Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/08/Category:Guy Lebègue

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

Category:Guy Lebègue

[edit]

Non-notable person, doesn't need own category, see also Commons:Deletion requests/Guy Lebègue. P 1 9 9  ✉ 19:00, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. Per nom. Bios deleted on en and fr wikis. --Randykitty (talk) 20:57, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete. Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue is sufficient. - Themightyquill (talk) 06:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Only because p199 removed Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue. - Themightyquill (talk) 09:06, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Un intervenant dit : Non-notable person. Il y a de nombreux articles ouverts dans COMMONS dans ce cas, par exemple Category Anne Fulda.--Cordialement, Kasos_Fr, (talk) 08:25, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not the same thing: there are articles on Anne Fulda on the French and English wikis. The corresponding articles on Guy Lebègue have been deleted after community discussions for lack of notability. Even if the cases were comparable, on enWP we call arguments like this "en:WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS" (on the frWP: fr:WP:PIKACHU)... --Randykitty (talk) 08:34, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Dans l'article sur Creator, il est dit : Anybody who is an author or creator of works hosted on Commons and meets notability requirements for Wikidata items, Commons categories. Il n'est pas imposé que l'individu ait un article biographique dans une quelconque encyclopédie Wikipedia!--Cordialement, Kasos_Fr, (talk) 15:02, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The above by User:Kasos fr is interesting. If it is not a violation of any policy I'd say let's keep the cat. It is the least we can do for a good contributor of Commons, as Monsieur Guy Lebègue, just before his 80'th birthday. I'm afraid we are disencouraging Mr Lebègue, who has contributed with a hundred or more quality pics to Commons, with these never-ending discussions. This is my final statement. I the undersigned, having duly examined... --E4024 (talk) 07:16, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Kasos fr: I think you may have misunderstood. Commons:Creator says "Who should have creator page: Anybody who is an author or creator of works hosted on Commons and meets notability requirements for Wikidata items, Commons categories or for Wikipedia articles." (Qui devrait avoir une page créatrice: Toute personne qui est un auteur ou créateur d'œuvres hébergées sur Commons et répond aux exigences de notabilité pour les articles Wikidata, catégories communes ou pour les articles de Wikipedia.) It's stating who should have a {{Creator}} template, not who should have a personal category. And the requirement is 1) anyone who has works on commons AND who meets the notability requirements for a wikidata item, a commons category or wikipedia articles. If this was a rule rather than a proposed guideline, it would only suggest that Guy Lebègue should not have a "creator" template if we delete his category. It certainly doesn't suggest, the opposite, that the fact that he has a creator template justifies him having a persion bio category. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:11, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@E4024: Commons categories are not rewards, they are designed to arrange useful content. If Guy Lebègue is a commons user, he can set up his own user category. If he is not a user, I seriously doubt he cares if he has a personal bio category as a parent for Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue (which I think should stay). - Themightyquill (talk) 08:11, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep If we have Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue than I would keep Category:Guy Lebègue as otherwise regular categories get wired. --Jarekt (talk) 18:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think this resolves the problem. All those same categories could just as well fit in a category called Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue without a Category:Guy Lebègue. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:10, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • (ec)Seems rather illogical to me, "Photographs by Guy Lebègue" (like is done for dozens of other such cats) makes much more sense, because that is what is in the categories: photographs. A category "Guy Lebègue" gives the impression that it contains stuff about GL, which is incorrect. As an aside, the box at the top of the cat contains a link to "authority control", but the only reason that Wikidata item exists is because there's a category "Guy Lebègue"... --Randykitty (talk) 19:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I second the comments from User:Randykitty. Category:Guy Lebègue is for pictures of the actual person, whereas Category:Photos by Guy Lebègue is for his work. No need to have a corresponding category (i.e. there is Category:Photos by P199, but not Category:P199). He is not notable, so he doesn't need his own category.
    Furthermore, the changes that User:Jarekt made today do NOT follow category logic and rules. I will revert.--P 1 9 9  ✉ 20:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No good reasons supplied to justified this category's existenced. Deleted. - Themightyquill (talk) 20:37, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2017/08/Category:Guy_Lebègue&oldid=288733928"