Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/08

Category:Selbstretter

See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2015/01/Category:Filterselbstretter.

I moved one category following one CFD (Commons:Categories for discussion/2015/01/Category:Filterselbstretter) not realizing we had two other similar categories: Category:Selbstretter and Category:Sauerstoffselbstretter‎. The latter is linked via wikidata to en:Self-contained self-rescue device. Can anyone help in renaming these appropriately? Thanks. -- Themightyquill (talk) 12:25, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Filterselbstretter are devices which let only non toxic parts of the air through. In contrast, Sauerstoffselbstretter are producing oxygen; the user depends not on the environment. Therefore the respective categories are subcategories to Selbstretter. In english language there are no appropriate names for these devices, thats the reason why i've used the german ones.--Markscheider (talk) 04:24, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
These devices only exist in Germany, Austria and Switzerland? - Themightyquill (talk) 15:19, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
I don't think so. --Markscheider (talk) 08:16, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
It seems unlikely to me that non-German-speaking people around the world use the term "Saueroffselbstretter." There must be an English equivalent.- Themightyquill (talk) 07:58, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
Find it and put it in. --Markscheider (talk) 10:40, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
That's why I started the CFD... - Themightyquill (talk) 08:29, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
"An emergency breathing apparatus is a respiratory protective unit for emergency evacuations. Two categories exist: air purifying devices like an escape respirator which feature a filter; and air supplying devices like SCSR self-rescuers that are dedicated to emergency evacuations in confined space, poorly oxygenated or toxic environments."  ? - Themightyquill (talk) 08:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Proposal:

How is that? Themightyquill (talk) 08:39, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Redirected. -- Themightyquill (talk) 09:56, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Reopened my Markscheider
This is wrong. The first one cleans the air from dangerous components, the second one produces it's own oxygen. I'm really tired of this. --Markscheider (talk) 10:22, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
The first one (respiratory protective devices for self-rescue) cleans the air from dangerous components. The second (self-contained self-rescue devices) supplies oxygen. I don't see the problem. -- Themightyquill (talk) 19:10, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:The 75th Anniversary of China Merchants Group

The name is wrong, because its official name in 1947 was China Merchants Steam Navigation Company. User:Urga tagged the photos with 《國營招商局七十五周年紀念刊》附圖. Roy17 (talk) 14:49, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

stale discussion. @Roy17: which new name do you suggest? Category:75th Anniversary of China Merchants Steam Navigation Company (note that "the" is not needed in category names)?--Estopedist1 (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I suggest moving to Category:國營招商局七十五周年紀念刊 without redirect. Roy17 (talk) 15:49, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
@Roy17: I don't think we can have categories in Chinese characters. -- Themightyquill (talk) 10:47, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
Some time ago it was decided things like books can have non latin titles. For now I dont have time to find the exact discussion, which I think was done on one of the village pumps. Roy17 (talk) 22:57, 6 August 2022 (UTC)

Category:Virgin Mary by Giovanni Bellini

Can this cat be united with Madonnas by Giovanni Bellini? Oursana (talk) 19:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Not completely. en:Madonna (art) says ""Madonna" may be generally used of representations of Mary, with or without the infant Jesus, is the focus and central figure of the image, possibly flanked or surrounded by angels or saints. Other types of Marian imagery have a narrative context, depicting scenes from the Life of the Virgin, e.g. the Annunciation to Mary, are not typically called "Madonna"." Since some of what's in this category is in that last group, it can't all be merged. --Auntof6 (talk) 20:52, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
@Auntof6@Oursana I guess that keep. Right? Estopedist1 (talk) 21:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Madonnas_by_Giovanni_Bellini >> for me is solved, thank you--Oursana (talk) 22:50, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Orthodox churches

See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/01/Category:Frescos in churches of Orthodox Church in Russia.
See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/02/Category:Orthodox murals in Romania.
See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2015/12/Category:Frescos of Orthodox Church.

