User talk:Foroa

Welcome on my talk page

I reply to messages on this talk page on this talk page. For readability, it is preferred to keep the discussions on the talk page where the discussion started, unless specifically requested otherwise.

I can read English, Dutch, French and some German. I'll do my best to reply in the language of the requester (except German, just too rusty) but don't laugh at me.

User talk:Foroa/archive 2007 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2008 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2009 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2010 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2011 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2012

Backlog: Commons:Database reports/Self-categorized categories Category:Uncategorized categories

TUSC token 97eaf337d9284037064c0a5c023091ca

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

About time......

that you get this

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		Nice work with maintaining categories, Foroa. --Kanonkas(talk) 19:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

You always pop up in my watchlist too ;) Specifically, User:CommonsDelinker/commands. Thanks for taking your time, espescially in the category area. Best, --Kanonkas_(talk) 19:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Wind rose versus Compass rose

Please, read the respective articles (en:Wind rose and en:Compass rose) at first. Don't look just to file name, look at image itself. The half of your cat. changes was fallacious. Alex Spade (talk) 21:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

We have indeed a problem here. As you can read in w:Wind rose : "Historically, wind roses were predecessors of the compass rose (found on maps), as there was no differentiation between a cardinal direction and the wind which blew from such a direction", the meaning of "wind rose" has changed in the last decades. Since we have many historical images that are real "wind roses" that indicate the names and directions of the various local winds, I think that it would be better to rename the current Category:Wind roses to Category:Wind roses (meteorology) so that Category:Wind roses can be used for old wind roses. Unless you are prepared to watch this category permanently and to have this discussion over and over again. What do you think ? --Foroa (talk) 08:10, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

A suggest that Category:Wind roses must be using for real ones (because of current using of term). For old wind/compass roses it is only possible to create Category:Wind roses (cartography)/Category:Wind roses (heraldry) as soft redirect to Category:Compass roses, or vice versa. Alex Spade (talk) 10:05, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

There are hundreds of files that refer to wind roses (in several languages) and there are many old (real) wind roses that don't really belong in the crowded category Category:Compass roses. So we should create a Category:Wind roses (meteorology) and Category:Wind roses (compass). Because of the confusion, we have to disambiguate anyway. --Foroa (talk) 11:51, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

My main idea - don't mix real and historical ones, as you have initially done with several files. The names of categories are not so impotant from my POV. Just don't foget to change commons/commonscat parameters in respective en-wiki articles after renaming commons-cats. Alex Spade (talk) 16:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Category:Panorama Fumay

Is Category:Panorama Fumay a correct name, as many panoramic categories are reserved for wide panoramic pictures, not for panorama's. --Havang(nl) (talk) 13:49, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Differences are confusing and too subtle for most people, so at least, we should try to get the category name uniform. --Foroa (talk) 15:22, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Czech

Thank you for disturbing me at work many times. This is the structure of Czech Republik and this of Slovak. Republik. {{Money-CZ}} (former only for czech notes) is now expanded to all czechoslovakian banknotes. --Drdoht (talk)

Please note that the structure for money containing banknotes, coins, ... is identical for all current and former countries, so please respect that for Category:Money of Czechoslovakia too. --Foroa (talk) 13:50, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

HotCat abbreviatons

I will ceasy my engagement for WM Commons for an unlimited time span if you or other admins keep speedy deleting the categories (Category:HotCat abbreviatons with the declaration herein, and their children) in an counter-productive manner. Frustration and anger are not elements of incitements for me spending 1,000s of hours including entire nights for the project. --Mattes (talk) 10:46, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

The basic rule is that a category name explains what it is containing, which is certainly not the case here. Moreover, as you can read in various places, {{Category redirect}}, redirected categories should not be categorised themselves. It would be nice if each user started to create whole series of shortcut redirects in 290 languages for the 2.3 million of Commons categories. I am spending thousands of hours of keeping the category structure clean and relatively tidy, so I don't need extra work neither. --Foroa (talk) 15:52, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Still, it is an innovation to save time and effort. COM:UNDEL policy requires to ask you for the reason and a request for undeletion. Please outline your reason(s) for a speedy deletion (in a few sentences regarding the usability issue) and please undelete

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:HotCat_abbreviatons
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Lmg&redirect=no
    • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Lmg15&redirect=no
    • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Lmg16&redirect=no
    • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Lmg17&redirect=no
    • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Lmg18&redirect=no
    • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Lmg19&redirect=no
    • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Lmg20&redirect=no
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Pws&redirect=no
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Pnc&redirect=no
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Plpti&redirect=no
  • http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Tpp&redirect=no

They save typing characters in the catgory box, e.g. 3 characters instead of 34 caracters to retrieve <Category:>Paintings with signatures in the HotCat box. This abbr. stuff weren't necessary with a more modern environment (right now it seems like to be the technology from the early 1990s)

Did you read and understand Commons:WikiProject Arts/Manual of Style#Paintings? --Mattes (talk) 16:25, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

This is an excellent idea: extend your local HotCat with a personal shortcut lookup table. This is however a very bad idea to put that globally as this can lead to thousands of personal shortcut categories that will conflict with the millions of other categories names and redirects. --Foroa (talk) 07:30, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Made in Italy

hello, why you have removed the category from Category:Brands and badges about quality ?? the category is right, is also written HERE (incipit and description of the page) and here link of Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Please do no act like FAEP, your behaviors are counterproductive and disrespectful --Pava (talk) 22:50, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Commons is not an extension of an Italian Ministry nor a promotion agency; flooding all sorts of categories with your so called quality is disrespectful too. See comments on Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/10/Category:Made in Italy. --Foroa (talk) 06:05, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Ukrainian art historians >> Category:Art historians from Ukraine

What are the causes replacement? --Zozula (talk) 16:14, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Commons standard naming convention as for example in Category:People of Ukraine by occupation, Category:Artists from Ukraine and Category:Scientists from Ukraine. Commons uses a more simple, analytical and consistent naming as the same naming scheme can be used for continents, countries, provinces, raions, cities, hamlets ... --Foroa (talk) 16:23, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Santa Maria dei Miracoli (Venice) picture categorization

Hello ! I see you cancelled the renaming I had proposed for the category "Exterior of Santa Maria dei Miracoli" (changed to "Santa Maria dei Miracoli - Exterior". In fact I tried to homogenize the category names, since there already were a "Santa... - Interior" and a "Santa... - Apse" category for this specific church. Are there any guidelines for the naming of these categories, or is it just more a "leave it as it is" policy, with just correcting obvious mispelling or typos in category names ? Thank you for your reply. Best regards. --LeZibou (talk) 20:08, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

You did not propose a renaming, you just moved Category:Exterior of Santa Maria dei Miracoli (Venice). I understand that because of historical reasons, the older standard of Italy seems according to your renaming. On Commons, we have a clear naming preference where the main topic is in front followed by qualifiers; this allows equally a nearly identical syntax from world/country/region/city down to church. This can be seen here. The case of exteriors is less pronounced because most buildings start their "life" with the exterior, while interior categories tend to be developed when it becomes too crowded. In general, when visiting a building, people might expect to see first the exterior (at the top level) as it is easier to recognise.

One day, all Apses in/of xxx will be harmonised too, but I agree, we are standing nowhere here.

As you can see in the category history, it has already be moved from an older syntax in our ongoing harmonisation efforts. Commons grows very fast and in an organic way, so we don't have the manpower to harmonise everything at once, but we are converging to clear standards. But at least, we try to avoid that harmonisation efforts are undone as you just tried. --Foroa (talk) 06:50, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. I take good note of that, and will try to follow these recommendations for my next contributions. Best regards.--LeZibou (talk) 07:14, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Police patches of District of Nevada

How do you tell someone that the categories they created are not proper, as in Category:Police patches of District of Nevada? Thanks for your help. --Mjrmtg (talk) 13:22, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

I will try to explain some ways in the coming days, but none of the approaches work always. Anyway, you have to work a bit in it before you start to really understand it. Your first category took some time to become complete, so you might be better placed to try to accelerate the learning process. Conditio sine qua none is that the user has its watchlist enabled and watches it; I don't know the default settings. --Foroa (talk) 14:18, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Note that this was not a complaint: it is just the way it evolves. After some thinking, I guess that only a very small part of the uploaders are concerned about the categories, people that go one step further by creating some of the needed categories are already a bonus, and the few ones like you that try to make a coherent category scheme are rather exceptional. Problem is that you focus on regional coherence, while the concerned contributor adds a thematic around the world; two different sets of problems and approaches. So I guess that the best we can do in order not to chase away people that do more than most uploaders is to help them and complete/correct their contributions in the hope that they learn and do more. --Foroa (talk) 07:23, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Education in Flanders

Hi, it would have been nice if you had at least notified me of deleting the category. Why did you do this? As with many subnational levels like Wales, California, Hesse and Andalusia, it makes sense to have categories for the levels where education is organised. Regards, SPQRobin (talk) 15:33, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that you created a couple of weeks ago Category:Education in French-speaking Belgium and Category:Education in Flanders and added a limited number of items in them. The first category has been emptied fairly quickly by one of our better contributors, the second one was marked for deletion. I deleted the second one as the naming was incoherent (the first points to a community, the second to a territory), while having "Education in Brussels" in Category:Education in Flanders is plain wrong. Other aspects as international schools, religious, communal and private educations,... where completely missing. As you can read in Category talk:Belgium, we aim at the simplest possible categorisation and shy away from complex schemes that cannot be understood by people that don't know very well the complex Belgian situation: that is for the wikipedias that have plenty of contributors to argue about it. On the other hand, when a new scheme is started, even incorrect and incomplete ones as the one proposed, people of other countries try to fill in some (easy) parts and makes it even more difficult to correct.

Anyway, we have a backlog of hundreds of thousands of uncategorised files, millions of very partly categorised images, so our priority is to make sure that a simple basic categorisation is in place. For example, the wiki loves monuments in Belgium campaign needs a full time job to get those images in the correct basic categories (without the more secundary ones), so we try to shy away from schemes that are basically adding complexity and all sorts of research and discussions, without answering a real need. --Foroa (talk) 07:15, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Flanders is both a community and region (in this case especially a community). I put the Brussels category in both categories, which is correct. I don't know what you're trying to say with missing international schools, religious, communal and private educations, I don't see such categories in Category:Education in Belgium either. And reading Category talk:Belgium ("clear consensus"? "we"?) I have the impression you are making problems where there aren't any. "All sorts of research and discussions"?. My aim was having the categories reflect the reality, which is an institutional and de facto division, it is less complex than you appear to think. Besides, I know about the (to this unrelated) backlog, which is something that is harder for me to help with, and imho needs to be addressed software-wise e.g. by requiring to add categories during uploading. Anyway, this discussion will most likely not end up anywhere useful, so well. Regards, SPQRobin (talk) 04:07, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Hagen (Rheinland)

Hagen is NOT situated in Rhineland. You can name it "Hagen (Westfalen)" or "Hagen (Westphalia)" or "Hagen (North Rhine-Westphalia", but NOT "Rheinland", this is definitely wrong, like "Amsterdam (Twente)". Please correct this issue, thx. -- Smial (talk) 09:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

 Done Category:Hagen (Westfalen) --Foroa (talk) 09:54, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Thx, That was quick :-) -- Smial (talk) 12:00, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Bulgarian pigeons ;)

Hallo Foroa,

do you know a bulgarian user/admin at commons who is able to check the User Pigeons who contributed two times on commons and three times in Bulgarian WP.

I suspect the files of copyright violation. They are tagged as "Own work". But if Pigeons really is identical with the bulgarian pigeons association... --84.181.63.204 14:19, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello IP from the Eulowitz region. Only one: User:Spiritia but not very active any more. You could ask the question on bg:Декоративни_гълъби, who knows ? --Foroa (talk) 14:40, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I did both and then thought about contacting Pigeon himself. All good things come in threes. --84.181.63.204 15:23, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Deleting a category linked to on the main page

Howdy. You appear to have deleted Category:Space. That category was linked to on the main page. It has been fixed.--Rockfang (talk) 15:54, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

This morning, it contained rubbish (since 9 days) and a couple of Vector graphs that had nothing to do with Outer Space. So I deleted it, maybe too hastily, but when looking in Category:Outer space, it explains why it has so much unrelated images in it. --Foroa (talk) 16:15, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Canton de vatan et valençay

Bonjour peut tu annuler la suppression de ces deux catégories : Category:Canton de Valençay et Category:Canton de Vatan, le temps que je recupere le texte pour le transfer ailleurs. --Floppy36 (talk) 11:33, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Merci d'insérer {{Badname|New name}} quand elle peuvent être effacées; ainsi les gens gens voient le nouveau nom, comme avec la catégorie berrichonne. --Foroa (talk) 15:18, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

merci j'ai fini le transfere, tu peut le supprimer définitivement. --Floppy36 (talk) 16:17, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Category nonsense

Why in heaven's name did you delete Category:Flags of the Palestinian National Authority when it was a redirect to a non-existent category??? Even if the redirected-to category existed, it's far from clear that this should be deleted, and the only reason it was a redirect was because of the unilateral manipulations of Orrling, which it is far from clear are desirable in the first place... AnonMoos (talk) 17:34, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Because I try to keep Category:Broken category redirects clean and I am fed up of repairing the stupidities of Orrling that tends to systematically revert my changes. --Foroa (talk) 17:49, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Whatever dude -- since you apparently gave User:Orrling an unlimited blank check for your admin powers, and freely and laxly let him manipulate you into using them in a self-evidently stupid and non-productive way, I've included you in the complaint at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Orrling and User:Foroa. -- AnonMoos (talk) 18:20, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Redirects for changed cats

. Foroa (talk | contribs) deleted page Category:Photographs by Larry Lamsa ‎(Category:Photographs by Larry Lamsa moved to Category:Files from Larry Lamsa Flickr stream)

Please don't delete redirects when you change a name!

I think this change was pointless to start with -- and we may have discussed this -- but don't hide the old name! Thanks, Pete Tillman http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Tillman

Category:Photographs by Larry Lamsa has been moved to Category:Files from Larry Lamsa Flickr stream; no idea why. When you click on the edition summary of the deletion, you will arrive in new category. --Foroa (talk) 13:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Categories by

Hello Foroa. What do you think of Verdy p's opinion about not to classify Category:Valued images of France by department by letter (little conflict between us, see history). For him, all departments should appear in 1 block, for me, all "by" categories should appear with letters (e.g. the sort key for 1 department in this category should be "|xxx", not "| xxx"). It is the first time I see such an opinion, and I think he's wrong (but he may be right). What is your advice, and the naming conventions ? It is just a detail, but part of my job here, and I have something else to do than correcting again and again. Thanks, Jack ma (talk) 07:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

En général, ce qui est fait pas Verdy_p n'est pas con. Quand je vois la structure actuelle de Category:Departments of France, il fait ce que nous faisons depuis 5 ans en Belgique au niveau de pays et municipalités (Category talk:Belgium): d'abord (chez nous, en haut à gauche) les choses/structures fixes qui ne changent jamais, puis les catégories variables qui ne cessent pas d'augmenter. Ça facilite sérieusement la navigation et la maintenance. Je ne prétend pas que notre façon est la meilleure, mais je sais que ça marche et ça sépare nettement le coté variable du coté fixe sans millions de changements de sort keys. --Foroa (talk) 08:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Merci, je comprends un peu mieux avec ce côté fixe de listes. Mais je continue à croire que les lettres facilitent la navigation pour une liste d'une centaine de départements. Voir aussi Category:Cities and villages in Charente qui est une liste fixe des communes dans un département.

Et penses-tu que c'est justifié de mettre "See also" pour la catégorie qui est au-dessus (cachée ou non; mais c'est peut-être là le pb). Voir par exemple : Category:Quality images of Montbron qui indique "Voir aussi Category:Quality images of Charente" ? Je pense que ça ne se justifie pas, sauf peut-être parce que la catégorie est cachée ? Jack ma (talk) 12:48, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Avec les trucs fixés d'abord, ça marche bien pour un dizaine de cats. Au delà, il faut essayer de trouver le meilleur compromis ou on place les fixes et les variables. Pour Category:Cities and villages in Charente, c'est assez simple (il n'y pas de choix et les fixes sont présent quasiment des le départ). Pour churches, paintings, il vaut mieux de mettre les cats d'abord parceque les fixes risquent de se développer au compte goute (voir churches in ...)

Attention pour les hidden; il me semble qu'ils sont uniquement hidden dans les images, pas dans les catégories.

Je trouve que le "voir aussi" a uniquement du sens pour des sister cats (featured/valued/quality pictures). Pour sauter de niveau, il y a les cats et la barre de navigation. --Foroa (talk) 18:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Je viens de faire un petit test rapide après un logout. Je n'ai pas trouvé un cas ou les catégories sont vraiment cachés ... Peut être pour les galléries ? --Foroa (talk) 19:01, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Rain Country

When I first saw this, I thought it was a contribution from a new user who was really wanting to make a gallery or did not understand the category system. Obviously not, but what are you trying to do? It does not clearly fit as a subcat of Alaska. What is the basis for the categorization? Dankarl (talk) 16:59, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I did not invent that category myself; I just found Category:Rain Country as a red category with 35 members in Special:WantedCategories. When looking in en:Juneau, Alaska, there might be some "Rain Country" there (KRNN Rain Country Radio" 102.7 and several companies with "Rain Country" in the name), so I tried to put it in the right area, till someone (like you ?) comes around that knows the area. --Foroa (talk) 17:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Herne, Germany and subcats

Hello Foroa, first of all thank you for contributing to Commons. I may introduce myself to you as someone mainly contributing here with edits dealing with coats of arms, flags, and seals, all of them subcats of symbols. Your work is interfering with mine while I contribute to complete the category trees for civic coats of arms, civic flags, and civic seals in Germany like:

 See also categories: Symbols from Krefeld, Symbols of Krefeld, Coats of arms from Krefeld, Flags from Krefeld, Seals from Krefeld, Coats of arms of Krefeld, Flags of Krefeld and Seals of Krefeld

 See also categories: Symbols from the Kreis Paderborn, Symbols of the Kreis Paderborn, Coats of arms from the Kreis Paderborn, Flags from the Kreis Paderborn, Seals from the Kreis Paderborn, Coats of arms of the Kreis Paderborn, Flags of the Kreis Paderborn and Seals of the Kreis Paderborn

All of those categories directly named above bear the proper versions of the Template:Districts of North Rhine-Westphalia, and most of the parallel categories of districts in North Rhine-Westphalia, where I am living, like:

  Borken · Coesfeld · Düren · Ennepe-Ruhr-Kreis · Euskirchen · Gütersloh · Heinsberg · Herford · Hochsauerlandkreis · Höxter · Kleve · Lippe · Märkischer Kreis · Mettmann · Minden-Lübbecke · Oberbergischer Kreis · Olpe · Paderborn · Recklinghausen · Rhein-Erft-Kreis · Rhein-Kreis Neuss · Rhein-Sieg-Kreis · Rheinisch-Bergischer Kreis · Siegen-Wittgenstein · Soest · Steinfurt · Unna · Viersen · Warendorf · Wesel ·

  Aachen · Bielefeld · Bochum · Bonn · Bottrop · Cologne (Köln) · Dortmund · Duisburg · Düsseldorf · Essen · Gelsenkirchen · Hamm · Krefeld · Leverkusen · Mönchengladbach · Mülheim · Münster · Oberhausen · Remscheid · Solingen · Wuppertal ·

My aim now is to do the same for the city of Herne (de:Herne), which now is categorized in Category:Herne, Germany. I do not mind wether it should be the first or the second as follows:

 See also categories: Symbols from Herne, Symbols of Herne, Coats of arms from Herne, Flags from Herne, Seals from Herne, Coats of arms of Herne, Flags of Herne and Seals of Herne

 See also categories: Symbols from Herne, Germany, Symbols of Herne, Germany, Coats of arms from Herne, Germany, Flags from Herne, Germany, Seals from Herne, Germany, Coats of arms of Herne, Germany, Flags of Herne, Germany and Seals of Herne, Germany

But I want it to be done coherently, and I want it to be done parallel to all the parallel categories. Do you have any counter-arguments so far?

Dear Foroa, if you are convinced that all subcats of Herne, Germany should bear Herne, Germany in its name, that’s okay for me. If you are convinced that all subcats of Herne, Germany should bear Herne in its name, that’s okay for me, too. But your edits in the last time produce incoherences: You repeatedly deleted Flags frome Herne and Flags of Herne with the reason “Improperly named”. Simultaneously you edit Coats of arms of Herne. Is the last one properly named if the others are not? I can see no sense in having at least two diverging name conventions here.

Please, come to a conclusion to what you want to do! If you want subcats of Herne, Germany to be named with Herne, Germany, so do it. But, PLEASE, if so do it completely for all of them:

[−] Herne, Germany

[+] Architecture of Herne, Germany

[×] Herne, Germany in art

[+] Culture of Herne, Germany

[+] Districts of Herne, Germany

[+] Economy of Herne, Germany

[+] Education in Herne, Germany

[+] Geography of Herne, Germany

[+] History of Herne, Germany

[+] Nature of Herne, Germany

[×] Night in Herne, Germany

[+] People of Herne, Germany

[+] Public services in Herne, Germany

[+] Sports in Herne, Germany

[+] Symbols from Herne, Germany

[+] Transport in Herne, Germany

[×] Videos from Herne, Germany

[×] D-AIGL (aircraft)

And do not forget to adjust the above named Template:Districts of North Rhine-Westphalia, widely used for navigation bars here at Commons in thousands of categories. Make all of those categories parallel, or leave it completely! Choose one of the two conventions, let it be with Herne or with Herne, Germany! Otherwise you hamper a number of subcats of Herne, Germany to being found with those navigation bars.

What made me very angry is that you repeatedly deleted the Category:Flags of Herne ([1], [2]) from the File:Flagge der Stadt Herne.svg instead of moving it to a proper subcat of the city this file belongs to. I do strongly support that any file depicting the symbol of any entity, may it be a city or a district or whatsoever, must be in the category of this entity or the proper subcat of this category. I suppose those edits have been done thoughtlessly, not maliciously. The named file should, in my point of view, be either in Category:Flags of Herne or in Category:Flags of Herne, Germany (whatever will be the final conclusion), a category that should also contain any photography depicting the flag of the city of Herne. As you can imagine, there are a lot of possible files to be put here.

After all, your repeated deletions and reverts of my edits hindered me very much in properly categorizing numerous files. Please, stop deleting categories I make! Your actions result in disrupting the category trees not only I am building up. Hoping for good cooperation, I send you kind greetings
--ludger1961 (talk) 23:35, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

You don't need a university degree to know why there are disambiguations such as for Category:Herne: this is only the beginning; as Commons goes much deeper in categories, there will be more to come. And it is obvious for most people here that subcategories that relate to their parent category, have the same name and disambiguation.

