User talk:Foroa

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome on my talk page

I reply to messages on this talk page on this talk page. For readability, it is preferred to keep the discussions on the talk page where the discussion started, unless specifically requested otherwise.

I can read English, Dutch, French and some German. I'll do my best to reply in the language of the requester (except German, just too rusty) but don't laugh at me.

User talk:Foroa/archive 2007 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2008 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2009 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2010 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2011 - User talk:Foroa/archive 2012

Backlog: Commons:Database reports/Self-categorized categories Category:Uncategorized categories

TUSC token 97eaf337d9284037064c0a5c023091ca[edit]

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

About time......[edit]

that you get this

Tireless Contributor Barnstar.gif The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
Nice work with maintaining categories, Foroa. --Kanonkas(talk) 19:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

You always pop up in my watchlist too ;) Specifically, User:CommonsDelinker/commands. Thanks for taking your time, espescially in the category area. Best, --Kanonkas(talk) 19:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Wind rose versus Compass rose[edit]

Please, read the respective articles (en:Wind rose and en:Compass rose) at first. Don't look just to file name, look at image itself. The half of your cat. changes was fallacious. Alex Spade (talk) 21:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

We have indeed a problem here. As you can read in w:Wind rose : "Historically, wind roses were predecessors of the compass rose (found on maps), as there was no differentiation between a cardinal direction and the wind which blew from such a direction", the meaning of "wind rose" has changed in the last decades. Since we have many historical images that are real "wind roses" that indicate the names and directions of the various local winds, I think that it would be better to rename the current Category:Wind roses to Category:Wind roses (meteorology) so that Category:Wind roses can be used for old wind roses. Unless you are prepared to watch this category permanently and to have this discussion over and over again. What do you think ? --Foroa (talk) 08:10, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
A suggest that Category:Wind roses must be using for real ones (because of current using of term). For old wind/compass roses it is only possible to create Category:Wind roses (cartography)/Category:Wind roses (heraldry) as soft redirect to Category:Compass roses, or vice versa. Alex Spade (talk) 10:05, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
There are hundreds of files that refer to wind roses (in several languages) and there are many old (real) wind roses that don't really belong in the crowded category Category:Compass roses. So we should create a Category:Wind roses (meteorology) and Category:Wind roses (compass). Because of the confusion, we have to disambiguate anyway. --Foroa (talk) 11:51, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
My main idea - don't mix real and historical ones, as you have initially done with several files. The names of categories are not so impotant from my POV. Just don't foget to change commons/commonscat parameters in respective en-wiki articles after renaming commons-cats. Alex Spade (talk) 16:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Smerinthus ocellata[edit]

Ok, I want to learn, how should we do? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:33, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Destroying the work from others and blanking pages is no solution. This is in general a symptom of vandalisme. Normally, galleries are moved, but I see now that you created your own version so I "moved" it a posteriori. --Foroa (talk) 09:37, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you I was hoping that somebody will come and help me. As you understand I'm not a vandal. How should I do to ask for a deletion of gallery? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
I know now that you are not a vandal, but I have to address more than hundred of such cases per week. Galleries can follow the standard deletion procedure as for images and in some cases are eligible for {{Speedy delete}}. But in the cases above, just rename it and build on that. Bonnes fêtes. --Foroa (talk) 10:05, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you I will remember, it's not complicated. Happy New Year 2013! Merci Face-smile.svg--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Cosmic Articulation[edit]

Hello. I've seen you've deleted Category:Vladimir Putin on 31 December and moved the files to Category:Vladimir_Putin_on_December_31. Is it not just cosmic articulation rather than any real value addition? Hindustanilanguage (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2013 (UTC).

It also makes little sense given our day categories are "(day) (month)" not "(month) (day)". -mattbuck (Talk) 19:36, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Please see Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Cosmic_Articulation. Rd232 (talk) 16:00, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Young Enterprise[edit]

  • Cat-a-lot: Moving from Category:Young Enterprise to Category:Young Enterprise (charitable organization)
Question - why did you do this? It is a completely useless move given that there is nothing disambiguatory. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Categories states clearly: The category name would be enough to guess the subject,, so don't tell me that this is the case for Category:Young Enterprise, which is basically not an enterprise, was categorised in Category:Enterprise which was intended for the Enterprise (ride), and which would be filled up within a year with plenty of things related to young enterprises (If you search on commons or en:wiki you will already find 4 or 5 items that are related to "young enterprise"). --Foroa (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Wrong category "Holtensen bei Wunstorf"[edit]

In my opinion you have reverted my category change in File:Wappen Holtensen (Barsinghausen).png incorrectly. "Holtensen bei Wunstorf" does not exist. The correct term is "Holtensen (Barsinghausen)" for the village near Wunstorf. Would you please check it and remove the category again? A look at de:Holtensen and de:Holtensen (Barsinghausen) may facilitate the examination. Thank you --Losch (talk) 20:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Destroying the work from others and blanking pages is no solution. Blanking is often a symptom of vandalism. I am reviewing more than hundred of such cases per week. If the name is wrong, either issue a {{Move}} request or insert {{Better name}}. When we delete it then, at least the original author will know where it has been moved to. --Foroa (talk) 18:33, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Files by user:Harold Hidalgo[edit]

Hey. I originally called the category "Nature at caracas" because I was about to add more images, but well, rl happens. As all images are taken by me, could you then rename it "Category:Files by Hahc21"? Thanks. — ΛΧΣ21 21:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done The category name was incorrect and there are several Caracas, so if I would not have renamed the category, chances were that people would have categorised the images in some subcats of one of the Caracas trees. Please indicate what Caracas you mean and proceed with proper topical categorisation. Thank you. --Foroa (talk) 18:45, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the help, Foroa. I greatly appreciate it. Regards. — ΛΧΣ21 19:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Possible Rijksmonumenten cats[edit]

Hallo Foroa,

Je had een aantal Possible rijksmonumenten cats in de reguliere boom van categorieën geplaatst (onder de bijbehorende plaatsen). Dat lijkt me niet heel handig, het gaat om een paarduizend tijdelijke categorieën (als de botupload klaar is over een maand, en als de categorieën daarna leeggewerkt zijn kunnen ze weggegooid worden.) Het lijkt me niet handig tijdelijke categorieën in de permanente navigatie op te nemen.

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 23:24, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Dat was niet zo gedocumenteerd en ik dacht dat het aansluiten bij de target cat het vinden van hulp om de beelden juist te classeren zou aanmoedigen. Mij goed, zoals je wilt. Beste groet. --Foroa (talk) 18:38, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

My move attempt.[edit]

I'm confused and in need of guidance. Your revert of my move attempt bears the comment, "Please follow move procedure, redirecets <sic> to non existing cats don't work." Well, COM:MOVE is the core guideline, so I started there. says: "Responding editors should follow the instructions on the template." and I believe that's exactly what I did. The template says, " please remove this notice, replacing it with a {{category redirect|Église Saint-François de Lavaur}}". So I'm following that procedure, at least. If there's a category renaming procedure, please point me to it; I'm not aware of it; perhaps COM:MOVE should point to it, eh? I guess I did the wrong thing, but then there seems to be something wrong with {{tl:category redirect}}. What's going on? What's right, what's wrong? I've just moved the two files into the destination category. Now that I've done that, is it appropriate to revert your revert? --Elvey (talk) 04:27, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

There is indeed a problem with the documentation, which is corrected by now. Problem is that redirects to non existing categories don't work. I moved it now. --Foroa (talk) 07:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Well, I was asking for guidance, but I have no idea what you did or what you're talking about. I tried to figure it out. :-( Oh, somehow I missed the link to Commons:Rename a category. --Elvey (talk) 20:08, 3 January 2013 (UTC)


Dag Foroa, ik had de files hernoemd vanwege misschien toekomstige verwarring met Colonel Claude Doussineau. Wil je eens zien of en hoe de categorie dient hiernoemd? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 08:09, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Inderdaad, geen goed idee om een familienaam als categorienaam te gebruiken. Verhuisd naar Category:Jean-Baptiste Doussineau. Geen idee in welke categorie zijn kruistocht onder te brengen is. --Foroa (talk) 06:36, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Bedankt! Oh, BTW, ik had nog geen gelegenheid mijn beste wensen voor het nieuwe jaar over te brengen, wat ik bij deze vlug doe! Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 16:40, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Ook beste wensen voor jou, soms denk ik dat ik al twee maanden ver ben in het nieuwe jaar ;). Er zin ier een pôotje pipos die my stif rap versleetn. --Foroa (talk) 17:31, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Doe vo wel en kyk nie omme ;). Van myn ook beste wenschn...--Zeisterre (talk) 17:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
Touché. Ôok zo vele, 't Doet deugd voe te ziene datter ier nog echte bezig zyne tusschen ol die môoskers. --Foroa (talk) 18:04, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

Radio broadcasting[edit]

Stop it, please. You are reintroducing a messy circular category strucure. I have thought something. --Cqdx (talk) 17:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

In Commons:Categories for discussion/2012/02/Category:Radio broadcasting there is clear consensus to keep it. Stop changing it. --Foroa (talk) 18:03, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. And now please redo the redirect, since one of the two parent categories (radio) of this category (radio broadcasting), is rightfully the subcategory of the other parent category (broadcasting). --Cqdx (talk) 18:04, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Your actions are disruptive. --Cqdx (talk) 18:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Revert Anfrage über[edit]

Wir müssen diskutiert werden.da die Frage aufgeworfen.auf der Diskussionsseite.
Stop bad orthography nuvola.svgCommons:Löschrichtlinien#L.C3.B6schantrag I will provide a reason that feel uncomfortable.German citizen serving my brethren.Revert performed otherwise.Danke. Gott segne Sie.--MOTOI Kenkichi(基 建吉) (talk) 18:15, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

File:Breydel & De Konick.jpg[edit]

Dag Foroa, bestaat er een consensus om dergelijk verkeerd gespelde naam te corrigeren, ttz hernoemen file? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Dag Lotje, geen enkel probleem om foute spellingen in namen te corrigeren. --Foroa (talk) 07:00, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Gulzar moved[edit]

Hello! The Category:Gulzar was moved to Category:Gulzar (poet) by you recently. I did not understand the reason behind it. There seems to be nothing else on Commons that has same name and would conflict requiring a disambiguation. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:01, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Simply because there are potentially 20 different en:Gulzar (disambiguation) and they eventually will all come on Commons ([1]). --Foroa (talk) 07:44, 10 January 2013 (UTC)
I see! Thanks! §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:57, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

RE: Kososvo[edit]

Hello, I disagree as English Wikipedia list the main article for Kosovo only as region, not as Republic of Kosovo or as Serbian provinces the Kosovo, and on Commons Kosovo is listed in the Category:Unrecognized or largely unrecognized states. But well, I agree to leave it then in order not to start another war. --Bdx (talk) 11:22, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Greek seals[edit]

Instead of changing the tags to a different one that also doesn't apply, please join the discussion about this issue. Fry1989 eh? 22:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Category change/speedy question[edit]

Hi Foroa. Can you take a look at Category:Artwork on Givat-Ram? I decided not to delete this without referring to you about it. INeverCry 21:21, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I gave up discussions and subsequent moves by the (self-proclaimed) Hebrew spelling specialists; it looks as if it is an art in its own right. I just try to keep the categories that have an en:wikipedia counterpart in line with the wikipedia. --Foroa (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Moving categories[edit]

Hi Foroa, I updated It will now follow links in the deletion log. So for example I moved Category:American Hotel (Amsterdam). The bot picks this up and updated the link. You are one of the most active category movers here at Commons. Could you make sure you include "moved to <some category as a link>" in your deletion summary? That way you'll be sure that any links downstream will get updated. By the way, the deletion link in {{Move}} will do this. Thank you, Multichill (talk) 13:07, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

I did so probably in the 29992 of the 30000 categories I moved lately. I try to find that back for blanked categories too.


You recently reverted my edit on Category:SVG simplification techniques, but you probably didn't noticed that it is still marked as a meta-category, but with a non-standard alert. So, what to do? Maybe it should use Template:CatCat? --Ricordisamoa (talk) 07:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I added {{CatCat}}. --Foroa (talk) 08:08, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Category:Rijksmonumenten categories to be classified[edit]

Hmm ik was even vergeten dat je gewoon Nederlands sprak, zal ik het nog even in het Nederlands opschrijven: Hallo Foroa,

Wat is de bedoeling van deze categorie? Sommige van de subcategorieën hiervan zijn namelijk foutief en hoeven niet aangemaakt te worden. Zoals Category:Rijksmonumenten in Horst. Er zijn namelijk 2 plaatsen Horst. Daarnaast zijn al deze categorieën niet in de rijksmonumentenboom opgenomen, en niet in de lijsten op nl-wiki gelinkt, waardoor de bots er slecht mee overweg kunnen. Ik ben van plan na de upload van alle afbeeldingen (over ongeveer 10-15 dagen) alle rode "Rijksmonumenten in XXX" categorieën aan te maken, of de afbeeldingen naar de gemeentecat te verplaatsen. Als de plaatsen geen eigen lijst op nl-wiki hebben (dat is minder dan 8 monumenten in de plaats) lijkt een eigen cat me overdreven en wil ik ze naar de gemeentecat verplaatsen, dit heb ik enkele dagen terug al voor de plaatsen S-Z gedaan, echter dit was vechten tegen de bierkaai, 2 dagen later waren er namelijk veel van de categorieën die ik geleegd had alweer gevuld met nieuwe foto's. Als ik dit dus achteraf doe scheelt me dat veel werk. Tot die tijd is het prima als de categorieën even rood blijven.

Mvg, Basvb (talk) 11:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

(Reply made before the Dutch version) I am (and others too) keeping an eye on Special:WantedCategories to detect buzzy novice uploaders with wrong categories, so we can correct, create or signal them as soon as possible, so they can improve their categorisation. Obviously, if you load with your bots hundreds of categories that will stay there for weeks or months, Special:WantedCategories becomes unusable. Therefore I created Category:Rijksmonumenten categories to be classified to get them quickly out of the way while it is less work for you (or others did already) to HotCat the right categories. With your hundreds of downloads in the wrong non disambiguated categories, you give us a hard time to keep Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories while I noticed that some uploads are on the wrong end of the world. So, if you want to win some time, just classify your categories somewhere where they don't interfere with the others. --Foroa (talk) 11:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Ok, dus als ik het goed begrijp wil je de categorieën met heel veel afbeeldingen blauw hebben? Dan is dit op zich wel een handige tijdelijke oplossing. Je hebt heel wat categorieën aangemaakt die foutief zijn (dubbel met slechte naam). Zolang niemand ermee aan de slag gaat kan ik ze dan vanuit de categorie in het kopje aanpakken over 10 dagen als alles af is en nomineer ik ze daarna wel voor verwijdering. Basvb (talk) 12:07, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Waarvoor waren de categorieën met maar 1 afbeelding nodig? Dit is toch alleen maar nodig voor de hele grote categorieën? Basvb (talk) 12:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, die foutieve cats komen van je bot, ik maak ze enkel blauw en zet ze in een hokje.
In Special:WantedCategories hebben wij al honderdtallen foute cats geleegd naar de correcte cats, en tientallen Nederlandse cats aangemaakt. Het ware natuurlijk veel eenvoudiger om niet alles ineen te klutsen en direct de juiste of verschillende cats te gebruiken, of cats die systematisch een <Buildings in stad-provincie> naam gebruiken. Vermits je meestal de file moet openen om de provincie te weten te komen is het splitten zeer tijdrovend. Alleen al op Category:Rijswijk ben ik al meer dan een uur bezig geweest.
Vermits die categorieën aanmaken nogal wat tijd vraagt, heb ik ook geprobeerd het via [2] en meer systematisch te doen. Levert geen noemenswaardige tijdswinst op en die kleine cats (die in principe nog kunnen groeien). --Foroa (talk) 13:16, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Tja heel wat plaatsen hebben nog geen categorie, 550,000 afbeeldingen uploaden levert veel mooi materiaal op, maar levert ook wat kleine probleempjes op. Plaatsen zoals Rijswijk kunnen het beste botmatig gedaan worden (afhankelijk van de provincie in de ene of de andere cat). De plaatscats zelf zijn nog een beetje een probleem. De rijksmonumentencats kan ik heel snel aanmaken als ik de nl-wiki lijsten erbij hou. Een paar plaatsen hebben een naam voor 2 plaatsen, dat kan helaas dan niet makkelijk automatisch goed gezet worden. DE categorieën van de vorm "Rijksmonumenten in XXX" zal ik voor zorgen, dat kan ik straks als de upload klaar is vrij eenvoudig doen, zal een maandje werk kosten maar is dan helemaal opgeruimd. Als ik het nu doe scheelt me dat achteraf niet noemenswaardig in tijd, ik wacht daar dus het liefste nog even mee. Basvb (talk) 16:21, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Met pywikipedia kun je met de volgende code als voorbeeld bijvoorbeeld Maasland oplossen:
python -lang:commons -family:commons -namespace:6 -cat:Maasland -summary:"Fix ambigious placed images" -regex -dotall "(\{\{Building address[^\}]+State \= Zuid\-Holland[^\}]+[^\}]+\}\}.+)\[\[Category:Maasland\]\]" "\1Category:Maasland,_Midden-Delfland"
Op deze manier is het een kwestie van enkel nog de goede cats per provincie vinden, dit werkt niet als de plaatsen in dezelfde provincie liggen, dan wordt het erg lastig. Misschien dat je met deze regex de andere cats makkelijker aan kunt pakken (dan had Rijswijk 5 minuten ipv meer dan een uur gekost). Basvb (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Overigens is dit net zoals de Rijksmonumentencategorieën het makkelijkste om te doen nadat alles geüpload is. Anders moet hetzelfde 2x gedaan worden. Achteraf wil ik best de ambigue plaatsen bekijken en met een botje zoveel mogelijk verwerken zoals ik zojuist bij een aantal grotere plaatsen gedaan heb. Basvb (talk) 16:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Probeer maar eens Category:Oudega snel snel te ontrafelen, en zo zijn er nog. --Foroa (talk) 17:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Tja, ik probeer alleen maar te helpen. Zoals je kunt zien heb ik vandaag vele duizenden afbeeldingen van verbeterde categorieën voorzien. Ik kan niet honderdduizend afbeeldingen in een dagje poef fixen. Plaatsen zoals Oudega zijn gewoon lastig, maar er is een hele schare vrijwilligers bezig met het identificeren van de afbeeldingen. Ik heb n.a.v. het bovenstaande overleg een paar van de grootste plaatscats gefixt, maar die plaatscats zal gewoon veel werk blijven. Misschien is het wel gewoon het handigste de ambigue plaatsen voorlopig even over te slaan (die Special:WantedPages kun je ook gewoon doorklikken, de eerste 5000 zijn niet allemaal Nederlandse plaatsen). En als alle afbeeldingen over 15 dagen geüpload zijn wil ik best kijken welke ambigue plaatsen ik met de bot veel werk kan besparen. De Rijksmonumenten cats zal ik tegen die tijd ook oppakken. Dat nu doen is voor mij dubbel werk en daar heb ik geen zin in.
Ik kwam overigens nog tegen dat je Category:Ougré (Obbicht) aangemaakt hebt als onderdeel van Sittard-Geleen. Ik zat echter te twijfelen over deze plaats. Er bestaat namelijk helemaal geen Ougré. Wel bestaat er een Ougrée in België, aangezien er geen provincie op deze afbeeldingen stond zou dit kasteel goed in het buitenland kunnen liggen. De categorie van een totaal onbestaande plaats Ougré is in ieder geval onjuist. Als ik op Ougré google krijg ik alleen resultaten die met Ougrée (Seraing) te maken hebben. Basvb (talk) 19:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Reliefs from the Campana Collection Vs. Campana Reliefs[edit]

Could you please tell me what you've done here? This is completely incorrect! "Campana Reliefs" are an terminus technicus in Classical Archaeology! Some of them are from the Campana Collection. But there are a lot more in a lot of museums worldwide. And there are Reliefs in the Campana Collection who are NOT Campana Reliefs. Why you do such things, when you don't know what you are doing? I changed it back. Please never do things you don't know about. It only makes work for the others. annoyed: Marcus Cyron (talk) 23:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, we had a delinker failure for 2 weeks and a long backlog on COM:DL, so I did not take to verify thoroughly the requested moves. --Foroa (talk) 18:54, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

art from vs. in[edit]

Hi Foroa, did you already notice this discussion Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/01/Category:1520s paintings from Germany? --Túrelio (talk) 07:30, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

File:55 Baker Street exterior II.jpg[edit]

Dag Foroa, dit is een afbeelding waar duidelijk aan "gesleuteld" werd (fotoshop, maquette?). Weet jij een category waarin deze dan ook kan worden ondergebracht? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:48, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Dag Lotje, ik dacht eerst aan Category:Models of buildings in the United Kingdom, maar dat gaat te ver. Het is niet noodzakelijk fout of fictional (facts disputed) maar het kan inderdaad de werkelijkheid vervalsen. Een interessante vraag voor de Village pump moet ik toegeven, sorry dat ik geen beter antwoord heb. --Foroa (talk) 07:09, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Dat deed ik omdat er bij jou Category: Maasland, Midden-Delfland stond en ik wilde dat eens uitproberen, zien wat het doet. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 17:03, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:São Paulo City and others[edit]

Why did you eliminate Category:People of São Paulo city and others like that?

"São Paulo City" (in Portuguese, "Cidade de São Paulo") does not exist, it's different from Mexico City, in which the word "city" is part of the name.

Please see Category:Rio de Janeiro city: "city" is not capitalized, and this is correct. In Category:São Paulo City the word "city" is capitalized, and this is wrong. See also pt:São Paulo (cidade), the article in Portuguese. There's no reason for the capital initial.

Good editions (and forgive my English, I'm a little bit rusty). Yanguas (talk) 12:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

You might be right that Category:São Paulo City, a long standing category that has been created 7 years ago, is suboptimal and that Category:São Paulo city or Category:São Paulo (city) could be better. That does not mean that you have the right to redirect a category with many subcategories using the same extension to a new name because you like it better and without any formal discussion and agreement, such as COM:CFD or insertion of a {{São Paulo city}} in the top level category. When there seems to be an agreement or no objections, then it can be renamed along with all its subcategories that needs renaming. See Commons:Rename a category. --Foroa (talk) 18:03, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
I didn't expect you to answer here, I thought you had not answer. Anyway... what should I exactly must do? Move the subcategories first? I have read the document about moving categories, but I don't know where to begin.
About the name itself, you don't need to believe me, just see article in Portuguese Wikipedia — it is not "Cidade de São Paulo" (such as pt:Cidade do México), but "São Paulo (city)". You think Category:São Paulo (city) is better than Category:São Paulo city? For me it is ok, for the only wrong way is the way it is now.
Yanguas (talk) 03:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
As I stated, COM:CFD or insertion of a {{São Paulo city}} in the top level category. --Foroa (talk) 06:24, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

löschen doppelter Seite Rhoden[edit]

Hallo Foroa, bitte von mir versehentlich doppelt angelegte Seite löschen.