What would you think of renaming the category as "Category:Eastern Orthodox churches" or "Category:Eastern Orthodox church buildings"? Wouldn't there be symmetry with Wikipedia's categories this way? --Orkhonien (talk) 12:46, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

I think we should be able to do something, but I'm not sure what. Category:Orthodox churches is currently a sub-category of Category:Eastern Orthodox buildings but it also contains Category:Oriental Orthodox churches‎ (which, if I understand correctly, are not Eastern Orthodox.) That doesn't make sense.
There are also a vareity of other orthodoxies that might have churches - see en:Orthodox. This issue has come up a few times before (see the links I've added above). But I see that Category:Oriental Orthodoxy and Category:Eastern Orthodoxy don't share any parent category called Category:Orthodoxy (which redirects to Eastern Orthodoxy) or Category:Orthodox Christianity (a disambiguation page) or Category:Christian Orthodoxy (which doesn't exist).
Do we really need ambiguous categories like Category:Orthodox churches, Category:Orthodox clergy, Category:Orthodox organizations and their ambiguous subcategories? Can they be safely deleted (without redirects) in favour of Eastern Orthodox churches, Eastern Orthodox clergy, and Eastern Orthodox organizations? Category:Orthodox rite is a subcategory of Category:Eastern Orthodoxy but Category:Orthodox liturgy is not. I'm not sure what to do with those.
Category:Orthodox art in Romania could also be moved. Pinging @Zoupan, Auntof6, ŠJů, and Achim55: for additional input, since you've been involved in the linked discussoins. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:56, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Comment
  • There is really a problem with the words "church/churches" which can mean both: a specific type of liturgical buildings, as well as specific Christian organizations (communities). However, the word "churches" is established for this type of Christian liturgical buildings across the whole category tree. I think, we need not to break this established consensus.
  • Not all buildings of any church (as an institution) are churches (as a type of building). Churches (as organizations or communities) can own also rectories, houses, hospitals, schools, chapels, monasteries etc. The term "church building" is unclear, it can mean "a building which is a church" as well as "a building which is owned by any church". The original problem with ambiguity persists, is not resolved by this proposal.
  • Some branches of category trees can be specified by denomination/confession, some by specific institution (e.g. in Ukraine, two or more "Eastern Orthodox churches" as institutions coexist or "compete" in the same area, especially Russian Ortodox Church often exists beside local Easter Orthodox churches. Similar situation can be with "protestant churches", such buldings can be owned by various protestant churches as institutions. I think, both levels can have their sense, depending on specific context.
  • As regards a relation of terms "Orthodox/Orthodoxy", "Eastern Orthodoxy" or even "Oriental Orthodoxy", it should be reviewed by context. "Ortodoxy" is often an abbreviation for "Eastern Orthodoxy". Generally, all churches consider themselves as "catholic", "orthodox", "apostolic" and "evangelic(al)" in general sense, but not in the specific sense labelling specific confessions. In most of contexts, "Orthodox" and "Eastern Orthodox" can be considered as synonymes, especially in local context. No need to unify them totally.
  • "Oriental Orthodoxy" is commonly a term for the six "Ancient Orthodox churches", also called "Old Oriental churches", "Small Eastern churches" etc. They should be specific by refusal of Council of Chalcedon which is accepted by Roman and Greek-Catholics as well as by Eastern Orthodox churches of Greek and Russian orientation. Generally, Eastern Christanity consists of three main groups: Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox churches, the Eastern Catholic Churches, and some of the denominations descended from the Church of the East (Persian Church). --ŠJů (talk) 14:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your input, ŠJů
  1. I think church as building vs organization is usually remedied through capitalization. An Eastern Orthodox church (building) vs the Eastern Orthodox Church (organization)
  2. I agree that "church building" is unclear (between a physical church vs another physical building associated with a church) but I don't see a great solution.
  3. Category:Russian Orthodox Church is currently a sub-category of Category:Eastern Orthodoxy in Russia, so Category:Russian Orthodox churches is a subcategory of Category:Orthodox church buildings by constituent church body (which should be renamed Category:Eastern Orthodox church buildings by constituent church body to match its intention and its parent categories).
  4. I agree that "Orthodoxy" is often an abbreviation for Eastern Orthodoxy, but not always. Similarly, "Catholic" is often an abbreviation for "Roman Catholic" but not always. We use Category:Roman Catholic churches so avoid the ambiguity. We should do the same with Eastern Orthodox churches (etc.)
Thanks again. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:57, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

