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

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)

Persian language

Hello. About those recent RVs., "Fârsi" is the local name of the language and is not an English word. So, for example, saying "I speak Farsi" is like saying "I speak Deutsch!" (instead of German), which is ridiculous. Also please read this. --Z 21:59, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello, I reverted you attempt to rename all Farsi related categories into Category:Persian language/en:Persian language for several reasons.

First, one does not change unilaterally and substantially category names and structures that are usually created for very good reasons, without having a discussion on it.

More importantly, before merging Farsi into Persian language, you have to think how you will name and structure:

• the various version of Persian through history: Old Persian, Middle Persian, Early New Persian, Classic Persian, Contemporary Persian, ...
• the various varieties of Persian: Western Persian (Persian, Iranian Persian, or Farsi), Eastern Persian (Dari Persian, Afghan Persian, or Dari), Tajiki (Tajik Persian) and the regional dialects: Hazaragi, Aimaq, Bukharic, Dzhidi, Dehwari, Darwazi, Pahlavani.
• the various related languages: Luri, Tat, Lari

As you can see, Persian language has to accomodate a series of languages and related structures, so one cannot merge all categories relating to contemporary Western Persian language (called Farsi here) into that global category. Commons is not a newspaper that limits itself to the current preferred name; we are a server for encyclopaedias that are not vulgarising all items under one single name.

The ISO language code for contempory Western Persian is fa from Farsi, and yes, if you look into the interwiki links at the left of most pages, you will see Deutsch as this is not the same as German language. --Foroa (talk) 07:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

PLEASE. Revert those revisions. You are completely wrong about this. There is no Wikipedia in this language! --Z 14:00, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I see no reason why my logic would be wrong. --Foroa (talk) 14:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

HNY

--Nevit Dilmen (talk) 13:40, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Roman province of Dacia (106 - 271 AD).svg

Hi! What is the right way to "merge back" two older versions of this map: File:Roman province of Dacia (106 - 271 AD).svg. The versions are:

• Roman Dacia 1.1.svg

  Older version, October 2010

• 692px-Roman Dacia 1.1.svg.png

  Older version, September 2008

They "branched" or got duplicated at some point with no obvious derivative work. I guess they should be deleted but I want to make sure that all articles which use them, will be redirected to point to the latest version. Thanks! --Codrin.B (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

This is touchy. The maps are not identical at all since as a very minimum, they use a different color scheme, other differences might be subtle but important. Moreover, it is not clear which map is created by whom. As you added the duplicate tag, the duplicate could be replaced by the original (or older) one. If an administrator will remove the so called duplicate, which I doubt, he will send it to the commons delinker for global replacement across all using wikis. --Foroa (talk) 12:09, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually it is pretty simple. All maps have been created by the User:Andrei nacu on Wikipedia EN, without being aware of the ability to upload over previous versions, thus branching. Once the maps got moved to Commons, he continued solely on the File:Roman province of Dacia (106 - 271 AD).svg version. As for the other versions, they have been moved by two other users from WP en without any changes and without knowing of duplications. I checked with User_talk:Antemister and he simply moved the map. The other map was moved by User:Jaime85 who is no longer active and also didn't change the map. The difference in color was introduced on January 14, 2011 by User:Andrei nacu as he resumed work on the map. To summarize, the two maps in question are older and not really changed, but duplicates of older versions. I think they are redundant.--Codrin.B (talk) 13:21, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Categories (Thuringia)

Hello - please stop this im working in the Category Tree systematical (see Baden-Würtemberg) --Metilsteiner (talk) 20:03, 27 December 2011 (UTC) Please visit the exambals and revert all actions and the deleation of templates

Category:Architectural elements in Landkreis Karlsruhe

Category:Architecture of Landkreis Karlsruhe

--Metilsteiner (talk) 20:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I had to change already hundreds of your categories which are not legitimate meta cats. I don't try to correct them any more, I just delete them. --Foroa (talk) 21:45, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thanks a lot for creating a Category:Lakhota_Museum_Jamnagar, am processing few more pictures to upload. Categorizing ll help all images keep organized. Thanks. Rangilo Gujarati (talk) 11:54, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

You are welcome. --Foroa (talk) 14:07, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Old versions of files

Good afternoon, could you please purge the old versions of several files? The reasons are: wrong orientation, wrong orientation, new image has better quality, new image has better quality, new image has better quality, retouched, retouched, wrong orientation, wrong orientation. Thank you very much.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 10:43, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I fail to see what is wrong. --Foroa (talk) 12:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Old versions of those files (visible in a table down the page) are much worse in quality, so I think it's better to delete those old versions.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

That's wikipedia; nothing can be deleted, only hidden. Why should we bother to do such an effort ? --Foroa (talk) 14:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

To decrease the mess. OK, I see you simply don't have time for this, so I'll ask someone else. Don't mind, please .--PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Liste der Baudenkmale in Bassum

Hello!

What was your intention with this category? What should it mean? --High Contrast (talk) 23:36, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

No clear idea. That happens all the time: in Special:WantedCategories, I try to empty senseles categories, move others to correct names, and others (like this one with 63 items) to insert in a sensible place. --Foroa (talk) 06:57, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I have moved it due to the incorrect title. --High Contrast (talk) 09:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Great and thanks. --Foroa (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedia_protected_templates

<removed ugly notice template> Oops, didn't see that it was you. It's not an really an issue, just a little imported template mess. Rocket000 (talk) 06:09, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit warring

Foroa kindly cease edit warring at Category:University of Pennsylvania alumni. From previous discussions you know very well this is contentious and there is no policy to support "Commons naming standard" - X of Y is just your preferring naming pattern. You also know very well to discuss contentious changes, I feel you are abusing your editing privileges when you start acting unilaterally and edit warring over the category names. If you really would like to change the name, start a discussion. Benchill (talk) 21:19, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

The two forms where existing with contents. I just merged into the correct form as used worldwide in Commons. --Foroa (talk) 06:03, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Move cat

Hi Foroa,

I removed some lines from cdl/cmd because the mediawiki software wasn't able to process all templates correctly. Please keep that in mind, when adding requests, or people like me will delete categories that are said to be empty! a×p_de^Hello! 14:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

As you like. I keep Siebot fed in an non stop way since yesterday morning. It processed already several thousands of category moves, even overnight. The template process limitation is only for the display. Glad that you take it over from me; it has been a hard rush. You need only to add the categories for century 0 to 16 (except 10 and 15 that are done). Enjoy. --Foroa (talk) 14:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The display is major issue!

I deleted several cats until you told me, that the display may be wrong!

But you knew about that and added thousands of lines, at the risk of people passing by and removing "obviuously" empty cats ...

Btw. I don't take anything over. All I wanted is to move ONE small cat, but this request hasn't been fulfilled for hours!! a×p_de^Hello! 14:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

10th-century of 10th century?

Looking though my watch list, I see some bots doing what it seem as contradicting work. If you look at the history of Category:Romania in the 10th century, User:SieBot and User:JarektBot go back and forth with the 10th-century vs 10th century formats. What's the right name? SieBot seems to be winning here. Even more bots fighting here. A war? ;-)--Codrin.B (talk) 19:47, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I noticed that too. RussBot is involved in the war to although he's helping both sides (by fixing redirects). I looked at your contribs to see what format you were using and it appears you're at war with yourself. What is going on? :D Rocket000 (talk) 04:02, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Are you talking about me? What did I do? :-D--Codrin.B (talk) 17:12, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

No, I meant Foroa. Indent was misleading. Rocket000 (talk) 23:54, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

As a noun it should be "10th century", as an adjective "10th-century". "Romania in the 10th century" uses it as a noun. - Jmabel ! talk 04:49, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, you're right. I didn't pay attention to how it was being used in the renames I saw. Rocket000 (talk) 20:22, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

It was moved by SieBot to an existing redirected category that was bounced back by RussBot. Amazing how few reactions the rename of 12000+ categories generates, as if it happened on another planet. --Foroa (talk) 22:54, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

The {{Move cat}} now at User:CommonsDelinker/commands/temp

all the cat moves have been done, however due to the expensive parser calls in the template the page was basically crapping itself. I have moved out all the completed requests (and now at User:CommonsDelinker/commands/temp). We can still see the functions, just need to be aware that the this page will still crap the parser, so that only the first few hundred or so (at any time) will show the requisite moved/to go count the rest will say 0/0 at where it timed out. If necessary, we can cut it down to smaller bite sizes.  — billinghurst sDrewth 16:20, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for creating Category:Caricatures of politicians of the United States

Hi there, Foroa, I hope you're doing well! Just a friendly heads up: I noticed that back in June 2010 you had created the category Category:Caricatures of politicians of the United States. Letting you know that I've created Category:Caricatures of Rick Santorum as a sub-category off of your original parent category. So thanks so much for your great idea! Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 18:28, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, in process of adding a bunch more subcategories. Thanks again, -- Cirt (talk) 18:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Caricatures of politicians of the United States — Check out the category page again - I've cleaned up all the pages so the categorization leads to sub-categories for everything I could find. :) -- Cirt (talk) 00:57, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I did not create the parent category, only structure to allow for "organic growth". Amazing how there is more than one new category per minute, heading for two million Commons categories, and still working. You did a nice clean-up, although I don't like the waste of time and energy to make separate female categories; categorisation levels should allow for a data reduction of a factor of 10 to 200, not two and a half (and what about the children ?). --Foroa (talk) 07:07, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

I didn't create the male/female subcategories. But thanks very much for your kind words about my efforts on categorization improvement of Commons, most appreciated! :) -- Cirt (talk) 15:27, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Centuries and millenia

Hello!

Congratulations for the work on century categories! As you may have seen I have tried to participate in the clean-up. However I'd like to ask you not to postpone the renaming of the "per millenium" categories left on the CommonsDelinker talk page. I have carefully selected these categories, and I am waiting for them to be renamed before finishing the renaming and sorting work needed for consistency in the {{Architecture by millennium}} and {{Architecture by century}} hierarchies.

I have also corrected a number of navigation templates with links to renamed century categories, such as ships or sculptures in Italy. Can you think of a way to find all such templates with links in bad format? Place Clichy 14:36, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, much appreciated. I moved the milleniums although I would have preferred the complete clean-up of the "big nth-century" move first (around 8000 categories, hundreds of templates and a few thousands of references). I placed a request on COM:BR#Navigation_templates, but it encountered not a great enthusiasm (yet). Adding your questions to it might revive it. --Foroa (talk) 17:09, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, a look-up at all categories named "19th century..." and so on (I checked from the 1st to the 46th century, AC & BC), it seems that all grammatically incorrectly named categories have now been renamed. However, there are apparently about 1255 "by century" templates, many of them in need of link updating such as this one. Bot help would be a great idea! Are you able to build a flat list of all category names before the renaming? We may this way be able to look for all pages (probably mostly in the Category and Template namespaces) with links to any deleted page. I tried to create a {{Subject by century}} template, but then again placing it on top of all relevant categories might need a bit work. Place Clichy 11:35, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Great job. There are probably only around 260 by century templates. What list do you mean ? Many non-defined categories (or say their contents) have been moved prior to changing the templates, such as in Special:Categories/19th+century. The latter tool does not show empty nor redirected categories. You might start to change a few templates in each country; chances are that a local cat specialists starts to expand. --Foroa (talk) 13:27, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

And with great help of Special:Contributions/NeverDoING. --Foroa (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

On the organization of highlighted (FP/QI/VI) media in Commons main category structure

Hi Foroa, You are one of Commons categorization experts. I therefore wanted to inform you, that I have started a discussion regarding some thoughts about getting a better integration and display of FP/QI/VIs in the main category structure at Commons:Village pump#Highlighted content in main category structure. Feel free to join the discussion if you feel like. Also feel free to invite others, if you think they have some interesting views on this. --Slaunger (talk) 22:35, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

SVG Flag map categories

Can you please explain why you are undoing all the work I've just spent the last few days doing. The naming style of the categories matches all those of USA, Asia, Eurasia etc. I can't see why you are attempting to complicate it all with redirects. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 17:31, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I changed it to make it compliant with the Commons standard naming and by country organisation, and to harmonise it with the related parent categories as in Category:Maps incorporating flags by country. --Foroa (talk) 17:42, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Fuck that, it was already organise perfectly thank you. You come along, change it all and don't say a fucking word to me, the person who had spent days setting it all out. Now that is fucking ignorant you twat! --Fred the Oyster (talk)

Blocked Fred for 24 hours. You'll have to undo some recent contribs of his. Rd232 (talk) 18:03, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

No real need, but thank you anyway. I will not drop death because of a couple of f** words. --Foroa (talk) 18:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Fred: Your valuable work is not wasted, only categories renamed and a structure added to fit the Commons naming. --Foroa (talk) 18:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I meant undoing his reversal of some of your changes. Rd232 (talk) 22:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Welsh churches

