Wikimore

Category:Sibilant affricates

Instead of having this category, we could use Category:Sibilant consonants and Category:Affricates separately or just categorize them as sibilants. --BodhiHarp (talk) 22:57, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Coach and Horses public house, Norwich

Cat conflates 3 pubs in Norwich (England): Coach & Horses (Q26653812), Coach & Horses (Q26578583) and Coach & Horses (Q137190266). Should the cat be deleted? In the meantime I can recatagorise into 3 new cats disambiguated by road name and create a new key Category:Coach and Horses pubs in Norfolk, England into Category:Pubs in Norfolk, England and Category:Coach and Horses pubs in England Tæppa (talk) 23:48, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Support for both the deletion, and the recatagorisation into the 3 separate ones, especially as they all have a wikidata item.. Jokulhlaup (talk) 09:24, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
Move to Category:Coach and Horses, Thorpe Road as "public house" (lower case) probably shouldn't be in the title as even though many listings include it it isn't normally how pubs are named and there doesn't appear to be any other Coach and Horses pubs on Thorpe Roads so the city doesn't appear to be needed. The Scope was for the Thorpe Road one and later images of the others were added but I have now removed then and created Category:Coach and Horses, Union Street and Category:Coach and Horses, Bethel Street. Crouch, Swale (talk) 14:44, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Very unclear what this category is meant to be; the current content is a hodgepodge, and the only parent category is Category:Boats. Some of these appear to be boat launches (Category:Boat launches is, correctly, a redirect to Category:Boat ramps). Others appear to be analogous to Category:Ship launchings, and if that is the intent I'm not sure the boat/ship distinction is useful here, but if it is the categories should be related, of only by a {{Cat see also}}. Jmabel ! talk 22:05, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

A ship launching is a ceremony that is only made once, when the ship is named and put to sea for the first time. Boats and smaller watercraft rarely have such elaborate ceremonies when they are put in the water for the first time. Boats have launchings every time they are put into the water after spending some time on land. In colder countries, were boats and smaller watercraft can't stay at sea all year around due to ice, boats are pulled up for the winter and then they are launched again in spring. This can be made via boat ramps, but cranes are used just as much. So ship launchings and boat launchings are two very different things, one is a ceremony and celebration, and the other is the task of getting the watercraft in the water.

When I created Category:Boat launchings, I didn't know about Category:Boat launches and its unfortunate and rather wrong redirect to boat Category:Boat ramps. These days "launches" is a word mostly associated with a different meaning: "the government is to launch a £1.25 million publicity campaign" or "the launch of a new campaign against drinking and driving". Using "launchings" for boats in the category name, distinguishes between these two. I'll see to fixing up the cats and the distinctions between them. --Cart (talk) 23:52, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

On WikiData, the item "ship launching" includes the value "ship naming ceremony" (Category:Ship christenings here on Commons). That is not part of an annual roll down the boat ramp, so two categories are needed. --Cart (talk) 00:08, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

A "boat launch" is an absolutely correct alternate term for a boat ramp; pluralized here like most other Commons categories. - Jmabel ! talk 01:48, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

I've fixed the redirect of "boat launches" to point at Category:Slipways, since that corresponds with the wiki-articles (see Slipway) and Wikidata for that. --Cart (talk) 13:23, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

@W.carter: en-wiki may have that redirect, but it also redirects "boat ramp" there. I have no problem with combining all these topics for the physical structures—from simple ramps to things with rails, etc.—into one category or hierarchy but, please, don't start moving things around while we are trying to reach a consensus on what to do.

Here are a few examples from three different parts of the U.S. showing "boat launch" used for a simple boat ramp. E.g. , , .

And I continue to disagree with you that simply putting a boat back in the water is at all commonly called a "boat launching." - Jmabel ! talk 21:00, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

I was simply following your cue to add the {{Cat see also}} to make the distinction between the the ceremony and the getting the boat back in the water. I have lived on and been on boats all my life, so I thought my maritime experience counted for something here. But since you are a native English speaker, an admin and do shout louder, I guess you outrank me in every aspect and I should just stay silent. Well, if you don't think much of my language skills, can you at least take a look at the file names and image descriptions in Category:Boat launchings and tell me that none of those users use the expression "boat launching" for putting a boat in the water? Do you really expect me to believe that this photo of someone with their little boat in Britain, is equivalent to a grand ship launching? Or perhaps just Google it: , , , (I got 953 000 results when I searched it). I concur that "launch" can describe many things, including boat ramps, putting a boat in water or even a special type of boats. Take a look at what Wiktionary writes here about boat ramps or here about launch: "movement of a vessel from land into the water" . --Cart (talk) 21:47, 4 December 2025 (UTC)

You would certainly launch a boat when you put it in the water, but I don't think one would typically use the noun-phrase "boat launching" to describe that. (If you read it as a gerund phrase it would fit, but then there is no plural form.) The best analogy I can come up with is that while employees might "open" a shopping center every morning, if we had a category for "shopping center openings", that is not what it would mean.

