser em inglês, bem como o de São Paulo, o da Argentina e o de Portugal não são. Emerson Júnior GSF (talk) 02:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Human activities in Israel[edit]

"Category:Activities in Israel" is full of human activities which are not subcategories of this category. Categories about Israel are, in general, a mess! 186.175.135.50 22:35, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plus: Is it normal that, as of now, there are only 2 (two!) subcategories of this huge category?! 186.175.135.50 02:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep If there are contents of Category:Activities in Israel which belong in Category:Human activities in Israel, simply diffuse them to that level. I'm not sure it needs discussion, just doing. Josh (talk) 06:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chi Kung[edit]

User:SilverStar54 has proposed moving the category to Qigong to be more consistent with the pinyin. Most of the Wikipedia projects use the "qigong" name but since this would be about different romanization standards, this needs discussion before this would be moved. Abzeronow (talk) 21:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be moved and have a desambiguation page with the different romanization standards? Oe show the different standards in the commons page?
Like: pinyin: Qìgōng; chinese simplified: 气功; chinês traditional: 氣功; Wade-Giles: ch'i4 kung1; japanese: kikō (気功?); tailand: ชี่กง TarcísioTS (talk) 16:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be fine with the category page stating the various ways it is written as you suggest. Abzeronow (talk) 01:10, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Technical note: Category:Qigong currently is a redirect to Category:Chi Kung. If the latter is moved, the redirect needs to be deleted and/or retargeted. --R'n'B (talk) 14:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Event venues[edit]

Can Category:Event venues be a subcategory of Category:Entertainment venues? I think there is a lot of overlap and after merging them, we can clean up both categories. JopkeB (talk) 08:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

more like the other way around? a religious event venue is not entertainment? RZuo (talk) 07:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, sometimes it is or can be (like religious festivals). But the EN-WP has it indeed the other way around (w:en:Category:Entertainment venues is a child of w:en:Category:Event venues), so I guess you are right.
So the new question is: Can Category:Entertainment venues be a subcategory of Category:Event venues? JopkeB (talk) 15:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i think Event venues should redirect to Category:venues. what venue is not an event evnue? RZuo (talk) 16:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"a place where people meet for an organized event, for example a concert, sporting event or conference" https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/venue . RZuo (talk) 16:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Venues that are not event venues are venues that are not for an organized event, venues you can spontaneously go to, without an appointment, like Category:Leisure venues‎? This category is now a direct subcategory of Category:Venues. JopkeB (talk) 04:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Visitor centres[edit]

What is the difference between Category:Visitor centres and Category:Information centers? Can both have descriptions showing the differences OR can both be merged (like in EN-WP)? JopkeB (talk) 08:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep both — According to Wikidata, an information center is a "place where information is given out", and a visitor center is a "combination of tourist center and museum directly related to a point of interest or the local area". An information center provides information for tourists/visitors, while a visitor center is a combination of an information center and a museum. For instance, the Government of India Tourist Office in New Delhi is a mere information center, while the Category:Kennedy Space Center Visitor Complex in Florida is both an information center and a museum. Apologies for providing examples from different hemispheres, but it is clear that "information center" and "visitor center" are not synonymous. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:11, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Sb1413. So:
JopkeB (talk) 15:58, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep both. I agree with Sbb1413 that they are distinct. Visitor centres may be a sub-cat of Information centers, but not all information centers are visitor or tourist centers. If FEMA sets up a trailer in the wake of a disaster providing information to citizens about how to get supplies and apply for assistance, that is an information center but I don't think we'd consider it a visitor/tourist center. At the courthouse, there is a small office near the entrance has an "Information" sign and helps folks figure out where the courtroom they need is, or which office they need to go to for the business they have. That might cater to visitors to the building but it doesn't really make sense to call it a visitor center as the courthouse isn't really a touristic place...it is really an information center. Josh (talk) 09:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions and actions[edit]

  1. Both categories should stay because they are about distinct subjects.
  2. An information center is a place where information is given out to visitors, not necessarily being tourists. Example: visitors of a courthouse.
    1. Libraries, archives and similar institutions are not information centers. Category:Angeles City Library and Information Center‎ should be removed as a subcategory.
    2. Category:Information centers should not be renamed to Category:Tourist centers or Category:Tourist information centres because they are not all for tourists.
  3. A visitor center is a combination of tourist center and a (touristic) place of interest, like a museum.
    1. Visitor centres may be a sub-cat of Information centers.

Actions to be taken:

@Sbb1413 and Joshbaumgartner: Do you agree? --JopkeB (talk) 15:01, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Support Thank you for the excellent summary, @JopkeB. Josh (talk) 16:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Rallying[edit]

rallying can refer to election rally etc. RZuo (talk) 20:23, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Agreed, but I think this name is fine as-is. You can add a {{Cat see also}} to alert and redirect those that may arrive there thinking it was something else. Josh (talk) 09:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=Rallying&title=Special:MediaSearch
quite many photos of demonstrations. RZuo (talk) 13:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lloyd Austin hosts the U.S. Indo-Pacific Change of Command[edit]

20 photographs out of 48 total photographs do no contain Lloyd Austin. The category would be more accurately named "United States Indo-Pacific change of command, Hawaii (May 2024)" Also, the only categorization is related to Lloyd Austin, not a location and specific date of this one day event. Ooligan (talk) 21:18, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest that these be moved to the already-existing category, 2024 United States Indo-Pacific Command change of command. SuperWIKI (talk) 07:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, @SuperWIKI. Thanks, -- Ooligan (talk) 06:54, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Baron Long's Ship Cafe[edit]

Should probably be moved to Ship Cafe or Ship Cafe (restaurant) bc Long was only one of several owner-managers over its history Jengod (talk) 22:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Too ambiguous. I would be happier with Ship Cafe (Venice, California), or perhaps better Ship Cafe Cabrillo (Venice, California), as the Evening Vanguard called it. -Broichmore (talk) 11:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ship Cafe (Venice, California) would work for me. Jengod (talk) 15:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Can I withdraw this nomination? If yes, what do I need to do? We seem to have it sorted, with the Baron Long's era as a subcategory of Ship Cafe (Venice, California). TIA Jengod (talk) 17:57, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Autonomous aircraft[edit]

As far as I know, many modern airplanes can fly autonomously using the so-called "autopilot" mode. So, I doubt whether a category for autonomous aircraft is useful. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 13:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An autonomous aircraft is one both capable of and intended to fly on its own without human intervention. In aviation, there is no confusion between autonomous aircraft and automation on aircraft such as an autopilot. No airliner, for example, is intended to operate without any humans in the cockpit. While it is true that the systems on a modern Airbus or Boeing are capable of amazing levels of automation relieving the pilots of many flight tasks such as level keeping and so forth, none is capable of safely and reliably completing flights without pilots at the controls and so no, I would not say that 'modern airplanes can fly autonomously'. The word 'autonomous' itself maybe can be used for varying levels of automation in other settings, but in aviation it is clearly distinct from 'automated' systems such as autopilots. Josh (talk) 09:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:US cities[edit]

As of this writing, there is no Commons:Templates for discussion, so I am using Commons:Categories for discussion to minimize turnaround time and maximize the number of people who see this. Per [1] User:Birdie wants to change the scope of {{US cities}} to include those "that were in the top 100 and are now over 100 000".

Template history[edit]

  • 2009: Created with 19 cities
  • 2012: Expanded to 20 cities
  • 2016: Expanded to 22 cities
  • 2019: Expanded to current day 100 most populous cities of the United States, included link to List of United States cities by population to establish template scope and to provide an easy verification of scope. Template:US cities/doc created, providing the first documentation of how to use the template.
  • 2022: Updated for 2020 US Census
  • 2024: Expanded to 109 cities, nine of which are claimed to be former 100 sometime in the past and over 100000 population as of the latest population estimate. Verification as to whether this designation is correct and complete is left to people other than the editor who changed the scope.

Note that this Wikidata SPARQL query reports 11282 current and former cities in the United States.

-- DanielPenfield (talk) 15:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Limit to 100 cities — Although I'm not so familiar with the US cities, I know from my common sense that 100 cities are enough for navigation between the most populous cities of a given country. I have made {{Cities of India}} based on this template and listed 50 most populous metro cities (excluding satellites and other suburbs) and 39 sub-national capitals of India. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:25, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose the scope change for the following reasons:
  • Up until the scope change, the scope of the template had been "cities in the United States as of the present day" since the time of its creation and for the past five years, that scope has been explicit as demonstrated by the linked List of United States cities by population which itself provides the exact dated reference ("July 1, 2022" as of this writing) to the source US Census Bureau population estimates.
  • As noted in Template:US cities/doc#Note, there are plenty of state-specific alternatives for smaller cities, plus a template for state capitals, plus another template for independent cities, all of which could be used for inspiration to create other state-specific templates.
  • When I examine the 1000 edits before the scope change and the 1000 edits after the scope change, I find that it was really applied to only 16 categories for only two of the nine ">100 (former top 50 and still over 100.000)" cities and no evidence that the modifier verified that the added cities are the complete list that meets the criteria change. It's as if the scope changer took the most short-sighted, least effort approach to shoehorn these nine cities into a preexisting template rather than consider what navigation boxes for past 100 most populous cities should look like.
  • The editor making the undiscussed scope change belatedly discovered that there are verified "100 most populous cities of the United States" lists in the English Wikipedia articles on the United States censuses (for example 1900 United States census#City rankings) which suggests that had he or she done his research, he would have concluded that he or she should have created decade-specific {{US cities in 1850}}, {{US cities in 1900}}, {{US cities in 1950}}, etc. instead of modifying {{US cities}}.
  • If the scope modifier's change is allowed to stand, it invites others to tack on still more changes. Why limit the list to 100 cities? Why not include all 11282 current and former cities in the United States? Why stop at cities? Why not add every last possible populated place in the United States? Why not add every neighborhood in every populated place? Why stop at the United States? Why not include every place outside the United States named for a place within the United States? The long-term effect of letting the scope change stand is that the navigation box will eventually dwarf the media and subcategories in the category for which it is providing navigation.
-- DanielPenfield (talk) 05:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Big cities[edit]

How does one define “big cities” (population? 100000 seems rather small; how about area?). Unless a clearer guideline is provided I see no point in this and all subcategories. (They seem to be the sole work of User:Sbb1413 modified by User:Verdy p). Qualitätssicherung (talk) 12:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete — Cities are generally defined by population (or population density) and not by area, unless you are talking about countries where "city" is just an honorific of an urban settlement. In India, cities are defined as urban settlements with a population above a lakh (100,000). German towns with a population above 100,000 are also called cities. So, the category Category:Big cities might be useless for countries whose minimum city population is 100,000. However, it might be useful for countries where "city" is just an honorific of an urban settlement, like the UK. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 13:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it is based on the Wikidata item on big cities, which is widely used in different city items. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 13:07, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is also based on the classification used in OpenStreetMap. The criteria is effectively not the area but the population, but it is dependent of countries: within very populated countries, the criteria of population for distinguishing "big cities" from others is higher, but they tend to merge to a common criteria based on world population data. Strictly speaking, it is not referring to "administrative units" (whose land area which changes over time by splitting/slicing/merging them), but on urbanisation criterias whose evolution is much slower and independent of administrative units ever changing due to local politics or laws (for example, where do you define the limits of London, Paris, Shangai, or New york City to count "their" population? The "municipal" population is not relevant here for geographic classification, urban and environmental planning, communications...). verdy_p (talk) 15:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since all big cities in that category are in country-sub-categories could changing the parent-category definition/description to something like "big cities as per the definition of the respective countries" solve the problem? Instead of using a random number for population like 100,000 or some sort of area parameter, just say "a big city in the US is whatever the US define to be a 'big city'" and if Italy uses a different measure then that's perfectly fine because it's their right to have their own understanding of what constitutes a "big city" - be it population or area. Nakonana (talk) 11:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete This is a mushy category that doesn't offer a particularly valuable distinction. We can of course adopt the 100k line as an arbitrary boundary, but that won't necessarily comport with what a lot of users may be looking for if they are looking for "big" cities. The discussion over what constitutes a 'city' and how to measure its size is immediately apparent if one starts researching cities by population or any other measure. Also, cities and their populations are constantly changing. In the end, I'm not sure of the value of sorting images based on the population of a city, but if we are going to do it and use arbitrary lines, we should name the category accordingly, so rename this one to Cities with over 100000 residents or something clear like that, not just "big". Josh (talk) 09:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete this and the related Category:Small cities. I had created this category since the classification is present in Wikidata and OSM. However, as Josh has pointed out, it is unnecessary to sort files based on the population of a city, which changes constantly. Also, "big" and "small" are problematic terms to use in Commons. I will propose my settlement hierarchy in an upcoming CFD. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 13:53, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Siti Cable[edit]

