Commons:Categories for discussion/2010/11/Category:Women by name

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.


we have Category:People by name, Category:Men, Category:Women; do we need Category:Women by name and maybe Category:Men by name? Herzi Pinki (talk) 23:12, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

And Girls by name, Adolescent girls by name, Old Women by name, boys by name, children by name, ... This is a proliferation of needless categories, I would propose to merge it back in Women and maintain one single "people by name" category. --Foroa (talk) 23:23, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
This category doesn't in fact imply all the others you cite. It isn't a subcategory of Category:people by name either. Merging it into Women tends to miss the point of this category.  Docu  at 08:45, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Here we have Category:Women/Men, which is pretty much the same. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:41, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Compare these with sv:Category:Kvinnor/Män and you will notice a substantial difference. -- User:Docu

To me this category looks quite unneeded. The "by-name" sorting structure is, as far as I understand, a maintenance super-cat utensil which yealds no separate existence to sub-themes. I may be wrong. The category looks reasonless. Orrlingtalk 08:46, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

OBVIOUS Symbol keep vote.svg Keep; unless the nominator has some other, better, suggestion for how to sort our "biographical" material by gender? & arguing that "we don't need to bother" is NOT an acceptable answer. as regards "people by name" having been made a "hidden" category, i'm not clear on why we thought it was NOT useful to allow ordinary users to have easy access to that cat? Lx 121 (talk) 00:43, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Kept. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:46, 9 June 2014 (UTC)