Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/07

Category:Solaiyar Dam

There is another category at Category:Sholayar_Dam which uses a current and more widely used spelling. However there is also a Lower Sholayar Dam on the Kerala side. I suggest creating and moving files to updated and accurate categories as Category:Upper Sholayar Dam and Category:Lower Sholayar Dam. Some of the images are of other other dams and those can be subsequently addressed. Shankar Raman (talk) 13:14, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

The spelling as per en wiki is Solaiyar Dam. I think the name change should be discussed there. Also, {{Merge}} would have been a better approach than deletion request. --Sreejith K (talk) 22:09, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Agree Sreejith K, and I've initiated discussion there now: en:Talk:Solaiyar_Dam#Renaming_as_Upper_Sholayar_Dam. Cheers --Shankar Raman (talk) 05:01, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

There is a serious problem with the articles and categories. People from Tamilnadu names the dam as Soliayar Dam, Nirar Dam, Aliyar Dam etc. and they think that this is the only dam in that area. Because the entry to Lower Sholayar Dam in Kerala is restricted. But with the permission from Forest Dept and KSEB we can visit the Lower Sholayar Dam. Also most people from Tamilnadu upload photos in this spelling. So it is better to keep this category for Upper Sholayar Dam and the other category Sholayar Dam must stay for Lower Sholayar because people from Kerala think that the spelling is Sholayar. Recently the page in English wiki was redirected to Solaiyar and which was also wrong. So In my opinion it is better to keep like this. --Ranjithsiji (talk) 02:56, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

@Shankar Raman, Sreejithk2000, and Ranjithsiji: this topic is too specific for non-Indian users. But I have collected the info:

Can you solve this "?"-gap? --Estopedist1 (talk) 10:45, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Metalurh Stadium, Komsomolske

Request to move to Category:Hirnyk Stadium, Kalmiuske (former name of the category) per current name and per name of the article in Polish Wikipedia pl:Stadion Hirnyk w Kalmiuśkim (Hirnyk Stadium in Kalmiuske).

  • Stadium name. The stadium was renamed from Metalurh to Hirnyk in 2006.
  • City name. The city was renamed from Komsomolske to Kalmiuske in 2016, although Donetsk People's Republic considers this controversial.

Pinging @Hedwig in Washington: and @Ahonc: who were involved in prior discussions about this category — NickK (talk) 20:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

IMHO the move / current status is OK. I won't lose any sleep over another name. If renamed to Stadion Hirnyk then the city name should be Komsomolske, same as in parent categories. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:39, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Stale discussion. @NickK: if the topic is controversial, could we keep the current situation? Objections?--Estopedist1 (talk) 11:03, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

@Estopedist1: Well, why should we keep the old pre-2006 name? I don't see any good reason to do it — NickK (talk) 11:12, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Circassians

Category:Adyghe and Category:Kabardinian are subcats of this category, but then, later, all the three cats are subcats of Category:Ethnic groups in the Caucasus. Is there not something wrong about this classification? E4024 (talk) 12:22, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

@E4024: I’m no expert, but it appears to mirror the terrible tangle with naming of these ethnic groups. In Western languages “Circassians” usually refer to all three branches, whereas in Russian there are кабардинцы=Kabardinians, черкесы=(?), and адыгейцы=Adyghe. To confuse all us further, the endonym of the whole people is “Adyghe”. I don’t expect anybody here can improve it. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:59, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Well, I understand at least one user agrees with me that there is a problem here. That is a first good step towards finding a solution. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 06:39, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
@Incnis Mrsi @E4024 I've created Category:Abkhazo-Adyghean peoples that might help resolving this problem. — Le Loy (talk) 00:20, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Heo Taewon (firefighter)

I doubt that we need a category for this man. Sanandros (talk) 14:05, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

  • Comment: I have seen some other Korean firefighters with cats, one even has "pages"... Something has to be done, but what? --E4024 (talk) 14:12, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
We can simple delete these cat but what we can do is to categories the pic with the events. Some pics seem to be from a firefighting exercise and other seem to be from a ceremony. In military cat we don't use for every soldier a category but sometimes we categorize certain events of a unit in a sub cat (like change of command or award ceremony).--Sanandros (talk) 17:12, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Stale discussion. It seems that one enthusiast (user:Kwangmo) has created over 350 categories of Category:Firefighters of South Korea by name. I guess most of them are not notable, and should be deleted. We can start with Category:Heo Taewon (firefighter), acting like user:Sanandros recommended--Estopedist1 (talk) 13:23, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:9.17.16 Batman Day signing

This is a violation of Commons:Categories selectivity principle as all authors are simply categorized inside instead of spllitting it up. Sanandros (talk) 15:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

