Last modified on 20 July 2014, at 01:09

Commons:Categories for discussion/Archive/2013/10

Commons logo

This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Categories for discussion.

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2007 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2008 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2009 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2010 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2011 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2012 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2013 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2014 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2015 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
2016 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12
Archive October 2013
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Newport SuperDragonsEdit

Up for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Newport SuperDragons Andy Dingley (talk) 12:10, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


They've been deleted. ghouston (talk) 08:31, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:WOW! GorillaEdit

Deletion requested at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Newport SuperDragons Andy Dingley (talk) 12:27, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


Images have been deleted. ghouston (talk) 04:48, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:June 2008 in LinconshireEdit

Typo: created in error. Real category exists --Robert EA Harvey (talk) 11:18, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svg Delete, correct name is Category:June 2008 in Lincolnshire. I requested speedydelete. --Passerose (talk) 17:52, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done. Has been deleted and is empty. Cfd closed. --Passerose (talk) 08:55, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Oxana OdaynikEdit

Empty. Not used. --Jarash (talk) 17:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedied. --Túrelio (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedily Deleted, --rimshottalk 23:25, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:Élder Carlos A. CifuentesEdit

See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Carlos Antonio Cifuentes Pérez. -- Tuválkin 02:18, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Delete Motopark (talk) 03:54, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Deleted 4 weeks ago. Still empty. → closed. --Passerose (talk) 18:15, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Carlos Antonio Cifuentes PérezEdit

See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Carlos Antonio Cifuentes Pérez. -- Tuválkin 02:18, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Delete Motopark (talk) 03:50, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
    • Deleted 4 weeks ago. Still empty. → closed. --Passerose (talk) 18:15, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Cycling in the East SussexEdit

Should be moved to Cycling in East Sussex - "the" is redundant Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 14:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


✓ Done -mattbuck (Talk) 16:07, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Category:F.A. LeyendeckerEdit

misnamed, artist is at Category:Frank Xavier Leyendecker Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:31, 18 October 2013 (UTC)


Redirected to full name. -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:Books by subjectEdit

we already have Category:Books by topic, and this one is unpopulated. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:19, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Agreed (deleted as empty cat).--- Darwin Ahoy! 15:21, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Books in in the Walters Art MuseumEdit

Needs to be renamed Category:Books in the Walters Art Museum (a la "Paris in the the spring") Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:00, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol keep vote.svg Agree that is a clear typo. I renamed it. --Jarekt (talk) 11:51, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:SexualityEdit

This category seems to be about everything to do with sexual reproduction. Wikipedia doesn't have an article about sexuality, it redirects to en:Human sexuality. Wouldn't it be more consistent if the contents of this category were merged into Category:Sexual reproduction?, which is little used at present? ghouston (talk) 07:24, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Support Right idea, thanks for noticing this. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

No. The term "sexuality" deals with a well-observed, broad social, behavioral, physiological, cultural, evolutionary and psychological infrastructure in organisms that serves the goal of reproduction. The entry about "sexual reproduction" is a bio-genetic niche which probably shouldn't be crossed with the casual, social-science discourse definition of sexuality. It might be valid, though, to suggest containing Sexuality under Sexual reproduction, guaranteeing that it continues speaking to the cultural / psychological pillars of sexuality and not sinks into being a biological cat. Orrlingtalk 01:42, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think Category:Sexual reproduction should be a bio-genetic niche, it should be a very broad category that has all of the current contents of the Sexuality category within its scope. Any bio-genetic niche categories should be subcategories of Sexual reproduction. You are right that Category:Sexuality could be retained as a subcategory of Sexual reproduction. It would help if it had a description explaining exactly what was in scope, since definitions of "sexuality" vary in different sources. I'm not sure that some of its subcategories, namely Asexuality, Castration‎, and X chromosome‎, belong there. ghouston (talk) 06:37, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
I agree with some principles here and there you see now, we already have a well-elaborated Category:Reproduction where "sexuality" is contained already, as suggested above. I guess you checked the category yesterday and didn't see the Reproduction parent on it, as someone had opted it out just a couple of days earlier; I now restored it and I'd like to know if you think the structure is basically OK. Why is this "Sexual reproduction" needed when it can't potentially manifest any tangible distinction from just "Reproduction" which we already have? You're proposing "sexual reproduction" be kind of intermediative between reproduction and sexuality. I, however, would eliminate that skim-dup altogether but I might be wrong. Orrlingtalk 09:02, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Sexual reproduction would include some things that are not covered by sexuality, such as sexual reproduction in plants and biological processes at the cellular level. I did originally suggest a single category, named "sexual reproduction", which avoids the extra level of grouping categories, the question is, how important is it to have a category named "sexuality"? ghouston (talk) 09:22, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
However, a general sexual reproduction category also has problems. Category:Animal reproduction doesn't fit into it, because some animals can reproduce asexually. Perhaps separating the sexual aspects alone isn't a bad idea. ghouston (talk) 11:54, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Sexuality applies to animals incl humans and we typically classify humans under mammals > animals, which is more than acceptable but "human"-categories still ideally parallel "animal"-categories at a same level notwithstanding. As to the rigor to eliminate our "sexuality" category – in this case by moving much of its content elsewhere - unfortunately I'm not convinced there's even a slight reason to accept such an idea, as sexuality is dealt as a social-science matter and held universally (including on Commons) as a network of cultural and psychological ties and notions away from the immediate biochemistry cause of splitting cells, a proposal to repress or dismantle Category:Sexuality can't even be sustained to the slightest. Orrlingtalk 20:29, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
I accept that Sexuality is a meaningful category. Classifying humans outside animals seems rather odd, what are we supposed to be, plants, minerals? The categories Sexuality and Sexuality in animals are duplicates, which isn't right. My solution would be to delete the Sexuality in animals category and move its contents to Sexuality. Alternatively, one could have Sexuality in animals and Sexuality in humans if it's essential to keep humans separate from other animals. ghouston (talk) 04:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Humans are not classified outside animals, and as I just pointed out in a previous comment - Humans categories regularly get Animals as one of their parent cats: please review some plenty of the "X in animals" and "X in humans" here on Commons and see how well and fine and logically they are interrelated in this project's tools. If there's anything to improve, come back here. I could see some point in merging animal sexuality into sexuality but this will need to be very careful and not blindly as sexuality is a BROADER notion than any of its given beneficiary organisms at any time. This is a topic which is observed APART from its narrow biological end. Orrlingtalk 16:16, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Anyone has objections to merging Category:Animal sexuality into Category:Sexuality? Orrlingtalk 18:47, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Well I don't really see the point of doing that... --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 19:38, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
You don't think they are duplicates? ghouston (talk) 21:26, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Well no. Sexuality = human sexuality + animal sexuality. Therefore it's a surcategory of both human and animal sexuality. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 12:08, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Oh I think I get it ! You say that sexuality only concerns animals (not vegetals) and since humans are animals, either "sexuality" is the same thing as "animal sexuality" or "human sexuality" would be a subcat of "animal sexuality". Am I right ? --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 12:09, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, that's it. ghouston (talk) 21:06, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
In that case I see no objection. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 07:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