I tried to tidy things up. Please tell me if I have made mistakes, as it was a very tedious and long process. Veverve (talk) 19:08, 7 October 2019 (UTC) Edit: I believe the work of making this category clearer is in no way finished and I welcome any form of help. Sub-categories should also be tidied up. Veverve (talk) 19:17, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

I am in favor in renaming this category into a disambiguation category. Veverve (talk) 00:36, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

@Themightyquill: @Zoupan, Auntof6, ŠJů, and Achim55: I tried to tidy things up once again. Veverve (talk) 13:58, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@Veverve: I can't remember what it looked like before but it looks very tidy now. Thanks for your work. Several issues remain:
  1. Do we need Category:Orthodox churches, Category:Orthodox cathedrals, and Category:Orthodox cathedrals by country, or can we convert them to disambig pages? (I'm in favour of the latter).
  2. If we are going to get rid of "Orthodox churches" and "Orthodox cathedrals" we may have a lot of work to do. We still often named categories "Orthodox" in place of "Eastern Orthodox." For instance, if Category:Orthodox churches in Ukraine is a subcategory of Category:Ukrainian Orthodox churches and Category:Eastern Orthodox church buildings by country, then shouldn't it be named Category:Eastern Orthodox churches in Ukraine]? And shouldn't its subcategory, Category:Orthodox cathedrals in Ukraine be a sub-category of Category:Eastern Orthodox cathedrals and renamed Category:Eastern Orthodox cathedrals in Ukraine?
  3. I don't think the "(buildings)" is necessary in Category:Eastern Orthodox churches (buildings) but it isn't confusing at least. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@Themightyquill:
I think we can rename those categories to Eastern Orthodox and delete the "Orthodox" pages. A DAB page would only make things confusing, and nobody would DAB images in those DAB pages. I disagree with @Billinghurst: and think the "Orthodox" pages should be deleted. I explained myself at Category talk:Orthodox rite; the DAB page will only get clogged up like Category:Orthodox churches was. I have seen some Oriental Orthodox topics being into those "Orthodox" categories, enough to know that having "Orthodox" as a redirect will make people upload Oriental Orthodox subjects into such categories, meaning we will have Oriental Orthodox subjects in Eastern Orthodox categories. Billinghurst has reverted some of my edits which intended to speedy delete those "Orthodox" pages. What do you think about deleting those "Orthodox" pages, Themightyquill?
I have not changed the Category:Orthodox churches, Category:Orthodox cathedrals, and Category:Orthodox cathedrals by country categories, as well as the subcategories of Category:Eastern Orthodox monks of monasteries in Poland, because it is a lot of work and frankly I was tired of manually clicking on all those categories (is there not a script like Cat-lot for categories?). Moreover, I stopped because I agree with your second point: one would have to check change numerous sub-categories, and check every images of each category to remove the Oriental Orthodox images which have been included in those categories due to their confusing names; this is a lot of work and for now I have already done a lot. Veverve (talk) 09:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 Comment You have long standing categories that where contributors use HotCat are going to start typing "Orthodoxy" and not find the categories that they have been using. The guidance does not readily allow me to speedy delete these categories. What is wrong with the redirects anyway, they allow users to type "Orthodoxy" and get them into the corresponding "Eastern Orthodoxy ..." category.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:22, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: What is wrong with the redirects anyway, they allow users to type "Orthodoxy" and get them into the corresponding "Eastern Orthodoxy ..." category "Orthodox" can refer to either Eastern Orthodox or Oriental Orthodox, as I wrote. When you end up with Oriental Orthodox in Eastern Orthodox categories, it is a problem. Veverve (talk) 20:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@Veverve: Please go and read more about HotCat, and how the system is utilised, and the templates in place to make it functional. If you don't want a {{Category redirect}} then make it into another functional template that directs to the options around disambiguation (see Template:Cat disambig). It is simply not acceptable to remove the visibility of a category name that has been in place for many years just because you want to rename it; you are taking away the options that the community should have to more easily categorise. This is bigger than your simple wishes and the community has implemented systems, so please use them and work out here which way is best to progress.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:29, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: I don't really see why so many editors would be typing "Orthodoxy" into hotcat, but I expect you mean "Orthodox." Still I don't see what alternative there is. Creating a disambiguation page at every example here, which wouldn't solve the hotcat issue. I would say that this is simply how wiki commons works and editors using hotcat and "orthodox" will need to adjust, but if you have a solution to propose that doesn't result in the miscategorization of content, I'd be very glad to hear it. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:48, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Themightyquill: My response is in relation to one person's requests to speedy delete, whereas whatever is the eyes wide open consensus of a discussion of the community will always be what we do. I would guess that there is some half way solutions for this, in terms of ensuring that the parental categories have the disambiguation, and once you fall into the hotcat subcats, then there is no requirement to redirect or disambiguate. There needs to be a reasonable way for those who use old cat names to find the new or existing cats.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: I'm not sure what you mean by speedy delete, since the discussion has been going for over a year. Do you mean just deletion (rather than redirect)? Even if we delete most of these, it would make sense to set up proper disambiguation pages at Category:Orthodox and Category:Orthodoxy. Anyone using hotcat would find those, and could use them to properly locate the category they are looking for. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Themightyquill: I had requested the speedy deletion of some categories, but billinghurst objected. I then said I was simply following the consensus I found on this page, and exposed my arguments. Veverve (talk) 14:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