I moved already in the beginning of November Category:Symbols of Herne and other categories to their proper names, I might have deleted other related cats that where empty at that time as I have limited time to correct fundamental and systematic mistakes. In stead of correcting, you reverted my moves and carried on creating categories with the wrong name. Strangely enough, your make no mistakes when it concerns a kreis, the Aachen area or Mülheim an der Ruhr So please, don't come here to complain about the interference, extra work or correction work. It is not because you hurried up to add the maximum of categories with the wrong name that you like the most that I become responsible for your mistakes. I noticed that you moved some disambiguated cities to the name without disambiguation. Well, you are shooting in your own feet as sooner or later, they will be disambiguated again.

So it is quite simple, just follow the very simple rule that places should be disambiguated whenever there is a possible conflict in one of the wikipedias (easy to see in the interwikis or when there is a disambiguation article in the German wikipedia) and make sure that the subcategories carry the same names as their parents. This will cause the least trouble, and if such cases appear exceptionally, I tend to be the first one to help to move the complete tree.

If you have a problem with the templates, I can change it. You can place rename requests on COM:DL --Foroa (talk) 16:40, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Dear Foroa, thank you very much again for your valuable contributions to Commons. Thank you for your answer, too. What would have been the problem with moving newly created categories instead of deleting them? And why did you repeatedly delete the category relating the File:Flagge der Stadt Herne.svg to its entity instead of moving it to the category of the entity or the most fitting subcat thereof?

Additionally you wrongly moved the contents from “Symbols of Herne” to “Symbols from Herne, Germany”, causing even more incoherences. Imagine that “Symbols of …” are subcats and different from “Symbols from …”, as you can see from the following examples:

Krefeld	Kreis Paderborn
[−] Symbols from Krefeld [+] Symbols of Krefeld [+] Coats of arms from Krefeld [+] Flags from Krefeld [+] Seals from Krefeld	[−] Symbols from the Kreis Paderborn [+] Symbols of the Kreis Paderborn [+] Coats of arms from the Kreis Paderborn [+] Flags from the Kreis Paderborn [+] Seals from the Kreis Paderborn [+] Symbols from Altenbeken [+] Symbols from Hövelhof [+] Symbols from Paderborn [+] Symbols from Salzkotten

Symbols of …

  Borken · Düren · Euskirchen · Gütersloh · Heinsberg · Höxter · Märkischer Kreis · Oberbergischer Kreis · Olpe · Paderborn · Rhein-Erft-Kreis · Rhein-Kreis Neuss · Rhein-Sieg-Kreis · Rheinisch-Bergischer Kreis · Siegen-Wittgenstein · Unna · Viersen · Warendorf · Wesel ·

  Aachen · Bielefeld · Bochum · Bonn · Bottrop · Cologne (Köln) · Dortmund · Duisburg · Düsseldorf · Essen · Gelsenkirchen · Hamm · Krefeld · Leverkusen · Mönchengladbach · Mülheim · Münster · Oberhausen · Remscheid · Solingen · Wuppertal ·

Symbols from …

  Borken · Coesfeld · Düren · Ennepe-Ruhr-Kreis · Euskirchen · Gütersloh · Heinsberg · Herford · Höxter · Kleve · Lippe · Märkischer Kreis · Minden-Lübbecke · Oberbergischer Kreis · Olpe · Paderborn · Recklinghausen · Rhein-Erft-Kreis · Rhein-Kreis Neuss · Rheinisch-Bergischer Kreis · Siegen-Wittgenstein · Unna · Viersen · Warendorf · Wesel ·

  Aachen · Bielefeld · Bochum · Bonn · Bottrop · Cologne (Köln) · Dortmund · Duisburg · Düsseldorf · Essen · Gelsenkirchen · Hamm · Herne · Krefeld · Leverkusen · Mönchengladbach · Mülheim · Münster · Oberhausen · Remscheid · Solingen · Wuppertal ·

The categories “Symbols of …” are one step between “Symbols from …” at the one side and “Coats of arms of …”, “Flags of …”, and “Seals of …” at the other side, but with falsely merging “Symbols of …” to “Symbols from …” you destroyed one important intermediate step for the city of Herne in Germany.

Dear Foroa, I explicitly invited you to move the categories, and I still invite you to do that. What I asked you, and what I still ask you, is to complete your work once you start it. You explicitly moved only one category, leaving its subcats unmoved, even insisting in keeping them unmoved, thus causing the trouble. When you want categories to be moved, move them instead of deleting and reverting edits.

As you can see, we agree in the aim of improving and developing Commons, and we agree in having limited time for doing so. We also agree in the aim of avoiding disambiguities and incoherencies as well. It is not possible to do all at the same time. The more important it is to cooperate instead of to combat. Again: I explicitly invited you to move the categories, didn’t I?

When watching me creating categories, then please watch me using the gadget Cat-a-lot as well to immediately fill those categories. And if you talk about Aachen, the Städteregion Aachen, and Mülheim an der Ruhr, which are my edits you question? Tell me your questions, so I can give you my answers.

Best wishes, --ludger1961 (talk) 22:24, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

PS: Sorry, my browser crashed down, while I was editing, thus resulting in blanking the rest of this page. Thank you, Rockfang, for recovering!
--ludger1961 (talk) 05:36, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I am not responsible for categories that have been created because people think that their Herne is the centre of the world. I try to solve and avoid conflicts at the world level, so I did a first step, now a second. Do not complain that I delete categories after you have been undoing a series of my moves in the right direction. Commons is a collaborative and incremental project and changes are generally done one step at a time. --Foroa (talk) 07:28, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry I missed that extra section.--Rockfang (talk) 14:43, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't think you missed it really. Thank you for your help. --Foroa (talk) 15:08, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages

Hi Foroa and thanks for the work on Category:Colombier :) I'm sorry for not creating a complete disambiguation page, I was working on File:Carte schématique des bourgs et villages voisins de Vesoul.jpg. However, I really don't see the problem in creating an incomplete disambiguation page : isn't it better to have an incomplete page instead of no page at all ? Léna (talk) 20:56, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

No real problem as disambiguation pages tend to be incomplete all the time anyway and are badly maintained. Problem is that people that are using HotCat and select that page, are constrained by the pages in the disambiguation page. Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories creates a real maintenance problem; sometimes, images are hanging there for months, although since a couple of months, some contributors (Funfood I guess) try to keep them empty on a regular base, although it is getting worse again. Personally, I doubt very much the usefulness of such categories, especially with the auto-fill-in of the search boxes. Many people look only if a category is blue when categorising manually which explains why Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories receives tens of new entries per day. Personally, I create mainly new disambiguation pages to replace an invalid redirect or to occupy the slot which avoids the creation of categories like Category:Clans and Category:Flagy as you tried. We try to avoid moving categories all the time as movng categories involves much more work and breaks links in our 900 wikimedia clients. . --Foroa (talk) 06:05, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Meaningless edit on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands

This is the second time you've attempted to delete a rename bot order relating to category:Red ensigns, in both attemps no comment or link was given why this move shouldn't be performed by the bot. You've been reverted as unreasoned deletion of editors' movecat orders is not something we do here on Wiki. Regardz, Orrlingtalk 15:40, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

That is quite obvious: it concerns ensigns by color. See category:Ensigns, it concerns not only the en:Red Ensign but red ensigns from all over the world. I don't accept nor refuse moves without a very good reason as you should know by now. And if it was only the en:Red Ensign, I don't feel that it should be in plural. --Foroa (talk) 16:00, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

1. I don't really know anything “of you" by now,, no one here depends on your acceptions of things or unacceptions of them.. we work according to Wiki's outlines and continue one-another's starts. 2. Your explanation - right or wrong - is not given in its either right place or time: when you decided to delete the command from the bot list you had to specify your view there and then, otherwise this looked clearly as some kind of meaningless disruption, and- 3. Basing on the two parents of "Red ensigns" being Category:Union flag and Category:Flags of the United Kingdom, topped by this explanation given to me yesterday, you are wrong in your explanation. Orrlingtalk 16:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I now removed three times your move requested that makes no sense and that is not motivated. The fact that I remove it makes it controversial, the second and third time I gave a rationale. The page states clearly: "No controversial name changes." You better remove it your self. --Foroa (talk) 16:29, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

It's been now removed by someone, so I hope the discussion can take process. You need to comment my above rationale regarding the category. Orrlingtalk 21:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I don’t mind that it’s in a singular form, but we need the capitalization Orrlingtalk 22:10, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

The delinker is for uncontested moves. Please follow the standard procedures for moves of CFD. --Foroa (talk) 07:40, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit war on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands

The edit war on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands is not acceptable. Yann (talk) 16:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Remarks: I don't care who is right on the issue. I blocked Orrling for one day. Please do not edit this page in the meanwhile. Thanks, Yann (talk) 16:39, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

You have been prevented from editing User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands. Orrling is under the same restriction. Please work it out with him/her and when you have reached a consensus, let me know on my talk page and I will lift your restriction. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:43, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Please note that I only applied the rules set forward in that page. User Yann removed the disputed request from that page according to that rule.

I am checking, processing, executing and cleaning the majority of the category move requests on that page. A significant part of the requests has to be altered or rejected, especially the ones from Orrling. I guesstimate that processing that channel results in about 10000 category moves per year, although lately, it calms down as SieBot blocks often and people move more using cat-a-lot which destroys part of the history. So if you are blocking me from processing that, I guess that you will find the equivalent of one full man day per week to execute that work. Will it be you ? --Foroa (talk) 07:05, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Do you agree to not touch anything added by Orrling if I disable it? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:27, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

File:Árminbánya2.JPG

Hi, by takong a closer look at this construction, i'm not so sure anymore that it's a winding tower after all. --Markscheider (talk) 11:29, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I had my doubts, but after some closer look, I am afraid that you are right by saying that we were wrong ... ;). --Foroa (talk) 11:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Btw: winding towers are generally not considered as _buildings_. Category:Mining buildings is intended for winding engine houses, ore mills, bureaus etc. --Markscheider (talk) 13:36, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm maybe wrong. Cat structure doesn't support my arguments. I'll take back my last edits. --Markscheider (talk) 13:42, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

It all depends if you consider a winding tower as a building (top level cat, Germany) or as an equipment/machine. Anyway, winding towers in xx country has to be be connected with mines one way or another: either mining in country, mines in country or mine buildings in country. --Foroa (talk) 13:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Adding non-Brit-based flags to "Category:Red ensigns"

Orrling is right on this particular narrow issue -- traditionally a red/blue/white ensign is a flag with the specified field color and the flag of England/Scotland/GB/UK in the canton, and a possible colonial badge at center right (with the qualification that a "white ensign" starts from a St. George flag or red cross on white, rather than from an all-white field). Later this was extended to countries (formerly British colonies) which patterned their naval flags after the British model. For other nations, you could create a category "Red naval flags" or whatever, but probably should not use "Category:Red ensigns"... AnonMoos (talk) 03:38, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

You are right that all sort of coloured ensigns all originate from historical British rules, but over the years it became a more generic habit and name in more colors. I guess that we have to create some sort of "Red Ensign (England)" category to isolate the "pure" red ensigns. I suggest to create a CFD for it. --Foroa (talk) 07:46, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, that's a fairly pointless suggestion -- a "Red Ensign (England)" category would include pretty much one file out of a hundred or more (File:English_Red_Ensign_1620.svg). Why not just keep the meaning of "Category:Red ensigns" in line with the meaning explained at en:Red Ensign? -- AnonMoos (talk) 08:49, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

See my point above; you just prove that the requested category rename is not a housekeeping move, that the category lacks a description of the scope and what needs to be done with the red ensigns that are not falling in the en:Red Ensign definition. --Foroa (talk) 09:22, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, I've added a definition and interwikis to the category page; hopefully that should keep you from replacing the actually-occurring definition with a theoretical made-up definition... AnonMoos (talk) 16:39, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Great, that is an improvement, but obviously not enough, as the latest changes seem to indicate. You cannot say, from now on, we restrict the use of the category to Red ensigns that are strictly falling in the En:Red Ensign class (how to determine that ?) and the other red ensigns have to bugger off somewhere else; we just throw them out. And frankly, how can an average contributor in the middle of for example China know that a red ensign flag has such a history that one needs to study half a day to understand it. Anyway, there are other coloured ensigns, (another reason why I declined the delinker move request) so this discussion has not to take place here but as a COM:CFD at the level of Category:Ensigns. --Foroa (talk) 17:10, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I see little problem with saying that the category is for flags derived in some way from the relevant British flags. Many words and phrases in the English language (or any other) have definitions which are a little fuzzy around the edges, but that doesn't present people from using such terms in a useful way understandable by others. AnonMoos (talk) 01:11, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

I still see a problem, but it might be because I am not British.

Could you explain why the following images recently needed removal from your newly defined category Category:Red ensigns, while they where sitting there for a long time, and why so many with non British flags are still on it ? Does this show that your interpretation is not the going interpretation, or is rather not practical ?

File:Russia Navy 1804 boat contr 3.svg, File:Russia Naval 1827 captain.svg, File:Russia Naval 1797 commander 3.svg, File:Naval Ensign of SFR Yugoslavia.svg, File:Flag of the Serbian River Flotilla.svg, File:Merchant flag of Spanish Morocco.svg --Foroa (talk) 06:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Template:MetaCat

Hi, Foroa. You have just reverted my contributions to {{MetaCat}} and you have kindly suggested to me that I should first discuss them. Could you please tell me where it is the best place to start such a discussion? Thank you in advance. --Albert Villanova del Moral (talk) 15:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but your changes on this high use category have a big system impact, and as far as I can see will auto-insert tons of new categories in existing country categories (as flat lists) that are now mostly properly structured by hand. Moreover, this approach might create all sorts of maintenance problems, typical for templates that autogenerate categories. I guess that in a first round, you might discuss that on the template talk itself, but in the end with a working sample, a COM:CFD on Meta categories might be indicated. --Foroa (talk) 15:27, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Europa abduction

Dag Foroa, ik vond dit plaatje op het internet. Weet jij of dit hier kan worden opgeladen? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 14:21, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Geen idee; ik blijf ver weg van licenties en modern werk met onze huidige "freedom of Panorama" politiek vind ik al helemaal frustrerend. Probeer het gewoon en zie whet het "systeem" doet, of vraag op Village pump/Copyright ? Het komt tenslotte van een soort van wikipedia. --Foroa (talk) 17:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art in the Category:New York Public Library

Dag Foroa, zou het zin maken om een Category:Miriam and Ira D. Wallach te maken? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 14:50, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Ik twifel eraan; mijn search levert 78000 images op, weliswaar veel oude stereo fotos. Maar wat ben je met een category die 78000 images heeft ? --Foroa (talk) 17:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Niet veel denk ik. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 12:35, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Category redirecy

Hi there the peoples names with no spaces in the middle are how flickr tags of names work. With those redirects exisiting it means that anything imported via flickr2commons go directly to the correct person category often hundreds of photos.MaybeMaybeMaybe (talk) 20:42, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

"Tips on becoming an excellent category redirecter ... The one specific variation that you think is useful probably won't help much unless there's a special reason (e.g. the old name of a category)." In this case there is that special reason as it allows photos of those people to go right to their categories.MaybeMaybeMaybe (talk) 20:42, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Category:Gymnosporangium clavariaeforme

Hi Foroa. I tried to move Category:Gymnosporangium clavariaeforme to Category:Gymnosporangium clavariiforme, because this is the right spelled name, but obviously something went wrong. As I saw, that you removed the latter but correct category, I want to ask you, if you can help me? Thanks. --Josef Papi (talk) 21:03, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

King of Rome

You are quick. I haden't time to insert the bad-name-template. ;)

I am looking for a solution between homing pigeons in general and breeds in particular. --PigeonIP (talk) 08:42, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, no clear idea, why I suggested the simple possible naming to avoid as much as possible such "bridge" solutions. --Foroa (talk) 15:56, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

CDC restriction removed

I think it's been long enough and the issue has cooled down, so I am lifting your page block on User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands. Please refrain from edit warring in the future. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:28, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll block him immediatly. --Foroa (talk) 07:39, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

HotCat shortcuts

A first prototype is ready now. The functionality is not yet in the gadget, though, thus if you want to test it, it's a bit involved:

• Disable HotCat in your gadget preferences.
• Then add the following line to your Special:MyPage/common.js:

importScript('User:Lupo/c2.js');

• Save and then reload your browser's cache.

User:Lupo/c2.js is my private development version of HotCat. To switch back to the normal HotCat gadget, remove the "importScript" line again, re-enable the gadget, and reload the browser cache.

A first shot at some documentation for this is at User:Lupo/hc_shortcuts. I'll probably add a few screenshots of shortcuts in action before this goes live.

If anything is unclear, or doesn't work, or could or should be improved, leave me a message, either here or on my talk page. Please test it thoroughly; and use it for a while with shortcuts defined. Our version of HotCat is used on many Wikipedias directly; before we can update our gadget with this, we'll have to be reasonably sure that it won't cause problems.

Cheers, Lupo 11:52, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Well, personally, I don't need such a feature, I pass it on User:Mattes that needs such a thing badly. --Foroa (talk) 12:50, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Breaking stuff

Hi Foroa! you have deleted Category:Nesher Factory - City Nesher Which was linked from the article in he.wiki, you broke this link. Can you please check category links crosswiki before deleting them? The delete request was made by Orrling. This is not his first request that led to Breaking stuff see here. Orrling is indef blocked in he.wiki for troling, Can you please check when you process his requests? Thanks Hanay (talk) 09:07, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

The same problem see Category:The old commercial center in Jaffa St. Haifa Hanay (talk) 10:35, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Also Category:Memorial merchant mariner whose place of burial is unknown. This is really a problem. Can you check all his Latest deletion requests? Thanks Hanay (talk) 13:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Hanay. Sorry, but I think that you have a misunderstanding of the Commons role as a media server for the 900 or so wikimedia clients in 270 languages. I merely validate and execute the various move requests (around 15000 moves I guesstimate this year).

Categories in Commons are its internal organisation, we have around 2.35 million categories, 480.000 new ones per year. Linking to internal Commons categories using Commonscat is frequently done, but has the consequences you are complaining about.

As you can read in User_talk:Foroa/archive_2011#Why_such_deletions_.3F, Commons:Category_redirects_suck and many sections in my archives, we have to be careful with category redirects. On most wikipedias, they are even forbidden or at least very much restricted. Edit summaries from the delinker are clickable to their new destination category.

Anyway, we have no tools to autogenerate redirects nor to check for the existence of incoming links, and frankly, manually editing in 270 languages is not simple.

It is much easier and efficient on the wikipedia sides to bot-check and update their outgoing commonscat links than to provide and maintain millions of redirects. I believe that they do something like that on the German wikipedia. I am under the impression that some wikis cross check the links through the interwikis on the Commons categories, why I spend significant energy in documenting and linking categories, but most people don't bother.

The best and most stable way to link to Commons is via a gallery that might contain images or a redirect to a category. At least, those redirects work and I try to maintain them.

So sorry, I can't do better but I have no more minutes in a day than you have. --Foroa (talk) 19:04, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Deletion requests/FoP Italy/2

Hi Foroa. When you have a moment, could you do me a favor. After this request of deletion I decided to occupy my time to list the files with the same problem. I drew up a list of many files to delete. The problem is "no FoP in Italy". Could you check if everything is correct on User:Raoli/Deletion requests/FoP Italy/2? Thanks! Raoli ✉ (talk) 14:15, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Raoli, I am a firm believer of public domain work, the FOP issues are caused by outdated laws that protect the famous (and wealthy) artists, while pushing the less known artists in the dark. Moreover, I have difficulty of understanding the wikipedia politics concerning those issues, so I shy away as far as I can from all issues that relate to that. So I am mainly in the category business. --Foroa (talk) 19:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Don't worry. I don't know all the administrators of Commons, so I'm asking for a bit around some opinions. Also others are not interested about problems caused by the absence of FoP. :) Raoli ✉ (talk) 22:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

However, I've added the whole discussion in the Administrators' noticeboard. Raoli ✉ (talk) 01:09, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Built in Jerusalem in 1939 etc.

Hi Foroa,
the formulation "built in Israel in" is misleading (as it is with buildings completed in a time when the place, where the building was completed, belonged to another country than now), but it is defined as "Buildings in ? [name of state] completed in …[year]". So buildings built before 1806 in Austria, the Czech Republic, or Germany, are listed as "Built in Austria/Czech Rep. or Germany in …" although Czech Rep, Austria and Germany became states of theses names only much later. Polish buildings in parts of the country once belonging to other states and built during this time, are categorised as "Built in Poland in …". Buildings built during British colonial reign in New England are listed as "Built in the United States in …"
So it is common practice to categorise the way done before.
Or is there any country in the commons, where the category "Built in state X in year Y" is called instead "Buildings in state X completed in year Y"?
Best wishes,
--Ulf Heinsohn (talk) 09:54, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I know, there has been some fiddling there. The top level category starts indeed always with the current situation, the country of today. Then subcats may contain other periods as we have with Britain, US, ...

Category:Great Britain in the 18th century switches over to Category:United Kingdom in the 18th century

Category:Thirteen Colonies in the 17th century switches over to Category:United States in the 17th century

Category:British Mandate of Palestine by year should switch over eventually to Category:Israel by year, but there is some need of restructuring and glueing there.

Category:1939 in Israel redirects to Category:1939 in the British Mandate of Palestine why your template doesn't fit: all the bot redirect moves get stuck there, so I removed the Israel cats as a first step (and a signalling to you). Might sound complicated, but simple compared to the problems of occupied and colonised territories in that area.

After some more searching as for example in Category:15th-century works by country, I have to admit that it is not clear which categories change name in the history and which stay at the current (actual) country. Frankly, a couple of years ago I often noticed huge naming inconsistencies in the time/date domain, so I managed to avoid that so far. --Foroa (talk) 10:36, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

OK, I see it is Pandora's box to start with this. So it needs better categories, the one "Buildings in Israel completed in year Y" would fit already, it is neutral, just categories as to the period will have to be added individually, right?
Or categories as to period in the Template:IsraelArc are to be deleted and individually added. What do you think, besides the understandable opinion of leaving it?

