Category talk:Transport of bicycles

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Category move[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It avoids misunderstandings Gürbetaler (talk) 21:48, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support on my own proposal... Ingolfson (talk) 05:23, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Symbol support vote.svg Support (Per discussion below --Bossi (talkgallerycontrib) 15:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC)) ;; Contrasts with Category:Road transport & Category: Rail transport. It seems like "Bicycle transport" would be about bicycle transportation, whereas "Transport of Bicycles" would be for media showing them being moved around... two completely different subjects, hence I'd think two completely different categories. --Bossi (talkgallerycontrib) 13:44, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ummm.... no offense, Thisisbossi, but have you looked at the category? At the contents and the subcategory and the only articles? At the definition at the top? This category contains pictures of bicycles transported ON on buses, trucks, ferries, whatnot (of course there are a few that are categorised wrong, but the majority are bikes BEING transported - which is no wonder, because most people sort images like the ones you refer to into category:Cycling and Category:Bicycles). I am not opposed to having a category "Bicycle transport". But please don't make me transport 99% of the images in here by hand into a "Transport of bicycles" category when I can have a bot do it and then transport 1% percent the other way. Cheers, Ingolfson (talk) 06:12, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Actually, a close look checks out - ALL images here seem to be categorised correctly as "transport OF bikes". Ingolfson (talk) 06:15, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
I agree that currently that's how this category is, but I'm just saying is that in the end we may be better off to have two categories. As to how that's accomplished: I could care less... move all the files into a new category; or rename this and then recreate the Bicycle transport category -- that's all fine. However, the Cycling categories are such a mess that an over-arcing Bicycle transport parent category may start to help clean things up... though part of the problem is that the cycling categories have been arranged as fitting into a sport / recreational categorical system and a transport system... and right now it doesn't seem to fit into either system well. We really need to find a way to sort those out so that it can properly fit into both categorical systems, to which Bicycle transport would likely be the parent category on the transportation side. --Bossi (talkgallerycontrib) 11:24, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
No problem. As you may have seen, I have made a start at solving that mess you talked about in both the bicycles and the cycling category. One thing after another, I guess - this would be one step of it only. I see the "new" bicycle transport sitting above it all, no problem. Ingolfson (talk) 21:38, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Then I can agree to that. Then it's just a matter of figure out how to create/transfer the Transport of bicycles category, and since the end result is the same either way: I don't particularly care about the means -- whichever is easiest. Thanks, by the way, for working on cleaning up so many of the transportation articles. It's nice to run into people with whom I may not necessarily agree with from the get-go, but can think rationally to reach a resolution... Wikis seem to be lacking in that! Cheers! --Bossi (talkgallerycontrib) 15:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
Hello Bossi, you asked what the best way to tidy this up would be - in this case, I'd suggest that you revert your original oppose into a support. Then we wait for an admin to make a bot move the contents (might take a while, but no issue, we'll just watchlist it, or we could ask one, probably Foroa) and once that is done, we "recreate" Bicycle transport as a higher-level category. Ingolfson (talk) 10:39, 25 January 2009 (UTC)