Hello - any particular reason why you deleted Category:Saint Cadoc churches in Wales in favour of Category:Cadoc churches in Wales when all the other sub-categories of Category:Churches in Wales by patron saint do use the "Saint X churches" format? Bencherlite (talk) 20:11, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

The main Category is Category:Cadoc an on enwiki en:Cadoc--NeverDoING (talk) 05:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)}}

Well, I had my doubts why I delayed somewhat the move requests from [User:NeverDoING|NeverDoING]] and executed it to see if there was some reaction. On the one hand, categories should correspond with the name of the parent cat. On the other hand, all churches dedicated to a saint have the saint in their name. I would prefer other opinions, maybe a discussion on VP ? --Foroa (talk) 08:10, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

And as all the other subcategories of Category:Saints of Wales are in the form "Saint X", it's the Cadoc one that's out of line (and that was only created a couple of days ago, by - guess who? - NeverDoING!). Why should the enwiki naming convention for articles determine commons category names? There's no consistency there either e.g. Category:Saint Decuman and en:Decuman, so let's just go with the well-established "Saint X churches in Foo", please. And why were categories emptied and deleted without following the approach at Commons:Rename a category? It wasn't a trivial fix, it wasn't an unambiguous fix (which in any event gives seven days grace for someone to notice that {{category redirect}} has been put on the categories) and so a {{move}} request should have been posted for discussion. Or what about Commons:Categories for discussion? I am reversing this out of process move. Bencherlite (talk) 11:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Template:Quality image

I reverted your edit here as it was causing images to sort badly - any quality images sorted as QI in all their categories unless they had sortkeys. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:16, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem, this was a test (See Commons:Village_pump#Highlighted_content_in_main_category_structure) to insert a blank + QI as sortkey in an attempt to push QI/FP/VI images in front of the image lists in a category display. I was under the impression that it did not work. --Foroa (talk) 16:31, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Deleting categories

for "incorr. name". Good evening! В Европе, конечно, гораздо за 3000 километров виднее, как называется по-английски в официальных документах Городского совета мой родной город Харьков. Где русский язык является официальным, кстати. А называется он Kharkov. Но дело не в этом. Зачем вандализировать ссылки со страниц Википедии, удаляя первоначальные категории? Они вам мешают? Ссылки с соответствующих страниц Википедий на Коммонз при удалении Вами базовых категорий становятся красными и ведут в никуда. For example: [1]. С уважением, --Vizu (talk) 09:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Kharkiv is the agreed root name, if you like it or not, and subcategories must use the same name. There are thousands of cities where we have 2 or even 5 languages, so in Commons we have to stick to one. So all categories using Kharkov will be moved, including all categories that don't follow basic Commons name conventions, such as Category:Kharkov child. Don't complain about broken links if you don't even try to follow the Commons naming rules. Anyway, you will find always in the deletion summary the clickable category where it has been moved to. --Foroa (talk) 10:05, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

The specific categories are better than general ones. This is why your behaviour is not constructive. Removing the specific categories you make the category tree much worse, and it may even look like vandalising. Please avoid this misconstructive practice.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 09:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

[This] is a fine sample of bad practice. I beg you not do not destroy the category tree removing the specific thematic categories.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 09:30, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

You know very well that categories should be in English and certainly not be in Cyrillic characters. If I want to avoid that people waste their time with things like Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/01/Category:Сретенская церковь в Переславле, I better merge and delete them. --Foroa (talk) 09:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

If you don't like the names in non-Empire language, you may rename them. Yet there is no rule at Commons to name the categories in only one language. You may find plenty of Italian and German categories.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 11:46, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

You know very well the rules and I wont waste my time to discuss this again. Wait and see. --Foroa (talk) 11:54, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

So you cannot show the rule about The Only Language. Here are the samples: Category:Les Enfants de Don Quichotte, Category:Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, Category:Osservatorio geofisico di Lipari, Category:Wielkie dni małej floty, Category:Kishiwada Danjiri Matsuri. Why are you only against Russian names?--PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:04, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

See User_talk:Foroa/archive_2009 and read the commons rules. The further the language is from English the quicker we change the names. Not to mention other character sets. --Foroa (talk) 12:21, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

What Commons rules reject all the languages other than the British Empire language? Thanks.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 13:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

 Info A small discussion at Administrators noticeboard shows it's not convenient to delete the category with its mother categories and other additional info, moving the grouped images into some general category. It would be better to alert before deletion, and maybe the moving bot can be changed to make such an alert. If only I knew how to speak with the bot author, I would tell him this idea.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Какого спрашивается Вы лезете в чужой огород и удаляете категории и имена? Нам харьковчанам лучше известно как правильно называть наш город!!! / Why the hell you intervene into "foreign turf" and remove categories and names? We citizens of Kharkov better know what is the correct name for our city! Корольков Дмитрий Юрьевич (talk) 09:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Maybe discuss it first at the en:wikipedia if you would use Kharkov or Kharkiv. Once you agree there and between the Kharkov/Kharkiv Russsian/Ukraine people, we can implement it as you agree upon. --Foroa (talk) 09:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:John B. Snook

The architect John B. Snook was known professionally by that name, and is referred to in every text I've every seen by that name. I have never seen him referred to as John Butler Snook. Please, stop changing the catageory, what you're doing is disruptive, and being an admin does not give you the right to do that. Leave it as I created it, please, and if you have objection, discuss them. Please do not revert again, especially as I am in the middle of working on this subject in conjuction with the article on en.Wiki. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:39, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

So, you went and changed everything back without discussion. That's real bush-league behavior. I expect more of admins. Beyond My Ken (talk) 12:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

So did you when reverting the original that was there since months. On Commons, we avoid middle initials: this is mainly an Anglo-Saxon habit, mostly in titles, which is little followed in the non English world. Full middle names (or disambiguation) allows for better searches and avoids mixups with for example "John S. Snook" and John B. Snook. And yes, last 2 months, I moved more than 5000 categories, without discussion. --Foroa (talk) 12:56, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Practice on Commons should reflect reality, and not usurp reality. I created that cetagory, my friend. Not that that gives me ownership, but I do think it means you should accord me the courtesy of talking to me when I object to something you're doing to it, and not simply overwriting me without discussion.

BTW, your "Anglo-Saxon" habit objection is meaningless, given that Snook was born in England and moved to the US. It's how he presented himself, it's how he was known to his contemporaries, and it's how he's known to history Only on Commons will he be known as "John Butler Snooks", a name he didn't use. That's just wrong. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:23, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Wait, are you saying that in the last two months you moved more than 5000 categories without discussion, and if someone comes back and reverts your move you reinstate the move without discussing it first? Even knowing full well that your undiscussed moves are only routine and uncontroversial if no one objects to them?'

If thata's the case, then you need to re-think what you're doing. Moving a bunch of categories without discussion is fine, if, in your judgement, they need to be moved to follow Commons policy, but if someone objects to the move you must discuss it!!'. I'm not going to make a big stink about it this time, but if you do that again and I'm aware of it, I will take it to the noticeboard.

I have no doubt that the maintenance work you're doing is, overall, helpful, but that does not release you from the obligation to discuss controversial edits, whether you're an admin or not. Please consider yourself on notice. Beyond My Ken (talk) 13:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

• Look at my talk page: are there so many contested moves ?
• I moved Category:John B. Snook in June last year and it stayed there till you moved it a couple of hours ago. The fact that I moved it back is a clear indication that I don't agree, so if you want to move it again, you have to issue a {{Move}} request or COM:CFD.
• I did a quick check on telephone lists in the US and UK and I found over 200 living "John Snook" persons, 7 of them being "John B. Snook". I believe that on en:wiki, they reference 4 different John Snooks. So finally, the best name should be Category:John B. Snook (architect) although maybe not sufficient if his children became architects too. --Foroa (talk) 18:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

{{Bad name}}

Thanks for your notes about this. The documentation for this template says it should only be used for files. Is the doc out of date? --Auntof6 (talk) 19:20, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it just works best for moved categories , at least I don't know which one would be better. A one click delete with auto summary containing links; far better than "empty". --Foroa (talk) 19:26, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Category:Portraits with neutral background

Dear Foroa, I wonder if you noticed that the Category:Portrait paintings with neutral background contains also portrait drawings with neutral background.--Thorvaldsson (talk) 08:09, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I fail to see the problem. --Foroa (talk) 06:28, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Dear Foroa, I would appreciate it if you could explain to me the reason, for which Category:Portraits with neutral background has been moved to Category:Portrait paintings with neutral background.--Thorvaldsson (talk) 13:31, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I just executed the request from User:NeverDoING and agreed since most of the items where concerning paintings and better matches its parent Category:Portrait paintings by background. I guess that Category:Portraits with neutral background will be recreated to contain pictures, drawings, ... --Foroa (talk) 07:44, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Printmakers from the Southern Netherlands (before 1830)

Hello, I noticed you have been changing categories for 17th and 18th century artists to reflect a Belgium category. Belgium only existed after 1830 and there are categories set up for these artists to reflect the separation of the Netherlands into North and South, such as Painters from the Southern Netherlands (before 1830). Please do not remove any of those categories, and please refrain from adding them all into a big Belgian container category, as most of these artists are known in the rest of the world as being Flemish. Thanks, Jane023 (talk) 19:17, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

The reference framework for all categories is the actual political situation. In the first place, painters and artist have to be classified in the city/cities where they lived and consequently, in the the country where the city currently belongs to. That is the top level categories and has to serve the audience (the large majority) that don't know all the details of the history. We will not classify Dutch painters in German, Roman, Frenh, UK categories because it made part of those countries at some moment in time. I fully appreciate your work to get them in deeper, historically more accurate categories, but I cannot accept that one states that a painter from Bruges is not a painter from Belgium. If you continue to remove the top level categories, I just will bot move them all back. --Foroa (talk) 06:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Besides that, it is funny that you state "as most of these artists are known in the rest of the world as being Flemish" but that cannot be found in the category names. --Foroa (talk) 06:54, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry, I do not understand your answer. I am just the messenger! Please contact User talk:Vincent Steenberg about these categories and the vision behind them. Meanwhile, thanks for deleting Category:Draughtsmen from the Northern Netherlands (before 1815)!! Can you also delete these (they should all be emptied into the corresponding "(before 1830)" by now):

• Category:Painters from the Northern Netherlands (before 1815)
• Category:Publishers from the Northern Netherlands (before 1815)
• Category:Stained-glass artists from the Northern Netherlands (before 1815)

Thanks, Jane023 (talk) 12:19, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! I added the (before 1830) back to Category:Jan Pauwel Gillemans (I), as I understand from Vincent Steenberg you approve double categories on these painters. Jane023 (talk) 14:18, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Great; this is not double categorisation: there is a main cat "painters from Belgium" and then all sorts of side specialisation cats which tend to be too difficult for most people, such as categories by era, by style, by technique, by material ... --Foroa (talk) 15:44, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Tasya van Ree pic

Hi, again. I came across this image, while editing, and wanted to make a cropped version showing only Tasya van Ree for her article, but noticed that copyright problem notice on that image's page, and didn't want to upload another version if the image would soon be deleted. The thing is, the deadline indicated by that notice came and went almost two months ago. Do you know what's going to happen to the image? Is it going to be deleted? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 03:31, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, but I have no idea. I shy away from license issues. --Foroa (talk) 06:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you know anyone who does have knowledge in that area that you can recommend? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 12:50, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Czech writers category

Now, I can see you redirected category I have created. But I did that upon consensus. See this discussion: Category talk:Writers from the Czech Republic.--Juandev (talk) 07:06, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

1. A consensus between two persons is hardly a consensus. Moreover, the actual category contains 400+ items, so I would say that the consensus (and Commons standard) is Category:Writers from the Czech Republic

2. Commons syntax is "Writers from ...", not in the other order.

3. It is not realistic to expect that an average person can see a difference between "Czech writers" and "Writers from the Czech Republic"; just a recipe for continuous mixup.