1   o.K.
2    please delete

best regards


It is far better to rename such galleries (move/verschieben tab) to avoid such situations. A second way is just inserting {{Duplicate|Rhoden (Osterwieck)}} and an administrator will delete when he agrees. --Foroa (talk) 18:32, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Cave of Altamira[edit]

Hello Foroa, I think that Marcelino Sanz de Sautuola‎ and Émile Cartailhac‎ have be out the category Altamira (cave), because, not all the pictures in each category are related with Altamira. If you include these men in Altamira and the related pictures too you will have a redundant categorization. There is another people related with the cave of Altamira (for example: Harlé, Breuil, Obermaier, Hermilio Alcalde del Río, ...) but it is not necessary put all of them into Altamira (cave) category just their pictures related with. Maybe the only person that it could be into Altamira Cave could be Sautuola because he was outstanding only for his work in the cave. Thank you for your time and sorry for my English, --Nachosan (talk) 15:45, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Your English is more than fine. The whole idea of Commons categories is not only classification but equally showing relations between things, so a person that is visiting the Altamira cave category can see immediately which persons have strong associations with the cave. Moreover, those persons might have written books about their findings; books that are not necessarily directly/exclusively related to the caves, but contain some information about it. --Foroa (talk) 18:44, 8 February 2013 (UTC)


Dag Foroa, denk je dat deze afbeelding naar Commons kan? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 14:52, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

In principe kunnen alle files in de:Kategorie:Datei:Public Domain (§134 Satz 2 UrhG) overgebracht worden, een bot job ? Misschien daar even navragen of er geen speciale Commons licentie/cat bij moet. --Foroa (talk) 07:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Undel req question[edit]

Hi Foroa. Can you please give your opinion on Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#Category:National Film Awards and Category:National Film Awards winners? Thanks for your time. INeverCry 21:42, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done--Foroa (talk) 07:17, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. INeverCry 07:34, 11 February 2013 (UTC)


I noticed Category:Sons moved to Category:Sons (offspring) with no reason in either the deletion or the new category. What other meaning of "Sons" would people confuse that word with? --Closeapple (talk) 07:20, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Because of en:Son (disambiguation), fr:Son, Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Sons and because I have to empty it too often as it contains mostly audio files and real sons (offspring) images as after all, each man is the son of someone. --Foroa (talk) 07:37, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Removing a category from a group of files[edit]

Hey, Foroa. Was suggested by Morning Sunshine to contact you. If you don't mind, could you help me with this please? I know such a tool exists; just don't remember where... Many thanks :) Rehman 14:34, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

There is no bot for such tasks, but Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot (enabled in my preferences/gadgets) is very handy for such things. I believe that Help:VisualFileChange.js can be used too. --Foroa (talk) 16:13, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, Foroa! Regards, Rehman 02:17, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Removing catgory " Plaques in Walloon Brabant"[edit]

What a pity to fall back to a national scale with the very broad "Plaques in Belgium". I was pleased to see there are smaller entities at city scale. Yet providing a filing system at province level seems a great improvement to cover what does not belong to a significantly large town. Thanks for clarifying your standpoint ! Olnnu (talk) 19:55, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Well it basically doesn't matter if there are 50 or 500 Category:Plaques in Belgium or in "Plaques in xx province"; those categories serve only for visual search, so the more concentrated they are, the better. Even when creating plaques per province, in the end, they will contain hundreds of items, so not a real improvement. As far as we know, nobody searches for some items in Belgium per province, so there are very few categories in Belgium per province. This is a long standing agreement of the Belgium user community that is documented in Category talk:Belgium and that never has been challenged seriously by "heavy" contributors to the Belgium Commons categories. It is confirmed by categorisation in other countries where some categories are per country only, others per province, district/city that the asymmetric approach just creates more complexity, maintenance problems and troubles without substantial gain. AS usual, the more simple it gets, the less problems. --Foroa (talk) 15:56, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Castles in belgium[edit]

Foroa, I don't appreciate your undoing of my categorizings without discussion. The category Castles in Belgium is much too crowded. 18:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the message above. It's the second time you undo Category:Castles in Liège (province). And with 248 subcategories in Category:Castles in Belgium, we have to create subcategories. If you just think it's the wrong name choose a better one. Best regards Traumrune (talk) 20:48, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
There is a long standing agreement of the Belgium user community that started in Category talk:Churches in Belgium and is kind of summarised in Category talk:Belgium that for cities and villages, significant churches, castles, town halls, ... that basically, the primary need for categories is to have lists by name, followed by lists by location. All this under the assumption that all items will get eventually encapsulated in their own category, which is confirmed every day. As a secondary need, we see "side-categories" to cover the "by type/style/model" needs. On the lowest need level is indeed the by province category, but only if it doesn't break the by name categories. Moreover, if would have by province categories, which we hardly have as can be seen in Category:Provinces of Belgium, it would mean that we add for each of the thousands of Belgium-level categories 10 extra subcategories, which certainly doesn't outweigh the advantages of the simplicity and maintenance free aspects of the basic system. --Foroa (talk) 06:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

The blanked categories for "Suceava" were redirected[edit]

I have added, renamed or organised some of the categories regarding the buildings in Suceava, Romania. I've seen that you have modified some of my work, explaining that I shouldn't blank the categories. The categories that I've blanked were in fact renamed (actually, moved) and now they have a correct name. I've modified the categories that were left blank and I've tagged them with "Category redirected". Thanks for your interest!

Frankly, if all people would blank categories because they disagree on the name of it, Commons would become a strange cemetery full of litter. I guess that you would not like that other people would blank your categories because they don't like the name. For quick deletion of categories, the procedure consist of inserting {{Badname|Good name}} if another category names exist. Alternatively, {{Speedy|reason}} can be used.
Blanking the page makes that the category appears several days later in Special:UncategorizedCategories which we try to keep as empty as possible, but requires significant work as we have to analyse each case if it concerns vandalisme, mistakes, beginners work (that may need assistance) or just a plain categorisation problem. As a minimal courtesy to the creator, we should leave in the deletion summary a reason for deletion and if possible where it has been moved to. So following the standard procedure saves us all unnecessary work. Thank you and keep up the good work. --Foroa (talk) 05:59, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello from Kefalonia, Greece:)[edit]

Hello and thanks for your interest in our work! As you have probably seen on my user page, I am a high school teacher in Greece, and we chose to upload our work on both school projects for Upper Secondary in the designated Commons Galleries. First of all, thanks for adding the right categories to the Wild Flora project, I had no idea where to put it! As for the 365 villages, I would just like you to explain the rationale behind the long list of categories at the bottom of the page. Is it a Wikimedia policy to categorize so "intricately"? Don't get me wrong! I would LOVE for all the categories to "fill up", like the Argostoli page (several are mine, I live in Argostoli). Just that all those red links perhaps "clutter" the page... thanks again, all the best from Kefalonia (sunny today... at least for now! Weather can change from sun to rain to hail three times a day, no exaggeration)--Saintfevrier (talk) 07:55, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

That's about what I understood by reading various bits and pieces, and why I tried to be of some help. Indeed, the best approach is whenever you have some sort of fixed structure, such as your villages, is to create the categories for it. Creating categories takes some upfront work, but once they are there, it is very easy for all uploaders to "drop" their images in it or to improve categories without impacting the other bits and pieces (modularity, you know very well). Then you can be sure that the doc is right, the links to wikipedia, ... You can insert {{Underconstruction}} for empty categories. I made the category list collapsible in the gallery (they can be removed, it was just a list of pointers) and added some example links to categories, but there could be links to wikipedias too. Thank you and enjoy. --Foroa (talk) 08:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Your help has been invaluable, thanks! As you can see, we followed up on the "365 villages" hidden category you created and started adding the code to all the photos we've uploaded... helps us keep all our images pooled in the same place, as e.g. I have one pupil who only uploads (at least for now), so it's easy for another pupil to pick up the former's images and integrate into the gallery. The best part is that this is the first time I've managed to get pupils enthusiastically involved in building the content: usually they hand over material and I do the uploading... now I have three of them working with their own accounts, and all I have to do is polish up their work:) Oh, which reminds me, another question, rather advice: in order to keep the galleries as streamlined as possible, I figured the best policy would be to provide titles in Greek and English, captions only in English (having mentioned that Greek descriptions are available on file page). What do you think? Of course if you look at the gallery right now, a lot of the captions are in Greek (not all my pupils are fluent in English, so I told them to do what suits them and I would afterwards go in and edit wherever necessary). Looking forward to your reply, thanks:) --Saintfevrier (talk) 21:29, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

The nice thing is that galleries have no language restrictions, so I would propose as a baseline Greek first, followed by English as far as possible. As a second level exercise, you could suggest to add the links to categories and assign a number of categories (links to wikipedia articles, cleaning out cats, summary, ...) to each pupil; a way of distributing the work. Enjoy. --Foroa (talk) 06:46, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Writers by language[edit]

Dag Foroa, onder de Category:Writers by language vind ik een Category:Flemish writers‎ terug. Bestaat/bestond er ook zoiets als een Category:Dutch-language writers‎? Bij taalgrensoverschrijdende rewards (nl:Nederlandstalige_jeugdliteratuur zou dat misschien handig zijn, of denk ik daar fout? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:25, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Denk ik niet, die cats ontstaan vooral in landen waar er nogal wat taalconflicten zijn of bij heel grote taalgroepen. In feite zou het moeten zijn "Writers in Dutch language" met als subcats "Flemish writers in Dutch language", "Writers from Suriname in Dutch language", ... Maar ik lig er niet wakker van. Bij Category:Dutch literature dat eigenlijk Category:Dutch language literature zou moeten heten, kan er gemakkelijker wat bijgebouwd worden. --Foroa (talk) 13:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Okay, als jij er niet wakker van ligt, ikke ook niet. Wie hernoemt in de regel bv. Category:Dutch literature dan Category:Dutch language literature? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Raad eens. Beste groet. --Foroa (talk) 18:25, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
Ik was te laat met raden, we was me voor! :) 06:17, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

File:Anefo 911-2840 Voorbereidingen.jpg[edit]

) Dag Foroa, hoe kan men te weten komen wie op deze afbeelding staat? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Dag Lotje. Op de source site is er geen extra info te vinden, tineye geeft geen resultaat, men zou het aan het archief of fotgraaf kunnen vragen ... Heb er dus maar category:Unidentified people of the Netherlands op geplakt. --Foroa (talk) 06:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Hartstikke leuk. Bedankt :) Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 07:52, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Cimitero Acattolico (Capri)[edit]

Hi Foroa, you moved Category:Cimitero Acattolico (Capri). Please fix the links from the Wikipedia articles to the category de:Cimitero Acattolico (Capri), it:Cimitero acattolico di Capri. -- Gerd Fahrenhorst (talk) 16:03, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Done by myself. -- Gerd Fahrenhorst (talk) 21:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Citadelle de Québec[edit]

I left this request for clarification on User_talk:Siebrand when his or her bot changed a bunch of files from Category:Citadelle de Québec to Category:Citadelle of Quebec. (The problem with this change is that while Citadelle de Québec is a legitimate French name, and Citadel of Quebec would be a legitimate English name, the name the bot used is a bastard hybrid that is not in French or English.)

Your deletion log entry for Category:Citadelle de Québec says only that it was moved to Category:Citadelle of Quebec. Like Siebot`s edit summary, it doesn`t say why the later category name should replace the earlier one. Are you aware of a policy or discussion which authorized this change?

Can I ask, if there was a good reason for renaming the category, why a redirection wasn`t left in place?

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 20:57, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Note that I merely check and execute the requests from COM:DL; 10 to 20000 per year. Recently, I executed a backlog of a few hundreds because SieBot, the category mover bot, has been down for 3 weeks. For complaints, linkfixes and redirects, please talk to the original requester or simply fix it. --Foroa (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


Hi Foroa. It looks like a user you'd reverted a few times came back and re-added the same cats. I reverted them and full-protected the cat. INeverCry 18:21, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, this Polish user seems not to understand the concepts of circular and overcats. Tried that many times as anonymous user too. Maybe a Polish admin should try to talk with him, although he doesn't seems very talkative. --Foroa (talk) 16:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Plat du jour[edit]


Non tout les mets ne sont pas susceptibles d'entrer dans cette catégorie et pour cause. Ils correspondent uniquement à ceux qui rappellent une cuisine familiale et qui ne sont servis que dans certains restaurants (En France, l'exemple le plus connu sont les restaurants routiers qui le proposent à côté du ou des menus). Ce met unique et généralement servi copieusement est de plus un repas bon marché. Cdlt --JPS68 (talk) 14:45, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Merci, ça clarifie. Si ne vous documentez pas ceci dans la catégorie, si possible avec des liens vers des articles, un jour votre catégorie sera supprimée. Dans beaucoup de pays, le plat du jour est tout simplement la suggestion du jour sans qu'il y a des nécessairement des limitations. --Foroa (talk) 14:50, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


Hello my friend,
Could you block my bot User:Liné1bot temporarely ?
I think I have a small issue.
Thanks Liné1 (talk) 09:42, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

24 h, N'hésite pas de ... --Foroa (talk) 09:49, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
Excellent. Merci beaucoup Liné1 (talk) 09:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[edit]

Dag Foroa, wat deed ik daar fout? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 11:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Niet echt zwaar fout, maar als the de categorieboom opklimt kom je bij Category:Flandria illustrata terecht die van Sanderus is. --Foroa (talk) 12:50, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


Please don't mess things up with unnecessary complications. - MPF (talk) 14:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Kindly explain your actions and the need for them, or I shall report you for vandalism - MPF (talk) 15:46, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
This is obviously a disambiguation problem. No need to shout 'vandalism'.  B.p. 15:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Very far from obvious. There are thousands of more obvious potential disambiguation problems which are not dealt with in the same way. - MPF (talk) 16:01, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
A repeating pattern with MPF who moves categories out to occupy the most important slot of taxonomy cats (Category:Tapera to Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul)). There is a genus, a city and two rivers that start with Tapera, so you keep it as a disambiguation cat or you delete it. You better use your energy to make durable solutions instead of moving categories back and forward. --Foroa (talk) 16:07, 1 March 2013 (UTC)--Foroa (talk) 16:07, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
Which just goes to show your personal vendetta against taxonomic categorisation (for which you have long been conspicuous, using the slightest pretext to get rid of taxonomic categories) - why have you not made similar changes for e.g. Category:Art, that you did for Category:Sylvia? You changed Category:Sylvia into a disambig on the spurious pretext of it being a forename (which aren't used for categorisation) so as to get rid of the taxon category. Now please do the same for Category:Art so that e.g. Category:Art Garfunkel isn't orphaned in the same way that you think Category:Sylvia Earle must be. And make similar disambig categories for every other forename, e.g. Category:Michael, Category:Peter, Category:Elizabeth, Category:Fred, Category:Paul, Category:Thomas, etc., etc., etc. . . . that these are all redlinks shows up your bias. And while you're at it, please use your energy to redesign Template:Genera and Template:Taxonavigation to make durable solutions so that they show the genus name correctly without that "(genus)" after Sylvia, etc. That these templates are currently buggered up by your disambiguated genus categories demonstrates a clear practical need for taxonomy categories to occupy the top slot - that is the sole reason why I give them that status. Solve it and I will remove my objections. - MPF (talk) 16:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
And why have you gone and changed things to suit your whims before establishing consensus for your changes, and before answering my points above? That is not appropriate behaviour for an administrator, it is what I expect from a vandal. And also - you changed my work (edit 14.13 UTC) within one minute (your edit 14.14 UTC) (see times). Why are you spying on everything I do? If I don't get a satisfactory explanation and apology for this behaviour within your next ten edits, you will be reported to the Administrators' noticeboard. - MPF (talk) 17:58, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
I noticed that you moved Category:Tapera to Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul); Tapera is is the primary name on most wikipedias for that city. That is a good move, provided that the old Tapera is deleted or becomes a disambiguation.
There are hundreds of categories with genus in it: Special:Search/intitle:Category:(Genus). And there are several taxonomy categories that are disambiguated themselves as there is a branch with the same genus for birds, plants, insects ...
If you don't agree on the disambiguation, we can always reinstate the original situation, and move Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul) back. --Foroa (talk) 18:18, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
I did not move Category:Tapera to Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul), I created a new category for the one file that was filed in Category:Tapera, and retained Category:Tapera for its one subcategory (Category:Tapera naevia, which has been in Category:Tapera since its creation nearly 2 years ago). This disambiguation would be far more satisfactorily achieved by retaining Category:Tapera for the genus (which does not readily take a suffix), and adding a hatnote with links to the other categories which do take suffixes more easily (like Category:Tapera (Rio Grande do Sul)), as has been done abundantly elsewhere for solving disambiguation on Commons. Show me the Commons disambiguation policy page supporting your ideas. It does not exist. Oh, and I am still waiting for answers to my points above. Please answer them, and stop evading or ignoring the issues. - MPF (talk) 18:33, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
You have a strange definition of move. The fact that Category:Tapera naevia has been so long in the wrong category proves that it needs disambiguation; we try to maintain Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories.
Here we go again, the nth attempt: User_talk:Foroa/archive_2010#Sylvia_story and I can certainly find others. The world is to be shared on an equal base, same for category names. --Foroa (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
I don't have "a strange definition of move" - I did nothing that used the CommonsDelinker commands for moving categories. And I am still waiting for answers to my points above (and also those which you never dealt with in that Sylvia discussion, either). - MPF (talk) 19:23, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Category:Castle of Turku[edit]

Foroa, you deleted Category:Castle of Turku with reason "Moved to Category:Turku Castle.Reason: Tagged with {{move}} since 13 January 2013". However, Category:Turku Castle is a category redirect pointing back to the deleted category; the category information is now lost to non-admins. I also raised this in COM:AN#Request undeletion of Category:Castle of Turku. MKFI (talk) 10:54, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Restored. --Foroa (talk) 16:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Move of Category:Cisne Branco=[edit]

You have now rebroken the link from English Wikipedia to this category. The German, Spanish Portugese and French links are also all broken - but 3 of the 4 give you a click-through option. Currently all links from Wikipedias to this category are broken. Actions like these are what part of what contribute to the frustration of some English Wikipedians with the Commons systems. Rmhermen (talk) 20:09, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Categories are an internal organisation of Commons and will change all the time because most people think that they have a unique name, which they almost never have. If you got linked the en:wiki as I just did, you would have less of a problem.
The deletion summary of Category:Cisne Branco contains a clickable link, as clickable as the other redirects, but at least, it stimulates people to correct the link, which is better to me than a redirect that doesn't really works. Your recreation of the category is not acceptable as a misleading redirect: it should be rather a disambiguation page. There is a bot in the works that should run on the wikipedia sides to improve on that, but as long as people think they are exclusive owner of a term, there will be frustration on both sides. --Foroa (talk) 06:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Kochi, Kerala ??[edit]

Hi, please take notice of Category:Kochi, Kerala ?? at Category talk:Kochi, thx Roland 19:48, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, and please restore Category:Kochi to keep version history ! So there'll be a consense, a redirect or a 'disamblig' imho is the 'correct' way, thx, Roland 19:59, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

When looking in [[::en:Kochi (disambiguation)]] and Special:PrefixIndex/Category:Kochi, it is clear that Kochi as category name should not be used.
A redirect is misleading.
A disambiguation page needs substantial time to setup and to maintain (few people do such efforts)
A deletion summary with a clickable destination category motivates people to update the link on the requesting page. There are bots in the work to update automatically Wikipedia links to Commons by extracting the destination from the deletion summary. Such a bot cannot do something with a disambiguation category.
I spend a substantial amount of time cleaning out Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories and I notice that many people (and bots) don't check categories; if they are blue, it is al-right.
So personally, I prefer the deleted category but sometimes I create disambiguation categories (if I have time) to ensure that the slot is not taken by some other item.
This is not a Wikipedia, and I don't think that the history really matters, although it is interesting to know that the first use of the category was for Japan, which proves that it needs disambiguation. --Foroa (talk) 06:40, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi, as mentioned I started a 'public discussion' at Category talk:Kochi (will copy thereafter that thread) ...
  1. imho there was no need to delete the category, ok it's done, but please re-establish the category, and for me it's absolutely no problem to establish the needed "disambiguations" according to EN-WP.
  2. your imho 'fast' deletion of the categspan class="signature-talk">talkory occurred to about 40 miss-leading "red" links in other categories,
  3. therefore, please fix the miss-leading links from time to time (was the 'work' of four years).
Thx & regards, Roland 18:44, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Stone house signs[edit]

Cher Foroa,

Je viens solliciter ton aide au sujet de la catégorisation de l'image reprise sous le lien suivant [[3]]. En effet, la catégorisation "Stone house signs in Belgium" qui lui était appliquée était erronée puisque l'image concerne un pont et non une maison. Je viens donc de la recatégoriser "Stone signs in Belgium", mais tu trouveras peu-être une catégorie plus adéquate.