Best wishes

--Ulf Heinsohn (talk) 11:35, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Personally, I think that there should be some continuity in years for countries in their current form, and the specific historical years relating to colonies, older country forms, ... should be subcats of it. After all, a writer or painter from 700 years ago is categorised in the country where he's place belongs to now. (Otherwise it would be impossible to categorise artists from Belgium that has been occupied by almost each country in Europe). And buildings built in Jeruzalem hundred years ago don't belong to the Palestinian Mandate but to Israel I would guess.

And indeed, if you want to avoid template acrobacy, you have to add some of the changing categories manually. I don't know who is the main creator if such categories, it might be user:AnRo0002. As usually, Commons will create and document the standard within 3 to 5 years when it is rock stable. Good luck. --Foroa (talk) 12:06, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Just to add my two cents, I believe strongly that such categories should reflect current countries and borders, regardless of year. Period. Varying the category structures to reflect geo-political reality two centuries ago is just a categorization disaster in the making. Category:Thirteen Colonies in the 17th century is an utterly pointless category, and it's insidious because it encourages people to create even more problematic category structures. One shouldn't need a Masters degree in Central European history to be able to categorize the images of buildings in eastern Poland by construction date, for example. Everyone thinks they are creating more accurate category structures, but it's all just a nightmare in the making. Israel is a bit of an exception, given the political sensitivities. But otherwise creating a set of year categories for past countries and colonies is almost always a terrible, terrible idea. That's it for my rant. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 22:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, we seem basically to agree all, but if you like it or not, people will always need and create Britain or Thirteen Colonies tree structures, so we have to try to find a place for it, as deep as possible as far as I am concerned. --Foroa (talk) 05:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Your Deletion of Category:Microsoft Surface (Tablet)

I have seen, that you have deleted Category:Microsoft Surface (Tablet) and moved the data in it to Category:Microsoft PixelSense. In my opinion that is not correct. Because Microsoft PixelSense is a table-mounted touch-computer by Microsoft and Microsoft Surface is a modern portable tablet-device of Microsoft which was released on 26th of October 2012. The former name of Microsoft PixelSense was indeed Surface but the tablet-device is not the same as the table-touch-computer.

• [3]
• [4]

They are different systems. Yours sincerely --Der Seraph [J.S.] ♂ _JohannesSch.(DISCU/EDITS/MAIL) 10:14, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

I stumbled over your uncategorised category with one entry and a capitalisation error (tablet should be lower case). Because Category:Microsoft Surface redirects to Category:Microsoft PixelSense, I moved it there too. I was not aware of the new MS device, so, it does not mean that I disagree with you, only that I had sufficient reasons to clean that up. --Foroa (talk) 19:45, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

From Category:Transport in Tokyo to Category:Transport in Tokyo prefecture

Could you explain why you renamed Category:Transport in Tokyo into Category:Transport in Tokyo prefecture? I think, as you can see in en:Tokyo prefecture and in en:Prefectures of Japan#To (Tokyo), Tokyo prefecture can be an ambiguous term because it also denotes a historical body that dates back in 1943 and before. It is neither a commonly used term in the government's official English documents to my knowledge (see [5] for example). Tokyo metropolis seems to be better, but there are other concerns on how to distinguish the administrative entity (Tokyo metropolis) and the geographic region (Tokyo). Please note that a similar concern was raised at Commons:井戸端#"Tokyo prefecture" ? (in Japanese). --whym (talk) 11:47, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that a person moved several cats in Japan within Japan without motivation/discussion/explanation and breaking the navigation templates. Moreover, he created several useless redirects to solve in an awkward way the resulting navigation template problem. So I restored several of them, but I went probably too far with the Tokyo ones. It is a pity as to me, Japan on Commons is probably the neatest categorised country on Commons with the most consistent naming. Sorry for that mistake. --Foroa (talk) 19:55, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanation, I guess it can happen to everyone when doing something a batch style. Would you mind if I re-create Category:Road tunnels in Tokyo and Category:Transport in Tokyo, and move the relevant files back to them? Of course, I will appreaciate if you could do so, but I would be happy to help, too. --whym (talk) 00:52, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

I just saw they were restored. Thanks :) --whym (talk) 14:51, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Reversion of three redirects, restoring uneeded duplicate files

Can you please explain your reversion [6][7][8] of these redirects I've performed (and any others I might have missed that you can recall or find). The reason I redirected those particlar files was because they are duplicates - the first two were uploaded direct to Commons by their author as well as to geograph, the third is present in the Flickr user's stream twice. The target images (1, 2, 3) are more suitable than the ones you've restored, not least because they're properly categorised and described, but also because in the first two cases the user's direct uploads to Commons are of higher resolution, and in the third case the target image is the unprocessed (slightly cropped) and correctly timestamped version. The difference in resolutions is presumably why the duplication is not automatically detected. Hopefully that explains why simply restoring them is undesirable and indeed problematic for various reasons. Ideally they should be deleted, but this would not prevent them being re-uploaded by someone else due to the difference in resolutions, so I believed redirection was best. If you are aware of a preferable approach for situations like this, please advise me what it is so I know next time. Ultra7 (talk) 19:54, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

You are not allowed to hide files behind a redirect. This creates unused files reports. Please use the {{Duplicate}} or {{Superseded}} template for it so that they can be deleted and replaced by a redirect if acceptable. Anyway, it is not Commons policy to delete files (and even less to hide them) for personal preferences. --Foroa (talk) 06:05, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I didn't "hide" anything, these were unused scaled down duplicates with inferior descriptions/categories. They pointed to superior replacements, which are used. Deletion does not prevent others re-uploading these unwanted duplicates, so I took the action that I believed was appropriate and would fix the issue permanently. So I don't appreciate your tone or the insinuation that this would be nothing more than exercising "personal preference". I don't see how files appearing on unused reports is any less problematic than the continued presence of inferior duplicates, particularly when it takes some effort to detect them and figure out the reason for their existence. In once case here, it even exposes users to misleading file information, so that clearly outweighs an internal issue like a report entry. I will use {{Duplicate}}, and if nobody bothers to redirect the filenames or do anything else to prevent them being re-uploaded, well I guess you won't care that's for sure. Ultra7 (talk) 19:14, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Don't take the personal preferences personally: it happens from time to time that people want to shift their personal version in the place of an existing image, which boils down to an effective deletion but upset the database system. For deletion of images, there are procedures to that effect. --Foroa (talk) 19:24, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

I took it personally because it is personal. My decision making was based on sound Commons principles, not personal preference (and you are mistaken if you believe the redirects are an attempt to use 'my' image over someone else's - none of these are actually my photographs, and in two of the three I am actually replacing my tranfers from geograph with the author's own direct uploads. For the third, both uploads were by me). It might boil down to an effective deletion in your eyes, but only because you seem unable or unwilling to acknowledge the presence of superior duplicates. I don't care about upsetting the database if the alternative is confusing users, uploaders and categorisers by forcing the display of poorly categoried/described and low resolution unused duplicates. Ultra7 (talk) 20:04, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Category-related bot request

Would you mind taking a look at Commons:Bots/Requests/PereBot? --99of9 (talk) 11:22, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

 Done --Foroa (talk) 11:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Rosh HaAyin or Rosh Ha'Ayin

Your commentary on my talk page – though removed for being ill-titled ("last warning"? what can you do? :) ) – can be a good service for us if some points from it are attended: You, whose most edits on Wiki are wrong or disputed by editors, may reserve the right to believe your time and unbased preferences play any role whatsoever, however, in practice you'll continue to deteriorate your image which will even further neutralize your menaces from any tangibility and make you just even more furious. A person who claims "there are procedures" while regularly violating many of wiki's procedures probably needs to think better about what a procedure is for him/her, and certailnly avoid embarrassing themselves - and us - in talking about the need to follow procedures & refrain from unilaterism. Everyone that's reading this knows what is talked about. I hope you're OK with it, you sure understand that by attempting to repeatedly disturb the fluent maintenance here, stalk editors and thwart even the most casual category fixings, you achieve little, and by restoring content again and again to suit your lonely, non-existent positions you do not forward your goal. As you know, in the end I win and the cats are virtually all renamed, so why go through this?

As to the current matter, again, you don't have a right to "disqualify" reparative move commands upon unfounded, irrelevant basis; by cross-checking a given category's title like category:Rosh Ha'Ayin with its en wiki parallel, which is not our source, no point is shown other than suggesting that some sources on the web employ different variants to foreign-language names, which is OK as a side-remark but not enough for actually stopping a category from being fixed in the light of language guidelines; and the reason you're ignored when doing so is because the experience shows that you use the more-established procedures to withhold processes for ever and that you employ such method not because you hold any varying topical opinion but due to your zeal for thwarting any initiative by me and constituting a stable bigot opposition to the corrective school on Commons. Your personal issue with editors isn't what bothers but only the hardening on self-obvious processes is why I'm here at your talkpage, asking you once again to abandon it, and motivate us to regard you in a better light trying to give you a chance to show that you're an impartial, reasonable and peaceful Commons participant. To end, your attempt with Rosh Ha'Ayin Forest and Rosh Ha'Ayin industrial area was of course a bad idea and I'm therefore reverting you, but you're most welcome to add your opinion about the transliteration of Rosh Ha'Ayin at the talkpage to get things about spelling agreed from a scholarly position. Orrlingtalk 14:42, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

It is true that there is uniformity missing for transliteration from Hebrew to English; in general, there seems to be 2 or 3 schools. With Category talk:Neve Sha'anan and en:Talk:Neve Sha'anan you proved that you have your own and original version and I had to protect some cats to stop your edit warring. As I told you before, we won't argue on Commons about the transliteration rules; we follow the en:wikipedia. If you want something changed; get it changed there and we will follow (after a while when it is proven to be stable). Moreover, basically on Commons, we don't care what punctuation version is taken, as long as the related subcategories are named in a consistent way with the parent categories. While you reverted some cats in an inconsistent state, a collegue of Israel reverted it again in a consistent state, which you reverted again. To stop that silly edit war, I blocked you for a couple of days after I had warned you on your talk page. --Foroa (talk) 19:00, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

You blocked Orrling before you replied here, or on the relevant category talk pages. Your "last warning" on Orrling's talk page was incomprehensible. See Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Foroa. The Commons does not depend on English Wikipedia spelling. That is your personal rule, and it is incorrect. You are not a native speaker of English anyway, and I am, and so I know a little more about what I am talking about concerning this: English Wikipedia has frequent misspelling of article names because people do not get around to correcting them. We on the Commons do not wait on English Wikipedia to fix their many problems, or many things would not get done in a timely way on the Commons.

Orrling had the correct spelling. The correct English spelling as far as I can tell is Rosh Ha'Ayin. See these English-language articles from 2 well-known publications that cover Israel:

1.5 billion barrels of oil discovered near Rosh Ha'Ayin. August 17, 2010. Ynet.

Israeli company finds oil beneath Rosh Ha'ayin. By Lior Zano, Dec.24, 2009. Haaretz. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:36, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

COM:AN

Please see: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Foroa --Timeshifter (talk) 20:52, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

bonthandelaar

Thank you for correction! Google translater writes bonthandelar with two a at the end? I know, it is your moedertoale ... ;) Is it a mistake of Google (and my dictionary too) or an old writing?--Kürschner (talk) 07:40, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Indeed in Dutch: handelaar. But plural is handelaars (more modern I guess) or handelaren. Making a plural is not always adding a s or n; that would be too simple. In West Flemish we would use commersant or mersjang (vellemersjang for the person that trades the skins). --Foroa (talk) 07:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Ach du meine Güte - oh my goodness - oh mijn god, hoe ingewikkeld. I will delete the second a in all category descriptions - the rest should do a native. Danke vielmals, hartelijk dank van de --Kürschner (talk) 08:30, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Just make a template {{Catdef furriers}} and include that where needed. Using {{On Wikipedia}} might be more universal. --Foroa (talk) 08:35, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

If I see it right, it gives only the translation for one term. But I cannot write, for example this category describes furriers in BELGIUM? So I think it will be more informative to stay with the up to now used template? --Kürschner (talk) 09:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

"in Belgium" could be passed as a parameter, but you don't need a university degree to understand that it concerns items in Belgium. What's important is that the keywords are there so we can search on it. I think that it is better to have one general instruction for all pages than 99 different ones spread out all over the categories. --Foroa (talk) 10:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)--Foroa (talk) 10:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, sehr schön jetzt, danke! --Kürschner (talk) 11:33, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Diesel locomotive TE3

The long name of category isn't necessary --Karel (talk) 18:27, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

That's you opinion, not the one of the person that created the category. Please follow standard Commons procedures for category renaming. We are heading for 3 million categories this year, so in such an internal context, a 3 letter category is just ridiculous. Commons:Categories states clearly: The category name would be enough to guess the subject,, so don't tell me that TE3 complies. Most categories here will be renamed sooner or later. --Foroa (talk) 18:45, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

«Soviet locomotive ТЭ3» or «TE3 (locomotive)» — such option is better? --Karel (talk) 19:10, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

I reply on the rename request, lets keep discussions together in one place. --Foroa (talk) 20:10, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Stained glass windows

Hello, Foroa, I should like to have redirects from the old Category:Stained glass glass windows of ... to the new categories, as it permits more easily to find the categories during upload. The new names are not as easy to find as the old ones, which have all the same beginning of name. --Havang(nl) (talk) 11:34, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have no time to create and maintain hundreds of redirects. --Foroa (talk) 16:48, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Moving files

Hallo Foroa, could you please move following files I uploaded from numbers only to more specific names author_source_number, please? or give me the rights to do so --PigeonIP (talk) 18:04, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

• File:N2308.jpg --> File:Bungartz_ISCRA_N2308.jpg
• File:N2303.jpg --> File:Bungartz_ISCRA_N2303.jpg
• File:N2302.jpg --> File:Bungartz_ISCRA_N2302.jpg
• File:Bungartz zvab 18870982.jpg --> File:Bungartz_ZVAB_18870982.jpg
• File:Tiermaler 08 gr.jpg --> File:Bungartz_Brüsseler Brieftaube_Tiermaler 08 gr.jpg
•  File mover now. And many tanks for your great and lonely work. --Foroa (talk) 18:50, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I have to thank you, for your input. --PigeonIP (talk) 19:27, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Categories on Kautsy

Dag Foroa, wil je, wanneer je even de tijd hebt, de category:Karl Kautsky en category:Luise Kautsky nazien? Ik heb zo de indruk dat ik hier niet goed bezig ben. Dank je. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 15:08, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Niet slecht; de category verwijst altijd naar de hogere orde/parent/familie. Het probleem was dat de family weer naar "beneden" ging, dus een cirkel maakte. Dat zou nu moeten opgelost zijn. Muggezifters zouden wel kunnen zagen omtrent overcat omdat vanuit vb category:Benedikt Kautsky verwezen wordt naar zijn vader, moeder en familie, hetgeen in feite 2 klasseringsystemen in één is. Niks van aantrekken dus, noch van het feit dat ik de echtgenote als subcat maak van de man, maar ik weet geen betere methode om koppeltjes te maken. --Foroa (talk) 13:28, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Dankjewel Foroa, echtgenote als subcat van de man... een beetje zoals Adam en Eva dan? ;-) Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 18:01, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Inderdaad, ambetant om de een subcat te maken van de andere, maar als je ze kruist gaat er in de kortste keren iemand ze gaan verwijderen als circulaire cat. En zonder relatie is ook triestig ... --Foroa (talk) 18:09, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Ja, zoals ze zeggen, een mens is niet gemaakt om alleen te zijn. ;-) Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 18:29, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

EE-Pigeon-Breed-Template

Hallo Foroa: is it possible to create a template like this

See also Commons:List of Entente Européenne Pigeon Breeds, No. 200 - 299

for all categories of pigeon breeds with ee-standards? It should allow to refer to groups as well as single breeds and breeds with "double" standards like Category:South German Monk? --PigeonIP (talk) 12:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Maybe with the "EE-cycle" of the following logo [9] --PigeonIP (talk) 12:52, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

this one --PigeonIP (talk) 12:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Or even better like this:

This is a photo of an object of cultural heritage inscribed in the [ registry] of the voivodeship code not given with number unknown.

• This is a category with media related to pigeon breeds with European standardisation inscribed in the EE-List of the breeds of fancy pigeons (ELFP) by the Section for Fancy pigeons of the European Association of Poultry-, Pigeon- and Rabbit breeders with number [ XXXX ]
• Dies ist eine Kategorie einer Taubenrasse mit europäischem Standard eingetragen in der EE-Liste der Rassetauben (ELRT) der Sparte Rassetauben des Europaverbandes für Geflügel- und Kaninchenzüchter mit der Nummer [ XXXX ].

Categories with this template should be sorted into Category:Pigeon breeds and based on the number in a Category:Pigeon breeds by EE Breed Groups. --PigeonIP (talk) 13:55, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but quite busy for now. Will try to look into it in a couple of days. --Foroa (talk) 07:48, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

No hurry. So far I began with

• User:PigeonIP/Template:ELRT/layout
• User:PigeonIP/Template:ELRT/en
• User:PigeonIP/Template:ELRT/de
• User:PigeonIP/Template:ELRT/link

and asked Jarekt for help, too. --PigeonIP (talk) 09:51, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

 Info {{ELRT}} in Category:Thuringian White Bib ;o) --PigeonIP (talk) 17:46, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Looks good. Jarekt does great too. --Foroa (talk) 11:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Jaffa street, Haifa moved to Category:Jaffa Street, Haifa

Hi Forora. Category:Jaffa street, Haifa was deleted and noved to Category:Jaffa Street, Haifa which create by orrling. realy I can not see the difference. Last week we fixed about 1,000 broken links between he:wiki and Commons, but they are still coming. yesterday Category:Messianic Judaism Cemetery in Haifa moved to Category:Messianic Judaism cemetery in Haifa. Instead of writing articles, I am spending my time in fixing broken links. It is so frustrating. Please, all this minor changes are not significant. Can you do something? Thanks Hanay (talk) 23:25, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

In standard English one would never use Jaffa street, Haifa. I am a native speaker of English. One uses Jaffa Street, Haifa. When used in addresses "street" is always capitalized.

Names of places are usually capitalized too (except for "the" and "of" and "on", and other minor articles). So Orrling was wrong to remove the capitalization from "Messianic Judaism Cemetery". Look up "cemeteries" in Google. For example; Cemetery Records Online. See also: en:List of cemeteries in Israel. Don't always count on Wikipedia to be correct though as concerns spelling. Many native English speakers are notoriously bad spellers. :)

We do not let incorrect English remain on the Commons. The Commons is an international resource and needs to show high standards in all things including spelling. If we did not do that, then there would be countless errors left on the Commons just to please the hundreds of Wikipedias in different languages. There are many people with "file mover" permission on the Commons. Names of files and categories are frequently changed.

I thought there were bots to handle this problem of file name changes effecting all the Wikipedias. See User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands. I have never used it though. See also:

User talk:Siebrand#A delinker talk page would solve a lot of problems --Timeshifter (talk) 13:51, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Please, Can you tell Orlling that he was wrong and see how he will accept it. In He:wiki we also correct wrong names but it is the responsibilty of the user who made the change to fix the links. Here, Commons leave all wikipedia to fix it by themself. Imagine the time consuming of fixing about 1,000 broken links manually. If the links to Commons are broken it is a huge problem for articles readers. As I see it this need to be fixed first before allow every one to change names of categories so easy. How knows how many mistakes were done? Hanay (talk) 15:15, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

It is not up to the Commons to fix mistakes on the Wikipedias. They are 2 separate issues. I suggest you learn how to use User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands.

Orrling tries to use User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands, but Foroa often blocks her from doing so. So you need to complain to Foroa too.

I have never understood why the Commons does not encourage redirects for category names. On Wikia I use redirects for everything; file names, page names, category names, and so on.

On English Wikipedia there is a bot to correct double redirects. For more info see en:Special:DoubleRedirects.

So the only remaining problems are interwiki links, and to make User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands easier to use. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:35, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

There is a difference between article/gallery redirects and category redirects. On most wikipedias, category redirects are very much restricted or even completely forbidden. See Commons:Category redirects suck.

For naming harmonisation and obvious renamings, there is User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands on which I remove/change a substantial number of requests. For all the rest, there are the {{Move}} and COM:CFD.

Capitalisations are not an absolute rule such as xxx cemetaries, xxx provinces is often a local preference; we just try to have it coherent for a specific country and avoid renamings.

No need to emphasise often your "native English" superiority and being condescending to non native English users. They know and respect generally better the English language than you might think. By the way, your frequent use of oftentimes is archaic English and a English variant of your region.

The delinker only changes names of files on various wikipedias. We have not even tools that allows to know the references towards Commons galleries or categories, let alone correcting them. But we are working on a bot that should be run on Commons clients: See: User_talk:RussBot#What_about_a_nice_little_bot_.3F. Hopefully, it could be deployed in a couple of weeks on our 700 or so clients. --Foroa (talk) 08:35, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I should add that I try to avoid category renamings as much as possible. On the other hand, the sooner we reach a (local) naming uniformity, the more new category names will conform to it thereby avoiding signficant renaming/harmonisation campaigns. --Foroa (talk) 08:53, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I still do not understand why category redirects are a problem. I think I read something about category redirects showing up in HotCat or something. But that is a problem with HotCat, and so HotCat should ensure that it automatically ends up using the correct category name when it finishes. Or redirected categories should not show up in HotCat. Maybe HotCat users could be given a choice about whether they see redirects or not. I would prefer to see them. It would make it easier to categorize files. As long as HotCat ends up using the correct category name.

I am a bureaucrat on a large wiki on Wikia, and I use redirects for files, articles, portals, templates, categories, everything.

I have been reading this: Commons talk:Only use category redirects where necessary. It seems that many people agree with me that we should use more, and not less, category redirects. --Timeshifter (talk) 14:30, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Hello Timeshifter, I waited several days to see if you said something to Orrling about his wrong remove the capitalization from "Messianic Judaism Cemetery", but there is nothing there. See also the change he made from Category:Hecht Museum, Haifa to Category:Hecht Museum, really was this change necessary? I saw that he was blocked for 2 weeks, at least no change of categories will be made for the time being Hanay (talk) 17:32, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Foroa of Belgium

Hi Foroa of Belgium. I need a little control by you about Category:Leuven on photochrome prints. Since a month I try to collect and sort all photochrome prints uploaded in Commons. Now I create this category: are these pictures in the correct Louvain category? I don't know this city, and there are two Louvain.... I hope next time that I come to Belgium to visit this town. Sorry for the disturb. Thank you very much. Best regards and wishes to you ! --DenghiùComm (talk) 18:32, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that you are doing a good job there. Part of the history can be found on fr:Affaire_de_Louvain. Louvain is the French name of Leuven that is in Flemish territory. The University added in 1936 all courses in Dutch, the move from the Walloon part happened in 1972 to a newly created town called Louvain-la-Neuve, so there is little chance of mixing it up. I'll have a look anyway within a couple of days. --Foroa (talk) 06:53, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much again ! --DenghiùComm (talk) 12:25, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Category creation

Hello!