I have a different question. Orrling and I had recently had a debate about the meaning of "Sex" on Commons. According to Orrling, sex is linked to "having sex" and should be (as it is now) a subcat of "Sexuality" ; while I think it should be the contrary as on English Wikipedia, where "Sex" is taken as a larger concept that includes 'Sexuality". I have been said that the present contents of the categories are more compatible to Orrling's POV. I can accept that affirmation but... in this case is there really a difference between "Sex" and "Sexuality" ? And if there's none, shouldn't we merge those cat - and later be able to recreate or reuse the "Sex" category as it is used on WP ? --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 07:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems that Commons Category:Sex in humans corresponds to en:Wikipedia w:Category:Sexual acts. Maybe the Commons sex categories should be renamed to be more specific. I don't think there's any benefit in naming this category "sex" instead of "sexuality" though. Would "sex" mean the same as "sexual reproduction"? ghouston (talk) 10:57, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Engaging oneself in pursuing congruence of the Commons categories' logic with English Wikipedia is not the right thing to do in any event. On Wikipedia we write text articles, while here we store and manage media files. "Sex" might have different meanings in many sources, maby even within the Wiki projects, because these are different projects from one another. So "sex" here on Commons means what it is in the more casual discourse, and not some equivalent of "Gender" because "gender" already has its own category on Commons, while Sexuality is even more simple - and can't be interpreted any longer in a variety of wishful ways than the way clarified and agreed in multiple venues already. If the hindrance is now about the question whether we thus continue to keep the term Sexuality as it normally is taken and understood or as it's rather interpreted by possible individuals, then I suggest we heartily refrain from indulging this occurrence of unreasonable caprices and keep evolving the category constructively. At this point we might benefit if we know whether we can or not carry out the merger of Category:Animal sexuality with Category:Sexuality. No point even in trying to explain to adult persons why sexuality (emotions, attraction) is broader than sex (coitus). Orrlingtalk 12:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
I have moved the sex-related categories from Category:Reproduction to Category:Sexual reproduction. The status quo is that the category exists, therefore it should be used. But if you think that it's unnecessary, I'd suggest starting a discussion on that category and asking for its deletion. ghouston (talk) 23:48, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Closing, the conclusion was that Category:Sexuality should be retained, and Category:Animal sexuality was merged into it. ghouston (talk) 22:37, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:CowParadeEdit

Deletion requested at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Newport SuperDragons Andy Dingley (talk) 12:24, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Category:Cow parade in Tijuana is a valid category where FOP means we can host these images. russavia (talk) 00:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
So what about outside Mexico? Andy Dingley (talk) 00:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Closed, they've been deleted where FoP doesn't apply. ghouston (talk) 03:57, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:Gromit unleashedEdit

Deletion requested at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Newport SuperDragons Andy Dingley (talk) 12:24, 6 October 2013 (UTC)