Merci d'avance,

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 11:13, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour Jean-Pol, j'ai vérifié, et effectivement, dans Category:Stone house signs in Belgium, il s'approche un peu, et je n'ai pas trouvé une catégorie plus adéquate. Mais si on trouve pas une meilleure catégorie, on peut peut-être faire mieux correspondre la catégorie existante, par exemple Category:Stone signs on buildings in Belgium, qui est plus passe-partout. Qu'est-ce que t'en penses ? Quel serait le nom en Français (spécialisé) ? --Foroa (talk) 16:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)


Hallo Foroa! Is it possible/achievable to delete Category:Doves with a reference to Category:Pigeons in art for less maintenance work? --PigeonIP (talk) 09:02, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I understand the maintenance problem. Kind of tricky to make the parent category disappear. You could try to make a redirect from Doves to Pigeons in art, with a bit of luck, there will no (immediate) shouting, although we tend to have quicker negative reactions than constructive ones. --Foroa (talk) 16:33, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Than it should be Category:Columbidae. The bot is categorising ringneck doves and others there as well. --PigeonIP (talk) 17:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Probably best solution indeed. --Foroa (talk) 08:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Biagio d'Antonio - The Archangel Raphael with Tobias.jpg[edit]

Hallo Foroa, mag je alsjeblieft hier kijken, die licentie heeft een categorie gevormed, en ik begrijp niet waarom. Bedankt en groeten.––Oursana (talk) 15:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I guess it is OK now; the misery created by template generated categories that are not properly verified. I spent already days on those ones. --Foroa (talk) 17:24, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, I did not aspect, that it was so little. Sorry and thanks.––Oursana (talk) 21:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

User cats[edit]

Regarding your recent reverts of my user cat edits: Can you please show me a consensus for demanding the use of {{User category}} or for the use of hidden cat. I have occasionally been discussing this for years and never has anyone produced such a consensus. /Dcastor (talk) 14:14, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

No doubt, this is clearly spelled out in Commons:User-specific galleries, templates and categories policy and in the header of Category:User_categories; there is no way that user categories can be topical categories. Where there is no consensus is how deep all sorts of parallel personal user categories can become, but don't be surprised if one day, someone decides to merge back your wieldy category tree into a more simple one. --Foroa (talk) 07:21, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Check the Commons:User-specific galleries, templates and categories policy again, and especially the talk page. There has been a stricter wording in the policy, but there doesn't seem to be a consensus supporting it. Of course user cats are not topical, but there is no automatic logic to hide non-topical categories. /Dcastor (talk) 00:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
I have no time to read the whole thing carefully, but you seem the only one opposing. Anyway, I am pretty much convinced that there is a consensus that non topical means hidden (which is not really hidden), and there is from time to time a bot that converts user categories into the template. --Foroa (talk) 07:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
If you are not interested in taking part in the discussion, nor to show one that establishes consensus, I will kindly request that you refrain from reverting my edits, which are in line with the current policy wording. /Dcastor (talk) 14:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, I will bot move all your images in one single category because there is a consensus that there should not be ten of user categories. --Foroa (talk) 14:53, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
First: Please communicate rather than (mis)use your admin tools. Second: Please show me the consensus for numbers of user cats. /Dcastor (talk) 15:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

User problems[edit]

FYI: [4] /Dcastor (talk) 16:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

South by Southwest[edit]

Hello. Since we have over 200 photos of South by Southwest, I don't see that a page displaying only 3 of them is particularly useful. this edit suggests you disagree. What is your reasoning? Thanks. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

This is not a valid reason to delete (or bypass) a gallery; most galleries start small. --Foroa (talk) 19:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Agree that alone is not a reason to delete. However I note that only one user has ever added media to the page, and that was more than 3 years ago (and the user seems not to have been active on Commons for more than a year). The page seemed to me inactive and highly misleading as to the amount and scope of media on the subject on Commons. My thinking was that changing it to a link directly to the category would be more useful. Of course if anyone wished to remake the page as a serious curated gallery they could still do so. Thank you for your feedback. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:53, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

File:Acks Mountain as viewed from Shirleysburg, Pennsylvania.jpg[edit]

Dag Foroa, bij het hernoemen van de originele file was de eerste letter blijven steken, ik undid mijn bewerking en hernoemde opnieuw en dit is wat ik nu te zien krijg. Verdwijnt deze versie automatisch na verloop van tijd of komt daar een admin bij te pas? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Railway Lines[edit]

For railway line category names, please use "–" instead of "-" between endpoints. Thanks, Andre de (talk) 09:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

On Commons, we try to avoid country/language/keyboard depending characters, such as em-dash as this is a source of problems (as you can see when editing this text, the difference is almost non-discernible). See in Commons:Categories for discussion/2011/10/Category:Bilateral relations by country for rationale. See how they are mixed-up (lightly) --Foroa (talk) 09:28, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
The railway specific problem is, that many train station names contain a "-". So its necessary to use the longer "–" for relation. The list how they are mixed-up (lightly) shows, that this version is much more common. --Andre de (talk) 11:30, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok, they are local categories, so you can do what's you judge best. --Foroa (talk) 11:27, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Ok. So please would you shift back your cat-moves? thanks, Andre de (talk) 21:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Request of deletion[edit]

This time I need your help for deletion! I have requested two images for deletion and I ask you to carry it out.

Reason: This file is lack of quality for purposes on Wikipedia and a permit will not be given.

Reason: Its upload was only for testing.

Thank you for your help. --Der Seraph [J.S.] ♂ JohannesSch. (DISCU/EDITS/MAIL) 18:59, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I am in the Category business and never deal with image deletions and/or licence discussions. Don't worry, someone will handle them. --Foroa (talk) 19:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Blocking Orrling - why only for 2 weeks?[edit]

Hi Foroa, I saw that you blocked him only for 2 weeks, what you need to do is to block him at least for 3 months. The last time he was blocked for a month he came back and continue with is un cooperative behavior. You know that nothing effect him. He will come back in 2 weeks and do the same. The time blocking should be grow up not down until the administrators in Commons will understand that Commons without him is better than with him. Please see also Category talk:Archaeological sites on the Golan Heights and Category talk:Archaeological sites in Samaria. Thanks Hanay (talk) 09:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

As I am one of the editors most suffering from Orrling's caprices, I could be considered as involved, so I don't feel inclined to take the lead in longer blocking. Since many of his edits make sense, I am not sure that his damage to the project is understood. As I see no real response on for example Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#User_for_Discussion_.28UFD.29 and I merely see editors that some sort of surrender, I have to wait till a less-involved contributor takes the lead. --Foroa (talk) 15:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
I appreciate what you are doing. I saw now his request for blocking in Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Lock category please I answer there, I hope it will help. Hanay (talk) 16:57, 24 March 2013 (UTC)


Hi Foroa, how are you? I saw that you reverted a couple of my edits concerning Category:Frogs. I don't really see the point of keeping that category in a multilingual project, to me it is vague and misleading, and it should be a redirect to Anura. Categories like Frogs in art or Frog warning signs have quite a few toad pictures, and it is more practical and makes the files more accesible to non-english speakers to keep everything in Anura. Also, in en:wikipedia Anura redirects to Frog. I am going to move all the files in Category:Frog eyes to Category:Ranidae eyes as all the photos belong to species in the family. I'll redirect, provisionally, the first one to Anura eyes. Kind regards. --Erfil (talk) 23:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Category:Frogs (that contains 3500 species) is needed as a base category for its various Frog based subcategories. We have to maintain the delicate coexistence between Category:Animals by common named groups and the scientific taxonomy categories, which rarely map one to one. People buy frog legs, see frogs in art, not Anura legs or Anura in art. We eat apples, not Malus. So in an international multilingual context, frogs are as important as the scientific names; suffice to have a look in Category:Frogs in art. --Foroa (talk) 08:32, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
I see your point, but that is not multilingual is just english. For example, if I search Rana (=Frog) in es:wikipedia it will take me to Anura, and then I have a link to commons that will take me to Category:Anura. If I'm looking for "Ranas en el arte" I will have to know that Frog means Rana and then search there for it (not obvious at all). If I start the search directly in Commons I will have to know english or spend quite a few time searching for it. The good thing of scientific names is that at least they apply for all the languages, compared to apple, frog. People not only buy frog legs or see frogs in art, ellos compran ancas de ran y ven ranas en el arte, or acheter des cuisses de grenouilles et voir les grenouilles dans l'art. I don't see the point in keeping a category that fits pretty well with Anura, but I'm not going to insist more. I think all this is a general failure of Commons, so sorry if it looks like I am blaming you for this. --Erfil (talk) 16:36, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
If the world was so simple; there are hundreds of such overlapping category systems as you can see in Category:Organisms by common name. I don't think that by using exclusively Latin that you will solve the language problem. Anyway, for apes in heraldry, fruit, ... Try to translate the categories in Category:Musical instruments by material in Latin; after all, English is a workable compromise. --Foroa (talk) 16:58, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Triodos Bank[edit]

Dag Foroa, hoort de file van de Triodos Bank in A Coruña bij de Category:Triodos Bank of hoort hij bij de Category:Banks in Spain Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 08:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Triodos heeft zijn roots in Nederland, maar net als Category:Fortis gaan er subcats nodig zijn voor de verschillende landen of regios. Dus voorlopig hoort Oficina Triodos Bank A Coruña Galiza Spain wGL.jpg bij beide. --Foroa (talk) 08:41, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Moving cats[edit]

If you move a long-standing category, can you please leave the appropriate category redirects behind (unless the redirect is misleading)? Category redirects aren't perfect, but they do not suck. If the cat has existed for a long time it is likely to be linked to - from other Wikimedia projects or external locations.

If you move the cat for disambiguation purposes, create the disambiguation category afterwards.

In both cases, there should be an actual page at the original location. Both provide the navigational links for users who might otherwise end up at a deleted page (forcing them to follow a deletion log comment is not appropriate).--Nilfanion (talk) 09:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Please do not delete categories after moving them but create redirects such as Category:Church interiors in Colombia. Certainly don't delete the redirect if someone else thinks it necessary! If you delete any further redirects I've created there - I will take it straight to AN. (In this particular case - the categories have been at that location for years - which is perfectly valid - just being deprecated for another valid English form. As this is a full deprecation, the redirects will not flood HotCat at all: The string starting "Church interiors" will be solely be these redirects).--Nilfanion (talk) 11:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

When I move, I check each act till it is empty, and then delete. I moved > 10000 cats per year, so I have to do it the most efficient way. --Foroa (talk) 12:01, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Efficiency is good. Breaking usability for our users (users means "readers" not "editors" in WP terms ) is bad. Whether you move 1 cat or 1 million, you should not be doing it by a bad practice. If you had a script that moves the category, and leave the appropriate redirect, would you find use it?--Nilfanion (talk) 12:13, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Leaving badly formed categories is just bad training and people tend to copy it for making other badly formed categories. There is a clickable link in the edit summary. Most categorisation (80 to 90 %) is done by dimple edition and preview, when they see a blue link, it is OK, only 10 or 20 % is using hotcat or Cat-a-lot. --Foroa (talk) 13:53, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Moved categories should leave redirects behind, that is Commons policy per Commons:Deletion policy. This is to ensure the usability of Commons for our audience (not Commoners) as then inward links don't get broken (from inside or outside), people get from the German name to the category (at its English equivalent) etc etc. That supersedes the inconvenience of inexperienced Commons users doing the wrong thing (which bots in any case eventually detect and correct).--Nilfanion (talk) 14:08, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Outgoing links should be corrected on the outgoing side, see [[User_talk:RussBot#What_about_a_nice_little_bot_.3F and I believe that Multichill works on something similar. In terms of usability, I think that I make and repair more links in one month than you in two years. --Foroa (talk) 14:19, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Special:Search/Category:Macaronis a small example of how redirects will eventually render a search system nearly useless. --Foroa (talk) 14:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Its better to do a task once inefficiently but correctly than the same task 1,000 times efficiently but incorrectly - speed, no matter how fast, does not justify errors, if serious enough. You may well make and repair more links than me, but you undoubtedly break a lot more too (I'd expect a lot more activity in w:Special:Contributions/Foroa if you were checking/fixing every time). We have different editorial interests, so you can't expect our editoral behaviour to be comparable - its like comparing chalk to cheese. Same would go for any other user on Commons.
The root cause of all problems with redirects is the lack of the technical ability for proper redirects from categories. Everything else we do is a least-bad patch to cope with that.
The search function on Commons sucks (a more intelligent keyword-type search will win every time) - a complete ban on category redirects wouldn't aid that problem at all in general, as that problem needes a different solution than avoiding redirects. Compare that search to Google search.
With incoming links to Commons: It is impossible to fix them all at the source. It is possible to fix some of those affected links (those from WM projects). But you have no abilty to identify, nevermind alter, links from outside Wikimedia projects. As a responsible repository we need to ensure those external links don't break. That matters more at the file level - for attribution - but isn't it still applies at the category level. If I want to link to a selection of images of Foo I might add a link in whatever it is I'm doing.
That is why stable URIs are a fundamentally good idea. As page names may need changing, so they may need moving and total stabilty is not viable. A redirect is then needed to retain that stability.
Having category redirects around makes maintenance tasks easier in general. For a start it allows a one-time bot run to convert them to real redirects if/when that's possible. Its probably easier for a bot-op to repair incoming WP links to cat redirects than to deleted pages. The bots will move a file from a category redirect if its erroneously uploaded there.
Category redirects resulting from a page move are qualitatively different to category redirects from synonyms. Links outside Commons are likely to have referred and may well be broken unless there's a redirect left behind. Redirects created from synonyms will not be targets for incoming links before they are created, and are extremely unlikely to become so after.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:27, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
Disagree completely; outgoing links have to be corrected at the source, not on the destination. If you would categorise more intensely, and not apply mainly small patches with HotCat, you would understand, like most prolific categorisers do. --Foroa (talk) 05:52, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
The problem you are missing is it is not possible to correct all outgoing links at the source. While it is theorectically possible to fix the most important (those from WM projects), it is all but impossible to correct those from other websites and completely impossible to prevent it in offline links. We should not ignore non-Wikimedia users of Commons content.
That is why redirects should be left behind, unless there is a good reason not to (because its inaccurate etc). We don't want to point WP users at category redirects, any more than we want to point them at deleted pages, so we should fix outgoing links on WM projects - and I mean fix them, not tell a bot-op to code a bot to fix them and ignore the problem until he is done. Accusing me of being ill-informed doesn't make your case more credible.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:25, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
BTW, your attitude on this is very similar to that being referred to by Brion here - that's a different issue but why the hostility to redirects? Seriously, how does it help anyone? I'd point out R'n'B would find the bot task you have asked him about easier if he is able to identify the current correct target of the broken link. Having a redirect there makes that trivial and is a lot simpler than having to trawl the log.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:40, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Please see this on ANU. You may think the redirects I have recently recreated are not particularly useful, and I'm wasting my time, but I do think they are useful. I'm not going to get into a wheel-war with you over this.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:48, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Movimiento del contenido de la categoría Suaita a la categoría San José de Suaita[edit]

Hola Foroa, en primer lugar me disculpo por escribir en español pero tengo muy poco dominio del inglés, con respecto al movimiento que hiciste, no es adecuado pues si bien San José de Suaita ha tenido más importancia históricamente es un corregimiento que hace parte de Suaita y buena parte del contenido que moviste corresponde a Suaita pero no a San José, doy gracias por tu interés y recomendaría dividir el contenido en las dos categorías. --LeinadCQ (talk) 02:53, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The images were mostly referring to San José de Suaita and Suaita is unknown to en:wiki. I added Suaita . --Foroa (talk) 13:54, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


Disambiguation, right, well done, thanks --Wistula (talk) 12:20, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


Cher Foroa,

Je viens à nouveau te solliciter. En effet j'ai constaté que la catégorie Arbre [[5]] qui concerne normalement un village de l'entité d'Ath dans la province du Hainaut est systématiquement utilisée pour y insérer des photographies qui devraient normalement se trouver dans la catégorie Trees. Puis-je te demander ton aide pour résoudre ce petit problème.

Merci d'avance et cordiales salutations.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 16:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

C'est l'inconvénient d'un nom pareil; vous avez encore de la chance que ce n'est pas encore un nom comme berg, bergen, Mons, qui attirent des bots (allemands) comme des mouches. La meilleure solution est de le renommer en Category:Arbre, Ath, ce que j'ai fait de suite. Le vidange est pour plus tard. --Foroa (talk) 16:36, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Foroa,

Merci pour ton aide efficace.

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 18:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Clergy from/of Canada[edit]

Hello. Shouldn't this be "from Canada", as per COM:PEOPLECAT? If I've missed something, I can switch it back. Cheers.--Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I hesitated; one could say that clergy is like people, a people group. But anyway, I thought that it would be better to harmonise with the other "Clergy of xxx", but personally I feel it would be better to harmonise them all to the from format. What do you think ? --Foroa (talk) 12:42, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Hmmmm. I had automatically thought of clergy as being a profession, like Category:Priests from Italy or Category:Lawyers from California, rather than thinking of the clergy as a mass or a group. Even if the latter case, though, it should likely be "in" much like Category:Crowds in the United States and Category:Political parties in Brazil. I've looked at the content of the clergy categories, and I'm inclined to think they should be treated like a profession (therefore - from). But I agree completely that they should be harmonized. Do you want me to do it? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Agree. --Foroa (talk) 07:10, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Category:Gamburg (Werbach)[edit]

Hello Foroa,

the brackets are unnecessary, as there is only one place with that name. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 14:49, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Gamburg without brackets etc. is also how the only Wikipedia article about the place is called: de:Gamburg. --Rosenzweig τ 15:04, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
I moved Gamburg to Burg Gamburg because it created confusion. No need to recreate the confusion which is avoided by the disambiguation term. I think that there is another Gamburg, but I can't find it back right now, Gamburg is the family name for at least 3 persons., a name of a ship and Гамбург transliterates to Gamburg (and Hamburg in some cases). I hate to move, so I make sure that it will never happen again. --Foroa (talk) 15:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Good luck in finding this other place called Gamburg. Please let me know if you do so. --Rosenzweig τ 16:03, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
As I said, there is Russian names transliterating to it, in Russian, Gamburg Properties 10-14 Saddle River Rd, Fair Lawn USA, Gamburg Downtown Branch YMCA. 724 Scott St Alexandria LA, Gamburg, Missouri, and probably another one I could not find back. --Foroa (talk) 16:37, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
Moving Gamburg to Burg Gamburg creates confusions! Because Gamburg is the city and Burg Gamburg is a housing area/building.That there are more places and names in the world with our name, we know. And by the way: the russian spelling of HAMBURG gives us nearly daily problems with train travellers arriving here in Gamburg(Tauber). Regards--Hokemo TV 09:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)inhabitant of Gamburg
It is some sort of contradiction: people want to make names as short as possible. And after a while, the shorter the name is, the more problems you have. People from Category:Taumatawhakatangihangakoauauotamateaturipukakapikimaungahoronukupokaiwhenuakitanatahu don't have that problem, but I guess they have another one. haubunagungamaug is another compromise. --Foroa (talk) 10:01, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Re: Categories[edit]

Hi Foroa. I will try to do my best. Thanks for your help. Have a nice day, Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 14:40, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

San Francisco Bay Area scenes[edit]

Is now fully diffused, and empty, ready for deletion. thanks.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:32, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

"People from...." categories[edit]

Hi. There's a question that I've been meaning to ask for some time, but I'm not sure where or who to ask: Regarding categories denoting where notable people are from, like People from New York City, and such, what do we do with people who were born in one city but raised in another, or with people who have lived in many different cities. Do we list them all, or should we list only ones that the subject identifies with? Is there a policy, guideline or consensus on this question? Thanks. Nightscream (talk) 19:46, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, there is in Commons:Category scheme People. Precisely because of this problem, we use "People of x place", which is wider than the "People from x place", so several places can be attached to one person. Problem is that for some countries, they want to stick to the en:wiki "People from x place" form. Anyway, when I see that the two forms exist, I merge them into one single one, which will eventually become "People from x place" one day. --Foroa (talk) 20:36, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
That addresses which preposition to use, but not my question above. Again, do we list every city in which a person has ever lived, or are we more restrictive in which ones to list? Nightscream (talk) 22:57, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Category scheme People states: Reasoning: "People of xxx" is preferred because it is a more open and wide term. It can contain the more narrow people "originating from, living in, worked in, died in" categories. . So, on Commons, we don't use normally "People from xxx" so that we can indeed assign them to several places. The occupations however are in the "Artist from xxx" form; the intention is to indicate where they operate from, so there might be several places too.
A problem that I forgot is that the "People of xxx" form is fairly well harmonised worldwide, except for the US and UK; mainly because the en:wiki uses the more restrictive "People from xxx" form, but that will be mass changed within a couple of months.
So basically, not to worry; there is no real restriction on using it whenever there is a semi-permanent or long-standing relationship between the person and the place. --Foroa (talk) 05:18, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Do we list every city that the person was born in and has lived in? Nightscream (talk) 08:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
We list every city that the person was born in and has lived in for a substantial amount of time. Not for temporary projects or exhibitions. --Foroa (talk) 08:18, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

What constitutes a substantial amount of time? Nightscream (talk) 13:15, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

I would say, at least to become part of the community, so say 2 years. --Foroa (talk) 16:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


hi Foroa, Smuconlaw removed my renaming request for Category:Lapidary. Is it still working? Happy Easter to you.––Oursana (talk) 21:44, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Its me that dropped it by mistake I guess (probably because it was completely undocumented). It is now back in the queue, but SieBot is currently down. --Foroa (talk) 09:00, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. Tell me if I have to do more (undocumented ?).––Oursana (talk) 09:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Well, it is always difficult to take a move request into account without a stated reason and without properly documented categories. --Foroa (talk) 14:21, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Moving German railway cats[edit]

Hi Foroa, why are you moving the German titled categories Category:Bahnstrecke Düren–Heimbach and Category:Bahnstrecke Jülich–Dalheim to English titles? I don't see the sense of this action, those are Germen railways and the cats are named same as articles in :de:wp: - which now link to nowhere on commons! So if you have no arguement for this, I'll move those cats back. Regards a×pdeHello! 21:52, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