And, no, I did not say that as an admin I had special authority. Neither of us should be messing with the situation while we discuss it, and as the person who opened this CfD, I am not the person to close it unless possibly if we actually reach a clear consensus. - Jmabel ! talk 00:14, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Like so many other male admins here, you behave very forcefully as if your position gives you special authority, hence my observation. Anyway, this is an international site, where categories are made for occurrences/items in any language. Sometimes there are special words in some languages to describe certain things, while other need more clunky noun-phrases to describe the same thing. Often it's the English language that has these special words, since it's an exceptionally rich language, but sometimes it's the other way around. Since the Nordic/Scandinavian countries all have boating traditions going back thousands of years, we actually have single words in our languages to describe this particular thing. Perhaps we should skip the English all together and simply use one of those words for the category? But it is a rather common practice here that we name the categories in English when it is possible, even if that gives them not so smooth names. The plural in 'boat launchings' was just to conform with the general Commons way of having categories in plural. I wouldn't mind if it was named 'boat launching' if that sits better with you. Just please stop treating Commons as a US site where English dictates what categories should and should not exist. --Cart (talk) 00:56, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Monarda hybrida 'Squaw'

Racist cultivar name of little to no taxonomic value Alexander Abair (talk) 03:07, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Could you elaborate a bit more? When I search online, I see this name being used in several places. Do you have another suggestion, or what did you have in mind? -- SimmeD (talk) 00:08, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

@Alexander Abair: Yes, it's racist, but are you saying this isn't the actual name of the cultivar? If it's the actual name, we should use it, however regrettable it may be. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:00, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

I see now that it does have an uncertain but evidenced history of usage. This is sort of frustrating because it's not recognized by plant taxonomic authorities like POWO, Tropicos, etc., and it's not clear where or when the name originated. I suppose I'll drop the issue on my end, because the act of investigating and discussing it creates its validity. Alexander Abair (talk) 05:09, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:War crimes during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine

shouldn't this be moved to (now merged with) Category:War crimes during Russo-Ukrainian War? Prototyperspective (talk) 15:17, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

While the 2022 is surely no longer meaningful, I only wonder whether the term "Russo-Ukrainian War" is now established. The corresponding category on :en is still en:Category:War crimes during the Russian invasion of Ukraine as is similarly its pendant on :de Wikipedia. --Túrelio (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Support merge and remove "2022" after the war has been ongoing for 4 years ... "War crimes during Russo-Ukrainian War" or "War crimes during Russo-Ukrainian War started 2022". Taylor 49 (talk) 17:37, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:2nd-century pottery in Canada

The only content in this category is actually Pre-Columbian pottery of Peru, and cannot even be dated exactly to the 2nd century, which is why it also fills two more categories. The file is otherwise correctly categorized as a museum object in Toronto, yes. Besides that, the object has nothing to do wth Canada in the 2nd century.

Pottery that actually comes from Canada ought likeweise to be categorized as "of Canada". Best regards, Enyavar (talk) 21:28, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Keep the pottery is located in Canada; there is no claim as to it's manufacture in Canada at that time period.

Laurel Lodged (talk) 16:05, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

The first part is true; however these objects are already categorized by their location in a Canadian museum. Additionally, their dating is so unreliable that they are also categorized as 3rd and 4th-century pottery. I am not sure our categories should be wild guesswork.

False on the second statement: These categories are all part of Category:Canada in the 2nd century, i.e. things that happened in the 2nd century in Canada. Somehow, this needs to be adressed.

I am also quite surprised that it is Laurel Lodged who is in favor of keeping this category, when they were also strong supporters of deleting categories of the exact same fashion when they were about 16th-century Italian art in the US. --Enyavar (talk) 08:12, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Kamookamimikokaminushitama-jinja

Category:Kamo-Ōkami-miko-kami-nushi-tama-jinja would be much more readable Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 21:34, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

@Immanuelle: For the people who don't speak Japanese, would you mind explaining why the letters aren't the same in the existing name and your proposed name? Specifically, the two "no" strings aren't in the original. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:06, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

It was actually an error on wikidata which I resolved. The nos were a mistake. However the dashes indicate the splits in many common shrine words, and there is a blatant spelling mistake which fuses the words Kamo and Okami together in the original one. Should be three os if you are gonna transliterate kana that way Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:45, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Apparently also every single file has the same error. So it might actually be an issue with Japanese wikipedia. This is hard to decide on. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:45, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Aldeia Rio Silveiras

The Category:Terra Indígena Ribeirão Silveira and Category:Aldeia Rio Silveiras should be merged, please, but I do not know, which of them should be kept. NearEMPTiness (talk) 03:17, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

I prefer the variant "Terra Indígena Ribeirão Silveira" because there is a Wikipedia article with that name: pt:Terra Indígena Ribeirão Silveira. Deltaspace42 (talk) 16:47, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

@NearEMPTiness and Deltaspace42: According to this list on English Wikipedia, the name is simply "Ribeirão Silveira".