Why did you create these two categories: Category:Denkmal-Objekte (Deggendorf) and Category:Kirche (Deggendorf)? Regards, High Contrast (talk) 00:16, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Those categories where red categories in Special:WantedCategories and filled up well before with images. I just tried to give them a place. --Foroa (talk) 17:12, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, we cannot assume that such redlinks might be meaningful. Both categories are nonsense and I will delete them and I will move the content. I am quite surprised that you act like a machine. Merry Christmas, High Contrast (talk) 23:07, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

I am quite surprised about your reaction. Question is what is most nonsense: leaving red categories in the dark till someone happens to fall over it or just giving those red categories a place and drop them in the proper area so that people can further categorise them or put the images in the right categories. I clean up hundreds of such red categories per month and the large majority find their place in the category tree. Moreover, new uploaders that create such categories see their categorisation work corrected and learn from it. Red categories that stay there for ages have no purpose. Merry Christmas too. --Foroa (talk) 20:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Boulanger, boulangist and Boulangism

Hi,

Is Boulanger a boulangist or rather is Boulanger boulangist ? I thought the first one is more logical to me (the Boulangism come from Boulanger but boulangist come from Boulangism not directly from Boulanger ; indeed, on fr.wp fr:Catégorie:Boulangiste is in fr:Catégorie:Boulangisme), but you seem to think otherway. Is there a rule, a pratice or a pattern on Commons for this king of situation ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 23:05, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

Good question, but to me it is natural to put the author/father/inventor/artist/architect/designer of something in the parent category, the follower in the subcategories. There is no boulangism on Commons, nor a precise rule. --Foroa (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:Aboriginal People and Culture of Australia

Hello. There's Category:Aboriginal which I want to be recategorized as Category:Aboriginal People and Culture of Australia. I'm surprised how an admin like you could think of Canada. Please note that all aboriginals are not Canadians and there is a need for separate categories for each. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 21:34, 30 December 2012 (UTC).

Simply use the glamorous tool on Category:Aboriginal and you will see that all images relate to Canadian items, so the contents belongs to Category:Aboriginal peoples of Canada. If you read en:Aboriginal, you will learn that there are aboriginals in tens of countries. Finally, the proposed name is completely wrong as you can read in Category talk:Aboriginal. --Foroa (talk) 21:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

With thanks ...

With thanks for your support and the pleasant co-operation in the past year, I wish you all the best in the new year! --Túrelio (talk) 20:16, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, the same to you. --Foroa (talk) 20:57, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Nieuwjaar 2013

Gelukkig Nieuwjaar 2013 !

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 21:36, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Un grand merci Jean-Pol, et mes meilleurs vœux aussi. --Foroa (talk) 21:47, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Smerinthus ocellata

Ok, I want to learn, how should we do? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:33, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Destroying the work from others and blanking pages is no solution. This is in general a symptom of vandalisme. Normally, galleries are moved, but I see now that you created your own version so I "moved" it a posteriori. --Foroa (talk) 09:37, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you I was hoping that somebody will come and help me. As you understand I'm not a vandal. How should I do to ask for a deletion of gallery? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I know now that you are not a vandal, but I have to address more than hundred of such cases per week. Galleries can follow the standard deletion procedure as for images and in some cases are eligible for {{Speedy delete}}. But in the cases above, just rename it and build on that. Bonnes fêtes. --Foroa (talk) 10:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you I will remember, it's not complicated. Happy New Year 2013! Merci --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Cosmic Articulation

Hello. I've seen you've deleted Category:Vladimir Putin on 31 December and moved the files to Category:Vladimir_Putin_on_December_31. Is it not just cosmic articulation rather than any real value addition? Hindustanilanguage (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC).

It also makes little sense given our day categories are "(day) (month)" not "(month) (day)". -mattbuck (Talk) 19:36, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Cosmic_Articulation. Rd232 (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Young Enterprise

• Cat-a-lot: Moving from Category:Young Enterprise to Category:Young Enterprise (charitable organization)

Question - why did you do this? It is a completely useless move given that there is nothing disambiguatory. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Categories states clearly: The category name would be enough to guess the subject,, so don't tell me that this is the case for Category:Young Enterprise, which is basically not an enterprise, was categorised in Category:Enterprise which was intended for the Enterprise (ride), and which would be filled up within a year with plenty of things related to young enterprises (If you search on commons or en:wiki you will already find 4 or 5 items that are related to "young enterprise"). --Foroa (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Wrong category "Holtensen bei Wunstorf"

In my opinion you have reverted my category change in File:Wappen Holtensen (Barsinghausen).png incorrectly. "Holtensen bei Wunstorf" does not exist. The correct term is "Holtensen (Barsinghausen)" for the village near Wunstorf. Would you please check it and remove the category again? A look at de:Holtensen and de:Holtensen (Barsinghausen) may facilitate the examination. Thank you --Losch (talk) 20:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Destroying the work from others and blanking pages is no solution. Blanking is often a symptom of vandalism. I am reviewing more than hundred of such cases per week. If the name is wrong, either issue a {{Move}} request or insert {{Bad name}}. When we delete it then, at least the original author will know where it has been moved to. --Foroa (talk) 18:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Files by user:Harold Hidalgo

Hey. I originally called the category "Nature at caracas" because I was about to add more images, but well, rl happens. As all images are taken by me, could you then rename it "Category:Files by Hahc21"? Thanks. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 21:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

 Done The category name was incorrect and there are several Caracas, so if I would not have renamed the category, chances were that people would have categorised the images in some subcats of one of the Caracas trees. Please indicate what Caracas you mean and proceed with proper topical categorisation. Thank you. --Foroa (talk) 18:45, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the help, Foroa. I greatly appreciate it. Regards. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 19:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Possible Rijksmonumenten cats

Hallo Foroa,

Je had een aantal Possible rijksmonumenten cats in de reguliere boom van categorieën geplaatst (onder de bijbehorende plaatsen). Dat lijkt me niet heel handig, het gaat om een paarduizend tijdelijke categorieën (als de botupload klaar is over een maand, en als de categorieën daarna leeggewerkt zijn kunnen ze weggegooid worden.) Het lijkt me niet handig tijdelijke categorieën in de permanente navigatie op te nemen.

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 23:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Dat was niet zo gedocumenteerd en ik dacht dat het aansluiten bij de target cat het vinden van hulp om de beelden juist te classeren zou aanmoedigen. Mij goed, zoals je wilt. Beste groet. --Foroa (talk) 18:38, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

My move attempt.

I'm confused and in need of guidance. Your revert of my move attempt bears the comment, "Please follow move procedure, redirecets <sic> to non existing cats don't work." Well, COM:MOVE is the core guideline, so I started there. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:File_renaming says: "Responding editors should follow the instructions on the template." and I believe that's exactly what I did. The template says, " please remove this notice, replacing it with a {{category redirect|Église Saint-François de Lavaur}}". So I'm following that procedure, at least. If there's a category renaming procedure, please point me to it; I'm not aware of it; perhaps COM:MOVE should point to it, eh? I guess I did the wrong thing, but then there seems to be something wrong with {{tl:category redirect}}. What's going on? What's right, what's wrong? I've just moved the two files into the destination category. Now that I've done that, is it appropriate to revert your revert? --Elvey (talk) 04:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

There is indeed a problem with the documentation, which is corrected by now. Problem is that redirects to non existing categories don't work. I moved it now. --Foroa (talk) 07:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Well, I was asking for guidance, but I have no idea what you did or what you're talking about. I tried to figure it out. :-( Oh, somehow I missed the link to Commons:Rename a category. --Elvey (talk) 20:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Doussineau

Dag Foroa, ik had de files hernoemd vanwege misschien toekomstige verwarring met Colonel Claude Doussineau. Wil je eens zien of en hoe de categorie dient hiernoemd? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 08:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Inderdaad, geen goed idee om een familienaam als categorienaam te gebruiken. Verhuisd naar Category:Jean-Baptiste Doussineau. Geen idee in welke categorie zijn kruistocht onder te brengen is. --Foroa (talk) 06:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Bedankt! Oh, BTW, ik had nog geen gelegenheid mijn beste wensen voor het nieuwe jaar over te brengen, wat ik bij deze vlug doe! Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 16:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Ook beste wensen voor jou, soms denk ik dat ik al twee maanden ver ben in het nieuwe jaar ;). Er zin ier een pôotje pipos die my stif rap versleetn. --Foroa (talk) 17:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Doe vo wel en kyk nie omme ;). Van myn ook beste wenschn...--Zeisterre (talk) 17:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Touché. Ôok zo vele, 't Doet deugd voe te ziene datter ier nog echte bezig zyne tusschen ol die môoskers. --Foroa (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Radio broadcasting

Stop it, please. You are reintroducing a messy circular category strucure. I have thought something. --Cqdx (talk) 17:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

In Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/02/Category:Radio broadcasting there is clear consensus to keep it. Stop changing it. --Foroa (talk) 18:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. And now please redo the redirect, since one of the two parent categories (radio) of this category (radio broadcasting), is rightfully the subcategory of the other parent category (broadcasting). --Cqdx (talk) 18:04, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Your actions are disruptive. --Cqdx (talk) 18:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Revert Anfrage über

• http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category%3AAAAP&diff=86919561&oldid=86919342

Wir müssen diskutiert werden.da die Frage aufgeworfen.auf der Diskussionsseite.
Commons:Löschrichtlinien#L.C3.B6schantrag I will provide a reason that feel uncomfortable.German citizen serving my brethren.Revert performed otherwise.Danke. Gott segne Sie.--MOTOI Kenkichi(基 建吉) (talk) 18:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Breydel & De Konick.jpg

Dag Foroa, bestaat er een consensus om dergelijk verkeerd gespelde naam te corrigeren, ttz hernoemen file? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Dag Lotje, geen enkel probleem om foute spellingen in namen te corrigeren. --Foroa (talk) 07:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Gulzar moved

Hello! The Category:Gulzar was moved to Category:Gulzar (poet) by you recently. I did not understand the reason behind it. There seems to be nothing else on Commons that has same name and would conflict requiring a disambiguation. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Simply because there are potentially 20 different en:Gulzar (disambiguation) and they eventually will all come on Commons ([10]). --Foroa (talk) 07:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

I see! Thanks! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:57, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

RE: Kososvo

Hello, I disagree as English Wikipedia list the main article for Kosovo only as region, not as Republic of Kosovo or as Serbian provinces the Kosovo, and on Commons Kosovo is listed in the Category:Unrecognized or largely unrecognized states. But well, I agree to leave it then in order not to start another war. --Bdx (talk) 11:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Greek seals

Instead of changing the tags to a different one that also doesn't apply, please join the discussion about this issue. Fry1989 ^eh? 22:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Category change/speedy question

Hi Foroa. Can you take a look at Category:Artwork on Givat-Ram? I decided not to delete this without referring to you about it. INeverCry 21:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I gave up discussions and subsequent moves by the (self-proclaimed) Hebrew spelling specialists; it looks as if it is an art in its own right. I just try to keep the categories that have an en:wikipedia counterpart in line with the wikipedia. --Foroa (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Moving categories

Hi Foroa, I updated Commonscat.py. It will now follow links in the deletion log. So for example I moved Category:American Hotel (Amsterdam). The bot picks this up and updated the link. You are one of the most active category movers here at Commons. Could you make sure you include "moved to <some category as a link>" in your deletion summary? That way you'll be sure that any links downstream will get updated. By the way, the deletion link in {{Move}} will do this. Thank you, Multichill (talk) 13:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I did so probably in the 29992 of the 30000 categories I moved lately. I try to find that back for blanked categories too.

Meta-category?

You recently reverted my edit on Category:SVG simplification techniques, but you probably didn't noticed that it is still marked as a meta-category, but with a non-standard alert. So, what to do? Maybe it should use Template:CatCat? --Ricordisamoa (talk) 07:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I added {{CatCat}}. --Foroa (talk) 08:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Rijksmonumenten categories to be classified

Hmm ik was even vergeten dat je gewoon Nederlands sprak, zal ik het nog even in het Nederlands opschrijven: Hallo Foroa,

Wat is de bedoeling van deze categorie? Sommige van de subcategorieën hiervan zijn namelijk foutief en hoeven niet aangemaakt te worden. Zoals Category:Rijksmonumenten in Horst. Er zijn namelijk 2 plaatsen Horst. Daarnaast zijn al deze categorieën niet in de rijksmonumentenboom opgenomen, en niet in de lijsten op nl-wiki gelinkt, waardoor de bots er slecht mee overweg kunnen. Ik ben van plan na de upload van alle afbeeldingen (over ongeveer 10-15 dagen) alle rode "Rijksmonumenten in XXX" categorieën aan te maken, of de afbeeldingen naar de gemeentecat te verplaatsen. Als de plaatsen geen eigen lijst op nl-wiki hebben (dat is minder dan 8 monumenten in de plaats) lijkt een eigen cat me overdreven en wil ik ze naar de gemeentecat verplaatsen, dit heb ik enkele dagen terug al voor de plaatsen S-Z gedaan, echter dit was vechten tegen de bierkaai, 2 dagen later waren er namelijk veel van de categorieën die ik geleegd had alweer gevuld met nieuwe foto's. Als ik dit dus achteraf doe scheelt me dat veel werk. Tot die tijd is het prima als de categorieën even rood blijven.

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 11:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

(Reply made before the Dutch version) I am (and others too) keeping an eye on Special:WantedCategories to detect buzzy novice uploaders with wrong categories, so we can correct, create or signal them as soon as possible, so they can improve their categorisation. Obviously, if you load with your bots hundreds of categories that will stay there for weeks or months, Special:WantedCategories becomes unusable. Therefore I created Category:Rijksmonumenten categories to be classified to get them quickly out of the way while it is less work for you (or others did already) to HotCat the right categories. With your hundreds of downloads in the wrong non disambiguated categories, you give us a hard time to keep Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories while I noticed that some uploads are on the wrong end of the world. So, if you want to win some time, just classify your categories somewhere where they don't interfere with the others. --Foroa (talk) 11:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok, dus als ik het goed begrijp wil je de categorieën met heel veel afbeeldingen blauw hebben? Dan is dit op zich wel een handige tijdelijke oplossing. Je hebt heel wat categorieën aangemaakt die foutief zijn (dubbel met slechte naam). Zolang niemand ermee aan de slag gaat kan ik ze dan vanuit de categorie in het kopje aanpakken over 10 dagen als alles af is en nomineer ik ze daarna wel voor verwijdering. Basvb (talk) 12:07, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Waarvoor waren de categorieën met maar 1 afbeelding nodig? Dit is toch alleen maar nodig voor de hele grote categorieën? Basvb (talk) 12:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, die foutieve cats komen van je bot, ik maak ze enkel blauw en zet ze in een hokje.

In Special:WantedCategories hebben wij al honderdtallen foute cats geleegd naar de correcte cats, en tientallen Nederlandse cats aangemaakt. Het ware natuurlijk veel eenvoudiger om niet alles ineen te klutsen en direct de juiste of verschillende cats te gebruiken, of cats die systematisch een <Buildings in stad-provincie> naam gebruiken. Vermits je meestal de file moet openen om de provincie te weten te komen is het splitten zeer tijdrovend. Alleen al op Category:Rijswijk ben ik al meer dan een uur bezig geweest.

Vermits die categorieën aanmaken nogal wat tijd vraagt, heb ik ook geprobeerd het via [11] en meer systematisch te doen. Levert geen noemenswaardige tijdswinst op en die kleine cats (die in principe nog kunnen groeien). --Foroa (talk) 13:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Tja heel wat plaatsen hebben nog geen categorie, 550,000 afbeeldingen uploaden levert veel mooi materiaal op, maar levert ook wat kleine probleempjes op. Plaatsen zoals Rijswijk kunnen het beste botmatig gedaan worden (afhankelijk van de provincie in de ene of de andere cat). De plaatscats zelf zijn nog een beetje een probleem. De rijksmonumentencats kan ik heel snel aanmaken als ik de nl-wiki lijsten erbij hou. Een paar plaatsen hebben een naam voor 2 plaatsen, dat kan helaas dan niet makkelijk automatisch goed gezet worden. DE categorieën van de vorm "Rijksmonumenten in XXX" zal ik voor zorgen, dat kan ik straks als de upload klaar is vrij eenvoudig doen, zal een maandje werk kosten maar is dan helemaal opgeruimd. Als ik het nu doe scheelt me dat achteraf niet noemenswaardig in tijd, ik wacht daar dus het liefste nog even mee. Basvb (talk) 16:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Met pywikipedia kun je met de volgende code als voorbeeld bijvoorbeeld Maasland oplossen:

python replace.py -lang:commons -family:commons -namespace:6 -cat:Maasland -summary:"Fix ambigious placed images" -regex -dotall "(\{\{Building address[^\}]+State \= Zuid\-Holland[^\}]+[^\}]+\}\}.+)\[\[Category:Maasland\]\]" "\1Category:Maasland,_Midden-Delfland"

Op deze manier is het een kwestie van enkel nog de goede cats per provincie vinden, dit werkt niet als de plaatsen in dezelfde provincie liggen, dan wordt het erg lastig. Misschien dat je met deze regex de andere cats makkelijker aan kunt pakken (dan had Rijswijk 5 minuten ipv meer dan een uur gekost). Basvb (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Overigens is dit net zoals de Rijksmonumentencategorieën het makkelijkste om te doen nadat alles geüpload is. Anders moet hetzelfde 2x gedaan worden. Achteraf wil ik best de ambigue plaatsen bekijken en met een botje zoveel mogelijk verwerken zoals ik zojuist bij een aantal grotere plaatsen gedaan heb. Basvb (talk) 16:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Probeer maar eens Category:Oudega snel snel te ontrafelen, en zo zijn er nog. --Foroa (talk) 17:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Tja, ik probeer alleen maar te helpen. Zoals je kunt zien heb ik vandaag vele duizenden afbeeldingen van verbeterde categorieën voorzien. Ik kan niet honderdduizend afbeeldingen in een dagje poef fixen. Plaatsen zoals Oudega zijn gewoon lastig, maar er is een hele schare vrijwilligers bezig met het identificeren van de afbeeldingen. Ik heb n.a.v. het bovenstaande overleg een paar van de grootste plaatscats gefixt, maar die plaatscats zal gewoon veel werk blijven. Misschien is het wel gewoon het handigste de ambigue plaatsen voorlopig even over te slaan (die Special:WantedPages kun je ook gewoon doorklikken, de eerste 5000 zijn niet allemaal Nederlandse plaatsen). En als alle afbeeldingen over 15 dagen geüpload zijn wil ik best kijken welke ambigue plaatsen ik met de bot veel werk kan besparen. De Rijksmonumenten cats zal ik tegen die tijd ook oppakken. Dat nu doen is voor mij dubbel werk en daar heb ik geen zin in.

Ik kwam overigens nog tegen dat je Category:Ougré (Obbicht) aangemaakt hebt als onderdeel van Sittard-Geleen. Ik zat echter te twijfelen over deze plaats. Er bestaat namelijk helemaal geen Ougré. Wel bestaat er een Ougrée in België, aangezien er geen provincie op deze afbeeldingen stond zou dit kasteel goed in het buitenland kunnen liggen. De categorie van een totaal onbestaande plaats Ougré is in ieder geval onjuist. Als ik op Ougré google krijg ik alleen resultaten die met Ougrée (Seraing) te maken hebben. Basvb (talk) 19:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Reliefs from the Campana Collection Vs. Campana Reliefs

Could you please tell me what you've done here? This is completely incorrect! "Campana Reliefs" are an terminus technicus in Classical Archaeology! Some of them are from the Campana Collection. But there are a lot more in a lot of museums worldwide. And there are Reliefs in the Campana Collection who are NOT Campana Reliefs. Why you do such things, when you don't know what you are doing? I changed it back. Please never do things you don't know about. It only makes work for the others. annoyed: Marcus Cyron (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, we had a delinker failure for 2 weeks and a long backlog on COM:DL, so I did not take to verify thoroughly the requested moves. --Foroa (talk) 18:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

art from vs. in

Hi Foroa, did you already notice this discussion Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/01/Category:1520s paintings from Germany? --Túrelio (talk) 07:30, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

File:55 Baker Street exterior II.jpg

Dag Foroa, dit is een afbeelding waar duidelijk aan "gesleuteld" werd (fotoshop, maquette?). Weet jij een category waarin deze dan ook kan worden ondergebracht? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Dag Lotje, ik dacht eerst aan Category:Models of buildings in the United Kingdom, maar dat gaat te ver. Het is niet noodzakelijk fout of fictional (facts disputed) maar het kan inderdaad de werkelijkheid vervalsen. Een interessante vraag voor de Village pump moet ik toegeven, sorry dat ik geen beter antwoord heb. --Foroa (talk) 07:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Dat deed ik omdat er bij jou Category: Maasland, Midden-Delfland stond en ik wilde dat eens uitproberen, zien wat het doet. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 17:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:São Paulo City and others

Why did you eliminate Category:People of São Paulo city and others like that?

"São Paulo City" (in Portuguese, "Cidade de São Paulo") does not exist, it's different from Mexico City, in which the word "city" is part of the name.

Please see Category:Rio de Janeiro city: "city" is not capitalized, and this is correct. In Category:São Paulo City the word "city" is capitalized, and this is wrong. See also pt:São Paulo (cidade), the article in Portuguese. There's no reason for the capital initial.

Good editions (and forgive my English, I'm a little bit rusty). Yanguas (talk) 12:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

You might be right that Category:São Paulo City, a long standing category that has been created 7 years ago, is suboptimal and that Category:São Paulo city or Category:São Paulo (city) could be better. That does not mean that you have the right to redirect a category with many subcategories using the same extension to a new name because you like it better and without any formal discussion and agreement, such as COM:CFD or insertion of a {{Move}} in the top level category. When there seems to be an agreement or no objections, then it can be renamed along with all its subcategories that needs renaming. See Commons:Rename a category. --Foroa (talk) 18:03, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

I didn't expect you to answer here, I thought you had not answer. Anyway... what should I exactly must do? Move the subcategories first? I have read the document about moving categories, but I don't know where to begin.

About the name itself, you don't need to believe me, just see article in Portuguese Wikipedia — it is not "Cidade de São Paulo" (such as pt:Cidade do México), but "São Paulo (city)". You think Category:São Paulo (city) is better than Category:São Paulo city? For me it is ok, for the only wrong way is the way it is now.