All images in this category are tagged CC-0. Very likely COPYVIO. These are too elaborate to be {{PD-textlogo}}. Although some are shown as part of the company’s ”Media Kit” presumably to be used. Alas under their Terms of Use it is stated: “The Website contains copyrights and intellectual property rights in certain material presented on the site (including but not limited to text, audio, video, graphical images), trademarks and logos (including trade mark "SITI Networks"), of SITI Networks, its parent, affiliates and associates and are protected under the applicable Indian laws. Any infringement of the IPR will be considered illegal and shall be vigorously defended and pursued to the fullest extent permitted by law.” 62.216.206.37 17:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If copyvio is suspected, the offending images should be raised as a deletion request. Only once they are deleted and the category is empty of legitimate content can we delete it. Josh (talk) 09:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Villages in (Macedonian municipal seat)[edit]

Duplicate categories. I propose to delete these or redirect them to Category:Villages in X Municipality:

--Upwinxp (talk) 07:23, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the categories are duplicates because the town has only one municipality (e.g. Category:Villages in Berovo is a duplicate of Category:Villages in Berovo Municipality). However, there are towns that include more than one municipality (e.g. Category:Villages in Bitola is greater than Category:Villages in Bitola Municipality because it includes the villages in the municipalities of Mogila and Novaci, which are also categorised in Category:Villages in Mogila Municipality and Category:Villages in Novaci Municipality). I suppose Raso mk’s primary goal when creating the categories of the type ‘Villages in X’ was to provide a better overview of the villages belonging to different towns.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your response Kiril Simeonovski. I didn't know about towns existing as a separate administrative unit, larger than municipalities (save for Skopje). Do you think the categories should be kept? If the "town" borders overlap with municipal, we could also place the municipal categories inside the town ones. --Upwinxp (talk) 13:56, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Past[edit]

Merge it to Category:History. We generally don't maintain the distinction between past and history, and the Category:History category is already used for anything related to the past. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:50, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep History is the systematic study and documentation of the human past. The period of events before the invention of writing systems is considered prehistory. I didn't know the category does contain some categories I thought it wouldn't contain somewhere in its subcategories but that is despite this being inconsistent with definitions of "History". So even if it stays like that so that the category doesn't really match what "History" refers to, the Past category is complementary to it.
For example, Paleontology, Early Earth (not just geologically but e.g. relating to the origin of earthly life), and prehistory anthropology are all well in the scope of Past but not in the scope of History per its definition. Also history is kind of like narrative stories or chronicling but there's more to the past than that such as Interactive virtual past‎ where the past, not historical events are recreated. There's no good reason to merge this broader concept into the much narrower unfitting one into which a few unfitting categories have been crammed into. Prototyperspective (talk) 09:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep I was going to agree with deletion or merge, as just about everything on here is depicting the past. I am uploading pictures from my museum trip only a few days ago, but a few days ago is still the past. But we do have images that depict at least visions of the future, or illustrate the concepts of past, present, and future as divisions of time. Thus, I think that as a period of time, it makes sense, and since we also have its colleagues Category:Present and Category:Future, I think it is warranted to keep this category.
I do think it is ripe for mis-use, as a lot of broad concept categories are, and it will require regular patrolling to keep on point. Josh (talk) 08:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sliced cucumbers[edit]

What is the difference between Category:Sliced cucumbers and Category:Cucumber slices? Can descriptions be added showing the difference OR can both be merged? JopkeB (talk) 11:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This [Sliced cucumbers] category was created first. "Cucumber slices" was created later by a person who was trolling me because I've tagged some of his pictures as low quality SpiderMum (talk) 13:03, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not trying to agree with a troll, but I do think that 'cucumber slices' is better than 'sliced cucumbers'. Either way, they can be merged. Josh (talk) 08:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cucumis sativus by country[edit]

What is the difference between Category:Cucumis sativus by country and Category:Cucumbers by country‎? Can these two categories be merged? (The last one to stay because that is more clear for me and I guess for a lot of other people.) JopkeB (talk) 15:05, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My best understanding is that Cucumis sativus is the plant as a whole and 'cucumber' is the fruit of the plant. I'm very confused as to exactly where the scientific name for a species is used and where the common name for it is used. However, what is definitely not correct is using both as is done in several of the sub-cats of this one. Josh (talk) 08:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Joshbaumgartner: So in principle these two categories are about two different things and should both stay.
Am I right? JopkeB (talk) 14:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@JopkeB I would agree with that. I've kind of skirted species categorization questions so far as it seems kind of its own community and biology was my least preferred science class so I feel under-equipped to discuss scientific categorization there. However, what you are saying makes sense, so unless someone from that community wants to correct us, I would be fine with your plan. Thanks, Josh (talk) 16:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Josh, I'll wait another two weeks for another reaction, and then I'll implement my proposal if there is not. JopkeB (talk) 04:43, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Travels into the Unknown[edit]

If this collection of Maastricht is really named in English, I suggest renaming the categoriy as "Travels into the Unknown collection (Maastricht)". If the official name is in Dutch, I suggest keeping that one. Otherwise, this category name is prone to attract unwanted additions that have nothing to do with the library (like this one). Enyavar (talk) 21:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Agree This category should be renamed. It looks like it is a collection with an English name, I cannot find a name in Dutch. I did find another website, Wikidata GLAM project Travels into the unknown (and there are many about a student using this collection for her thesis). Perhaps: "Travels into the Unknown (Maastricht University Library collection)"? It is a long name, but it says exactly what it is. JopkeB (talk) 06:21, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Van Munster[edit]

This category should be renamed, it shows the coats of arms of a family called "Münster", not "Munster". New name: Coats of arms of Münster family (Westphalia, Courland) GerritR (talk) 08:25, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Agree Looks an appropriate name to me. JopkeB (talk) 06:24, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sportspeople who died as a result of playing sport[edit]

"Playing sport"?! Does a runner "play sport"? A high jumper? Is this American English? 200.39.139.17 21:57, 9 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK. So everybody other than me thinks this a good title... 🧐 200.39.139.17 21:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not much to do without a proposal to fix the issue (maybe with rationale for good measure). Josh (talk) 08:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Category:Sportspeople who died as a result of doing sports" maybe? (note: I'm not a native English speaker and am thus not 100% sure whether this suggestion would actually work or whether it should be "sport" or "sports" in case that the verb "doing" could be used here.) Alternatively, Category:Sportspeople who died as a result of engaging in sport activities (but that might be too broad and I'm also not sure whether the word "engage" would work in this context). Nakonana (talk) 11:11, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete it's not commons category's job to document cause of death. RZuo (talk) 08:11, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not a bad idea. 200.39.139.17 16:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vashti McCollum[edit]

Does this category have potential to be populated? Cc. @Minerva97 and Billinghurst: , who seem to disagree. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Minerva97: I don't know. When I created it, many years ago, it contained this photo which @Joofjoof: nominated for deletion in spite of being substantially a PD photo. In this case there's no need to discuss, report the empty category to an admin for the deletion. -- Blackcat 17:09, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete As I said, this person passed away 18 years ago. If the category wasn't populated yet, it won't be populated too soon. So , in my opinion, it should be deleted. If, at any point, an image appears under a free license that is uploaded to the project, simply recreate the category. Minerva97 (talk) 17:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment @Mdaniels5757: please don't misquote me. The speedy deletion criteria is "[if] a category is empty and is obviously unusable, unlikely to be ever meaningfully used", and as such a WD attached category is less likely to meet the criteria for speedy deletion. This deletion process is what I pointed the user to use if they felt that a deletion was necessary. I have no specific knowledge nor attachment to the category. I will note that I also don't typically see much point in hastening these linked categories to death as it doesn't particularly serve a functional purpose and any re-creation also requires a relinking at WD, and recategorisation, so it is more than "simply recreate" [all of which is not a long conversation for here.]  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lucy G. Acosta[edit]

Same situation as Commons:Categories for discussion/2024/05/Category:Vashti McCollum. @Minerva97 and Billinghurst: —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete As I said, this person passed away 16 years ago. If the category wasn't populated yet, it won't be populated too soon. So , in my opinion, it should be deleted. If, at any point, an image appears under a free license that is uploaded to the project, simply recreate the category. Minerva97 (talk) 17:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Superstraight[edit]

