User talk:Triplec85

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Benutzerseite
(german)


User page

  Diskussion
(german) (+)


Talk (+)

  Beiträge
(german)


Contributions

  Bewertung
(german)

Rating 		  Dateien
(german)

Files 		  Projekte
(german)

Projects 		  Impressionen aus dem Lieblichen Taubertal (german)

Impressions from the
Lovely Tauber Valley) 		 

This is a Wikimedia Commons user talk page.

This is not an article, file or the talk page of an article or file. If you find this page on any site other than the Wikimedia Commons you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user to whom this talk page belongs may have no personal affiliation with any site other than the Wikimedia Commons itself. The original page is located at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Triplec85.

This is the user talk page of Triplec85, where you can send messages and comments to Triplec85.

  • Be polite.
  • Be friendly.
  • Assume good faith.
  • No personal attacks.
  • Please sign and date your entries by clicking on the appropriate button or by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end.
  • Put new text under old text.
  • New to Wikimedia Commons? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers as soon as possible.
  • Click here to start a new topic.

2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023


Revert

See User:Yann's talk page. The whole "Categories of categories" thing is just pointless, nonsensical, and doesn't follow the guidelines about how to name categories. I also disagree that "location by subject" categories are that unusual. It's actually used quit a lot outside of Germany. Although in Germany it seems to be "location by topic." So I've taken the step of creating a category for Municipalities in Main-Tauber-Kreis based on that instead. The main thing here though is that categories containing the word "categories" doesn't work. Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 14:15, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamant1: I think you are wrong. The Category:Categories is a useful auxiliary structure. Only MetaCats. It collects categories that are classified according to the scheme Categories by... are named.
@Yann: Where did a discussion take place? Where is there consensus to tear down this whole category tree?
I see no consensus.
It makes no sense to move all Category:Categories of Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality to Category:Municipalities in Main-Tauber-Kreis by topic.
And why change only in this district?
You don't postpone either:
So why change that without discussion and without consensus ?!?
Greets -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:11, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamant1: Stop to change common system and read above. Whait for consensus. -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:13, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will you do that for all without discussion and without consensus???
Category:Categories of Baden-Württemberg by municipality by district ?!?
Why are you destroying the commons system? -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:15, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For once, I agree with Adamant1. The whole tree Category:Categories is useless. Category:Categories of France by city should be moved/renamed Category:France by city. Yann (talk) 19:18, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: But where is the consensus / the categories-discussion about that. I accept your opinion. But where can i found the consensus to change that?
And: Then @Adamant1: should take care of it for the whole world. change that for all districts and not just for one district. create the whole superstructure with templates. Otherwise, it leaves behind a mess and a dung heap. I think despite cat-a-lot it will need months of time for this. -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another question: Who is harmed by this meta-structure? I don't think anyone, but many find them helpful. -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:25, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I accept the opinion that some find it useless. But many also find it useful. A consensus is needed for such serious changes. ;-) And I don't see it!!
But: I log out now, grab a bag of popcorn and watch a movie. You could tear down the existing categories structure worldwide. Let's see how far you can get before you burn your fingers. Or you have luck. It is a matter of taste how it is structured. if you want to change it everywhere, it doesn't add value, in my opionion it's just a different name for the same.
Greets -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:30, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
should take care of it for the whole world. change that for all districts and not just for one district. create the whole superstructure with templates. How do you know I'm not in the process of doing that? I've nominated plenty of "categories of" categories for deletion in the last couple of days. You can't just revert someone, force them to discuss it ad nauseum, and then bitch about how they haven't made the same change for similar categories. Your literally keeping me from dealing with other districts by the way your handling this.
Who is harmed by this meta-structure? I don't really feel like giving specific examples right now, but it just creates a lot of pointless duplication and other problems. Plus as I've already pointed out to multiple times now it goes against the guidelines, which exist for a reason. At the least though it's just totally pointless. We already have metacats, catcats, and other things for "categories containing categories." There's absolutely zero reason to add categories named "categories of" on top of that. You keep going off about how there's no consensus here. There actually already is to use those things for categories containing categories though and there was plenty of discussion involved in the decision not to have ambiguous category names. So I don't need to ask for anyone's permission to use or follow either one. It's on the people who think "categories of" is a better way to do it then status quo and I don't see you or anyone else here doing that. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:37, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamant1: then read the section below on how alone you and Yann contradict each other in the wording suggestions.
Yann said Category:Categories of France by city should be moved/renamed Category:France by city You mo
You moved Category:Categories of Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality to Category:Municipalities in Main-Tauber-Kreis by topic., not to Category:Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality.
It creates more confusion that way.
I would correspond to yann's suggestion. I would also find this better, since all categories end with "by municipality"; not with "by topic" Can you change Category:Municipalities in Main-Tauber-Kreis by topic. to Category:Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality? -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Their kind of separate categories and I don't see them as mutually exclusive to begin with anyway. So changing Category:Categories of France by city to Category:France by city makes sense and so does Category:Categories of Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality to Category:Municipalities in Main-Tauber-Kreis by topic. It's not like there's one single best or right to categorize everything on here. The main thing is just getting rid of "Category:Categories of" categories. I could really care less how things are structured beyond that. Your clearly just nitpicking over things that aren't issues to begin with as derailing tactic though. --Adamant1 (talk) 20:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