There is no single reason to use a German category name when the English name is clear and understandable for everyone; that is the Commons naming rule; we will not use a Chinese, Arab or Russian version of Bahnstrecke because it is called so on the related Wikipedia. Deviations from the the English name are only acceptable for widely known items for which there is no identical name in English, such as Rittergüter, Studentenverbindungen, ... So, one day or another, all Bahnstrecke will be renamed, so don't come back to complain about broken links. --Foroa (talk) 05:23, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
If I remember right, there's a rule not to move any category just for the sake of having the name in English. Other language categories are allowed and there's no need to move those categories. If you can't provide any rule, that German railway categories imperatively have to be named in English, I will move those categories back! a×pdeHello! 13:14, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
There is no such rule, but a name harmonisation rule is more important. --Foroa (talk) 13:19, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
No! Commons is multilingual, there are even categories in Chinese or Japonese signs!
Btw: Why did you rename the English named Category:Betuweroute to Dutch Category:Betuwelijn? (See [6]) You seem to be not so honest about your private motives!! a×pdeHello! 13:26, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Category names should be in English; that's one of the few basic rules that most people agree upon. I merged indeed upon user request Category:Betuweroute into the long standing Category:Betuwelijn, because the latter is somewhat a semi-official proper name, but I agree that this names creates more confusion than it solves. So please don't call me dishonest or having private motives, especially for Dutch or Flemish, or because you feel attacked because I don't accept Bahnstrecke in stead of railway line. --Foroa (talk) 14:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Oef, een open zenuw. De Betuwelijn is echt een andere route dan die de Betuwelijn volgt. Dat heeft niets met de taal te maken, alleen maar met de fysieke spoorweg. Het heeft echt ook mijn voorkeur om het verschil te blijven maken. Desnoods ga ik in Gorinchem en Arkel een paar foto's maken van de Betuwelijn. Als dat het probleem oplost. (Ik heb Kleyn geholpen bij zijn proces in Straatsburg, zit er iets dieper in dan gebruikelijk. Eerder een nadeel dan voordeel, moet me dus inhouden. --Stunteltje (talk) 22:56, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Niet echt een probleem, behalve dat in de media en en:wiki die namen nogal door elkaar gehaspeld worden, en dat we de naam Betuwelijn dus beter vermijden. (Zie nl: Dat heeft niets te maken met het gebruik van Bahnstrecke voor stukjes spoorweglijn; dit kan denk ik beter vermeden worden, vooral als ze de grenzen naderen waar ze dan weer een andere inlandse naam moeten krijgen. --Foroa (talk) 05:11, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Het kopje van dit stukje zette je op het verkeerde been. Wat ik zag is, dat je de bestanden van de Betuweroute in Category:Betuwelijn hebt ondergebracht. (De stationscategorieën staan daar correct, want de Betuweroute heeft geen stations.) Mijn voorkeur zou hebben om dat terug te draaien en veruit de meeste foto's weer naar Category:Betuweroute te verplaatsen. Dat de bestandsnaam dan niet klopt is niet zo'n probleem. Ik heb gisteren het recht van FileMover gekregen en zou dat best eens willen uitproberen op deze bestanden. Is het een probleem als ik ze weer terugplaats? --Stunteltje (talk) 06:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Geen probleem, ik heb Category:Betuweroute hersteld en de move request eruit gehaald. --Foroa (talk) 06:17, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Grappig dat je daarbij ook de spoorbrug hebt overgezet. Dat draai ik terug, dat is het voordeel van lokale kennis. De Betuweroute kruist het Merwedekanaal bij Gorinchem via een betonnen viaduct, de Betuwelijn gaat in Arkel over de spoor(draai)brug. Ik ga ook proberen m'n eerste file te moven. Moet lukken. --Stunteltje (talk) 06:29, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Dat terugdraaien lukte dus niet. Zal beveiligd zijn. --Stunteltje (talk) 06:32, 5 June 2013 (UTC)


Hi, just curious to learn your rationale for renaming cat Auster to Auster Aircraft Limited, that seems a bit cumbersome. The aircraft manufacturer remains the primary use of Auster at en:WP, perhaps no confusion with Paul Auster etc? At Commons, we often put aircraft company names under Aircraft manufacturers, then the aircraft models under sub-cat eg Auster aircraft (small a) and Aircraft by manufacturer. MTIA, PeterWD (talk) 11:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Several reasons. first Category:Auster Aircraft Limited is the real name and is closer to what most wikipedias refer to; Commons has no notion of primary use as these tend to be country/language/wikipedia specific. Since there was no higher level Auster category, I took the name of the company to better link with the manufacturers, but Auster aircraft would work too indeed. Second, en:Auster (disambiguation), de:Auster, fr:Auster, pl:Auster ... has several meanings and is disambiguated in many languages. On Commons, we have already 4 categories using an Auster that has nothing to do with the airplane,, within 2 years, we will have 20 of them. --Foroa (talk) 12:41, 2 April 2013 (UTC)


Do you know „Lenzing“ outside of Austria?

(Deletion log); 07:38 . . Foroa (talk | contribs) deleted page Category:Lenzing ‎(moved to Category:Lenzing, Austria)

-- Bwag (talk) 08:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

You would be surprised: try "Lenzing Germany" on Google maps. Nearly impossible to have a 6 letter word not used somewhere, strange enough not in the US or Australia (this time). Now corrected to Lenzing, Upper Austria. --Foroa (talk) 08:27, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I surprised: [7] or [8] or [9]. -- Bwag (talk) 08:35, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Foroa[edit]

talkback at Category talk:Bantu and I think at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Bantu cat struck again, same user Penyulap 03:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Orrling's block[edit]

I was wondering why you've blocked Orrling (talk · contribs) for three months? I've probably missed something? Bidgee (talk) 07:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Basically, still the same pattern as you blocked him a couple of months ago for and the reverts concerning Bantu, for which he has been blocked the last 3 or 4 times. See #Blocking_Orrling_-_why_only_for_2_weeks.3F. --Foroa (talk) 08:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Regarding Category:Mao Zedong and 14th DL[edit]

I notice you've deleted this redirect. I use this redirect on talk pages on the English Wikipedia, to prevent talk pages from being blocked by China's firewall. China uses keyword-based censorship, meaning that if any link contains the word "Dalai Lama" on a specific page, it blocks the entire page, and users browsing from within China get a HTTP 404 when trying to access that particular talk page. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs 08:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

See also: Category talk:Mao Zedong and 14th DL -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs 08:12, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
I appreciate the problem, but the page referred to Category:Mao Zedong and Tenzin Gyatso, 14th Dalai Lama that has been deleted recently without leaving a trace. --Foroa (talk) 08:18, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Oh, didn't realise that the category was deleted. Sorry about that. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs 05:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Honeycomb (photography)[edit]

Hello. Undelete the cat. Category:Honeycomb (photography), please. Beauty dish is not the same as honeycomb. Honeycomb in photography is the part of softboxes etc... I am preparing the article for the cs wikipedia. For example see this: [10] or [11] - Thank You, --Svajcr (talk) 05:08, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I know, I hesitated, but the category was undocumented, not in plural and I don't think that the name is stating what it means. Category:Honeycomb light diffusers should express what it really means. --Foroa (talk) 06:36, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Well, can You do it, please? Thanks, --Svajcr (talk) 07:31, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done Made up quickly some mini description. --Foroa (talk) 07:47, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Add the other files, you have deleted, please. Thanx.--Svajcr (talk) 07:52, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

File:01 Logo d'accueil.png[edit]

Hi Foroa,

Why have you undid my contribution 94014197 in File:01 Logo d'accueil.png ? File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-fr.png is better than File:01 Logo d'accueil.png, so the rediction is justified !

What do you think about that ?


--Juanes852 (talk) 19:33, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me for my bad english, but I'm a French contributor

ça serait jolie si on commençait à effacer des images en plaquant un redirect dessus. Donc un item file.xx.jpg est soit un redirect, soit un vrai fichier. Le système digère mal les deux combinés. --Foroa (talk) 04:53, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Euh, je ne suis pas sûr d'avoir compris.
Après une lecture de Help:File redirect. J'ai compris la chose suivante : File:01 Logo d'accueil.png et File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-fr.png doivent être identiques. Désormais ils sont identiques, du coup, je peux réaliser la redirection.
J'avais demandé la suppression de File:01 Logo d'accueil.png car la création de ce fichier constitue une erreur de débutant. Cette demande avait été rejeté, et je n'ai pas compris pourquoi.
--Juanes852 (talk) 08:51, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Pas vraiment: quand ils sont identiques, tu peux appliquer {{Duplicate}} afin de pouvoir mettre à jour tous les wikipedia qui font référence à ce fichier. Mettre un redirect sur un fichier existant n'est pas permis. Je l'ai fait pour toi. --Foroa (talk) 09:27, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Merci pour la réponse,
J'avais déjà eu l'idée de mettre {{Duplicate}} sur File:01 Logo d'accueil.png, mais le 2 avril 2013 Moogsi m'a révarté avec le résumé de modification suivant : "Not an exact or scaled-down duplicate".
Enfin peu importe, Nikbot a supprimé le document ! C'est ce que je voulais depuis plus d'une semaine ! Cette suppression me semble injuste car le logo Wikipédia a été téléversé sur common dans de nombreux fichiers (par exemple File:Barre latérale - boite à outils déroulée.jpg). Mais enfin ce n'est pas grave, car je voulais que File:01 Logo d'accueil.png soit supprimé !
Désormais Category:French Wikipedia screenshots est vide (j'avais créé cette catégorie pour téléverser une série de copie d'écran du bandeau de droite, afin d’illustrer w:fr:aide:interface, mais c'était une mauvaise idée, en conséquence je les avais fait supprimer en invoquant le motif (Please provide the title of the work), texte brute). Du coup, serait-il possible de supprimer Category:French Wikipedia screenshots ?
--Juanes852 (talk) 12:52, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Merci --Juanes852 (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Wirral Peninsula[edit]

I noticed you may have reversed edits i have made. I was trying to clear and clean this page up as per talk page, it was all over the place. Why not make your thoughts known on the talk page? Babydoll0409 (talk) 19:50, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

I am not saying that I am disagreeing, I just cleaned up.
For the Category:Village greens in the Wirral Peninsula can I remind you that for quick deletion of categories, the procedure consist of inserting {{Badname|Good name}} if another category names exist. Alternatively, {{Speedy|reason}} can be used.
Blanking the page makes that the category appears several days later (again) in Special:UncategorizedCategories which we try to keep as empty as possible, but requires significant work as we have to analyse each case if it concerns vandalisme, mistakes, beginners work (that may need assistance) or just a plain categorisation problem. So following the standard procedure saves us all unnecessary work. This has already been asked to you by another administrator. Thank you and keep up the good work. --Foroa (talk) 14:54, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. I apologise but i don't know all the procedures. In this example the category should not have been started as it would be "Village Greens in the Metropolitan Borough of Wirral" for example. Babydoll0409 (talk) 12:11, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Diogenes of Sinope looking for a man[edit]

Dag Foroa, zie jij er het nut van in deze category te hernoemen "Category:Diogenes searching for an honest man" ? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:46, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Niet zeker: in en:Diogenes of Sinope#Notes : Laërtius & Hicks 1925, Ⅵ:41. Modern sources often say that Diogenes was looking for an "honest man", but in ancient sources he is simply looking for a "human" (anthrôpos). The unreasoning behavior of the people around him means that they do not qualify as human. En mijn klassiekers zijn meer dan roestig (+43 jaar). --Foroa (talk) 12:38, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Face-smile.svg Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 16:12, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Het zou dus een "looking for a human" of "looking for a honest man" moeten zijn: dus een Commons compromis waar we nergens correct mee zijn maar die iedereen zou kunnen begrijpen ... --Foroa (talk) 16:44, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Belarusian names[edit]

Colleague, dirty work (1, 2, 3, 4, 5). --Чаховіч Уладзіслаў (talk) 07:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Not half as dirty as the 60 categories that you patched with {{Bad name}}. See Commons:Village_pump#Guideline_for_transliteration.3F. --Foroa (talk) 07:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
I do not mean {{Bad name}}, your edits removed except the template is also useful content categories. I know English is very bad, so the link to the discussion for me is worthless. I just want to note that all localities in Belarus originally named it the Belarusian, who is still, despite the Russification of the country as a part of the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, is the national and official language, but because the name should be transliterated exclusively with the Belarusian language. This is what was provided for in the law in 2007, which was approved by the UN. I hope that Google Translator mastered the meaning of my message will be clear to you :) --Чаховіч Уладзіслаў (talk) 13:22, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
I think that I do understand your problem; I would be pretty helpless on the Russian or Belarusian wikipedia too. We have on Belarusian village/city category naming a fundamental problem, a problem that exist in many countries that have several official languages, often made even more difficult by invasion/colonisation by other cultures.
As far as understand, there are two official languages in Belarus and Russian is the main language, used by 72% of the population, while Belarusian, the second official language, is only used by 11.9%. Minorities also speak Polish, Ukrainian and Eastern Yiddish. So I assumed that all village names would be in Russian, but that might be wrong. I do know that fighting about names and all related edit wars, as we had in Ukraine, Spain, Basque country, ... doesn't help none of us.
Anyway, the best way out is to agree upon a formal list of city/village names and import that here in Commons. To facilitate that, you could try to discuss it with user:EugeneZelenko who is bureaucrat, very helpful and very busy, User:Renessaince or user:Kaganer who is Russian, but very helpful. --Foroa (talk) 07:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Glass 7, Gouda[edit]

Hallo Foroa, Kun je zeggen waarom je de Category:Glass 7, Gouda hebt aangemaakt met de naam Gouda terwijl alle andere alleen Category:Glass... genoemd worden? Er stond eerst Glass 7, maar die is verwijderd. groeten --Agaath (talk) 18:37, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Zoals je kan zien in COM:CAT, The category name would be enough to guess the subject, hetgeen de enige echte naming rule is on Commons. Commons heeft slechts één enkele naming space voor de categorieën, wij zitten nu aan 2600000 categorieën, en ik denk dat, om echt nuttig te zijn, er rond de 20 miljoen categorieën moeten ontstaan.
Hoedanook, als iedereen in zijn kerk zijn glasraam details begint te nummeren in de stijl van "Glass xxx", dan gaat er een redelijk soepje ontstaan. --Foroa (talk) 08:07, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Ik begrijp het. Bedankt --Agaath (talk) 17:42, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Orphan works in the United States[edit]

Dag Foroa, in het kader van de Freedom of panorama maakte ik een beginnetje met de werken van Eugène Atget, onder welke Category hoort deze Category:Orphan works in the United States nu thuis? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:42, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Bestaat dat ook al ? Ik denk dat je dat beter op Commons:Village pump/Copyright aankaart, misschien is er ook een apart type licentie nodig; en zo komen die mensen ook op de hoogte van dergelijke gevallen. --Foroa (talk) 07:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Catégorie Mons (Hainaut)[edit]

Bonjour Foroa,

Peux-tu jeter un coup d’œil au renommage de cette catégorie

En effet, il y a peu nous avions commencé le renommage des catégories de Mons vers Mons (Hainaut) pour faire la distinction entre les villes belges de Mons (Hainaut) et Mons (Liège) ainsi qu'avec la ville française de Mons (Var), or je vois qu’un utilisateur peu au courant du motif de nos travaux et revenu à la catégorie initiale.

Merci d’avance pour ton aide et cordiales salutations

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 08:14, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour Jean-Pol, le fait qu'il y avait encore plusieurs cats avec l'ancien et le nouveau nom qui coexistaient encore, crée bien de confusion. Et il y a des gens qui essayent toujours de raccourcir les noms des catégories; ils oublient que ça crée des mixups et de travail supplémentaire pour renommer les cats. Un grand merci pour ton travail. Beste groet. --Foroa (talk) 07:24, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Prins Boudewijn[edit]

Zeg eens, mag ik vragen waarom je ZKH Cat Prins Boudewijn steeds recat?Carolus (talk) 07:16, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Omdat de Grenadiers (Belgium) naar hem vernoemd zijn, niet omdat hij er deel van uitmaakt, dus de Grenadiers (Belgium) zouden naar koning boudewijn moeten verwijzen, niet omgekeerd. --Foroa (talk) 07:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
De grenadiers zijn naar Prins Boudewijn vernoemd omdat hij de bekendste grenadier is! Zie ook zijn portret. Wat heeft koning Boudewijn hier van doen? Carolus (talk) 08:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Als een item naar iemand vernoemd wordt, dan staats de naam in de parent categorie. En Category:Baudouin of Belgium is op zijn zachts gezegd verwarrend; daar gaan nogal wat beelden van Koning Boudewijn in belanden in plaats van in Category:Baudouin I of Belgium . --Foroa (talk) 08:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Dat is geen antwoord op mijn tweede vraag, ik kan er niet aan doen dat beide heren dezelfde naam droegen...Mensen moetn zelf opletten bij het categoriseren.Je definieert het probleem, maar zonder oplossing.Carolus (talk) 08:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
Ik verwarde dus ook de koning met de prins. Reken er niet op dat mensen categoriën checken, en dat is een van de redenen waarom op alle wikipedias het corresponderende wikipedias het artikel een andere naam heeft. Ik ga die dan ook straks gaan hernoemen. --Foroa (talk) 13:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Ik zie daar geen reden toe...en hoe ga je die hernoemen?Carolus (talk) 13:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Wat dachten jullie van Category:Prince Baudouin of Belgium ? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:12, 26 June 2013 (UTC)



Pourquoi ça?, en plus l'image n'existe pas!!! --— Mouh2jijel [Talk] 11:12, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Parce que le fait d'enlever </gallery> rend tous les categories et interwikis inutilisables. --Foroa (talk) 13:08, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Reverts in categories[edit]

Foroa, you have been reverting several changes I've done in categories. I would love to know why. --NaBUru38 (talk) 16:05, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, because we discussed some of it already, for example in User_talk:Foroa/archive_2012#Category:Buildings_in_Foo. So basically, the following categories are main categories or topics for which the large majority of images is downloaded and that people should find right away:
  • Buildings (and not hide it behind culture/architecture of xxx). In Beijing, architecture is redirected to buildings.
  • People (and not hide it behind culture/society/ of xxx)
  • Military in many countries where war and related industry plays an important role.
    • By the way, I think that you are wrong by hiding military and law underneath politics. Politics might drive to some extent the government, but in most countries, it is the government that controls laws, police and military.
Most media are photographs, so photographs is not a major topic, only for special cases, so no reason to put it on the top of the country category; it is just a topic as any other; we don't want to ,mislead people and push them to navigate in photograph categories to find a topic.
Before you change structures in Belgium, please read Category talk:Belgium; the structures are optimised for easy categorisation AND navigation. --Foroa (talk) 16:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Church of Savigneux[edit]


I noticed that you have deleted this category (Category:Town hall of Savigneux). Could you do the same action for this one (Category:Church of Savigneux).
Thank you very much,
--Agamitsudo (talk) 14:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Just insert {{Badname|Église Saint-Laurent de Savigneux (Ain)}} and it will disappear automagically. --Foroa (talk) 15:18, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Via de' Benci[edit]

Please, do not move back to Category:Via de' Benci (Florence). It's the only street in Italy named like that, no need of disambiguation, Thank you. I am a resident photographer in Florence, I cannot get mad if you change me all the cat names everytime without any notice and reasonable purpouse. Thank you. --Sailko (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I can understand that for you, Florence is the centre of the world, but that is not the case for Commons. I am getting tired of your moves to remove disambiguating terms because you find Florence entitled to carry the exclusive name, and the other less important ones, have to disambiguate. While most Italian contributors understand that systematic disambiguation settles the name once and for all, while keeping a systematic naming approach, you keep removing disambiguations. Many, if not most of the non disambiguated streets in category:Streets in Florence do exist in other cities, and I don't plan to waste my time to move them each time there is a conflict and a need for disambiguation. So I am warning you, next time I have to rename a street because a street with the same name pops up in another place, I will disambiguate with the bot all the streets in Florence. Most churches in Florence had to be renamed because of your Florence-centric approach, which is a gigantic waste of time. Fortunately, for the streets, the problem is understood in most cities in most countries. --Foroa (talk) 06:02, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Please reply to my discussion page, I came back here just for casualty. I know there were sometimes mistakes in the past, and I apologize. Even if it is false that the churches category names were renamed after my fault: I just gave up moving back Santa Maria del Fiore (Florence), even if no other churches in the world have such name. Category names should be kept simple. There is no apparent reason why we should have Category:Van Gogh Museum (not "Category:Van Gogh Museum (Amsterdam)") and Category:Pinacoteca di Brera (Milan), for instance. Are the users from Amsterdam less "systematic" that the Milanese ones? Also, you should leave category redirects, if you delete the previous category you miss a link from wikipedias, etc. The longest the name is, the most difficult is to remeber it when you search it, for any reason. It is not a matter of Florence-centering, I would do right the same in any other city, if I had pictures to upload. Mostly, your approach is not appropriate for an administrator, it looks like you want to start an edit war, without advising the users if you find a mistake, especially on multiple times and especially about a subject your are not specialized in. I just did not notice and remeber how many time I moved a cat, so I wrote you as soon as I noticed. And next time you would find a conflict, instead of threatening to mess up a category, before any moving or deleting, let me know please, so in case I can also change the links from wikipedias. I don't think it will happen any often, anyway. --Sailko (talk) 11:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/03/Category:Demolished buildings[edit]

FYI, a suggestion has been added. Hamblin (talk) 12:00, 24 April 2013 (UTC)


Blijf aub van de categorie-structuur af! Je weet niet waarover je spreekt. Nu is dit File:Leopold of Belgium, Duke of Brabant; Nicaise de Keyser.jpg bestand verkeerd gecategoriseerd. In 1853 was Prins Boudewijn nog niet eens geboren! Laat staan dat er Carabiniers Prins Boudewijn – Grenadiers bestonden????? Je helpt alles om zeep door het hernoemen van de categoriëen! Je blijft gewoon zaken veranderen zonder overleg. Echt triestig. De overige foto's die ik van de grenadiers heb zal ik niet uploaden, door jouw acties verspreid je verkeerde info. En die ene afbeelding laat me niet lachen, dat idiote tekeningetje is zo zielig dat het amper wiki-waardig is. Je kent niet eens de geschiedenis van de mexicaanse troepen onder hare Keizerlijke Majesteit Keizerin Charlotte, slechts een tiental grenadiers waren actief. Je bent duidelijk onbekwaam zolang je geen bronnen geeft. Ik betwijfel bovendien of je ooit al eens een grenadier hebt gezien of gesproken. Ik betreur dit ten zeerste, je wijzigingen hebben zelf gevolgen voor de relatie met het leger, zij zullen niet meer willen meewerken aan wikipedia door dergelijke onjuistheden en baldadigheden. Carolus (talk) 14:17, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Wat zijn wij welgezind vandaag. Er is geen twijfel dat je een unieke kennis hebt over tal van onderwerpen. Op gebied van categorie namen en structuren hebben wij wel wat meer ervaring. Wij stevenen op naar 3 miljoen categorieën en ik hernoem er ruim tienduizend per jaar. Als je dus een Category:Grenadiers (Belgium) creëert dan is dat een top level categorie voor alles wat met grenadiers in België te maken heeft, inclusief poppen, carnaval optredens, fanfare grenadiers uniforms, historische evocaties, schilderijen, straten en cafés die min of meer verband houden met grenadiers. Zo simpel is dat. Indien je categorieën wil beperken in scope dan is het voldoende om er een duidelijke naam aan te geven. Drama maken of de mensen uitschelden helpt niks vooruit. --Foroa (talk) 05:32, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


this time i will use English; so verybody can read. your cats are all wrong (AGAIN!)