As far as I'm aware the whole "Super Straight" thing was mainly a transphobic internet meme that never took off. All the images in the category seem to be completely made up or copyrighted to. As there is no "Super Straight" flag outside of a few internet transphobic online message boards. It's by no means official or widely used outside of transphobic circles though. So my suggestion is that the images in this category be deleted along with files. Or at least the category be deleted and the files in it up-merged to Category:Controversial sexual and gender identities. I don't think we need a whole category just for a bunch of duplicate images of a transphobic and fake meme flag though. Adamant1 (talk) 06:26, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep the overall vibe I get is “I find this offensive”. Commons isn’t censored, so that’s invalid. There are plenty of absolutely non-notable made-up orientations and pride flags here so the argument that a concept we know exists “in the wild” is too obscure to be covered is also invalid. And even if you deleted a bunch of redundant ones you’d still have enough for a category. Also none of these files are copyrightable, even the google trends chart which is simple facts and data shown in an auto-generated graph that required no creative effort. Dronebogus (talk) 07:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your vibe is wrong. I could really care less about it personally outside of it not being an actual, official concept. Nor do the files even really have anything to do with it either. Since again, the flag is completely fictional and that's essentially all there is in the category. Nice try making this about me though. I'd like to think it would be possible to discuss the actual merits of having a category for something like this without you treating me like I started it just because I'm offended by the thing. You can't just use Commons not being censored or hide behind fake claims of my feelings about this as an excuse to keep a category that serves no purpose and goes against the projects goals either. That's not how this works.
I think you could make an argument for keeping the category if it contained files that were actually about the whole "superstright" thing to begin with. But there's no point in having one for it if the only things on here related to the concept is a couple of images of fake flags. There's no reason they can't just be upmerged. The category is essentially worthless when it comes to anything actually having to do with the "superstraight" thing though. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:05, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Firstly, there is no need to get inordinately offended about me saying I think you’re offended. Secondly, It’s not an “actual official concept”, but it is an actual hoax/neologism. Thirdly, there’s no need to try and delete a category that you’re currently trying to empty anyway. As long as at least two images exist the category is valid. If most or all the images are deleted, then of course the category would serve no purpose. But right now this is purely redundant. Dronebogus (talk) 10:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"it is an actual hoax/neologism." Is it though and how would that even matter? Neologisms aren't inherently worth having seperate cateogries for and this has been around for at least a few years now with essentially zero buy in for it outside of a couple of posts on 4chan. If you look for "superstraight flag" on Google image search there doesn't seem to be any images of the "flags" actually being used IRL anywhere either. So I really don't see how this is an actual thing outside of being a barely notable meme. It wouldn't even be that much to begin with if not for the transphobic element. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m done responding to you here. You can answer me on the individual DRs. I stand by my assertion that this is a pointless and invalid nomination because the category is still serving an objective purpose. Dronebogus (talk) 10:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I'd still appreciate an answer about why you wouldn't support the images that are left after the DRs being upmerged though since I think I've provided plenty of evidence for why its not an actual thing regardless of if there are images related to it or not. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:09, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep. It should be ignored whether the sexuality in question is notable or not, whether it is offensive or not, whether it is a product of the far-right or not. Besides from the fact that Commons is not censored, if we analyze its existence in a purely technical manner it is evident that the category meets the requirements to continue existing, more specifically the 4th point of Commons:Category inclusion criteria: it is part of a diffusion scheme. Note to the nominator that there are several relevant categories in Category:Superstraight and, if it gets deleted, the files currently in it would be spread across various categories, making their finding costly. By the way, most if not all of the files are being nominated for deletion by this nominator; I can guarantee here that at least one will be kept, as it is below the threshold of originality in the United States, and at least one flag four flags must be kept, as it is they are Commons:In use. Thanks, RodRabelo7 (talk) 21:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RodRabelo7: Can you point out where the guidelines say us not being censored has anything to do with the existence of specific categories? Because I must have missed that. Also, where exactly have I said this has anything to with it being offensive? You and Dronebogus seem to be the only one's who are making it about that. Not that I disagree that we don't censor things, but I don't see why any particular category or file should be kept simply because it relates to the topic of gender somehow. Yet unless I'm miss understanding you that seems to be your and Dronebogus' only argument against up merging the images to a better category. --Adamant1 (talk) 22:32, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can you point out where the guidelines say us not being censored has anything to do with the existence of specific categories?
    It doesn't, that's why I used "besides".
  • Also, where exactly have I said this has anything to with it being offensive?
    I'd say when you used the word "transphobic" five times throughout this discussion.
RodRabelo7 (talk) 22:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it's just an American English thing, but to me "besides" has the connotation of "in addition to." In other words, "in addition to the fact that Commons is not censored, if we analyze its existence in a purely technical manner" makes it sound like your saying the category should be kept because we anti-censorship "in addition to" the technical aspects. I don't really see why you'd bring it if you didn't think it was relevant to keeping the category or not either. Thanks for clarifying it though.
The "transphobic" thing is simply a description of the origins of the thing. Since I think the context is important to the question of it deserves a separate, individual category outside of other non-notable, niche memes on here that don't have one. The claim that my mention of it being transphobic has anything to do with it being offensive is simply you reading to much into it. As I already mentioned to Dronebogous "I could really care less about it personally outside of it not being an actual, official concept." --Adamant1 (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry. In order to make it clear, I'll try to rewrite it: "It should be ignored whether the sexuality in question is notable or not, whether it is offensive or not, whether it is a product of the far-right or not; Commons is not censored, period. [Furthermore,] if we analyze its existence [blah blah blah]." RodRabelo7 (talk) 22:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep If your issue is that you believe the content files to be out of scope, then you should raise a deletion request for those. So long as they are on Commons, however, this appears to be a valid category for them to be under. If they do get deleted at some point and this category is empty as a result, it can be deleted at that time. Josh (talk) 08:32, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Videos of penile erection[edit]

L'ultimo video non ha nessun collegamento con l'argomento. Va eliminato Acossiga (talk) 14:10, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If a particular file here is mis-categorized, you can simply correct the categorization on that file without a CfD. Is there something bigger here that requires discussion that I'm missing? Josh (talk) 08:28, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Photographs by date by country[edit]

A request for comment relating to the sub-categorization of this tree has been posted at Commons:Requests for comment/Categories of photographs by country by date, so please comment there. Josh (talk) 16:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nezami[edit]

There is a disput between me and user Orijentolog about the categories in the Category:Nezami. User Orijentolog is adding disputed categories "Poets from Iran", "12th-century people of Iran" and "13th-century people of Iran"[2][3][4], which is wrong as I think. As it can be seen in the top of these categories they are related to the modern country of Iran. In the talk page I realized that user Orijentolog mixed the means of these categories with country and cultural context. If these categories are related to the people lived within the modern borders of Iran, then they must be removed because Nizami did not live within the modern borders of Iran, he lived within the modern borders of Azerbaijan. If these categories are related to people who lived in the country called "Iran", then these categories again must be removed because Nizami lived in Seljuq Empire ruled by Turkic dynasty of the Atabegs of Azerbaijan. If these categories are related to all Persian language poets then these categories again must be removed because there is already a category "Persian-language poets" there, otherwise we should add country categories related to the main language to the categories about all poets, e.g. category "Poets from Azerbaijan" to the category about Azerbaijani poet Fuzuli. Interfase (talk) 16:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, categories reflect the situation on all major Wiki projects where Nezami is categorized under Iran-related categories because it stands not only for modern country but also for historical cultural region. Medieval Iran, like Ancient Iran or Ancient Greece, spans wider than contemporary political borders and we can not categorize historical figures under modern countries. Your pseudohistorical claim that Nezami is an "Azerbaijani" poet shows your motive is of purely nationalistic nature. Attempts of Azerbaijanization of Nezami already failed on tens of Wiki projects, so you bring it here. --Orijentolog (talk) 19:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On the talk page I showed that even Britannica says that Azerbaijan has given the world Nizami. But here we discuss the categories about Iran, not about Azerbaijan. Nizami was not from the counrty called "Iran". Nizami was not from the terriory that is located within the modern borders of Iran. So, the adding of categories "Poets from Iran", "12th-century people of Iran" and "13th-century people of Iran" here is not reasonable. I think that you are still mixing country/language/culture when say "Iranian" and do not realize what these categories stands for. That why I am not already interesting in your comments. Let's see what Commons comunity thinks. Interfase (talk) 19:41, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More than ten years ago, in December 2013, you claimed Nezami "has nothing with Iran", using the same quotes from Britannica. Your claims have been rejected as a pseudohistory, so now you try it here. Because no major project accepted your historical negationism and the Baku's ongoing campaign. --Orijentolog (talk) 21:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And to repeat once again, scholarly perspectives about the issue are pretty clear, that's why all Wiki projects categorize Nezami under Iran-related categories. The only exception is the Azerbaijani Wikipedia which follows the state propaganda. Your claims are no different. --Orijentolog (talk) 22:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are trying to take the discussion in a different direction. I repeat once again, no one here is trying to add the category “poets of Azerbaijan” to the category about Nizami, we are talking about controversial categories about poets and people of Iran, to which Nizami could not belong as I stated above. In English Wikipedia there are no such categories, only categories about "Iranian people" which are not the same. Iranian people are not equal to "people of Iran". Interfase (talk) 05:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's "controversial" only for you. Tons of subcats of People by century by country are interconnected with Wiki equivalents (despite "X-ian" vs. "from X" differences), and according your logic it's all "wrong". --Orijentolog (talk) 06:50, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't discus tons of subcats, we discuss this particular category. If tons of categories are not in correct places, then they must be removed as well. Let's for now correct category about Nizami and remove these misleading categories. Interfase (talk) 07:27, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You do discuss it because your claim imply there are thousands of wrong connections. And there's nothing misleading in this particular case. --Orijentolog (talk) 17:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If there is wrong connection, then we need to correct this wrong connection, not to mislead the readers and users of Commons. If we face with mistake we need to correct this mistake not apply it everywhere again and again. As I explained on a talk page and here categories with "of Iran" and "from Iran" are wrong in the category about Nizami Ganjavi because he was not from Iran. If he wrote his poems in Persian and considered as Persian poet or Iranian poet it does not mean that he is from Iran. Frank Sinatra is Italian. But we cannot place category "Vocalists from Italy" or "Actors from Italy" to the category about Frank Sinatra, despite the fact that the category "Italian-American vocalists" is located in the category "Vocalists from Italy". Why you continue to ignore this simple logic based on the common sense? Interfase (talk) 18:17, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your claims are based on pseudohistorical interpretations, as you already proved on the major talk page. The world regards Nezami as an Iranian poet. Parallels with Sinatra are false analogy, historical cases like Herodotus are much more relevant. His categories will ultimately lead you to Greece, Iran and Turkey. --Orijentolog (talk) 18:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it is you who proved on the major talk page that you are mixing territorial and cultural context in the term of "Iranian poet". You think that the "Iranian" is the same with "of Iran" or "from Iran", but this is false. Parallels with Sinatra are correct. You will not find "Vocalists from Italy" in category "Frank Sinatra" but you can find it in category "Italian-American vocalists" because Italian-American vocalists can be from Italy, but not all Italian-American vocalists were from Italy like Sinatra who was not from Italy but was Italian. The same thing with Herodotus: you will not find "Historians from Greece" in category "Herodotus" but you can find it in category "Ancient Greek historians" because Ancient Greek historians can be the historians from Greece, but not all "Ancient Greek historians" were from Greece like Herodotus. The same should be applied for Nizami. He was Persian language poet and was from Seljuq empire. We can find category "Iran" in he category about people from Seljuq empire because Seljuq empire was located mainly in the territory of Iran and people from Seljuq empire can be from Iran but not all people from Seljuq empire should be from Iran. Interfase (talk) 05:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Justiça do Trabalho do Brasil[edit]

Is this Brazilian language? Why not English? 200.39.139.16 15:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per category naming policy , if this is the official name of the organization and they have no published or official English version, it is acceptable to leave the proper name in a non-English language. However, reviewing their official website reveals important details:
  1. In Portuguese, their name is styled as simply "Justiça do Trabalho", not "Justiça do Trabalho do Brasil". If were were to use their form in Portuguese, "do Brasil" should be dropped. If dab is needed, "(Brazil)" should be used.
  2. The official website does offer an English version, and there, the name is styled "Labor Court". Since this there is an English name provided on the official site, that should be used for the category name, probably warranting "(Brazil)" as a dab.
Thus, Rename category to Category:Labor Court (Brazil) in compliance with category naming policy  Josh (talk) 07:01, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Court? 200.39.139.16 16:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Caso Tatiane Spitzner[edit]

Does caso mean case? 200.39.139.16 16:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, so Rename category to Category:Case of Tatiane Spitzner, Category:Tatiane Spitzner case, or even just Category:Tatiane Spitzner. I'm not sure if the true crime folks have much of a standard for these kinds of categories, any of those three comply with Commons category policies  as far as I can tell. Josh (talk) 07:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On the right path... 200.39.139.16 16:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, caso means case in Portuguese. What’s the matter?