4. Current reference framework is the actual political situation. Older historical areas might be in subcategories in that. Some of them will not be categorised as writers from Austria because the country was ruled by Austria at their time. --Foroa (talk) 14:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure, writers by country and writers by nationality (= by language, for many nations) are two very different criteria. Many Czechs live and lived outside Czech lands and many notable writers in Bohemia or Moravia (like Franz Kafka) were German-writing or, in mediaeval times, Latin-writing. Czech lands were multinational area during ages and affected by several waves of emigration. I'm not sure whether we need two categories and are able to maintain them, it is not simple to distinguish who is enough "Czech" and who is from where, but your redirect is not the best solution. --ŠJů (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Maybe not the best solution, but still better, as you state, than two categories that create confusion and mixups and next to impossible to maintain. Feel free to propose improvements. --Foroa (talk) 06:43, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Republika Srpska

Please, would you be able to consider whether categories of Republika Srpska should be unified to the form with article (Municipalities in the Republika Srpska) or without article (Churches in Republika Srpska‎)? --ŠJů (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I was a bit surprised but after looking into En:Republika Srpska and En:Constitution of Republika Srpska, along with other categories in Category:Republika Srpska, I would be inclined to drop the "the". A bit confusing as indeed, the "the" would have been required when the name would be "the Republic of Srbin". As Srpska/Srbin shows, each language has its own fuzzy rules and idiosyncrasies. ("the republic of" is a collection and needs the, En:Republika Srpska, Flanders, various towns that are called Republic/Replubica ... don't). --Foroa (talk) 06:38, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

"the Republic of Srbin" would be a nonsense (Srbin is a singular of the Serbian word for a member of the Serbian people), do you mean "the Republic of Serbs" or "the Republic of Serbia"? The exact translation of Republika Srpska is "(the) Serbian Republic" but the non-translated form is used to avoid confusion with Republic of Serbia which is a different country. Nevertheless, you are right that en:wikipedia can be relevant in this case. --ŠJů (talk) 00:02, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Churches in Belgium

Hello Foroa, please excuse my bad and ill-understand English (translated by google). I saw your recent changes and was a bit surprised. The categorie was full and I wanted to share it to churches to communes and provinces. The category "by location" I find it very problematic, since a church after hameau, village, municipality is categorized. Then there will soon be more categories than churches. Hystrix (talk) 01:01, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

See Category talk:Belgium and Category talk:Churches in Belgium. Belgium used to have close to 5000 villages, and it is not because they have been concentrated in 500 or so municipalities since 40 years that they no longer exist: each of them tend to retain a strong identity and most people don't know if they are a municipality or to what municipality they belong. Provinces are a subdivision that is slowly disappearing and little known by most people. We just want to have categories with the most simple (and flat) layout so that people don't need to know the complex Belgium organisation, why we systematically categorise by location. There are much more churches than villages, and none of the categories is "full". It is always easier to click to a following page than having to know details about province or municipality organisations. --Foroa (talk) 06:09, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Category "Europe History"

Hello. Could you explain me why you deleted my category redirect? Thanks, greetings. Angelus^(talk) 10:58, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

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. Europe History is typically a bad name that breaks all the naming rules and would not be used in no other language neither. --Foroa (talk) 11:11, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Old categories of towers

Hi. I noticed, you deleted many categoires like "Radio towers..." and "Television towers..." However, this is a typical case that all old categories should be changed to soft redirects ({{seecat}}), not deleted. Firstly, the new names are relatively complicated - that's why the simple and intuitive old names should remain as redirects to the new ones. Secondly, many articles and categories of wikipedias link to the old categores here. We have no tool for automatic fixing them and that's why all old categories which are not mistaken but only replaced should be redirected, not deleted. Thank You. --ŠJů (talk) 14:54, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

That is your opinion, not mine. 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 are clickable to their new destination category. Adding tripe redirects such as Category:Communication towers will not help very much neither.

It is much easier and efficient on the wikipedia sides to bot-check and update their outgoing commonscat than to provide and maintain millions of redirects; we are approaching 1.9 million categories and I moved around 8000 categories last 2 months.

The relation of the previous categories, such as radio towers and television towers is not necessarily one to one; some will land in communication towers and masts, some in communication towers. I think that radio and television tower categories will come back, or maybe as broadcasting towers.

The rename CFD has in my opinion been concluded and started to hastily. Because it was started manually, and would take a very long time, I have been hurrying to get the system in a consistent state. --Foroa (talk) 16:00, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Undiscussed Siebot move. Palestinian culture

Foroa. You moved categories via the Siebot bot without discussing the move first. See User talk:SieBot which points to User talk:Siebrand which points to the edit history of User:CommonsDelinker/commands. That edit history shows your initiation of the bot move. See this diff from there. It lists this:

{{Move cat|Palestinian culture|Culture of Palestine}}

See: Category talk:Palestinian culture for more info.

Also see: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard and the section titled something like "Undiscussed Siebot move initiated by Foroa. Category:Palestinian culture." --Timeshifter (talk) 20:52, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

I've commented at AN. Foroa, could you please give some input there? I note that CommonsDelinker's instructions actually include the warning Please do not request name changes that you know may be controversial... A CFD would have been more appropriate, I think. Rd232 (talk) 03:31, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

I just restored the situation as it was before Timeshifter initiated a move (and completed by Orrling) without any form of discussion. --Foroa (talk) 06:12, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Replied at AN. (But I note that your comment here is contradicted by your comment at AN, where you said the move of content was done by Orrling, after Timeshifter created an additional category.) Rd232 (talk) 12:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, completion above. --Foroa (talk) 15:16, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Sint-Katelijneplein

Dag Foroa, Ik kan je verzekeren dat de foto waaraan je net hebt gewerkt het Sint-Katelijneplein niet voorstelt, maar wel de Brandhoutkaai aan de rechterkant en de Baksteenkaai aan de linkerkant, met de Anspachfontein op de achtergrond, en dus niet thuishoort in de categorie Place Sainte-Catherine. Het plein bevindt zich achter dit beeld aan beide kanten van de kerk. Ik suggereer dat je dit even nakijkt op een plan van Brussel. Het zou nog beter zijn, moest de misleidende titel van het beeld gewijzigd kunnen zijn. Groeten, Michel wal (talk) 17:00, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Dank je wel Michel, nu zou File:Quai au Bois à Brûler et quai aux Briques, Bruxelles.jpg op zijn plaats moeten zitten. We hebben een achterstand van honderduizenden beelden, zo dat we er soms weleens compleet naast kunnen slaan. Alvast bedankt voor je goede bijdragen en werk. --Foroa (talk) 17:24, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Trim & Category:Trim, County Meath

Hallo - een vraagje hoe het beste bovenstaande twee categorieën samen te voegen. Voor zover ik kan zien is er maar een plaats die zo heet en de andere opties die genoemd staan op en:Trim lijken niet zo van toepassing op Commons. Desalniettemin is "Trim, County Meath" natuurlijk niet verkeerd. Mij maakt het niet uit. Groeten, Deadstar (talk) 15:00, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Misschien is er nu geen conflict maar met een 4-letter woord gaat het zeker nog komen. En vermits er toch een merge diende te gebeuren, beter in de veilige richting (en in line met en:wiki). --Foroa (talk) 15:18, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Bedankt! Groeten, -- Deadstar (msg) 16:06, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Blacksmith's tools

I weighed in at http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2012/02/Category:Blacksmithing_tools&diff=66988263&oldid=66753215

Good faith contributors routinely decide that some category has a stupid name, so they create a parallel category, depopulate the old category, while populating the new category. This would not be a problem if all these new names were well advised. However, they are not all well advised.

Unfortunately the original, better categories get deleted, simply because they are empty. It is unfortunate that we rely on categories so heavily, when they don't preserve a record of when elements were added or subtracted to them. Maybe in some future version of the WMF software.

Meanwhile, could you please restore Category:Blacksmithing tools? Geo Swan (talk) 23:26, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done I am facing this problem every day; one can only see what has been manually moved to a new category (downloads with that category and bot moves are not seen), so I have often to search in user contributions. In this case however, Category:Blacksmithing tools has been created well after the original Category:Blacksmith's tools while blacksmithing is a more difficult term. --Foroa (talk) 06:59, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Foroa, you are not a native English speaker, and that is why you make so many mistakes. Blacksmithing is not a more difficult term. Geo Swan is correct in his reasoning here in saying that "Blacksmithing tools" is the better category name. Geo Swan, you can add a {{move}} tag to the "Blacksmith's tools" category. If more people agree with you than disagree with you, then the category will be changed. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

No need to spread the discussion here or being condescending. I just concluded a merge from an empty newer category into an older. Just use standard procedures when you disagree. --Foroa (talk) 07:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't condescending. I stated a fact about English. Your calling it condescending shows one cause for some of your problems on the Commons. --Timeshifter (talk) 09:22, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Copyright question

Hello, I see you are admin here. Could please help me regarding the copyright status of this image? The source URL, as specified in the image, is a dead link now and the Flickr user, the author of the image, closed his account. So what to do with the image, is it a candidate for deletion? --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 07:56, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Asked the question in Commons:Help desk --SupernovaExplosion (talk) 08:10, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Great, I shy away of such discussions. --Foroa (talk) 08:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for creating Category:Freedom of speech

Thank you for creating Category:Freedom of speech. You may be interested in Commons:Village_pump#Category:Freedom_of_speech_-_Crosswiki_Sister_Link_project_coordination. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 06:43, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Deleting broken redirects on User pages

Hi Foroa, You deleted the protected redirects I left at User:Ry0ukai and User:Kai.nissen after user renames. I realize they were redirects to empty pages (because the user does not yet have a userpage), but I think they were serving some important purposes. For one, it allows users who need to find them to track them down. Secondly, it prevents new accounts being created with the old username. What do you think? Is there any reason other than "cleanliness" to always delete them? --99of9 (talk) 08:08, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I delete many broken redirects every day, so I cannot build up a list of "tolerated" broken redirects. A redirect to a non existing page makes no sense anyway, and as far as I can see, those previous account seems not registered. So, if you want to maintain that, you can create a (empty) user page. And it is not because a user page has been deleted that one can create a new account "over" it. It looks as if user:Kai.nissen never made contributions here. --Foroa (talk) 08:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Actually, it does make sense, just like a redlink in a signature makes sense. The user's old contributions are still signed with their old username, so will go there first. And it would be better if they were redirected straight through to the new userpage (even if it is still red... though one day it may not be). The redirect is exactly what helps you to know where this "unregistered" user has gone! For example, you can now find Kai.nissen's contributions here (and could find that if you followed the redirect I left you :-)). Regarding new account creation, as far as I know, there are two things that could stop it - a registered account, or a user/talk page. When we move accounts, the registered account is gone, so the only thing that can stop it is a user page.

However, all that being said... I accept that for your convenience deleting other redirects, it would be better for these not to confuse you. I will create a soft redirect instead, and will protect it. The protection is my message to others to think twice before deleting it. --99of9 (talk) 09:43, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

I did not know about the "releasing" of the account when there is no user/talk page. Personally, I would have created a blank user page, but your solution is neat too. --Foroa (talk) 11:06, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Amol

Hi Foroa, You have redirected Category:Amol to Category:Amol (city) that I think is incorrect. Let me explain by an example. In Persian "Tehran" is the name of a city, a county, and a province. When we say "Tehran", we mean "Tehran city". In order to refer to Tehran as a county or a province, we use "Tehran county" and "Tehran province" respectively. Likewise, Category:Amol needs no disambiguation because it solely refers to w:Amol as a city. Take a look at w:Tehran, w:Tehran County, and w:Tehran Province on the English Wikipedia. Thanks. AMERICOPHILE 10:00, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 Comment - Note that there are other topics with the same exact name, listed at w:AMOL, apparently previously listed at w:Amol (disambiguation). -- Cirt (talk) 10:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Some comments.

• We are Commons, not wikipedia.
• Categories are not articles; we have to be much more organised with naming as many bots participate in categorisation. We cannot take assumptions in the sense "When we say "Tehran"", we mean "Tehran city" (we make exceptions for capitals for historical reasons). We absolutely need to be more explicit.
• Categories are not articles; if you navigate in the wrong article, you take another. People tend to drop their images in the first category that sound right without really checking. We have 2 to 3 times more categories than on wikipedia.
• As stated by Cirt, there are many w:Amol (disambiguation), not to mention the Amol restaurants, hotels, products, companies, first names ... (google "Amol -Iran" returns 11 million results) . As Amol is a 4 character word, I can assure you that villages with the same name will pop-up; don't forget that all Greec, Arabic, Chinese, Indian, Russian ... names have to be transliterated in English.
• many cities, such as Utrecht, Wakefield , Groningen, Toledo, ... started with similar assumptions as yours: in the end they had to add disambiguitian terms because of the mess it created and that involved a lot of work. So the sooner you do that, the less you have mistakes, work and troubles. --Foroa (talk) 13:03, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, I just wanted to make sure that you know what you are doing. Thanks again. AMERICOPHILE 14:34, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Museum De Lakenhal

Hi Foroa, Before you do any major changes to this category, I would like to point out that this museum recently changed it's name from "Stedelijk Museum De Lakenhal" to simply "Museum De Lakenhal". So it would make more sense to change the title of the en.wikipedia than to rename this category here on commons. Regard, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 15:51, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

You tend to align the names to the en:wikipedia, so I checked the en:wikipedia and aligned it. For the moment I reverted it but we'll need to disambiguate that sooner or later because there are several Lakenhal(len) museums. --Foroa (talk) 18:37, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

ok, thanks for the quick intervention. In the meantime I changed the en.wiki article. I don't know of any other Lakenhal which calls itself a museum, but we'll see. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:22, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Backlighted vs Contre-Jour

Since you are not a native speaker of English and therefore apparently a neutral observer, could you consider that the term "Contre-jour" is completely unknown in the USA -- I have been a photographer for fifty+ years, have read most of the trade journals from time to time, and never seen it used. It does not appear in American dictionaries.

