User:WayneRay/Archives05 to 2016

editing comments etc

Thanks for the comments and changes. I found the Canadian Photographers Category, and as I am and have been doing photography for several decades, with photo credits in books and small magazines as well as a few shows, and a very large photo collection and archives, i thought I would put up a sample of my own. On my wikipedia user page, a friend thought it was vanity thing and asked me not to upload any more. YOU wrote "(rv - We should have an inter wiki link and a category; If there is a reason not to; please explain on talk. I don't understand, this is standard)" Do you mean a Category for Photo Collage and a Category for Photo Poems?? Also do you think this is a vanity page, how should I have approached the topic? WayneRay 14:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)WayneRay

Hi. By inter wiki link, I mean the non-visibile "en:Wayne Ray" code at the bottom of the article (visible when you edit it). It means somebody can click on the "English" link under "In Wikipedia" on the left of the screen. In your Wikipedia article, the tag {{Commons}} allows for a "link back" to Commons. The two-way links are handy, so we don't have to duplicate things (e.g. keep the pics here, and text there), and people can move easily between them. It's reasonable to assume people interested in one page, will be interested in the other.

On the issue of "vanity": Frankly, I don't care what your friend said. I personally, never heard of you before you made the article. But you got accepted as being notable, and I consider the matter settled. That means your work, is also deemed notable. It also illustrates what you do, fairly well. We discourage vanity, but that's because we discourage self-promotion. If you upload images to Commons, you're making them freely available to others, to legally re-use and/or edit for any purpose, without payment. So, that's more a sacrifice than a self-promotion, IMO. --Rob 08:46, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Category:Seed_disribution

Category:Seed_disribution has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Tangopaso (talk) 16:35, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Duplicate categories

Please stop creating duplicate categories and then putting them in Category:Unidentified maps. Files can simply be categorized into the existing categories. DrKay (talk) 17:27, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

• • I usually go back after finding all these in Uncategorized Images requiring Categories or requiring humans etc, then I was going to go and finish cleaning up the Maps section. I knew they had appropriate Cat links but I only have 2 hours a day on the Library Internet and hadn't gotten back to finish the editing. I will clean up asap and take more time doing them as I cleanup but to me it's easier to put images all together then cleanup. Sorry I should have left a note on the Discussion page. WayneRay (talk) 09:43, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Audubon Zoo, New Orleans

Re your edit; reverted. This has nothing to do with Audubon magazine. Thanks for your attention. -- Infrogmation (talk) 21:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks, I was using Cat a Lot to decrease 3600 images in Cat Natural History and was incorporating a title search which turned up the titles and I didn't notice the photos. Again thanks and I am down to less than 200 images right now after a week of @#$% LOL WayneRay (talk) 21:31, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Miscategorization of books as book covers

I noticed that circa December 22 you bulk recategorized a number of DjVu and PDF files away from book categories and into book cover categories. As you probably know, DjVu and PDF are multipage formats capable of storing entire books, which is usually the case, though occasionally you might find exceptions where uploaders simply made a poor choice of format for uploading a single image. I reverted a few of these (a few books I uploaded and had on my watchlist), but given the large bulk of books am asking if you could go back and fix the edits made in error. Thanks, djr13 (talk) 17:34, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

• Hey. Sure no problem. At that time I didn't know what a djvu file was. I created Cat:PDF files years ago and then others have added on. I am currently going through all the book and journal and catalog categories and doing sorts. I will look into all you mentioned as I made a few mistakes along the way. I just figured out how to single image file sort on Cat-a-Lot so things are going smoother. User Fae's bot has screwed up so much it is taking me ages to correct the script bot. Thanks WayneRay (talk) 18:38, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi! I think some files have gone to a wrong category: those books dated 1898 but have no relation AFAIK to Notes and Queries (look the files located at the bottom of Category:Notes and Queries page). I have noticed this because I have 2 of the books in my track list. It is a pity to send you messages because of one or two isolated errors, and none because of your ton of valuable editions so, for balancing, now... I will press... The Button (that with the heart image in it, I really don't know how it works but it says it is for greeting or awarding or something like that, it depends on the translation...) :) Best regards! -Aleator (talk) 23:10, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