Category:Images from Christie's by Hans Baldung[edit]

makes no sense at all and only crowds the place, and then for 1 img. MenkinAlRire (talk) 17:26, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not an image but a painting. 200.39.139.17 22:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Paintings are a kind of image. Josh (talk) 07:57, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This category name implies that "Christie's" is the name of the source from which these images were gathered, and that the original creator of the images was Hans Baldung. If that is what these 3 images are, then this seems a correct category to hold them in accordance with Commons category policies , so  Keep unless that isn't what these are. Josh (talk) 08:00, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Kiwen[edit]

Should be renamed to Category:kiwen (toki pona) Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:37, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ko[edit]

Should be renamed to Category:ko (toki pona) Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lape[edit]

Should be renamed to Category:Lape (toki pona) Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Laso[edit]

Should be renamed to Category:laso (toki pona) Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Lawa[edit]

Should be renamed to Category:lawa (toki pona) Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Len[edit]

Should be renamed to Category:len (toki pona) Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Linja[edit]

Should be renamed to Category:linja (toki pona) Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Loje[edit]

should be renamed to Category:loje (toki pona) Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pini[edit]

I do not know what this catergory is supposed to be about but it certainly has nothing to do with Toki pona. Should be discussed for potential deletion, clarification of the name, and categorization Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alexander-von-Humboldt-Gymnasium[edit]

Ich schlage vor, den Klammerzusatz (Konstanz) anzufügen, denn wie man in Category:Schools named after Alexander von Humboldt sieht, gibt es sehr viele Schulen dieses Namens. Frupa (talk) 17:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Support Ich denke, das wäre eine recht unkontroverse Umbenennung. Aber vielleicht sollte man sich auf eine Namensform einigen bzw. den Städtenamen-Zusatz vereinheitlichen; denn derzeit gibt es sowohl die Variante "Alexander von Humboldt Gymnasium Stadtname" als auch ""Alexander von Humboldt Gymnasium (Stadtname)". Ersteres impliziert, dass der Stadtname Teil des offiziellen Namens der Schule ist, was vermutlich anzuzweifeln ist. Nakonana (talk) 11:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Benoît Prieur[edit]

Category of a globaly banned user Durifon (talk) 07:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep, nothing to do. --Achim55 (talk) 18:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep per above. Why was the user banned and why is that not clearly visible on the user page? Prototyperspective (talk) 14:10, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Study of the Christ child[edit]

only one copy after deletion of the dublicate (and no need) MenkinAlRire (talk) 20:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One file is enough and there are two here. Nothing required. Close the discussion. 186.173.236.245 12:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Paintings by Marian Stelmasik[edit]

COpyvios, uploader is not author 178.37.205.142 19:52, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Avant-corps in Interlaken[edit]

Renaming in: Facades in Interlaken? Fassaden in Interlaken? Rectilinium (talk) 03:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The category is meant for an architectural feature, see w:Avant-corps. Enhancing999 (talk) 20:59, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, my fault. Definitely a keeper. Probably adding a new cat for facades. Rectilinium (talk) 22:49, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Palestinian women[edit]

It's not really clear what the difference between this category and Category:Women of Palestine is. So does anyone care if it's up-merged? Or if the answer to that is no can someone at least say exactly how they are different? Adamant1 (talk) 06:14, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The adjective form is usually used for ethnic groups. E.g. Kalmyk people, who are an ethnic group of Mongolian origin that has been living in the European part of Russia for centuries and have their own federal state/republic within Russia - Category:Kalmykia -, but only 67% of Kalmykia's population are Kalmyks (the others are ethnic Russians, Germans, Chechens etc.). So, an ethnic Russian woman who was born and lives in Kalmykia would be a "Woman of Kalmykia", but she wouldn't be a "Kalmyk woman". That's the difference between the two categories. Now, I'm not familiar with the situation in Palestine. Is there a notable amount of "women of Palestine" who are not "Palestinian women"? If yes, then a separation of the two categories might make sense. If not, then "Palestinian women" could be kept as a redirect to "women of Palestine". Nakonana (talk) 11:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at the subcategories of this one most, if not all, of them are for women who were born and live in Palestine. So they seem to be both "Palestinian women" and "women of Palestine." As oppossed to say a woman who was born and lives in the United States but happens to be of Palestinian ancestory, which I assume there's another category for altogether. So probably redirecting one is the best option. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Homeland[edit]

Ambiguous name, can be misused by uploaders to categorize their own homelands. No objections for Category:Homeland in art. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 08:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Basalt dikes[edit]

What is the difference between Category:Basalt dikes and Category:Dikes (flood protection) from basalt? Can they both have descriptions showing the differences OR can they be merged? JopkeB (talk) 11:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Paintings of penitent Saint Jerome[edit]

cat should better be called Paintings of Saint Jerome in the Desert, avoiding the imgs of him in his study to be tagged with this one (penitent as the general characterisation of him) MenkinAlRire (talk) 15:32, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Coat of arms of the Duchy of Milan (Before 1395)[edit]

There was no Duchy of Milan before 1395. It was created in 1395. These are the arms of the Visconti family, who before 1395 were "lords of Milan". The category seems intended for un-crowned Biscione Lobsterthermidor (talk) 17:25, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ehemaliges Progymnasium (Bern)[edit]

There is some overlap between Category:Ehemaliges_Progymnasium_(Bern) (created 2013) and Category:Progr (created 2008). What to do? Merge or make one a subcategory of the other? Enhancing999 (talk) 17:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative: rename one to Category:Waisenhausplatz 30 (Bern) and redirect the other there. Enhancing999 (talk) 08:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Transportation (Trujillo, Peru)[edit]

Reasons for discussion request: Hello, this category is duplicated, as it has a similar name to Category:Transport in Trujillo (Peru) and there are photos uploaded there, so I want the duplicate category to be deleted. --Fabco09 (talk) 21:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fabco09, I imagine this can be speedy deleted without controversy. I notice the correct category has a Wikidata Infobox, but is missing an item over at Wikidata. Can you by chance either fix that or remove the infobox? Josh (talk) 07:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Works by Andrea Mantegna in the Cleveland Museum of Art[edit]

no other museum has this parent. Both should be sorted under d./p....by museum MenkinAlRire (talk) 21:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Roofing by material[edit]

What is the difference between Category:Roofing by material and Category:Roofs by material? Can both get descriptions showing the difference OR can both be merged? JopkeB (talk) 07:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Category:Roofing by material into Category:Roofs by material "Roofing" is not a topic on Commons, so it doesn't make sense to have an index category of roofing. It seems an inadvertent duplication of the correct category, which is a useful index of the existing topic, Roofs. Josh (talk) 07:18, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Streets in Gelnhausen[edit]

I would rename the subcategories to the more usual "<streetname> (Gelnhausen)" format. Enhancing999 (talk) 09:36, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Support in compliance with the Universality Principle . Josh (talk) 06:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Support as Josh pointed out. But I would advise you to do this only if (ever) the Problem with Cat-a-lot has been solved. Because it is already quite a lot of work to do this, and without Cat-a-lot properly working it might be a hell of a job. JopkeB (talk) 06:40, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Tribunais Regionais do Trabalho[edit]

Why not in English?! 200.39.139.16 14:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Porque se trata de tribunais brasileiros! Devem ser redigidos em português do Brasil Emerson Júnior GSF (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per category naming policy , if this is the official name of the organization and they have no published or official English version, it is acceptable to leave the proper name in a non-English language.
However, reviewing their official website reveals that the official website does offer an English version, and there, the name is styled "Regional Labor Courts". Since this there is an English name provided on the official site, that should be used for the category name, probably warranting "(Brazil)" as a dab.
Thus, Rename category to Category:Regional Labor Courts (Brazil) in compliance with category naming policy  Josh (talk) 07:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. 200.39.139.16 16:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ministers of Tribunal Superior do Trabalho[edit]

"Ministers of" is OK. 200.39.139.16 16:13, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per category naming policy , if "Tribunal Superior do Trabalho" is the official name of the organization and they have no published or official English version, it is acceptable to leave the proper name in Portuguese.
However, reviewing their official website reveals that the official website does offer an English version, and there, the name is styled "Superior Labor Court". Since this there is an English name provided on the official site, that should be used for the category name, probably warranting "(Brazil)" as a dab.
Thus, Rename category to Category:Ministers of the Superior Labor Court (Brazil) in compliance with category naming policy  Josh (talk) 07:15, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. 200.39.139.16 16:54, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Electric three-wheeled stand-up scooters by location[edit]

 Delete, this is an unnecessary extra layer of metacat. Josh (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Different types of IFO (ufo identified)[edit]

Poorly named category at best. Seems to be a collection of 'things people thought were aliens' or 'things in the air people commonly misidentify as something more mysterious than they should be' or some such. Perhaps rename as Category:Aerial phenomena commonly presumed to be UFOs? I still don't think it makes for a good category, but its better than its current name. Delete and merge into Category:Atmospheric phenomena? Josh (talk) 23:07, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Different types of UFOs[edit]

Bad name, Rename category to Category:UFOs by type or Category:UFOs by shape. Josh (talk) 23:09, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Monstration[edit]

Is there a good reason this category name is singular? Jmabel ! talk 01:01, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel I suppose it depends on whether this category is for the activity or the event. In this case, I have no idea how you depict the activity without the event, so I'd go with plural. Josh (talk) 06:46, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Japanese FOP cases/deleted/3D artworks[edit]

No practicality to distinguish 3D artworks from other cases related to artistic works of Japan, as under the eyes of the Japanese law both 2D and 3D are just the same, artistic works. Therefore, all case pages should be reverted back to Category:Japanese FOP cases/deleted. Category:Japanese FOP cases/deleted/literary works is not included as the literary works are not artistic works. Regarding concerns of potential category overcrowding, it is normal to have thousands of FoP deletion requests in a single category. See Category:Russian FOP cases/deleted and Category:United States FOP cases/deleted, for example, both also do not provide liberal FoP for non-architecture. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Women's sumo[edit]

I think this should be merged with Category:Female sumo wrestlers but I am unsure about what policies apply here. That one is about the participants and this is about the act Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 19:34, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Support for this merge. It is valid to maintain one cat for the sport and a second (sub-cat) for the participants, but only if we have images about the sport that are not depictions of the players. Here, both images are clearly images of Female sumo wrestlers. Josh (talk) 06:39, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Titular Monarchs of India[edit]

Unnecessary category, since we don't categorize the monarchs by the nature of monarchy. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 03:45, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also it's monarchs, not Monarchs. 186.173.236.245 13:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Bus routes by designation[edit]

Rename Category:Bus routes by designation to Category:Bus routes by number for consistency with both parent and sub categories. The vast majority of contents are named "Bus routes numbered XXX". There are a few named "Bus routes designated XXX" and these should be renamed from 'designated' to 'numbered' to match the rest of the category. Josh (talk) 18:53, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some routes have designations, that aren't numbers. MB-one (talk) 22:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Carrer del Bisbe bridge closes up[edit]

Propose moving to Category:Close-up photographs of the Carrer del Bisbe bridge. (A different name with correct grammar would also be fine, but the present name is not.)) Jmabel ! talk 04:21, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Facade of Palau de la Generalitat at Carrer del Bisbe (Barcelona)[edit]

Can we change "at" to "on" here? I don't think any native English speaker would say "at", and the alternative "in" is a bit odd in U.S. English when referring to a building (as against something actually on the surface of the street). I know "on" is acceptable here in U.S. English, and believe it is acceptable in UK English, though I'd appreciate if someone from the UK would weigh in on that. If it's unaccceptable in UK English, I could even live with the British "in", but "at" is simply wrong. Jmabel ! talk 05:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also affects Category:Relief of Saint George at carrer del Bisbe facade (Palau de la Generalitat), where I'd change "at" to "on the". I'd also capitalize "carrer" ("Carrer" instead). And on both categories, I'd be happy to see "facade" changed to "façade", but it's not a big issue to me. - Jmabel ! talk 05:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Harmful sexual identities[edit]