Closed, most have been deleted. ghouston (talk) 03:55, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:Beach and park signs in CaliforniaEdit

Unneeded: now split into Category:Beach signs in California and Category:Park signs in California — hike395 (talk) 12:15, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Thumbs up - thanks for this. It was the only state to have this combined category. --Mjrmtg (talk) 12:31, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:Masná burzaEdit

  • delete, name of category is too vague, created new cat.: Masná burza Brno RomanM82 (talk) 16:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete. Bad name, all files have been moved. --Uacs451 (talk) 05:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Deleted, empty. --rimshottalk 00:27, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:Eternal flames in USAEdit

Recently created category should be changed to Eternal Flames in the United States. Who abbreviates any United States categories to USA? Mjrmtg (talk) 11:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Just do it. -- Дар Ветер (talk) 06:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the move. I know many people who abbreviate the United States of America to USA. You'll hear it chanted a lot during the next Olympics. But, if you mean, here on Commons, no. It's preferred to use "United States" to "USA" in every situation I've ever seen. Willscrlt ( Talk | w:en | b:en | meta ) 05:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Created category of Category:Eternal flames in the United States of America and moved all photos to new category :) --Mjrmtg (talk) 00:20, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:SmokingEdit

I think this category should be taken out of the tobacco category, and should be for all smokeable materials. I think we should create Category:Tobacco smoking, for all the categories and images specific to tobacco smoking. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 15:40, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think that "Smoking" as a category name is too generic, period. Fires smoke, volcanos smoke, signs indicate smoking is or is not allowed, etc. If this is about Tobacco, then Category:Tobacco smoking, Category:Cigarette smoking, Category:Pipe smoking, or something along that line makes more sense to me. The category of Category:Smoking could become a meta category that collects all the different types of smoking things together to help people find the correct one to sort into. Willscrlt ( Talk | w:en | b:en | meta ) 05:09, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Agree with Will, although I actually think Category:Smoking should be a DAB page. I think it would be one awkward meta category that includes both cigarette smoking and smoking volcanoes as one overall subject, and technically it wouldn't actually be a proper meta category. Apologies if I have read Will's comments too literally.--Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:56, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
    Not too literally in my opinion. :-) I'm glad that you see my point. It probably even gets worse when we start trying to translate "smoking" into other languages. There probably are cases where the different meanings of smoking have different words. I'm not sure how DABs in categories work here on Commons, but pretty much anything that points people to the correct more-specific category would be fine with me. Willscrlt ( Talk | w:en | b:en | meta ) 10:20, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
Here is an example. When categorizing using hotcat, if a contributor enters in the name of the DAB category, hotcat immediately shows the category options instead of allowing the contributor to place the image in the DAB cat.--Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment great ideas, cant argue with them. Im not sure whats best, a DAB or a generic category, but we need a better definition of Smoking as a category.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:42, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

  • No objections, so done. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:57, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Internet Explorer logo.pngEdit

Symbol delete vote.svg Delete: empty cat, inadequate name. --Passerose (talk) 18:06, 15 November 2013 (UTC)


Deleted, looks like it has been created accidentally. --rimshottalk 00:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:CGR Fairlie 0-6-0+0-6-0Edit

̪Speedy delete please. Replaced by Category:CGR Fairlie 0-6-6-0 since Fairlies were not designated 0-6-0+0-6-0 André Kritzinger (talk) 20:32, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support, --Passerose (talk) 15:28, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Deleted, moved to Category:CGR Fairlie 0-6-6-0. --rimshottalk 00:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:Love mattersEdit

This category has no clear subject. BrightRaven (talk) 08:27, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Delete empty and meaningless (well thats a sad way to put it...)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:16, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Deleted, empty. --rimshottalk 00:36, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:Granite Nude TorsoEdit

empty category. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:07, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Codornieces CreekEdit

rename to Category:Codornices Creek, per correct spelling. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 09:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


Moved to Category:Codornices Creek. --rimshottalk 18:43, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Mayer Sound LaboratoriesEdit

rename to Category:Meyer Sound Laboratories, error Mercurywoodrose (talk) 09:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


Moved to Category:Meyer Sound Laboratories. --rimshottalk 18:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Shanon WheelerEdit

rename to Category:Shannon Wheeler, people creating categories in berkeley cant spell (they need a university there to teachg spellling) Mercurywoodrose (talk) 09:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Apparently, given the way you spell the words "teachg" and "spellling", or how you can't seem to capitalize proper nouns. ;-) Nightscream (talk) 13:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

The creator of this category made an honest mistake; it happens to the best of us. Let's not argue and just change the name. --Judithcomm (talk) 09:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

If changing the name of a category is still done manually, i will try to do some of the changes i have proposed. I thought there was some automated process, i think i was wrong.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 23:52, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Moved to Category:Shannon Wheeler. For such simple cases, there is no need to start a discussion, just use {{bad name}}. It will work much quicker. --rimshottalk 18:40, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Mobil Radio transmittersEdit

should be "Mobile radio transmitters" Cqeme (talk) 14:17, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol keep vote.svg Agree Most likely a spelling mistake. The Yeti 14:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Symbol keep vote.svg Agree Agree. You don't have to ask, just change it. Cheers. --Chetvorno (talk) 08:49, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Moved to Category:Mobile radio transmitters. --rimshottalk 20:21, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Vietnamese BeautiesEdit