I note also that the instruction manuals for my several Nikon cameras all use "Back Light" and do not mention "Contre Jour". I suspect that the same is true for the other major manufacturers.

I don't want to get into an edit war with anyone, but I think that "Contre Jour" is a poor choice for the category. Regards,      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:33, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Sorry but those are technical terms used by people that are really deeply involved with photography. Backlighting is an overall technique covering a large range of use.

• En:Contre jour, for which there seems to be no translation (as often in specialist jargon such as Category:Bokeh that is probably not in your dictionary neither, I am not native french but use the term for 30+ years, I was surprised not to find an English term) means 'against daylight', uses one single light source and has a very stark contrast and creates mainly silhouettes.
• When the back/front light ratio decreases or the light is more coming from the side, then we often talk about low-key lighting (remember clair-obscure). There often, several lights are (discretely) used.
• When we want to accent for example hair, shoulders, ... then selective/directed backlight is used; it is sometimes called hair or shoulder light. This is a more subtle technique applied to parts of the pictures, and I don't think we have a category for it (I would not know what name to use neither).

So backlighting is a global term and indeed often used in popular science publications and grand public publications to group the three (or more) different ways of using back light(s). Maybe we should use some global back lighting cat, but I am afraid that this will be controversial as some people will not accept that low-key is always back light. So anyway, contre-jour equals not back light. --Foroa (talk) 19:23, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps you should take a look at the depth of my photographic experience at User:Jameslwoodward -- as I said above, I have been a photographer, professional and for the love of it, for more than fifty years. I have read and still occasionally do read various serious photographic journals and references. I have never before seen the term "contre-jour", even for the very specific use you mention above.

In this country any photograph taken toward the light source, whether natural or artificial is "backlit" or, less frequently, "backlighted". As I noted, that is also the term used by Nikon in its manuals, which appear to be mostly written by Japanese who speak English. It is also used exclusively in other standard references here. My five volumes of Ansel Adams Photo Series (The Camera, The Negative, The Print, Natural Light Photography, and Artificial Light Photography) are packed away, but I would be prepared to wager that Adams does not use "contre jour".

As you note, the term "backlight" is also used for a light behind the subject, usually in portrait photography, that is used to highlight the hair.

With all that said, I don't have the time to get into a serious debate over it. Just please be aware that "contre jour" will be meaningless to any American reader, even very sophisticated ones.     Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 23:36, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jameslwoodward, apologies for bumping into this conversation, but is this what you are talking about? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 11:25, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem -- everybody is welcome. No, what I am saying is that Contre-jour is a meaningless article title for American photographers. I would title the article "Backlighting (photography)" or something similar, and the same thing with Commons cats.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:06, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

We can put contre-jour photography under backlight(ing) photography--Pierpao.lo (listening) 12:43, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

hotcat

hello :) why (about this edit the categories: Category:Tyrrhenian Sea, Category:Coasts of the Mediterranean Sea in Italy and Category:Coasts of Sardinia are no right for the image? thank you--Pava (talk) 06:13, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Maybe that the Category:Coasts of Sardinia could apply, but the rest is overcategorisation; commons is not a tagging system. See COM:OVERCAT. --Foroa (talk) 06:26, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

sorry can you explain why you respond in your discussion page and not in mine? thank you--Pava (talk) 07:14, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

See the top of my talk page; this is followed by most people on Commons. Keeping discussions on one single place makes it easier to follow them, especially for other people. Moreover, one can refer to specific statements above the new texts, which is next to impossible when the discussion is on several places. --Foroa (talk) 07:20, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Ok, but i no receve notifications :( oh well is not that important. I would like to request your help, i have difficulty to explain and understand a user, on these actions: [please look here and this talk (talk for user) and my talk. This user consider my actions "vandalism" but i don't understand something or if I'm wrong or he teases me. He asked me to read this, however I can not find the part that believes his version right and my wrong. Can you help me please?--Pava (talk) 07:40, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

First, most people put automatically pages that they edit (including talk pages) in the tab "user preferences - watchlist" on their watchlist. So when looking in their watchlist, they see immediatly what has been changed in their region of interest.

COM:OVERCAT, referred to by User:FAEP, refers mainly to the fact that one should categorise as "deep" as possible, meaning adding "category:snow" makes no sense when an image is in "category:snow in Italy".

Concerning File:Ochre Porsche 997 GT3 3.8 in front of the Lamborghini São Paulo dealership.jpg, only the category "Buildings in São Paulo City" is debatable, so is the contents of castles, museums and art galleries too. It is a problem of the chicken and the egg. The picture shows the content of a building in Sao Paulo, and some day, somebody will create a category concerning that particular building and then this picture will "belong" to it. So, lets say that so far, that category is used to indicate that it is from Sao Paulo.

You did right with File:- ITALY La Maddalena (Sardegna) Fiat 500 sulla costa.JPG, but if La Maddalena would have been categorised as Coasts of Sardinia, then it would have been overcat. Problem is when images contain obviously too many overcats, the important ones are easily cleaned away with the others. I hope this helps. --Foroa (talk) 08:07, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

yes, thank you :)--Pava (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:AlbanyNY and Category:Albany, New York Collection

re your comment - did you not see the "on hold" message? Would you consider removing it and commenting in the RFC instead (and coming back to the DR later)? Or could you at least comment in the RFC and explain a bit more - where your question might also get an answer? Thanks. Rd232 (talk) 11:29, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed the RFC, but decided to read the several pages of text and respond on it later more extensively. I was shocked by yet another template generated category that was badly named and cannot be moved nor renamed by bots. --Foroa (talk) 11:41, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

OK. Please do comment later (and note especially my point that the approach does not seem to be disallowed by policy, so if we really don't want this, we should clarify it in writing somewhere). cheers, Rd232 (talk) 13:17, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Advice

You've probably thought about proper categorization more than anyone else. What do you think of the discussion at Category talk:Home Life Insurance Company Building? Am I missing something here? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:44, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Maison Jonathas

Cher Foroa,

Tu viens de changer la catégorie relative à la maison Jonathas d'Enghien en indiquant Jontahas. Or le site officiel du musée repris sous le lien suivant: http://www.visitwapi.be/offres-attractions-pivot/maison-jonathas-musee-de-la-tapisserie indique bien Jonathas. Peux-tu aller y jeter un coup d'oeil.

Merci d'avance pour ta bonne collaboration.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 14:06, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Merci Jean-Pol, j'avais mergé deux catégories dans une, trop vite apparemment. Merci de ta vigilance. --Foroa (talk) 14:24, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Images of Cuyahoga County, Ohio

Please, undelete this category. It may looks like it is useless but it is useful during moving images from enwiki (en:Category:Images of Cuyahoga County, Ohio) Bulwersator (talk) 11:40, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

There are hundreds or thousands of such categories. I do not plan to maintain two parallel category trees. --Foroa (talk) 16:58, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

QI categories

Perhaps you would be interested as well: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#User:Martin_H.. - A.Savin 13:28, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

CFD on cat:Pictures_and_images and similar

As someone who has recently edited Category:Pictures and images, please see the (non-) discussion (not) going on at Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/02#Category:Pictures and images (and the 9 nominations following that one), if you haven't already, and comment there if you wish. Thanks. - dcljr (talk) 01:10, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:SIUE

Hey Foroa,

I haven't spent nearly as much time on the commons as I have Wikipedia, but I see that you recently deleted a category that I created. Many people searching for media relating to Southern Illinois University Edwardsville will simply type in "SIUE". I know of nothing in any other language that SIUE is commonly used to represent, so this shouldn't be a problem. If this category is against policy, I understand why you deleted it, but I'd like an explanation as to what is wrong with it. I usually try to add those types of things in edit summaries. Illinois2011 (talk) 07:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I deleted it because it was a redundant parallel category that was uncategorised. I made Category:SIUE a redirect that can stay as long as there are not too many conflicts, which will not be for long when looking at this. Categories are not articles and redirects are much more of a problem (Try to create en:Category:SIUE and you will see) --Foroa (talk) 07:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Category:Ancient Roman bridges by country

The bridges in the cat feature two different ways of disambiguating, some by brackets (eg. Römerbrücke (Mainz)‎), others by comma (eg. Roman bridge, Trier‎). Do we need to implement a consistent naming standard? What is the correct system? Gun Powder Ma (talk) 14:56, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Long time ago, we tried to uniformise disambiguation with a comma. We failed miserably. But we try at least to maintain de same style in the same region. So, I would change "Roman bridge, Trier"‎ to "Roman bridge (Trier)‎". Sooner or later, I will pass by to harmonise the generic names "Roman bridge" as it makes no sense to have that in 14 languages and all the possible lower/uppercase combinations. --Foroa (talk) 14:12, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Bad name

Do we still need this? We have now "duplicate" and "rename". -- RE rillke questions? 13:57, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, very much used but get self-deleted all the time; so it works. As far as I know, the only speedy deletion template for categories that tells where the right/new category is.

Should refuse to work when category is not empty. --Foroa (talk) 14:17, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

“ This template should only be used for files. For categories see Commons:Categories for discussion. ”

Could you update the documentation, please? Thanks in advance. -- RE rillke questions? 14:24, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Did it. You are more experienced in this area. Could you check and correct, please. Thanks in advance. -- RE rillke questions? 13:38, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks alright, but when trying, it seems to use the text from {{Bad name/en}}. --Foroa (talk) 14:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Rye House

Please note:

1. "Rye House" is a common name, and exists in other counties, for example Yorkshire and Sussex;
2. "Rye House" refers to a part of Hoddesdon, and also to a historic place (w:Rye House, Hertfordshire).

I don't understand the present situation with the Rye House categories, but there has been some confusion introduced by your edits. Charles Matthews (talk) 12:24, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

As can be seen in en:Rye House, there are many places (end even real Rye Houses and farms that will pop up here sooner or later), so it needed disambiguation. As it is structured now, all subcategories of Rye House belong to Hertfortshire. Once it is moved, I will make it a disambiguation category. Members of a disambiguation category should not be categorised in the disambiguation category that must remain empty. (See Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories). --Foroa (talk) 12:44, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, I have now created Category:Rye House (district of Hoddesdon) and I think it fixes the immediate problems. Charles Matthews (talk) 14:08, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, didn't know there was a district too; that makes a neat bundled solution. That is a typical problem with the geograph images: they need much deeper categorisation, which is not easy to find, certainly not on the en:wikipedia. --Foroa (talk) 14:39, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Protected Basque category

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Category:Enclave_of_Trevi.C3.B1o relates to your protection. Maybe you can explain it (or document at the category, or remove the protection) - there's no obvious reason or clear explanation that I can see. Thanks. Rd232 (talk) 01:50, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

I tried to moderate in three long major nationalistic/language edit wars: Category talk:Basque Country including the much contested Category:Enclave of Treviño, Land of Valencia and South Tyrol/Trentino (Italian vs German). They all settled down, partly because of the protection, but from time to time, there is still some problem, such as recently in Category:Navarre. I tend to remove the protection when there is an edit request. Note that if a nationalist comes along, such as Patricia Rios, in very little time they can completely ruin the structure; they are very clever by adding bit by bit new parallel structures before suddenly switching to the new categories. Such things are difficult to repair. Spain, with its five official languages, created most problems, as you can equally see on the hundreds of renames that have bee done on the en:wikipedia. --Foroa (talk) 06:29, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks.↔↔↔↔↔ Category talk:Basque Country/Category scheme Basque Country (linked from Category talk:Enclave of Treviño) is a draft and on a talk page, which is a bit odd. Category talk:Basque Country is linked from there but I hadn't looked at it before :) and that clarifies the background. Maybe Category talk:Basque Country/Category scheme Basque Country could become a proper category scheme? eg Commons:Category scheme Italy is also a draft, but a bit more convincing. Rd232 (talk) 18:17, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

A bit small to make it an official scheme, but why not. Anyway, all those schemes are used to get a discussion and agreement going. Once the categories start growing again, they expand and change faster then one can maintain those things. It would be useful to have a tool that can make a snapshot of the most important categories of a certain topic. Those graph things are not really readable. --Foroa (talk) 18:46, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

"a snapshot of the most important categories of a certain topic" - that sounds interesting. How would you define "important"? Top level + the next 1, 2 or 3 levels down? A bot should be able to do that pretty easily. Rd232 (talk) 23:27, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I have to think of it, but I have already a basic idea, that satisfies another need, namely category coherence checking. Because for example, in France one categorize rivers at 3 different levels and in n regions and departments, so next to impossible to check on coherency without going through them all one by one. So I would need a structure that contains the indented cats (according to its level), followed by the categories in which is equally categorised.