 Comment I was not part of the discussion, I came to it when pointed to it when doing admin duties. I don't see a clear stated consensus of action, and addressing how which long-standing categories would become disambiguation pages, which become meta categories, which become redirects, and which are deleted. I faced a series of speedy deletion requests and as an outside observer I would like to see a clear plan that a new user can understand and find. To me "Orthodoxy" is too ambiguous a term to say just apply to religions, there are many types of orthodoxy.

As a general user, my general expectation is to see a either a meta category, a category redirect or a disambiguation page at Category:Orthodox churches if there is not usual categorisation. If I look at something comparative like Category:Catholic churches, am I going to see somethign similar here? Maybe I am a hard task master, but I don't see the clarity in this discussion to understand, act and start deleting.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:01, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Fair points, at least in terms of a request for a clear plan. If Category:Orthodoxy is too broad to apply to just religions, it shouldn't be a redirect to a very specific Category:Eastern Orthodoxy (which is has been since 2017). The fact that Veverve recently incompletely redirected Category:Eastern Orthodoxy to Category:Eastern Orthodox Church is less of a problem.
I would propose the following:
I acknowledge that we have Category:Catholicism for all kinds of Catholicism but that's something even wikipedia doesn't have - en:Catholicism is simply for Roman Catholicism. If you want something more general, you need to go to en:Catholic (disambiguation) or en:Catholic Church (disambiguation).
I would argue that we don't need Category:Orthodox churches by country or Category:Orthodox churches (buildings) by country. There is no such category structure on wikipedia because Eastern and Oriental Orthodox churches aren't closely enough related that they need to be grouped together any more than Category:Eastern Orthodox churches (buildings) and Category:Orthodox synagogues need to be grouped into Category:Orthodox religious buildings.
We do have Category:Catholic churches by country but is mostly populated with country categories containing only a one or two subcategories (Eastern Catholic churches or Roman Catholic churches) with little room to grow. I don't think that's a good model to follow. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:45, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I now noticed we have the same problem with Category:Orthodox churches in France. Veverve (talk) 09:03, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
As well as for Category:Orthodox crosses by country and Category:Orthodox cemeteries by country. Veverve (talk) 22:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Comment: in common English usage, the word Orthodox (capitalized) is not ambiguous between Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox, it is synonymous with what Wikipedia, somewhat weirdly, calls Eastern Orthodox. These are two different Christian traditions, albeit called with a similar name. It is also wrong to consider that there would be a larger grouping gathering these two traditions, called Orthodoxy or else. The only grouping gathering the Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox is Eastern Christianity, which also includes e.g. the Eastern Catholics and the Assyrians/Nestorians. Also note that the word orthodox (capitalized or not) is also frequently used in other compounds such as the Orthodox Jews and the orthodox Marxists.