I don't believe Commons maintains "hot chick" categories, especially ones containing obviously underage children. BanyanTree 18:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Having just recently read the guidelines and policies about user galleries and user categories, I am certain that I read that something similar to this category was used as an example. In that example, it stated that making a gallery like this in your own userspace was acceptable, but making it a category, even a user category, was not. Delete it. And, yes, the whole underage thing is really creepy, too, but I'm just quoting the guidelines I'm familiar with. I'd hope that the underage thing also is a policy, but I've never needed to look that one up. Willscrlt ( Talk | w:en | b:en | meta ) 04:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete Beyond the creepy factor, there is nothing gained from having this category, and it would be better off deleted. Kevin Rutherford (talk)

Deleted, as per nom. --rimshottalk 20:25, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Universities in AlgeriaEdit

Empty, already have Category:Universities and colleges in Algeria Aloneinthewild (talk) 21:46, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol delete vote.svg Delete, --Passerose (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:07, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Facultat de Medicina (Montpellier)Edit

there is another cat named "Faculté de médecine de Montpellier". This cat is not usefull. Sammyday (talk) 12:12, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


Redirected to Category:Faculté de médecine de Montpellier as per nom. --rimshottalk 20:41, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Telephone 706Edit

Merge Telephone 706 and GPO Telephone 706. I don't care which, but this duplication is pointless Andy Dingley (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

keep.The 706 style telephone was also produced for non GPO subscribers by many of the same manufacturers that produced telephones for the GPO. These telephones can be identified by having no "706" reference on the underside and will usually have the manufacturer's own reference instead. Whilst most of these phones were superficially similar to the GPO 706 many had different internal parts including "tropicalised" versions for counties with high humidity or potential insect ingress. See w:GPO telephones.--Pierpao.lo (listening) 17:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Kept, no reply to plausible sounding objections. --rimshottalk 20:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Telephone 746Edit

Merge to GPO Telephone 746. Pointless duplication Andy Dingley (talk) 12:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol keep vote.svg Keep.The 746 style telephone was also produced for non GPO subscribers by many of the same manufacturers that produced telephones for the GPO. These telephones can be identified by having no "746" reference on the underside and will usually have the manufacturer's own reference instead. See w:GPO telephones--Pierpao.lo (listening) 17:52, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Kept, no reply to plausible sounding objections. --rimshottalk 21:00, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Coats of arms of France to be classifiedEdit

BROSSARD WHAT CATEGORIE? 24.48.6.65 15:20, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

A hidden category for maintenance purposes. I made it hidden right now.--Havang(nl) (talk) 15:39, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Keep, as this is part of a whole cat tree Category:Coats of arms to be classified. We don't want to delete them all, as they indeed are useful as maintenance categories. We'd want them to be all hidden, though. Is there a bot that could do that for us? --PanchoS (talk) 03:06, 16 November 2013 (UTC)


Kept, as per discussion. --rimshottalk 21:04, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Rue PoissonnerieEdit

Delete empty, user recreated it with a better name Category:Rue Poissonnerie, Bayonne Traumrune (talk) 16:55, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support, --Passerose (talk) 15:20, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:"1974 State Visit to the USSR" photo kit at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential LibraryEdit

nixon letters 65.49.160.130 18:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)


Not done, not a category discussion. --rimshottalk 21:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Im Keuper (Stuttgart)Edit

replaced bei cat Im Keuper, cat Im Keuper (Stuttgart) should be deleted Gerd Leibrock (talk) 16:52, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, Category:Im Keuper (Stuttgart) is more distinct than Category:Im Keuper. --Passerose (talk) 15:24, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

The correspondent German Wikipedia article is "Im Keuper" and I would like to name the Commons cat and the wikipedia article the same. When I had tried to name the article "Im Keuper (Stuttgart)" there would have been certainly some people to oppose it because "im Keuper" is UNIQUE without the extension "(Stuttgart)".--Gerd Leibrock (talk) 16:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)


Redirected to Category:Im Keuper, as per nom. "Im Keuper" seems quite distinct enough.--rimshottalk 21:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Ancient Roman amphitheatre (Aquincum)Edit

Empty, unneeded category: now split into Category:Ancient Roman civil amphitheatre (Aquincum) and Category:Ancient Roman military amphitheatre (Aquincum) --Fekist (talk) 19:46, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

  • I created the category and since now it is split into two more, there is no reason to keep it. Go ahead, and place a {{speedy|Empty page}} mark. Love. --User:G.dallorto (talk) 22:59, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Delete, --Passerose (talk) 18:11, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Signatures of people from India (low quality)Edit

empty category, very unlikely to be needed in future. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:56, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support, --Passerose (talk) 15:26, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Helene HübenerEdit

empty category, no images of her found here. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Jcb TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:05, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:CurdyEdit

empty category, no files found with this subject Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:15, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:08, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:B100C in CologneEdit