Yanguas (talk) 03:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

As I stated, COM:CFD or insertion of a {{Move}} in the top level category. --Foroa (talk) 06:24, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

löschen doppelter Seite Rhoden

Hallo Foroa, bitte von mir versehentlich doppelt angelegte Seite löschen.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhoden_%28Osterwieck%29

1   http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Rhoden_%28Osterwieck%29?uselang=de   o.K.

2  http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Rhoden?uselang=de    please delete

best regards

festus

It is far better to rename such galleries (move/verschieben tab) to avoid such situations. A second way is just inserting {{Duplicate|Rhoden (Osterwieck)}} and an administrator will delete when he agrees. --Foroa (talk) 18:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Cave of Altamira

Hello Foroa, I think that Marcelino Sanz de Sautuola‎ and Émile Cartailhac‎ have be out the category Altamira (cave), because, not all the pictures in each category are related with Altamira. If you include these men in Altamira and the related pictures too you will have a redundant categorization. There is another people related with the cave of Altamira (for example: Harlé, Breuil, Obermaier, Hermilio Alcalde del Río, ...) but it is not necessary put all of them into Altamira (cave) category just their pictures related with. Maybe the only person that it could be into Altamira Cave could be Sautuola because he was outstanding only for his work in the cave. Thank you for your time and sorry for my English, --Nachosan (talk) 15:45, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Your English is more than fine. The whole idea of Commons categories is not only classification but equally showing relations between things, so a person that is visiting the Altamira cave category can see immediately which persons have strong associations with the cave. Moreover, those persons might have written books about their findings; books that are not necessarily directly/exclusively related to the caves, but contain some information about it. --Foroa (talk) 18:44, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

LohseHinrich

Dag Foroa, denk je dat deze afbeelding naar Commons kan? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

In principe kunnen alle files in de:Kategorie:Datei:Public Domain (§134 Satz 2 UrhG) overgebracht worden, een bot job ? Misschien daar even navragen of er geen speciale Commons licentie/cat bij moet. --Foroa (talk) 07:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Undel req question

Hi Foroa. Can you please give your opinion on Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#Category:National Film Awards and Category:National Film Awards winners? Thanks for your time. INeverCry 21:42, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done--Foroa (talk) 07:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. INeverCry 07:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Sons

I noticed Category:Sons moved to Category:Sons (offspring) with no reason in either the deletion or the new category. What other meaning of "Sons" would people confuse that word with? --Closeapple (talk) 07:20, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Because of en:Son (disambiguation), fr:Son, Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Sons and because I have to empty it too often as it contains mostly audio files and real sons (offspring) images as after all, each man is the son of someone. --Foroa (talk) 07:37, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Removing a category from a group of files

Hey, Foroa. Was suggested by Morning Sunshine to contact you. If you don't mind, could you help me with this please? I know such a tool exists; just don't remember where... Many thanks :) Rehman 14:34, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

There is no bot for such tasks, but Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot (enabled in my preferences/gadgets) is very handy for such things. I believe that Help:VisualFileChange.js can be used too. --Foroa (talk) 16:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Foroa! Regards, Rehman 02:17, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Removing catgory " Plaques in Walloon Brabant"

What a pity to fall back to a national scale with the very broad "Plaques in Belgium". I was pleased to see there are smaller entities at city scale. Yet providing a filing system at province level seems a great improvement to cover what does not belong to a significantly large town. Thanks for clarifying your standpoint ! Olnnu (talk) 19:55, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Well it basically doesn't matter if there are 50 or 500 Category:Plaques in Belgium or in "Plaques in xx province"; those categories serve only for visual search, so the more concentrated they are, the better. Even when creating plaques per province, in the end, they will contain hundreds of items, so not a real improvement. As far as we know, nobody searches for some items in Belgium per province, so there are very few categories in Belgium per province. This is a long standing agreement of the Belgium user community that is documented in Category talk:Belgium and that never has been challenged seriously by "heavy" contributors to the Belgium Commons categories. It is confirmed by categorisation in other countries where some categories are per country only, others per province, district/city that the asymmetric approach just creates more complexity, maintenance problems and troubles without substantial gain. AS usual, the more simple it gets, the less problems. --Foroa (talk) 15:56, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Castles in belgium

Foroa, I don't appreciate your undoing of my categorizings without discussion. The category Castles in Belgium is much too crowded. 18:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the message above. It's the second time you undo Category:Castles in Liège (province). And with 248 subcategories in Category:Castles in Belgium, we have to create subcategories. If you just think it's the wrong name choose a better one. Best regards Traumrune (talk) 20:48, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

There is a long standing agreement of the Belgium user community that started in Category talk:Churches in Belgium and is kind of summarised in Category talk:Belgium that for cities and villages, significant churches, castles, town halls, ... that basically, the primary need for categories is to have lists by name, followed by lists by location. All this under the assumption that all items will get eventually encapsulated in their own category, which is confirmed every day. As a secondary need, we see "side-categories" to cover the "by type/style/model" needs. On the lowest need level is indeed the by province category, but only if it doesn't break the by name categories. Moreover, if would have by province categories, which we hardly have as can be seen in Category:Provinces of Belgium, it would mean that we add for each of the thousands of Belgium-level categories 10 extra subcategories, which certainly doesn't outweigh the advantages of the simplicity and maintenance free aspects of the basic system. --Foroa (talk) 06:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

The blanked categories for "Suceava" were redirected

I have added, renamed or organised some of the categories regarding the buildings in Suceava, Romania. I've seen that you have modified some of my work, explaining that I shouldn't blank the categories. The categories that I've blanked were in fact renamed (actually, moved) and now they have a correct name. I've modified the categories that were left blank and I've tagged them with "Category redirected". Thanks for your interest!

Frankly, if all people would blank categories because they disagree on the name of it, Commons would become a strange cemetery full of litter. I guess that you would not like that other people would blank your categories because they don't like the name. For quick deletion of categories, the procedure consist of inserting {{Badname|Good name}} if another category names exist. Alternatively, {{Speedy|reason}} can be used.

Blanking the page makes that the category appears several days later in Special:UncategorizedCategories which we try to keep as empty as possible, but requires significant work as we have to analyse each case if it concerns vandalisme, mistakes, beginners work (that may need assistance) or just a plain categorisation problem. As a minimal courtesy to the creator, we should leave in the deletion summary a reason for deletion and if possible where it has been moved to. So following the standard procedure saves us all unnecessary work. Thank you and keep up the good work. --Foroa (talk) 05:59, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello from Kefalonia, Greece:)

Hello and thanks for your interest in our work! As you have probably seen on my user page, I am a high school teacher in Greece, and we chose to upload our work on both school projects for Upper Secondary in the designated Commons Galleries. First of all, thanks for adding the right categories to the Wild Flora project, I had no idea where to put it! As for the 365 villages, I would just like you to explain the rationale behind the long list of categories at the bottom of the page. Is it a Wikimedia policy to categorize so "intricately"? Don't get me wrong! I would LOVE for all the categories to "fill up", like the Argostoli page (several are mine, I live in Argostoli). Just that all those red links perhaps "clutter" the page... thanks again, all the best from Kefalonia (sunny today... at least for now! Weather can change from sun to rain to hail three times a day, no exaggeration)--Saintfevrier (talk) 07:55, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

That's about what I understood by reading various bits and pieces, and why I tried to be of some help. Indeed, the best approach is whenever you have some sort of fixed structure, such as your villages, is to create the categories for it. Creating categories takes some upfront work, but once they are there, it is very easy for all uploaders to "drop" their images in it or to improve categories without impacting the other bits and pieces (modularity, you know very well). Then you can be sure that the doc is right, the links to wikipedia, ... You can insert {{Underconstruction}} for empty categories. I made the category list collapsible in the gallery (they can be removed, it was just a list of pointers) and added some example links to categories, but there could be links to wikipedias too. Thank you and enjoy. --Foroa (talk) 08:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Your help has been invaluable, thanks! As you can see, we followed up on the "365 villages" hidden category you created and started adding the code to all the photos we've uploaded... helps us keep all our images pooled in the same place, as e.g. I have one pupil who only uploads (at least for now), so it's easy for another pupil to pick up the former's images and integrate into the gallery. The best part is that this is the first time I've managed to get pupils enthusiastically involved in building the content: usually they hand over material and I do the uploading... now I have three of them working with their own accounts, and all I have to do is polish up their work:) Oh, which reminds me, another question, rather advice: in order to keep the galleries as streamlined as possible, I figured the best policy would be to provide titles in Greek and English, captions only in English (having mentioned that Greek descriptions are available on file page). What do you think? Of course if you look at the gallery right now, a lot of the captions are in Greek (not all my pupils are fluent in English, so I told them to do what suits them and I would afterwards go in and edit wherever necessary). Looking forward to your reply, thanks:) --Saintfevrier (talk) 21:29, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

The nice thing is that galleries have no language restrictions, so I would propose as a baseline Greek first, followed by English as far as possible. As a second level exercise, you could suggest to add the links to categories and assign a number of categories (links to wikipedia articles, cleaning out cats, summary, ...) to each pupil; a way of distributing the work. Enjoy. --Foroa (talk) 06:46, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Writers by language

Dag Foroa, onder de Category:Writers by language vind ik een Category:Flemish writers‎ terug. Bestaat/bestond er ook zoiets als een Category:Dutch-language writers‎? Bij taalgrensoverschrijdende rewards (nl:Nederlandstalige_jeugdliteratuur zou dat misschien handig zijn, of denk ik daar fout? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:25, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Denk ik niet, die cats ontstaan vooral in landen waar er nogal wat taalconflicten zijn of bij heel grote taalgroepen. In feite zou het moeten zijn "Writers in Dutch language" met als subcats "Flemish writers in Dutch language", "Writers from Suriname in Dutch language", ... Maar ik lig er niet wakker van. Bij Category:Dutch literature dat eigenlijk Category:Dutch language literature zou moeten heten, kan er gemakkelijker wat bijgebouwd worden. --Foroa (talk) 13:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, als jij er niet wakker van ligt, ikke ook niet. Wie hernoemt in de regel bv. Category:Dutch literature dan Category:Dutch language literature? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Raad eens. Beste groet. --Foroa (talk) 18:25, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Ik was te laat met raden, we was me voor! :) 91.87.32.50 06:17, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Anefo 911-2840 Voorbereidingen.jpg

) Dag Foroa, hoe kan men te weten komen wie op deze afbeelding staat? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Dag Lotje. Op de source site is er geen extra info te vinden, tineye geeft geen resultaat, men zou het aan het archief of fotgraaf kunnen vragen ... Heb er dus maar category:Unidentified people of the Netherlands op geplakt. --Foroa (talk) 06:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Hartstikke leuk. Bedankt :) Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 07:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Cimitero Acattolico (Capri)

Hi Foroa, you moved Category:Cimitero Acattolico (Capri). Please fix the links from the Wikipedia articles to the category de:Cimitero Acattolico (Capri), it:Cimitero acattolico di Capri. -- Gerd Fahrenhorst (talk) 16:03, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Done by myself. -- Gerd Fahrenhorst (talk) 21:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Citadelle de Québec

I left this request for clarification on User_talk:Siebrand when his or her bot changed a bunch of files from Category:Citadelle de Québec to Category:Citadelle of Quebec. (The problem with this change is that while Citadelle de Québec is a legitimate French name, and Citadel of Quebec would be a legitimate English name, the name the bot used is a bastard hybrid that is not in French or English.)

Your deletion log entry for Category:Citadelle de Québec says only that it was moved to Category:Citadelle of Quebec. Like Siebot`s edit summary, it doesn`t say why the later category name should replace the earlier one. Are you aware of a policy or discussion which authorized this change?

Can I ask, if there was a good reason for renaming the category, why a redirection wasn`t left in place?

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 20:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Note that I merely check and execute the requests from COM:DL; 10 to 20000 per year. Recently, I executed a backlog of a few hundreds because SieBot, the category mover bot, has been down for 3 weeks. For complaints, linkfixes and redirects, please talk to the original requester or simply fix it. --Foroa (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Czeladź

Hi Foroa. It looks like a user you'd reverted a few times came back and re-added the same cats. I reverted them and full-protected the cat. INeverCry 18:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, this Polish user seems not to understand the concepts of circular and overcats. Tried that many times as anonymous user too. Maybe a Polish admin should try to talk with him, although he doesn't seems very talkative. --Foroa (talk) 16:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Plat du jour

Bonjour

Non tout les mets ne sont pas susceptibles d'entrer dans cette catégorie et pour cause. Ils correspondent uniquement à ceux qui rappellent une cuisine familiale et qui ne sont servis que dans certains restaurants (En France, l'exemple le plus connu sont les restaurants routiers qui le proposent à côté du ou des menus). Ce met unique et généralement servi copieusement est de plus un repas bon marché. Cdlt --JPS68 (talk) 14:45, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Merci, ça clarifie. Si ne vous documentez pas ceci dans la catégorie, si possible avec des liens vers des articles, un jour votre catégorie sera supprimée. Dans beaucoup de pays, le plat du jour est tout simplement la suggestion du jour sans qu'il y a des nécessairement des limitations. --Foroa (talk) 14:50, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Bot

Hello my friend,
Could you block my bot User:Liné1bot temporarely ?
I think I have a small issue.
Thanks Liné1 (talk) 09:42, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

24 h, N'hésite pas de ... --Foroa (talk) 09:49, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Excellent. Merci beaucoup Liné1 (talk) 09:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AMap_of_Ghent_by_Sanderus.jpg&diff=91574938&oldid=91567336

Dag Foroa, wat deed ik daar fout? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 11:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Niet echt zwaar fout, maar als the de categorieboom opklimt kom je bij Category:Flandria illustrata terecht die van Sanderus is. --Foroa (talk) 12:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Tapera

Please don't mess things up with unnecessary complications. - MPF (talk) 14:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Kindly explain your actions and the need for them, or I shall report you for vandalism - MPF (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

This is obviously a disambiguation problem. No need to shout 'vandalism'.  B.p. 15:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Very far from obvious. There are thousands of more obvious potential disambiguation problems which are not dealt with in the same way. - MPF (talk) 16:01, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

A repeating pattern with MPF who moves categories out to occupy the most important slot of taxonomy cats (Category:Tapera to Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul)). There is a genus, a city and two rivers that start with Tapera, so you keep it as a disambiguation cat or you delete it. You better use your energy to make durable solutions instead of moving categories back and forward. --Foroa (talk) 16:07, 1 March 2013 (UTC)--Foroa (talk) 16:07, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Which just goes to show your personal vendetta against taxonomic categorisation (for which you have long been conspicuous, using the slightest pretext to get rid of taxonomic categories) - why have you not made similar changes for e.g. Category:Art, that you did for Category:Sylvia? You changed Category:Sylvia into a disambig on the spurious pretext of it being a forename (which aren't used for categorisation) so as to get rid of the taxon category. Now please do the same for Category:Art so that e.g. Category:Art Garfunkel isn't orphaned in the same way that you think Category:Sylvia Earle must be. And make similar disambig categories for every other forename, e.g. Category:Michael, Category:Peter, Category:Elizabeth, Category:Fred, Category:Paul, Category:Thomas, etc., etc., etc. . . . that these are all redlinks shows up your bias. And while you're at it, please use your energy to redesign Template:Genera and Template:Taxonavigation to make durable solutions so that they show the genus name correctly without that "(genus)" after Sylvia, etc. That these templates are currently buggered up by your disambiguated genus categories demonstrates a clear practical need for taxonomy categories to occupy the top slot - that is the sole reason why I give them that status. Solve it and I will remove my objections. - MPF (talk) 16:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

And why have you gone and changed things to suit your whims before establishing consensus for your changes, and before answering my points above? That is not appropriate behaviour for an administrator, it is what I expect from a vandal. And also - you changed my work (edit 14.13 UTC) within one minute (your edit 14.14 UTC) (see times). Why are you spying on everything I do? If I don't get a satisfactory explanation and apology for this behaviour within your next ten edits, you will be reported to the Administrators' noticeboard. - MPF (talk) 17:58, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I noticed that you moved Category:Tapera to Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul); Tapera is is the primary name on most wikipedias for that city. That is a good move, provided that the old Tapera is deleted or becomes a disambiguation.

There are hundreds of categories with genus in it: Special:Search/intitle:Category:(Genus). And there are several taxonomy categories that are disambiguated themselves as there is a branch with the same genus for birds, plants, insects ...

If you don't agree on the disambiguation, we can always reinstate the original situation, and move Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul) back. --Foroa (talk) 18:18, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I did not move Category:Tapera to Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul), I created a new category for the one file that was filed in Category:Tapera, and retained Category:Tapera for its one subcategory (Category:Tapera naevia, which has been in Category:Tapera since its creation nearly 2 years ago). This disambiguation would be far more satisfactorily achieved by retaining Category:Tapera for the genus (which does not readily take a suffix), and adding a hatnote with links to the other categories which do take suffixes more easily (like Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul)), as has been done abundantly elsewhere for solving disambiguation on Commons. Show me the Commons disambiguation policy page supporting your ideas. It does not exist. Oh, and I am still waiting for answers to my points above. Please answer them, and stop evading or ignoring the issues. - MPF (talk) 18:33, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

You have a strange definition of move. The fact that Category:Tapera naevia has been so long in the wrong category proves that it needs disambiguation; we try to maintain Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories.

Here we go again, the nth attempt: User_talk:Foroa/archive_2010#Sylvia_story and I can certainly find others. The world is to be shared on an equal base, same for category names. --Foroa (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't have "a strange definition of move" - I did nothing that used the CommonsDelinker commands for moving categories. And I am still waiting for answers to my points above (and also those which you never dealt with in that Sylvia discussion, either). - MPF (talk) 19:23, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Category:Castle of Turku

Foroa, you deleted Category:Castle of Turku with reason "Moved to Category:Turku Castle.Reason: Tagged with {{move}} since 13 January 2013". However, Category:Turku Castle is a category redirect pointing back to the deleted category; the category information is now lost to non-admins. I also raised this in COM:AN#Request undeletion of Category:Castle of Turku. MKFI (talk) 10:54, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Restored. --Foroa (talk) 16:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Move of Category:Cisne Branco=

You have now rebroken the link from English Wikipedia to this category. The German, Spanish Portugese and French links are also all broken - but 3 of the 4 give you a click-through option. Currently all links from Wikipedias to this category are broken. Actions like these are what part of what contribute to the frustration of some English Wikipedians with the Commons systems. Rmhermen (talk) 20:09, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Categories are an internal organisation of Commons and will change all the time because most people think that they have a unique name, which they almost never have. If you got linked the en:wiki as I just did, you would have less of a problem.

The deletion summary of Category:Cisne Branco contains a clickable link, as clickable as the other redirects, but at least, it stimulates people to correct the link, which is better to me than a redirect that doesn't really works. Your recreation of the category is not acceptable as a misleading redirect: it should be rather a disambiguation page. There is a bot in the works that should run on the wikipedia sides to improve on that, but as long as people think they are exclusive owner of a term, there will be frustration on both sides. --Foroa (talk) 06:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Kochi, Kerala ??

Hi, please take notice of Category:Kochi, Kerala ?? at Category talk:Kochi, thx Roland 19:48, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, and please restore Category:Kochi to keep version history ! So there'll be a consense, a redirect or a 'disamblig' imho is the 'correct' way, thx, Roland 19:59, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

• Would it not be better to have Category:Kochi as a disambiguation between Category:Kochi, Kerala (in India) and Category:Kochi, Kochi (in Japan)? That way, the history would also be retained (assuming it matters). Rodhullandemu (talk) 20:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

When looking in :en:Kochi (disambiguation) and Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Kochi, it is clear that Kochi as category name should not be used.

A redirect is misleading.

A disambiguation page needs substantial time to setup and to maintain (few people do such efforts)

A deletion summary with a clickable destination category motivates people to update the link on the requesting page. There are bots in the work to update automatically Wikipedia links to Commons by extracting the destination from the deletion summary. Such a bot cannot do something with a disambiguation category.

I spend a substantial amount of time cleaning out Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories and I notice that many people (and bots) don't check categories; if they are blue, it is al-right.

So personally, I prefer the deleted category but sometimes I create disambiguation categories (if I have time) to ensure that the slot is not taken by some other item.

This is not a Wikipedia, and I don't think that the history really matters, although it is interesting to know that the first use of the category was for Japan, which proves that it needs disambiguation. --Foroa (talk) 06:40, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, as mentioned I started a 'public discussion' at Category talk:Kochi (will copy thereafter that thread) ...

1. imho there was no need to delete the category, ok it's done, but please re-establish the category, and for me it's absolutely no problem to establish the needed "disambiguations" according to EN-WP.
2. your imho 'fast' deletion of the category occurred to about 40 miss-leading "red" links in other categories,
3. therefore, please fix the miss-leading links from time to time (was the 'work' of four years).

Thx & regards, Roland 18:44, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Stone house signs

Cher Foroa,

Je viens solliciter ton aide au sujet de la catégorisation de l'image reprise sous le lien suivant [[12]]. En effet, la catégorisation "Stone house signs in Belgium" qui lui était appliquée était erronée puisque l'image concerne un pont et non une maison. Je viens donc de la recatégoriser "Stone signs in Belgium", mais tu trouveras peu-être une catégorie plus adéquate.