The solution to the problems mentioned above is, therefore, not to place content about Oriental Orthodox foo... into a parent category called Orthodox foo... but in the nearest Christian foo... category. Place Clichy 09:43, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Al-Ahly Cairo

See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/08/Category:Football kit body/Al-Ahly.

This category should be merged with Category:Al Ahly SC to match the club's parent article on Wikipedia. Ben5218 (talk) 12:14, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

 Support Robby (talk) 08:59, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Ben5218 and Robby: currently Category:Al-Ahly Cairo is redirected to Category:Al-Ahly FC, but we also have Category:Al Ahly SC. Same organizations?--Estopedist1 (talk) 23:06, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
@Estopedist1: All categories are about the same club: Al Ahly SC, and I strongly believe that all of them should redirect to the name I proposed, since it's the official name of the club in English. The club's categories on Wikipedia are also spelled that way. Ben5218 (talk) 00:30, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Category:Football kit body/Al-Ahly

See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/08/Category:Al-Ahly Cairo.

This category should be merged with Category:Football kit body/Al Ahly SC to match the parent's article. Ben5218 (talk) 12:21, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Category:Former members of the Legislative Council of Hong Kong

See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/06/Category:Former members of the CDU.

Looking at cat structure of other national parliaments, I suggest this cat be deleted. Instead, categorise the members by term: members after 1997 in the format of members of the n-th legco of hk, those between 1985 and 1997 as members of the legco of hk (19xx-19xx), and all others before 1985 as members of the legco of hk before 1985, cf. https://www.legco.gov.hk/general/english/timeline/council_meetings.htm?/general/english/counmtg/cm1620.htm . sortkeys would be double digits of the ordinal numbers, 00 for ...before 1985, 00 19xx for 1985-1997, 00 Provisional for provisional legco. Roy17 (talk) 14:00, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Category:Church of Archangel Michael in Zhambul

The coordinates for this church place it in Taraz, Jambyl/Zhambyl Region/Province, Kazakhstan, not in Uzbekistan. Moreover, I can't find any reference to a Zhambul, Uzbekistan. Is the whole Zhambul category tree perhaps meant to be Category:Zhambyl Province? Themightyquill (talk) 07:27, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

stale discussion. Ruwiki has article of this church: ru:Храм Архангела Михаила (Жамбул). I guess this article helps to solve this CFD--Estopedist1 (talk) 22:22, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

@Estopedist1: Yes! Thank you. It's in Taraz, which used to be called Zhambul. I propose renaming to Category:Church of Archangel Michael, Taraz, and renaming Category:Russian Orthodox churches in Zhambul to Category:Russian Orthodox churches in Taraz. -- Themightyquill (talk) 10:07, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Bridge name signs

Redundant to Category:Bridge nameplates.--Leit (talk) 14:23, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

 Keep Bridge nameplates and bridge name signs are different. Bridge nameplates are plaques on bridges. Bridge name signs, however, aren't plaques as they don't commemorate anything. They're simply signs that inform about the bridge names (and sometimes about technical data like length and altitude as well). Moreover bridge name signs aren't necessarily "on" bridges or attached to bridges but frequently are placed more or less in front of bridges.

-- Ies (talk) 15:34, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

I can accept the location (bolted on a bridge or on a pole) as a logic for differentiation. This is not a nameplate, by my understanding. But I don't see why the two signs above are not nameplates, just because they don't commemorate anything. en:Nameplate makes no mention of commemoration (though, to be fair, it also makes no differentiation between signs and nameplates based on location). - Themightyquill (talk) 10:44, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Category:Old Fauna of Egypt

Unclear purpose. Aging fauna? Extinct fauna? Themightyquill (talk) 11:51, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