OMG, The Button is too hard for me. Kittens, cookies... I cannot finish the process. I'm not prepared yet. So I will say it simple: thanks for your tons of valuable edits :) -Aleator (talk) 23:20, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

• • • Thanks I have put them in the correct Category Category:1898 books djvu files Thanks. If you want to learn about Cat-a-Lot to do these moves yourself, let me know. WayneRay (talk) 00:39, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Unnamed_Road,_Albania

Category:Unnamed_Road,_Albania has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Albinfo (talk) 10:21, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:Poetry_books,_book_covers,_etc.

Category:Poetry_books,_book_covers,_etc. has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Categorising books

Hello, I saw that you are creating new categories por Fae's books. However, take care because some of your recent changes are creating a mess! Books are generally ordered by "name (year)", to avoid ambiguities (there cam be several editions, with the same name, but a different year). An example is with a duplicate category you created: Category:Œuvres choisies de Sébastien Le Clerc, chevalier romain, dessinateur et graveur du cabinet du roi‎, which doubles the old and correct Category:Œuvres choisies de Sébastien Le Clerc (1784)‎.

Can you stop and check that you haven't created such doubles in the years you've edited? Thanks. --Ruthven (msg) 19:32, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi and thanks, yes I noticed a few similar doubles. I will go back and check the Cats I have done. I shall move the files you mentioned together then. Fae's Bot is doing an incomplete job and lots of Sub Cats are left with no connecting main Category. I will go through the areas I did. Sorry I caused a mess WayneRay (talk) 23:19, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Category:20120521_photos

Category:20120521_photos has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Estormiz (talk) 09:06, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Books to be categorised by country (Can you help)

(sorry for my low level in english) It is also my opinion that all these single images should be deleted. --Palamède (talk) 09:17, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks I will contact the uploader and put a note on the page Merci Bien Salut WayneRay (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Before dumping files to Category:Books DJVU files, please check if they are not in a subcat of Category:Books DJVU files already, e.g. Category:DjVu files in English. Thanks--Mpaa (talk) 20:13, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

My intention is to go and look at the entire Cat of DJVU files and re organize them. I think having a main subject category is ok, If not I will stop. I am trying to save these files from Category:Books to be categorised by country in case any of them are not connected to anything. I had started deleting single files without checking and another User/Admin/Editor had found 7 that had no connections at all. 90% are User:Fae's dump into this Cat and I could just go ahead and mass delete. PDF's are affected as well. WayneRay (talk) 20:19, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

I am just pointing out that sometimes your are putting them in the father category when they already belong to the child category. So putting them in the father cat is redundant. You can just delete Category:Books to be categorised by country w/o adding Category:Books DJVU files.--Mpaa (talk) 20:24, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

You are right, I will just delete the single images before i sort the actual book categories. Thanks. WayneRay (talk) 20:27, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

File:Rudyard Kipling - The Fringes of the Fleet (cover) - cleaned.jpg

I'm not quite sure why you removed this and related files from the Book covers category. It's not in any subcategories of that. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I removed it after noticing it had some sub categories from Category:Books to be categorised by country I would have found it eventually if it has to go somewhere else. WayneRay (talk) 22:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Images_of_people_involved_with_Films

Category:Images_of_people_involved_with_Films has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

McGeddon (talk) 11:07, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Serbian_maps

Category:Serbian_maps has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Zoupan (talk) 12:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Blason par Syryatsu

Hello WayneRay, I'm wondering about the name and purpose of this category. Which kind of arms are we supposed to add to the category? Syryatsu did not create all of the files in there. De728631 (talk) 18:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Ok, I guess this is for derivative images containing elements drawn by Syryatsu. I don't read French very well, but I think the name is misleading because these are not coats of arms drawn entirely by Syryatsu. I think it should rather be something like "Coats of arms containing graphic elements by Syryatsu", and it should be a hidden category like other user and author-related categories. De728631 (talk) 19:01, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