Merci d'avance,

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 11:13, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour Jean-Pol, j'ai vérifié, et effectivement, dans Category:Stone house signs in Belgium, il s'approche un peu, et je n'ai pas trouvé une catégorie plus adéquate. Mais si on trouve pas une meilleure catégorie, on peut peut-être faire mieux correspondre la catégorie existante, par exemple Category:Stone signs on buildings in Belgium, qui est plus passe-partout. Qu'est-ce que t'en penses ? Quel serait le nom en Français (spécialisé) ? --Foroa (talk) 16:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Doves

Hallo Foroa! Is it possible/achievable to delete Category:Doves with a reference to Category:Pigeons in art for less maintenance work? --PigeonIP (talk) 09:02, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I understand the maintenance problem. Kind of tricky to make the parent category disappear. You could try to make a redirect from Doves to Pigeons in art, with a bit of luck, there will no (immediate) shouting, although we tend to have quicker negative reactions than constructive ones. --Foroa (talk) 16:33, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Than it should be Category:Columbidae. The bot is categorising ringneck doves and others there as well. --PigeonIP (talk) 17:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably best solution indeed. --Foroa (talk) 08:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Biagio d'Antonio - The Archangel Raphael with Tobias.jpg

Hallo Foroa, mag je alsjeblieft hier kijken, die licentie heeft een categorie gevormed, en ik begrijp niet waarom. Bedankt en groeten.––Oursana (talk) 15:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I guess it is OK now; the misery created by template generated categories that are not properly verified. I spent already days on those ones. --Foroa (talk) 17:24, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I did not aspect, that it was so little. Sorry and thanks.––Oursana (talk) 21:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

User cats

Regarding your recent reverts of my user cat edits: Can you please show me a consensus for demanding the use of {{User category}} or for the use of hidden cat. I have occasionally been discussing this for years and never has anyone produced such a consensus. /Dcastor (talk) 14:14, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

No doubt, this is clearly spelled out in Commons:User-specific galleries, templates and categories policy and in the header of Category:User_categories; there is no way that user categories can be topical categories. Where there is no consensus is how deep all sorts of parallel personal user categories can become, but don't be surprised if one day, someone decides to merge back your wieldy category tree into a more simple one. --Foroa (talk) 07:21, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Check the Commons:User-specific galleries, templates and categories policy again, and especially the talk page. There has been a stricter wording in the policy, but there doesn't seem to be a consensus supporting it. Of course user cats are not topical, but there is no automatic logic to hide non-topical categories. /Dcastor (talk) 00:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I have no time to read the whole thing carefully, but you seem the only one opposing. Anyway, I am pretty much convinced that there is a consensus that non topical means hidden (which is not really hidden), and there is from time to time a bot that converts user categories into the template. --Foroa (talk) 07:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

If you are not interested in taking part in the discussion, nor to show one that establishes consensus, I will kindly request that you refrain from reverting my edits, which are in line with the current policy wording. /Dcastor (talk) 14:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I will bot move all your images in one single category because there is a consensus that there should not be ten of user categories. --Foroa (talk) 14:53, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

First: Please communicate rather than (mis)use your admin tools. Second: Please show me the consensus for numbers of user cats. /Dcastor (talk) 15:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

User problems

FYI: [13] /Dcastor (talk) 16:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

South by Southwest

Hello. Since we have over 200 photos of South by Southwest, I don't see that a page displaying only 3 of them is particularly useful. this edit suggests you disagree. What is your reasoning? Thanks. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

This is not a valid reason to delete (or bypass) a gallery; most galleries start small. --Foroa (talk) 19:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Agree that alone is not a reason to delete. However I note that only one user has ever added media to the page, and that was more than 3 years ago (and the user seems not to have been active on Commons for more than a year). The page seemed to me inactive and highly misleading as to the amount and scope of media on the subject on Commons. My thinking was that changing it to a link directly to the category would be more useful. Of course if anyone wished to remake the page as a serious curated gallery they could still do so. Thank you for your feedback. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:53, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Acks Mountain as viewed from Shirleysburg, Pennsylvania.jpg

Dag Foroa, bij het hernoemen van de originele file was de eerste letter blijven steken, ik undid mijn bewerking en hernoemde opnieuw en dit is wat ik nu te zien krijg. Verdwijnt deze versie automatisch na verloop van tijd of komt daar een admin bij te pas? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Railway Lines

For railway line category names, please use "–" instead of "-" between endpoints. Thanks, Andre de (talk) 09:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

On Commons, we try to avoid country/language/keyboard depending characters, such as em-dash as this is a source of problems (as you can see when editing this text, the difference is almost non-discernible). See in Commons:Categories for discussion/2011/10/Category:Bilateral relations by country for rationale. See how they are mixed-up (lightly) --Foroa (talk) 09:28, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

The railway specific problem is, that many train station names contain a "-". So its necessary to use the longer "–" for relation. The list how they are mixed-up (lightly) shows, that this version is much more common. --Andre de (talk) 11:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, they are local categories, so you can do what's you judge best. --Foroa (talk) 11:27, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok. So please would you shift back your cat-moves? thanks, Andre de (talk) 21:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Request of deletion

This time I need your help for deletion! I have requested two images for deletion and I ask you to carry it out.

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:ML Michael Hesemann in Rom.jpg

Reason: This file is lack of quality for purposes on Wikipedia and a permit will not be given.

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:DK Gerhard Merkl Orgel.JPG

Reason: Its upload was only for testing.

Thank you for your help. --Der Seraph [J.S.] ♂ _JohannesSch.(DISCU/EDITS/MAIL) 18:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I am in the Category business and never deal with image deletions and/or licence discussions. Don't worry, someone will handle them. --Foroa (talk) 19:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Blocking Orrling - why only for 2 weeks?

Hi Foroa, I saw that you blocked him only for 2 weeks, what you need to do is to block him at least for 3 months. The last time he was blocked for a month he came back and continue with is un cooperative behavior. You know that nothing effect him. He will come back in 2 weeks and do the same. The time blocking should be grow up not down until the administrators in Commons will understand that Commons without him is better than with him. Please see also Category talk:Archaeological sites on the Golan Heights and Category talk:Archaeological sites in Samaria. Thanks Hanay (talk) 09:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

As I am one of the editors most suffering from Orrling's caprices, I could be considered as involved, so I don't feel inclined to take the lead in longer blocking. Since many of his edits make sense, I am not sure that his damage to the project is understood. As I see no real response on for example Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#User_for_Discussion_.28UFD.29 and I merely see editors that some sort of surrender, I have to wait till a less-involved contributor takes the lead. --Foroa (talk) 15:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate what you are doing. I saw now his request for blocking in Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Lock category please I answer there, I hope it will help. Hanay (talk) 16:57, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Frogs

Hi Foroa, how are you? I saw that you reverted a couple of my edits concerning Category:Frogs. I don't really see the point of keeping that category in a multilingual project, to me it is vague and misleading, and it should be a redirect to Anura. Categories like Frogs in art or Frog warning signs have quite a few toad pictures, and it is more practical and makes the files more accesible to non-english speakers to keep everything in Anura. Also, in en:wikipedia Anura redirects to Frog. I am going to move all the files in Category:Frog eyes to Category:Ranidae eyes as all the photos belong to species in the family. I'll redirect, provisionally, the first one to Anura eyes. Kind regards. --Erfil (talk) 23:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Category:Frogs (that contains 3500 species) is needed as a base category for its various Frog based subcategories. We have to maintain the delicate coexistence between Category:Animals by common named groups and the scientific taxonomy categories, which rarely map one to one. People buy frog legs, see frogs in art, not Anura legs or Anura in art. We eat apples, not Malus. So in an international multilingual context, frogs are as important as the scientific names; suffice to have a look in Category:Frogs in art. --Foroa (talk) 08:32, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I see your point, but that is not multilingual is just english. For example, if I search Rana (=Frog) in es:wikipedia it will take me to Anura, and then I have a link to commons that will take me to Category:Anura. If I'm looking for "Ranas en el arte" I will have to know that Frog means Rana and then search there for it (not obvious at all). If I start the search directly in Commons I will have to know english or spend quite a few time searching for it. The good thing of scientific names is that at least they apply for all the languages, compared to apple, frog. People not only buy frog legs or see frogs in art, ellos compran ancas de ran y ven ranas en el arte, or acheter des cuisses de grenouilles et voir les grenouilles dans l'art. I don't see the point in keeping a category that fits pretty well with Anura, but I'm not going to insist more. I think all this is a general failure of Commons, so sorry if it looks like I am blaming you for this. --Erfil (talk) 16:36, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

If the world was so simple; there are hundreds of such overlapping category systems as you can see in Category:Organisms by common name. I don't think that by using exclusively Latin that you will solve the language problem. Anyway, for apes in heraldry, fruit, ... Try to translate the categories in Category:Musical instruments by material in Latin; after all, English is a workable compromise. --Foroa (talk) 16:58, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Triodos Bank

Dag Foroa, hoort de file van de Triodos Bank in A Coruña bij de Category:Triodos Bank of hoort hij bij de Category:Banks in Spain Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 08:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Triodos heeft zijn roots in Nederland, maar net als Category:Fortis gaan er subcats nodig zijn voor de verschillende landen of regios. Dus voorlopig hoort Oficina Triodos Bank A Coruña Galiza Spain wGL.jpg bij beide. --Foroa (talk) 08:41, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Moving cats

If you move a long-standing category, can you please leave the appropriate category redirects behind (unless the redirect is misleading)? Category redirects aren't perfect, but they do not suck. If the cat has existed for a long time it is likely to be linked to - from other Wikimedia projects or external locations.

If you move the cat for disambiguation purposes, create the disambiguation category afterwards.

In both cases, there should be an actual page at the original location. Both provide the navigational links for users who might otherwise end up at a deleted page (forcing them to follow a deletion log comment is not appropriate).--Nilfanion (talk) 09:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Please do not delete categories after moving them but create redirects such as Category:Church interiors in Colombia. Certainly don't delete the redirect if someone else thinks it necessary! If you delete any further redirects I've created there - I will take it straight to AN. (In this particular case - the categories have been at that location for years - which is perfectly valid - just being deprecated for another valid English form. As this is a full deprecation, the redirects will not flood HotCat at all: The string starting "Church interiors" will be solely be these redirects).--Nilfanion (talk) 11:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

When I move, I check each act till it is empty, and then delete. I moved > 10000 cats per year, so I have to do it the most efficient way. --Foroa (talk) 12:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Efficiency is good. Breaking usability for our users (users means "readers" not "editors" in WP terms ) is bad. Whether you move 1 cat or 1 million, you should not be doing it by a bad practice. If you had a script that moves the category, and leave the appropriate redirect, would you find use it?--Nilfanion (talk) 12:13, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Leaving badly formed categories is just bad training and people tend to copy it for making other badly formed categories. There is a clickable link in the edit summary. Most categorisation (80 to 90 %) is done by dimple edition and preview, when they see a blue link, it is OK, only 10 or 20 % is using hotcat or Cat-a-lot. --Foroa (talk) 13:53, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Moved categories should leave redirects behind, that is Commons policy per Commons:Deletion policy. This is to ensure the usability of Commons for our audience (not Commoners) as then inward links don't get broken (from inside or outside), people get from the German name to the category (at its English equivalent) etc etc. That supersedes the inconvenience of inexperienced Commons users doing the wrong thing (which bots in any case eventually detect and correct).--Nilfanion (talk) 14:08, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Outgoing links should be corrected on the outgoing side, see [[User_talk:RussBot#What_about_a_nice_little_bot_.3F and I believe that Multichill works on something similar. In terms of usability, I think that I make and repair more links in one month than you in two years. --Foroa (talk) 14:19, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Special:Search/Category:Macaronis a small example of how redirects will eventually render a search system nearly useless. --Foroa (talk) 14:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Its better to do a task once inefficiently but correctly than the same task 1,000 times efficiently but incorrectly - speed, no matter how fast, does not justify errors, if serious enough. You may well make and repair more links than me, but you undoubtedly break a lot more too (I'd expect a lot more activity in w:Special:Contributions/Foroa if you were checking/fixing every time). We have different editorial interests, so you can't expect our editoral behaviour to be comparable - its like comparing chalk to cheese. Same would go for any other user on Commons.

The root cause of all problems with redirects is the lack of the technical ability for proper redirects from categories. Everything else we do is a least-bad patch to cope with that.

The search function on Commons sucks (a more intelligent keyword-type search will win every time) - a complete ban on category redirects wouldn't aid that problem at all in general, as that problem needes a different solution than avoiding redirects. Compare that search to Google search.

With incoming links to Commons: It is impossible to fix them all at the source. It is possible to fix some of those affected links (those from WM projects). But you have no abilty to identify, nevermind alter, links from outside Wikimedia projects. As a responsible repository we need to ensure those external links don't break. That matters more at the file level - for attribution - but isn't it still applies at the category level. If I want to link to a selection of images of Foo I might add a link http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Foo in whatever it is I'm doing.

That is why stable URIs are a fundamentally good idea. As page names may need changing, so they may need moving and total stabilty is not viable. A redirect is then needed to retain that stability.

Having category redirects around makes maintenance tasks easier in general. For a start it allows a one-time bot run to convert them to real redirects if/when that's possible. Its probably easier for a bot-op to repair incoming WP links to cat redirects than to deleted pages. The bots will move a file from a category redirect if its erroneously uploaded there.

Category redirects resulting from a page move are qualitatively different to category redirects from synonyms. Links outside Commons are likely to have referred and may well be broken unless there's a redirect left behind. Redirects created from synonyms will not be targets for incoming links before they are created, and are extremely unlikely to become so after.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:27, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Disagree completely; outgoing links have to be corrected at the source, not on the destination. If you would categorise more intensely, and not apply mainly small patches with HotCat, you would understand, like most prolific categorisers do. --Foroa (talk) 05:52, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

The problem you are missing is it is not possible to correct all outgoing links at the source. While it is theorectically possible to fix the most important (those from WM projects), it is all but impossible to correct those from other websites and completely impossible to prevent it in offline links. We should not ignore non-Wikimedia users of Commons content.

That is why redirects should be left behind, unless there is a good reason not to (because its inaccurate etc). We don't want to point WP users at category redirects, any more than we want to point them at deleted pages, so we should fix outgoing links on WM projects - and I mean fix them, not tell a bot-op to code a bot to fix them and ignore the problem until he is done. Accusing me of being ill-informed doesn't make your case more credible.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:25, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

BTW, your attitude on this is very similar to that being referred to by Brion here - that's a different issue but why the hostility to redirects? Seriously, how does it help anyone? I'd point out R'n'B would find the bot task you have asked him about easier if he is able to identify the current correct target of the broken link. Having a redirect there makes that trivial and is a lot simpler than having to trawl the log.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:40, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Please see this on ANU. You may think the redirects I have recently recreated are not particularly useful, and I'm wasting my time, but I do think they are useful. I'm not going to get into a wheel-war with you over this.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:48, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Movimiento del contenido de la categoría Suaita a la categoría San José de Suaita

Hola Foroa, en primer lugar me disculpo por escribir en español pero tengo muy poco dominio del inglés, con respecto al movimiento que hiciste, no es adecuado pues si bien San José de Suaita ha tenido más importancia históricamente es un corregimiento que hace parte de Suaita y buena parte del contenido que moviste corresponde a Suaita pero no a San José, doy gracias por tu interés y recomendaría dividir el contenido en las dos categorías. --LeinadCQ (talk) 02:53, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The images were mostly referring to San José de Suaita and Suaita is unknown to en:wiki. I added Suaita . --Foroa (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Nathusius

Disambiguation, right, well done, thanks --Wistula (talk) 12:20, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Arbre

Cher Foroa,

Je viens à nouveau te solliciter. En effet j'ai constaté que la catégorie Arbre [[14]] qui concerne normalement un village de l'entité d'Ath dans la province du Hainaut est systématiquement utilisée pour y insérer des photographies qui devraient normalement se trouver dans la catégorie Trees. Puis-je te demander ton aide pour résoudre ce petit problème.

Merci d'avance et cordiales salutations.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 16:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

C'est l'inconvénient d'un nom pareil; vous avez encore de la chance que ce n'est pas encore un nom comme berg, bergen, Mons, qui attirent des bots (allemands) comme des mouches. La meilleure solution est de le renommer en Category:Arbre, Ath, ce que j'ai fait de suite. Le vidange est pour plus tard. --Foroa (talk) 16:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• Foroa,

Merci pour ton aide efficace.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 18:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Clergy from/of Canada

Hello. Shouldn't this be "from Canada", as per COM:PEOPLECAT? If I've missed something, I can switch it back. Cheers.--Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I hesitated; one could say that clergy is like people, a people group. But anyway, I thought that it would be better to harmonise with the other "Clergy of xxx", but personally I feel it would be better to harmonise them all to the from format. What do you think ? --Foroa (talk) 12:42, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmmmm. I had automatically thought of clergy as being a profession, like Category:Priests from Italy or Category:Lawyers from California, rather than thinking of the clergy as a mass or a group. Even if the latter case, though, it should likely be "in" much like Category:Crowds in the United States and Category:Political parties in Brazil. I've looked at the content of the clergy categories, and I'm inclined to think they should be treated like a profession (therefore - from). But I agree completely that they should be harmonized. Do you want me to do it? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Agree. --Foroa (talk) 07:10, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Gamburg (Werbach)

Hello Foroa,

the brackets are unnecessary, as there is only one place with that name. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 14:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Gamburg without brackets etc. is also how the only Wikipedia article about the place is called: de:Gamburg. --Rosenzweig τ 15:04, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I moved Gamburg to Burg Gamburg because it created confusion. No need to recreate the confusion which is avoided by the disambiguation term. I think that there is another Gamburg, but I can't find it back right now, Gamburg is the family name for at least 3 persons., a name of a ship and Гамбург transliterates to Gamburg (and Hamburg in some cases). I hate to move, so I make sure that it will never happen again. --Foroa (talk) 15:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Good luck in finding this other place called Gamburg. Please let me know if you do so. --Rosenzweig τ 16:03, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

As I said, there is Russian names transliterating to it, www.gamurg.net in Russian, Gamburg Properties 10-14 Saddle River Rd, Fair Lawn USA, Gamburg Downtown Branch YMCA. 724 Scott St Alexandria LA, Gamburg, Missouri, and probably another one I could not find back. --Foroa (talk) 16:37, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Moving Gamburg to Burg Gamburg creates confusions! Because Gamburg is the city and Burg Gamburg is a housing area/building.That there are more places and names in the world with our name, we know. And by the way: the russian spelling of HAMBURG gives us nearly daily problems with train travellers arriving here in Gamburg(Tauber). Regards--Hokemo TV 09:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)inhabitant of Gamburg

It is some sort of contradiction: people want to make names as short as possible. And after a while, the shorter the name is, the more problems you have. People from Category:Taumatawhakatangihangakoauauotamateaturipukakapikimaungahoronukupokaiwhenuakitanatahu don't have that problem, but I guess they have another one. haubunagungamaug is another compromise. --Foroa (talk) 10:01, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Categories

Hi Foroa. I will try to do my best. Thanks for your help. Have a nice day, Jacopo Werther ^iγ∂ψ=mψ 14:40, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

San Francisco Bay Area scenes

Is now fully diffused, and empty, ready for deletion. thanks.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:32, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

"People from...." categories

Hi. There's a question that I've been meaning to ask for some time, but I'm not sure where or who to ask: Regarding categories denoting where notable people are from, like People from New York City, and such, what do we do with people who were born in one city but raised in another, or with people who have lived in many different cities. Do we list them all, or should we list only ones that the subject identifies with? Is there a policy, guideline or consensus on this question? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 19:46, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, there is in Commons:Category scheme People. Precisely because of this problem, we use "People of x place", which is wider than the "People from x place", so several places can be attached to one person. Problem is that for some countries, they want to stick to the en:wiki "People from x place" form. Anyway, when I see that the two forms exist, I merge them into one single one, which will eventually become "People from x place" one day. --Foroa (talk) 20:36, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

That addresses which preposition to use, but not my question above. Again, do we list every city in which a person has ever lived, or are we more restrictive in which ones to list? Nightscream (talk) 22:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Category scheme People states: Reasoning: "People of xxx" is preferred because it is a more open and wide term. It can contain the more narrow people "originating from, living in, worked in, died in" categories. . So, on Commons, we don't use normally "People from xxx" so that we can indeed assign them to several places. The occupations however are in the "Artist from xxx" form; the intention is to indicate where they operate from, so there might be several places too.

A problem that I forgot is that the "People of xxx" form is fairly well harmonised worldwide, except for the US and UK; mainly because the en:wiki uses the more restrictive "People from xxx" form, but that will be mass changed within a couple of months.

So basically, not to worry; there is no real restriction on using it whenever there is a semi-permanent or long-standing relationship between the person and the place. --Foroa (talk) 05:18, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Do we list every city that the person was born in and has lived in? Nightscream (talk) 08:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

We list every city that the person was born in and has lived in for a substantial amount of time. Not for temporary projects or exhibitions. --Foroa (talk) 08:18, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

What constitutes a substantial amount of time? Nightscream (talk) 13:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I would say, at least to become part of the community, so say 2 years. --Foroa (talk) 16:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

User_talk:CommonsDelinker

hi Foroa, Smuconlaw removed my renaming request for Category:Lapidary. Is it still working? Happy Easter to you.––Oursana (talk) 21:44, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Its me that dropped it by mistake I guess (probably because it was completely undocumented). It is now back in the queue, but SieBot is currently down. --Foroa (talk) 09:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Tell me if I have to do more (undocumented ?).––Oursana (talk) 09:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, it is always difficult to take a move request into account without a stated reason and without properly documented categories. --Foroa (talk) 14:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Moving German railway cats

Hi Foroa, why are you moving the German titled categories Category:Bahnstrecke Düren–Heimbach and Category:Bahnstrecke Jülich–Dalheim to English titles? I don't see the sense of this action, those are Germen railways and the cats are named same as articles in :de:wp: - which now link to nowhere on commons! So if you have no arguement for this, I'll move those cats back. Regards a×p_de^Hello! 21:52, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

There is no single reason to use a German category name when the English name is clear and understandable for everyone; that is the Commons naming rule; we will not use a Chinese, Arab or Russian version of Bahnstrecke because it is called so on the related Wikipedia. Deviations from the the English name are only acceptable for widely known items for which there is no identical name in English, such as Rittergüter, Studentenverbindungen, ... So, one day or another, all Bahnstrecke will be renamed, so don't come back to complain about broken links. --Foroa (talk) 05:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

If I remember right, there's a rule not to move any category just for the sake of having the name in English. Other language categories are allowed and there's no need to move those categories. If you can't provide any rule, that German railway categories imperatively have to be named in English, I will move those categories back! a×p_de^Hello! 13:14, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

There is no such rule, but a name harmonisation rule is more important. --Foroa (talk) 13:19, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

No! Commons is multilingual, there are even categories in Chinese or Japonese signs!

Btw: Why did you rename the English named Category:Betuweroute to Dutch Category:Betuwelijn? (See [15]) You seem to be not so honest about your private motives!! a×p_de^Hello! 13:26, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Category names should be in English; that's one of the few basic rules that most people agree upon. I merged indeed upon user request Category:Betuweroute into the long standing Category:Betuwelijn, because the latter is somewhat a semi-official proper name, but I agree that this names creates more confusion than it solves. So please don't call me dishonest or having private motives, especially for Dutch or Flemish, or because you feel attacked because I don't accept Bahnstrecke in stead of railway line. --Foroa (talk) 14:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Auster

Hi, just curious to learn your rationale for renaming cat Auster to Auster Aircraft Limited, that seems a bit cumbersome. The aircraft manufacturer remains the primary use of Auster at en:WP, perhaps no confusion with Paul Auster etc? At Commons, we often put aircraft company names under Aircraft manufacturers, then the aircraft models under sub-cat eg Auster aircraft (small a) and Aircraft by manufacturer. MTIA, PeterWD (talk) 11:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Several reasons. first Category:Auster Aircraft Limited is the real name and is closer to what most wikipedias refer to; Commons has no notion of primary use as these tend to be country/language/wikipedia specific. Since there was no higher level Auster category, I took the name of the company to better link with the manufacturers, but Auster aircraft would work too indeed. Second, en:Auster (disambiguation), de:Auster, fr:Auster, pl:Auster ... has several meanings and is disambiguated in many languages. On Commons, we have already 4 categories using an Auster that has nothing to do with the airplane,, within 2 years, we will have 20 of them. --Foroa (talk) 12:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello

Do you know „Lenzing“ outside of Austria?

