This unnecessary category could be renamed to Photographs of male actors in order to create more and more new unnecessary categories. 186.173.79.57 01:05, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All of the files in this category need to be renamed to Cleveland Monsters Hockey. Due to an error in the original Flickr album, they all say "Hocley" instead. I've forgotten how to do a mass file move request so I'm sending this to categories for discussion instead. Denniscabrams (talk) 13:38, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd really like to see this not go lower than the country level. It is hard to see how this extreme splitting by category intersection helps anyone. Notice that most of these categories contain one photo, and few contain more than a handful. - Jmabel ! talk00:36, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@A.Savin: your link just takes us to COM:VP; the discussion you are referencing is no longer active there, so we can't see that history.
I do not agree with an arbitrary limit to X-level territory for Y-level date granularity. Such things should be based on the actual files present for a given territory to decide what makes sense. For this one, day seems at least one level too granular. I should think month would be more than enough date accuracy for this district (frankly year is probably enough). Josh (talk) 18:00, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
none of the current contents are groups of 1, 1 and 10. delete this cat after the files are properly categorised. RZuo (talk) 16:47, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nopes, both images tagged with this cat are actual depictions of what the cat name implies, within the scope of other such categories:
groups of 1, 1, 3 and 7 markers (considering their placement). or, groups of 3 and 9 (considering visibility of their barcodes).
groups of 4, 1, 1, 5 and 1 pots (considering their height). or, groups of 3, yellow flowers, green leaves and red flowers (considering their colours). RZuo (talk) 16:59, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Go ahead and create those categories, then. But the categorization described by me above is still correct, in spite of your curious description of it as imprecise and improper. -- Tuválkin✉ ✇ 00:51, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is by the way a clear example of how CfD can be misused: Normally this user would have instead recategorized the files in question (hopefully with some file talk discussion to avoid edit warring), leaving any empty categories to be quietly deleted as such. Like this, there’s a Streisand effect taking place. All considered, it’s really funny, but not in a good way. -- Tuválkin✉ ✇ 00:57, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it? This seems more like a vague enough category that it isn't obvious. Still, CFD is a poor solution for a categorization of images question. If the images were removed and the category was empty then CFD would be a moot issue. Ricky81682 (talk) 21:02, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i dont think moving the category is the best solution for this category. we should perhaps still categorise files related to this song when it was called "god save the queen" under that? RZuo (talk) 16:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Category contains a single file that is also part of the parent category, and none of the other files in the parent category have a subcategory like this one. RPI2026F1 (talk) 15:13, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Due to the huge amount of CJK ideographs and their many variants, it's extremely difficult to sort them and find them. We need links to references, infoboxes, related to their classification. And many ideographs are still not categorized and many will be added (notably with ancient Chinese character variants, but as well with national variants). Putting everything in a "parent" category will not help, it is a (very) long work in progress (here in Commons, but also in Wikidata in parallel, and then independantly in some relevant Wikipedia or Wiktionary articles, that can arrange them in their own local groupings) and we can't mix everything in the same few categories (creating lot of confusion and misusages of these images). verdy_p (talk) 14:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also note that there are still not a lot of glyphs for the "CJK Ideographs Extension G", "H" and "I" blocks, which are still today recent additions to the UCS (since Unicode 13.0, 15.0, and 15.1 respectively). But due to lack of support of those characters in many existing CJK fonts for now (including "Noto CJK [SC/TC/JP/KR]", and other default fonts for Google/Microsoft/Apple OS'es except for a few Chinese simplified characters allocated in Extension G from Unicode 13.0 and needed for modern use today, notably in official place names and standardized people names, until their next major milestones to support characters in the CJK Ideographs Extension blocks allocated in the TIP, the Tertiary Ideographic Plane U+30000-3FFFF), those glyphs will be progressively added here in Commons, for use notably in Wiktionary (definitions), Wikisource (Chinese and Japanese text transcriptions), and Wikipedia (sometimes needed for book titles, people or place names and other references...).