File:0 Soignies - Rue H. Ferrer - Garde impériale (1).jpg File:Acoz Fo9JPG.jpg File:Bataille Waterloo 1815 reconstitution 2011 2.jpg

This images arent Belgian Grenadiers, they are French! And second in 1815 Belgium didn't exist. This proves again and again that you don't know anything about the matter. Please remove the categorie of the Belgian Grenadiers. On this page it is Raininig complaints about your categorisation, non stop! If you do not stop this non-sense; i will have to mark you for your disruptive behaviour. You never ask advise, you just don't listen to advise you are given. Carolus (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

In all categories related to history, the reference is the current political constellation. A painter from Bruges from 1503 is a painter from Belgium in the first place. De Guldensporenslag is in Belgium, but is part of the history of Belgium and France. A reenactement in Belgium of a grenadier from France belongs to Grenadiers in France and Belgium. --Foroa (talk) 06:59, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
I am really sorry, but honestly i doubt your historical intelligence...what you are telling is actually just sad and ridiculous...if a picture taken of Hitler in Belgium, you will say Belgian dictator? Please...just go elsewhere to tell people this kind of craziness...and don't wast the time of other people who try to make Commons are performing disruptive behavior. Carolus (talk) 17:38, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
That's the way history is classified here. If you don't stop reverting, you will be blocked for longer. --Foroa (talk) 17:45, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Foroa, you're missbehaving when blocking an user you have an edit war with! And your "you will be blocked for longer" is clearly exactly what no admin should do! a×pdeHello! 18:40, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I am fed up with that user behaving as his contributions are his own and insulting all people that try to touch his files. He was almost blocked for that some years ago on his lace categories and got similar community problems on the dutch wikipedia where he was blocked indef. If he disagrees with things, he has to follow COM:CFD or any other procedure. If he disagree with the description of an image, he can mark it as facts disputed, not reverting things all the time. This is a really simple case of bad faith, otherwise I would not block him, I don't believe I have a history of quick blockings. --Foroa (talk) 18:47, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
If you are edit warring with a user, it's at least a conflict of interests to block this user. You should have made this behaviour public and ask some fellow admins to proceed in this case. Even if you're right with what you've said above, now that you've blocked him you weakened your position! a×pdeHello! 19:09, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
That's right. Therefore, I request that a Dutch speaking administrator evaluates the bad faith, rudeness and totally irresponsible behaviour of Carolus, which made in my judgment the block justified. --Foroa (talk) 19:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:House of Ursel en Category:D'Ursel castle[edit]

Dag Foroa, ik heb de Category:D'Ursel castle onder Category:House of Ursel gezet. Is dit correct? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 07:07, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Dag Lotje, dat ziet er logisch uit en klopt ook met de verschillende links op nl:wiki. Maar eindelijk ken ik er niet veel van zeggen ze. Hoedanook, als het verkeerd is zal er wel iemand van zijn oren maken, als het goed is zwijgen ze als vermoord. Zoals gewoonlijk, doe voor wel en zie niet om. --Foroa (talk) 08:46, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Dat is correct gedaan, ook door eerst overleg te plegen! Het kasteel is nu eigendom van de provincie antwerpen. Carolus (talk) 12:41, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Em dashes[edit]

Why does commons avoid Em dashes? - it seems very weird that we can not be consistent with the WP:Pages which use Em dashes for the cyclone seasons.Jason Rees (talk) 09:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Well, you are lucky, it is more difficult to be consistent for the other 270 languages. Commons is a much more multi-language project, and em- dashes are a source of problems as they are not present on all keyboards and I believe in some countries, they use another character. See in Commons:Categories for discussion/2011/10/Category:Bilateral relations by country for more a longer discussion.
The categories with hyphens you wanted to move (thank you for the great work) are there nicely and consistently since 3 years, so certainly no reason to degrade the situation while annoying potentially the 700 clients that might be linked to it.
Keep on the good work. --Foroa (talk) 05:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Foroa.[edit]

I change the way that User:Шуйская is removed from the categories, in a way that I think would still allow her to copy across her work once she has 'gotten the hang of' the coding and article-writing, without needing to remember the list. I did it like this can you check that it still does exactly what you wanted it to do, that there are no mistakes I make ? Please reply on my tp if that's ok. Penyulap 08:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi again Foroa, sorry that I must speak out against your mistake at AN, it is not a good way to make friends, I do hope that you will know how to fix what you've done there, so everything will be better than before. Penyulap 12:11, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
If you would have followed and understood all his actions and discussions, you would have realised that this person has a serious community problem. --Foroa (talk) 16:53, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
It is quite possible, but there is no talkpage, and the only thing I could find is here on your talkpage, and it looks quite heated. Is there more on commons ? it may be there is some external reason, but it is a very alarming thing for editors here to watch an admin block someone they are in the middle of an edit war with, that is how it looks, and they only did 2 edits, you did 3, I'm not saying you don't have a reason, but look at how other people who only know what they see on commons think, it is alarming don't you think ? Penyulap 17:43, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:L'Osservatore Romano[edit]

Dag Foroa, onder welke Category hoort Category:L'Osservatore Romano denk je? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:48, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Lotje, voila: Category:Newspapers by country => Category:Newspapers of Vatican City en OOK =>Category:Magazines of the Vatican City. WAARBIJ Category:Newspapers of Vatican City gecategoriseerd wordt ook onder => Category:Vatican City . Groet Carolus (talk) 10:19, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

category redirects exists[edit]

Please, when you rename any category, if the name has not an evident mistake (like mispelling), leave a category redirect, like here. Commons categories are linked with "Commonscat" and similar from local wikipedias, and it is difficult to image and search the new names. Thank you. --Sailko (talk) 13:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Evident capitalisation mistake, if we have to maintain millions of such redirects for the nearly 3 million cats, the system will become unusable. The new category is as clickable in the edit summary as the redirect. --Foroa (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
There is no difference of leaving a redirect or not for the system. We can keep as many millions as we want, servers are powerful enough. Please do, I explained you why already. Also if someone memorized the old name and upload new images there, a bot can move it to the proper category, but if there is no redirect it won't. Thank you. PS: I also mentioned how the correct palce for reply to me is here. Administrators should be more user friendly. Thanks. --Sailko (talk) 15:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you sir. --Foroa (talk) 15:56, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

In case you weren't aware of: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User problems#Foroa. --Túrelio (talk) 07:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

en:Ansar Dine[edit]

Dag Foroa, ik had de Category:Ansar Dine aangemaakt, maar waaronder zou die best ressorteren denk je? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:30, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Er was een goed begin, ik heb het wat vervolledigd, maar het is nogal touchy en op dit gebied is Commons (gelukkig soms) nogal onderontwikkeld; ze rebellen noemen of terroristen is een POV en vraagt om reactie. Islamisten gelijkschakelen met rebellen is ook problematisch. We zien wel. --Foroa (talk) 08:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Fijn, bedankt Foroa. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 12:00, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Disambig needed[edit]

Hi Foroa - I know you like making categories into disambigs; here's one that badly needs to be made into one: Category:Hawthorn, with its current classification moved to [Category:Hawthorn, Co Durham] (or similar) - MPF (talk) 07:07, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

No I hate making them, and I even hate it more to untangle them. Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories requires and awful lot of maintenance work, while 95 % of the wrong items in them are just overcats. Very few people are keeping those disambiguation pages up to date. So basically, I would prefer that such categories are deleted and locked but in the mean time, I suppose I have to live with them. (As far as I know, there is no single wikipedia that accepts disambiguation categories). I will clean it out Category:Hawthorn later, but you dont have to wait for me. --Foroa (talk) 08:10, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I've cleared it out. Must admit, I am surprised you hate making them, I really thought you did like them. In which case, I'd make a plea again for the 'undisambiguation' of Category:Sylvia, that one really isn't necessary to be a disambig, as first names are never used for categorisation. The other genus names you've made into disambigs I can see there is a case for, but that one, there really isn't. Anything other than species of the genus Sylvia that gets put there can far more easily be tackled by keeping a casual eye on it, which I can do just as I do for numerous other genus cats which acquire rare miscategorised files. - MPF (talk) 13:47, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Well, dear MPF, you keep surprising me too. I thought that with the experience with Category:Hawthorn where:
So I fail to understand any advantage to create such a mix (and work) attracting category such as Category:Sylvia by making it a taxon category. For recall, to me the best solution is no category at all AND locked so that nobody can use the slot as people try all the time. The disambiguation is the next best solution, but I have my doubt on it. --Foroa (talk) 06:07, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Rename practices[edit]

Dag Foroa, zoetr ip de vlamschen wiki etwa moet'n gedoan word'n ivm t'érnoemienge van accounts gelik dan d'admins nu bezig zyn ip meta? 'k aant éêst an Tbc gevraagd, moa 'kwoarn héêl te haans vergetn datje tie noois mê reagirt ip zyn usertalkpage. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 15:53, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Gin gedacht oan der gevalln goan zin voe vls, en nog mindre watte en wie datter da zoe moetn doene. --Foroa (talk) 07:21, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Quick undeletion[edit]

Could you please undelete Category:Pi.1415926535? I created it as an intentional category redirect; when I'm doing mass uploads, the shorter category name is useful for sorting. Thanks! Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:41, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

I deleted it because of Commons:User-specific_galleries,_templates_and_categories_policy#Categories and Commons_talk:User-specific_galleries,_templates_and_categories_policy#Notability_and_the_naming_of_user_categories. --Foroa (talk) 15:55, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
I understand why based on those it should not be a category with any content, but I don't follow why it's disallowed as a redirect for auto-sorting uploads. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:59, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Most users that do significant categorisation work are happy with a category that is blue. To search one, they will type "Category:Pi" in the search box and take the first one that seems reasonable. For HotCat and cat-a-lot, they will only type Pi and take the first one that looks reasonable; they don't tend to look back if the tool has changed it. And Commons:Category redirects suck. --Foroa (talk) 16:19, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
I created it for when I'm adding categories when uploading; "Pi.1" gets me the category quicker than "Photographs by User:Pi.1" and for that upload form the redirect does work. Do you know if there's any way to customize the upload form to automatically add the full category, just like adding &uselang=ownwork to Special:Upload automatically adds my username? (I've also asked at MediaWiki talk:Uploadtext/ownwork. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
A small template, such as {{User Pi.14}} might include the category. --Foroa (talk) 13:40, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Antropologie (retail company)[edit]

Dag Foroa, wil je deze Category verwijderen, ik had nl. bij het aanmaken een typo gemaakt. Bedankt. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:01, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Geen probleem, volgende keer plak je er {{Badname|Good name}} op en dan zal het in het "niets" verdwijnen. --Foroa (talk) 05:21, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Birds in Cincinnati Zoo[edit]

There's a discussion going on at "Category talk:Birds in Cincinnati Zoo", if you're interested. — SMUconlaw (talk) 13:49, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Hernoemen van files[edit]

Dag Foroa, graag je mening hierover: Image:Ooo (1).jpg, Image:TO.jpg, File:Es Ra Katso?.jpg. Er is nogal wat commotie ontstaan rond enkele hernoemingen van mij en nu wilde ik toch eerst jouw mening leren kennen omtrent een eventuele rename. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 17:03, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Die zijn inderdaad aan een rename toe. Hoe meer ze gebruikt worden op wikis, hoe voorzichtiger je moet zijn. Je kan altijd snel een blik werpen op hun huidige naming "stijl" (of wat ze soms beweren dat het is) door snel even te kijken in hun recente uploads: Special:ListFiles/Geagea in dit geval.
Dat is wel een totaal andere "stijl" dan de files waar ik het over heb. Ik zal zien hoe Geagea reageert op mijn vraag op zijn usertalkpage.
Is mijn uitleg over die upside-down hosry nu duidelijk ? --Foroa (talk) 17:47, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Niet echt, maar wat ik ervan leerde: man, man, man, je moet wel soms aan tiptoedancing doen, sommige tenen zijn zooooo lang. :$ Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 18:41, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Je moet ook niet gaan overdrijven om een rename aan iedereen te gaan vragen, vooral niet de heel evidente gevallen (de andere vind ik persoonlijk ook overbodig). Inderdaad, wij hebben hier de meest diverse collectie van het menselijk ras, en hoe dichter je bij hun uploads komt, hoe meer het territorium instinct naar boven komt; het is niet altijd mooi. Al bij al slalom ik er nog redelijk goed doorheen. --Foroa (talk) 09:16, 9 May 2013 (UTC)


Hi. Please, try to think like a human and not like a badly programmed bot. Don't confuse an unique local name (try to search by or other map) with all images their description contains similar words. --ŠJů (talk) 00:19, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Please, try to think like a human and not like a badly programmed bot when creating categories for street names Category:Streets in Prague by name. If someone would create categories for street names in any other language that translate to Transition, China, Europe, English, Africa, Argentina, ..., they wouldn't stay long time. Remember the one and only commons basic naming rule: a category name should allow to guess the name of the subject. So a big part of the culture in the Czech republic seems to stop in the streets of Prague. If you would work a bit more on Special:WantedCategories, you would maybe understand. --Foroa (talk) 08:54, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Interior‎ (empty); Category:Interior of Casa Vasari (Arezzo)‎‎ Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Exterior‎‎‎ - Naming policy[edit]

Hi Foroa, I get irritated about naming policy xxx- Interior or Interior of XXXX please see Vasari (Arezzo) - Interior, Category:Interior of Casa Vasari (Arezzo). With your help I replaced Category:House of Giorgio Vasari (Arezzo) by Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Exterior‎‎‎. Then I created Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Interior‎ and asked via Commons delinker to move files from Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) thereto. Then User:Smuconlaw changed commons delinker to Category:Interior of Casa Vasari (Arezzo)‎‎, as being standard wording, see above link to discussion and asked me to ask you about it. So do I have to delete Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Interior‎ and rename Category:Casa Vasari (Arezzo) - Exterior‎‎‎? When using cat-a lot xxx- Interior would make subcat visible to everyone. If Interior of XXXX is the Standard, could we have a policy stating this. Greetings--Oursana (talk) 14:04, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

There are several reasons for this harmonisation.
  • First, all Commons naming start with the main topic first as this is the most flexible naming schema that is consistent across all levels (world/country/state/city/building). As you can see in Special:Categories&from=Interiors+of+churches, they are already widely adopted, but leave place too for for future categories, such as Roccoco interiots of Gothic chuches in ...". I guess taat you currently don't bother for your museum, but eventually, it will be possible to naviagate for museum contents, not the their building or surrounding.
  • I am a bit surprised that nobody seems to contest the standard naming of "Paintings by xx in museum y", while the "interior/room/division" of museum xxx seems to create problems in a few cases. In the long run, we are all better of with a predictable naming.
  • I am sure that you will appreciate a consistent naming style, but the older style <museum name> - <Interior> did exist in tens of variations: hyphens, slashes, colons or 3 different dashes, with and without spacing, interior and interiors, with and without capital I, ... Moreover, those categories cannot be deepened (style/period/...) to have a finer specification without switching to yet another naming style.
--Foroa (talk) 15:15, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your detailed answer. I will surely appreciate consistent naming. You do not mean naming like Category:Paintings in the Gemäldegalerie, Berlin - Room 37‎ Regards --Oursana (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of Category:National Arboretum[edit]

Hi, would you please explain your speedy deletion of Category:National Arboretum. As it was already being used (by mistake), and the U.S. National Arboretum is returned for the first 5 Google search result pages (I didn't check further) when searching for "National Arboretum," it seems like a natural redirect. I myself had trouble finding the category at first because I searched Commons for "National Arboretum." I personally don't think it should be deleted at all per Commons:Rename a category#Should the old category be deleted?, but I definitely don't think a speedy was the right call, and would appreciate being notified in the future when pages I create are deleted. Thank you. --Peter Talk 17:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

We are not Google and Commons is for the whole world. On Commons, there are already images of national arboreta of Australia, France, UK, Israel and Korea. There will doubtless be others in Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russia, Greek ... countries that will translate to national arboretum. The redirect you created this morning was misleading. --Foroa (talk) 18:08, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Is there a way to create a disambiguation page of sorts? --Peter Talk 19:06, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
We are probably the only wikiproject that supports category disambiguation. It requires a lot of attention and work to keep Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories empty, while most of the time, they contain items that are overcategorised while they seem to attract quite some bot categorisation (although this has been improved last months). Sometimes, things are hanging there for months, while very few user bother to maintain their content; users bother even less to update the terms. So basically, we use it to occupy the slot to avoid that someone else take it and to disambiguate things that have a real different meaning, especially when the same word means different things in several languages. So it doesn't make sense to create an alternative disambiguation cat to serve the "National arboretum" needs; if you want it absolutely, one could create a parallel national arboretum tree, but I doubt that this will help the project. --Foroa (talk) 14:52, 12 May 2013 (UTC)


Please have another think about reverting the changes to Category:Selby. The present situation is frankly a mess, with categories split between the district (the normal minimum level we go down to in the United Kingdom, except in cases where there are a great many files), the civil parish, and the settlement within the civil parish (which to all intents and purposes is identical to the civil parish). I realise that the intention was to try to reduce confusion, but the end result has been to cause further confusion with some categories subcategories of Category:Selby (town), some subcategories of Category:Selby (civil parish), and some even listed as "XXX in Selby (town and civil parish)]]. This doesn't serve anyone trying to navigate round the category system well, particularly for such a small district as Selby (no larger than many medium sized European municipalities). At this stage, it is far better to have a common system categorised at the district level, linking through to the categories at county level, with the files also located in the category for the civil parish. Skinsmoke (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

My main concern is that you convert disambiguation pages which are there for a very good reason into your own category. See En:Selby (disambiguation): There are several other Selby places in at least 5 countries. So don't come here to complain about the additional mess you did create. --Foroa (talk) 09:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
What happened to observing the niceties of being polite to other users? Not one of those other places you mention is even referred to on the disambiguation page (probably because we don't appear to have any categories for the "Selbys" in Australia, Canada, South Africa or the United States), which merely disambiguates between (1) Selby (town); (2) Selby (civil parish), which contains no settlements other than Selby; and (3) the District of Selby. There is no reason to have separate categories for the "town" and "civil parish", as the only difference between the two is a few fields. Previous discussions concerning places in Yorkshire specifically ruled out establishing separate categories for the settlement and the civil parish in such cases. Disambiguation between the settlement/civil parish and the district is usually achieved in the United Kingdom by titling the district category "District of XXX", "Borough of XXX" or "City of XXX". If it is felt that further disambiguation is required, then the settlement/civil parish categories could be titled "Selby, North Yorkshire" to disambiguate from any of the other Selbys should categories ever be created for them. Skinsmoke (talk) 09:26, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't consider hijacking of a needed disambiguation category as very polite. It is up to you to organise the various UK dimensions of Selby, but normally, polite people talk with the authors of the split categories before renaming and/or merging them all. --Foroa (talk) 10:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Do you think we can try and move forwards with this to try and find a solution? I presume that you are saying that the disambiguation category is there as a placement in case categories are created for the "Selbys" in other countries. That wasn't immediately obvious. Would my suggestion above about having a combined category at the settlement/civil parish level named Category:Selby, North Yorkshire resolve your concerns (as I mentioned earlier, this would be the normal pattern when further disambiguation is required in the United Kingdom)? That would leave the disambiguation page to point to Category:Selby, North Yorkshire and Category:District of Selby. The "XXX in ..." categories can then be moved to their more normal position as subcategories of Category:District of Selby, as the general view appears to be that having such categories at the parish level is overcategorisation (unless, of course, the categories at the district level become so large as to be unwieldy). The breaking down to parish level also caused some of the links to the categories at county level to be lost, and that can be repaired at the same time. Skinsmoke (talk) 10:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Indeed, we try to anticipate future disambiguation slots as each move of a parent category involves often more subcat moves and problems. (not to mention the mix-up and subsequent untangling)
I think that for places, the old logic of splitting in deeper categories if it becomes too crowded, is a counter-productive logic. We are better of with a logic that is based on the fact, that within a few years, the category will contain ten times more images, so we better get it right from the beginning.
But I have indeed my doubts about the split of the Selby town from the Selby parish. Separate categories make only sense when there are really distinct towns/quarters/villages with a clear own identity. The sooner they are created, the easier new images will "fall" in it. For many areas, we would have been far more productive in bot-creating all hamlets/villages upfront. So it is quite possible indeed that Selby, Yorkshire is a more logical organisation; it is up to you as the original author doesn't seem to be active any more since a couple of months. --Foroa (talk) 11:29, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I'll have a go later today. Thanks to Geograph's 3.4 million images (which have swamped British categories, causing all sorts of problems, but providing thousands of really good images, we already appear to be at a situation of having ten times more images for British categories (if the German Geograph project ever takes off—it's only at 35,000 images so far—you'll get the same problems and oportunities over in Europe too). There are some doubts about the ability of Geograph to expand significantly (though I suspect it will continue to do so—we'll just have to wait and see). In any case, it will probably take us 20 years to get the images already imported into meaningful categories, not to mention getting them out of the incorrect categories where they have already been placed, often by bots (It's quite common to find images of Wales turning up in Scottish, or even Australian or American categories).
For the United Kingdom, categories for all villages, towns and hamlets were indeed created by bot up front. It isn't always straight forward, as images of the same feature frequently finish up in categories for different adjoining settlements (very often, they get placed in the category for a nearby town or larger village), but at least it's a starting point, and slowly they get repatriated. The problem is that settlements have no defined boundaries, so it's often better to use civil parishes (in Europe that would be commune/gemeinde), where the boundaries are clearly defined on some maps, and I suppose the same argument would apply to, say, ortsteile in Germany, former municipalities in Belgium etc. If the bot-generated categories had not been available before the Geograph onslaught hit British categories, I shudder to think what would have happened! Skinsmoke (talk) 12:41, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
You are probably right, Geograph was a good start and test case, but I did spend many days moving things because there was no proper disambiguation approach to start with (why I get nervous when it gets removed). That explains indeed the many things from small quarters such as in Leeds that we founnd back in Canada. Campaigns like Category:Images from Wiki Loves Monuments 2012 are quite stressing as there are many novices loading hundreds of thousands of images in a couple of weeks. And anyway, it is sufficient to have a photo scavenger hunt organised in one town to increase the media volume with one or two orders of magnitude.
I think that you would be surprised how people are keen on their hamlets/quarters and have them clearly distinguished from the "big" entity, even when it is not always clear on official maps, you can bet that they will know the difference. Leeds contains "only" 130 places for now, but I bet that there are at least 3 times more. --Foroa (talk) 14:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Oh, believe me, nothing would really surprise me on local identity. My own settlement, Bredbury, in Greater Manchester, ceased to be a separate civil parish in the 1860s. It includes an area, Woodley, that has never had a separate administrative existence, and yet the people of the two settlements maintain distinct identities, even though nobody can agree where the boundary is. To the extent that one street has Woodley United Reformed Church, Bredbury Vicarage, Woodley Electrical Supplies, Bredbury House and Bredbury Police Station all intermingled and within a few hundred metres of each other. I was thinking more, though, of some of the rural categories that were bot created, where the settlement consists of two farms and a phonebox, and which only appear on the most detailed map (if then), where even the handful of residents are surprised to find they are within a distinct community. Such examples aren't really a problem, providing they are also linked into the larger village/civil parish, so that users searching for images at least get a nudge to look there. At the moment, in the United Kingdom it's usually easier and more reliable to search for images on Geograph using their gridsquare based search function, then try to upload the image and find it is already on Commons, than it is to search for it in the Commons category system. I suspect this will be the case for many years to come, and am not sure there is a "fix" for that problem, unless we were to develop a search facility using geographic coordinates in some way. Skinsmoke (talk) 17:27, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Deleting Category[edit]

Ik heb de category Houses in Papendrecht (voorlopig) even verwijderd omdat hij toch leeg is. Mocht hij weer nodig zijn is hij zo aangemaakt, ben druk bezig met aanvullingen dus laat me even zou ik (talk) 14:48, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Ik probeer het hier wat op te kuisen en netjes te houden, dus blank aub geen cats, zoals gevraagd in de edit summary. Blanking is nogal dikwijls een indicatie van beginners en vandalen. --Foroa (talk) 14:56, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Bedankt voor de eer :-)!! Zou u hem dan netjes willen opruimen. (talk) 15:02, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

category RI-52-0000077[edit]

Why did you remove the category RI-52-0000077? This is the official number of the “Bien de Interés cultural” in Spain. It has been a subcategory of the “Category:Bien de Interés Cultural”. Have a look there. If anybody finds this number - for example here ( )or in an other table - he gets the pictures.--Koppchen (talk) 09:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

As far as I know, the RI nr appears in the concerned category, being Category:Lago Martiánez in this case. There are only 53 RI-xx-yyy categories which are placeholders for proper categorisation and till a proper category with a "human" name is created and categorised in one of the 8000 categories in Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Spain by ID. --Foroa (talk) 09:58, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Such a RI_xxx-yyy is useless for normal Commons users, they only know names and would never find those RI-xxx-yyy things. I am under the impression that you are the only one creating such categories, so if you don't believe me, it might be better to discuss this with the concerned people. --Foroa (talk) 10:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)


Would you like to check these images. According to resolution I think are not from the uploader. Dank --R ašoAero-stub img.svg 11:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Another gallery $
Sorry, but I try to concentrate on categories and never get involved in license and right issues. Try maybe Commons:Village pump/Copyright. --Foroa (talk) 13:03, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Tulipier de Virginie[edit]

Cher Foroa,

Je vois que tu continues à faire ton magnifique travail de catégorisation auquel j'accorde beaucoup d'intérêt.