Mistake, please delete. Liamdavies (talk) 14:58, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Bombardier Flexity Swift GermanyEdit

Mistake, sorry, please delete. Liamdavies (talk) 15:15, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Jcb TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:ST14 in GermanyEdit

Mistake, are actually NGT8D trams, please delete. Liamdavies (talk) 15:30, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:09, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Victor CharletEdit

Vide. A supprimer. Sammyday (talk) 17:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Jcb TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:10, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Antoine FrançoisEdit

Vide. A supprimer. Sammyday (talk) 17:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Jcb TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Matthias DierckensEdit

Vide. A supprimer. Sammyday (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Jcb TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Julien ThaminEdit

Vide. A supprimer. Sammyday (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Stanislas LeguézecEdit

Vide. A supprimer. Sammyday (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Jcb TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Florent FenaertEdit

Vide. A supprimer. Sammyday (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Jcb TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Marc RegnaultEdit

Vide. A supprimer. Sammyday (talk) 17:35, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Jcb TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:11, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Valentin MigneauEdit

Vide. A supprimer. Sammyday (talk) 17:36, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Jcb TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:12, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Yannick SchambertEdit

Vide. A supprimer. Sammyday (talk) 17:36, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Yann TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:12, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Other buildings in Burlington, VermontEdit

An oddly named category, which seems like an attempt by one editor to avoid COM:OVERCAT. Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:54, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is indeed an attempt to avoid OVERCAT, since the editor above objected that my original category structure violated that guideline. The category in question is not "Buildings in Burlington, Vermont", which would be a general category, it's a catchall category for all buildings which are not in the education, church and historic building categories. There is no requirement that there be a "Buildings" category, and we should make a category structure which is most useful to the reader. Mine puts "Churches", "Education", "Historic" and "Other" on the main page, making it easy for the reader to choose which category to look in. The other category puts "Buildings" on the front page, making it necessary for the reader to click through in order to get to "Churches" and "Historic". My structure, which is non-overlapping and does not violate guidelines, is easier and cleaner.

Further, I object to the editor above edit-warring to restore his preferred structure. Apparently, he thinks that being an admin gives him a special privilege to do so. I've asked him to stop, and he has continued. This nomination appears to be in the way of retribution for my not agreeing with him. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:16, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure why we would deviate from our normal category structure (i.e. having a buildings subcategory), and then delete/redirect Category:Buildings in Burlington, Vermont in favour of having an unusually named category with arbitrary inclusion criteria (for which one has to read the description to understand what it is intended to include - people using hotcat would be out of luck), simply because one editor is trying to avoid COM:OVERCAT and is willing to depopulate the buildings category of subcats pertaining to buildings (e.g. churches, historic buildings, etc.) in order to do so. As for the odd accusations in the last paragraph, I initiated a CFD to be helpful, not as "retribution". And I haven't used any admin powers or claimed any "privileges". I will take that up with him on his talk page. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:25, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol delete vote.svg Delete Okay, apparently that editor is not interested in having a discussion. Therefore, I would simply recommend deleting this category and moving the content back to Category:Buildings in Burlington, Vermont. As stated above, Category:Other buildings in Burlington, Vermont is inconsistent with the rest of the category tree and the manner in which we handle buildings subcats for other locales and has arbitrary inclusion criteria (all buildings that are not churches, historic sites or connected to education). It was created simply to avoid a COM:OVERCAT problem, on the questionable premise that users are better served by having some buildings in Category:Buildings in Burlington, Vermont and other buildings out. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:30, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The introductory nomination seems unclear, and may be unfair. The intent of User:Beyond My Ken seems to have only one level of categorization inside Category:Burlington, Vermont, namely: "Churches", "Education", "Historic buildings", "Other buildings", "Breakwater", "Ben & Jerry's", etc. Perhaps this is correlated with the fact that User:Beyond My Ken is loading a series of picture in this category and is interrested with an optimal ergonomy. On the other hand, User:Skeezix1000 seems to have never ever uploaded anything in Category:Burlington, Vermont, but nevertheless seems thinking he knows better how to organize the files. Pldx1 (talk) 16:48, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Um, excuse me? Your tone and comments about people's motives are unnecessary (and, frankly, untrue as I have done a lot of work on Vermont categories over the years). I would ask that you review COM:AGF.

In any event, this has nothing to do with thinking I "know better", but rather avoiding awkward category names and structures, and keeping this category consistent both its parent Vermont categories and the category structure we use elsewhere for virtually every other locale. The reason we follow standard category practices, and look to maintain consistency in a category tree, is to avoid having individuals (Ken, you, me, or anyone else) coming up with their own creative and subjective "optimal ergonomy" for every category. It remains unclear why people looking for images of buildings wouldn't look to Category:Buildings in Burlington, Vermont as they do for every other locale, and why a category that contains images of some buildings, but not others, isn't more confusing. There is a reason we don't have an "Other buildings" category tree for this state or others. Remember that users will come at the Burlington buildings images not just via the Category:Cities in Vermont category tree, but also via the Category:Buildings in Vermont tree and also via the search function, and they expect to find all the images of Burlington buildings when they come across the buildings category for this town.