(Deletion log); 07:38 . . Foroa (talk | contribs) deleted page Category:Lenzing ‎(moved to Category:Lenzing, Austria)

-- Bwag (talk) 08:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

You would be surprised: try "Lenzing Germany" on Google maps. Nearly impossible to have a 6 letter word not used somewhere, strange enough not in the US or Australia (this time). Now corrected to Lenzing, Upper Austria. --Foroa (talk) 08:27, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I surprised: [16] or [17] or [18]. -- Bwag (talk) 08:35, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Foroa

talkback at Category talk:Bantu and I think at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Bantu cat struck again, same user Penyulap ☏ 03:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Orrling's block

I was wondering why you've blocked Orrling (talk · contribs) for three months? I've probably missed something? Bidgee (talk) 07:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Basically, still the same pattern as you blocked him a couple of months ago for and the reverts concerning Bantu, for which he has been blocked the last 3 or 4 times. See #Blocking_Orrling_-_why_only_for_2_weeks.3F. --Foroa (talk) 08:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Category:Mao Zedong and 14th DL

I notice you've deleted this redirect. I use this redirect on talk pages on the English Wikipedia, to prevent talk pages from being blocked by China's firewall. China uses keyword-based censorship, meaning that if any link contains the word "Dalai Lama" on a specific page, it blocks the entire page, and users browsing from within China get a HTTP 404 when trying to access that particular talk page. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 08:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

See also: Category talk:Mao Zedong and 14th DL -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 08:12, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate the problem, but the page referred to Category:Mao Zedong and Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama that has been deleted recently without leaving a trace. --Foroa (talk) 08:18, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Oh, didn't realise that the category was deleted. Sorry about that. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs 05:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Honeycomb (photography)

Hello. Undelete the cat. Category:Honeycomb (photography), please. Beauty dish is not the same as honeycomb. Honeycomb in photography is the part of softboxes etc... I am preparing the article for the cs wikipedia. For example see this: [19] or [20] - Thank You, --Svajcr (talk) 05:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I know, I hesitated, but the category was undocumented, not in plural and I don't think that the name is stating what it means. Category:Honeycomb light diffusers should express what it really means. --Foroa (talk) 06:36, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, can You do it, please? Thanks, --Svajcr (talk) 07:31, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done Made up quickly some mini description. --Foroa (talk) 07:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Add the other files, you have deleted, please. Thanx.--Svajcr (talk) 07:52, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

File:01 Logo d'accueil.png

Hi Foroa,

Why have you undid my contribution 94014197 in File:01 Logo d'accueil.png ? File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-fr.png is better than File:01 Logo d'accueil.png, so the rediction is justified !

What do you think about that ?

Regards,

--Juanes852 (talk) 19:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me for my bad english, but I'm a French contributor

ça serait jolie si on commençait à effacer des images en plaquant un redirect dessus. Donc un item file.xx.jpg est soit un redirect, soit un vrai fichier. Le système digère mal les deux combinés. --Foroa (talk) 04:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Euh, je ne suis pas sûr d'avoir compris.

Après une lecture de Help:File redirect. J'ai compris la chose suivante : File:01 Logo d'accueil.png et File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-fr.png doivent être identiques. Désormais ils sont identiques, du coup, je peux réaliser la redirection.

J'avais demandé la suppression de File:01 Logo d'accueil.png car la création de ce fichier constitue une erreur de débutant. Cette demande avait été rejeté, et je n'ai pas compris pourquoi.

Cordialement,

--Juanes852 (talk) 08:51, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Pas vraiment: quand ils sont identiques, tu peux appliquer {{Duplicate}} afin de pouvoir mettre à jour tous les wikipedia qui font référence à ce fichier. Mettre un redirect sur un fichier existant n'est pas permis. Je l'ai fait pour toi. --Foroa (talk) 09:27, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Merci pour la réponse,

J'avais déjà eu l'idée de mettre {{Duplicate}} sur File:01 Logo d'accueil.png, mais le 2 avril 2013 Moogsi m'a révarté avec le résumé de modification suivant : "Not an exact or scaled-down duplicate".

Enfin peu importe, Nikbot a supprimé le document ! C'est ce que je voulais depuis plus d'une semaine ! Cette suppression me semble injuste car le logo Wikipédia a été téléversé sur common dans de nombreux fichiers (par exemple File:Barre latérale - boite à outils déroulée.jpg). Mais enfin ce n'est pas grave, car je voulais que File:01 Logo d'accueil.png soit supprimé !

Désormais Category:French Wikipedia screenshots est vide (j'avais créé cette catégorie pour téléverser une série de copie d'écran du bandeau de droite, afin d’illustrer w:fr:aide:interface, mais c'était une mauvaise idée, en conséquence je les avais fait supprimer en invoquant le motif  ). Du coup, serait-il possible de supprimer Category:French Wikipedia screenshots ?

--Juanes852 (talk) 12:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Merci --Juanes852 (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Wirral Peninsula

I noticed you may have reversed edits i have made. I was trying to clear and clean this page up as per talk page, it was all over the place. Why not make your thoughts known on the talk page? Babydoll0409 (talk) 19:50, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

I am not saying that I am disagreeing, I just cleaned up.

For the Category:Village greens in the Wirral Peninsula can I remind you that for quick deletion of categories, the procedure consist of inserting {{Badname|Good name}} if another category names exist. Alternatively, {{Speedy|reason}} can be used.

Blanking the page makes that the category appears several days later (again) in Special:UncategorizedCategories which we try to keep as empty as possible, but requires significant work as we have to analyse each case if it concerns vandalisme, mistakes, beginners work (that may need assistance) or just a plain categorisation problem. So following the standard procedure saves us all unnecessary work. This has already been asked to you by another administrator. Thank you and keep up the good work. --Foroa (talk) 14:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I apologise but i don't know all the procedures. In this example the category should not have been started as it would be "Village Greens in the Metropolitan Borough of Wirral" for example. Babydoll0409 (talk) 12:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Diogenes of Sinope looking for a man

Dag Foroa, zie jij er het nut van in deze category te hernoemen "Category:Diogenes searching for an honest man" ? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:46, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Niet zeker: in en:Diogenes of Sinope#Notes : Laërtius & Hicks 1925, Ⅵ:41. Modern sources often say that Diogenes was looking for an "honest man", but in ancient sources he is simply looking for a "human" (anthrôpos). The unreasoning behavior of the people around him means that they do not qualify as human. En mijn klassiekers zijn meer dan roestig (+43 jaar). --Foroa (talk) 12:38, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 16:12, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Het zou dus een "looking for a human" of "looking for a honest man" moeten zijn: dus een Commons compromis waar we nergens correct mee zijn maar die iedereen zou kunnen begrijpen ... --Foroa (talk) 16:44, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Belarusian names

Colleague, dirty work (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). --Чаховіч Уладзіслаў (talk) 07:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Not half as dirty as the 60 categories that you patched with {{Bad name}}. See Commons:Village_pump#Guideline_for_transliteration.3F. --Foroa (talk) 07:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I do not mean {{Bad name}}, your edits removed except the template is also useful content categories. I know English is very bad, so the link to the discussion for me is worthless. I just want to note that all localities in Belarus originally named it the Belarusian, who is still, despite the Russification of the country as a part of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, is the national and official language, but because the name should be transliterated exclusively with the Belarusian language. This is what was provided for in the law in 2007, which was approved by the UN. I hope that Google Translator mastered the meaning of my message will be clear to you :) --Чаховіч Уладзіслаў (talk) 13:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I think that I do understand your problem; I would be pretty helpless on the Russian or Belarusian wikipedia too. We have on Belarusian village/city category naming a fundamental problem, a problem that exist in many countries that have several official languages, often made even more difficult by invasion/colonisation by other cultures.

As far as understand, there are two official languages in Belarus and Russian is the main language, used by 72% of the population, while Belarusian, the second official language, is only used by 11.9%. Minorities also speak Polish, Ukrainian and Eastern Yiddish. So I assumed that all village names would be in Russian, but that might be wrong. I do know that fighting about names and all related edit wars, as we had in Ukraine, Spain, Basque country, ... doesn't help none of us.

Anyway, the best way out is to agree upon a formal list of city/village names and import that here in Commons. To facilitate that, you could try to discuss it with user:EugeneZelenko who is bureaucrat, very helpful and very busy, User:Renessaince or user:Kaganer who is Russian, but very helpful. --Foroa (talk) 07:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Glass 7, Gouda

Hallo Foroa, Kun je zeggen waarom je de Category:Glass 7, Gouda hebt aangemaakt met de naam Gouda terwijl alle andere alleen Category:Glass... genoemd worden? Er stond eerst Glass 7, maar die is verwijderd. groeten --Agaath (talk) 18:37, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Zoals je kan zien in COM:CAT, The category name would be enough to guess the subject, hetgeen de enige echte naming rule is on Commons. Commons heeft slechts één enkele naming space voor de categorieën, wij zitten nu aan 2600000 categorieën, en ik denk dat, om echt nuttig te zijn, er rond de 20 miljoen categorieën moeten ontstaan.

Hoedanook, als iedereen in zijn kerk zijn glasraam details begint te nummeren in de stijl van "Glass xxx", dan gaat er een redelijk soepje ontstaan. --Foroa (talk) 08:07, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Ik begrijp het. Bedankt --Agaath (talk) 17:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphan works in the United States

Dag Foroa, in het kader van de Freedom of panorama maakte ik een beginnetje met de werken van Eugène Atget, onder welke Category hoort deze Category:Orphan works in the United States nu thuis? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:42, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Bestaat dat ook al ? Ik denk dat je dat beter op Commons:Village pump/Copyright aankaart, misschien is er ook een apart type licentie nodig; en zo komen die mensen ook op de hoogte van dergelijke gevallen. --Foroa (talk) 07:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Catégorie Mons (Hainaut)

Bonjour Foroa,

Peux-tu jeter un coup d’œil au renommage de cette catégorie

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Museums_in_Mons_(Hainaut)

En effet, il y a peu nous avions commencé le renommage des catégories de Mons vers Mons (Hainaut) pour faire la distinction entre les villes belges de Mons (Hainaut) et Mons (Liège) ainsi qu'avec la ville française de Mons (Var), or je vois qu’un utilisateur peu au courant du motif de nos travaux et revenu à la catégorie initiale.

Merci d’avance pour ton aide et cordiales salutations

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 08:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour Jean-Pol, le fait qu'il y avait encore plusieurs cats avec l'ancien et le nouveau nom qui coexistaient encore, crée bien de confusion. Et il y a des gens qui essayent toujours de raccourcir les noms des catégories; ils oublient que ça crée des mixups et de travail supplémentaire pour renommer les cats. Un grand merci pour ton travail. Beste groet. --Foroa (talk) 07:24, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Prins Boudewijn

Zeg eens, mag ik vragen waarom je ZKH Cat Prins Boudewijn steeds recat?Carolus (talk) 07:16, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Omdat de Grenadiers (Belgium) naar hem vernoemd zijn, niet omdat hij er deel van uitmaakt, dus de Grenadiers (Belgium) zouden naar koning boudewijn moeten verwijzen, niet omgekeerd. --Foroa (talk) 07:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

De grenadiers zijn naar Prins Boudewijn vernoemd omdat hij de bekendste grenadier is! Zie ook zijn portret. Wat heeft koning Boudewijn hier van doen? Carolus (talk) 08:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Als een item naar iemand vernoemd wordt, dan staats de naam in de parent categorie. En Category:Baudouin of Belgium is op zijn zachts gezegd verwarrend; daar gaan nogal wat beelden van Koning Boudewijn in belanden in plaats van in Category:Baudouin I of Belgium . --Foroa (talk) 08:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Dat is geen antwoord op mijn tweede vraag, ik kan er niet aan doen dat beide heren dezelfde naam droegen...Mensen moetn zelf opletten bij het categoriseren.Je definieert het probleem, maar zonder oplossing.Carolus (talk) 08:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Ik verwarde dus ook de koning met de prins. Reken er niet op dat mensen categoriën checken, en dat is een van de redenen waarom op alle wikipedias het corresponderende wikipedias het artikel een andere naam heeft. Ik ga die dan ook straks gaan hernoemen. --Foroa (talk) 13:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Ik zie daar geen reden toe...en hoe ga je die hernoemen?Carolus (talk) 13:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour

Bonjour,

Pourquoi ça?, en plus l'image n'existe pas!!! --— Mouh2jijel ^[Talk] 11:12, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Parce que le fait d'enlever </gallery> rend tous les categories et interwikis inutilisables. --Foroa (talk) 13:08, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Reverts in categories

Foroa, you have been reverting several changes I've done in categories. I would love to know why. --NaBUru38 (talk) 16:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, because we discussed some of it already, for example in User_talk:Foroa/archive_2012#Category:Buildings_in_Foo. So basically, the following categories are main categories or topics for which the large majority of images is downloaded and that people should find right away:

• Buildings (and not hide it behind culture/architecture of xxx). In Beijing, architecture is redirected to buildings.
• People (and not hide it behind culture/society/ of xxx)
• Military in many countries where war and related industry plays an important role.
  • By the way, I think that you are wrong by hiding military and law underneath politics. Politics might drive to some extent the government, but in most countries, it is the government that controls laws, police and military.

Most media are photographs, so photographs is not a major topic, only for special cases, so no reason to put it on the top of the country category; it is just a topic as any other; we don't want to ,mislead people and push them to navigate in photograph categories to find a topic.

Before you change structures in Belgium, please read Category talk:Belgium; the structures are optimised for easy categorisation AND navigation. --Foroa (talk) 16:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Church of Savigneux

Hi,

I noticed that you have deleted this category (Category:Town hall of Savigneux). Could you do the same action for this one (Category:Church of Savigneux).
Thank you very much,
--Agamitsudo (talk) 14:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Just insert {{Badname|Église Saint-Laurent de Savigneux (Ain)}} and it will disappear automagically. --Foroa (talk) 15:18, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Via de' Benci

Please, do not move back to Category:Via de' Benci (Florence). It's the only street in Italy named like that, no need of disambiguation, Thank you. I am a resident photographer in Florence, I cannot get mad if you change me all the cat names everytime without any notice and reasonable purpouse. Thank you. --Sailko (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I can understand that for you, Florence is the centre of the world, but that is not the case for Commons. I am getting tired of your moves to remove disambiguating terms because you find Florence entitled to carry the exclusive name, and the other less important ones, have to disambiguate. While most Italian contributors understand that systematic disambiguation settles the name once and for all, while keeping a systematic naming approach, you keep removing disambiguations. Many, if not most of the non disambiguated streets in category:Streets in Florence do exist in other cities, and I don't plan to waste my time to move them each time there is a conflict and a need for disambiguation. So I am warning you, next time I have to rename a street because a street with the same name pops up in another place, I will disambiguate with the bot all the streets in Florence. Most churches in Florence had to be renamed because of your Florence-centric approach, which is a gigantic waste of time. Fortunately, for the streets, the problem is understood in most cities in most countries. --Foroa (talk) 06:02, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Please reply to my discussion page, I came back here just for casualty. I know there were sometimes mistakes in the past, and I apologize. Even if it is false that the churches category names were renamed after my fault: I just gave up moving back Santa Maria del Fiore (Florence), even if no other churches in the world have such name. Category names should be kept simple. There is no apparent reason why we should have Category:Van Gogh Museum (not "Category:Van Gogh Museum (Amsterdam)") and Category:Pinacoteca di Brera (Milan), for instance. Are the users from Amsterdam less "systematic" that the Milanese ones? Also, you should leave category redirects, if you delete the previous category you miss a link from wikipedias, etc. The longest the name is, the most difficult is to remeber it when you search it, for any reason. It is not a matter of Florence-centering, I would do right the same in any other city, if I had pictures to upload. Mostly, your approach is not appropriate for an administrator, it looks like you want to start an edit war, without advising the users if you find a mistake, especially on multiple times and especially about a subject your are not specialized in. I just did not notice and remeber how many time I moved a cat, so I wrote you as soon as I noticed. And next time you would find a conflict, instead of threatening to mess up a category, before any moving or deleting, let me know please, so in case I can also change the links from wikipedias. I don't think it will happen any often, anyway. --Sailko (talk) 11:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/03/Category:Demolished buildings

FYI, a suggestion has been added. Hamblin (talk) 12:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Nogmaals

Blijf aub van de categorie-structuur af! Je weet niet waarover je spreekt. Nu is dit File:Leopold of Belgium, Duke of Brabant; Nicaise de Keyser.jpg bestand verkeerd gecategoriseerd. In 1853 was Prins Boudewijn nog niet eens geboren! Laat staan dat er Carabiniers Prins Boudewijn – Grenadiers bestonden????? Je helpt alles om zeep door het hernoemen van de categoriëen! Je blijft gewoon zaken veranderen zonder overleg. Echt triestig. De overige foto's die ik van de grenadiers heb zal ik niet uploaden, door jouw acties verspreid je verkeerde info. En die ene afbeelding laat me niet lachen, dat idiote tekeningetje is zo zielig dat het amper wiki-waardig is. Je kent niet eens de geschiedenis van de mexicaanse troepen onder hare Keizerlijke Majesteit Keizerin Charlotte, slechts een tiental grenadiers waren actief. Je bent duidelijk onbekwaam zolang je geen bronnen geeft. Ik betwijfel bovendien of je ooit al eens een grenadier hebt gezien of gesproken. Ik betreur dit ten zeerste, je wijzigingen hebben zelf gevolgen voor de relatie met het leger, zij zullen niet meer willen meewerken aan wikipedia door dergelijke onjuistheden en baldadigheden. Carolus (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Wat zijn wij welgezind vandaag. Er is geen twijfel dat je een unieke kennis hebt over tal van onderwerpen. Op gebied van categorie namen en structuren hebben wij wel wat meer ervaring. Wij stevenen op naar 3 miljoen categorieën en ik hernoem er ruim tienduizend per jaar. Als je dus een Category:Grenadiers (Belgium) creëert dan is dat een top level categorie voor alles wat met grenadiers in België te maken heeft, inclusief poppen, carnaval optredens, fanfare grenadiers uniforms, historische evocaties, schilderijen, straten en cafés die min of meer verband houden met grenadiers. Zo simpel is dat. Indien je categorieën wil beperken in scope dan is het voldoende om er een duidelijke naam aan te geven. Drama maken of de mensen uitschelden helpt niks vooruit. --Foroa (talk) 05:32, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

WARNING

this time i will use English; so verybody can read. your cats are all wrong (AGAIN!)

File:0 Soignies - Rue H. Ferrer - Garde impériale (1).jpg File:Acoz Fo9JPG.jpg File:Bataille Waterloo 1815 reconstitution 2011 2.jpg

This images arent Belgian Grenadiers, they are French! And second in 1815 Belgium didn't exist. This proves again and again that you don't know anything about the matter. Please remove the categorie of the Belgian Grenadiers. On this page it is Raininig complaints about your categorisation, non stop! If you do not stop this non-sense; i will have to mark you for your disruptive behaviour. You never ask advise, you just don't listen to advise you are given. Carolus (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

In all categories related to history, the reference is the current political constellation. A painter from Bruges from 1503 is a painter from Belgium in the first place. De Guldensporenslag is in Belgium, but is part of the history of Belgium and France. A reenactement in Belgium of a grenadier from France belongs to Grenadiers in France and Belgium. --Foroa (talk) 06:59, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I am really sorry, but honestly i doubt your historical intelligence...what you are telling is actually just sad and ridiculous...if a picture taken of Hitler in Belgium, you will say Belgian dictator? Please...just go elsewhere to tell people this kind of craziness...and don't wast the time of other people who try to make Commons work.you are performing disruptive behavior. Carolus (talk) 17:38, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

That's the way history is classified here. If you don't stop reverting, you will be blocked for longer. --Foroa (talk) 17:45, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Foroa, you're missbehaving when blocking an user you have an edit war with! And your "you will be blocked for longer" is clearly exactly what no admin should do! a×p_de^Hello! 18:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I am fed up with that user behaving as his contributions are his own and insulting all people that try to touch his files. He was almost blocked for that some years ago on his lace categories and got similar community problems on the dutch wikipedia where he was blocked indef. If he disagrees with things, he has to follow COM:CFD or any other procedure. If he disagree with the description of an image, he can mark it as facts disputed, not reverting things all the time. This is a really simple case of bad faith, otherwise I would not block him, I don't believe I have a history of quick blockings. --Foroa (talk) 18:47, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

If you are edit warring with a user, it's at least a conflict of interests to block this user. You should have made this behaviour public and ask some fellow admins to proceed in this case. Even if you're right with what you've said above, now that you've blocked him you weakened your position! a×p_de^Hello! 19:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

That's right. Therefore, I request that a Dutch speaking administrator evaluates the bad faith, rudeness and totally irresponsible behaviour of Carolus, which made in my judgment the block justified. --Foroa (talk) 19:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:House of Ursel en Category:D'Ursel castle

Dag Foroa, ik heb de Category:D'Ursel castle onder Category:House of Ursel gezet. Is dit correct? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 07:07, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Dag Lotje, dat ziet er logisch uit en klopt ook met de verschillende links op nl:wiki. Maar eindelijk ken ik er niet veel van zeggen ze. Hoedanook, als het verkeerd is zal er wel iemand van zijn oren maken, als het goed is zwijgen ze als vermoord. Zoals gewoonlijk, doe voor wel en zie niet om. --Foroa (talk) 08:46, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Dat is correct gedaan, ook door eerst overleg te plegen! Het kasteel is nu eigendom van de provincie antwerpen. Carolus (talk) 12:41, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Em dashes

Why does commons avoid Em dashes? - it seems very weird that we can not be consistent with the WP:Pages which use Em dashes for the cyclone seasons.Jason Rees (talk) 09:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, you are lucky, it is more difficult to be consistent for the other 270 languages. Commons is a much more multi-language project, and em- dashes are a source of problems as they are not present on all keyboards and I believe in some countries, they use another character. See in Commons:Categories for discussion/2011/10/Category:Bilateral relations by country for more a longer discussion.