You may be right I don't know abot derivitives. I was cleaning up images in images needing categorising and thought all of one persones images should be together. Please correct the links if you can. Hidden means no one will find it though won't it? If you can clean it up that would be great WayneRay (talk) 20:41, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

A "hidden" category is just not displayed in a regular fontsize at the footer of an image page but it uses a tiny font below the regular topical categories on that page. The main focus of categorising is, however, the content of the files. So for coats of arms you would really need some knowledge of heraldry and its special terms to find the proper categories. E.g. Category:Gules a chevron Or is a good main category for shields with a red background and a golden chevron but there may be lots of other elements to categorise too. Grouping images together by authors like in Category:Photographs by photographer is mostly done for administrative purposes though and not so much for navigating to one's subject of interest. De728631 (talk) 21:53, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Oh Ok thanks, So what should I do? If I delete the category then less than a hundred will be uncategorized which is where I found them? Let me know WayneRay (talk) 23:05, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, you cannot delete the category on your own, and I think none of the files in there were totally uncategorised before. Often, such files are just not removed from maintenance categories like Category:Media needing categories, or they are put in there to find more categories than just one or two that were added by the uploader. That said, let's keep the Syryatsu category as it is. It doesn't hurt anyone and if anyone really feels it should be deleted, they will just remove all images from there and let the category be orphaned. De728631 (talk) 20:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Ok and I will be more careful in the future. WayneRay (talk) 21:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Pasquale Altavilla

I am not following you in your categorisation of djvu files. For example, why is Category:Pasquale Altavilla put under "Category:Books from Italy" and "Category:Books DJVU files"? This guy is a person, not a book ... --Mpaa (talk) 21:30, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

BTW, your talk page has several posts on your categorisation work. My humble opinion is that you should take a break, find an appropriate forum and discuss there your intentions.--Mpaa (talk) 21:36, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

If you look at the files on his page they are all djvu files which I believe are scans of books. Is he not Italian? I have discussed my intention but again: User:Fae has dumped tens of thousands of images and subcategories in most of the Books categories. They are not books but images or scans from books without the text part. PDF and DJVU files are the real books. I am going through all the Books by year, and other Books categories and putting real books in djvu & PDF files . I think I have been putting intention messages on many Cats Discussion pages, also asking for help and ideas WayneRay (talk) 22:37, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Then the single files should be added to the category, not the container itself.--Mpaa (talk) 10:55, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Well then go ahead and create a subcategory with a proper name and move them into it and don't forget to then put that sub cat into the DJVU files main Category. Thanks WayneRay (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Poetry books, book covers, etc.

inappropriate category: too vague, could include any images related to poetry books, Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

We already have Category:Poetry books for the general case, but as this category mainly seems to contain book covers, I'd propose a rename to Category:Poetry book covers. Everything that is not a poetry book cover can be upmerged. --rimshot^talk 07:28, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

• • Hi and thanks for your concern. I have been going through all the book and catalog and journal related Categories as User Fae and others have been putting images from books etc in these areas. I realized that there was a difference between what people think are books and are really just book covers or book pages or blank pages or blank covers and back covers. There already is a Cat for book covers and book covers by year. Only recently I found out what djvu files were and really, they and pdf files are the only true books. All the rest are book covers and some single pages. I am trying to clean up all the excess images so the main page is clear and only contains sub Cats. For example:

► Poetry books .djvu files‎ (106 F)
► Poetry books PDF files‎ (155 F)
► Botany book covers, single pages etc.‎ (9 C, 143 F)
► Botany PDF files‎ (2 C, 26 F)
► 1770 books book covers, single pages, etc.‎ (18 F) and other years
► 1770 books djvu files‎ (17 F)
► 1770 books PDF files‎ (2 F)