"Terra Indígena Ribeirão Silveira" would translate to "Indigenous Land Ribeirão Silveira", which is the name Wikidata uses and also what Commons likely should use according to its language policy. ReneeWrites (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, I looked at Rio Omerê Indigenous Territory and Uru-Eu-Uaw-Uaw Indigenous Territory by opening links in the en:List of Indigenous territories (Brazil), and now I propose Category:Ribeirão Silveira Indigenous Territory.--NearEMPTiness (talk) 05:07, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Merged and thus completed. NearEMPTiness (talk) 17:13, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

Category:Sugiyama jinjya (Shrine, Shinyoshida-cho)

Category:Sugiyama-jinja (Shinyoshida-cho) makes more sense as a title. Shrine in the middle randomly is confusing Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 11:36, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Logos of television programmes

Should merge with Category:Logos of television series as there is no clear distinction between the two categories. Astros4477 (talk) 22:08, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

I don't think the categories should be merged. I think television programms means any type of TV show, like talk shows, news, award shows, one-off specials, or reality shows. Television series is different in my opinion, it only means shows that have multiple episodes and a continuing story. I think that is the distinction between the two categories. The categories might need to be cleaned up. -- SimmeD (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

I think this is a good distinction, even if the categories need to be cleaned up to reflect this. ReneeWrites (talk) 22:06, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Videos of religion

merge to Category:Videos about religion? Distinguishing videos of sth and those about the subject is very reasonable but for religions this doesn't make much sense; they're basically all about the religion; this just duplicates the cat and is incomplete where people don't see/find the videos; also see Category:Videos of religions Prototyperspective (talk) 11:50, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Support merge into ONE cat. Taylor 49 (talk) 23:56, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

@Prototyperspective: I think there could be a distinction. Category:Videos of religion includes Category:Videos of religious buildings. That category could include, for example, videos about the restoration of Notre Dame de Paris, which could be solely about the rebuilding and not about the religious aspect of the building. So videos of religion could depict things with a religious connection, whereas videos about religion might discuss the religious aspects. Just some thoughts. -- Auntof6 (talk) 05:13, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Good point. However, these also aren't really videos 'of religion' – these are videos of religious buildings. I think they don't fit less well into a category 'videos about religion' (they're about religions in that they show the buildings built as a result of or in association with religions). An alternative would be to just link to the category via a see also (and back also via see also) which has the advantage that the deepcat view would then not be cluttered with videos merely showing religious buildings (this advantage would however also be there if the cat is in a category above videos about religion). Don't know which of the three or some additional option would be best. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:48, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Sambas de Enredo 2010

These "samba enredo" (en: samba theme) categories are absolutely useless and make no sense whatsoever. "Samba enredo" is the name of the SONG the samba school is gonna sing in that year, not a samba school.

Examples of why these categories don't make sense:
Inside the Category:Sambas de Enredo - Série A Carnaval 2013 we have:

These are NOT name of songs, these are names of tha samba schools.

Let's suppose a samba school is active for 50 years, until it ceases operations. If it has a different samba theme each year, so, will this samba school fall into fifty different categories? Given that these categories should include songs and not schools?
At the end of the day, it's just a jumble of categories within other categories with no real function.

Minerva97 (talk) 12:46, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Other categories in this discussion:

Minerva97 (talk) 12:48, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Delete per nom. Thought it was maybe photos of sambas de enredo of that year but it really categorizes whole samba schools. This is one of the top CfDs by number of categories affected per Commons:Categories for Discussion table so it would be great if this could be solved. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:30, 14 April 2026 (UTC)

Category:St John the Baptist's church, Colwick

Needs disambiguating from St John the Baptist (Q105079011) (built 1951, in Colwick Civil Parish, one image), where this cat is presently linked to the Grade II listed & Scheduled Monument Ruins of Church of St John the Baptist (Q26546657) (ruinous, not or no longer in Colwick Civil Parish, see also St John Baptist's Church and graveyard, Colwick (Q17642920)). As there are technically two different NHLE designations, also including the graveyard, we might need 4 new cats and a history merge. Name ideas: 1) St John the Baptist, Colwick 2) St John Baptist's Church and graveyard, Colwick , 3), Ruins of St John the Baptist, Colwick (history merge) 4)Ruins of St John the Baptist graveyard, Colwick Tæppa (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

If we have two we usually go old and new. So maybe St John the Baptist's church, Colwick (new) and Ruins of St John the Baptist, Colwick with St John the Baptist's church, Colwick kept as a disambiguation? WereSpielChequers (talk) 14:47, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