• Category:Alemps → Rivers of Dordogne ↔ Rivers of France by name ↔ Dordogne Basin
  • Category:Alesani → Rivers of Haute-Corse ↔ Rivers of France by name↔ Tributaries of the Tyrrhenian Sea
• Category:Allondon → Rivers in the canton of Genève ↔ Rivers of Ain ↔ Rivers of France by name ↔ Rhône Basin

Obviously, it would be nice to define the category depth, have an option to have them displayed as tree or flat and sorted. Sorted parent categories would be nice too. --Foroa (talk) 18:58, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Well when you're ready, maybe it's worth posting at Commons:Bots/Work requests, in the hope that someone might pick it up. We could also try approaching some of the authors of related category tools and bots directly. Alternatively, there is mw:Extension:CategoryTree and its Special:CategoryTree and categorytree tag. I'm wondering whether that could be used or adapted. Rd232 (talk) 22:01, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Umbenennen und Löschen von Kategorien (Category:Walterswil BE in Category:Walterswil, Bern)

Wenn Du Kategorien umbenennst (wobei der ofizielle Namen der Gemeinde ja Walterswil BE lautet), dann sollstest Du aber diese Änderung in allen Artikeln (Commonscat-Schablonen, in den Artikeln, die das Thema behandeln) anbringen, welche auf diese Kategorie verweisen. Im vorliegenden Fall ist diese Umbenennung allerdingst nicht wirklich nachvollziehbar. Mit herzlichen Grüssen DidiWeidmann (talk) 19:41, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Leider sehen wir hier nicht, wenn die Kategorien verlinkt sind. Das ist ein großen Problem. -- RE rillke questions? 19:51, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

You should know by now that we don't accept abbreviations in the category names and in case of doubt, we tend to align to en:Walterswil, Bern. So if you follow that rule in the first place, changing links should only be necessary in very exceptional cases. And yes, if external wikis want to keep their links up to date, das ist ein kleinen Problem; for them it is dead easy to run every know and then a bot that checks all IW links: that should be done one the calling side, not the receiving side. Or better, link Commons via a gallery: they can be redirected easily with links that work. Best. --Foroa (talk) 21:23, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Massimiliano Galardi

Hello Foroa, btw of this, the user is not very fluent in languages different from Italian. I am trying to explain him that he's doing a mess with pages and categories, he's slowly learning that Commons is not a personal repository of photos but a tool for sharing them under free licence :-) -- Blackcat (talk) 10:12, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Blackcat, it is indeed not easy to explain. As you can see here and Category:Galleries in the Province of Prato, he has been very original in creating categories around his Prato town. Histories like this are really a waste of time. Your help is appreciated. --Foroa (talk) 10:47, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

he he apart from that he doesn't seem to understand well how commons work. I blocked him for one day and told him to write me in private, so i am sure to have got his attention. -- Blackcat (talk) 15:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Sometimes, indeed, we have to force users to think, explore and read a bit. In the mean time, it might be a good idea to categorise the items in Russia, more specifically the ones of Saint Petersburg before he creates categories in his original style. One of the specialists of Saint Petersburg is user:Kaganer. --Foroa (talk) 18:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Category moves and deletions

Hi Foroa.

• When making some controversial or mass moves or deletions, please don't forget to link in the summary the discussion where a consensus on such action was achieved or where such action was proposed and discussed previously.
• I please again and again: respect rules Should the old category be deleted? If the old category is a simple typo or you are the only person who ever used the category and you are the one fixing it up, it can safely be deleted. In other cases, the old category mostly should be redirected. --ŠJů (talk) 05:36, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

1. I did not initiate the protest move ([(http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:CommonsDelinker/commands&diff=68005186&oldid=68005149 see here, I warned the administrator]), which in my eyes was premature without consensus.

2. We know that we completely disagree about structural category redirection. To me this creates bad training, causes people to create more and more such wrong categories, and pollute and in some cases saturate tools like cat-a-lot and auto-search/fill. I create and repair many redirects, probably more than you, but only when I feel that they are essential.

3. The last 3 months, I moved more than 8000 categories; needless to say that I don't need more work.

4. Less than 0,5 % of the categories that I moved and deleted, are recreated as a redirect, which shows that my approach is the most efficient.

5. When I move a category because it needs disambiguation, I certainly don't create a redirect. When I have time, I create disambiguation categories. I keep deleting redirects that should be a disambiguation page. --Foroa (talk) 06:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Ad 1) I agree with you. I have not any definite opinion whether the merge is a good idea. It's true that the two category trees are very related but I think, march or crowd protests are a bit different from protest texts, paintings, sculptures, boards etc. That's why such mass merges shouln't be made without thoroughgoing previous discussion. However, your edit summary should be more clear when the case can be controversial.

Ad 2) I'm sure, you should not delete anything without clear consensus. You should respect current principles, not enforce your own preferences without consensus. Redirects create good training because they send user to the right categories and help to find them. There were manytimes described also other reasons why all useful redirects should be kept. Wrong (confusing, misspelled) categories, i. e. categories with incorrect and confusing names, should be really deleted. However, you repeatedly deleted category names which are not really "wrong" but only old.

Ad 3) Also (and especially) very active users should respect rules and consensus of the project and should be careful not to make damage by his actions.

Ad 4) You are proving that is very difficult to rectify such damages and most of such damages remain.

Ad 5) I don't understand your explanation. Things are simple: if the redirected category is one, the redirecting page works as a redirect. If there are more redirected categories, the redirecting page is a disambiguation page. None of these cases give a reason to delete the old category. --ŠJů (talk) 07:22, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I will no longer respond on things you even don't want to read or understand. And again, I did not initiate the protest move on which I don't really agree. --Foroa (talk) 07:27, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I think, I read your answer and your summaries and I reacted to them. --ŠJů (talk) 07:46, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Over-categorization

Hi. What should mean this and this edit and some others? Before your edits, the images were correctly described and categorized, the parent categories as well. Do you disagree with the standard modular principle of categorization, or do you make this over-categorization in some sudden inattention? --ŠJů (talk) 06:58, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Those additions have been made after a user created a uncategorised Category:Dubi. So when such items appear, the first thing I do is checking if there is no risk of naming collision, and while at it, I add some images that appear to belong to the category. I am pretty sure that the second Dubi or related categories did not pop up in the search results (search "not in category" is not always predictable or repeatable, especially when it concerns a fairly recent category). It is only later that I discovered to my surprise that it was redundant to Category:Dubí, so I redirected it; a really useful redirect. Frankly, initially, I did not notice any difference between Dubi and Dubi. I should maybe have undone some of the categorisation to the first and I should not use the "not in cat" search for new categories. There are however a millions of things here that I should, and the more one does, the more things should ... --Foroa (talk) 07:19, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

I think, it needn't to be such suprprise. When anyone try to identify the town and verify its name, he must to discover that the real name is Dubí and that the town had its own category already. Also when anyone check parent categories of the categories where the images were categorized, he can not to miss the existing category. I understand that an unexperienced user can create such dupe category. But I think, it is necessary a big negligence and rashness to accept and fill such misspelled and duplicate category. Yes, everyone can make a mistake. We should learn our lesson from our mistakes. I believe you for next time, you will try to look around before such edits. --ŠJů (talk) 07:43, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Militaire begraafplaatsen

Hi Foroa,

ik heb even vlug dit [2] teruggedraaid om voorlopig brokken te voorkomen. Maar, eer je je op je tegen getrapt voelt: wel klopt het dat er in de categorieën van de verschillende landen wat verschillende manieren van benoemen zijn, maar je had de verkeerde categorie geredirect ;-) En we moeten misschien eens ons werk er van maken. M.b.t. deze Belgische begraafplaatsen:

• Belgian military cemeteries = Belgische militaire begraafplaatsen = onderhouden door de Belgische defensie, met Belgische oorlogsgraven = Belgische gesneuvelden. De mééste bevinden zich weliswaar in België, vandaar misschien de verwarring. Maar ook in NL bijvoorbeeld, en dat is niet "in Belgium".
• Military cemeteries in Belgium = militaire begraafplaatsen in België = de vele Britse en de Duitse en Franse en Amerikaanse begraafplaatsen, en ook de meeste uit het puntje hierboven.

Twee sterk onderscheiden dingen dus ;-) De verwarring tref je misschien minder aan bij de Britse begraafplaatsen: deze worden door de CWGC onderhouden, dus is er minder verwarring met de naam "Brits". ('t zijn trouwens ook o.m. Australiërs, Canadezen en Nieuw-Zeelanders die er liggen).

Illustratie:

• Category:Military cemeteries in the United Kingdom = in het UK (= zustercat. van Category:Military cemeteries in Belgium = naampatroon Military cemeteries in COUNTRY)
• Category:Commonwealth War Graves Commission cemeteries = "Britse" oorlogsbegraafplaatsen wereldwijd. (=zustercat. van Category:Belgian military cemeteries = naampatroon NATIONALITY/ORGANIZATION cemeteries)

Vergelijk met het taalgebruik in de omgangstaal:

• een "Engels oorlogskerkhof" is voor ons geen oorlogskerkhof in Engeland, maar bv. een "Engels oorlogskerkhof in de Westhoek" = een begraafplaats met (in de volksmond 'Engelsen'), in werkelijk slachtoffers uit het vroeger Britse Rijk.
• een "oorlogsbegraafplaats in Engeland" ligt dan wel geografisch in Engeland.

MAAR: er is op commons wel wat dubbelzinnigheid en misschien slordigheid in de categorieën.

• zo hebben wel al sinds jaar en dag Category:Military memorials and cemeteries in Belgium waar oorlogsbegraafplaatsen én -monumenten onder vallen (soms is er ook een sterke overlap, want sommige monumenten dienen voor gesneuvelden zonder graf, of dienen als graf, of het komt op 1 terrein voor).
• bovendien is er ook een categorieboom met category:War cemeteries. Vooral deze laatste boom snap ik niet goed: is m.i. hetzelfde als het betere 'military cemeteries' ?
• en er bestaat die boom met category:Military cemeteries

Ik zou je redirect bv. wél op Category:Military memorials and cemeteries in Belgium kunnen plaatsen, en dan verdelen we die netjes over Category:Military cemeteries in Belgium (dus een hele hoop Britse + Duitse + Franse + Amerikaanse begraafplaatsen) en een categorie met oorlogsmonumenten ? (sommige foto's en subcats. in beide) ??? Maar die Category:Military memorials and cemeteries ... bestaat ook voor enkele andere landen, dus daar zou het dan ook netjes moeten aangepakt worden -- op voorwaarde dat iemand daar geen bezwaren tegen heeft omdat er een weloverwogen beslissing achter zit ?? Lijkt je dat een idee? Anders wil ik hier wel mee helpen wat indelen en klasseren ;-)

Conclusie: er kan 't een en 't anders wat gestroomlijnd worden op commons, je had enkel de verkeerde specifieke categorie laten redirecten ;-) en ik wil gerust een handje toesteken --LimoWreck (talk) 12:30, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

• Zie nog mijn opmerking op Category talk:Belgian military cemeteries. Wat zou je er voor denken om, naast de "by country" boom, ook een "by nationality" (of een betere naam) boom op te zetten, maat daarin dan:
  • Category:American Battle Monuments Commission cemeteries voor de Amerikanen (Category:American Battle Monuments Commission)
  • Category:Belgian military cemeteries - voor de Belgen
  • Category:Commonwealth War Graves Commission cemeteries - voor de "Britten" (ruime zin van het woord)
  • Category:French military cemeteries - voor de Fransen. Bv. daartoe behoren dan nl:Saint-Charles de Potyze in Ieper en het nl:Ossuaire Kemmelberg : "French military cemeteries", maar ook "Military cemeteries in Belgium": bemerk het verschil
  • Category:German War Graves Commission cemeteries of Category:Volksbund cemeteries voor de Duitsers. Bemerk dat daar al een subboompje Category:War cemeteries of Germany by country bestaat : of Germany, by country -> 2 indelingsbomen
  • ... andere...
• lijkt dat jou een goed idee?--LimoWreck (talk) 12:49, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Dag Limo, blij nog eens van je te horen. Sorry, ik ben inderdaad wat kort door de bocht gegaan. Het ziet er goed uit en ik kijk het in de loop van de week eens rustig na. --Foroa (talk) 14:24, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Dag LimoWreck, het zou nu ongeveer moeten accepteerbaar zijn, maar er steekt daar iemand zijn neus in voor het ogenblik. Misschien even de werken van onze wereldverbeteraar laten afkoelen. --Foroa (talk) 17:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

A question

Greetings. You recently deleted a category for an unincoporated community in Humboldt County, California named "Korbel, California."

Please tell me what I did wrong with creating the category? I went today to upload more photos from that trip, besides the two I had uploaded previously, only to find the category gone. I have other unincorporated communities in California that I'm working on and none of their categories has been deleted before.

I didn't see any reason for deletion that made sense, so I am sorry, but I have to bother you to ask why it was removed.