What do you mean by "authors"? Which part of Commons:Categories are you referring to? Nightscream (talk) 15:43, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
I mean "Simplicity principle This principle suggests not to combine too many different criteria." And with authors I mean all these persons which are a parent category right now.--Sanandros (talk) 16:37, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Agree that Category:Scott Snyder, Category:Greg Capullo and Category:Frank Miller need to be removed from this parent category and added to individual photos that they appear in. --Mjrmtg (talk) 17:29, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
I disagree for the following reasons:
First, keeping track of that would be a lot more difficult during the upload process.
Second, doing so would cause all those photos to appear on the main category pages of those subjects. Consider that you're talking about hundreds of photos showing up those pages. When that happens, categories need to be subdivided, which is one of the main reasons I've grouped them by event. When you consider the sheer number of signings I've covered (do you intend to do this to ALL of them?), and the fact that many of these people have appeared at multiple signings (I've photographed Peter David, for example, at six different events that yielded photo counts large enough to merit their own cat pages), this would result in a mess of way too many photos placed on the main categories pages for users to navigate through. Isn't this why we subdivided into subcats in the first place?
Third, I see nothing at the Commons:Categories that indicates that 12 criteria qualifies as "too many", nor does it give any indication of any number that so qualifies.
This is how I've categoried the over 10,000 photos from signings I've uploaded to the Commons since 2007, and I've never gotten any indication from a single member of the community that there is anything wrong with this until now. It's what works for me, as it makes the workload of uploading so many photos slightly more manageable, and organizes it more easily for the user. When you're talking about hundreds of photos per signing, with different subjects in each photo, having to keep track of which cats to put each photo in as I upload them is simply not reasonable nor feasible. My system works fine. Please leave it alone. Nightscream (talk) 17:44, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
It would not bother me so much if all of these guys are just categorized in the comic cats but Tom King is categorized in the CIA cat, and obviously a Batman singing is not a child category of the CIA.--Sanandros (talk) 20:41, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Then perhaps we should be open to considering the practice, at least in some situations like this one, that categories can be directly related to their immediate parent or child category, and not always to their grandparent/grandchild one. The degree to which it is possible to adhere to organizational rules in systems as vast as the Commons is naturally going to be limited, and not entirely absolute, as imperfections or inconsistencies may at one point or another be unavoidable. I think that important thing is that in general, at least, this mostly works fine. Nightscream (talk) 02:11, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Stale discussion. @Nightscream: Here is categorization mistakes as noted by user:Sanandros. Firstly, the category name should be something like "Category:Batman Day in 2016" (location to be added if needed, but currently even Category:Batman Day is missing). Secondly, for the specific person, the acceptable category name would be "Category:Scott Snyder at Batman Day 2016", and this can be categorized under "Category:Scott Snyder"--Estopedist1 (talk) 13:33, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

I'd agree with that suggestion.--Sanandros (talk) 18:29, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
See my response above. Regarding the first matter, the passage cotaining the link to the Midtown Comics signings applies. Regarding the second matter, the passages regarding uploading large amounts of photos. Nightscream (talk) 04:52, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Colorful Art

See also: Category talk:Colorful.
See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/03/Category:Colorful.

There doesn't seem to be a definition of what fits in this category. If it were fully populated, it would probably have so many things in it that it wouldn't be useful. Unless we can define criteria for including things here, and possibly subcategorize, this cat should probably be deleted. Auntof6 (talk) 10:41, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

None of those specify what the criteria are for being considered colorful. Neither does Category:Colorful. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:41, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
@Benzoyl: I see you created some of the sub-categories of Category:Colorful. Would you like to comment on this? - Themightyquill (talk) 13:02, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
I think Colorful is not less than Category:Four colors. Colorful = not only vivid. --Benzoyl (talk) 23:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
There is Category:Blue in art etc. Fit to it, The Category name may be better Category:Colorful in art. --Benzoyl (talk) 00:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
It's very colorful art, not just 3 colors for example. Cat is now located at Category:Colorful works of art. I think the issue that needs to be solved here is that such a large fraction of files is missing. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:40, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:Party per fess shields

Category name should be "Party per fess fields" or even better "Fields party per fess". Charges can also be "per fess", for example a lion rampant per fess gules and vert. Need to reorganise structure with top level category "Per fess in heraldry" Lobsterthermidor (talk) 13:46, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Stale discussion. @Lobsterthermidor: heraldry-specific topic. Moving to category:Party per fess fields would be a massive move. We definitely need more input to be sure that correct is the word "fields" and not "shields".--Estopedist1 (talk) 14:43, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Department of Drawings and Prints, Metropolitan Museum of Art

this should be one cat with Drawings and prints in the Metropolitan Museum of Art at least related to.
See also Metropolitan Museum of Art by department - Drawings and Prints (Non-empty category redirects) Oursana (talk) 18:10, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

I agree. All of these "Department of" categories are duplicative and inconsistent with established category naming conventions. If they are important to the institution (e.g., to indicate where the image came from), perhaps they could be renamed more explicitly and made into hidden categories, perhaps as subcategories of Images from Metropolitan Museum of Art or some other appropriate umbrella category. Laura1822 (talk) 09:11, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
A departmental category refers to the curatorial department and galleries that host the artwork. This is quite different from a category based on a purely subject-based classification. For example, the Department of Islamic Art, Metropolitan Museum of Art includes a number of artworks from non-Islamic cultures (e.g. Christians in Islamic Spain), while there are a number of works from Islamic cultures in other departments (e.g. in the Department of Arms and Armor).--Pharos (talk) 18:57, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 Keep this and other similar categories as they serve a structural purpose;  Support hiddenising and subcategorising ideas. --Taterian (talk) 02:48, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Stale discussion. The nominated category fits well into the parent Category:Metropolitan Museum of Art by department. The other two above-mentioned categories are changed to the redirects. I am not sure about hiddenising--Estopedist1 (talk) 08:43, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

 Keep, of course, but renaming to Drawings and prints in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. The parent Category:Metropolitan Museum of Art by department fits perfectly - nothing to be done any more.  Oppose hiding ("hiddenising"). ThomasPusch (talk) 06:28, 21 June 2023 (UTC)