Category:Sexual abuse and category:Paraphilias already exist 💚Kelly The Angel (Talk to me)💚 09:33, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Not all paraphilias are tied to harmful acts (sexual abuse in this case). And those are two categories that can be summed up by one (the current one we are discussin). And the scope of this category is about sexual identities, subtype of Category:Controversial sexual and gender identities. Formerly, Category:Pedophilia was categorized in category:sexual identity and category:sexual violence, so this one merges both. MikutoH (talk) 00:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about it for a while and decided it would better to keep the category, but change it’s name to "coercive paraphilias". Category:Controversial sexual and gender identities is about LGBT identities only, not sexual identities in general. 💚Kelly The Angel (Talk to me)💚 13:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not true, it contains sexual and gender identities that fall outside the scope of LGBTQ on their own, like Sapiosexual, fictosexual, superstraight and (arguably, though not IMO) Femboy Dronebogus (talk) 04:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep valid overlap of two categories— sexual identity and sexual violence. I’m not sure about necrophilia but many pedophiles and zoophiles definitely see their paraphilias (paraphiliae?) as identities, and subcultures have developed around both. Dronebogus (talk) 04:17, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(IMO) Calling a sexual identity "harmful" by itself is weird and informal, not to mention that it can lead to bad-faith edits of users adding controversial identities they don’t like personally. It would be nice to rename this category to "coercive paraphilias" to avoid such incidents. 💚Kelly The Angel (Talk to me)💚 16:14, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with renaming. While for necrophilia, there's indeed "necrosexual", they even have some flags, though I agree that most necrophiles don't even identify as necro-anything. MikutoH (talk) 01:03, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t know how to feel about that information Dronebogus (talk) 10:24, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People wearing female clothing[edit]

Too Western-centric perspective to categorize clothing. See my more detailed rationale here: Template talk:People wearing clothing#Auto-categorization for "female clothing" category Nakonana (talk) 10:24, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lean toward delete. Applying this is going to be really problematic not just because of the question of where the clothing is considered female but also because it can change over time. For example, silk stockings are now thought of as very female, but in the 18th Century they were not. Another example: in the U.S. pink was a specifically female color for a large part of the 20th Century, but before that it was not, and starting roughly in the 1970s it became acceptable for men's shirts (and at some later date shoes) but generally not for other male garments. Etc. - Jmabel ! talk 15:23, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nakonana, @Jmabel, why did you specifically nominate this category, doesn't it apply to all Category:Female clothing? I've added the CfD tag there as well as this is really about that category, not just this one sub of it. Josh (talk) 23:44, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just used the "People wearing clothing"-template a lot recently and noticed that it was adding the "People wearing female clothing" category automatically that's why I nominated that one. The added category was usually a red link and I hardly ever bothered to create the corresponding category, so I just never arrived at the real parent category "Female clothing", I guess. So, it's nothing against your template in particular, just my laziness to track down the real parent category. Nakonana (talk) 00:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I didn't make the nomination. I haven't any real problem with some clothing being labeled as "female": in many contexts many items of clothes clearly are gender-specific. But I think it is much more problematic when it gets into what someone is wearing, especially if it is being added by a template that cannot be aware of the context in which the clothes are worn. Is a woman in the 2020s not "wearing female clothing" if she has on a T-shirt? Is a man "wearing female clothing" if he dressed like Prince (who was eminently male, but wore a lot of clothing more traditionally thought of as female)? - Jmabel ! talk 00:57, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. A wedding dress can be "female clothing", but the second it is worn by a man it turns into "male clothing", so to speak. Such a dress would probably also need to be adjusted to the size and the body frame of a male body and therefore wouldn't be exactly a dress that is designed for women. Nakonana (talk) 01:23, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nakonana Wait, no, that's incorrect. A piece of female clothing, if we can determine it to be such (say a wedding dress made for a woman to wear, using the example above), is still a piece of female clothing no matter who happens to be donning it at the moment. Let's be very clear, the adjective 'female' is applied to the clothing, and means that the clothing is designed/intended for a female to wear. However, should a man put on that wedding dress we are talking about it doesn't change the design intent, so it doesn't change to being a 'male dress'. Josh (talk) 06:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But what if the dress design was changed to fit a male body? A blouse is just a dress shirt (or whatever the male version is called in English) that is fitted to a woman's body. So, if a dress shirt fitted to a female body is considered "female clothing", then wouldn't a wedding dress that is fitted to a male body be considered "male clothing" accordingly? And the perspective of a wedding dress being "female clothing" by default is again a Western-centric perspective. I mean, is the guy in this photo wearing a "wedding dress" or...? And do we agree that this wedding dress is "male clothing"? Nakonana (talk) 20:00, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel I don't agree with you on that. If we determine whether clothing is male or female just based on who is wearing it, then it is meaningless to ascribe gender to the clothing at all and we might as well delete the whole male/female clothing scheme completely. If the T-shirt you speak of is designed for female use (sizing, fit, marketing, etc.) to the point we can call it a female t-shirt, then it is always a female t-shirt, same with a male one. If it is a unisex design, then it should never be gendered, regardless of who is wearing it. As for Prince's outfit, if it was made for him, then it is male clothing, and it is irrelevant if someone thinks its effeminate or whatever...likewise, if it is an article made for a woman, but he dons it, it is still female clothing. Josh (talk) 06:13, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

to the point we can call it a female t-shirt

The question is really whether we can do that. In the US, pink and magenta shirts or jackets for kids are usually exclusively for girls. But in Scandinavian countries it is not too uncommon for boys to wear such items in such colors. And children's clothing is also quite unisex in its size and fit. It might get tricky to determine for whom an item was created. I'm not saying that there aren't some rather obvious cases, but there are also cases where it can get complicated. Nakonana (talk) 20:06, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Question @Nakonana: Why is this a "Western"-centric issue? The idea of certain clothing being intended for, designed for, sized for, culturally accepted being worn by, and/or is more generally expected to be worn by a particular gender is common to most cultures on the planet past and present, isn't it? Maybe there are some cultures which completely lack gendering in their clothing, but it is a pretty small group, so I just wonder why you would think this is a specifically 'Western' issue (whatever 'Western' refers to). Josh (talk) 01:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The way the category currently looks like is Western-centric (North American / Europen). I was going off of "dresses" and "skirts" being categorized as "female" clothing. Those two types of clothing might be categorized differently from an Asian-centric perspective for example. Nakonana (talk) 01:15, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Nakonana I think we all are in agreement that neither dresses nor skirts as a whole should be categorized as gendered (female, male, or otherwise), and that goes for American as well as other perspectives. Josh (talk) 05:56, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That we can agree on and I'm happy with that conclusion :) Nakonana (talk) 20:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Question @Jmabel: Something like silk stockings is a broad type of clothing that can certainly come in varieties with different genders (or no gender) associated with them. I agree with you that categorizing general types of clothing by gender is very problematic. However, there are certainly more specific clothing which are undeniably associated with a particular gender. I'm thinking of particular styles or products that are specific to a given time/place/culture and very much are gender-specific in that scope. My question is, how do we categorize that if we delete gendered clothing categories, or should we just not worry about it and no longer do categorization along those lines? Josh (talk) 01:08, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Joshbaumgartner: It's possible that this is a salvageable category, and that would be fine. But look at Category:Men wearing skirts, which is currently categorized under this. I would say at a glance that 30-40% of the images in that category are not people wearing female clothing. Are you interested in taking the time to sort this out? I'd have no problem with that. - Jmabel ! talk 05:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel Men wearing skirts does not belong under female clothing because "skirts" is too broad a class of clothing to determine that all "skirts" are intended for female humans to wear, and more technically, because Category:Skirts is not a sub-category of Category:Female clothing. It didn't take much time to fix this mis-categorization. In fact it was already fixed before your comment, so I'm assuming you were viewing a cached version of the page or working from memory. Josh (talk) 05:31, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Let's take another case. File:Before 2013 Solstice Parade 068 (9139827592).jpg (which I took) is in Category:Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, which is in , which is in turn in Category:People wearing female clothing. But is it really that? The Sisters' habits could not be mistaken for anything else. The reference they make to the habits of Catholic and Anglican nuns is clear, but certainly no actual Catholic and Anglican nun ever dressed like that: only the overwhelmingly male or male-identified Sisters.
Or File:Bikram Yoga - with Bikram Choudhury - Flickr - tiarescott.jpg: in Category:Men wearing bikini bottoms, which traces up through Category:Male humans wearing bikini bottoms to Category:Male humans wearing female clothing to Category:People wearing female clothing. But, really, when I look at that picture, nothing in it suggests to me a man wearing female clothing, just a man very minimally clothed to hide his genitals and (presumably) anus.
Again: I'm not saying this category area certainly couldn't be cleaned up and maybe made useful (though I have my doubts), just that right now it's a mess. - Jmabel ! talk 02:12, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it might be doable if a human would manually add this category on a case by case basis. So, if the "Category:People wearing female clothing" would be just a sub-category of "People wearing clothing" and wouldn't have any broad sub-categories of its own that classify certain types of clothing (such as dresses, bikinis etc.) as "female" by default. Instead, the category would only contain files that were manually tagged as "people wearing female clothing". This might help to ensure that the category really only contains files where someone is wearing clothing that was clearly not intended for them. Maybe something like the following would qualify for that category: File:Japan, Tokyo, young boy in his mother’s shoes 1.jpg and File:Japan, Tokyo, young boy in his mother’s shoes 2.jpg. Nakonana (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Category:Coats of arms of Eckher von Kapfing family[edit]

Unnötige Zwischenkategorie, sollte erst geleert und dann gelöscht werden GerritR (talk) 12:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it unnecessary/redundant? JopkeB (talk) 06:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's the only subcategory of an empty parent category. One of them is not necessary, at least for now.--GerritR (talk) 08:17, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In that case I think that Category:Coats of arms of Eckher family is redundant. JopkeB (talk) 15:05, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aichi SH 138[edit]

AICHI SH 138 5.59.15.187 22:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the problem? What should be done? Why? Please give an explanation. JopkeB (talk) 06:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They prefer capital letters. Don't you see? 186.173.236.245 12:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please, do not react so condescending. If you want to discuss something, it should be absolutely clear for all participants what the discussion is about, now and in the future.
Who is "they"? And if the problem can be solved by renaming the category, you can just ask for it in the category (tab "More", "Rename" and fill in the form), an administrator will make the change. JopkeB (talk) 15:10, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:General de división shoulder straps[edit]

What is the purpose of this category? Sinigh (talk) 11:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Aerial photographs od Lubrza, Lubusz Voivodeship[edit]

duplikat Cyku new (talk) 14:14, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cosplay by year by work[edit]

There is little usefulness in categorizing cospaly by year by work. Categorizing by character and country is already enough Trade (talk) 18:10, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Disney characters by year of introduction[edit]

Is this category really necessary? Trade (talk) 18:34, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Pedestrians by district[edit]

Look at the Category tree downwards please. 176 categories invented for one foolish file! 186.173.5.168 23:16, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"176 categories invented for one foolish file"? Strange fantasy of an anonymous guest.RG72 (talk) 03:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization in Category:Space Jam[edit]

Huge amount (+100) of metacats created for Space Jam made by an IP user, most of which are empty or only contain one file (Space Jam including all its subcategories has about 20 files in total). This affects other franchises as well (Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, The Lego Movie, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Scooby-Doo and Scoob!) for which I made separate CfD's.

All of these should be deleted.