I think it's great that Ken has uploaded new images, but that doesn't give him an entitlement (as you seem to think) to organize the category in a manner that please him, but otherwise violates COM:OVERCAT and/or is inconsistent with the category tree.Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

As often, ignorance of past discussions may be preventing me from understanding why anyone has reason to be upset about this question. My failure to understand the reasoning behind this category may have a similar cause. A quick search shows Category:Other quartz and Category:Other roads whose contents and connections do not inspire confidence in their usefulness. Such a search has not shown me how the present "Other" category fits a widely used pattern or precedent in categories dedicated to miscellany. There are occasions when we cat wranglers ought to set rather than follow precedent, but I don't see why this is such a case. Jim.henderson (talk) 13:34, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Delete Per Skeezix1000, this cat serves no real purpose other than needlessly disambiguationg the "other" buildings from historic or church buildings. It's just not needed, all the contents of this cat are buildings that are in fact in Burlington, hence the category Category:Buildings in Burlington, Vermont is the logical home for them. Liamdavies (talk) 09:01, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
  • We haven't heard from many commentators, so the question is, have we enough to declare a consensus, or must we seek more in hopes of getting either more arguments in defense of the category or a clearer consensus? Jim.henderson (talk) 00:05, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

There appears to me to be a consensus here. We have one editor who wants buildings in Burlington categorized in a way that is different from the rest of Commons, and several editors, including me, who think that is silly. I have moved all the files and cats and deleted this cat. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

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

Category:Plain IntroductionEdit

routine cleanup, contents moved to correct title, Category:A Plain Introduction to the Criticism of the New Testament Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:03, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted by Dschwen TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 01:25, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Grimus (Waves Vienna 2012, Flex Café)Edit

Mistyped the year when creating the category, the right one is here: Category:Grimus (Waves Vienna 2013, Flex Café). --Tsui (talk) 12:35, 21 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted, as per nom. --rimshottalk 21:13, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Etcengineer/Sub-páginaEdit

Out of project scope, commons are not wikipedia, same type of category has been deleted before Motopark (talk) 17:06, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol delete vote.svg Delete Agreed. This is a gallery that has been deleted before set up as a sub-page of a category. Categories do not have sub-pages on Commons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:23, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Deleted, as per nom. --rimshottalk 21:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:American football officialsEdit

1398291963341?ref=hl 78.187.50.167 08:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


Not done no reason given. --rimshottalk 21:19, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Public services in Castile and LeónEdit

Denominación incorrecta. Hay otra categoría con la denominación correcta: Public services of Castile and León Raimundo Pastor (talk) 00:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Si tiene mal el nombre estoy de acuerdo.--Sebasweee (talk) 07:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Deleted: INeverCry 21:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:TølløsebanenEdit

Redundant category to be deleted. Category:Train stations on Tølløsebanen should be used instead. Beethoven9 (talk) 07:31, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Church of Santo Agostinho (Vila Viçosa)Edit

Useless category. The correct one is Category:Igreja dos Agostinhos Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:56, 2 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Females with black skinEdit

same arguments as at Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/09/Category:People with black skin Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Girls with black skinEdit

same arguments as at Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/09/Category:People with black skin Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Women with black skinEdit

same arguments as at Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/09/Category:People with black skin Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:35, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I've replied down the discussion at the main category - People with black skin, and suggest others do so too. Orrlingtalk 18:26, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Deleted: INeverCry 21:31, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Males with black skinEdit

same arguments as at Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/09/Category:People with black skin Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:35, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:31, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Men with black skinEdit

same arguments as at Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/09/Category:People with black skin Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:36, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I've replied down the discussion at the main category - People with black skin, and suggest others do so too. Orrlingtalk 18:28, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Deleted: INeverCry 21:31, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Boys with black skinEdit

same arguments as at Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/09/Category:People with black skin Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:36, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:30, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:People with black skin in artEdit

same arguments as at Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/09/Category:People with black skin Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:37, 10 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:30, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Die IGA und das WortEdit

shoud be deleted, has been replaced by cat Lyrische Stationen Gerd Leibrock (talk) 17:48, 15 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Lyrische StationenEdit

should be deleted, replaced by cat Lyrikstationen Gerd Leibrock (talk) 05:53, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Margaret HodgesEdit

we have no images related to margaret hodges on the commons. the gallery is empty. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:38, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:The Miller's DaughterEdit

there doesnt appear to be a fairy tale with this name, and all the images at the commons with this phrase are not A fairy tale (one is of the millers daughter from rumplestiltskin) , unless its Battle of the Oranges Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:47, 17 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:CalaveraEdit

merged items into more descriptive categories Thelmadatter (talk) 02:05, 26 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:27, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Barcombe Railway stationEdit