(new) vs 'Ruins of ...' makes sense. Ruins of St John the Baptist, Colwick could be categorised under St John Baptist's Church and graveyard, Colwick (exact scheduled monument name) with a graveyard/churchyard category such as Ruins of St John the Baptist (churchyard), Colwick categorised under both? Historic England don't seem to provide any details of why the 'graveyard' is explicitly scheduled but Find a Grave suggests there are a number of gravestones yet to be photographed / uploaded here. Tæppa (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:St Chad's Church, Wybunbury might need disambig'ing along similiar lines (church tower, site of church & new church of the same name) Tæppa (talk) 17:02, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Madeleine Wickham

Would it make more sense to have this author's category be the name they are most known by? (i.e. Category:Sophie Kinsella) I wasn't able to find any clarifying guidelines about category names of individuals, so I didn't want to make the move, without clearance. EdoAug (talk) 16:22, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Birds and Category:Aves

Well "birds" and "Aves" is the very same thing. Just keep one of them and connect it to d:Q1456850. Taylor 49 (talk) 20:48, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

@Taylor 49 - see the discussion of exactly this suggestion from just a few months ago. The consensus was to keep them separate in these few top-level cases, and they perform different purposes - MPF (talk) 01:44, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Oops I see ... still the "consensus" is very weak, and I can't see a prominently visible clear principle for distinction for those pairs of cats. So until someone delivers a convincing principle for distinction, I support merge of all those pairs. Catredirect either way (Birds->Aves or Aves->Birds) is fine. Taylor 49 (talk) 11:01, 19 December 2025 (UTC)

I'm still for keeping both; they have separate functions. - MPF (talk) 15:22, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

@User:MPF: Please elaborate on those separate functions. Taylor 49 (talk) 00:04, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Maybe not functions, but while latin names are better for cataloging the common names are which people usually look for or want to use (and aliasing wouldn't work too well). One reason in the cited discussion was that it would look stupid to have main Aves category with varius "Birds by something" subcats. I would say the best still would be top cat called Aves and everything below Birds by XY and like, but I am sure there's plenty of people disagree with me for some reason or another. :-) -- grin ✎ 19:41, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Military brats

This category (and its subcategory Category:Army brats) is a term for children of military personnel, and is being used as a metacategory for people.

Is this category even useful on Commons? Being the child of a person in the military is largely unremarkable, and in any event is not generally apparent in media related to a person. I don't think it's necessary; it's clearly wildly underpopulated as it stands.
If this is a useful category, is there a more appropriate name we can use for it? Per the description, this term is "most notable for its usage in a pejorative context".

Omphalographer (talk) 06:28, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Keep I do not perceive it to be pejorative, since military brats themselves use it. As for usefulness, it's as useful as any other category derived from some aspect of a person's biography that the general public may not be aware of, like a subject's exact year of birth, where they went to college, etc. Nightscream (talk) 22:18, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Wiki-Yanama

Unclear purpose ("Space for project images during the year 2025-2026"). @Leonfd1992: what is the purpose of this category? Please categorize files based on their contents, not just what project they were uploaded as part of. Omphalographer (talk) 00:39, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello, greetings.

This category was created to document a practice of the Wayuu community called Yanama, which consists of cooperation and collective work. Thanks, explanation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJLSipnD3d8&t=5s Leonfd1992 (talk) 17:35, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Film scores by composer

This is also for the "Films scored by <name/nationality> subcategories in this category. None of these contain actual film scores or media, just more subcategories. Similar overcategorizing or irrelevant categorizing as the recently deleted "Films by actor" categories. --Trivialist (talk) 20:33, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

Delete. As I've said in previous discussions, Commons is not Wikidata, nor is it IMDb. These categories are even less likely than usual to be useful on Commons given that (unlike actors) composers almost never make public appearances to promote films they worked on. Omphalographer (talk) 22:45, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

@Auntof6 and Bedivere: Hi, this CfD has had limited participation but affects a large number of categories. The problems with these categories very closely mirror those of Commons:Categories for discussion/2025/05/Category:Films by actor which did have substantial participation and a strong consensus. If you're willing, your discretion in assessing whether that prior consensus reasonably applies here would be appreciated. Thanks for taking a look. ReneeWrites (talk) 22:17, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@ReneeWrites: I think there's a difference. A film score is the work of one person, so it's strongly tied to that person, just as a book is tied to its author. When it comes to actors, that's not the case. -- Auntof6 (talk) 23:29, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

And the contents of the subcategories are all about the respective films, not actually about the film scores. This would be more accurately titled "movies by composer of score", but that is just another film credits category which serves no purpose on Commons. This is already catalogued at Wikidata, where it can be used by other projects (including by Commons). Duplicating this categorization from Wikipedia, which, to be clear, is what is happening here, is not productive and an endless issue here. Οἶδα (talk) 04:30, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Delete per Trivialist and Omphalographer and per precedent at other movie metadata CfDs. Delete all subcategories as well, per nom. Οἶδα (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Category:Laguna Larga

I propose, to move the files and subdirectories of this category to Category:Laguna Larga (Córdoba), because three other cateogories exist with very similar names. NearEMPTiness (talk) 09:35, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

I see that it was done the other way, files from the other category were moved here. It's OK for me. pertile (talk) 11:43, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Category:Souqs