different changes / proposals

@Yann: When you say above that Category:Categories of France by city should be moved/renamed Category:France by city

Then i ask: Why did @Adamant1: change Category:Categories of Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality to Category:Municipalities in Main-Tauber-Kreis by topic. and not to Category:Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality (analog to France example).???

Greets -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:35, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't change Category:Categories of Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality to Category:Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality because really the category has to do with "topics of Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality." So I just think that category is more specific. Nothing stops you from creating Category:Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality and putting Category:Municipalities in Main-Tauber-Kreis by topic into it though if you think that's better. That would be more useful then going off on me about it or acting like it's on me to change or fix every single thing even slightly related to this. I'm purely here to get rid of "Category:Categories." I could really care less how things are categorized outside of that as long as whatever is done beyond there follows the guidelines and doesn't make things worse. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:41, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamant1: Can you change Category:Municipalities in Main-Tauber-Kreis by topic. to Category:Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality? (without "Category:Categories.") -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:51, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, because they aren't mutually exclusive and the categories are by topic. So I don't personally think it's worth doing. Your free to do that yourself if you think it's better though. This is a collaborative project and I'm not your servant. Sorry. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:58, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamant1: So then I will change in to Category:Main-Tauber-Kreis by municipality. Because similar like Paris example and all end with "by municipality".It's more logical. I will change it for whole Baden-Württemberg and maybe for whole Germany. So all "Category:Categories" in Germany by municipality will end up. Greets -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 07:42, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
However you want to do it as long as the "categories of" categories are deleted. I just noticed that you created templates like Template:Baden-WürttembergArcDecadeDistrict that forces the addition of "categories of" categories to other categories. That part of the templates should be deleted so the categories don't just get re-added when people use them. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:46, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can change Templates, without "Category:Categories", after moving and/or for new Category's created with templates. Greets -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 08:02, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine. I'll try to avoid editing anything related to Germany having to do with this for now so there's no editing conflicts. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:06, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Alte Brücke (Heidelberg) in 2024

