File talk:Tartu asv2022-04 img51 Veski 6.jpg

@A.Savin: I removed fences category as it's hard to consider the fence as the subject of this image. The image focuses on building, while fence is merely a detail at the bottom. If people use fences category to find illustrations of fences and they find such poor illustrations of the subject then the category doesn't seem to fulfil its purpose. You might want to crop the image and upload it separately to produce an image that more clearly illustrates the fence, e.g. similar to this image. 2001:7D0:81E6:EF80:5006:D38:1060:59EB 06:53, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

Please leave the category as is, it is common practice on Commons to have multiple categories, the subject does not have to be the main purpose. Regards --A.Savin 10:10, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

In general, surely an image can depict multiple subjects prominently and there can be multiple categories. But I don't think it's really a common practice to categorize by incidental details. See also COM:C#Categorization tips where it's pointed out that when choosing categories it should be determined "what is the main subject" and "what are the noteworthy features of the image". Which is sort of obvious anyway as otherwise categories would be much less useful. 2001:7D0:81E6:EF80:309C:AA0F:1328:667 11:02, 11 July 2022 (UTC)

In general I'm amongst the last ones who would ever place a category of something hardly visible (many others do), but as said in this case, the fence category is perfectly fine, and if you disagree you may raise a thread on COM:VP, but please do not remove anything arbitrarily. I also think this "costs nothing" and really not worth long discussions. Regards --A.Savin 11:36, 11 July 2022 (UTC)