This category could be renamed later with the actual ideograph (like all other ideographs), but could be left with the redirecting category with the hexadecimal code point notation "U+31772" (such redirects should be useful as well for almost all characters in the TIP). verdy_p (talk) 01:54, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
either move to a better name or delete. many crises and periods of economic hardship have existed in history. RZuo (talk) 14:32, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It's a useful category and as there is no other categories under "cost of living crisis" the claim of vagueness is fairly meaningless. It certainly is useful when needing to sort through images. Des Vallee (talk) 20:13, 7 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
RZuo They have no article nor categories about them, so there is no confusion about the meaning of them, also you indented 5 when the previous indent was 3. If there was it could make sense to disambiguate however as there is no such categories there is no reason to. Renaming it to the current English wiki article name would be fine but there is little to no confusion in the first place. Des Vallee (talk) 03:31, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unclear name, so renaming would be a good option; and it should be crises (plural), not crisis; if the category is mainly about protests (as the subcategories imply), the category name should reflect that. If this category is only about the crisis in 2022 (or another period), then the name should reflect that (too).
perhaps a category about inflation (but that is now a subcategory of Economic crises, although not each inflation means a crisis; central banks want to have about 2% inflation each year and we do not have an economic crisis each year)
"cost of living crisis" is a special phrase that only the uk frequently uses for an economic crisis or a period of high inflation, which are nothing special in the world. many countries have experienced similar problems, often even worse, like argentina and turkey having 100% inflation. if the uk having 20% inflation is a crisis, those countries are going thru hell or something...
as such, this can be redirected to Category:Economic crises in the United Kingdom. surprisingly, commons has not built a cat tree for economic crises. this tree will be created if no one objects.
JopkeB is also right about inflation. only high inflation is a problem in the eyes of economists and governments. on the other hand, not all crises are periods of inflation. deflation can also be an economic crisis. RZuo (talk) 11:22, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As the online catalogue shows, all of these objects are part of the Greek and Roman collection; they have no connection with the Egyptian collection. The colossal statue of a goddess (2011.75) was temporarily stored at the end of one of the Egyptian galleries while it was being restored and an exhibition space was being prepared for it in the Greek and Roman galleries. (This is when you photographed it in 2012.) It is now displayed in room 207 with other works of Greek and Roman sculpture. The Herakles statuette (14.733) and the portrait of a child (01.8202) are also on display in the Greek and Roman galleries. (The mosaic (2002.128.1) is not currently on display.) It is neither accurate nor useful to describe any of these pieces as "Roman art at the collection of egyptian antiquities in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston." Choliamb (talk) 13:42, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I've turned it into a redirect, though I think that the new name is worse because it just means "Youth" while this category indicates that it's the newspaper. For Anglomonophones out there, that would be as if someone replaced a category called the "New York Daily" with a category called "New York" because they rarely include the official name on their website, but the latter category is obviously more ambiguous so would have to be replaced by something called "New York (newspaper)". Plus, the nominator assumed that the old category had to be deleted rather than redicted which would also cause other editors to think that there was no category for the "Báo Thanh niên" as it wouldn't make much sense otherwise. Either way, bad move. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
AddendumThe Vietnamese-language Wikipedia article is called "Thanh Niên (báo)" and starts with "Báo Thanh Niên là một tờ nhật báo Việt Nam có trụ sở tại Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh.", If you actually type in "Thanh Niên" in the Wiktionary you'll be redirected to this page which reads: "Etymology - Edit - Sino-Vietnamese word from 成年. - Pronunciation - Edit - (Hà Nội) IPA(key): [tʰajŋ̟˨˩ niən˧˧] - (Huế) - IPA(key): [tʰɛɲ˦˩ niəŋ˧˧] - (Hồ Chí Minh City) IPA(key): [tʰan˨˩ niəŋ˧˧] - Adjective - Edit - thành niên = having come of age; adult", which clearly doesn't even mention the newspaper. Either way, the new name is more ambiguous and should probably be a redirect or a disambiguation page. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:20, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I want to solve a mess. Following en:Tracht, Tracht is the (regional and internationally accepted) name for traditional clothing in German speaking countries and regions (*). Therefor it is correct, to find that category in Category:Traditional clothing by ethnic group. However belowCategory:Tracht there is no common rule wheter to call the categories Traditional costumes of region XY or Tracht from region XY. Some examples:
