Category talk:Pages that look like the thing they're about

Delete the gimmick subcategories

>Bage is looking as the thing it is saying (2 P)
>Book covers that don't look unlike the nothing they aren't unrelated to (1 P)
>Pa6es 7ha7 look like 7he 7hin6 7hey're abou7 (2 P)

Why do we need 500 subcategories that make finding articles unnecessarily hard for a one-page gimmick? - Goopz 10:46, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

It's funny doe 09:36, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

it really isn't North (talk) 09:41, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

The joke should go on the article itself. Having the category conform to it adds no value, just confusion to whoever wants to browse funny self-referencing articles. Not to mention it's a lot of garbage categories for just one article. --Anthem6904 (talk) 20:08, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

agreed they serve no purpose GauntletThrown (clittyleakage zone) 10:14, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Cobblestone disagrees. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ~Chud2078 (talk • contribs)

...your point being? North (talk) 11:21, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

>one 7 month old edit

also you're still outnumbered nusoiGauntletThrown (clittyleakage zone) 00:01, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

You're right. I'll make them all 1 category. Cobblestone (talk) 00:08, 9 January 2026 (UTC)