Commons:Categories for discussion/2022/04/Category:Tom Hanks

Category:Tom Hanks

i'll use this cat as an example for several issues. RZuo (talk) 22:25, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Descent of a person

i believe we should refrain from adding such cats when references are not given. they can be added only if the references are posted on cat talk page. it's impractical and exhausting to check whether such claims are valid, so i'll just assume everything is unsubstantiated unless proven otherwise and remove all of them.--RZuo (talk) 22:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree that these are most often not justified, and added by IP users without any relevance! See for instance the edit history of the 2601:81:4300:0:0:0:0:0/48 range. See also these edits on Category:Jess Harnell (no less that 30 absurd categories of fancy ascendancies of which the Wikipedia articles says absolutely nothing: Bahamian? Belarusian-Jewish? Cherokee?) or Category:Richard Pryor (descent from 15 different African countries from Guinea-Bissau to Ethiopia and Mozambique, none of which, again, are mentioned on the Wikipedia article). I suggest not to keep any descent/heritage category that is not supported by a statement with reliable sources in the English Wikipedia or another Wikipedia project. Place Clichy 14:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree that wrong categorization should be corrected. I disagree that you need to open a CfD for that: Just go ahead and delete the wrong categories. In the case at hand, any justifiable category about Tom Hanks’ ancestry should be kept.

Please note that deleting wrongly applied categories from a file or subcat is one thing, while wholesale emptying and deleting categories is something else, and that would need a discussion.

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 16:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Cast cats

"cast of movie xyz"/"movie xyz cast"... such cats are really dumb. for an actor like tom hanks he would be put into hundreds of such cats.

i propose the category tree handling the relations between actors and movies should be: "person xyz" -> "films starring xyz"/"films directed by xyz"/"films produced by xyz"...

also, we should delete the "xyz filmography" cats, because for most filmmakers they only specialise in a single profession. even if someone is multitalented, it's not necessary to create this extra layer.--RZuo (talk) 22:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree as well that these categories are useless. I opened a Village Pump discussion suggesting that placing actors in film categories, and films in actor categories, is not useful. Also, it creates forbidden category loops. Note that in most cases this information is (or should be) on Wikidata, and the Wikidata infobox provides exactly this information, with useful links. Place Clichy 14:08, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Really dumb? You wanna go there? Well, really dumb is not using upper case letters, what about that? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)