I am not in the slightest angry, merely confused and seeing information how to do this better so pages do not get deleted without warning. Thank you. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:49, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

As you can see in en:Korbel, California , there is Category:Korbel, Humboldt County, California and Category:Korbel, Sonoma County, California. I moved your pictures in the right category before deleting the confusing one that could be possibly created as a disambiguation category. --Foroa (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

What happened to File:Aurelia Bradeanu 15.jpg ?

Hello, Foroa. I see that you have deleted File:Aurelia Bradeanu 15.jpg, with the reason "File page with no file uploaded", but the logs show that there were uploaded two versions of this file (one by Flickr upload bot and one by Cropbot, both operated by me). Can you check if the uploaded files still appear in the history and restore them if possible? If it's not possible, I will upload them again. Thanks, Razvan Socol (talk) 06:21, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Must have been a bug/error in Commons:Database reports/File description pages without an associated file. Restored by now. --Foroa (talk) 06:32, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

David Bowie tour categories

Why do you keep deleting the redirects from the alternate tour names to the correct names? They are alternate names that someone may search for, but by deleting the redirects, they now cannot be found. Commons:Rename a category#Should the old category be deleted? states that a redirect should be used if it is "likely that a new user might ever try to use this category by accident". Please restore the redirects you have deleted. Namely, Category:Stage Tour, Category:Soul Tour and Category:Young Americans Tour. --JD554 (talk) 19:42, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

First: Commons:Category redirects suck. Categories are not articles. Try to do the same category redirects on en:Wikipedia, and you will see how long they will stay. You can use any redirect from gallery name space to category name space you want, and at least, those redirects work.

As can be seen in COM:CAT, The category name would be enough to guess the subject, which is the primary naming rule and is not the case for Category:Stage Tour and Category:Soul Tour; there are tens or hundreds of them, not to mention the ones in Russian, Arab, Chinese, Greek, ... that will translate to the same term. There are many en:Young Americans.

Those categories have not been renamed, you just tried to create a number of redirects that are far too ambiguous. We are approaching 2 million categories. If every user attempted to create a number of redirects in the 280 languages we support, the whole system would collapse and tools like hotcat would become unusable. Maintaining redirects is a time consuming task as we move 1000 to 2000 categories per months, without any bot tools to maintain the redirects. --Foroa (talk) 07:11, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

They would last quite well on Wikipedia. However, this is Commons and the rules are not necessarily the same. The page you directed me to is only a proposed guideline and looking at the talk page, it doesn't look like it is close to being ready. In the meantime Commons:Rename a category is currently part of commons' help and therefore is part of what we should be doing until such time as it may change. Having said that, Commons:Only use category redirects where necessary backs up my argument by saying "where necessary". As these were tour names were commonly used in English speaking countries (where the tours took place), it is not unreasonable to expect them to be probable search terms. You say there are many Young Americans. However, you will note there was only one Young Americans Tour. --JD554 (talk) 08:51, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

On en:wiki, there are only 15000 category redirects, and I am pretty sure that your category directs would be eliminated very quickly. On many wikipedias, redirected categories are forbidden or only for really exceptional cases. While we are on it, I am pretty sure that even article redirects on en:wikipedia such as Stage Tour and Soul Tour would be quickly eliminated or converted to disambiguation pages as it would be misleading indeed. So one cannot state that a misleading redirect can be considered as "where necessary". --Foroa (talk) 18:22, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of page Commons Featured pictures of User

Hi, I just found out you deleted (without warning me), my page of featured pictures on Commons and incorrectly merged it with my featured pictures of Wikipedia, two completely different things. Now my Userpage commons FP counter cannot count any of my FP's.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Commons_Featured_pictures_of_User:Paolo_Costa_Baldi

Please return my category as it was, and if it is not possible to have two different categories of FPs (one for Wikipedias and one for Commons), I think you should warn people before deleting and moving files of personal pages. Isn't it fair? If you told me so, I would have given you permission to delete category Wikipedia featured pictures by me, and keep the ones from Commons, which are more important. Anyways, now I have a big chaos among my pictures categories. Please revert your changes in every file to my Commons Featured pictures by Paolo Costa category. Thank you very much. --Paolo Costa (talk) 20:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry I just found out it was not you who moved the categories, you just deleted it because it was empty. I'm going to re-write this on user Cirt's page. Sorry for the misunderstanding. --Paolo Costa (talk) 20:11, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Once again here. User Cirt told me it was you who tagged it for deletion. So I am back to you once more. Please revert the changes you've done, and if anywhere it is stated that I cannot have two FP categories for my pictures (one for Wiki and one for commons), then bring back the category of commons FPs and delete the ones from Wikipedia. I'm open to discussion, but I need my category of FP's on commons. Thanks for understanding. --Paolo Costa (talk) 22:36, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the two nearly identical named and undocumented categories were just a typo, as happens often with categories; indeed Category:Wikipedia Featured pictures of User:Paolo Costa Baldi looks pretty much like Category:Commons Featured pictures of User:Paolo Costa Baldi. Category restored by now. Please document them properly. --Foroa (talk) 05:45, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! But I did not understand what you mean for document them properly? I'm guessing you are suggesting to add some title to the pages to make them look differently. I'll do that asap. --Paolo Costa (talk) 14:15, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:NME

It seems you and I aren't seeing eye to eye on categories at the moment ;-)

I think Category:NME should be the proper category and Category:New Musical Express should be the redirect. My reasoning for this is that "NME" is by far and away the most common name for magazine (and it's subsidiary tours and awards). Even their own web page is www.nme.com. Also look at the logo in the category File:NME_logo.png. Looking at the proposed guideline Commons:Naming categories, it says we "should in general use the name most frequently used in English-language literature". A quick google search shows that "NME" 117,000,000 hits[3] is used over 22 times more often than "New Musical Express" 5.2 million hits[4]. --JD554 (talk) 09:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

NME is not a name, it is an acronym that tend to be very country/culture specific and that we try to avoid. As one can see in the interwikis on Category:NME, this terms is disambiguated on at least 5 wikipedias for a very good reason. One can be sure, the moment that a term is disambiguated somewhere, it will need disambiguation one day on Commons too as we go much deeper in categorisation and naming than any wikipedia. On Commons, we have not such a thing as primary topic as those are very culture/country specific; categories must tell what they contain without doubt (with the exception of some country and capital city names and national symbols. Just do a search here on NWE. I can move it to Category:NME (magazine) if you prefer. --Foroa (talk) 17:53, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

NME is actually a registered trademark. The quote from the proposed guideline I provided a link to shows that the concept of a primary topic is coming to Commons. I agree with Category:NME being a disambiguation page, but feel that the category would best be served by Category:NME (magazine) as you suggest as an alternative. --JD554 (talk) 19:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Tram depots in Belgium

I would like to limit this new category to: tram depots in use or recent use (rail tracks stil visible). In Belgium there are numerous ex-vicinal depots now in use as bus depots. We could create a sub category "ex tram depots in Belgium". Most are ex vicinal but not all.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:10, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I created and filled the subcategory Historic tram depots in Belgium. Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:51, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Good job, I added wrong ones on purpose to trigger a more clear definition, maybe that "former tram depots" to match Category:Former train stations in Belgium and prepare for "former tram stations" such as Category:Hoeilaart train station (former) and the postcards on the hundreds of "tramstaties". Maybe we will need a specific cat for "stelplaats", some of which are nor a depot, just a place where they are on standby for a while (to sleep ?), such as File:Stelplaats rit bij Oostende renbaan.JPG. --Foroa (talk) 18:06, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Clarification needed

Can you explain me (and to the italian wikisource community) why you have deleted the Category:It Wikisource books (moved to Category:Italian Wikisource books), and did not the same for Category:De Wikisource book (to be moved to Category:German Wikisource books)? Different behaviours for the same kind of category. It seems to me a sort of discrimination. Can you please proceed in the same way for the german category?

Thanks, --Accurimbono (talk) 19:41, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I think you better take this up with the person that requested the move, the German move has been reverted for some reason. --Foroa (talk) 21:43, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Done. But I don't see the reason for the stop. And why only german moving has been stopped at the time and not all others? --Accurimbono (talk) 07:56, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Those harmonisation moves where much needed, the German one has not been stopped, but reverted. No idea why. --Foroa (talk) 08:40, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Funerary monuments

Hi Foroa. Why are you insisting that Category:Funerary monuments in Belgium should be included as a subcategory of Category:Cemeteries in Belgium? This is not how the category tree works at a global level, where Category:Funerary monuments is a subcategory of Category:Death customs and Category:Monuments and memorials to people, and not of Category:Cemeteries. This is presumably because not all funerary monuments are in cemeteries. They include all graves (which may well not be in cemeteries), burials at cathedrals, church memorials, effigies, epitaphs, prehistoric tombs and towers of silence (shouldn't imagine there are too many of those in Belgium).

In fact, Category:Cemeteries is a subcategory of Category:Burial grounds, which is a subcategory of Category:Graves, which in turn is a subcategory of Category:Funerary monuments. That makes perfect sense, as a Cemetery is a Funerary monument, whereas a Funerary monument may not necessarily be a Cemetery.

There is, however, a problem at the global categories that needs sorting, as Category:Funerary monuments is a subcategory of Category:Monuments and memorials to people, which is a subcategory of Category:Monuments and memorials, which is a subcategory of Category:Funerary monuments. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

(EC)That is maybe your logic, but not necessarily most people's logic. The previous logic was having graves in cemeteries: that is the case for 95% of the graves and hat is the most elementary logic that must be apparent. Because one keeps creating intermediate categories, graves became completely unconnected from cemeteries (unless stepping up and down through several intermediate categories). So I could live with one intermediate category at the most.

Making Category:Burial grounds a subcategory of Category:Graves is the reverse order: graves are in burial grounds.

I see that when modifying categories, you systematically change the order too which makes it painful to find out what really changed. From now on, when I see that you removed incorrectly a category, I will not try to correct it, simply revert it.

Buildings in Onroerend erfgoed categories are buildings with a "heritage" label, which has nothing to do with other categorisations in buildings, churches, museums or just the place. So please, don't call that overcategorisation. --Foroa (talk) 17:46, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Why the aggressive tone? If you disagree with the global categorisation, why not start a Category for discussion. The global categorisation places Category:Burial grounds as a subcategory of Category:Graves, and that is where you need to raise your disagreement with the order, rather than throwing a hissy fit.

I moved the Onroerend erfgoed categories as we are told not to place in one category that is a subcategory of another, but I actually largely agree with your point on this one. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:55, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

This top level category structure changes at least two times per year and it not abnormal that it is a bit wieldy; but it is next to impossible to find the relationship between cemetery and graves in less than 5 minutes, which is obviously wrong. However, people tend to overlook the bottom up side of the problem. In many places, one of the first categories besides churches and town halls, is a cemetery, often followed by some graves on that cemetery, and that is where most villages stop. If we want people to make good categorisations, they should be able to find their basic structure in the higher level categories; they should not need to make a series of local local intermediate categories such as death customs, burial grounds, Monuments and memorials, Funerary monuments, ... --Foroa (talk) 18:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for fixes on various photos I transferred from Wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons. It was my first time doing that and I learned from your fixes what to watch out for the next time! Again thank you for catching the errors. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:35, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

You are welcome. Don't hesitate to ask. --Foroa (talk) 19:38, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Max Ludwig (General)

Hello Foroa! You have a Category:Max Ludwig (general) created. "General" in German is a noun and is therefore written with a large G. I have created a new category with the same name and corrected this error. Could you please delete the old category? You also have added this person in the Category: People of Gotha. This person died in Gotha. Is that common in this case? Thank you for your efforts and many greetings from Sweden --Old European (talk) 21:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Our basic language on Commons is English and we don't use capitals in disambiguation terms (writer, artist, painter, politician): all without capital. We cannot make a rule that is different for each country. --Foroa (talk) 22:00, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok, if you say that. I assumed that the category has been selected according to the lemma. And the original (German) lemma is called Max Ludwig (General). I was not going to demand a separate rule. Excuse the effort. PS: What about my question about the inclusion in the category: People of Gotha? Greetings again --Old European (talk) 23:43, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem, it was late yesterday. Concerning Gotha, that's precisely why we use "People of Gotha" and not "People from Gotha". For many people, it is not really clear where they are really from and making of and from categories will not work and are a cause of disputes. So the compromise is of to indicate places where people spent a significant part of their life. What's important on Commons is that we can organise relationships between items, without being precise. In a next round, it could be possible that we find trace of the general in Gotha (grave for example). In the long run, this is the real added value of Commons: connecting things. --Foroa (talk) 07:58, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Category scheme for plants, fruit, vegetables, trees, etc

Hi Foroa,

I was wondering if there is an official (or unofficial) scheme for plants, fruit, vegetables, trees, etc. Most things seem to be organized by their latin names, but are often organized by common names as well, particularly in the case of fruit, vegetables, flowers. I've been placing the fruit (Category:Apples) inside the Latin species name (Category:Malus domestica) but this isn't always easy, since other types of apples may belong under the Genus name (Category:Malus). Then there are cultivars (Category:Apple cultivars), which could alternately be named Malus cultivars and/or Malus domestica cultivars as well. Some categories add "fruits" to the common names of the fruit to distinguish from the whole plant (Category:Okra fruits).