C'est donc en toute amitié que je te signale que l'image suivante n'est pas un peuplier mais bien un tulipier de Virginie.

Cordiales salutations,

Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 09:23, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Cher Jean-Pol,
Merci pour ton message. J'essaie de faire descendre le niveau de Special:WantedCategories, et j’avoue, des fois je vais un peu trop vite. Des fois, je suis aussi gêné de devoir créer des catégories avec la grande brosse, mais de l'autre coté, c'est mieux qu'elles sortent de l’obscurité et en ajoutant des images, je tire un peu les autres dans le bain, comme toi maintenant ;). Cordialement. --Foroa (talk) 09:33, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Men with glasses[edit]

Someone User:Pigsonthewing isn't happy with the decision to only categorize photos with Category:Men with glasses, he keeps reverting when I try to add Category:Men with glasses of photos of him with glasses, like File:Wiki Academy Kosovo 2013 Award ceremony 04.jpg, File:QSMM GLAM 3177.JPG, File:Herbert Backstage Pass cmglee 65.jpg. He feels his category of Category:Andy Mabbett must have the category Category:Men with glasses on it. --Mjrmtg (talk) 09:59, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

It looks odd having his category Category:Andy Mabbett as the only category of a person in Category:Men with glasses. --Mjrmtg (talk) 11:50, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Ethnic not 'national'?[edit]

Hi there! I saw your edit of the 'ethnic costumes' category. What is an ethnic costume if it's not tied to people of a certain nation, region or country? If you look at the definition of they are the same, I think. National is also a nice solution to do away with the term 'ethnic', which can easily become racist. --Judithcomm (talk) 17:43, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Most countries have several ethnic groups, and many ethnics are spread over several countries. So don't try to tell that a Kurdish costume = National Turkish costume. Its tricky. --Foroa (talk) 17:51, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
Depends on what you call 'national'. To me this has to do with nations: not so much people from the same country, but people from the same background, like Armenians all over the world. They have their own culture, like music and dance. My problem with 'ethnic' is that is almost always refers to non-US, non-Western-European people as 'others'. Tricky indeed. Would the traditional dress from let's say Volendam in the Netherlands be called ethnic by the Dutch? Even Frisians, who even have their own official language - Holland has two official languages - are never referred to as an ethnic group. Why would that be, you think? --Judithcomm (talk) 18:50, 17 May 2013 (UTC) P.s. We kunnen deze discussie ook voortzetten in het Nederlands als je wilt ;-)
Good luck to differentiate en:Ethnic groups in Europe where you seem to forget that in the Dutch ethnic group, you have the Zeeuws people, and the various Flemish groups. I guess that it is arguable that they are really ethnic groups, categorising them under folkloric group might avoid that type of discussions. And what to do with the diaspora in South Africa, the Antilles, ... where you feel clearly some connections with that group. --Foroa (talk) 08:46, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Interesting those European ethnic groups. I never saw such a map before. Indo-European seems to have a different meaning from the one I have used all my life. My 'connection' is with Frisians and Indo's (meaning part Dutch and part Indonesian). Folkloric would be the word for me. Folklore can be associated with all skincolours.--Judithcomm (talk) 16:18, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Com:Categories for discussion/2013/05/Category:Former counties of Scotland[edit]

Please read the discussion on the "Counties of Scotland" that you renamed "Former Counties of Scotland" and move the category to "Shires of Scotland". Scotire (talk) 18:53, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll just point out that although some consensus seems to have arisen, this CFD has not yet been open for the usual seven days and others may still wish to add comments. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 19:17, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Weaving shuttle vs knotting needle[edit]


Ik heb gezien dat je laatste actie is het veranderen van weaving shuttle in precursor of a weaving shuttle. Helaas moet ik het hier al weer met je oneens zijn. Een weefspoel is ontwikkeld om een hoeveelheid garen door de sprong te dragen en (dit is cruciaal) daarbij de hoeveelheid garen nodig voor een inslag automatisch af te wikkelen. Het garen werd daarom oorspronkelijk op een stukje riet gewikkeld (Dr. J.A.P. Boot en Dr. A. Blonk Van smiet- tot snelspoel 1957) en in de spoel geplaatst met een opening in de spoel naast de top van het garenpakket, zo kon het garen afwikkelen tijdens de weg over de doekbreedte. Dit automatische afwikkelen is met een knoop naald onmogelijk. Op de foto is te zien dat het garen om de pen boven in de naald geslagen wordt en daarna tussen de twee uitsteeksels onder aan de naald gehaald wordt en dan langs de andere kant van de naald naar de pen terug gaat en dan van de andere kant om de pen geslagen wordt enzovoort. Het garen wordt dus vastgezet, zodat het garen nooit afwikkelen kan als deze naald door de sprong bewogen zou worden. Ik weet niet of je wel eens iemand een net hebt zien boeten. Ik wel, want mijn vader en grootvader waren Zuiderzeevisser totdat de Afsluitdijk kwam. Als je garen wilt aflaten van de naald moet deze met de punt omlaag of omhoog gehouden worden om de draad van de pen te laten glijden. Dat het garen niet automatisch afloopt is bij het knopen gewenst omdat de knoop met kracht aangetrokken moet worden en dan moet de draad geblokkeerd zijn. Nog even mijn achtergrond: ik heb mijn hele leven in de mechanische textielindustrie (spinnen, weven, breien, vlechten) gewerkt in allerlei functies varierend va ploegbaas in de spoelerij (geen succes) tot leider van de ontwikkelingsafdeling weven, breien en vlechten bij Akzo (toen deze nog garens maakten) en docent breien en weven aan IHBO de Maere. Ik zal verder aan dit onderwerp (en voorlopig aan het hele textieldeel) niets meer doen.

Gerrit41 (talk) 17:15, 18 May 2013 (UTC)

Dank je wel voor je uitgebreide (...) uitleg. Ik heb bewondering voor je expertise en je vele goede werk, dat ik ten zeerste apprecieer, temeer daar ik lang geleden een paar jaar in de textiel rondgezworven heb en er nog steeds affectie voor heb (ook van thuis uit, de vlasstreek). Wij hebben absoluut nood aan mensen zoals jij. Anderzijds heb ik ook gemerkt dat je soms nogal strakke categorieën maakt waar er niet altijd plaats is voor randgevallen. Ik ben daar soepeler in en probeer categorieën een beetje (historisch) in mekaar te laten overlopen, vooral als er er geen goede tussencategorieën zijn. Enerzijds hebben wij nood aan gespecialiseerde categorieën, anderzijds zijn de meeste mensen niet in staat om dieper te gaan dan zeg maar een "weefmachine". Zonder er al te veel over na te denken vond ik dat die visnaald er als een voorloper van een schietspoel uitzag en eigenlijk de zelfde functie vervult; het mechanisme van het afwikkelen van de draad is inderdaad compleet anders. Je doet maar, het bijzonderste is dat we elkaars logica verstaan. En laat je vooral niet afschrikken van de ruwe wereld op Commons. --Foroa (talk) 17:40, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
En terwijl wij toch bezig zijn, kun je Category:Pemberton looms documenteren; is dat een speciaal type of van een pecifieke fabricant of beide ? --Foroa ([[User

talk:Foroa#top|talk]]) 18:19, 18 May 2013 (UTC)


Pemberton is een merk, in Nederland en Belgie niet veel voorkomend. Ik had deze ctegorie nog niet gevonden. Bedankt en ik houd me voor vereder tips aanbevolen.

Gerrit41 (talk) 16:42, 19 May 2013 (UTC).

Hi Foroa, the protection of Category:Andy Mabbett might be a bit inadeqate as the "opponing" editor is actually the subject of that cat. --Túrelio (talk) 19:04, 18 May 2013 (UTC)


Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Involved admin protecting disputed category. Andy Mabbett (talk) 20:24, 18 May 2013 (UTC)


HAllo, kan jij de Category:Beveren, East Flanders hernoemen naar de juiste benaming aub? en dat is wel Category:Beveren-Waas. Zoals je hebt Nieuwkerken-Waas, Sint-Gillis-Waas, etc. bedankt Carolus (talk) 00:34, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Ik denk niet dat het een goed idee is. In geen enkele wikipedia wordt het Beveren-Waas genoemd: een samengestelde naam zoals deze geeft de indruk dat het een deelgemeente is van Waas. --Foroa (talk) 07:56, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Het officiële bord!
Dat is het ook, wat denk je dat Sint-Gillis-Waas is? Ze zijn deelgemeenten van het waasland, logisch. Bovendien zijn ze op andere wiki's gewoonweg fout. Voorbeelden van Beveren (Waas) zie: [12] en [13], [14], [15],[16], [17],[18], enz...Carolus (talk) 11:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Australian census maps[edit]

Thanks for starting the census map categories for me. I'm hoping to write a script to mass create them when I've figured out the names of all the subcats, so don't put too much effort into structuring them at this stage. --99of9 (talk) 20:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I am just trying to bring Special:WantedCategories to a reasonable and exploitable level, which is not easy when bots are creating thousands of categories. Many of those categories are hanging there for several years, which is not a real solution neither. I gave up trying to categorise your fast growing set of categories, so I just put them all together where you can easily find them. --Foroa (talk) 05:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
That's perfect. I agree that's a very useful page when it's manageable - it would be nice if it updated more often. --99of9 (talk) 08:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Indeed, an update per day would allow us to catch quickly (semi-)batch uploaders, especially the ones that add twenty invalid categories to one set of images that finally belong in one specific category, such as File:Dr_Tajamul_Islam_Shah_15.jpg. --Foroa (talk) 09:13, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
I have seen that in Special:WantedCategories, there are quite some categories waiting for you. --Foroa (talk) 14:12, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Janneken_Pis[edit] 17:47, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

thank you[edit]

Hi Foroa, thank you very much, sincerely, Roland 15:25, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Category:Norte Region, Portugal[edit]

Please remove category "Geography of Portugal" - this over-categorisation ("Regions" are included in the "Geography" through "Subdivisions"). --Kaganer (talk) 19:11, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Monumentos Nacionais in Madeira[edit]

Hey Foroa, it wasn't really an "edit war" (at least it wasn't intended to be). Anyway, we have resolved the issue, and I'll recreate that category, ok? Sorry for any inconvenience.-- Darwin Ahoy! 21:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

You have been lucky, probably because you are Portuguese. Normally, user:Tm reverts back again and again to his preferred category name, as Portuguese as possible and without any consideration for the international community, as he tried with Category:Norte Region, Portugal. He rarely engages in a discussion, just reverts. Several times per year, there are complaints on his behaviour on the AN notice board, but nothing really happens, so most people give up or shy away of working in Portugal or Commons altogether. So my experience with such cases is that in preventive locking out some of the categories, it creates the time to calm down the situation and opens the way for a discussion. Problem is that I have sometimes complaints that I should not lock things in which I am involved (although they don't care about the real problem). So, I locked it to give you some time, avoid escalation and if needed result in a discussion, which worked this time, exceptionally, for you. SO feel free to do whatever is needed, I was just giving a hand. --Foroa (talk) 05:57, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
I suspect your protection played a vital role in this issue. I know his case, and was already preparing myself to embrace a painful and time-wasting situation at the administrators board once again, but this time, surprisingly, he stopped the reversions and exposed his arguments (which had some logic, after all, tough in this case I still preferred the English version. But when all the major countries use those cultural heritage categories on their own language, it's difficult to argue back). I know about what happened to others, it's very unfortunate, and I can understand them. Blind reversions are one of the most unnerving things in this kind of project. Can turn a very pleasant experience in an hell. I see he was blocked some time ago, when there is no cooperation, that's the way to go. Thank you very much, -- Darwin Ahoy! 09:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Two questions[edit]

Hi, In the Category:Businesspeople from the United States, I'm puzzled by people categories sorted under "?" instead of under the name of the person. As in this example: [19]. How does that work exactly?

Another question: In the category Writers from Canada, I see the Category:Le plus populaire du monde by Jacques Savoie What is this category for?

Thanks in advance for your help. -- Asclepias (talk) 00:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I am working hard on Special:UncategorizedCategories and Special:WantedCategories to keep those lists at a reasonable level (say more than three thousand categories per month). I cannot afford to categorise and document completely all categories as it is next to impossible to do it in all domains in a reasonable amount of time, from a small town in China, Russia or India, to a special issue in chemistry and a music instrument speciality. So when I feel that a category belongs in a fairly well developed class where there are quite some other people working, I just steer it then in the right direction with a question mark key to signal that it is only a rough categorisation.
Unfortunately, some people "correct" that by just adding a "proper" sort key, so they just disappear in the list and become unnoticed. I completed Category:Conrad Hilton to show what I consider a more complete categorisation.
In areas under development or where there are beginners active, I spend some more time in helping structuring and documenting categories as needed.
Concerning Category:Le plus populaire du monde by Jacques Savoie, I spent quite some time on finding the correct spelling and origin of the files that have been deleted by now (See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by CassAmz). In the mean time, a couple of images have appeared on Category:Jacques Savoie but they might disappear again. Feel free to complete. --Foroa (talk) 06:46, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Request that category moves are better documented in edit summary[edit]

Hi. I am repeatedly being poked by people not liking category moves, this usually follows my doing a removal or catredirect from the commands page. I am asking all admins who add category moves if they would please look to better document the moves that are being ordered for SieBot. As background, I asked Siebrand if there was a better means to automate the "who ordered" statement, but he is unable to do so, such we are going to need to do this manually. Thanks for your cooperation.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:17, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

OK, I will try to add the name of the requester on COM:DL batches, that should ease the down tracking. Note that some people add it in the reason field of the move template; it is however not visible in normal display. I don't think that it is technically feasible to carry the reason field in SieBots move edit summary; the current information is more important (although the from field could be possibly dropped). But it could be inserted in the talk page of the destination category. --Foroa (talk) 06:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Pubs in Queensland[edit]

I see you recreated Category:Pubs in Cairns, Queensland and Category:Pubs in Brisbane. Please note the existence of Category:Hotels and pubs in Cairns, Queensland and Category:Hotels and pubs in Brisbane. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 09:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

That's because the Queensland bot uploader came back to life and started filling up many moved categories in Australia. As you can see here, if those routing tables are not updated, the bot will keep filling them up. I corrected already some of them, but I have only two hands, the bot never sleeps ... --Foroa (talk) 09:41, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
Ah, I understand ... I wasn't angry, just pointing the new category tree. Cheers, Mattinbgn (talk) 10:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Buildings, structures, etc.[edit]

Look, I tried to respect what you were telling me, but as far as I can see it's your personal opinion. In looking at other places, I don't see consistency in how those things are structured. Can't you point me to where some consensus was reached about this? --Auntof6 (talk) 08:20, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


Warum hast Du diese Kategorie nach Category:Altona, Hamburg verschoben? Alle Hamburger Bezirke waren bisher ausschließlih mit ihren offiziellen Namen in den Kategorien verzeichnet (Category:Hamburg-Mitte, Category:Altona, Category:Eimsbüttel, Category:Hamburg-Nord, Category:Wandsbek, Category:Bergedorf, Category:Harburg). Warum soll das - ohne vorherige Diskussion - ausgerechnet beim Bezirk Altona nunmehr anders sein? --Mogelzahn (talk) 20:14, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Mogelzahn. I cannot see a reason for it. Bezirk Altona is definitely the main meaning of "Altona". NNW 20:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
There is no such thing as "main meaning" on Commons, except for countries, (former) country capitals and some national symbols. For precisely this reason, we disambiguate whenvere there is a doubt. You know very well that there are several meanings for it (It is even not the main meaning on de:Altona), moreover Category:Altona, Hamburg has a different names as on most wikipedias. --Foroa (talk) 08:03, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Let's move Category:Rotterdam, there might be a doubt with Rotterdam in New York
The naming scheme for articles at de:WP differs from commons usage. As Altona is a district (now, formerly a town on its own for a very long time) the lemma is de:Bezirk Altona. But the common short version is "Altona". "Altona, Hamburg" is rubbish. To keep it disambiguate and to have a consistent system for the Hamburg districts I suggest Category:Bezirk Altona and the same for the other districts. With one districts out of a scheme this is difficult to handle for people which aren't fulltime Wikimedians. NNW 09:55, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Foroa, I also agree with Mogelzahn. You have to consider that Hamburg is a Bundesland like Nordrhein-Westfalen, than Bezirk is like province, see Category:Walloon Brabant‎. If you look at Category:Subdivisions of Hamburg, especially Category:Districts of Hamburg‎ Altona is the only one not called by its name. If on Category:Subdivisions of Hamburg you click on Bezirk Altona you get Begriffserklärungsseite Category:Altona--Oursana (talk) 09:59, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
It is indeed possible that the name is not optimal, there are other bezirks there that will be renamed sooner or later. --Foroa (talk) 13:08, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


Hallo Foroa,

Ik Heb de afbeeldingen van de categorie Beamers overgezet naar Warping machines. Deze machines zijn ook scheermachines en waarom dan 2 verschillende categorien gebruiken?

Gerrit41 (talk) 17:03, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Bedankt. Ik had al mijn twijfels betreffende de naam, vooral de auteur kennende. Maar in eerste instantie probeer ik Special:WantedCategories op te kuisen zonder mij al te veel vragen te stellen betreffende nieuwe categorie namen. --Foroa (talk) 17:13, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


Hi collega,

Kun je me uitleggen wat je bedoeling is met de categorie ? Er is namelijk ontzettend veel 19e eeuwse klassieke- en volksmuziek op Commons beschikbaar die ook als dansmuziek kan worden beschouwd. Zie ook --Judithcomm (talk) 11:41, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Ik probeer gewoon Special:WantedCategories wat op een redelijk niveau te brengen. Daartussen zat dus ook Category:19th_Century_Dances die ik moeilijk kon thuisbrengen in dances en dus voorlopig in de goede area geplaatst heb. Ik heb over het algemeen mijn tijfel over cats per eeuw, maar ik wist er niet meteen weg mee. --Foroa (talk) 12:30, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Ok, je hebt dus een 'weeskind' aan een 'moeder' geholpen. Ik vind catagorieën per eeuw soms interessant als je echt met geschiedenis bezig bent. Om oud materiaal beter vindbaar te maken, bijvoorbeeld dansfoto's. Maar de chronologische indeling moet voorkomen uit het onderwerp, vind ik. Silent era is voor film bijvoorbeeld beter. --Judithcomm (talk) 13:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Sur-catégorisation - trains stations in Charleroi et trains in Belgium[edit]


Il ne faut pas mettre un article dans une catégorie et une sous-catégorie de la même branche d'arborescence.

✓OK Category:Charleroi-Ouest train station‎ -> Category:Train stations in Charleroi -> Category:Train stations in Belgium
X mark.svg Not OK Category:Charleroi-Ouest train station‎ -> Category:Train stations in Belgium

Voir : Commons:Catégories#Sur-catégorisation ou Commons:Categorieën#Overcategorisatie

Bien à toi.

--Jmh2o (talk) 13:39, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour. Voir Category talk:Belgium; essentiellement un système à deux niveaux (pays/endroit), ce qui simplifie énormement. Le fait que j'ai placé les train stations by location à coté fait qu'il n'y plus d'overcat, même pour les puristes. On fait ça pour les churches, castles, train stations, windmills , ... et encore des autres à venir. --Foroa (talk) 17:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
X mark.svg Not OK Je bent duidelijk in de fout, hou je toch aan de regels zoals hierboven gevraagd? Carolus (talk) 19:50, 2 June 2013 (UTC)


Hi Foroa,

could you tell me how you found in almost no time that Category:Trekshoes, Haarle should be categorized under Category:Haarle, Hellendoorn and why my comment "which should be a disambiguation category, note the numbers 20482424, ...2425, 6, 7" should stay (though on another line)?