See also Category:Books DJVU files Etc etc. I realize that I could only use only book covers but it was too time consuming to open every file individually so therefore I was using the three main sub Cats. I hope this explains things. I can just use book covers seperate from single pages if really necessary. WayneRay (talk) 13:59, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I co-created Cat Poetry book covers and will clean up the other Cat and change the name for more clarity. If this is OK WayneRay (talk) 22:59, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

• • I went through Cat: poets, Poetry, Poems etc and am filling Cat Poetry book covers and I think I created a Cat Poetry ogg files as well as there are lots of sound and video files as well. I will try and straighten out my original mistake accordingly. WayneRay (talk) 04:11, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
    • I am reorganizing all the poetry related Cats. I will empty this one and relabel it for the time being Category:Poetry books single pages, etc. unless someone has any positive suggestions WayneRay (talk) 00:59, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I have reorganized two of the subcategories. I removed etc. for poetry books single pages, etc. and moved all the files in the new Cat. Someone renamed Poetry book covers and I moved the rest of the files in there. I vote to remove this old Category. !WayneRay (talk) 15:56, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Books in PDF by year

We have already Category:Books by year and Category:Books by country by year. Do we really need Books by file type by year? Achim (talk) 12:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes Yes we do, those Categories that you mention are not books really, they are the images from books not the whole book, text and images. PDF files and DJVU files are the complete and real books. The pdf files go back to the 1500's and there are hundreds of them. Category:Books by country by year contains the files of images as well. User:Fae has uploaded tens of thousands of files he labels as and puts in these "book" categopries but if you really look they are only the images from the books and plugging up Commons. PDF books are the whole thing and should be kept. Same as books in djvu file format. There are Book covers by year as well that I am cleaning up. Most were actually Title pages and sample pages not covers. I think there is little confusion in all the Book Cats. I am doing most of my work cleaning up all the book related Cats. My vote as creater is Keep. WayneRay (talk) 13:57, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Ah, Wayne, now I see your intention. But might it perhaps be better to differ Complete books and Extracts of books or Single pages of books? If a complete book is provided as a .PDF or .DJVU or .EPUB or what else file format plays a minor role in my opinion. --Achim (talk) 15:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

You may be right but relabelling all the Books Categories Complete books and Extracts of books or Single pages of books would be massive and searchers and researchers would probably be looking for just Books type categories. As far as single pages I have already instituted that sub cat in just about every journal, catalog, and book category from zoology books all the way down. Eventually I could recategorize Book cats into the areas you mention. I just got the coding for Books by year and Books by country by year and pdf by year so how do you propose I do things.

Here is a complete Books by year listing as I see the rest of them becoming. It includes all the main subcats. Category:1727 books . Perhaps a disclaimer like you are saying could be put on the main Cats that these are book extracts etc. I have put one in the Discussion pages of a few already. WayneRay (talk) 18:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I have the same concerns as Achim about sub-dividing content categories by filetype categories. I'm really not sure it's a good idea. Even if it has already been done. Should we also have Category:1727 books JPG files and Category:1727 books GIF files for those uploaded in their totality, but page by page? Nor am I a big fan of the category name "YearX books single pages, etc.‎" what does the etc mean? I'm not sure if any of that type category is necessary at all. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

I created the books single pages, etc for all the uploads of images that were not books or covers. but parts of books, as you mentioned, the jpg and gif etc files are the ones that go in there. I bet 90% of all the images in Books by year are just the images from books and not the complete books. I am putting them in their appropriate sub cat titles so all that remains is single pages, etc. I couldn't think of a simpler title. If we decide to delete that one, then each Books by year Cat will be full of misc. images and not honed down to just the titles of books. I can leave it alone for now but feel the Books in PDF and Books in djvu should stay as they are actual complete books (by year). Thanks WayneRay (talk) 14:18, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

@WayneRay: But if the reason for categorizing PDFs and DJvu files separately is because they are actual complete books, then why not give them a category title that indicates that, instead of discussing the file format? If I upload a a single page of a 1810 book in PDF format, would go in both Category:1810 PDF books and Category:1810 books single pages, etc.? Could you explain what the "etc" refers to, aside from single pages?