Please delete: duplication of Barcombe railway station. Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 06:51, 26 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Immigrants to Lampedusa, ItalyEdit

Poorly named category now located at Category:Refugees from Africa in Lampedusa, should be deleted. Sorry for the inconvenience, PanchoS (talk) 19:03, 26 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Arch, IndiaEdit

This category has no clear subject. BrightRaven (talk) 08:42, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 21:25, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Great LibraryEdit

This category was nominated for speedy deletion, but I've removed the tag and restored the content for the time being to allow for a discussion. First, I am not 100% sure that there was any problem with the plain category name. But for all I know people were categorizing images pertaining to the famous library in Alexandria here. So, assuming I am alone in the position that the current name is fine, what is the best rename? The proposed replacement (Great Library of the Law Society of Upper Canada) is not great (and I don't mean that to be critical of the user who proposed it, as it is much better than many alternatives that come to mind). Not sure if that's the full official name or not, but as a lawyer in Ontario, and a member of the LSUC, I'm hard pressed to think of anyone who would refer to it as such (although I have no doubt someone will prove me wrong by pointing to multiple examples on the web). I, personally, would lean towards "Great Library (Osgoode Hall)", or even "Great Library (Law Society of Upper Canada)", as I think disambiguation is better than a mouthful of a name. Possibly "Great Library, Toronto" (keeping in mind the dictum of Foroa that comma disambiguation is for where, brackets for what and who).

Let's not let this discussion linger as some CFDs do. I can move the content to the consensus rename once there is agreement. Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:15, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

I originally renamed this to "Category:Great Library of the Law Society of Upper Canada" because when I looked up the website of the Library on Google the description was "Home page of the Great Library of the Law Society of Upper Canada ..." However, I note that this name does not actually appear on the home page of the website, so I have no objection if the category is renamed "Category:Great Library (Osgoode Hall)" as suggested by Skeezix1000. In any case, I feel that category needs renaming because "Great Library" is not sufficiently specific. For instance, "en:Great Library" redirects to the Library of Alexandria in Egypt. — Cheers, JackLee talk 17:26, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Moved to a subcategory and changed to a dissambiguation. --ŠJů (talk) 19:53, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Oy vey. Did you read the discussion? You moved it to the wrong name. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 16:50, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Ignore me. Spent my morning yelling with opposing parties on the phone at work, and it's made me unnecessarily combative. Thank you for trying to resolve this discussion. If anyone was at fault, it was me for so rudely forgetting about the discussion and not responding to Jacklee. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Closing since it has already been resolved. --ghouston (talk) 11:13, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:Doctor's officesEdit

This should be plural: "Doctors' offices", since "Doctor's offices" is the offices of one doctor. It's like if we had a category for "Category:Child's museums" instead of "Category:Children's museums". The category concept is great, and there's no way that it should be deleted; the name is the only problem whatsoever. Nyttend (talk) 02:55, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

  • If the problem is slightly wrong name, then use {{move|Better name|Better name|2013-11-17}}. Pozdrawiam. --Starscream (talk) 20:47, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll rename it. --ghouston (talk) 11:19, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

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

Category:BarnstarsEdit

This category should be renamed Category:Wikimedia barnstars, with the content of Category:Actual barnstars moved here, and "actual barnstars" deleted. since when do we have internal categories trump reality? Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:36, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (mostly) — I totally agree that moving the real life barnstars into this category is a must. Moving the awards out of this category also is a must. I think that Barnstar awards might be a better name than Wikimedia barnstars, since the barnstars are used across multiple projects, and some may even be used outside of WMF projects (independent wikis using Wikimedia Commons as their shared multimedia repository. Willscrlt ( Talk | w:en | b:en | meta ) 05:05, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
    • I like barnstar awards, esp. since the images can be used anywhere, as they dont have wikipedia/wikimedia graphics in them.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The architectural meaning has clear primacy. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:22, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Closing this in favour of real life having first claim to the mainspace, wikimedia barnstars will all be moved there, however because there are so many wikimedia barnstars, rather than a straight move and swap, the wikimedia barnstars will be diffused into sub-categories with wikimedia barnstars as the parent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KTo288 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 10 February 2014‎ (UTC)
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Actual barnstarsEdit

This category should be deleted, and content moved to Category:Barnstars, with that categories contents moved to a new category, Category:Wikimedia barnstars, as reality should get the main name, not our internal award procedures. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 16:38, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support mostly — See my reasoning above. In a nutshell, I support the moves, except I would recommend something like Category:Barnstar awards as the destination for those. Willscrlt ( Talk | w:en | b:en | meta ) 05:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Barnstar awards is better than my idea.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 05:14, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Closing this in favour of real life having first claim to the mainspace, wikimedia barnstars will all be moved there, however because there are so many wikimedia barnstars, rather than a straight move and swap, the wikimedia barnstars will be diffused into sub-categories with wikimedia barnstars as the parent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KTo288 (talk • contribs) 15:21, 10 February 2014‎ (UTC)
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:SubjectsEdit