I agree that in a Jewish/Christian/Muslim context, the word 'idolatrous' tends to be negatively judgmental. I suggest Religious procession with idols; specifying 'religious' could seem awkward, but it may avoid confusion with Korean pop stars. -- Verbarson talkedits08:28, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Immanuelle I disagree that the word has negative connotations. I just think of it as a word that's often used in a religious sense. And I got married in a Catholic church... David10244 (talk) 11:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the linked CFD discussion Olybrius says that they are needed for maps on distribution of names. I think we could concentrate on that problem instead, and I think it is better done through a maps hierarchy, with categories such as Category:Maps of surnames in Europe and Category:Maps of surnames in the world. Now, if you want to make maps of names of Belgium, or whatever, I am not convinced that you need a category for those; a list of Belgian names could as well point to categories for each name. Such lists could be on Wikipedias or on gallery pages (with assortments of such maps). Lists with proper sources should probably be on Wikipedia. Is this adequate? Are there other use cases for these categories? –LPfi (talk) 09:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete very difficult to document geography here (as against language, which is clearer). For several of these countries, the meaning of that country name in eras when people were mostly taking surnames is itself a tricky question (e.g. is a name from Gdansk "from Germany" or "from Poland"? And "from the United States"?? Almost no surnames have originated in the U.S., and almost any can be found there. - Jmabel ! talk06:49, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
As the creator of this categoryCategory:Surnames from Germany, I just realized I neglected to comment here. The purpose of the creation of Category:Surnames from BelgiumCategory:Surnames from Germany was to parallel existing related categories (as listed above). If those related categories are removed/renamed/etc., I have no problem with the same thing happening to this category. I agree that classifying names by geography is not always straightforward, and that using language is generally (albeit not always) a clearer distinction, but I don't have the knowledge to be able to determine the languages of the names listed in this category. I suppose that is an argument in favor of keeping geographically-oriented categories – language origin is not in fact always clear – but I don't have strong feelings either way. – Kreuz und quer (talk) 15:22, 29 April 2023 (UTC); edited 16:21, 29 April 2023 (UTC).[reply]
Seems to me that images are placed in these categories randomly. I'd like to hear from the author what is the purpose of these categories, as I don't see any right now. Wostr (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The current population of these categories looks random because it is the result of a first pass through categories such as Category:LA letter combinations, which hitherto contents have been slowly dissiminated (also) into subcats classifying those media files by the semantics of the relevant letter arrangement — in that case those being not only lanthanum, but also Laos, Louisiana, Lancashire, Los Angeles, the Latin language, the word "la" in several langauges, or rail vehicles with 3 wheelsets, among others. -- Tuválkin✉ ✇ 11:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What's more, moving images from regular categories about chemical elements to categories Xx standing for xxx will make it difficult to navigate between categories and find the right images. I wouldn't known at all that to find an image with the periodic table I had to enter this category... Wostr (talk) 17:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless creator can explain the value here. Wostr is right that this makes it harder to find relevant/related images. DMacks (talk) 02:52, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I’d rather «explain the value» by populating up these categories properly and improving/completing the categorization of each affected media file, and, while in that process, by (further) correcting the glaring categrization errors that plague the 100-something categories about chemical elements, in some cases for decades.
Some of the pointed examples were indeed moved from the main element category to the symbol subcategory in a way that’s not ideal, but for me this is a work in progress: I intend to go back and further refine each of them and only moved instead of copied to avoid timewasting with nitpickers who’d go about COM:OVERCAT as if this is a done deal.