I also notice that you've put, as an example, Category:The Domestic Encyclopædia in Category:1802 books djvu files, even though the category contains .png files as well. At very least, I don't imagine any of the "YearX books file format" categories should have any sub-categories, because those sub-categories could always contain files of various file formats.- Themightyquill (talk) 21:42, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I didn't notice the png files, they should go in 1802 books single pages, sorry for the oversight. They shouldn't have sub cats. I will fix it and any others I find. Thanks again. WayneRay (talk) 22:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

I am going back over the various Book Categories and renaming and removing the XXX books single pages, etc and they will be your suggestion of XXX books single pages Thanks for the input WayneRay (talk) 23:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Here's one for your possible cleanup deletion etc.

What is this? Category:Theses There is no definition at the top of the Cat page? Most know its meaning. NOT BOOKS NOT THESES they are all just images of drawings? How are these from someones Theses? No Text, no University connection. This is a redundant Cat that should be deleted maybe. I bet they are dumps from User:Faes Bot Script ?? OPinion needed? WayneRay (talk) 19:13, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I've create a new discussion for this at Commons:Categories for discussion/2016/02/Category:Theses - Themightyquill (talk) 13:58, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Category:Books to be categorised by country

20,000+ images that are not Books but only uncategorized images. 15,000+ book categories are already there to be worked on. I wish to delete all single images as they are already connected to subcategories and won't be affected. I have already contacted the Cat creator and User:Fae whose images are mostly his, there. WayneRay (talk) 15:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

These files didn't have categorisation by country and don't have such categorisation in the moment: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] etc --Butko (talk) 05:39, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, not quite sure what you mean? I am going through all the book related files and categories for the past year and they will be looked at, probably in Book covers which is what they look like. The Category here is or seems to be for complete book pages not just covers of pdf or djvu. So do you mean I should or should not delete files that are not books but just book images here?? WayneRay (talk) 13:40, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I meat that you wrote "they are already connected to subcategories and won't be affected" but as you can see they aren't --Butko (talk) 19:00, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Ok I see. I looked through those and more and found they were connected to something in most of them. As I am going through Cat Books by year I find many of the images duplicated here. I spent some time and tried to clean out the DJVU and PDF files so they won't be affected. Thanks for your input. I will try and double check as I delete or just cleanup. I just went through 600 files of single titles and pdf and djvu files and connected what was necessary and deleted the rest as they were in Books by year or had a Cat.WayneRay (talk) 21:12, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I am going through Cat Books by year I find many of the images duplicated here - please don't forget that categorisation by year and categorisation by country are different branches and can't duplicate each other --Butko (talk) 07:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I will delete the duplicates, however, am I wrong in , for example, putting the book categories in say, 1754 books from Germany instead of Books from Germany? that way they don't appear duplicated in 1754 books and Books from Germany and 1754 books from Germany? I see someone has already connected Books from Russia by year in some of the books by year subcategories so it appears that thinning out is best to avoid duplication? Does this make sense. I have just mastered Cat-a-lot and want to plow ahead. Happy Valentines Day. WayneRay (talk) 12:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

putting the book categories in say, 1754 books from Germany instead of Books from Germany - 1754 books from Germany is best way because we can categorise by year and by country category instead single images. Please use template {{Books from Germany by year|175|4}} when you create new category --Butko (talk) 09:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Kool! that's great. I must learn better coding. I will have to go back and do that for all the new Cats. I just use the Hot Cat link. Ok I will put the categories in this Main Cat in books by year by country which is wht I think I was originally doing. I am checking each 200 image page before delting photos. Thanks so much WayneRay (talk) 14:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