It's quite possible that I overlooked something (and then my comment should be deleted, I think), but what did I miss? -- 23:05, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

That's experience. Trekshoes doesn't sound right and most probably does not exist; not the first time we have wrong names from the Rijksdienst. Terphoes Molenweg Haarle is probably closer. When looking in the georeferenties from the Rijksdienst, you are in the Hellendoorn area. In general, consecutive RCE numbers are created in the same batch and belong to the same place. There are often mistakes in the database, it takes a lot of time and detective work to find out (we found a RCE batch about a castle in Maastricht back in Liège, Belgium because it was from the same architect as another castle in Maastricht). Anyway, for proper checking everything is next to impossible. The best chance is that they are categorised as close as possible. Even when it is wrong, you have a chance that it is detected by local people, when it remains uncategorised or in a disambiguation page, it might stay there for ever. --Foroa (talk) 06:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Trekshoes doesn't sound that bad, I don't who/what Trek(s) is, but the farm would be named Trekshoes, Trekshuus, Trekshuis, Trek(s)man, or Trek(s/k)ink. In both Haarles (Hellendoorn/Tubbergen), one doesn't need terps, which seems to rule out Terphoes. -- 08:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I edit in the Hellendoorn area (I was born there), but I do not know Trekshoes. That doesn't mean much, Haarle in Hellendoorn is south-east of Nijverdal and my parents (and grandparents &c.) were from the north-west. In Category:Haarle, Hellendoorn the chances that people from Tubbergen recognize the name are rather slim. If I would know that Trekshoes isn't in Hellendoorn (because, say, in Haarle, people say "huus" instead of "hoes"). I would have placed it in Tubbergen. -- 08:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Try this: it is getting close ... --Foroa (talk) 08:45, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I tried it: the only result which doesn't strike "terphoes" is which talks about "'t Terphoes" in Enschede, and "de Molle" in Haarle, Hellendoorn (and many other "Social Agencies", of whom almost none are in Lemselo (it is the 17th page of a dump of a rather eager bot). Why do you think that page would be relevant? -- 10:15, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
According to H. Hagens visited Hezingen (in Tubbergen) the same day. -- 16:54, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
See Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#Category:Haarle. -- 21:24, 2 June 2013 (UTC)

Red spiders[edit]

Cher ami, il y a plein de Strimigeny rouges qui attendent ton bot avec impatience.] Bon amusement. --Foroa (talk) 07:37, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello my friend.
Sadly my bot is only capable of adding the Taxonavigation to a category or an article in rare cases :
  • The Taxonavigation is copied it genus category to species category and article => So the genus needs a Taxonavigation (I just added Taxonavigation to Category:Strumigenys)
  • The genus category needs to contain a {{Species}} entry (I just added one to Category:Strumigenys, sadly only ITIS has info on Strumigenys)
  • The species must be listed in the {{Species}} entry. (That won't be the case as ITIS does not know a lot of species)
Do you have a good online source for Hymenoptera ? (I created {{MantodeaSF}} and {{OrthopteraSF}} for those 2 orders)
Cheers Liné1 (talk) 08:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I have some vague souvenirs of Latin and I know the difference between a spider and a fly, between an apple tree, an Acer tree and other trees...
So I guess that you don't have a handy solution for those or those neither ?
Question: do I need any sort of validation before I can add a species cat to its parent, or do you check first before adding it ?



I've fixed the cooldown thing and made the log work. Would you please unblock my bot? (Currently testing on main account.) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:24, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

That cleanout of the double redirects seems to be a great job. I should have mentioned that redirected categories should never be categorised themselves in another category. (they can however refer to other categories)
Don't forget that there are a number of templates that do the same job:
RussBot is currently stalled for some reason, so I prefer not unblock your bot till RussBot terminates his batch to avoid possible interferences. --Foroa (talk) 17:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
It's likely terminated (might be because of the bug made in updating posted on mw:User talk:Xqt#Bug) -- it haven't made any edit since 08:43, 31 May 2013 (UTC). --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 01:44, 2 June 2013 (UTC)
When, do you think, you can unblock it? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 08:37, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
RussBot still runs strangely. I am awaiting a reply from its operator. It doesn't look as if you corrected all the double redirects. --Foroa (talk) 15:12, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Might be. It's running too slow -- only several edits in a few hours. I'm trying to make the three parts (hard redirect checking, double redirect fixing, and category moving) of the script into different parts so that it can run less jobs. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 10:44, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
en:User_talk:R'n'B#RussBot_on_Commons There seems to be a general problem with bots. --Foroa (talk) 05:28, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
The bug should be fixed by mw:User:Xqt on 17:17, 2 June 2013 (UTC) as mw:Special:Code/pywikipedia/11610. The updated version works well, just a little too slow (I terminated it yesterday). --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 10:48, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

What do you think of my first automatically started and complete run (log)? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:55, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Finish running two times, now running the third time. BTW, can you unblock it until RussBot fixes its bug? Thanks. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 05:47, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:Mount Ida[edit]

Dag Foroa, denk je dat een hernoeming van de Category:Mount Ida naar Category:Mount Ida (Turkey) vanwege eventuele verwarring met Category:Mount Ida (Crete) wenselijk is? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:20, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Dank je, was meer dan nodig, en er moeten er nog bijkomen: en:Mount Ida (disambiguation). --Foroa (talk) 06:58, 4 June 2013 (UTC)


Hello, Why yor revert my moves? I hav reverted the movs by Edits an ex-Translate administrator. This user has done all wrong. I hav taken 1,5 hour to fix all problems on the Licensing page. Klick. Greetings--Steinsplitter (talk) 06:45, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Just repairing some Special:BrokenRedirects, there are still some left. --Foroa (talk) 06:49, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
Okay. Thank you. :-) --Steinsplitter (talk) 06:54, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Lisbon tram 542[edit]

Hello! It is better like this, yes, as the simple number category makes more sense to show up as one in the parent cat "by number", while the split categories make more sense under each series’ listing. -- Tuválkin 17:21, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Well, we spend quite some energy to keep Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories tidy, why I trapped your category. In general, it is not a good idea to have categories that forward link to categories that it contain as this creates maintenance/consistency problems. --Foroa (talk) 05:24, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:Elst - Dordrecht railway[edit]

Je bent me net iets voor. Ik zie dat de stations fout gaan en dacht dat aan een specialist over te laten via De Kroeg. Ik zet ze nu even bij elkaar, dan is het duidelijk. --Stunteltje (talk) 07:07, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

De stations zijn nu hier naartoe verplaatst. Er zijn vaak twee categorieën per station. Lijkt mij niet juist. Maar ik ben geen spoorspecialist, heb geen enkele voorkeur voor de juiste naam. Los jij dat weer zelf op of vraag ik dat ergens anders? --Stunteltje (talk) 07:41, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
Ik denk dat veel stations op meerdere lijnen liggen. Het feit dat de categories verplaatst zijn zal vermoedelijk wel de geinteresseerden wakker maken. --Foroa (talk) 07:46, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

CommonsDelinker working?[edit]

Just wondering if you know if CommonsDelinker is working again. I've been away. — SMUconlaw (talk) 08:03, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:Allegories of rivers[edit]

Dag Foroa, wil je even checken of mijn eerste drie bewerkingen van vandaag wel correct zijn? Ik heb zo de indruk dat ik daar iets fout deed. :$ Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 03:28, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Ik veronderstel dat je de gallery Allegories of rivers nog wil aanvullen of is het een vergissing ? --Foroa (talk) 05:59, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Neen, dat is een vergissing van mijntentwege. sorry! Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:27, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:Whalers Bay -->Whalers Bay (South Shetland Islands)]][edit]

Dag Foroa, (only me again), meen je dat een hernoeming van de Category:Whalers Bay -->Category:Whalers Bay (South Shetland Islands) vanwege verwarring met Whalers Bay (Svalbard) aangewezen is? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 04:25, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Heb ik veranderd, maar het is wel redelijk genant dat ik nu niets vind voor Whalers Bay (Svalbard). --Foroa (talk) 15:32, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Bishop Museum[edit]

Can you name another museum called "Bishop Museum"?--KAVEBEAR (talk) 07:10, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

There are several, but here on commons, the first ones that come to mind are the Benny Bishop Museum and the Bishop's museum in Trier. --Foroa (talk) 14:24, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
hahahahaha !!!!!!!!! that is wrongly translated the correct name should be episcopal museum. the adjective of bishop is episcopal, and nothing else. by the way the one from Trier is called Bischöfliches Dom- und Diözesanmuseum Trier. Carolus (talk) 10:38, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Historic Center of Quito - World Heritage Site ( !!!!!!! thanks !!!!!!! - - - - - - - - thanks again for categorizing !!!!!!! - - -[edit]

Historic Center of Quito, an area of 790 acres with 130 monumental buildings in addition to 5,000 properties that are registered with the the municipality of Quito as heritage properties.

User talk:Foroa (awesome category for Quito....Historic Center of Quito - World Heritage Site - - thanks for categorizing


Hi Foroa! Zum de.WP-Artikel "Izi" habe ich versucht meine Bilder in eine weiterführende Category einzufügung. Leider klappt das nicht. Nun ist die Cat.Izi schon 2x angelegt. Kannst du das korrigieren bzw. die überflüssigen löschen damit der Com moms-Link funktioniert??!Vielen Dank und noch einen schönen Abend -----Martin der Ältere! 20:08, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but Category:Ixi is not acceptable; There can be millions of Ixi things, we are heading for millions of categories and a category name must be clear about its contents. I created Category:Ixi (vocalist) for you. --Foroa (talk) 08:47, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Danke schön für deine schnelle Hilfe!! Mit den Cat's habe ich immer noch Schwierigkeiten. Viele Grüße und noch frohes Schaffen!----Martin der Ältere! 19:11, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Kindly request to block my user page and user talk[edit]

Dear Foroa, I beg your pardon to contact you referring to my question/request on Commons:Forum, topic Eigene Benutzerseite und Unterseiten sperren lassen, as of June 11, 2013.
In short: Kindly request to block my user pages User:Roland zh and User talk:Roland zh.

As a personal comment to you: As you propably remarked or perhaps do remind, imho I have 'bad experiencies' respectively 'serious dificulties' regarding 'discussions' on user talks, i.e. a (too) long list was leading to a (seriously) 'mental blockation' in such 'discussions' again and again, see p.e. as of June 11, 2013, and too many more. In 'real life' i'm (honestly) an old men with 'tense nerves' and 'tired' in "talkings about everything" instead of "do something usefull work" to support Wikimedia commons.

As an administrator 'of my confidence' (once again, please excuse my bad written English), I beg to 'block' my pages User:Roland zh and User talk:Roland zh for further edits by Wikimedians, 'freezing' the status quo as of June 11, 2013.

So I don't miss-interprete, I refer for this request on Commons:Schutzrichtlinie#Schutzgesuch_stellen.

If possible, I would to go on 'as usual', i.e. editing Category:India related media and categories, establish categories and upload media respectively 'Swiss' related photographs.

So it's not possible to block 'my userpage and talk' as I would like have to, thank you for a short comment.

However, thank you very much for your assistance the past years and my very best greetings, Roland 22:24, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Foroa, ✓ Done already. Feel free to comment at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#user.2Ftalkpage_protected. --Túrelio (talk) 07:34, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Túrelio, I really appreciate. Roland, If you want to get the content of your user pages changed, just create something like User:Roland zh/Sandbox and/or User talk:Roland zh/Discussion and let me know when I have to transfer it. --Foroa (talk) 05:27, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Dear Foroa and Túrelio, thank you very much, both of you :-) As also told directly to Túrelio, his effort I appreciate very much, it's perfect. As mentioned, imho in future there should no need for further updates of my Wikimedia sites on user-level, but your offer it's very kind, thank you! My best greetings, Roland zh 17:50, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems as of 22:48, 6. Aug. 2013[edit]

Dear Foroa, i kindly ask you, so it's possible for you, to intervent above mentioned matter, as there imho seems to be a serious problem i requested some minutes ago. Thank you very much so you may mediate and best regards, Roland zh 23:05, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

[Locked] double / triple redirect [loop][edit]

There's so many [locked] double / triple redirect [loop] on commons as reported in User:Zhuyifei1999/Sandbox (Copied from script stdout). Shall I ignore it or manually fix it? (Bot fixing might not be possible.) --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 03:21, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Good catch. I'll look at it later. Part of those things used to be reported in Commons:Database reports/Broken redirects but this one seems stalled: User_talk:MZMcBride#BernsteinBot_inactive. Was very handy. Note that in all cases, user hard redirects to another wikipedia need to be replaced by a {{Softredirect}}. --Foroa (talk) 07:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)


Hello, thank you for your intervent on Italian Coachbuilders, can you please make this actions [20] on Category:Australian Coachbuilders Category:Chinese Coachbuilders and Category:Austrian Coachbuilders ?? i am ispired by this for create cat, and now the cat are incorrect :(. Ciao Grazie --Pava (talk) 17:29, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

There are still thousands of categories that need renaming, no reason to bypass the basic naming rules. --Foroa (talk) 15:56, 16 June 2013 (UTC)


Dag Foroa, zou dit in het Engels moeten hiernoemd worden? (Ninety-three?) Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 11:51, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Ik zie niet in waarom een Frans boek van een Franse auteur in het Engels zou moeten zijn, tenzij het een echte wereldhit zou zijn. Het moet echter in minimum twee talen gedocumenteerd worden (and searchable) en hernoemd worden naar Category:Quatrevingt-treize by Victor Hugo. --Foroa (talk) 16:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Okay, bedankt, goed om te weten. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Čvrsnica and landscapes of Bosnia and Herzegovina[edit]

do you have any explanation for your category removals?Quahadi Añtó 06:12, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Sure. There are several reasons.
By the way, Commons user prefer images without borders and without watermarks. --Foroa (talk) 06:24, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Autocomplete cateogry[edit]

Hey Foroa, I saw you deleted the category Category:Autocomplete in which I collected the screencast tutorials to build an autocomplete service. I named it accordingly to the wikipedia article in the english wikipedia. How should I have named the category and why didn't you rename it? --Renepick (talk) 12:11, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

That's right, I was cleaning out the Special:WantedCategories where I moved a number of invalid categories, and in the red non existing category Category:Autocomplete I found a number of files such as File:Auto Complete Demo5 Introducing The Contextlistener.webm and File:Autocomplete Demo 7 Introducing Client Caching And Formatting.webm that where largely overcategorised and seemingly redundant with the undocumented Category:Neo4j. (Please read COM:CAT and especially COM:OVERCAT). I don't think that Autocomplete is a good name as it can mean many things. I think that "Software autocompletion" is a better term in this case. Remember that Commons has only one basic naming rule for categories; it must say what it means, and there can be autocompletion in many other domains too (speech, filling pumps, music, automata ...). In your case, I think that you better make a dedicated category that explains what you show in stead of filling up several vaguely related categories; Commons is not a tag based categorisation system. --Foroa (talk) 13:00, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for your various hints! I was always confused on how categories in commons should be used. I thought that Autocomplete is this dedicated category (much more than neo4j or gwt which are just exchangable technologies being used to explain how to create an autocomplete service I will read all your linked articles and see how to proceed if I have any further questions I will contact you again --Renepick (talk) 13:23, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Category:Russell Lee[edit]

Dag Foroa, meen je dat deze categorie dient hernoemd omwille van evt. verwarring met Russell Lee? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Ja eigenlijk wel. Er zijn nog een 2800 Russel Lee pictures, maar ik weet niet of er andere Russell Lees tussen zitten en in welke mate het dringend is. Je kan er alvast een {{Move}} op zetten. --Foroa (talk) 11:50, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Corps Diplomatique[edit]

Just as I was moving images from Category:Corps Diplomatique to Category:Diplomatic corps, I noticed that you put one in the other. Did you intend to Category:Corps Diplomatique to represent "CD" symbols and things like that particularly? (I'm waiting before redirecting the category because of noticing this.) --Closeapple (talk) 17:26, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Sure, CD is a label that stands for "Corps Diplomatique", not for Diplomatic Corps. I made that category recently to contain all things that are related to the label. Over time, there will be plenty of things to fill up Category:Diplomatic corps. --Foroa (talk) 17:32, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
OK. It's a bit confusing because "corps diplomatique" is, of course, still in common use (as evidenced by the labels), so it's difficult to tell that it's supposed to be specifically about CD designations used by the diplomatic corps, rather than about the corps itself. I guess the labels should be moved to whatever is decided for that subcategory. --Closeapple (talk) 18:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
So what have you accomplished with your change ? Just an American reflex ? --Foroa (talk) 20:35, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Naming of categories[edit]

Hi, Foroa. How do you think of these cases ? In English Wikipedia en:Nanking Massacre is used now. Takabeg (talk) 22:40, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

This is obviously a controversial move. This large category is there, uncontested, since almost 8 years, both names are common, it fits will with the parent categories and with many wikipedias. Overall naming seems more consistent than the en:Wiki versions. --Foroa (talk) 05:54, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Hmm. Nanking/Nanjing cases is OK. But "The Memorial Hall of the Victims in Nanjing Massacre by Japanese Invaders" have to be changed to "Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall‎". ("The Memorial Hall of the Victims in Nanjing Massacre by Japanese Invaders", "Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall‎") Takabeg (talk) 06:34, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
Please use the move or CFD procedure. --Foroa (talk) 05:34, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

Rename Category[edit]

Dag Foroa, naar mijn bescheiden mening zou de Category:Baudouin of Belgium best renamed worden -->Category:Prince Baudouin of Belgium, vanwege eventuele verwarring met Baudouin of Belgium, wat denk je? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 07:31, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Inderdaad: zie #Prins Boudewijn. Ik heb het nog niet gedaan omdat ik nog geen geschikte naam gevonden heb: Prince Baudouin kan ook de huidige Boudewijn zijn voor hij koning werd. --Foroa (talk) 08:28, 26 June 2013 (UTC)


Hello, plz change it MediaWiki:Aboutsite/bn manually (remove this {{SITENAME}} বৃত্তান্ত and add this উইকিমিডিয়া কমন্স বৃত্তান্ত (don't worry,this is not vandal.. already done here, Translated by me). Thanks :) --Aftab1995 (talk) 22:43, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done --Foroa (talk) 05:00, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Misleading category links[edit]

Hi, Foroa. When I was testing my bot File:AT-25391 Rupertihof (Sulzau) 02.jpg caused an error. It turns out that it has a category called Category:Rupertihof #Sulzau#, which makes a section error. So what does Category:Rupertihof #Sulzau# really mean? Or how shall we fix it? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

This is a faulty category name, the # sign is not supported in category names, but anyway, in your case, faulty or non existing categories should not be taken into account. --Foroa (talk) 12:49, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Category moves for painters[edit]

Hi Foroa, I noticed you have been renaming some painter categories, which is all fine, but I noticed you are not leaving behind a category redirect. For example I noticed these diffs: 08:58, 28 November 2012 Foroa (talk | contribs) deleted page Category:Lucas Cranach d. J. (Category:Lucas Cranach d. J. moved to Category:Lucas Cranach the Younger) 21:05, 28 August 2012 Fastily (talk | contribs) deleted page Category:Lucas Cranach d. J. (Empty category) Apparently this category is now Lucas Cranach the Younger, which is fine, but I think we still need a category redirect for Lucas Cranach d. J., or it will probably be created again by some well-meaning German GLAM. For situations like this one, which you deleted due to the pre-existance of [:Category:William Allan (painter)|this one]] I think a disambiguation category is needed, or at least a category redirect that can later become a disambiguation category. What do you think? I have been told that redirects are fine and do not hurt the project in any way, but increase search capabilities, so I always leave a redirect when merging categories and never request a deletion (or leave it empty, which will get it deleted for emptiness). Jane023 (talk) 11:11, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I delete all moved categories that are based on a naming which is not compliant to Commons naming style (d J/Ä, ...) and the ones that are misleading. Note that when I delete them, you have a clickable destination in the deletion edit summary. You can create a disambiguation category if you want, but then I hope that you will help to maintain them (See Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories). Most people drop things in the first category that they find acceptable, so that the majority of items in Category:Non-empty disambiguation categories are just lazy and/or double categorisations to make sure they have it all, so basically, disambiguation pages (that tend to be badly maintained) are essentially creating more maintenance work. --Foroa (talk) 05:29, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[edit]

Dag Foroa, denk je dat een category: zinvol zou zijn? Er bevinden zich (als ik het goed heb) momenteel zo'n 2,806 files op commons. Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 06:51, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Er bestaat inderdaad al een Category:Images from met een parent category. Ik zie niet in wat er meer zou nodig zijn. Hoedanook lijkt het mij geen goed idee om categories aan te maken met gewoon de site names. --Foroa (talk) 07:00, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Bedankt, die category had ik over het hoofd gezien.
Wat is je mening omtrent een Category:Affidavits ? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 08:38, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Ik dacht eerst dat het iets was om op te eten. Niet dus, maar best wel interessant. --Foroa (talk) 08:42, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Affidavits? om op te eten, misschien kan dat wel in de zin van "z'n eigen woorden opeten ... Wink.png Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 09:04, 2 July 2013 (UTC)


Hi, thanks for taking an interest. If you want to improve any of the category mapping please do work them in. It does not affect Faebot's work immediately, but will help me improve it through later changes. It is a giant task, at the moment Faebot has been tackling a subset of "middle" England for several weeks and is on Page 105,380 out of a filtered suspect list of 714,703 :-) Other non-Commons stuff is filling my time right now, but I hope to return to spend time reworking this around August and perhaps hit the rest of England, and possibly Scotland and Ireland, shortly afterwards. BTW, my watchlist is extremely long, it is worth dropping a note on my user talk page to ensure I spot changes. -- (talk) 17:52, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

Possible data loss[edit]

Such edits may cause possible data loss.--Juandev (talk) 19:26, 2 July 2013 (UTC)

You must be joking. --Foroa (talk) 04:32, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[edit]

Dag Foroa, heb jij enig idee waaronder deze afbeeldingen kunnen gecat worden? ~~

Dag Lotje. Je kan het GLAMorous tool (preferences - gadgets) gebruiken om te zien waar die afbeeldingen gebruikt worden als ze al in een categorie zitten, anders kan je het gebruik zien op iedere file afzonderlijk. Maar ook via Google " kom je bij en:Waubay Wetland Management District terecht. --Foroa (talk) 05:32, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Wanted Categories[edit]

Hi, Foroa. My bot has ran a second time since you last posted on Work Requests. Any new lists? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 12:33, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Sure, but not right away. --Foroa (talk) 16:23, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi, Foroa (again). EugeneZelenko seem to have different opinions about this work [Commons:Bots/Requests/YiFeiBot (3)#Discussion]. I'm not sure whether to accept it. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 04:57, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Not at all, as I mentioned earlier, the precise details of what categories should be auto-created and in how far the defined rules are active should be on an isolated/special page (now on Bot Work request, but those disappear in archives). The bot request is concerning the authorisation to execute those rules. --Foroa (talk) 05:44, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, but I can't understand what you mean. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 06:31, 8 July 2013 (UTC)


This Is Not Your Ordinary Acid3 Fan. (My Talk Page) 18:42, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Show pictures on top of certain main catagories[edit]

Hi, maybe it's not quite clear why recently two or three pictures were put on top of the main catagory of some Dutch cities.