Category:‎Automobiles in Space Jam by work
Category:Automobiles in Space Jam: A New Legacy‎
Category:Automobiles in Space Jam‎
Category:Bugs Bunny in Space Jam: A New Legacy by medium‎
Category:Bugs Bunny in Space Jam: A New Legacy‎
Category:Darius James (Space Jam)‎
Category:‎Families from the Space Jam franchise
Category:‎Films featuring Darius James (Space Jam)
Category:Films featuring Malik (Space Jam)‎
Category:James family (Space Jam: A New Legacy) interpreters‎
Category:James family (Space Jam: A New Legacy)‎
Category:‎LeBron James (Space Jam: A New Legacy)
Category:LeBron James in Space Jam: A New Legacy by medium‎
Category:LeBron James in Space Jam: A New Legacy‎
Category:Parodies in Space Jam: A New Legacy‎
Category:Scoob! in Space Jam: A New Legacy screenshots‎
Category:Scoob! in Space Jam: A New Legacy‎
Category:Space Jam (1996 film) characters‎
Category:Space Jam (1996 film) guest characters by name‎
Category:Space Jam (1996 film) guest characters‎
Category:Space Jam animated characters‎
Category:‎Space Jam artworks by language by work
Category:Space Jam artworks by type‎
Category:Space Jam artworks by work‎
Category:‎Space Jam artworks in English
Category:Space Jam by character by medium‎
Category:Space Jam by character by work‎
Category:‎Space Jam by character
Category:Space Jam by language by medium‎
Category:Space Jam by language by work‎
Category:Space Jam by language‎
Category:Space Jam by medium‎
Category:Space Jam by name by work‎
Category:Space Jam by source by work‎
Category:Space Jam by source‎
Category:Space Jam by subject by work‎
Category:Space Jam by subject‎
Category:Space Jam by work by medium‎
Category:Space Jam by work‎
Category:Space Jam by year of introduction‎
Category:Space Jam by year‎
Category:Space Jam character redirects to lists‎
Category:Space Jam characters by franchise‎
Category:Space Jam characters by gender‎
Category:Space Jam characters by name by type‎
Category:Space Jam characters by name by work‎
Category:Space Jam characters by name‎
Category:Space Jam characters by role‎
Category:Space Jam characters by source‎
Category:‎Space Jam characters by type by work
Category:Space Jam characters by type‎
Category:Space Jam characters by work by type‎
Category:Space Jam characters by work‎
Category:Space Jam characters by year of introduction‎
Category:Space Jam characters in A New Legacy by name‎
Category:Space Jam characters in A New Legacy‎
Category:Space Jam characters introduced in 1996‎
Category:‎Space Jam characters introduced in 2021
Category:‎Space Jam female characters
Category:Space Jam film characters‎
Category:Space Jam films by character‎
Category:Space Jam guest characters by name‎
Category:Space Jam guest characters by work‎
Category:Space Jam guest characters‎
Category:‎Space Jam heroes
Category:‎Space Jam in English
Category:Space Jam live-action film characters‎
Category:Space Jam male characters‎
Category:Space Jam original characters by name‎
Category:Space Jam original characters‎
Category:‎Space Jam posters by language by work
Category:Space Jam posters by language‎
Category:Space Jam posters in English‎
Category:Space Jam screenshots by character‎
Category:Space Jam screenshots by work‎
Category:Space Jam screenshots‎
Category:Space Jam universe‎
Category:‎Space Jam universes by work
Category:Space Jam villains‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy artworks by language by type‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy artworks by language‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy artworks by source‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy artworks by type‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy artworks in English‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy artworks
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy by character by medium‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy by character‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy by decade‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy by language by medium‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy by language‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy by name‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy by source by medium
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy by source
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy by subject‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy by universe‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy by version by medium
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy by version‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy by year
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy characters by name‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy characters by type
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy characters
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy guest characters by name‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy in 2021‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy in English
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy in the 2020s‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy logos by language‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy logos in English‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy logos‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy music
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy original version screenshots‎‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy original version‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy photographies‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy posters by language‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy posters by type‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy posters in English
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy posters
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy RIP artworks‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy RIP banners‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy RIP special banners‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy screenshots by character‎‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy screenshots by language‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy screenshots by version‎
Category:‎Space Jam: A New Legacy screenshots in English‎
Category:Space Jam: A New Legacy universe‎
Category:Stan Podolak‎ (an unused redirect to Space Jam)

--ReneeWrites (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Yes, this is a kind of a disaster. I whish we had a possibility to prohibit this kind of creating categories and categorization. And can the IP adress be blocked? JopkeB (talk) 06:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a dynamic IP. How do you suggest we block it? Trade (talk) 00:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Admins are able to block IP ranges. ReneeWrites (talk) 01:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization in Category:Mickey Mouse[edit]

Large amount of empty meta-categories in Category:Mickey Mouse, most of these are by the same IP user who made the categories in Space Jam, Steamboat Willie, The Lego Movie, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Scooby-Doo and Scoob!.

Category:Gallery pages about Mickey Mouse
Category:Mickey Mouse artworks by language
Category:Mickey Mouse artworks by work
Category:Mickey Mouse artworks in English
Category:Mickey Mouse by character by medium
Category:Mickey Mouse by character
Category:Mickey Mouse by character by work
Category:Mickey Mouse by decade by work
Category:Mickey Mouse by decade
Category:Mickey Mouse by festival by work
Category:Mickey Mouse by festival
Category:Mickey Mouse by language by medium
Category:Mickey Mouse by language
Category:Mickey Mouse by medium by work
Category:Mickey Mouse by name by work
Category:Mickey Mouse by name
Category:Mickey Mouse by source by work
Category:Mickey Mouse by source
Category:Mickey Mouse by subject by medium
Category:Mickey Mouse by subject
Category:Mickey Mouse by version by medium
Category:Mickey Mouse by version by work
Category:Mickey Mouse by version
Category:Mickey Mouse by work by medium
Category:Mickey Mouse by work
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by gender
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by language by name
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by language
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by medium by name
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by medium
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by name by type
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by name
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by role
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by source by name
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by source
Category:Mickey Mouse characters by type
Category:Mickey Mouse characters in Steamboat Willie by name
Category:Mickey Mouse characters in Steamboat Willie
Category:Mickey Mouse characters
Category:Mickey Mouse female characters‎
Category:Mickey Mouse heroes
Category:Mickey Mouse in English
Category:Mickey Mouse in media
Category:Mickey Mouse in Steamboat Willie
Category:Mickey Mouse in the 1920s
Category:Mickey Mouse male characters‎
Category:Mickey Mouse original characters by name
Category:Mickey Mouse original characters
Category:Mickey Mouse posters by language
Category:Mickey Mouse posters in English
Category:Mickey Mouse screenshots by character
Category:Mickey Mouse screenshots by language
Category:Mickey Mouse screenshots by subject
Category:Mickey Mouse screenshots by version
Category:Mickey Mouse screenshots by work
Category:Mickey Mouse screenshots in English
Category:Mickey Mouse screenshots
Category:Mickey Mouse universe
Category:Mickey Mouse universes by work
Category:Mickey Mouse villains
Category:Screenshots of Mickey Mouse characters by character
Category:Screenshots of Mickey Mouse characters
Category:Screenshots with Mickey Mouse characters by character
Category:Screenshots with Mickey Mouse characters
Category:Screenshots with Mickey Mouse in Steamboat Willie
Category:Screenshots with Mickey Mouse

--ReneeWrites (talk) 11:01, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete JopkeB (talk) 07:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization in Category:Scooby-Doo and Category:Scoob![edit]

Large amount of empty meta-categories (and empty character categories) in Category:Scooby-Doo and Category:Scoob!. Most of these are by the same IP user who made the categories in Space Jam, Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, The Lego Movie and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

Category:Automobiles in Scoob!
Category:Automobiles in Scooby-Doo by name
Category:Automobiles in Scooby-Doo by work
Category:Automobiles in Scooby-Doo
Category:Photographs of Scooby-Doo (character)
Category:Sandy Duncan in Scooby-Doo
Category:Scoob! artworks by language by type
Category:Scoob! artworks by language
Category:Scoob! artworks by source
Category:Scoob! artworks by type
Category:Scoob! artworks in English
Category:Scoob! artworks
Category:Scoob! by character
Category:Scoob! by language by medium
Category:Scoob! by language
Category:Scoob! by medium
Category:Scoob! by name
Category:Scoob! by source by medium
Category:Scoob! by source
Category:Scoob! by subject
Category:Scoob! characters by name
Category:Scoob! characters by type
Category:Scoob! characters
Category:Scoob! guest characters
Category:Scoob! in English
Category:Scoob! logos by language
Category:Scoob! logos in English
Category:Scoob! RIP artworks
Category:Scoob! screenshots by character
Category:Scoob! screenshots
Category:Scoob! universe
Category:Scooby-Doo (character) by medium
Category:Scooby-Doo (character) by source
Category:Scooby-Doo (character) in Scoob! by medium
Category:Scooby-Doo (character) in Scoob!
Category:Scooby-Doo artworks by work
Category:Scooby-Doo artworks
Category:Scooby-Doo by character
Category:Scooby-Doo by character by medium
Category:Scooby-Doo by character by work
Category:Scooby-Doo by medium by work
Category:Scooby-Doo by name by work
Category:Scooby-Doo by source by work
Category:Scooby-Doo by subject by medium
Category:Scooby-Doo by subject by work
Category:Scooby-Doo by subject
Category:Scooby-Doo by work by medium
Category:Scooby-Doo by work
Category:Scooby-Doo by year of introduction
Category:Scooby-Doo by year
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by gender
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by medium by name
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by medium
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by name by work
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by name
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by role
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by source
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by type by work‎
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by type
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by work by type‎
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by work
Category:Scooby-Doo characters by year of introduction
Category:Scooby-Doo characters in Scoob! by name
Category:Scooby-Doo characters in Scoob!
Category:Scooby-Doo characters introduced in 1969
Category:Scooby-Doo female characters‎
Category:Scooby-Doo guest characters by name
Category:Scooby-Doo guest characters by work
Category:Scooby-Doo heroes‎
Category:Scooby-Doo male characters‎
Category:Scooby-Doo screenshots by character
Category:Scooby-Doo screenshots by subject
Category:Scooby-Doo screenshots by work
Category:Scooby-Doo screenshots
Category:Scooby-Doo universes by work
Category:Scooby-Doo villains‎
Category:Screenshots of Scooby-Doo (character) in Scoob!
Category:Screenshots of Scooby-Doo (character)
Category:Screenshots of Scooby-Doo characters by character
Category:Screenshots of Scooby-Doo characters
Category:Screenshots with Scooby-Doo (character) in Scoob!
Category:Screenshots with Scooby-Doo (character)
Category:Screenshots with Scooby-Doo characters by character
Category:Screenshots with Scooby-Doo characters
Category:Simon Cowell in Scoob!
Category:Simon Cowell in Scooby-Doo

The following page contains character categories that are all empty.

Category:Scooby-Doo character redirects to lists
Category:Blue Falcon (Scoob!)
Category:Captain Caveman (Scoob!)
Category:Captain Cutler's Ghost‎
Category:Cavemens (Scoob!)
Category:Cerberus (Scoob!)‎
Category:Daphne Blake (Scoob!)‎
Category:Dick Dastardly (Scoob!)‎
Category:Doctor Jonathan Jacobo
Category:Dusty (Scoob!)‎
Category:Emile Mondavarious
Category:Fred Jones (Scoob!)‎
Category:Heather Jasper-Howe‎
Category:Madelyn Dinkley‎
Category:Mary Jane (Scooby-Doo)‎
Category:Mrs. Dinkley‎
Category:Muttley (Scoob!)
Category:Patrick Wisely‎
Category:Principal Deedle‎
Category:Scooby-Doo (Scoob!)‎
Category:Shaggy Rogers (Scoob!)‎
Category:Sheriff Bronson Stone‎
Category:Velma Dinkley (Scoob!)‎
Category:Vice Principal Grimes‎
Category:Wanda Grubwort‎

--ReneeWrites (talk) 11:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete JopkeB (talk) 07:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization in Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles[edit]

Empty and redudant metacats, redundant character categories filled with duplicates. (E.g. Michelangelo is included in almost all of these categories because he features in all of these films, these categories are not specific to the movies they're supposedly about).

Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1987 TV series) characters
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990 film series) characters‎
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2003 TV series) characters‎
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) characters‎
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2014 film series) characters‎
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles artwork
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles artworks by type
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles by medium
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles by work
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles characters by work
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles universes by work
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem characters‎
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles objects
Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles vehicles
Category:Humans (Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles)
Category:TMNT (2007 film) characters‎
Category:Turtles Forever by subject
Category:Turtles Forever by universe
Category:Turtles Forever characters

--ReneeWrites (talk) 12:39, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This one is more tricky. At least Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) characters‎ has a lot of subcategories. My advise: delete only the empty ones and the ones with only one or two subcategories. JopkeB (talk) 07:07, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand that category. Many of the subcats are explicitly mentioning a completely different TV show released 30 years ago. What are they even doing here? Trade (talk) 00:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And why are Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series) a subcategory of Category:Leonardo (2012, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles)‎? And Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012) cast‎ a subcat of Category:Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2012 TV series)‎?? There doesn't seem to be any kind of internal logic at play here Trade (talk) 00:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization in Category:The Lego Movie[edit]

Large amount of empty meta-categories in Category:The Lego Movie. Most of these are by the same IP user who made the categories in Space Jam, Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Scooby-Doo and Scoob!

Category:The Lego Movie characters by gender
Category:The Lego Movie characters by name
Category:The Lego Movie characters by name by type
Category:The Lego Movie characters by role
Category:The Lego Movie characters by type
Category:The Lego Movie female characters
Category:The Lego Movie heroes‎
Category:The Lego Movie male characters
Category:The Lego Movie original characters by name
Category:The Lego Movie original characters
Category:The Lego Movie villains

--ReneeWrites (talk) 12:34, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization in Category:Warner Bros.[edit]

See also Space Jam, Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, The Lego Movie, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Scooby-Doo and Scoob!

Category:Warner Bros. characters by franchise
Category:Warner Bros. characters by gender by franchise
Category:Warner Bros. characters by gender
Category:Warner Bros. characters by medium by franchise
Category:Warner Bros. characters by medium
Category:Warner Bros. characters by name by franchise
Category:Warner Bros. characters by name by work
Category:Warner Bros. characters by name
Category:Warner Bros. characters by role by franchise
Category:Warner Bros. characters by role
Category:Warner Bros. characters by source by franchise
Category:Warner Bros. characters by source
Category:Warner Bros. characters by type by franchise
Category:Warner Bros. characters by type
Category:Warner Bros. characters by work by franchise
Category:Warner Bros. characters by work
Category:Warner Bros. characters by year of introduction by franchise
Category:Warner Bros. characters by year of introduction
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 1937‎
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 1938
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 1945‎
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 1946
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 1949‎
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 1950‎
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 1969‎
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 1993‎
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 1996
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2000‎
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2001
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2002
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2003
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2004
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2005
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2006
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2007
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2008
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2009
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2010
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2011
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2012
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2013
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2014
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2015
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2016
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2017
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2018
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2019
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2020
Category:Warner Bros. characters introduced in 2021
Category:Warner Bros. female characters‎
Category:Warner Bros. heroes
Category:Warner Bros. male characters‎
Category:Warner Bros. original characters
Category:Warner Bros. universe
Category:Warner Bros. villains‎

--ReneeWrites (talk) 13:26, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization in Category:Looney Tunes[edit]

See also Space Jam, Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, The Lego Movie, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Scooby-Doo and Scoob!

Category:Jeff Gordon in Looney Tunes: Back in Action
Category:Looney Tunes by character by work
Category:Looney Tunes by character
Category:Looney Tunes by medium
Category:Looney Tunes by subject by medium
Category:Looney Tunes by subject
Category:Looney Tunes by work
Category:Looney Tunes by year of introduction
Category:Looney Tunes by year
Category:Looney Tunes characters by gender‎
Category:Looney Tunes characters by medium by name
Category:Looney Tunes characters by medium
Category:Looney Tunes characters by name by type
Category:Looney Tunes characters by name
Category:Looney Tunes characters by role
Category:Looney Tunes characters by type
Category:Looney Tunes characters by work
Category:Looney Tunes characters by year of introduction
Category:Looney Tunes characters introduced in 1937‎
Category:Looney Tunes characters introduced in 1938
Category:Looney Tunes characters introduced in 1945‎
Category:Looney Tunes characters introduced in 1946‎
Category:Looney Tunes characters introduced in 1949‎
Category:Looney Tunes characters introduced in 1950‎
Category:Looney Tunes characters introduced in 1996‎
Category:Looney Tunes female characters‎
Category:Looney Tunes films by character
Category:Looney Tunes guest characters by work
Category:Looney Tunes heroes‎
Category:Looney Tunes male characters‎
Category:Looney Tunes original characters by name
Category:Looney Tunes original characters
Category:Looney Tunes universe
Category:Looney Tunes universes by work
Category:Looney Tunes villains‎
Category:Looney Tunes: Back in Action guest characters
Category:Michael Jordan in Looney Tunes: Back in Action

--ReneeWrites (talk) 13:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overcategorization in various Disney & Warner Bros. categories[edit]

Empty, redundant or barely-used metacats made by the same IP user who made hundreds of similar categories for Space Jam, Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, The Lego Movie, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Scooby-Doo and Scoob!

Category:Looney Tunes characters by medium by name
Category:Lola Bunny by medium
Category:Photographs of Lola Bunny
Category:Photographs of Bugs Bunny
Category:Bugs Bunny by medium
Category:Bugs Bunny by medium by source
Category:Bugs Bunny universe
Category:Screenshots of Bugs Bunny
Category:Screenshots with Bugs Bunny
Category:Disney universe
Category:Hanna-Barbera characters by year of introduction
Category:Hanna-Barbera characters introduced in 1969
Category:Hanna-Barbera characters by name
Category:Hanna-Barbera characters by role
Category:Hanna-Barbera heroes
Category:The Flintstones characters by work
Category:The Flintstones guest characters by work
Category:The Flintstones (film) guest characters
Category:The Flintstones (film) characters
Category:Disney characters by type
Category:Disney characters by type by franchise
Category:Disney characters by gender by franchise
Category:Disney characters by medium by franchise
Category:Disney characters by name by franchise
Category:The Lion King by name
Category:The Lion King characters by name
Category:The Lion King characters by role
Category:The Lion King heroes
Category:The Lion King villains‎
Category:Lilo & Stitch characters by name‎
Category:Lilo & Stitch by name
Category:Lilo & Stitch heroes
Category:Lilo & Stitch characters by role
Category:Lilo & Stitch universe
Category:Harry Potter by character
Category:Harry Potter films by character
Category:Films featuring Harry Potter (character)
Category:Peter Rabbit characters by name
Category:Peter Rabbit characters by role
Category:Peter Rabbit heroes‎
Category:Peter Rabbit villains
Category:Peter Rabbit characters by gender
Category:Peter Rabbit male characters
Category:Peter Rabbit female characters
Category:Automobiles in Toy Story by name
Category:Automobiles in Toy Story
Category:Films featuring Bo Peep (Toy Story)
Category:Films featuring Buzz Lightyear‎
Category:Films featuring Woody (Toy Story)‎
Category:Pixar characters by role by franchise
Category:Pixar characters by role
Category:Pixar heroes‎
Category:Pixar universe
Category:Toy Story characters by name
Category:Toy Story characters by role
Category:Toy Story characters
Category:Toy Story films by character
Category:Toy Story heroes‎
Category:Toy Story universe

--ReneeWrites (talk) 12:45, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Films by character[edit]

Overcategorization by the same IP user who made hundreds of categories for Space Jam, Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, The Lego Movie, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Scooby-Doo and Scoob! and others, but structurally this one is a little different from the other CfD's. Many of these are tiny, contain no media but 1-2 categories, and are circular/self-referential (e.g. "Toy Story Films by character" will have a subcategory for "Films featuring Woody (Toy Story)‎" or "Films featuring Bo Peep (Toy Story)" which contains the category Toy Story).

Category:BoOzy’ OS films by character‎
Category:Films featuring Aud’ OS‎
Category:Films featuring BoOzy’ OS (character)‎
Category:Films featuring Cock’ OS‎
Category:Films featuring Hedgeh’ OS‎
Category:Films featuring L’ OS t’SoOl‎
Category:Films featuring MammoOth’ OS‎
Category:Films featuring Marie-L’ OS‎
Category:Films featuring Mari’ OS‎
Category:Films featuring OSmic‎
Category:Films featuring Pteranod’ OS‎
Category:Films featuring Rob’ OSmic‎
Category:Films featuring SkoOlet’ OS‎
Category:Films featuring Smilod’ OS‎
Category:Films featuring Tarz’ OS‎
Category:Pinocchio (Disney) films by character
Category:Films featuring Jiminy Cricket‎
Category:Films featuring Pinocchio (Disney character)
Category:SynCop films by character
Category:Films featuring Victor Chai
Category:The Cockbite films by character
Category:Films featuring the Cockbitosaurus (character)
Category:Toy Story films by character
Category:Films featuring Bo Peep (Toy Story)
Category:Films featuring Buzz Lightyear‎
Category:Films featuring Woody (Toy Story)‎
Category:Films based on Hanna-Barbera by character
Category:Scooby-Doo films by character
Category:Films featuring Daphne Blake‎
Category:Films featuring Fred Jones (Scooby-Doo)
Category:Films featuring Scooby-Doo (character)‎
Category:Films featuring Scrappy-Doo‎
Category:Films featuring Shaggy Rogers‎
Category:Films featuring Velma Dinkley‎
Category:The Flintstones films by character
Category:Films featuring Barney Rubble‎
Category:Films featuring Betty Rubble‎
Category:Films featuring Fred Flintstone‎
Category:Films featuring Pebbles Flintstone
Category:Films featuring Wilma Flintstone‎
Category:Tom and Jerry films by character
Category:Films featuring Droopy‎
Category:Films featuring Jerry Mouse‎
Category:Films featuring Tom Cat‎
Category:The Jetsons films by character
Category:Films featuring Astro (The Jetsons)‎
Category:Films featuring Elroy Jetson‎
Category:Films featuring George Jetson‎
Category:Films featuring Jane Jetson‎
Category:Films featuring Judy Jetson‎
Category:Films featuring Blue Falcon and Dynomutt
Category:Peter Rabbit films by character
Category:Films featuring Benjamin Bunny
Category:Films featuring Cottontail Rabbit‎
Category:Films featuring Flopsy Rabbit‎
Category:Films featuring Jemima Puddle-Duck‎
Category:Films featuring Johnny Town-Mouse‎
Category:Films featuring Josephine Rabbit‎
Category:Films featuring Mr. McGregor‎
Category:Films featuring Mrs. McGregor‎
Category:Films featuring Mopsy Rabbit‎
Category:Films featuring Mr. Jeremy Fisher‎
Category:Films featuring Mrs. Tiggy-Winkle‎
Category:Films featuring Peter Rabbit‎
Category:Films featuring Pigling Bland
Category:Films featuring Samuel Whiskers‎
Category:Films featuring Mr. Tod‎
Category:Films featuring Tom Kitten‎
Category:Films featuring Tommy Brock‎
Category:Films featuring Pete (Space Jam)
Category:Films featuring Cruella de Vil

--ReneeWrites (talk) 16:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete --Trade (talk) 06:10, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete Pointless minutia in category form. Commons categories aren't suppose to be a complete recreation or whatever of everything having to do with a particular subject. Really the some goes for the Wikidata entries, which someone should nominate for deletion on Wikidata's end once the categories are dealt with. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:26, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Vil·la romana de l'avinguda de la Catedral[edit]