Moin! Könntest du bitte mal bei dieser Kategorie und beim verwendeten Template vorbeischauen? Problem: In dieser Kategorie können sowohl Foto- als auch Videoaufnahmen einsortiert werden. Die Kategorie ist aber einer Kategorie zu sortiert, welche nur Fotos erlaub. Das passt nicht zusammen. Könntest du das Template eventuell anpassen? Danke im Voraus und beste Grüße aus Berlin Lukas Beck (talk) 14:05, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@L. Beck: Danke für die Info. Das Problem mit der Einsortierung in "by year of photographing" hatte ich mit User:AnRo0002 schon an anderer Stelle diskutiert. Etwa bei
a) Category:Heidelberg Castle by year (auch für nicht-Fotos ... Videos, Kupferstiche, Gemälde, sonstiges) und Category:Heidelberg Castle by year of photographing (darunter; nur für Fotos).
Persönlich finde ich das suboptimal mit zweierlei Templates, aber der weit verbreitete Kategoriezweig "by year of photographing" ist halt eine eindeutige Festlegung und auch Engführung.
Eine andere Lösung wäre:
b) neben dem Template:Alte Brücke Heidelberg, das in "by year of photographing" einsortiert, etwa ein weiteres Template, beispielsweise Template:Alte Brücke Heidelberg (no photo) zu erstellen, welches die Einsortierung in "by year of photographing" ausspart/weglässt. Dann je nach Fall das eine oder andere verwenden.
Oder
c) einzelne Kategorien ohne Template anlegen, dabei in "by year of photographing" weglassen und das Template nur verwenden, wenn im jeweiligen Jahr Fotos bestehen.
Oder
d) nur in Category:Bridges in Germany by year einsortieren, die Kategorien Bridges in Germany "by year of photographing" komplett ignorieren.
Gruß -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 19:22, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was ist deine Meinung @A.Savin? Lukas Beck (talk) 07:25, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@L. Beck: Ich habe mal testweise das Template:Alte Brücke Heidelberg (no photo) erstellt. In Jahren, in denen Dateien (aber keine Fotos) vorliegen (etwa Karten, Gemälde, Kupferstiche, Videos, usw.) kannst du das mal testen. Es würde fast alle Kategorien gleich erzeugen, nur die Einsortierung in "by year of photographing" weglassen. Wenn es nicht gefällt, könnten wir dieses Template auch wieder löschen. Es würde zumindest keine doppelte Jahresstruktur schaffen. Gruß -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 08:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dann ist mir noch aufgefallen, dass die Brückenbilder in die Category:Transport in Heidelberg by year einsortiert werden.
Das sollten wir ändern auf die Category:Land transport in Heidelberg by year (die ebenfalls besteht). (da wir bei Category:Bridges ja auch von Category:Land transport infrastructure sprechen; und wenn sie schon besteht ;-).
Gruß -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 08:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gerade ausprobiert. Gefällt mir soweit ganz gut. Gruß Lukas Beck (talk) 09:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Es würde völlig ausreichen, bei "Bridges by year" (ohne photographing) zu bleiben, Commons ist nunmal zu gefühlt 99% eine Foto-Datenbank und die allermeisten Kategorien dieser Art enthalten eh keine Videos oder Gemälde --A.Savin 15:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wobei es in diesem Fall auch andere Arten "by year" gibt.
...
Gruß -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 17:37, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lilienstein

Moin! Ich bin es noch Mal mit einer kleinen Bitte bezüglich eines Templates. Es geht um die sortierung des Liliensteins nach Jahren. Aktuell wird etwa diese Kategorie in diese Kategorie einsortiert. Nun liegt der Berg aber vollständig in Bad Schandau und sollte entsprechend in diese Kategorie einsortiert werden. Das ganze gilt natürlich für alle Jahre. Würde mich freuen, wenn du dir das bei Zeiten anschauen könntest. Einen schönen Sonntag gewünscht. Gruß Lukas Beck (talk) 09:27, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@L. Beck: ich habe das angepasst. ;-) Kannst du prüfen, ob alle "Bad Schandau by year"-Kategorien bestehen? (und die Categorien neu speichern, damit die Template-Änderung greift). Schönen Sonntag -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 09:43, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Erledigt! Danke Lukas Beck (talk) 12:31, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wieder einmal Template Probleme

Moin! Könntest du bitte Mal bei dieser Kategorie vorbeischauen? Sie ist sowohl in diese, als auch in diese Kategorie einsortiert und damit liegt leider eine Überkategorisierung vor, da diese Kategorie bereits in diese Kategorie einsortiert ist. Gruß und schönes Wochenende Lukas Beck (talk) 13:30, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@AnRo0002: Das betrifft ein Flora-Template. Du bist ein Flora- und Template-Experte. Und du hast die entsprechenden Kategorien angelegt. Was meinst du dazu?
Einsortierung "Fagales" by year/month (Trees by tyxon) nur in Trees by year/month, nicht in Flora by year/month, da Trees eine Unterkategorie von Flora ist. Gruß -- Triple C 85 | User talk | 20:05, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Triplec85&oldid=940406806"