Synonym of Category:Bazaars in the Middle East. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs • uploads) 10:16, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Geodesy by country

duplicate category for Category:Geodesy by country of location; empty category Gampe (talk) 16:32, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Move Category:Geodesy by country of location to Category:Geodesy by country, since there is no need for clarification (there is no Category:Geodesy by country of origin). For example, in the Category:Surveying, there is Category:Surveying by country, not Category:Surveying by country of location. Deltaspace42 (talk) 17:25, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Agree with Deltaspace42, although moving the subcategories is tricky, as the categories are added by {{Topic in country}}. ReneeWrites (talk) 23:41, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Screenplays by writer

This also applies to all of the "Screenplays by" categories. If any of these categories contained actual screenplays they would be useful, but otherwise it's just overcategorization and pointless duplication of Wikipedia categories. Trivialist (talk) 20:01, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Delete. You hit the nail on the head - the contents of the subcategories are all movies, not screenplays. This might be better titled "movies by writer of screenplay", but that name just underscores that this is yet another film casting category which serves no purpose on Commons. Omphalographer (talk) 05:15, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Delete --ReneeWrites (talk) 22:28, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Delete per Omphalographer and per precedent at other movie metadata CfDs. Οἶδα (talk) 03:31, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Category:Film heroes

(also Female film heroes, Male film heroes, and Category:Disney heroes. Subjective, and apparently the project of one IP user, as the characters included are mostly animated or from children's media. Trivialist (talk) 20:40, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

Possibly also worth looking at:

and their subcategories, all of which are slicing the same pool of (mostly animated film) characters in slightly different ways. Omphalographer (talk) 04:03, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Delete the whole tree. These categories seem to specifically cross-categorize characters who are also in Category:Disney heroes, a category that contains very few actual heroes and seems to equate that with "protagonist". ReneeWrites (talk) 11:06, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Delete. Subjective categorization. Delete the whole tree per the above. Οἶδα (talk) 04:50, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Category:Photographs of male screenwriters

This seems to be an odd category. While we do have some "photographs of" categories, normally they are catcats to group things like "black and white photographs of", "aerial photographs of", etc. Otherwise: photographs are the bulk of Commons' content, and we don't usually spell that out. We could nearly double our categories if we separated out "photographs of" for things like this. Jmabel ! talk 18:34, 15 December 2025 (UTC)

Having had no comments here, I have posted at COM:VP#"Photographs of" (permalink). If anyone thinks I've failed to be neutral in my wording there, please comment there; otherwise, discussion should remain here. - Jmabel ! talk 19:55, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Agree with it! I took as an example File:BobGale2024.jpg. That file has now the categories “Bob Gale” and “Photographs of male screenwriters”. I my opinion “Photographs of male screenwriters” should be removed and to Category:Bob Gale the category Category:Male screenwriters from the United States should be added (and not “Photographs of male screenwriters from the United States”). Wouter (talk) 20:19, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Support merge to more typical categories - probably to Category:Male screenwriters if nothing more specific applies. Some of the photos in this category could also use attention for notability; I've already F10ed a bunch of unused selfies. Omphalographer (talk) 22:33, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Support per Jmabel's and Wouterhagens' arguments. --ReneeWrites (talk) 12:19, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

@Eskivor: as creator of this category, do you have any argument against the above? - Jmabel ! talk 19:19, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

But a cateogry Category:Photographs of people by occupation already exist with its sub-categories. So what's the exact problem here? Do you accept the whole existence of Category:Photographs of screenwriters and its sibling categories like Category:Photographs of actors or is the problem just the combination between Category:Photographs of screenwriters and Category:Male screenwriters? Eskivor (talk) 22:35, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

@Eskivor: If those were set up as "catcats" (categories that should contain only other categories, {{Catcat}}), they could be fine, as long as there are legitimate categories under them that justify their existence. Category:Photographs of actors definitely has that; Category:Photographs of screenwriters probably not (the only reasonable category under it is Category:Black and white photographs of screenwriters, and that could just go directly under Category:Screenwriters rather than create a "candlestick" in the category hierarchy. In theory the same would be true for Category:Photographs of male screenwriters, but since it doesn't contain any categories, that would leave it empty and it would just get deleted for a different reason. - Jmabel ! talk 01:17, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

I propose to move the entries to Category:Male screenwriters, and then move selected entries to new categories such as Category:Paintings of screenwriters or Category:Works by screenwriters. I am not even sure, whether we need to distinguish between male and female screenwriters at all. NearEMPTiness (talk) 08:45, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@NearEMPTiness: I'd be more than happy to drop genders from categories on almost everything (probably keep it for actors, singers, and competitive sports), but every time I've proposed anything of the sort I've been overruled, so I've stopped proposing it. I suspect that fighting that battle here would mean that this would not be closed in anything like a timely manner. - Jmabel ! talk 18:43, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Hopefully, nothing will be chisselled in stone. NearEMPTiness (talk) 19:18, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Support per Jmabel & Wouterhagens. -- Ooligan (talk) 02:41, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Support per Jmabel & Wouterhagens. Οἶδα (talk) 04:32, 26 April 2026 (UTC)

Category:Historical images of Manila

Deprecated in favor of Category:History of Manila, as per Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Historical images. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 05:41, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Support moving all content from "Historical images of" ... to "History of" ... and deletion of the bad cats.

Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Historical_images_of (ca ∞ hits)
Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Historical_photographs_of (ca ∞ hits)
Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Historical_photos_of (ca ∞ hits)
Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Old_photos_of (ca ∞ hits)
Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Old_photo_of (4 hits, all catredirected, can be deleted ASAP)

and

Speedy delete already emptied Category:Historical images of the Philippines by city and Category:Historical images of Manila

{{en|'''This category and its subcategories should be deprecated per [[Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Historical images]]. For each subcategory, please move images and subcategories to ''Category:History of ...'' and its subcategories, then delete or redirect ''Category:Historical photographs of ...''}}

-- Taylor 49 (talk) 05:02, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Historical images of the Philippines by city

Deprecated in favor of Category:History of the Philippines by city, as per Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Historical images. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 05:42, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Speedy delete see Commons:Categories for discussion/2025/12/Category:Historical images of Manila. Taylor 49 (talk) 03:56, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Historical images of the Philippines by subject

Deprecated in favor of Category:History of the Philippines by subject, as per Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Historical images. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 06:12, 16 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Flag of Syria (1932–1958, 1961–1963)

Rename to Category:Flag of Syria (1932–1958, 1961–1963, 2024-present) Punkboy3401 (talk) 19:07, 17 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose Having "present" in the title doesn't seem like a good idea to me, because if they change the flag, the category would need to be renamed again. Also, this is a subcategory of Category:Historical flags of Syria, so it's supposed to be related to the past, not present. Deltaspace42 (talk) 18:01, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Epidemiology of diseases and related health problems

these "Epidemiology of…" categories contain useful statistics but visitors of the categories who are interested in such charts probably largely (less than half) do not expect them there or don't look there – could something be done to make this clearer so people who look for charts or choropleth maps see where they can be found? Prototyperspective (talk) 00:56, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

@Prototyperspective: . You are right, I think your proposal is pertinent. So for each Category:Epidemiology of... you can create Category:Epidemiology charts of... This category does not contain maps, but the maps are easily visible from the Template:DiseasesNav navigation bar. You can see how it looks at Category:Epidemiology_charts_of_dracunculiasis.

Having done this, there is (or isn't) a problem: Will you create the categories for the charts and fill them with the appropriate charts? Right now, I don't have time to do it. Maybe in a year and a half.

--Jmarchn (talk) 06:17, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

This wouldn't solve the problem as the charts category would be a subcategory. There would also need to be a maps subcategory. And there's quite many of these epidemiology cats by the way.

A solution could be to rename all the cats like, in this case, "Epidemiological statistics of diseases and related health problems". This would make it clear what these categories are about in the category where they are the subcategory (the disease/disorder category). What do you think of that? Maybe somebody knows how to bulk-rename a set of categories. Prototyperspective (talk) 20:27, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Maps showing data at subnational resolution

It's best to delete this category for now. I had added that category to a couple of categories and a few files as a redcategory but deliberately didn't create it yet.
I deliberately didn't create that category (yet at least) because the files and categories included in it are a tiny fraction of that type of files on Commons. It's not good to create a category that is super incomplete because
1) it's not useful and 2) is misleading in that people landing there think that would be nearly all Commons has of that type of file.
I don't know if there's a way to find files and categories of that type at scale.
The creator of the category seemed to be okay or agree with the category deletion on their talk page (please confirm here). An alternative would be to make this category reasonably comprehensive and keep it but that would be difficult and I doubt anybody here is able to do it and doing it. Prototyperspective (talk) 14:54, 20 December 2025 (UTC)

Well if it is to be kept which is fine too then somebody please help getting at least about half such files into the cat. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:02, 30 March 2026 (UTC)

(Nitpick: "Maps showing data" is not a great word choice, as all maps show data.)

From the assembled selection, I infer that the category is about statistical data (almost exclusively choropleth type maps). For the US or Canada, the "subnational resolution" would be states, rivers and counties; for the EU we would go with the various NUTS, right?

So, um. This is not a rare thing in maps. Most countries already have mutliple subcategories about "maps of subdivisions of..." and "demographic maps of..." and so on. If we develop this category here, and more maps+categories are added into it, we will eventually have to split the category up by country. So we will get for example Maps of France showing data at subnational resolution, which is essentially a duplicate of already existing statistical map categories of France, for example "Demographic maps of France" and other topics mapped for France, like "election maps" or "economic maps". If a map only shows a single nation anyway, I don't really see why we would need the distinction of the presented statistics being "subnational".

