Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/12/Category:Women with big breasts

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Category:Women with big breasts[edit]

How are big breasts defined? Does this category makes sense? Friechtle (talk) 12:17, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

  • There is a medical term for bosoms that are large enough that they cause medical problems -- like back strain. In the ideal world we would have dry clinical pictures in a category named for this medical term.

    The images currently in this category all seem to be entertainers. It is quite likely that rather than having a medical condition from which they might consider surgical relief, they are proud owners of what Penn Gilette called "after market bosoms", and thus wouldn't qualify for the grouping I suggested above. Geo Swan (talk) 22:11, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Really, is this a medical term? We have Category:Hypertrophy of breast. I think this should be then a subcategory of Category:Women with big breasts, right? And what about Category:Christina Hendricks or Category:Kat Dennings? I think this category should be deleted as there can't be a general agreement of what makes a breast big or not. Also it is a little bit sexist I think because there are no other categories like Category:Women with small breasts and Category:Women with medium breasts. The only usage in this category I see, is for people that like big breasts. But that has no encyclopedic background. So I think this category should be deleted.--Friechtle (talk) 07:18, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Maybe we should just redirect the big breast category to the Hypertrophy category? That way, both sides are happy. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 02:54, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
With regard to Category:Christina Hendricks and Category:Kat Dennings -- you expose a weakness of the whole system of regular contributors using categories to classify stuff. The (missing) feature we should have for classifying stuff would (1) provide a place for an explanation as to why the element belongs in the category; (2) the replacement for categories should enable a record of what elements it had once contained. I strongly suspect that when categories were added, they were seen as a tool for the software maintainers and developers, one which regular contributors and readers would never notice.
With regard to the size of Ms Hendricks's bosoms -- journalists and other commentators (ie not fanboys) have commented on the size of her bosoms. So it is documentable, and thus, I suggest, in scope. Geo Swan (talk) 14:26, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Symbol delete vote.svg Delete as above. Yann (talk) 14:12, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Deleted: This category does not make sense - the discussion points it out quite clearly. --High Contrast (talk) 14:37, 10 February 2013 (UTC)