In the mentioned example of File:(S)-2-Chloro-2-fluoropentane.svg, for one, there was never a move from a main element category to its symbol subcategory, rather there was a move from a more generic "CL" cat to a more specific one.
Comment I would like to clarify that my place in all of this was merely creating a template to standardize categorization, and expanding the framework that was already here. I did not create the first "[symbol] standing for [element]" categories. OmegaFallon (talk) 11:58, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Concerning another example presented in the o.p., something like this is the further/refined categorization I plan to do for all media files in these categories. Few files, if any, will be sufficiently categorized only with a category of this set, about the depicted element symbol. -- Tuválkin✉ ✇ 11:59, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete After reading this discussion I still don't see any value in having such categories. The only reasonable connection between categories like Category:TE letter combinations and Category:Tellurium should be a direct link in description of such categories. The existence of such categories would require that in the future all illustrations of chemical structures containing symbols of chemical elements be categorized in this way. It would be invalid to simply add such categories like Category:Tellurium compounds there, due to the fact that they contain many different types of illustrations, not necessarily including a symbol. Tens of thousands of chemical structures would have at least a few such categories, the categorization value of which, in my opinion, is zero. The whole Category:Two-letter modern element symbols categorisation tree should be discontinued and deleted. Wostr (talk) 20:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wostr says that «The existence of such categories would require that in the future all illustrations of chemical structures containing symbols of chemical elements be categorized in this way», which is just wrong. Just like the existence of Category:Male humans sticking out the tongue doesn’t endanger in any way other ways of dissiminating the contents of Category:Albert Einstein.
Rather, the existence of these categories allows (doesn’t «require» — categorization is not a duty) illustrations of chemical structures containing symbols of chemical elements to be categorized in this way, which enables a transversal topical nexus between, say, "Na" standing for sodium and Namibia or nanoampere.
I’m sure Wostr is sincere in his distate for this subtree («The whole Category:Two-letter modern element symbols categorisation tree should be discontinued and deleted») — after all Chemistry is way more important and interesting than Typography. I even agree, but I know that we can have both, at least in Commons categorization: Wostr and all others who think this tree cat is irrelevant can just ignore it and go on categorizing media about chemical formulae and diagrams as before.
in worse state than it was before, merely categorized as Category:Tellurium?
Should this cat tree indeed be «discontinued and deleted» (and drowned and quartered, its lands salted and its cattle gelded!), how should be categorized images such as this one?
Splitting is getting out of hand here. There is absolutely no good reason for this intersection category. All of these should be moved up to the parent categories here. Jmabel ! talk15:14, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WaitQuestion@Jmabel: Why only Democratic governors of Washington? Or are you proposing abolishing the entire "X partyY position of Z state" level of categorization? Josh (talk) 23:02, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Joshbaumgartner: Yes, I would be more than glad to get rid of that entirely. While it is worth classifying politicians by which party they belonged to, if you are looking for past governors of a state it is ridiculous to have to know which party they belonged to to find them.