This was especcially done, because since the Rijksdienst voor het Erfgoed has released its whole archive by simply 'throwing' all its old images, no matter their quality and relevance, in out of all the main catogory of many Dutch places, these catagories since months already are not exactly what visitors are supposed to expect them to be, namely the main page where they immediately can get an impression of what pictures are present relevant to the place they're interested in.

As a matter of fact like this these catagories in many cases are a very big mess, now that hundreds and sometimes thousands of black-white images about often most uninteresting subjects (like indoor construction details of buildings (like ruinous farm houses)) are filling these main catagories and thus making the more recent images as good as unvisible.

Of course the best thing that should happen would be, when he or those who uploaded this tidal wave of questionable images, would be forced to take care they all are catagorised in a proper way.

But as long as this has not happened, it is estimated to be most usefull, when visitors are offered an at least minimal impression of the quality images that are present, through some of them being showed on top of the main page. Therefore, it would be appreciated, when (at least as long as the current situation lasts) these show images will not be removed any more (like happened for instance here: [21])

Kind regards, Natubico (talk) 02:43, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

I agree that the massive uploads from "Rijksdienst voor het Erfgoed" have not been thought out carefully, but that is partially due to the lack of experience and the lack of the knowledge of its precise contents. As one can see in Category:Rijksmonumenten categories to be classified on which I already worked several weeks, and the number of people working on it, it will take several years before they get cleaned out. This is even more difficult because the file names are unclear, so difficult to move with Cat-a-lot.
Anyway, I've got the same feeling of frustration as you when some cats are flooded with hardly usable images, while the better ones disappear under the snow. But including some of them in the category description, besides jeopardising the category system, is no real systematic solution. I moved some images already to the top of the category display by giving a sort key. This is a quick work around hack, no systematic solution but still better than yours. I guess that the only permanent solutions for the worst cases is to isolate those images in proper subcategories (which is a pain too considering the fact that the building name is not in the file name) or to create separate categories such as "Buildings in xxx (RCE)" or so. --Foroa (talk) 06:42, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
@Foroa. Would it make sense in categories like that, to make a Category:Rijksdienst voor het Erfgoed good quality images on top of the category page? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

"I guess that the only permanent solutions for the worst cases is to isolate those images in proper subcategories (which is a pain too considering the fact that the building name is not in the file name) or to create separate categories such as "Buildings in xxx (RCE)" or so."

A catagory "Black/white images of buildings in the 20th century" was created soon after hundreds of those images were put into the Delft main catagory. But the uploader of those images removed it and told its creator to "be very carefull" (or something like that) "because these are three different subjects in one catagory".

Maybe one or more superiors in the Commons-hiërarchy can force him to take care that all those images as yet will be put into a catagory with a that informative (to visitors) name (no matter how many subjects it contains).

By the way on first sight it seems not quite sure that this Rijksdienst (governmental service) is acting juridically correct by publishing all these images (including many that were made inside private buildings) worldwide in a way like this.

Natubico (talk) 02:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

@Natubico, yeeh,... laws are made by governments, but if need be, the officials go ahead and change or simply ignore them. :-D Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 05:02, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
User Natubico apparently has some preconceived ideas about Commons that are not common on Commons, as far as I know. His remarks above: "black-white images about often most uninteresting subjects (like indoor construction details of buildings (like ruinous farm houses)) are filling these main catagories", "this tidal wave of questionable images", and "quality images that are present, through some of them being showed on top of the main page" are very much POV statements. His request "show images will not be removed" shows a lack of understanding of the function of Commons, a database (an online repository of free-use images, sound, and other media files), not a showcase. --VanBuren (talk) 13:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)


Dag Foroa, ik had het lemma gemoved op de Engelstalige om verwarring te vermijden, zou je overwegen dit ook op commons te doen en er Category:Spam (food) van maken? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 12:50, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done --Foroa (talk) 05:59, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Administrative okrugs of Moscow[edit]

You are not right. At first, you are in conflict with your opponent, so you should not protect this page, you should ask other sysop. And secondly, in English Wikipedia category has name Category:Administrative okrugs of Moscow, and we should use this name. If you are disagree, you should rename firstly in English WIkipedia.--Anatoliy (talk) 19:00, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't care how it is named, I care about naming consistency. Changing the name would require renaming of several subcategories and significant/complex changes in {{Districts of Moscow}} navigation template that is used now in 17 places, but potentially in several hundreds of categories. Moreover, it has to be seen if the districts of the same level city Saint Petersburg has to be renamed too.
So this is not a conflict with an opponent, just a change that has several implications that have to be organised, and not just by redirecting a category. --Foroa (talk) 08:24, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec[edit]

Hi there - hope all is well! Ik kwam toevallig bij de bovengenoemde categorie die nogal rommelig blijkt te zijn. "Works by" zit in "Paintings by" en "Posters" zit niet in "works"..., "early/late" works en dan ook nog per jaar - En geen categorie voor tekeningen bijvoorbeeld. En de individuele bestanden zitten ook nogal verschillend ingedeeld (zie deze twee bv waltzing 1 and 2.)

Hoe het beste aan te pakken? (en ik heb dus geen cat-a-lot) Ik had gedacht om "early/late works" in naam aan te passen naar "works before 1888" en "works after 1896", duidelijkere splitsing. Is het nodig om alle schilderijen in 1 categorie te zetten voor "paintings by"? Of liever toch mapjes voor al die verschillende schilderijen? Zou u een botje kunnen laten lopen voor een nieuwe categorie Category:Works by Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec in the Brooklyn Museum‎ (voor Category:European Art in the Brooklyn Museum en dan ws. ook een nieuwe category "Works by HTL by museum") met al die bestanden uit de hoofdcategorie? ... Laat maar weten hoe het beste verder te gaan, tot nu toe heb ik alleen de twee "works between (year)" categorieën met sortkeys georganiseerd. Groeten, -- Deadstar (msg) 10:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


Dag Foroa, ik heb daar een probleempje met de Category:RCE suggested: Refugium, Category:Refugium van de abdij van Tongerlo (Diest) Category:Refugium van Sint-Truiden (Mechelen) en de Category:Asylum, horen die bij elkaar denk je? Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 14:06, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

W. Walter Gill[edit]

Dag Foroa, wil je eens zien hoe ik die boomstructuur best aanpak? Category:Books by William Walter GillCategory:William Walter Gill, Category:Gill, William Walter Lotje ʘ‿ʘ (talk) 04:39, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Maestro del Bigallo[edit]

Hi Foroa, I just want you to remember, when you change the category name, this afflicted several interwikilinks and the creator template. I fixed it. Could wikida help?Oursana (talk) 09:37, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

Category:Voie Verte[edit]

Hello, I asked in 2012 for a move of Category:Voie Verte to Category:Voies Vertes, but the move-request did not show up in the requested moves categories. I did a new move request which also does not show up. Can you move the category? Thanks. --Havang(nl) (talk) 19:26, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


Hi, Foroa. The category was made into a redirect long ago, and RussBot cannot move the files in it since they're protected. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 10:26, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Hi again, just noticed that some of the files in the redirect target aren't about wikimedia movement. Perhaps the category shouldn't be a redirect? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:46, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


Hello Foroa, I created Category:Beauregard (Ain), making Category:Beauregard a redirect; however, this redirect should become a dichotomy category, see commons-search Can you fix that the right way? I adapted already fr:Beauregard (Ain) commonscat, but how about other WP-links to commons? There will come more cat's moves for such a reason, following the French dichotomy and article names. --Havang(nl) (talk) 21:10, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Idem redirect for Category:Carignan. --Havang(nl) (talk) 18:00, 3 August 2013 (UTC)


Globe-trotter (talk) 14:21, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Categories communes DOMTOM France[edit]

Hello, Foroa, I made for communes DOMTOM France a LIST of equivalent commons categorie names; some turned out to be red, I added the actually existing blue category name as well. AntonyB from projet communes France sur Wikipedia has commented this list, doing category name proposals. Can you have a look and mark with #OKE# the names you agree on with AntonyB and which may be changed without further discussion as trivial improvements. For the others we may make a move proposal.--Havang(nl) (talk) 12:40, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Category move[edit]

Hi, you commented on this Categories for discussion, would you be able to move it as it's been good to go for nearly a year. Cheers, Mattythewhite (talk) 17:13, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 19:26, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Category:Egyesült Izzólámpa és Villamossági Rt.[edit]

--Retired electrician (talk) 17:13, 1 September 2013 (UTC)


Nyttend (talk) 20:15, 2 September 2013 (UTC)


Thelmadatter (talk) 15:22, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


Thelmadatter (talk) 15:23, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


Thelmadatter (talk) 16:41, 8 September 2013 (UTC)


Jwh (talk) 00:20, 9 September 2013 (UTC)


Thelmadatter (talk) 01:45, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Gent Coupure[edit]

Dag Foroa, weet jij hoe die nummerplaat onherkenbaar gemaakt kan worden? Lotje (talk) 04:35, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Deze ook nog. Lotje (talk) 04:38, 13 September 2013 (UTC)


Thelmadatter (talk) 16:29, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Possibly useful category[edit]

I found one of my images in an empty category that you recently deleted. The category appears to be useful: Category:Historic Places in Canada templates with deprecated parameters. Perhaps it should be flagged to not delete. Royalbroil 13:40, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't know if you're still around anymore. I restored the category since it's not empty anymore. If that was wrong, please leave me a message so we can do what is necessary. Thank you. Royalbroil 13:51, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


Rschen7754 00:17, 15 September 2013 (UTC)


I'm wondering what Category:Thai-NP-Tools are? - Takeaway (talk) 13:49, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Dance by year/decade etc[edit]

Hi. Why did you comment out part of the dance by year template to prevent decade categories? Wondering, -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


Hi Foroa, I am wondering, are you in a break or retired? All the best. --Túrelio (talk) 20:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I was wondering the same. I hope it's the former, not the latter. Cheers, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:38, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
We all miss you. I hope you are fine. I wish you all the best and I also hope you only take a break.--Oursana (talk) 20:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
I miss you too. INeverCry just retired. I hope you're not going to do that. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 22:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
No, he cannot just retire, because he has to make the numberplates invisible here. Face-smile.svg Lotje (talk) 05:01, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Where are you great Foroa? We miss you all ! And not even you answer the email ! Please, give us one answer ! Cheers, --DenghiùComm (talk) 16:09, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Hope you are OK. You do great work here, and we all miss it. — Cheers, JackLee talk 08:26, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Please, just tell us whether you're still here or not, or just left commons, to have more time on other projects:
--Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:10, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

A break is well deserved, but it would be nice to know if all is well. --99of9 (talk) 10:08, 14 November 2013 (UTC)


The Photographer (talk) 18:32, 16 November 2013 (UTC)


Hi Foroa - I suspect Category:Guadalupe would be better made into a disambig; I just emptied out a whole lot of pics that weren't of the current subject (Isla Guadalupe off Mexico). My preference would be to move the current cat to Category:Isla Guadalupe (the local name), but Category:Guadalupe Island (English translation) may fit Commons policy better. Any thoughts? - MPF (talk) 22:40, 23 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi, MPF, I do not know where Foroa is hanging out these days, therefore I keep an eye on his userpage. As to your question, if you ask me, Category:Guadalupe Island seems logical.Lotje (talk) 06:26, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll do that later today - MPF (talk) 09:34, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
I actually just made the Category:Guadalupe Island and created the "Guadalupe" disambiguation category, looking for all existing links and possible targets for disambiguating it, and sorting the existing contents that were mixed in the ambiguous category (except images that were insufficiently geolocalized). There are certainly many other uses of the name "Guadalupe" around the world, more could be listed in the disambiguation page (I tried to document the locations or topics precisely for each one to help recategorizing the contents correctly).
Note that I also renamed the former page "Guadalupe" which was also ambiguous but not about the same topic as the island that was previously documented in the category.
Finaly the incorrect or missing wikidata entries were updated. verdy_p (talk) 16:21, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Happy holidays![edit]


Mjrmtg (talk) 22:44, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Orientation tables or toposcopes?[edit]

You might be interested in this proposal. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 19:47, 15 January 2014 (UTC)


Nanite (talk) 12:04, 19 January 2014 (UTC)


Nanite (talk) 12:21, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Category:Coats of arms of Portuguese nobility‎[edit]

De-adminship warning[edit]

This talk page in other languages:

Dear Foroa, I am writing to inform you that you are in danger of losing your adminship on Commons because of inactivity.

If you want to keep your adminship, you need both to sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Feb-Mar 2014 within 30 days of today's date, and also to make at least five further admin actions in the following six months. Anyone who does not do so will automatically lose administrator rights.

You can read the de-admin policy at Commons:Administrators/De-adminship.

Thank you, odder (talk) 20:37, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Regrettably, Foroa's last edit on Commons was July 23rd, 2013. --Túrelio (talk) 21:17, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
I hope he's okay, and that his absence is explained by nothing more serious than he got fed up with the lot of us.--Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:32, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure he got fed up with me. :$ Lotje (talk) 11:14, 14 February 2014 (UTC)


Hi Foroa! This is just to inform you that earlier today, you had your adminship privileges revoked on Meta by a Wikimedia steward; as you are an experienced editor, I added you to the autopatrolled user group (which doesn't affect your editing anyway). Thank you for you service as an administrator, and I hope you will stay active on Commons as a regular contributor. Of course, please do feel free to re-apply for adminship when you get more active :-) Thank you! odder (talk) 14:06, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Category:2012-13 Butler Bulldogs men's basketball[edit]

--Chrishmt0423 (talk) 21:44, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Category:Phagocytes[edit] 21:03, 19 March 2014 (UTC)


Mercurywoodrose (talk) 23:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)


Takeaway (talk) 20:32, 25 April 2014 (UTC)


Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:36, 27 April 2014 (UTC)


BrightRaven (talk) 11:26, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Wikimedia "Brighton Museum & Art Gallery" category page[edit]

Brighton Museum and Art Gallery (IoE Code 480508).jpg

Hello Foroa! I don't think that this category page should have been moved. "Brighton Museum & Art Gallery" is the official name of the attraction, but the category name's now been changed to "Museum and Art Gallery, Brighton, East Sussex", which is descriptive, but not the attraction's actual name. If you look at the picture of the outside of the building, you'll see that its official name is spelled out in metal letters on the side of its wall: ErkDemon (talk) 03:25, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Could you please explain...[edit]

You deleted Category:Cuban refugees at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base with a deletion log entry saying it had been moved to Category:Refugees from Cuba at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base. Since it was linked from the wikipedia article Cuban refugees at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, surely deletion was not in order?

If there was a discussion over replacing Category:Cuban refugees at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base with Category:Refugees from Cuba at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base could you please provide a link to that discussion? Geo Swan (talk) 00:57, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

RE:Buildings and structures in the Azores[edit]

Good day Foroa. It seems I made of mess of a categorization system that you developed, which I only came across (luckily) today. I started creating Category:Buildings and structures in the Azores, and specifically Category:Buildings and structures in Vila do Corvo, when I noticed you and your colleagues had determined the irrelevance of the categories, of which I do not contend. Call it "a lack of knowledge of the structure of the WikiCommons categories". I was hoping, in your off-time, if you could find a way to delete these categories? I have re:categorized the images and sub-categories into their appropriate groups, I just need to eliminate the offending categories. Oh, and also, there seems to be a category about a lighthouse that, really, has no images. Is there a way to remove that as well? I am sorry to be a problem. I guess I am still a newbie here. ruben jc ZEORYMER (talk) 10:25, 20 August 2014 (UTC)~

Okay...I resolved it. No prob...but thanks for being there. ;) ruben jc ZEORYMER (talk) 11:07, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


Fyi. Geo Swan (talk) 00:21, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Foroa doesn't seem active any more on any of the wiki projects[edit]

- Takeaway (talk) 12:02, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

I know, and I feel very, very sad about it. He helped me a lot in the time. :'-( Lotje (talk) 12:31, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Hope you're OK, Foroa. We all miss you and your good work. :'( — SMUconlaw (talk) 21:31, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Ditto. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


   FDMS  4    23:44, 30 September 2014 (UTC)


Avron (talk) 19:21, 15 October 2014 (UTC)


Derbeth talk 16:55, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

File:St. Peter, Straubing[edit]

File:St. Peter, Straubing has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Geagea (talk) 22:26, 18 October 2014 (UTC)


Animalparty (talk) 07:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Could you please explain...[edit]

I'm confused. I am trying to figure out why you deleted Category:USS Mitscher (DDG 57). Did it have a meaningful revision history? Geo Swan (talk) 00:04, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

The category was not deleted. It was only redirected. There is still here. --DenghiùComm (talk) 06:29, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

Are you back?[edit]

Fingers crossed. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:59, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[edit]

Hallo Foroa, man, ben ikke blij dat je terug bent. Ik had nog zoveel vragen en stond er helemaal alleen voor. Hoera! Lotje (talk) 07:07, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Category:Pubs in Ealing[edit]

Why have you been moving such odd unconnected images into this category?--P.g.champion (talk) 20:54, 19 December 2014 (UTC)


Mike Hayes (talk) 22:56, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Your assistance please...[edit]

You deleted Category:Spadina Road as an "implausible redirect". I think the consensus at Commons:Categories for discussion/2011/11/Category:Spadina Avenue was that Category:Spadina Road was not an "implausible redirect", and that it should point to Category:Spadina Road, Toronto.

You may not have realized that Toronto had colinear Spadina Road and Spadina Avenue...

So could you please restore the category's original revision history?

Thanks Geo Swan (talk) 03:17, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Esterházy-kastély, Fertőd[edit]

Hi! You added Category:Imre Madách to Category:Esterházy-kastély, Fertőd. Why?--Szenti Tamás (talk) 17:33, 25 April 2015 (UTC)


LenderKarl (talk) 15:08, 2 June 2015 (UTC)


DMacks (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

We miss you, Foroa ![edit]

Hi Foroa! I hope you are well. I miss your fruitful interactions in the past here on Commons. I hope that one day, you will be back with us. I add your name to Commons:We miss you. But it is clear that I am not the only one missing your kindness, to working with you, and your constructive work. We all wait that you come back! Take care, --DenghiùComm (talk) 14:51, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Category:United_States_Bicentennial_materials_in_the_Gerald_R._Ford_Presidential_Museum[edit] 01:30, 1 October 2015 (UTC)


Sebari (talk) 06:54, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


Threeohsix (talk) 12:38, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


Zoupan (talk) 03:32, 26 November 2015 (UTC)


Zoupan (talk) 17:33, 22 December 2015 (UTC)


Yanguas (talk) 12:24, 29 December 2015 (UTC)


Zoupan (talk) 21:45, 5 January 2016 (UTC)


Elly (talk) 14:32, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


IagoQnsi (talk) 01:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)


Matma Rex (talk) 22:50, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


Matma Rex (talk) 22:52, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


Matma Rex (talk) 23:02, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


Pippobuono (talk) 15:09, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


Pippobuono (talk) 15:11, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


Paulbe (talk) 12:35, 19 August 2016 (UTC)


Themightyquill (talk) 19:21, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Deerlijk René De Clercq (dichter) -1.JPG[edit]

File:Deerlijk René De Clercq (dichter) -1.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

BrightRaven (talk) 09:01, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Fake UploadWizard categories[edit]

Matma Rex (talk) 12:48, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings[edit]

{{Subst:Xmas4}} Lotje (talk) 06:43, 25 December 2016 (UTC)


ŠJů (talk) 23:15, 3 January 2017 (UTC)


2A02:A03F:1258:F900:DDE:3228:49D4:B2D3 14:24, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

Category talk:Android (operating system)[edit]

Category talk:Android (operating system) has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category ⧼pageinfo-talkpage⧽, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

PETHS (talk) 13:37, 28 February 2017 (UTC)


Themightyquill (talk) 12:34, 14 March 2017 (UTC)


ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 23:28, 21 March 2017 (UTC)


b_jonas 19:42, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[edit]

El Grafo (talk) 13:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Category:Carriage types by name[edit]

I can't make head or tail of the text at the top of Category:Carriage types by name, which appears to be yours. Can you have a look and possibly make it clearer? - Jmabel ! talk 15:03, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Foroa is not more active User:Jmabel. It should be the list of the sub categories with some alternative denomination--Pierpao.lo (listening) 19:50, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Category:Buildings in Shushi (town)[edit]

Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:00, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Category:Schoolors[edit] 16:28, 13 July 2017 (UTC)


Jochen Burghardt (talk) 06:10, 3 August 2017 (UTC)


DGtal (talk) 08:41, 6 August 2017 (UTC)


P 1 9 9   19:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)


Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:58, 11 December 2017 (UTC)


Jc86035 (talk) 15:30, 5 January 2018 (UTC)


GZWDer (talk) 18:31, 23 February 2018 (UTC)


E4024 (talk) 11:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)


Sincerely, NeoMeesje (talk) 18:45, 2 April 2018 (UTC)


GRuban (talk) 20:10, 21 May 2018 (UTC)


Kungfuman (talk) 11:47, 11 June 2018 (UTC)


E4024 (talk) 10:38, 14 June 2018 (UTC)


E4024 (talk) 12:41, 26 June 2018 (UTC)


Dianepride (talk) 14:51, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


Jochen Burghardt (talk) 15:34, 29 August 2018 (UTC)


Themightyquill (talk) 21:47, 6 October 2018 (UTC)