We also have (Category:X-based food) as well as (Category:X as aliment), which isn't such a problem, but could be standardized.

Any advice and/or thoughts on this? Thanks! - Themightyquill (talk) 20:33, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, there have been many attempts to rename all items using common names into scientific names by what I call Taxomaniacs. This has calmed down significantly last year, probably because they start to realise that there must be a cohabitation of both naming systems, as you noticed, with apples, cats, dogs, horses, fruit, vegetables, food, spices, herbs, natural textiles, ... the relation is rarely one to one. So I did spend significant energy in trying to keep those common name categories alive as they are really needed.

As those sorts of naming battles seem to be calmed down, we might think of some sort of scheme, but frankly, I would currently have no idea how to tackle it as they have quite different logic. --Foroa (talk) 06:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Actions taken on CFDs

Thanks for taking action on some of my CFDs, but you probably should add a comment at the end of each related CFD discussion explaining what you've done. - dcljr (talk) 21:40, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I prefer to spend my energy on solving obvious cases and close them as soon as reasonable by action; too many CFD's stay open for years. When looking in Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2012/02#Category:Pictures_and_images_by_country, all the red links make it clear that actions have been taken, clicking on the red links show precisely where it has been moved to by whom; basically as could be deduced form the discussion. --Foroa (talk) 06:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Sculptors, painters ... from Liège

Ok, I will group them as in Ghent. --CrucialFriend (talk) 16:46, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Děkujeme, odcházíme

Hi Foroa, firstly, thank you for your work with renaming categories, however, I'd like to ask you, why you rename and delate "category:Děkujeme, odcházíme" and replaced by "Category:Protests by ambulance workers in the Czech Republic (2010-2011)". Děkujeme, odcházíme was and still is official name of this protest in the Czech Republic, see cs:Děkujeme, odcházíme, and as second it was not protest of workers with ambulance but protest of all doctors working in the Czech Republic. Therefore, renaming and deleting of this category was mistake and Czech name of it is the right one. Not this "artifical" name. So please restore the category and recategorize images again. Regards --Chmee2 (talk) 14:01, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Renames has been requested by user:Jacklee as one can see here. Proper documentation might avoid such surprises. --Foroa (talk) 14:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)--Foroa (talk) 14:25, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, this is not my problem, who requested it :) What I am saying to you, that the mistake in renaming was done by "you". Of course, I can write to Jacklee, but you deleted the category so it is appropriated that you restore it again and therefore I am asking you to restore the category and fix your mistakes because it is obvious that the renaming of the category was wrong. Please, do it and next time, check more details of the the request on "homeland" wikies. And you are right, more documentation was needed however in the time of the riots, we have no idea that it will be official name of it... With all the best --Chmee2 (talk) 20:48, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, this not my problem. Category names should be in English in the first place. Category:Děkujeme, odcházíme restored, but that name could mean anything. --Foroa (talk) 10:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Well... thank you really much for your assistance and for your help. Have a good time, regards --Chmee2 (talk) 19:05, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Vraagje

Dag Foroa, ik zag dat je dit deed. Ik had recentelijk al een paar (andere) redirects geplaatst op de projecten waar ik zo rondhang. niet goed dan? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Zoals de edit summary zegt: hard redirects binnen een enkel wiki project, softredirects voor categories en links naar andere wikipedias. (Zie Commons:Database reports/Broken redirects) --Foroa (talk) 14:52, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry,...

...could you please explain this action? Thx - A.Savin 16:19, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Let's be serious: one cannot say that this is an image representing a musician with a synth, unless looking really hard. See here as well. --Foroa (talk) 16:36, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Commons Category:Alitala Express

The Italian airlines "Alitala Express" do not esixt, the right airline is "Alitalia Express", I think there was a misprint in the creation of the category, so it would be appropriate to delete it. Chesipiero (talk) 21:25, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

That's not a reason to blank the category; somebody has to clean it up and indicate what the right name is. Please use {{Badname|Alitalia Express}} for such cases. --Foroa (talk) 05:01, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Properties of the National Park Service by type

Is there a naming convention I missed when I created Category:National Park Service properties by type? --Auntof6 (talk) 01:19, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Categories usually start with the topic name, left to right. We don't want to end up with constructs like "Historic Soviet Union National Park Service properties by type". --Foroa (talk) 19:36, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Macedonia

Hi! What is problem with categories about Macedonia? I think of those hundreds that I have created, and you have deleted them and put a type system of government on them title? It's not a practice on Commons and as far as I know here we not put terms like Republic, Kingdom or State in the title. Best regards--R ašo 20:39, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Subcats should correspond with the parent category. --Foroa (talk) 06:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Which parent category? You have all renamed! Just main category was Republic of Macedonia. But that's no excuse.--R ašo 19:16, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Overwriting an existing image

Hi. Isn't it true that you're not supposed to overwrite an existing image with a completely different one? If so, you might want to take a look at the version of this image I discovered. Nightscream (talk) 23:26, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, but its concerns his own picture and the uploader and owner changed his mind in the first 24 hours. (almost 3 years ago) --Foroa (talk) 06:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Maxliebermannreal grave.jpg

Dag Foroa, is deze afbeelding volgens jou in orde of kan ik de oude versie terugzetten? Ik werkte gisteren aan Max Liebermann en vind de originele versie beter, maar ik wil natuurlijk niet op iemands teentjes trappen. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:04, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Inderdaad een randgeval; de eenvoudigste "no-fuss" oplossing is een copie maken van het origineel (of de de nieuwe versie in een retouched versie zetten). --Foroa (talk) 06:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Dag Foroa, uit het antwoord van User:Smerus leid ik af dat ik dit anders zal moeten oplossen. Wil je me daarbij helpen? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 07:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Maxliebermannreal grave original.jpg (save as en opnieuw upload). Beste groet. --Foroa (talk) 07:52, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Bedankt! Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 08:52, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Tank Regiments

Hello!

Why did you move "Category:Tank Regiments" to "Category:Armored regiments". The category discussion is still running and you did not point out any reason for your moving action. --High Contrast (talk) 14:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

There was no reaction on the discussion requests on category:Tank Regiments since several days. As the category was wrongly capitalised and several badly named categories had been created (italian tank regiments, U.S. Army Tank Regiments, USA Tank Regiments, Japanese Tank Regiments) I moved it to Category:Armored regiments in line with the parent category of :Category:Royal Tank Regiment. --Foroa (talk) 17:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I see. It is easier for other users if the "discussion board" of this category is closed then. --High Contrast (talk) 18:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I have tried to embed this category in a new category tree in dependence on the tree on en:wiki. If you want to, you can look over it. Thanks in advance. Regards, High Contrast (talk) 18:54, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Great. In the mean time, I moved it to Category:Armoured regiments for name consistency. Any idea what to do with the CFD on Category:Wehrmacht_Panzertruppen ?--Foroa (talk) 06:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Category Rename

Hi Foroa, I noticed that you removed my category rename request of San Thome Basilica, Chennai to San Thome Basilica. I am unable to find another category with a similar name as per your explanation. As per my understanding there is only one San Thome Basilica. --Jovian Eye _storm 00:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

The San Thome Basilica is basically a cathedral. There are at least two other Saint Thomas basilicas and several Saint Thomas cathedrals. As can be seen in COM:CAT, The category name would be enough to guess the subject, which is the primary naming rule and is not the case for Saint Thome/Thomas basilica. So lets not waste our time in removing useful disambiguation terms. --Foroa (talk) 05:19, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Gadget autodel

While I can understand that you're frustrated, I have to protest: I didn't remove the gadget

1. out of the blue
2. but because it is a serious security vulnerable.

If you want to use it for yourself just add

importScript('User:Mike.lifeguard/Gadget-autodel.js');

to your User:Foroa/common.js.

Next time I will add a watchlist notice before making changes. If I feel a growing hostility against the few remaining script-maintainers, I will quit. -- RE rillke questions? 17:38, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

That is not a hostility against you, you do an excellent but not very rewarding job; software seems never good enough. I checked, and the last 4 months, I did 9000 deletions, mostly from category moves. As I can manage around 3 deletions per minute, I did spend 3000 minutes or 50 hours clicking like a zombie on deletion icons one by one. This is a very boring job and the removal of the autodelete function would double the needed time. Thank you for allowing me to continue to use it, without I would probably leave that silly job to other contributors. --Foroa (talk) 06:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism

I consider your "undos" as vandalism. It is vital that at least the wrong "category by name" entry is deleted from those silly redundant galleries. If you want to improve the galleries, then do so. Reverting a useful edit is not what improves the Commons. Why do you think I spend my time adding authority data and making the Commons more useful for users? You obviously don't know what you're doing when undoing these edits, so just leave me alone. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 17:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Andreas, I think that you should reread the gallery deletion rules. If we keep deleting gallery beginnings, we will never have decent galleries. Galleries take their complete role when categories start to be filled up with many images and categories. They are often completed by the people that improve articles and try to get the data better organised. And don't tell me that replacing the gallery content by a redirect is not a deletion. --Foroa (talk) 06:19, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Dmitry Borshch

Dag Foroa, as the Dmitry Borshch article has been deleted on the English wikipedia, should the Category along with the files be deleted too, or is there a different policy on Commons? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 07:06, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, it doesn't mean that the artist (or his article) is not considered notable enough by elitist Western standards, that he is not by Crimean Tatar, Ukrainen, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolian, (West Flemish), Absurdistan ... standards. His work seems to be present in many galleries worldwide. I am not God, so I refrain from using the "notability" argument; maybe this guy is becoming the Picasso of the next decade ... --Foroa (talk) 07:29, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Just imagine we would have discovered the Picasso of the next decade. o/\o :-) btw, I kind of like his pictures, seems something like to put on playing cards (the color is already there). If I would be him, I would present my artwork to that industry. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 08:19, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

You & your Vandalism

It´s not your category for any regiments on commons 

Sorry! why have you taken a deletion from User_talk:Skapheandros on the following files? You are not allowed to bring this action again to this one.You can suffer a deletion completely as a User from Wikimedia Commons and Creative Commons as User talk:Foroa.Now you know unless you don´t respet User:Skapheandros I advise you, you must be suffering a demand that you didn´t have previously any permission to be done as allow it.Why not you didn´t apply a category for all of them? where are all these images?. Request me devolving all of them, please.

Image:Tableu vivan.jpg Image:Pxw.jpg ‎ Image:Qas.jpg.tif ‎ Image:T.vts.tif ‎ Image:Algoritmo.jpg

Thank you 

THX Y.

I warned you on of your art work. --Foroa (talk) 13:56, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Category:Cospedal

Hi. Why did you delete that category redirect? It is a valid one. That politician is known by her surname, and her name is very long. It is useful. Please, restore it. emijrp (talk) 20:53, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Cospedal can mean several persons and things. Search for Cospedal and you will see. Would be nice if we had to redirect to all surnames ;). --Foroa (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

1915 Ensor Banquet of the starved anagoria

Dag foroa, er bestaat onder Category:Paintings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art een Category:Flemish paintings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, maar geen Belgian paintings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, wél ook een Belgian art in the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Meen je dat het aanmaken van deze category zinnig is? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Ja waarom niet: die Flemish gaan ooit wel veranderd worden in Netherlandish or Early/South Netherlandish onder bepaalde invloeden ... --Foroa (talk) 06:02, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

your assistance please...

Over on COM:VP there was a discussion over the actions of User:Howcheng -- who instructed a bot to empty categories like Category:Photos of Shane T. McCoy and Category:Photographs by Shane T. McCoy and create new categories like Category:Shane T. McCoy and strip the contents from the existing categories.

I believe the consensus of that discussion is that Howcheng never should have authorized such massive changes, without discussion, and that the action was not a good idea.

Am I correct that there is some peculiarity in the WMF software that prevents restoring the contribution history of deleted categories? The real life Shane T. McCoy weighed in in one of the categories -- I believe it was Category:Photos of Shane T. McCoy. He is not regular contributor here, and I thought his comments there were quite important to record.

If you can restore the contribution history would you please do so? Geo Swan (talk) 18:13, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

• I hope no one minds my barging in. We can easily restore the contribution history at Category:Photos of Shane T. McCoy (where he made numerous edits himself) and Category:Photographs by Shane T. McCoy (where only one edit was his), but can't move that history to a different category. I'll fully restore those two categories. It would be appreciated if someone else would redistribute the photos in Category:Shane T. McCoy to these and any other categories where they may belong. - Jmabel ! talk 23:36, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
• Geo: it looks like your last edit on Category:Photos of Shane T. McCoy turned it into a redirect; I'm restoring it anyway, with the full history, and you can sort it out from there. - Jmabel ! talk 23:39, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Frank H. Nowell

I can see you've been doing a great job sorting out the Frank H. Nowell stuff, but one of these I think may be an error. File:Seattle - Carolina Court ad 1916.jpg: what's it got to do with him? - Jmabel ! talk 23:28, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Corresponds with what you inserted in the author field. --Foroa (talk) 17:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Nagorno-Karabakh

Good morning, Foroa. I've seen that You're changing the names of the categories ¹ and it's categorisation ² in the articles about the places in the Republic of Mountainous Karabakh from local Armenian names to Azerbaijani names what is actively supported by Azerbaijani ^{f.e. User:Interfase} and Turkish ^{f.e. User:Takabeg} users.