I don,t think aging fauna is appropriate. Extinct fauna indicate that the disappearance, however the animals might be still present but the distribution has declined e.g. Ostriches are not yet extinct from Egypt but is only present in few natural protectorates. Perhaps we might change old fauna to become ancient fauna? If you think it would be more indicative. --Ashashyou (talk) 05:15, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
@Ashashyou: I'm thinking deletion might be the best option, since its purpose is highly unclear. None of the sub-categories are for animals specific. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:42, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
As for the purpose, as indicated by the title. It is about the old fauna. That is to say, the animals of old Egypt. It helps to understand the environmental changes also it helps to understand Ancient Egyptians symbols, titles, city names ...etc. For example the old name of the Minia and Beni Seuf district are during old Pharaonic Egypt was referring to an antelope like animal or an Ibex. Which is now rare or extinct from that area. The category collects mainly the fauna of prehistoric & ancient Egyptians eras. It's a repository to help any one looking at those times and to anyone looking at the climate change. We are lucky to have drawings and other evidence since this long time. I don't see a reason to delete it.--Ashashyou (talk) 22:59, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
In that case, you're talking about "Fauna of Ancient Egypt" not "Ancient fauna of Egypt". Moreoever, that sounds like a good name for a gallery or list. Categorizing modern images of animals based on where their ancestors *used to* live is a bad idea. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:31, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

stale discussion.  Delete. Unclear purpose. One category Category:Media from Sallam et al. 2011 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0016525 should be put into Category:Prehistoric life of Egypt (if it comes), or Category:Fossils of Egypt--Estopedist1 (talk) 22:41, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I also found that we have Category:Animals in ancient Egypt. Some upmerging to there would be also possible--Estopedist1 (talk) 22:43, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
I like it. - Themightyquill (talk) 10:15, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Gänseblümchen (Bellis perennis) in Ruhland

This is a not permitted German category name acc. to Commons:Categories. Also it's not a categoy name that will ever be searched for some reason. In other words: Nobody will ever search for the exact wording "Gänseblümchen (Bellis perennis) in Ruhland". Therefore the use of Category redirect is inappropriate. This German language category should be deleted. Ies (talk) 04:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Agreed. A redirect from Category:Gänseblümchen to Category:Bellis perennis would be reasonable though. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:32, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, I was in vacancy and there will be another vacancy soon.
I know, that catagory names must be in english (with exception of own names in local langguages or greek or latin species names, for example).
The discussed name redirects to a category with solely local files and will be used predominantly by local (german) photographers (e.g. pupils). The german name helps them to find the category. „No one will seek this name” is a false assertion. The additional latin species name helps all other users (and precises in case of different local names).
Therefor, please, keep the redirect.
By the way, there is a chance, in addition to a gallery to show pictures in a (sortable) wikitable containing english, german, and latin species name, which could help to identify the right category. If that was passable, I will do so. Greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 06:36, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
@Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR: You can imagine the quantity of redirects necessary to do this for every species, every region, and ever local language, right?
I think you could make a sortable wikitable in a gallery easily enough. - Themightyquill (talk) 11:07, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
@Themightyquill: Thank you for your answer and statement. Sorry if my English or understandindg is not ever so good. I'm willing accept the rules here, but if there is a legal leeway I want to use it in this case.
Also it seems now, the better and passable (whereof I was not sure as yet) way is the wikitable in one or more gallery page(s). So I will do so and hope, no one will then DR.
And @Ies: , I'm not angry about your work, but seeking legal leeways to help local users (and I hope, photograpers, too).
Greetings --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 20:53, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
A short time ago I spoke with the director and the chairman of parents' association of our secondary school (gymnasium), and with two biology teachers there, and with a pensioned biology teacher, too. They all say to me, that the discussed name is very helpful. Please respect this at the decision. Greetings from Ruhland / Germany --Wilhelm Zimmerling PAR (talk) 13:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

stale discussion. In the meantime, the nominated category is renamed to Category:Bellis perennis in Ruhland. We probably can close this CFD--Estopedist1 (talk) 22:49, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Category:Individual ancient Greek vases

This discussion is for the following three categories:

Does the term "individual" have a special meaning related to this pottery? If not, I propose renaming these categories to remove that term from the category name, and/or merging their contents upward where that makes sense. Every piece of pottery is individual. If these categories are for individual pieces for which we happen to have multiple files, I don't think this is the right naming for that. If these categories are for pieces that have been given a name or designation, maybe the categories could be called something like "Named ancient Greek vases" or "Ancient Greek vases by name or designation". Otherwise I think the contents could be merged upward.