OK I had just created Category:Books in PDF by year So what is the coding to put the Years panel in the pages? Thanks WayneRay (talk) 14:08, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

{{Books in PDF by year|192|9}} --Butko (talk) 19:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I updated all the PDF books by year with the new coding and am updating Book covers by year right now. Thanks so much. WayneRay (talk) 23:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

@WayneRay: I'm definitely not sure about this. I can understand why it might make sense to sub-categorize "by year" and "by country" with "by year by country" but it seems to be it was, at least to some degree, a conscious decision not to do so. Like Category:Deaths by year. Achim and Zoupan may know more about this - I don't know. See Commons:Categories for discussion/2015/12/Category:1896 books in Bohemia (1867-1918) for a similar category that was recently deleted. I'm not saying I'm necessarily opposed, but I'd recommend waiting for further discussion before expanding the tree, unless you want to risk having all your work undone. - Themightyquill (talk) 18:24, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I have been looking at the result of only putting Books by year by country as everything appears after this is done. The Cat list includes, Books by year and books by year by country as well, the books by year by country automatically appears in each Books by year category. It's quite amazing what one code can do. I am doing this for now and going back to cleaning up all the misc Books categories. YOu said "but it seems to be it was, at least to some degree, a conscious decision not to do so" but it seems to work quite well. WayneRay (talk) 22:06, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes I looked at the link and see the difficulties that were there. I only came upon this Category:Books to be categorised by country by accident and then noticed the notices on all the other book files I was sorting. I came upon many already as "by year by country" so I thought that was the new system My feeling is that 80% of the files are really scanned images of pictures in books and not really books. So the books by country by year would be in the Books by year Cats along with PDF and djvu book files as they are complete and actual books. It would cleanup a lot there. I will wait as you say and see what others have to say. Right now I still think all the single images in Category:Books to be categorised by country need to be deleted because I will find them in Books by year as I go through them. I am still in the 1500's right now and a bit of 1700's. WayneRay (talk) 21:05, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I have been going through each group of images and seeing if they have a sub category or putting them in ones that were incomplete and needed Cats and sub cats. I will start cleaning up this group of Books as soon as the individual images are deleted. As per instructions above I will put Category:Books_to_be_categorised_by_country in Books by year & Books by country by year. NOT Books by country. WayneRay (talk) 18:26, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Copy of a recent discussion with a major uploader to this Category

Copied from User talk:Fæ#Deletion of images in a Category

---

Category:Books to be categorised by country has about 22,000 images that are already connected to other subcategories. These individual images are not books. The actual Book Categories 15,214 total are already there for reassignment to Books by country by year and are being processed as are all the previous ones we have discussed now in Category:Books by year which I am spending most of my time on. I finished the seed catalogs etc from when we first met and talked.. I will be deleting all the images in the above Cat as they are not books. Let me know what you think. I already contacted the original creator and he agrees. WayneRay (talk) 14:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

The category appears empty. If this is a categorization decision, that sounds fine. If you are deleting files, then I'd appreciate some examples to look at. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 14:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

It is not empty here is the block and copy of the list of images. Don't know where you were looking? WayneRay (talk) 14:51, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Media in category "Books to be categorised by country"

The following 200 files are in this category, out of 20,409 total. (previous page) (next page)[8]

Thanks, I was just looking at Books by year. I have no issue with improving categories, so my assumption is that we are not talking about mass file deletion for the reason that the categorization is not optimal. --Fæ (talk) 14:57, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Absolutely. It is an optimal new category. Just not the images included. Should I go to Commons:Categories for discussion or just go ahead with the cleanup. What do you think of the partial cleanup in Books by year? I have started in the 1700's area and the change is noticable. WayneRay (talk) 15:04, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I suggest you go ahead. I doubt anyone would object to your tidying these up. Thanks for your work, it does have a significant impact for any member of the public looking for relevant archive materials. --Fæ (talk) 16:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

---

WayneRay (talk) 01:06, 13 February 2016 (UTC)