Commons talk:Categories for discussion

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Categories for discussion.
Archives: 1

About adjusting the Wikidata item[edit]

As a result of the outcome of Commons:Village pump/Archive/2023/08#How independent is Commons in deciding which categories are appropriate? I think the section "Closing a discussion" of this page should be adjusted as well. I would like to add:

Adjust the Wikidata item if needed. If a category gets a redirect or will be deleted: change or remove the category from the Wikidata item (at two places); if it is about a category with two or more subjects as well, add P971 (category combines topics) for each subject (see Q15 in Commons:Wikidata infobox help).

Questions:

  1. Do you agree?
  2. If yes: Where should this line be inserted? As a part of 4. or make a new point 7?

JopkeB (talk) 05:49, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I fully understand, but: there are times when a redirect is perfectly appropriate interwiki link for a Wikidata item. In fact, redirects are sometimes created for exactly that purpose. Not every time that Wikidata breaks something apart means that Commons needs to, and vice versa. Otherwise, you tend toward a situation of "if splitters win over lumpers anywhere, they win everywhere." For example, Wikidata normally splits out an item for every separate translation and edition of a book; Commons does not, and should not need to follow Wikidata in this respect if we have a category for the book. - Jmabel ! talk 18:03, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I intended to add it as a reminder: when someone closes a discussion, (s)he might have to change the Wikidata item as well, especially when a redirect or deletion of a category is involved, at the discretion of the editor. I agree: "Commons does not, and should not need to follow Wikidata", but that is not my intention. This new line is purely to keep Wikidata up to date after a redirect or deletion of a Commons category. JopkeB (talk) 01:39, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@JopkeB: Maybe you mean something different by "gets a redirect" than I thought. I assumed that meant "becomes a redirect" and seemed to suggest that a redirect can never be an appropriate target for a Wikidata interwiki link. If that's not what you mean, can you spell out what you mean? - Jmabel ! talk 15:51, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"gets a redirect" for me means: insert {{Category redirect|XXX}} or #Redirect[[Category:XXX]] into a Commons category. Is that not correct?
And yes, a redirect can be a target for a Wikidata, but I think it is better to have such a link directly to the correct Commons category, if possible. JopkeB (talk) 16:24, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@JopkeB: My point, though, is that there are times when a redirect is actually the correct target of the interwiki link, and occasionally may be created precisely to be the target of an interwiki link. For example, let's say that in addition to Bob Keeshan (Q4354581) and Captain Kangaroo (Q447527) (the show), Wikidata had a separate item for the persona Captain Kangaroo. We could create Category:Captain Kangaroo (character), soft-redirect that to Category:Bob Keeshan, and link the new Q-item to that new, redirected category. - Jmabel ! talk 19:35, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: So my proposal should be less assertive, something like:
Adjust the Wikidata item if needed. If a category gets a redirect or will be deleted: judge whether the category should be changed or removed from the Wikidata item (at two places); if it is about a category with two or more subjects as well, add P971 (category combines topics) for each subject (see Q15 in Commons:Wikidata infobox help).
Would you agree with this change? JopkeB (talk) 04:54, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely a lot better. I wouldn't be surprised if it could be further improved, but I'd have no objection to that. - Jmabel ! talk 16:55, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
How would you further improve it? JopkeB (talk) 04:13, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the proposed changes. This discussion is closed now. JopkeB (talk) 03:06, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a standard way to ask for the closing of a discussion, or to publicize a discussion?[edit]

Commons:Categories for discussion/2022/08/Category:Tony Blinken has been opened for more than a year, with the last comment being made in March of this year (minus the one I just added). How would I go about requesting closing this discussion? At the moment there is a mix in the naming of the categories and it would be nice to normalize the naming. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 03:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To publicize a discussion, you post to somewhere appropriate (village pump, administrators' noticeboard, WikiProject talk page, etc.). Please be as neutral as you can (don't advocate for a particular position). Make sure you also indicate on the CfD itself that you have done so, or it could be considered inappropriate canvassing. Usually the notice on the CfD itself is set off in a <small> element.
To ask for closure, ping an admin or two.
In this case, with opinion nearly evenly divided, I'm not surprised no one has closed the CfD, so seeking more opinions might be more useful than asking for closure. - Jmabel ! talk 05:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank your for these pointers. I'm not really finding a good place to gather more opinions. Village pump and admin noticeboard feels a little too broad for this rather small issue. And I can't locate a WikiProject that would be interested in this issue. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 14:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cryptic-waveform: How about Commons talk:Project page translation?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 00:36, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see how the project is related to the CfD. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 01:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cryptic-waveform: Sorry, how about the talk pages of the parent categories? Or is it too late, as you have renamed the category already out of process?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 02:33, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cryptic-waveform and Jmabel: I'm sorry, I overreacted.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:19, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cryptic-waveform: you absolutely should not rename a category while there is active discussion as to what it should be named. As you probably know, renames are somewhat hard to undo cleanly in the case where one name will be the "real" name and the other a redirect. - Jmabel ! talk 06:04, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And leave a misspelled category in place? Let's agree to disagree. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 11:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Tony" is not a misspelling, it is a nickname. - Jmabel ! talk 18:42, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I moved from Anthony to Antony. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 18:50, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
See Revision #830050541 and Revision #830050972. I was open about this and specifically said that the outcome of the CfD would be respected: Revision #830050796. I don't really appreciate being accused of not respecting the CfD process. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 13:37, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Cryptic-waveform: my sincere apologies, then, that was perfectly reasonable and appropriate. - Jmabel ! talk 19:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, It has been over 2 weeks since a notice for category for discussion has been added to this page and only 1 person - the person who added the notice - has called for the category to be deleted. Can somebody please remove the category for deletion notice off the page? It should I believe never have been added to it. The category is great, I believe. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Official_Languages_Act,_2003 Darren J. Prior

Nothing really to change about the answer I gave you in December. Remember that barring a very clear, strong consensus (usually one including the category creator), one week is a minimum to leave a CfD open, and admins are backed up several months in closing even the ones that are one step less routine than that. - Jmabel ! talk 07:23, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible for me to remove the CfD notice from the page now? Darren J. Prior (talk) 15:58, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
From what page? Neither Category:Tony Blinken nor Category:Antony Blinken have such a notice, nor did they when you asked. - Jmabel ! talk 13:26, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Category:Buildings in Cologne by year of destruction"[edit]

I think, there should be a distinction between buildings that disappeared by that destruction, and buildings that were reconstructed some years later.--Ulamm (talk) 20:53, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ulamm: this page is certainly not the place to discuss it. This is the talk page to discuss the page Commons:Categories for discussion. - Jmabel ! talk 03:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons_talk:Categories_for_discussion&oldid=871196770"