One case I would accept as useful concerns maps that show statistical data for multiple countries at subnational resolution, like this one for the EU or like this one for the world. THIS is comparatively rare, and maps of this type could be pointed out.

In the spirit of the current category name at discussion, I would suggest the category name Maps of multinational coverage showing statistical data at subnational resolution. With Statistical maps showing subdivisions of multiple countries, it could also be a bit simpler. --Enyavar (talk) 21:15, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

What do you mean with "NUTS"? Yes, the category is about statistical data such as choropleth maps but also heat maps etc. "would be states, rivers and counties" yes but these are not visualizing data in this context. Good find about Category:Demographic maps of France etc – yes these would need to be part of this. The current cat scope is any maps with subnational resolution that visualize data. The case you brought up could maybe be solved with one quick and simple edit: adding the cat to Category:Demographic maps by country. There is no need to subcategorize by country here. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:03, 10 April 2026 (UTC)

Category:Media data without source

I think this should be renamed to Category:Media without data source Prototyperspective (talk) 22:47, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Agree, that name makes more sense. But a complicating factor is that most of these files were (from what I've seen) not added manually but via a template. ReneeWrites (talk) 18:27, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Could also be considered to make this easier to implement: editing Template:References missing would move most/many of the files. Prototyperspective (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ichinomiya

I propose renaming to Category:Ichi-no-Miya to be more legible and consistent with other category names and less confusable with placenames Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 22:55, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

@Immanuelle: Please specify the proposed new name. -- Auntof6 (talk) 18:35, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

@Auntof6 apologies: the name came out as a category due to lacking a “:” Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 21:17, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

@Immanuelle: Ah, sorry, I would have fixed it myself if I'd noticed that was the problem! -- Auntof6 (talk) 08:19, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Amanotanagao-jinja

Move to Category:Ame-no-Tanagao Shrine to make the name more legible in English Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 03:31, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Comment Both Google Maps and the English-language version of the island's official website call it "Amanotanagao Shrine". ReneeWrites (talk) 15:34, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:NDL-DC 1112098 Nansatsu Shashin Taikannomaki

This category and all of its files are not human readable at all. Aside from being related to Nansatsu Shashin Taikannomaki and the National Diet Library I have no clue what this is. I think the category and all of its files need to be renamed to something that clearly indicates what it is Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:25, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Shimosa Province

Should be renamed to Category:Shimōsa Province because that is the proper diacritics to indicate vowel length Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:27, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose since most computer keyboards do not easily support such diacritics. On the other hand, here in Commons, the Latin letter approximations are probably understood by users of that language. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:57, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Totomi Province

Should be moved to Category:Tōtōmi Province for proper diacritics Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:29, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose as in Commons:Categories for discussion/2025/12/Category:Shimosa Province. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:58, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Kozuke Province

Should be moved to Category:Kōzuke Province for proper diacritics Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:29, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Hoki Province

Should be moved to Category:Hōki Province for proper diacritics Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose as in Commons:Categories for discussion/2025/12/Category:Shimosa Province Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:58, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Hyuga Province

Should be moved to Category:Hyūga Province for proper diacritics Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Bitchu Province

Should be moved to Category:Bitchū Province for proper diacritics Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:30, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose as in Commons:Categories for discussion/2025/12/Category:Shimosa Province Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:58, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Osumi Province

Should be moved to Category:Ōsumi Province for proper diacritics Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:31, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Omi Province

Should be moved to Category:Ōmi Province for proper diacritics Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 05:31, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Ame-no-oshihomimi

Move to Category:Ame no Oshihomimi Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 07:58, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Comment Ame-no-oshihomimi is the name used as the title on the English Wikipedia, though the name is spelled as one word ("Amenooshihomimi") throughout the rest of the article. There doesn't seem to be any indication that the proposed spelling is more correct than the other two. ReneeWrites (talk) 15:02, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ama-no-Tanagahime Shrine

Should be renamed to Category:Ama-no-Tanaga-hime Shrine Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 08:11, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Comment According to this English-language sign at the shrine's location, its name is "Amenotanagahime Shrine". --ReneeWrites (talk) 15:16, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Kamiichinomiya Oawa-jinja

Move to Category:Kami-Ichi-no-Miya Ōawa Shrine Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 08:14, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Comment The name Google Maps uses for this shrine is "Kami-Ichinomiya Ōawa Shrine" while the English-language version of the town's website calls it "Kamiichinomiya Oawa Shrine". ReneeWrites (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Unitas

Siehe https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Unitasː Umbenennung in Unitas-Verband wird empfohlen GerritR (talk) 08:50, 23 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Dedicated ebook devices

Rename this and subcategories to Category:E-readers, which is a common term for these devices nowadays. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs • uploads) 12:56, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Xbox

This category supposedly covers the original game console developed by Microsoft. However, the trademark "Xbox" now commonly refers to Category:Xbox (brand), whereas we have a separate Category:Xbox Console category for the console. So, there are two options to deal with these categories:

Convert this into a dab page with links to both Category:Xbox (brand) and Category:Xbox Console.
Move Category:Xbox (brand) to Category:Xbox.