The categories with hyphens you wanted to move (thank you for the great work) are there nicely and consistently since 3 years, so certainly no reason to degrade the situation while annoying potentially the 700 clients that might be linked to it.

Keep on the good work. --Foroa (talk) 05:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Foroa.

I change the way that User:Шуйская is removed from the categories, in a way that I think would still allow her to copy across her work once she has 'gotten the hang of' the coding and article-writing, without needing to remember the list. I did it like this can you check that it still does exactly what you wanted it to do, that there are no mistakes I make ? Please reply on my tp if that's ok. Penyulap ☏ 08:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi again Foroa, sorry that I must speak out against your mistake at AN, it is not a good way to make friends, I do hope that you will know how to fix what you've done there, so everything will be better than before. Penyulap ☏ 12:11, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

If you would have followed and understood all his actions and discussions, you would have realised that this person has a serious community problem. --Foroa (talk) 16:53, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

It is quite possible, but there is no talkpage, and the only thing I could find is here on your talkpage, and it looks quite heated. Is there more on commons ? it may be there is some external reason, but it is a very alarming thing for editors here to watch an admin block someone they are in the middle of an edit war with, that is how it looks, and they only did 2 edits, you did 3, I'm not saying you don't have a reason, but look at how other people who only know what they see on commons think, it is alarming don't you think ? Penyulap ☏ 17:43, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:L'Osservatore Romano

Dag Foroa, onder welke Category hoort Category:L'Osservatore Romano denk je? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:48, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Lotje, voila: Category:Newspapers by country => Category:Newspapers of Vatican City en OOK =>Category:Magazines of the Vatican City. WAARBIJ Category:Newspapers of Vatican City gecategoriseerd wordt ook onder => Category:Vatican City . Groet Carolus (talk) 10:19, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

category redirects exists

Please, when you rename any category, if the name has not an evident mistake (like mispelling), leave a category redirect, like here. Commons categories are linked with "Commonscat" and similar from local wikipedias, and it is difficult to image and search the new names. Thank you. --Sailko (talk) 13:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Evident capitalisation mistake, if we have to maintain millions of such redirects for the nearly 3 million cats, the system will become unusable. The new category is as clickable in the edit summary as the redirect. --Foroa (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

There is no difference of leaving a redirect or not for the system. We can keep as many millions as we want, servers are powerful enough. Please do, I explained you why already. Also if someone memorized the old name and upload new images there, a bot can move it to the proper category, but if there is no redirect it won't. Thank you. PS: I also mentioned how the correct palce for reply to me is here. Administrators should be more user friendly. Thanks. --Sailko (talk) 15:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you sir. --Foroa (talk) 15:56, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

In case you weren't aware of: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User problems#Foroa. --Túrelio (talk) 07:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

en:Ansar Dine

Dag Foroa, ik had de Category:Ansar Dine aangemaakt, maar waaronder zou die best ressorteren denk je? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Er was een goed begin, ik heb het wat vervolledigd, maar het is nogal touchy en op dit gebied is Commons (gelukkig soms) nogal onderontwikkeld; ze rebellen noemen of terroristen is een POV en vraagt om reactie. Islamisten gelijkschakelen met rebellen is ook problematisch. We zien wel. --Foroa (talk) 08:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Fijn, bedankt Foroa. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 12:00, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambig needed

Hi Foroa - I know you like making categories into disambigs; here's one that badly needs to be made into one: Category:Hawthorn, with its current classification moved to [Category:Hawthorn, Co Durham] (or similar) - MPF (talk) 07:07, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

No I hate making them, and I even hate it more to untangle them. Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories requires and awful lot of maintenance work, while 95 % of the wrong items in them are just overcats. Very few people are keeping those disambiguation pages up to date. So basically, I would prefer that such categories are deleted and locked but in the mean time, I suppose I have to live with them. (As far as I know, there is no single wikipedia that accepts disambiguation categories). I will clean it out Category:Hawthorn later, but you dont have to wait for me. --Foroa (talk) 08:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! I've cleared it out. Must admit, I am surprised you hate making them, I really thought you did like them. In which case, I'd make a plea again for the 'undisambiguation' of Category:Sylvia, that one really isn't necessary to be a disambig, as first names are never used for categorisation. The other genus names you've made into disambigs I can see there is a case for, but that one, there really isn't. Anything other than species of the genus Sylvia that gets put there can far more easily be tackled by keeping a casual eye on it, which I can do just as I do for numerous other genus cats which acquire rare miscategorised files. - MPF (talk) 13:47, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, dear MPF, you keep surprising me too. I thought that with the experience with Category:Hawthorn where:

• Category:Hawthorn and Category:Hawthorn, County Durham has been living in parallel for years
• Category:Hawthorn was a mix-up of place and taxon related items
• Category:Hawthorn took us more than a hour to clean up, while it was an easy one as taxon's is your speciality, it is close to the area where you are living and they where mostly in your language

So I fail to understand any advantage to create such a mix (and work) attracting category such as Category:Sylvia by making it a taxon category. For recall, to me the best solution is no category at all AND locked so that nobody can use the slot as people try all the time. The disambiguation is the next best solution, but I have my doubt on it. --Foroa (talk) 06:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Rename practices

Dag Foroa, zoetr ip de vlamschen wiki etwa moet'n gedoan word'n ivm t'érnoemienge van accounts gelik dan d'admins nu bezig zyn ip meta? 'k aant éêst an Tbc gevraagd, moa 'kwoarn héêl te haans vergetn datje tie noois mê reagirt ip zyn usertalkpage. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 15:53, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Gin gedacht oan der gevalln goan zin voe vls, en nog mindre watte en wie datter da zoe moetn doene. --Foroa (talk) 07:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Quick undeletion

Could you please undelete Category:Pi.1415926535? I created it as an intentional category redirect; when I'm doing mass uploads, the shorter category name is useful for sorting. Thanks! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I deleted it because of Commons:User-specific_galleries,_templates_and_categories_policy#Categories and Commons_talk:User-specific_galleries,_templates_and_categories_policy#Notability_and_the_naming_of_user_categories. --Foroa (talk) 15:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I understand why based on those it should not be a category with any content, but I don't follow why it's disallowed as a redirect for auto-sorting uploads. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:59, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Most users that do significant categorisation work are happy with a category that is blue. To search one, they will type "Category:Pi" in the search box and take the first one that seems reasonable. For HotCat and cat-a-lot, they will only type Pi and take the first one that looks reasonable; they don't tend to look back if the tool has changed it. And Commons:Category redirects suck. --Foroa (talk) 16:19, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I created it for when I'm adding categories when uploading; "Pi.1" gets me the category quicker than "Photographs by User:Pi.1" and for that upload form the redirect does work. Do you know if there's any way to customize the upload form to automatically add the full category, just like adding &uselang=ownwork to Special:Upload automatically adds my username? (I've also asked at MediaWiki talk:Uploadtext/ownwork. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

A small template, such as {{User Pi.14}} might include the category. --Foroa (talk) 13:40, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Antropologie (retail company)

Dag Foroa, wil je deze Category verwijderen, ik had nl. bij het aanmaken een typo gemaakt. Bedankt. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:01, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Geen probleem, volgende keer plak je er {{Badname|Good name}} op en dan zal het in het "niets" verdwijnen. --Foroa (talk) 05:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Birds in Cincinnati Zoo

There's a discussion going on at "Category talk:Birds in Cincinnati Zoo", if you're interested. — SMUconlaw (talk) 13:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Hernoemen van files

Dag Foroa, graag je mening hierover: Image:Ooo (1).jpg, Image:TO.jpg, File:Es Ra Katso?.jpg. Er is nogal wat commotie ontstaan rond enkele hernoemingen van mij en nu wilde ik toch eerst jouw mening leren kennen omtrent een eventuele rename. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 17:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Die zijn inderdaad aan een rename toe. Hoe meer ze gebruikt worden op wikis, hoe voorzichtiger je moet zijn. Je kan altijd snel een blik werpen op hun huidige naming "stijl" (of wat ze soms beweren dat het is) door snel even te kijken in hun recente uploads: Special:ListFiles/Geagea in dit geval.

Dat is wel een totaal andere "stijl" dan de files waar ik het over heb. Ik zal zien hoe Geagea reageert op mijn vraag op zijn usertalkpage.

Is mijn uitleg over die upside-down hosry nu duidelijk ? --Foroa (talk) 17:47, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Niet echt, maar wat ik ervan leerde: man, man, man, je moet wel soms aan tiptoedancing doen, sommige tenen zijn zooooo lang. :$ Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 18:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Je moet ook niet gaan overdrijven om een rename aan iedereen te gaan vragen, vooral niet de heel evidente gevallen (de andere vind ik persoonlijk ook overbodig). Inderdaad, wij hebben hier de meest diverse collectie van het menselijk ras, en hoe dichter je bij hun uploads komt, hoe meer het territorium instinct naar boven komt; het is niet altijd mooi. Al bij al slalom ik er nog redelijk goed doorheen. --Foroa (talk) 09:16, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Categorization

Hi. Please, try to think like a human and not like a badly programmed bot. Don't confuse an unique local name (try to search by http://maps.google.cz or other map) with all images their description contains similar words. --ŠJů (talk) 00:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Please, try to think like a human and not like a badly programmed bot when creating categories for street names Category:Streets in Prague by name. If someone would create categories for street names in any other language that translate to Transition, China, Europe, English, Africa, Argentina, ..., they wouldn't stay long time. Remember the one and only commons basic naming rule: a category name should allow to guess the name of the subject. So a big part of the culture in the Czech republic seems to stop in the streets of Prague. If you would work a bit more on Special:WantedCategories, you would maybe understand. --Foroa (talk) 08:54, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Interior‎ (empty); Category:Interior of Casa Vasari (Arezzo)‎‎ Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Exterior‎‎‎ - Naming policy

Hi Foroa, I get irritated about naming policy xxx- Interior or Interior of XXXX please see Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Interior, Category:Interior of Casa Vasari (Arezzo). With your help I replaced Category:House of Giorgio Vasari (Arezzo) by Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Exterior‎‎‎. Then I created Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Interior‎ and asked via Commons delinker to move files from Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) thereto. Then User:Smuconlaw changed commons delinker to Category:Interior of Casa Vasari (Arezzo)‎‎, as being standard wording, see above link to discussion and asked me to ask you about it. So do I have to delete Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Interior‎ and rename Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Exterior‎‎‎? When using cat-a lot xxx- Interior would make subcat visible to everyone. If Interior of XXXX is the Standard, could we have a policy stating this. Greetings--Oursana (talk) 14:04, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

There are several reasons for this harmonisation.

• First, all Commons naming start with the main topic first as this is the most flexible naming schema that is consistent across all levels (world/country/state/city/building). As you can see in Special:Categories&from=Interiors+of+churches, they are already widely adopted, but leave place too for for future categories, such as Roccoco interiots of Gothic chuches in ...". I guess taat you currently don't bother for your museum, but eventually, it will be possible to naviagate for museum contents, not the their building or surrounding.

• I am a bit surprised that nobody seems to contest the standard naming of "Paintings by xx in museum y", while the "interior/room/division" of museum xxx seems to create problems in a few cases. In the long run, we are all better of with a predictable naming.

• I am sure that you will appreciate a consistent naming style, but the older style <museum name> - <Interior> did exist in tens of variations: hyphens, slashes, colons or 3 different dashes, with and without spacing, interior and interiors, with and without capital I, ... Moreover, those categories cannot be deepened (style/period/...) to have a finer specification without switching to yet another naming style.

--Foroa (talk) 15:15, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Category:National Arboretum

Hi, would you please explain your speedy deletion of Category:National Arboretum. As it was already being used (by mistake), and the U.S. National Arboretum is returned for the first 5 Google search result pages (I didn't check further) when searching for "National Arboretum," it seems like a natural redirect. I myself had trouble finding the category at first because I searched Commons for "National Arboretum." I personally don't think it should be deleted at all per Commons:Rename a category#Should the old category be deleted?, but I definitely don't think a speedy was the right call, and would appreciate being notified in the future when pages I create are deleted. Thank you. --Peter ^Talk 17:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

We are not Google and Commons is for the whole world. On Commons, there are already images of national arboreta of Australia, France, UK, Israel and Korea. There will doubtless be others in Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russia, Greek ... countries that will translate to national arboretum. The redirect you created this morning was misleading. --Foroa (talk) 18:08, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Is there a way to create a disambiguation page of sorts? --Peter ^Talk 19:06, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

We are probably the only wikiproject that supports category disambiguation. It requires a lot of attention and work to keep Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories empty, while most of the time, they contain items that are overcategorised while they seem to attract quite some bot categorisation (although this has been improved last months). Sometimes, things are hanging there for months, while very few user bother to maintain their content; users bother even less to update the terms. So basically, we use it to occupy the slot to avoid that someone else take it and to disambiguate things that have a real different meaning, especially when the same word means different things in several languages. So it doesn't make sense to create an alternative disambiguation cat to serve the "National arboretum" needs; if you want it absolutely, one could create a parallel national arboretum tree, but I doubt that this will help the project. --Foroa (talk) 14:52, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Selby

Please have another think about reverting the changes to Category:Selby. The present situation is frankly a mess, with categories split between the district (the normal minimum level we go down to in the United Kingdom, except in cases where there are a great many files), the civil parish, and the settlement within the civil parish (which to all intents and purposes is identical to the civil parish). I realise that the intention was to try to reduce confusion, but the end result has been to cause further confusion with some categories subcategories of Category:Selby (town), some subcategories of Category:Selby (civil parish), and some even listed as "XXX in Selby (town and civil parish)]]. This doesn't serve anyone trying to navigate round the category system well, particularly for such a small district as Selby (no larger than many medium sized European municipalities). At this stage, it is far better to have a common system categorised at the district level, linking through to the categories at county level, with the files also located in the category for the civil parish. Skinsmoke (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

My main concern is that you convert disambiguation pages which are there for a very good reason into your own category. See En:Selby (disambiguation): There are several other Selby places in at least 5 countries. So don't come here to complain about the additional mess you did create. --Foroa (talk) 09:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

What happened to observing the niceties of being polite to other users? Not one of those other places you mention is even referred to on the disambiguation page (probably because we don't appear to have any categories for the "Selbys" in Australia, Canada, South Africa or the United States), which merely disambiguates between (1) Selby (town); (2) Selby (civil parish), which contains no settlements other than Selby; and (3) the District of Selby. There is no reason to have separate categories for the "town" and "civil parish", as the only difference between the two is a few fields. Previous discussions concerning places in Yorkshire specifically ruled out establishing separate categories for the settlement and the civil parish in such cases. Disambiguation between the settlement/civil parish and the district is usually achieved in the United Kingdom by titling the district category "District of XXX", "Borough of XXX" or "City of XXX". If it is felt that further disambiguation is required, then the settlement/civil parish categories could be titled "Selby, North Yorkshire" to disambiguate from any of the other Selbys should categories ever be created for them. Skinsmoke (talk) 09:26, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't consider hijacking of a needed disambiguation category as very polite. It is up to you to organise the various UK dimensions of Selby, but normally, polite people talk with the authors of the split categories before renaming and/or merging them all. --Foroa (talk) 10:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you think we can try and move forwards with this to try and find a solution? I presume that you are saying that the disambiguation category is there as a placement in case categories are created for the "Selbys" in other countries. That wasn't immediately obvious. Would my suggestion above about having a combined category at the settlement/civil parish level named Category:Selby, North Yorkshire resolve your concerns (as I mentioned earlier, this would be the normal pattern when further disambiguation is required in the United Kingdom)? That would leave the disambiguation page to point to Category:Selby, North Yorkshire and Category:District of Selby. The "XXX in ..." categories can then be moved to their more normal position as subcategories of Category:District of Selby, as the general view appears to be that having such categories at the parish level is overcategorisation (unless, of course, the categories at the district level become so large as to be unwieldy). The breaking down to parish level also caused some of the links to the categories at county level to be lost, and that can be repaired at the same time. Skinsmoke (talk) 10:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, we try to anticipate future disambiguation slots as each move of a parent category involves often more subcat moves and problems. (not to mention the mix-up and subsequent untangling)

I think that for places, the old logic of splitting in deeper categories if it becomes too crowded, is a counter-productive logic. We are better of with a logic that is based on the fact, that within a few years, the category will contain ten times more images, so we better get it right from the beginning.

But I have indeed my doubts about the split of the Selby town from the Selby parish. Separate categories make only sense when there are really distinct towns/quarters/villages with a clear own identity. The sooner they are created, the easier new images will "fall" in it. For many areas, we would have been far more productive in bot-creating all hamlets/villages upfront. So it is quite possible indeed that Selby, Yorkshire is a more logical organisation; it is up to you as the original author doesn't seem to be active any more since a couple of months. --Foroa (talk) 11:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I'll have a go later today. Thanks to Geograph's 3.4 million images (which have swamped British categories, causing all sorts of problems, but providing thousands of really good images, we already appear to be at a situation of having ten times more images for British categories (if the German Geograph project ever takes off—it's only at 35,000 images so far—you'll get the same problems and oportunities over in Europe too). There are some doubts about the ability of Geograph to expand significantly (though I suspect it will continue to do so—we'll just have to wait and see). In any case, it will probably take us 20 years to get the images already imported into meaningful categories, not to mention getting them out of the incorrect categories where they have already been placed, often by bots (It's quite common to find images of Wales turning up in Scottish, or even Australian or American categories).

For the United Kingdom, categories for all villages, towns and hamlets were indeed created by bot up front. It isn't always straight forward, as images of the same feature frequently finish up in categories for different adjoining settlements (very often, they get placed in the category for a nearby town or larger village), but at least it's a starting point, and slowly they get repatriated. The problem is that settlements have no defined boundaries, so it's often better to use civil parishes (in Europe that would be commune/gemeinde), where the boundaries are clearly defined on some maps, and I suppose the same argument would apply to, say, ortsteile in Germany, former municipalities in Belgium etc. If the bot-generated categories had not been available before the Geograph onslaught hit British categories, I shudder to think what would have happened! Skinsmoke (talk) 12:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

You are probably right, Geograph was a good start and test case, but I did spend many days moving things because there was no proper disambiguation approach to start with (why I get nervous when it gets removed). That explains indeed the many things from small quarters such as in Leeds that we founnd back in Canada. Campaigns like Category:Images from Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 are quite stressing as there are many novices loading hundreds of thousands of images in a couple of weeks. And anyway, it is sufficient to have a photo scavenger hunt organised in one town to increase the media volume with one or two orders of magnitude.

I think that you would be surprised how people are keen on their hamlets/quarters and have them clearly distinguished from the "big" entity, even when it is not always clear on official maps, you can bet that they will know the difference. Leeds contains "only" 130 places for now, but I bet that there are at least 3 times more. --Foroa (talk) 14:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Oh, believe me, nothing would really surprise me on local identity. My own settlement, Bredbury, in Greater Manchester, ceased to be a separate civil parish in the 1860s. It includes an area, Woodley, that has never had a separate administrative existence, and yet the people of the two settlements maintain distinct identities, even though nobody can agree where the boundary is. To the extent that one street has Woodley United Reformed Church, Bredbury Vicarage, Woodley Electrical Supplies, Bredbury House and Bredbury Police Station all intermingled and within a few hundred metres of each other. I was thinking more, though, of some of the rural categories that were bot created, where the settlement consists of two farms and a phonebox, and which only appear on the most detailed map (if then), where even the handful of residents are surprised to find they are within a distinct community. Such examples aren't really a problem, providing they are also linked into the larger village/civil parish, so that users searching for images at least get a nudge to look there. At the moment, in the United Kingdom it's usually easier and more reliable to search for images on Geograph using their gridsquare based search function, then try to upload the image and find it is already on Commons, than it is to search for it in the Commons category system. I suspect this will be the case for many years to come, and am not sure there is a "fix" for that problem, unless we were to develop a search facility using geographic coordinates in some way. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:27, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Deleting Category

Ik heb de category Houses in Papendrecht (voorlopig) even verwijderd omdat hij toch leeg is. Mocht hij weer nodig zijn is hij zo aangemaakt, ben druk bezig met aanvullingen dus laat me even zou ik zeggen...--Bezeh.nl (talk) 14:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Ik probeer het hier wat op te kuisen en netjes te houden, dus blank aub geen cats, zoals gevraagd in de edit summary. Blanking is nogal dikwijls een indicatie van beginners en vandalen. --Foroa (talk) 14:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Bedankt voor de eer :-)!! Zou u hem dan netjes willen opruimen. --Bezeh.nl (talk) 15:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

category RI-52-0000077

Why did you remove the category RI-52-0000077? This is the official number of the “Bien de Interés cultural” in Spain. It has been a subcategory of the “Category:Bien de Interés Cultural”. Have a look there. If anybody finds this number - for example here (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Bienes_de_inter%C3%A9s_cultural_de_la_provincia_de_Santa_Cruz_de_Tenerife )or in an other table - he gets the pictures.--Koppchen (talk) 09:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

As far as I know, the RI nr appears in the concerned category, being Category:Lago Martiánez in this case. There are only 53 RI-xx-yyy categories which are placeholders for proper categorisation and till a proper category with a "human" name is created and categorised in one of the 8000 categories in Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain by ID. --Foroa (talk) 09:58, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Such a RI_xxx-yyy is useless for normal Commons users, they only know names and would never find those RI-xxx-yyy things. I am under the impression that you are the only one creating such categories, so if you don't believe me, it might be better to discuss this with the concerned people. --Foroa (talk) 10:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Check

Would you like to check these images. According to resolution I think are not from the uploader. Dank --R ašo 11:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Another gallery $

Sorry, but I try to concentrate on categories and never get involved in license and right issues. Try maybe Commons:Village pump/Copyright. --Foroa (talk) 13:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Tulipier de Virginie

Cher Foroa,

Je vois que tu continues à faire ton magnifique travail de catégorisation auquel j'accorde beaucoup d'intérêt.

C'est donc en toute amitié que je te signale que l'image suivante n'est pas un peuplier mais bien un tulipier de Virginie.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Liriodendron_tulipifera_JPG5a.jpg

Cordiales salutations,

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 09:23, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Cher Jean-Pol,

Merci pour ton message. J'essaie de faire descendre le niveau de Special:WantedCategories, et j’avoue, des fois je vais un peu trop vite. Des fois, je suis aussi gêné de devoir créer des catégories avec la grande brosse, mais de l'autre coté, c'est mieux qu'elles sortent de l’obscurité et en ajoutant des images, je tire un peu les autres dans le bain, comme toi maintenant ;). Cordialement. --Foroa (talk) 09:33, 15 May 2013 (UTC)