At a certain point, categories become over-large and there is a reason to split them so that things can be found, but when a category like the governors of a particular U.S. state is not terribly big, then it's absolutely a liability to split it along a dimension where only relatively expert people will be able to guess which way to go. This splitting makes it harder to find things, not easier. - 23:44, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Splitting is getting out of hand here. There is absolutely no good reason for this intersection category. All of these should be moved up to the parent categories here. Jmabel ! talk15:15, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to combining the discussions, though it is not obvious that they would have the same outcome. There are far more members of the State House than there are governors, so this one might be more reasonable. I personally would be glad to get rid of both, though, on the same basis. - Jmabel ! talk23:48, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@RZuo: For a lot of numbers (including many integers), they don't strictly need the "(number)" dab as there are no other categories to get confused with. However, since many of them do need that, instead of require every single number be evaluated on a case-for-case basis, and for the matter of simplicity and consistency, we just went with adding "(number)" to all of them. I think this is a valid approach, even if not strictly necessary for each instance. Josh (talk) 23:09, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This category seems way too granular. We do not have books published in city by year (compare Category:Books published in New York City, Category:Books published in Paris, etc.) The problem is each category creates a tiny tree of year in London, and books in London by that decade, and basically each category is the entirely of the Books published in the United Kingdom by year parent. The largest category here (Category:1908 books from London does contain 68 categories but the parent Category:1908 books from the United Kingdom has eight more. Better to upmerge these to decade, rename these into a England category (likely the same) and merge in the books from the UK. This is also helpful because of the complicated prior-1707 books from London categories which have a mix of books from GB/books from the UK where England/Scotland/Wales/Northern Ireland are a better split. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:36, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I also note that this is the only "published in" category versus the other "from" in the parent tree. Published in is used for the city categories but it isn't done by year. Ricky81682 (talk) 07:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It seems granular, but London had for centuries by far the largest output of books in England if not the world, dwarfing entire European countries. My efforts are also restricted to London right now, so no wonder London stands out. As for the name, it is a sub-category of Category:Books published in London; but the per-year-categories are always using the "from"; so all child-categories are using the "from London" as well. I don't object to renaming the parent category into "from". --Enyavar (talk) 08:47, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Edit (update): I did not create the categories that are (at the moment) still red, I only created the "from London" categories. If the categories "from GB"/"from UK" exist, the template makes it easy to navigate towards them and check if there is content that can be moved into "from London" (we would also need to empty the GB/UK categories per the proposal to move into "from England", right?). I am/was aware that these two parent categories are essential duplicates and at times anachronistic. For the time being they are both heavily used in the 19th century, so I included them temporarily until the matter of the CfDs is resolved - please nobody create them just for the purpose of having them around, this cannot be a permanent part of the template anyway.
I see the future of this part of the category tree as follows: "Books from <national-unit-of-the-British-Isles> by year" (the name of the nation changes, but there can only be one of them, not UK and GB parallel). This parent category then invariably owns the category "Books from England by year" and additionally Scotland, Wales and Ireland as needed. Within "Books from England by year", there is "Books from London by year". As far as I checked, even in the 1590s there are enough books from London to justify this distinction. Probably in the 1550s and earlier, we might not have enough books each year, so we can only use the "Books from <England/London> by <decade or century>" instead. (I did some work and now have sorted about ~100 books in the 1590s and 1600s, and in the 1640s there are at least ~250 from London. Updated as of --15:54, 27 April 2023 (UTC))
What I don't think is worth doing, is "at first" setting up three categories in each file, and later come back to replace the three categories with the one that I wanted to use all along. It means doing the same work but four times instead of once. --Enyavar (talk) 08:14, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nominate for deletion: As the category is named after a (smallish) company that doesn't exist anymore it is unlikely that any more content will be placed here. Currently the only content is a category containing images of the companies founder. KaiKemmann (talk) 11:15, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It currently has content, and just because an entity is not currently active doesn't mean there can't be more content in the future. Commons categories do not only exist to reflect the current world, but history as well. Josh (talk) 23:13, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsensical name; BMT is not place, there are no paintings "in" it. batter names might include "Paintings in the collection of Birmingham Museums Trust" or "Paintings held by the Birmingham Museums Trust", or, most accurately, the existing Category:Collections of the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery.
I know that the Birmingham Museums Trust is the digital repository of nine museums [1]
I used the category Paintings in the Birmingham Museums Trust by artist because the images in this categories come from that website, but I don't know if all the paintings are in the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery
I'll try to recategorize that files int the collection you suggest Category:Paintings in the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery by artist[2], but I can't delete the empty categories at the end of that process.
Just give me some time, please...
PS.
English is not my language, so I make apologies in advance for the mistakes, misunderstandings and other inconsistencies in this message. WideAngleEyes (talk) 07:28, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need to call ms (nor anyone else here) "Sir".