I prefer the second one, since Category:Xbox Console will come under Category:Xbox (brand) anyway. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs • uploads) 14:50, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Buildings in Galway

Rename to Category:Buildings in Galway (city) to disambiguate from buildings in the county of Galway. Each is a distinct first level administrative territory in Ireland. They are not synonymous. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:49, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

Oppose Merry Christmas! Just use Galway for the city and County Galway for other uses, different names, no need to disambiguate or clarification. --Joanbanjo (talk) 03:24, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Is this because the city usage is more common than the county usage? Do you have evidence for such common usage primacy? Even if that were true, it would not necessarily be a compelling argument in category space. Let us not forget that the main purpose of categories is to assist navigation; in this regard the advantages of additional words to reduce ambiguity trumps brevity. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:21, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Don't forget Category:Galway, New York. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:44, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Galway ≠ County Galway, different words. Yes, it seems that Galway it's the primary topic, it's acompelling argument. If the main purpose of categories is to assist navigation then keep it simple. I don't forget Galway, New York and there are probably some other meanings, including some ships named Galway, they are clearly not on the same level. Greetings Joanbanjo (talk) 04:56, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

You have not really address my questions. To repeat: Do you have evidence the city has common usage primacy? Even if that were true, would it necessarily be a compelling argument in category space for primacy? "Keep it simple" is not usually the best reason for a name in category space: "Keep it unambiguous" is much more useful. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:16, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Happy New Year. Seems pretty clear that the city itself it's the primary topic. Yes, if it's true it's a definitive argument for it's primacy. It is not ambiguous at all, there's no confusion with the county (different thing), so there's no problem. Better not to create unnecessary complications when they don't improve navigation at all, quite the opposite. The same goes for the church thingy. Joanbanjo (talk) 04:16, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Simply stating your opinions as if they were facts does not make them facts. Some policy citations or evidence might bolster your claims. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:05, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Support renaming the categories, and turning Galway into a disambiguation category. --ReneeWrites (talk) 01:49, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Ram's head

This category is poorly named, and keeps attracting content that does not belong here. Jmabel ! talk 02:45, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Rename to something more specific - "Limestone ram's head" or "Tang Dynasty ram's head", for instance? Omphalographer (talk) 06:44, 25 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Black and white photographs of actors

One of the parent categories indicates that this is specifically for men; that is not how it has been used, and we do not have a Category:Black and white photographs of actresses. "Actors" in English can be either specifically male or gender-neutral. I suggest that rather than create a parallel female category, we remove the parent category that says this is specifically male and make this overtly a gender-neutral category, since it seems it is already being used that way. Jmabel ! talk 01:25, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Pinging @Cathy Richards who is the one who changed this a decade or so ago to be specifically male. - Jmabel ! talk 01:26, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Comment This touches on a topic that's broader than just this specific category. There was a CfD to rename "Actresses" to "Female actors" (Commons:Categories for discussion/2024/12/Category:Actresses), but "actresses" was created in 2007. This indicates "actors" has always been used on Commons to refer to men, and actresses to women, and there has been (as far as I can tell) no CfD to change that. I would support changing actor to be gender-neutral, but this is not how that word is currently used on Commons, and Cathy's edit was in line with current consensus (both then and now). ReneeWrites (talk) 10:03, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@ReneeWrites: then we would need a Category:Black and white photographs of actresses (which we have never had) and photos such as File:65978 Anita Thallaug.jpg belong there, not here. - Jmabel ! talk 18:22, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Category:Locales in the United States

And Category:Locales in the United States by state This was made as a parent for Category:Locales in the United States by state, but there is no "Locales by country" scheme (it has since been made) and I have no clue what makes something a "locale". We already have many, many category schemes to arrive at some kind of place/region/location and I don't see what this adds. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:10, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

With respect to geography, a "locale" (as defined by the United States Geological Survey) is place with human activity, that is not a populated place, nor a dam or mine. There is much less-that-amicable discussion among many editors (particularly regarding subjects in the United States) as to whether particular places qualify as a populated places or not. This category allows for a category for places of human activity that may not qualify as a current or former populated place. An Errant Knight (talk) 17:08, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Alternative computer keyboards

What are "alternative computer keyboards"? Some of the subcats are actually mainstream keyboards, like Virtual keyboards. Plus, there are variations even within "mainstream" keyboards. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs • uploads) 04:05, 26 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Bausünden

Subjective term used to describe architecture that is perceived as ugly. Category should be deleted. Carl Ha (talk) 13:11, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Delete pe nom. Taylor 49 (talk) 00:13, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Station signs

Proper disambiguation with Category:Train station name signs since right now, both fill in the same niche (a category for station name signs). ManuelB701 (talk) 11:59, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Category:Station signs To be emptied and turned into disambig cat. Taylor 49 (talk) 20:22, 31 December 2025 (UTC)