It seems unclear how to exactly differentiate this relatively new category from its superior Category:Topics on the one hand, resulting in several subcategories being double categorized, and from Category:Objects on the other hand; the latter part of the problem has become manifest in a conflict upon the question, if organisms should be categorized as objects. The category description, although given in four languages, is not really instructive either. --Abderitestatos (talk) 14:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I oppose any implied proposal to move this category anywhere, it's superfine. Regards Orrlingtalk 12:51, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
It is not fine at all: If no comprehensible definition can be given, this category is not sustainable. I do agree, though, that renaming it would not do any good. --Abderitestatos (talk) 20:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
I suppose Orrling wants us to guess the meaning of the category. The category names Subjects and Topics don't give much clue: they are synonyms as far as I know. I'd say that since Category:Things has been redirected there, that it's supposed to refer to the subset of Topics that somehow relate to "things". He also wants objects restricted to inanimate objects, so "things" includes organisms and objects and certain concepts, but not concepts which are left in the parent category of Category:Topics. But comparing Category:Categories by topic and Category:Categories by subject, it's hard to see a pattern in it. ghouston (talk) 01:01, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

I also agree with the nominator and ghouston -- the distinction attempting to be drawn is not helpful for Commons. JesseW (talk) 02:10, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

I was not quite wanting us to guess the meaning of anything, we have long had the scheme of "topics" that yielded "Categories by topic", and "Subjects" in turn assembles the sub-topics that are at the head of our very-elaborate and well-established "Categories by subject", so if you thoughtfully insight that the current "Categories by topic" and those "by subject" are not distinct from one another this is a different matter than the agenda of the user in creating this CFD and obviously trying to mix the "Objects" issue in here is a dash odd and unwelcome; try to tell whether you simply propose the merger of Categories by subject and Categories by topic (though I wouldn't do it on this page but in a forum that can be taken more seriously) and my support will then be garanteed. Orrlingtalk 06:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
OK, so Categories by topic and subject is indeed a usage where topic and subject are synonyms. Perhaps it would be convenient to combine them into a Category:Categories by subject/topic so that they are all in one place, even if there's no good reason to rename half of them. But why use the name "Subjects" for this category instead of "Things"? And I still don't understand how you distinguish what belongs in this "Things" category vs what remains in "Topics". It doesn't help that some categories like Objects and Belief appear in both. ghouston (talk) 06:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
This is an environment where things are constantly in progress and construction. So "Why I haven't completed arranging just ALL the right topics that may fit in the Subjects category" is maybe not the most constructive question. In the past 6 months I was doing lots of various edits away from my inherent contriblist, so now that I was back in the account I can address any topic in need, and everyone other than I can equally set the entries in or out from the Topic-father. –not surprisingly, more than half of the current residents in Subjects, which I'm happy with, were categorized in there by other editors, which could be you too. Generally speaking, "topics" being a WikiCommons root container may be understood as higher in scope than "subjects", and I welcome any argument that suggests it need to be vice-versa. In the same way I'd be more than OK if "Categories by topic" merge down with "Categories by subject" and this will allow to observe Subjects as a redirect to Topics and save the branching from it. Orrlingtalk 08:21, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Given that Category:Categories by subject (flat list) already contains topic and subject entries, it'd be consistent to move the contents of Category:Categories by topic into Category:Categories by subject. There's a mix of names, and we also have large categories like Category:Topics by year‎, but it's not a big deal if topic and subject are recognised as synonyms, and Category:Subjects can redirect to Category:Topics. ghouston (talk) 08:46, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
I agree Orrlingtalk 08:53, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Category:Topics as a nearly exact synonym in this case. We seem to tend to use "by topic" a little more than "by subject", not sure why, but it seems like a fine decision. not every English word needs to be used as a category name. we have to make choices here, we definitely dont need both. I cant quite follow the discussion of "categories by topic", "categories by subject", and the flat list category. im not sure what value they serve, but more importantly, im not sure if they are relevant to this specific discussion. new top level categories should really be discussed first, before being created.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:49, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
  • I think it would be possible to rename the flat list category from subject to topic simply by creating the new category and editing Template:ByCat to populate it. That would mean "topic" could be used throughout. ghouston (talk) 04:12, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
No, the "Topics" will migrate to "Category:Subjects", the same way as "Categories by topic" merge down to "Categories by subject" with no opposition on the village pump topic we've now had for a week run. You may still send forth your objections on that discussion, as pointed above, this page here is of no meaning Orrlingtalk 12:41, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Is this discussion going any further, or does everybody agree now with making Category:Subjects a redirect to Category:Topics? --Abderitestatos (talk) 15:08, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I think everyone wants them merged, but Orrling wants Topics to be redirected to Subjects. The village pump discussions are here and here. --ghouston (talk) 21:00, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
I think they should be merged to Category:Topics. If anybody wants to propose later that Topics should be renamed to Subjects, that can be handled separately. --ghouston (talk) 04:36, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Merging into Category:Topics, since there were no objections. --ghouston (talk) 01:00, 20 July 2014 (UTC)