I want to explain that to the English chapter of wikipedia all articles about the settlements in the South Caucasus (former Armenian, Azerbaijan and Georgian SSR) were downloaded by user Carlossuarez46 from the official sources of this three post-soviet republics.

I want to mention that in the late 80-s in the Azerbaijan SSR took place an ethnic cleanings against Armenians ^{(1, 2)} what caused a full-fledged war in Azerbaijan SSR between the Azerbaijani armed forces and Armenian ethnic minority. However, in the region of Nagorno-Karabakh the majority was consisted by Armenians, while Azerbaijani Community of Nagorno-Karabakh. After the collapse of the USSR Azerbaijani armed forces couldn't take the control under the Armenian populated region of Nagorno-Karabakh which have declared an independence and passed a referendum ^{(were supported by more than 99% of voters)}. After years of the war, on May 5, 1994 in Bishkek representatives of Republic of Armenia, Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh, Republic of Azerbaijan and Russia's representative to the CSCE Minsk Group signed a provisional ceasefire agreement - en:Bishkek Protocol which have introduced the defacto borders between the unrecognised Republic of Nagorno-Karabakh and Republic of Azerbaijan. Today in the Azerbaijan there're no Armenians and in the Nagorno-Karabakh there're no Azeris. The borders since signing a Protocol in 1994 are unchanged and there're stabil situation.

So while user Carlossuarez46 downloaded to the wiki articles about settlements of the South Caucasus he have'not tooked into account that the info about the settlements in Nagorno-Karabakh are wrong, because they're given by the state which doesn't control this areas, however there're unrecognised state which controls this areas since the collapse of the USSR and which has a real database. In spite of the fact that Azerbaijan takes one of the last places in the world with the human rights ^{by the way since 1993 (19 years), there're only two president's in Azerbaijan - Geydar Aliyev and his son Ilham Aliyev}, oil industry in Azerbaijan is very developed that's why major states don't want to impair relations with such type of state by recognising of small state wich took defence from such rich state more than 20 years.

As I see, unfortunately, You're supporting changes of the names in the commons from the local Armenian names to the Azerbaijani names which proclaims Azerbaijan and which are useless in Karabakh. Wikipedia is not a political source, so we shouldn't pass the political statements of the state against the names which are used by locals and in unrecognised state. We shouldn't mislead the reader with the official China names about the Taiwan as well as with the articles about the Nagorno-Karabakh. Both this two states has all the signs of the state and both of them are independent for a long time, so the names of the PRC and Azerbaijan there're useless. Please, take it to account to not mislead the readers. --Ліонкінг ^{Lion King} 08:20, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi Ліонкінг, I sympathize with your difficult situation while we tend to help minorities, but we are not taking political positions: we have to serve almost thousand wikipedia projects in 270 languages, so we have to try to use names that serves best the ensemble of our users, why we tend to follow the English wikipedia names in most cases. Obviously, a category name like Tsar can mean many things, so it is completely normal that it is renamed (not by me) to a properly documented and referenced category. I have seen several moves between Sushi and Susha, each time mixing up the town, rayon and province, so not surprising that some one tries to get it properly done and referenced. If you want to find acceptance of the local names in your region, the first thing you should do is to make sure that people use the most common names find them and that all places are properly documented and referenced. Just renaming them stubbornly will not help your cause. --Foroa (talk) 17:25, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Textiles and Category:Fabrics

Dag Foroa, in some way, these categories seem to similar and related, though I do not quite see the point. I was working on the Textile page and noticed there is a reference made to both categories. Would ik make sence to merge them and to make one category? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:51, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

They are related and hard to differentiate indeed. I tried to improve documentation, but it is difficult. Note that I see fabrics for all the things that are non traditional woven, but including equally more abstract interpretation of fabrics such as social, communication, network ... fabrics. --Foroa (talk) 13:27, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Foroa, I will try to remember. In fact, my question was based on this file. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 14:39, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Link to Toolserver

You can link to Toolserver using [[tools:...]], which means you can make links in edit summaries in this way; tools:~magnus/commons_sumitup.php --Z 12:03, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I use that every day: it is enabled in my preferences/gadgets, so I have it always in the left menu toolbox bar. --Foroa (talk) 12:07, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

I mean, here for example, as you know [http://...] format doesn't work in edit summeries, but [[...]] does, and you can link to TS like this. --Z 12:53, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Alvise dal Friso

Dag Foroa, deze cat hoort niet in parent/boven cat: Paolo Veronese, de link is voldoende, hotcat verorzaakt een fout.Oursana (talk) 21:45, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Dat is jouw standpunt. Ik heb de gewoonte sterke relaties tussen mensen om te zetten in categorie verbanden, maar daar is geen duidelijke Commons regel voor. --Foroa (talk) 05:02, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

I noticed that my usertalk redirect didn't work as I expected; it was my first cross-wiki redirect. I'm indifferent to it working "properly", but didn't know it was showing up as "broken" -- so thanks. -- Eriksiers (talk) 17:25, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Category in countries

Why did you change Category:Military in countries to Category:Military by country of operation. The new category name seems much less clear to me. Semper Fi! FieldMarine (talk) 11:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Requested by user:Auntof6 during his major clean up works, quite rightly because having "military" of and "military in" together is a recepy for mix up. --Foroa (talk) 15:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Category

Hi, Foroa. As long as I understand, you are expert in categories. What do you think of the case of Category:Dargeçit/Category:Kerboran ? I think it's very clear case per en:Dargeçit. Do I have to go to Commons:Categories for discussion ? Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 14:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

First, thank you for the wonderful job you are doing here. As can be seen in the interwikis of en:Dargeçit, that's the one. This would have been different if the Kurdish names and language would be formally accepted by the countries that make part of Kurdistan. (as we do with the Spanish side of the Basque Country). --Foroa (talk) 18:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

And when you have the time, could you check Category talk:History of Persia ? Takabeg (talk) 14:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I guess that I need some time to investigate and to find a clean, simple and non-disputable time line, but my current feeling is that the History of Persia should include all time before the name Iran popped up. Personally, I might prefer to have it all under one single "Ancient Persia" umbrella, thereby eliminating all "non ancient" Persian things, especially all the related mixups, but I doubt that this would be feasible/acceptable. --Foroa (talk) 18:02, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts. I think that Category:Cuisine by region is not suitable for Category:Kurdish cuisine. Because even in the United State, the Kurdish cuisine is Kurdish cuisine. Are there categories such as Cuisine by ethnicity, Cuisine by culture etc. ? Takabeg (talk) 14:18, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

That is a thing we never can get right as most cuisines are ethnicity driven, while mostly categorised by political/administrative country categories. For culture related aspects, countries and regions are simplifications of a reality. So we have a cuisine of China but Chinese style restaurants. So here, we better associate the Kurdish people with the Kurdistan region, otherwise we get in troubles. It is not bad when make such an error, provided we make systematically the same error. --Foroa (talk) 16:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Ducati

Hello :), i have undo your edit in Category:Ducati because the terms of contract are not yet final and it is not quite correct to categorize the category: Ducati as you did, it would take more than the category of industrial or financial group, not the car brand. if you can, please reply in my talk page mad then I forget :( ciao :) --Pava (talk) 11:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

I removed also part of the description, as descriptive and not superfluous, not suitable to a field of this kind, in order to deepen reads the voice --Pava (talk) 11:26, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Fine with me. You are playing with words. Sooner or later, other people will revert it anyway. --Foroa (talk) 11:57, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Wakefield Plantation

Dag Foroa, this category is in fact about Wakefield Plantation, Alabama and not Raleigh, NC, but I am not sure if and how to change this. Will you show me? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 15:58, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Thnks. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 11:59, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Bathurst class corvettes

Ik heb de schepen gecategoriseerd volgens het inmiddels bekende stramien. Maar User:Bidgee draaide dat voor drie schepen terug, vanwege "no consensus". Hoe pakken we dat alsnog op? Die consensus over de naamgeving wachten we al een hele poos en ik zie weinig vooruitgang. --Stunteltje (talk) 18:16, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

In sommige gaten en sommige pipos zijn stijf ambetant voer standoards. Hier eb je de 2 t'hope. Een paar moanden wachten en laten ernoemen deur de bot of iemand van die kanten. Sorry voer 't geheimtoalke. Wat betreft de consensus, enerzijds is de standaard allebehalve volledig gedocumenteerd, anderzijds is een standaard dikwijls goed voor de anderen, niet voor hun eigen geval. --Foroa (talk) 21:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Snappo. Ik was al eens begonnen met een Engels totaaloverzicht van de nieuwe standaard, maar die heb ik te veel verborgen in een zankbak ergens. Als ik die terugvind meld ik dat wel en kunnen we kijken of we zo rond de 20.000 schepen op naam wel consensus kunnen lospeuteren. Dan kan die template er eindelijk ook eens af. --Stunteltje (talk) 21:46, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Heusden schandpaal.jpg

Please stop adding this image to the category of Pillories. It is a borderstone of a former waterboard, not a pillory. Waterboards weren't responsible for pillories in the Netherlands. It also has never functioned as a pillory. The ring that is suggested to be added for the purpose of a pillory was added at the renovation in 1992 long after pillories were abolished in the Netherlands. LeeGer (talk) 21:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

The original text states that it is a kaak, a schandpaal. --Foroa (talk) 05:52, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes the uploader might have thought it was a pillory, but people can be wrong. See the discussionpage of the file for numerous arguments why it can not be a pillory. Please use common sense instead of just assuming the name of the file is the absolute truth. LeeGer (talk) 15:40, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Jean-Philippe Rameau

Dag Foroa, on the article there is a colored image of him. Would it make sense to look into the possibilities uploading it on Commons? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 04:39, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Probably same as File:Inconnu d'après Augustin de Saint-Aubin, Jean-Philippe Rameau, détail (Museo internazionale e biblioteca della musica di Bologna).jpg - look at the various versions. it:File:Rameauuu.jpg is scheduled for transfer to Commons, so, unless in a terrible hurry, I would just wait for it. --Foroa (talk) 06:14, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll wait, haast en spoed is zelden goed :っD Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 07:33, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Category:Cuisine of Belgium

Dag Foroa, there is a Category:Cuisine of Belgium with a Category:Cuisine of Wallonia. Should there be a Category:Cuisine of the Flanders too? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 07:49, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

With a contents as in Category:Cuisine of Wallonia, that looks not very encouraging. You will probably find a small series of preparations that are incontestably for Category:Cuisine of Flanders (asperges, witloof, waterzooi and a series of gebak and snoep), but when looking in Category:Cuisine of Nord-Pas-de-Calais and Category:Cuisine of the Netherlands, you are in for many discussions. Good luck to document the differences between stamppot, hutspot, hutsepot, stoemp, and also puree, stampers, melkstamp, dauphinois, ... And Frites, are they Flemish, Belgian or ... ? --Foroa (talk) 09:42, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

You are right, cuisines become global and I am not into many discussions... Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:55, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I noticed you added to Vlaamse Hutsepot the Category:Stamppot. In my humble opinion this is not a stamppot because the vegatables are not mashed. I would rather call it a Pot-au-feu and thus add the Category:Pot-au-feu instead. Maybe the Category:Stamppot should be fit into the Category:Pot-au-feu ? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 11:58, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

The verschillen tussen door elkaar roeren, mengen, stampen, mixen zijn nogal subtiel en streekafhankelijk. I think that hutsepot is more a potée than a pot-au-feu as most liquid disappears, but both are French cuisine ... All subtle differences, good for long discussions. --Foroa (talk) 12:48, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

File:EPO 2537.jpg

Dag Foroa, this file and maybe similar ones should in my opinion be renamed. What to you think? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 13:20, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

At second thoughts, as it already exists as File:Carnival versions of Louis XIV and Marie-Antoinette in front of Versailles Palace.jpg, it should be deleted I guess. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 13:30, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Normally, I don't waste my time on file renames, enkel om je een plezier te doen en om te zien hoe de delinker zich uit de slag trekt, alhoewel je zelf een deel veranderd hebt in sommige wikipedias. --Foroa (talk) 15:46, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Meaning... I am wasting my time, bedoel je dat ik de files ongemoeid moet laten op de wikipedias waar ze in voorkomen? Da's namelijk goed om weten, zeker al jij dit zegt. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 18:48, 23 May 2012 (UTC)