How is the one photo in this category any more about the Vil·la romana than any other photo in Category:Hotel Colón Barcelona? Jmabel ! talk 02:58, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest checking the one photo in the record for the remains of this villa in the heritage register of Barcelona. The building in the place of the villa is the only thing visible.
I must admit that it seems weird to illustrate the remains of an ancient Roman villa with a photograph of a modern building, but a lot of sources about archaeological sites are illustrated by the photograph of how the site looks nowadays, and that is often just an empty field, an orchard or a modern building. That image doesn't look odd compared with those. Pere prlpz (talk) 07:43, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
However, since the (potential) content of the category is the same as Category:Hotel Colón Barcelona, deleting or merging it is also reasonable.--Pere prlpz (talk) 11:45, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categories should have at least reasonably clear criteria for membership. It seems to me that unless we have or expect to have specifically archaeological photos of this site, we basically have two categories here for the same thing, and should merge them. - Jmabel ! talk 17:38, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Football[edit]

It is currently a dab pointing to different types of football. While I agree that the term "football" is ambiguous globally, it does not mean that we cannot use this term as a container for all types of football. Because of the current situation of this category, categories like Football organizations and Football by location have remained as "orphan" categories without any connection to the parent topic. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 17:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Photographs by Suo Edits[edit]

Per Suo Edits Sebbog13 (talk) 18:13, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

G7ed by Túrelio (non-admin closure) Queen of Hearts (not related) 08:29, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Natalia Dolia[edit]

Empty category Rathfelder (talk) 20:19, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can ask for a speedy deletion. See Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion for an instruction and then use the Template:Speedydelete. Please close this discussion afterwards, see Commons:Categories for discussion#Closing a discussion for an instruction. JopkeB (talk) 07:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Cyanistes caeruleus (low quality)[edit]

see previous discussion at: Commons:Categories for discussion/2024/01/Category:Cyanistes caeruleus (low quality)

Rename category to Category:Low quality images of Cyanistes caeruleus to match other low quality images by subject categories (e.g. Category:Low quality images of cats) in compliance with the Universality Principle . Josh (talk) 16:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@JopkeB, @A1Cafel, @MPF, pinging participants at previous discussion on this category. Josh (talk) 16:55, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree - when dealing with scientific name taxa it makes much better sense to have the taxon name first, e.g. it sorts the subcategories better in Cat-a-lot and HotCat. There are numerous other similar examples, e.g. Category:Pinus nigra (low quality) (and compare also similar categories for images where the taxon is present but not the main subject, such as Category:Pinus nigra (incidental)). - MPF (talk) 17:09, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MPF is right, see Category:Low quality images of plants: all these subcategories have the format Category:Scientific plant name (low quality) or Category:Scientific plant name (low quality images). So I agree that it is better not to rename this category. JopkeB (talk) 05:12, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Question @JopkeB, @MPF, does the logic for using the "Topic (image type)" format only apply to scientific names? If so, can you elaborate on how it is different from other topics? I ask because there are ongoing discussions about how we structure and name media categories in general, so this insight may be valuable to consider in those discussions. Josh (talk) 17:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I fear I've never stopped to think about that! Being a taxonomist, I don't in my editing ever deal with e.g. cat pics.

But one other, very important, point, is brevity: the shorter the category name, the better, as long as it is easily understood. Long category names make Cat-a-lot in particular almost impossible to use, as the width of the pop-up covers over many, or even most, of the files one is trying to select to recategorise. It isn't good with Hot Cat, either. - MPF (talk) 22:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Regardless of the order chosen, (low quality) should be changed to (low quality images) to make it clear what the category represents. We aren't collecting low quality plants, but low quality images of plants that may themselves be of quite high quality. Josh (talk) 17:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but again, I'd disagree: mainly on the principle of brevity mentioned above, but also one might want to use the (low quality) subcategory for dumping out poor audio or video files (e.g. if you can barely hear the named bird above background hiss). I doubt very much whether anyone would ever be confused by the meaning. - MPF (talk) 22:44, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Opera vocalists[edit]

Opera vocalist is not the terminology most widely used in common English or in major reference works. The term "opera singer" is commonly used both in speech and in reference works on the subject, such as The Grove Book of Opera Singers. The english language wikipedia categories all use the word singer. The entire category tree should be modified accordingly. Commons should mirror the English language wiki categories which were made by WikiProject Opera. On a side note, I actually have worked as a professional opera singer and I find the phrase "opera vocalist" odd, even if its is technically correct. 4meter4 (talk) 02:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Opera vocalist" is indeed awkward and unnatural. I agree that the more typical "Opera singer" seems vastly more suitable. Aza24 (talk) 03:11, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See Category:Singers: it gives a redirect to Category:Vocalists. So on Commons we use the term "Vocalists", not "Singers", how awkward and unnatural it may sound. Though, it looks like that redirect was made with the creation of the category in 2007. My conclusion is that there never was a proper discussion about it. But then we should discuss it on the level of Category:Vocalists, not here. And it would be very much work to change that properly, because all the subcategories, grandchilds and so on, should also be changed. I wonder whether this is worth it. So my opinion is: Keep it the way it is. JopkeB (talk) 07:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And close. 186.173.236.245 12:48, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sergei Majskij[edit]

Alumni of Ural State University? 186.174.244.237 11:41, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:The sun during the solar eclipse of 2017 August 21[edit]

IMO not necessary to have a category call the sun during the solar eclipse of <date>, as most of the images is related to the eclipsed sun, which seems to be redundant A1Cafel (talk) 16:38, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Venues of the Major League Rugby[edit]

This seems oddly named. Do people really say the Major League Rugby? Jmabel ! talk 17:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Actors by role[edit]

Category spam, courtesy of the same IP user who made the categories in Space Jam, Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, The Lego Movie, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Scooby-Doo and Scoob!

None of the subcategories herein contain any media, and rather than categorizing media they create abstract (and often circular) relationships between categories instead. Every single one of them should be deleted, as well as the main category.

-- ReneeWrites (talk) 19:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trim to notable characters only There's nothing wrong with creating a category pertaining to those people closely associated with a fictional character -- I've actually done this with comics characters. Category:People associated with Spider-Man is one example, which is subdivided into writers and artists who have worked on the character, and actors who have portrayed them. But in each of those charcters, the character is a major one, which has its own Wikipedia article. I know that the Commons is a separate site, but there needs to be some type of standard, and notability seems like a good one. Right right now, the subcats in the Actors by role cat looks like it's filled with non-notable character, or characters who part of an ensemble show, movie, or book that's notable by itself, and who are not notable individually, and some of them look like they're empty of content. I say trim those who do not have their Wikipedia artice, or which have minimal or empty content that is subcategoried elsewhere. Nightscream (talk) 21:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The standard is typically that works or characters created by a specific person get subcategorized under that person's name. That person doesn't become a subcategory of their own creations. So e.g. "Spider-Man" as a subcategory of "Characters created by Stan Lee" would be valid, and would not create a circular structure. "Stan Lee" as a subcategory of "People associated with Spider-Man" would. (Being associated with something is also a very fuzzy and ill-defined term, whereas being a writer, artist or actor is far less so).
To take another example, Category:Spider-Man actors is a category with 190 entries that contains everyone who has ever played any role in any Spider-Man film. If there is a lot of media of a specific actor playing a specific role, it can get subcategorized as "[Actor] as [character]" - the creation becomes a subcategory of the creator. The actor himself would not become, in his entirety, a subcategory of that role. ReneeWrites (talk) 16:16, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Film characters by actors[edit]

Category spam, courtesy of the same IP user who made the categories in Space Jam, Steamboat Willie, Mickey Mouse, The Lego Movie, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Scooby-Doo and Scoob!

None of the subcategories herein contain any media, and rather than categorizing media they create abstract (and often circular) relationships between categories instead. Every single one of them should be deleted, as well as the main category.

-- ReneeWrites (talk) 19:23, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:RED ƎYE[edit]

Category and all its subcats should be renamed to "Red Eye" to comply with Commons' category naming guidelines (COM:CATNAME). The category also contains an excessive amount of subcategories that should be trimmed extensively, to name one example see Category:RED ƎYE characters by body part and all its subcats. ReneeWrites (talk) 11:09, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ReneeWrites,
The official spelling of our company is "RED ƎYE" (in capital letters) but we had to register it with the spelling "RED 3YE" since the character "Ǝ" is not accepted by the French administration. "RED EYE" is only used for pronunciation but might match other companies. If using capital letters goes against the rules, we are fine with using lowercase instead, but using "3" instead of "Ǝ" is more appropriate than using "E".
In all cases, we will comply with your rules and choices
As for the categories, we based ourselves on general categories to establish an identical scheme, with the desire in mind to be as accurate as possible. We still have files to upload but perhaps should we have published them first and created the categories after. If we have not acted in the right way, please accept our apologies. We remain attentive to your advice.
Anyway, we are stopping our edits for the moment, waiting for all this to be resolved and in order to avoid wasting time if our work has to be deleted.
Thanks for your understanding,
Kind regards,
RED🔴ƎYE (talk) 06:32, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@REDƎYE: I appreciate your reply (both here and in the Village Pump). Having the categories renamed as Red3ye or Red 3ye would be okay too, if that has your preference I'll change that in the original post.
It's generally speaking best practise to upload files first and then diffuse after if the categories get too big, yes. It's also more beneficial to people who are looking for certain files to have short category trees rather than very long ones, so they're able to find what they're looking for more quickly (or if they're looking for something that isn't there, to be able to find that out more quickly as well). I didn't ask for all these categories to be deleted after all, just for them to be trimmed. Trade made a helpful propsal of what that could look like below.
Between this CfD and the deletion discussion that was posted to your page a month ago, I'm sorry if Commons has been a stressful experience for you lately. ReneeWrites (talk) 18:21, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree with either name. Commons categories are supposed to use generally used titles and names, not whatever stylizing that the company decided to use in marketing Trade (talk) 13:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Trade,
What would you suggest?
Kind regards,
RED🔴ƎYE (talk) 03:56, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Red Eye (company) Trade (talk) 12:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Trade,
Thanks for your reply
The problem is that it's not the correct spelling. As we indicated above, we were declared to the French administration under the name Red 3ye Productions (the "3" replacing the unauthorized "Ǝ "). You can check it here, as well as on any other recognized register. If the decision is to call us Red Eye despite everything, we will accept it, but it will cause confusion with other companies bearing this name (the choice of "E"/"3" was precisely made to distinguish us).
Thanks for your understanding,
Kind regards,
RED🔴ƎYE (talk) 03:57, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi ReneeWrites,
You are welcome
Regarding the name, we just checked on the official records, it would be exactly Red 3ye Productions ([5]).
As for categories, from how many files is it advisable to subcategorize? Thanks to Trade for taking the time to make this proposal.
As for this CfD and the deletion discussion, we understand the process so that's ok, don't mention it
Kind regards,
RED🔴ƎYE (talk) 03:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Trade[edit]

(Merge the following categories into "Category:RED ƎYE logos")

(Merge the following categories into "Category:RED ƎYE banners")

(Merge the following categories into "Category:RED ƎYE artworks")

(Merge the following categories into "Category:Cristal Gem Zone screenshots")

(Merge the following categories into "Category:SynCop")

(Merge the following categories into "Category:RED ƎYE characters")

Thanks to ENWP user Lambiam for the help.

Omphalographer (talk) 07:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is specifically in reply to the proposal from @Trade: I would argue to  Keep the following categories, because they have enough content to justify their existence:

As subcategories of Category:RED ƎYE characters:

-- ReneeWrites (talk) 07:05, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2024/05&oldid=880993303"