Commons talk:Categories

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Categories.

• This is not a forum for general discussion of the page’s subject.
• Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
• Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
• New to Commons? Check out the project scope. Ask questions, get answers.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4

Personal Categories

Let's say a user has uploaded 200 images, and now gets to work adding better descriptions to each one.

Well, he would like to create the hidden category "Norfowitz done" to the ones he has already finished fixing, to help him keep better track of what still needs fixing.

So please mention if it is OK to do so.

Also, he knows in the future he will likely upload another batch, so this category needs to be permanent.

Maybe there needs to be a new type of category only he can see.

No, he is not good at databases, or other tracking software, to help him keep his own list on his own computers.

Jidanni (talk) 06:20, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

@Jidanni: See Commons:User-specific galleries, templates and categories#Categories for the guideline about this. --Auntof6 (talk) 07:57, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm not good at databases either, so I just use Notepad and when something is fixed I add "DONE".;) So far it works for me. MartinD (talk) 20:46, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Photo shows two adjacent but different businesses. Any reason I can't add categories for more than one of them?

After more than a dozen years of being active on Commons, I thought I had a general idea of how categories work. @Allforrous: apparently has different ideas and thinks I'm wrong. I'm trying to avoid an edit war, so I want feedback from others. Here's one of the photos in contention: File:MagazineIgnatiusHoHoDec07.jpg It shows a building with housing a restaurant on one half and a clothing shop in the other half. I had categories for both businesses - That seemed appropriate to me, and I'm unaware of any rule prohibiting doing so. Allforrous removed category for the shop. At first I thought Allforrous mistakenly thought the shop category referred to the restaurant, so I pointed out that it did not, then restored the category, but Allforrous removed the category again, siteing OVERCAT. As far as I can determine, "OVERCAT" does nothing to prohibit more than one category on an image if each category refers to a specific different thing seen in the image. Discussion started at User_talk:Allforrous#Unexplained_category_removal. I have not gotten further response there recently, so I'm bring the question here for others to see and give guidance. Thank you for your attention, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:30, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm not an expert but I'm contributor since a number of years. I'm inclined to agree with you. Suppose I upload a photo showing two adjacent buildings, one housing a bike shop and the other a library. Far-fetched? No. Just image yourself standing at geolocation 52.232837,4.831553. I think the correct categorization would be both "Bike shops in North Holland" and "Libraries in North Holland".

Or imagine yourself on a platform of Arnhem railway station, and your photo shows EMU's to Utrecht, Nijmegen and Zwolle, and DMU's to Winterswijk. The correct categories would be "Electric multiple units, motor coaches and railcars of the Netherlands" and "Diesel multiple units, motor coaches and railcars of the Netherlands". If you wanted to be more specific you could change them to "DD-IRM" and "Breng GTW". Doing so and not removing the two more general categories, would constitute overcategorization, as I understand the concept of overcategorization.

Or take a look at this file, showing several types of trains at this station. From back to front: Stadler GTW DMU's used by Arriva, Stadler GTW DMU's used by Breng, a 1600 class locomotive (in 2013 probably still used by NS Goederen) and an ICM EMU used by NS reizigers. I think that would require four categories.

Hope this helps. MartinD (talk) 20:52, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes, this is correct. This is discussed in Commons:OVERCAT, in the Commons:Categories#Exception for images with more categorized subjects section. If a photo shows multiple subjects, then the lowest possible subcategory for each subject should be there. If that results in a photo being in both a parent and a child category, that is OK. The overcategorization tools will flag an image or category in that state, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. The intended solution would be to create further subcategories of Category:Shops in Uptown New Orleans for the second store's type, to be parallel with Category:Restaurants in Uptown New Orleans‎. But until those other categories exist, the photo should be in both. Carl Lindberg (talk) 23:38, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback, that makes sense to me. (I was unaware there is something called an "overcategorization tool". Link please?) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot has an option for checking overcategorization on selected files (or with a preference set, other selected categories). It does flag your initial image. Carl Lindberg (talk) 00:46, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Very good. Perhaps that was what Allforrous was using. Yes tools are useful, but as an addition to looking oneself, not instead of! Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 02:27, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

LANGVAR in category names ?

Should a long-established and stable name in one variant of English be renamed without discussion to a US variant spelling, to be "Consistent with other such categories with American spelling."?

There is no COM:LANGVAR although I believe en:WP:LANGVAR would be relevant and illuminating. The intention there is to reduce "churn" in language-variant naming, and avoid edit-warring. There is also no reason that category names have to be consistent with each other: their membership is defined explicitly, not implied through names. Navigation between categories is primarily done by following links. If a reader is typing category names, they're more likely to be doing so in a local variant, not on the assumption "Everyone uses American spelling".

See [1]] @Soumya-8974: Andy Dingley (talk) 19:15, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

@User:Andy Dingley: Support the rename in this case. This is NOT a general preference for US over UK. Taylor 49 (talk) 22:32, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

• IIRC, early discussion was to prefer UK spelling/terms in UK related categories and US spelling/terms in US related cats. "Consistency" should not be used as an excuse to rename things contrary to what locals call them. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:45, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

  I know this is the case in English Wikipedia, as I found it written in its style guide. However, I couldn't find the same thing in Commons and tried to give categories a consistent American spelling. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talk • contribs) 05:33, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Obviously, but why would you do that? Just to land-grab for America? Some of us do find that pretty offensive, and even if (yet again) Commons doesn't have an explicit policy, why do you choose to act so inconsistently with Wikipedia, and then justify that as "for great consistency"? Andy Dingley (talk) 14:30, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• @Andy Dingley: I don't know what you mean here. Is not some "style guide" better than none at all to justify a spelling? Krok6kola (talk) 16:22, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• My point is that the nearest we have to a style guide is that from en:WP. Which is very strong on "don't make pointless changes" to avoid this problem, rather than the false claim that we need "consistency" to make categorization work. Commons already goes too far for consistency, such that we have "(ship)" in every category name for marine vessels, even for barges, boats, floating cranes and a whole slew of things that definitely aren't ships. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:55, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

I have resolved to use relevant national spelling variants for categories, following the Wikipedia policy. --Soumya-8974 (he) (talk • contribs) 07:35, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia guidelines are not in effect here, but the reasoning in and about them can be enlightening. Unilaterally changing category names should also not usually be done.

The consistency becomes obviously problematic in categories that combine aspects: American spelling might have been consistent for space programmes, but a seriously doubt it would be consistent in the part "European" of Category:European space programmes, which this concerned. Any category can ultimately be subcategory of a category in a different scheme, so when aiming for consistency, one cannot decide based only on one aspect, but should have a discussion with a broad audience. At some point the consistent names will clash badly with e.g. the principle of most commonly used name.

–LPfi (talk) 16:42, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Abbreviations

Is there some kind of rule for when it is OK or not to abbreviate something when creating a category, for instance "Company" versus "Co."? Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)