As a further note, the Wikidata item for this category shows interwiki entries that translate to "painted Greek vases" (Italian) and "works of antique Greek ceramics (French), neither of which seem to match the name of this category. Auntof6 (talk) 10:29, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Please stay away from a system you don't understand. Ofcourse there's a cause for this. There is a difference between all vases or a certain group of them and a special vase. It's like you have a category for Policemen and Policemen by name. Such requests are so frustrating and power steaing. And there are always the same persons. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 12:31, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
@Marcus Cyron: Commons is intended to be used for all, not just for experts. Categories that are not clearly titled should get explanatory notes. While we're here, would you case to explain why the subcategory Category:Name vase is singular instead of Category:Name vases? - Themightyquill (talk) 21:37, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
Upmerge seems appropriate to me. The vases are already identified as distinct specimens by being sorted into specific subcategories like Category:Amphora Getty Villa 86.AE.80, just as Category:Vincas Kaulinis–Miškinis is called out as a specific police officer as a child of Category:Police officers. There's no need to put a category between the topic and the specific instance. "X by name" categories are only needed when the volume of specific instances would overwhelm the topic category. – BMacZero (🗩) 20:28, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Category:Witton Bridge

Is Category:Witton Bridge redundant with Category:Witton, North Norfolk? Themightyquill (talk) 12:03, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Witton Bridge seems to be a hamlet in Witton? I just batch created all the missing locations back in the day. I'm fine with either making the distinction clearer or merging it. Multichill (talk) 20:41, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
  • Merge indeed "Witton Bridge" appears to just be a bridge with "Witton" being the village. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:34, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
    "Witton Bridge" seems to be the name of a hamlet east of Witton, click on the map here and you will see both "Witton" and "Witton Bridge" so we could keep this category for the hamlet and the Witton one for the village and parish? The WP article was renamed in 2010 because of this. Crouch, Swale (talk) 08:13, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • A search of Google Books and https://visionofbritain.org.uk/ finds "Witton Bridge" as the name of a post office; according to https://www.old-maps.co.uk/ shows the post office in an area called Stonebridge, in the village of Witton, more recent maps show Witton Bridge there but it's unclear whether it refers to the bridge or another name for Stonebridge. The church is in another part of the parish, so it's likely that the name of the post office has sometimes been used to distinguish it from the other Witton in Norfolk (Category:Witton, Broadland). https://www.achurchnearyou.com/church/10083/ just has Witton, not Witton Bridge, but the church in the other Witton is also St Margaret's; the church categories are Category:St Margaret's, Witton Bridge and Category:St Margaret's, Witton, Norfolk. Peter James (talk) 12:15, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Change to Witton, North Norfolk Having driven past the gate of the parish church this morning I noted that the sign next to the gate describes the church as Saint Margaret’s, Witton, aboslutly no referece to Witton Bridge. Also the village hall only has Witton on its sign, no bridge. Personally I think the category should be re-named to Category:Witton, North Morfolk. Kolforn (talk) 07:23, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Category:Symbolic oaks

Redundant with its parent category, Category:Famous Quercus? -- Themightyquill (talk) 19:57, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Good question. I suppose a tree could be symbolic without being famous, or vice versa. Still, I suspect that many in the "symbolic" category aren't really symbolic of something as much as they're just associated with something. --Auntof6 (talk) 22:21, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
@Themightyquill and Auntof6: this CFD seems to be a tough one. Eg parent category:Symbolic plants is well-developed--Estopedist1 (talk) 07:46, 14 November 2021 (UTC)
@Estopedist1: I'm just not convinced that, for example, Category:Brureika needs to be in Category:Symbolic oaks in Norway, Category:Famous trees in Norway, and Category:Ancient oaks. -- Themightyquill (talk) 16:05, 14 November 2021 (UTC)