Is Wiki a photo agency or does it deal with information? Blue sky, really?/ Those categories emboldens people to upload meaningless pictures. MenkinAlRire (talk) 14:37, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Category should be moved to "Dia Beacon" as the colon is only stylized for the general name "Dia" not for the individual museums. Sourced to the website for the museum[3]Found5dollar (talk) 15:47, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this reflects the former styling the museum used, but I'm unsure if it is still in use anywhere in this style. ɱ(talk)15:58, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please realise the instruction that files and categories can be moved or deleted AFTER the discussion. It is inpossible for me as initiator of the category to find out why I created this category when it is inpossible to see which ships were involved.--Stunteltje (talk) 21:13, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This photograph shows a storehouse at the shipbuilder Wigham Richardson's Neptune Yard. In 1881 the owner John Wigham Richardson made a large sundial, which can be seen here hanging on the storehouse wall. He also wrote a motto underneath: 'Watching these fleeting hours soon past, remember that which comes at last.' The storehouse was taken down when Wigham Richarson merged with Swan Hunter in 1902, but the sundial was preserved, and today it is in Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums' collections. Reference: TWCMS: 2001.3617 (Copyright) We're happy for you to share this digital image within the spirit of The Commons. Please cite 'Tyne & Wear Archives & Museums' when reusing. Certain restrictions on high quality reproductions and commercial use of the original physical version apply though; if you're unsure - for image licensing enquiries please follow this link
I think the category should be deleted. I have recategorized the few files it contained to their proper subcategories under the new category Collections of the Pergamon Museum (Berlin). Also several images it contained were not from the Pergamon Museum but were photographed in the Neues Museum. These images were mislabeled on Flickr. Mharrsch (talk) 14:36, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support but categorise both into similar categories. Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 04:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Keep, I've turned it into a redirect, though I think that the new name is worse because it just means "Youth" while this category indicates that it's the newspaper. For Anglomonophones out there, that would be as if someone replaced a category called the "New York Daily" with a category called "New York" because they rarely include the official name on their website, but the latter category is obviously more ambiguous so would have to be replaced by something called "New York (newspaper)". Plus, the nominator assumed that the old category had to be deleted rather than redicted which would also cause other editors to think that there was no category for the "Báo Thanh niên" as it wouldn't make much sense otherwise. Either way, bad move. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:13, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
Addendum The Vietnamese-language Wikipedia article is called "Thanh Niên (báo)" and starts with "Báo Thanh Niên là một tờ nhật báo Việt Nam có trụ sở tại Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh.", If you actually type in "Thanh Niên" in the Wiktionary you'll be redirected to this page which reads: "Etymology - Edit - Sino-Vietnamese word from 成年. - Pronunciation - Edit - (Hà Nội) IPA(key): [tʰajŋ̟˨˩ niən˧˧] - (Huế) - IPA(key): [tʰɛɲ˦˩ niəŋ˧˧] - (Hồ Chí Minh City) IPA(key): [tʰan˨˩ niəŋ˧˧] - Adjective - Edit - thành niên = having come of age; adult", which clearly doesn't even mention the newspaper. Either way, the new name is more ambiguous and should probably be a redirect or a disambiguation page. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 07:20, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
See also: Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/03/Category:Surnames by ethnicity and Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/03/Category:Surnames from Europe. 
Delete very difficult to document geography here (as against language, which is clearer). For several of these countries, the meaning of that country name in eras when people were mostly taking surnames is itself a tricky question (e.g. is a name from Gdansk "from Germany" or "from Poland"? And "from the United States"?? Almost no surnames have originated in the U.S., and almost any can be found there. - Jmabel ! talk 06:49, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Wait 
Question @Jmabel: Why only Democratic governors of Washington? Or are you proposing abolishing the entire "X party Y position of Z state" level of categorization? Josh (talk) 23:02, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
Recent Comments