Category talk:Appapa (ship)
Category:Appapa (ship)[edit]
No ship called "Appapa" existed in Lloyd's Register. This is a mis-spelling of "Apapa". Motacilla (talk) 08:11, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- If it's this one, it's probably easiest just to redirect this category. Rodhullandemu (talk) 08:14, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Motacilla: Unfortunately, the category is now empty and it is not possible for the discussants to find out where its content has disappeared and whether its categorization were adequate. Motacilla (talk · contribs) removed the only included file File:06-1939 P.Vendres, Appapa Foto L. Sitenský.jpg from the category without finding and proving the correct name for the ship. If the ship's name in the category title was inaccurate, the category should be properly renamed or redirected to the correct name, not simply emptied or even deleted. Btw., the file name proposal contains also no reasons, resources and identification, so no one can comply with it either.
- @Rodhullandemu: IMHO, a cargo ship built in 1973 cannot be photographed in 1939 as a military ship. --ŠJů (talk) 12:39, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
- My superpowers are many and great, but even I am not gifted with knowing what *used to be* in an empty category. There seems to be enough category information in the file to narrow it down, assuming it's correct information. But a quick Google supports that it is, in fact, a separate ship. Rodhullandemu (talk) 12:43, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Btw., Gpkp moved the file (on User:Motacilla's request) without redirect, and without any source documenting the correct name of the ship. By default, redirect should be left when renaming a file, especially if the file is linked from several pages, and we do not have the option to verify if it is not linked from the outside. Until we have no source, what should convince us that the uploader had an error in the name and Motacilla knows the ship's name reliably? Two rename proposals, no evidence nor source, no reaction in the discussion. --ŠJů (talk) 04:59, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
- @ŠJů: The file wasn't linked to any article, so I didnt leave the redirect. Also while renaming a file, if the corresponding file is linked to any article, there is no option to rename it without leaving a redirect. Meanwhile I renamed it checking the category name. --Gpkp (talk) 05:16, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
- Redirects are not just useful to Commons. If a file has been linked to from an external website, not leaving a redirect will break their page. The only times a redirect should not be left, IMO, are (a) a file has just been uploaded with an incorrect name or (b) the original filname is hopelessly useless, i.e. File:IMAGE_1997. Rodhullandemu (talk) 08:34, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
- Appreciate it. Thank you @Rodhullandemu: . --Gpkp (talk) 06:20, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
- Redirects are not just useful to Commons. If a file has been linked to from an external website, not leaving a redirect will break their page. The only times a redirect should not be left, IMO, are (a) a file has just been uploaded with an incorrect name or (b) the original filname is hopelessly useless, i.e. File:IMAGE_1997. Rodhullandemu (talk) 08:34, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
@Motacilla, Rodhullandemu, ŠJů, and Gpkp: Closed (stale discussion; no consensus to change current state) Josh (talk) 01:16, 2 April 2022 (UTC)