Category talk:Facing left

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Ae-tan2.jpg
Anthonis_van_Dyck_051.jpg

Category description[edit]

I added to a short description about the type of images to include. Category:Facing right has a similar one. I cross referenced this from Category talk:Facing right and Category talk:Facing forward.

Based on the description, I would remove File:Ae-tan2.jpg from the category.

File:Anthonis_van_Dyck_051.jpg should probably also go into Category:Looking right. -- User:Docu at 11:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)


Subcategories[edit]

<moved from usertalk:Docu> Hi. I don't understand this edit. I created the category by merging two categories. Why is "facing" a better parent category for "People facing left and looking right" than "facing left"? Wondering, Infrogmation (talk) 06:25, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

It complicates expanding the two main "facing" categories. Obviously, if you have other plans for them, I wouldn't want to stop you. -- User:Docu at 06:28, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, that didn't clarify what I was wondering. I created the category as the intersection of images that were both in "Category:Facing left" and "Category:People looking right". I don't see how combining two categories "complicates" things. I don't have any particular "other plans" beyond attempting to simplify things by creating a new category to combine two categories where they intersect. Also, if images were previously in category "facing left", why do you think it is better to change the category to "facing"? Is what I'm asking clearer now? Thanks much. Cheers, 06:57, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Obviously you could split "Facing left" by color of hair, clothing, color of eyes, year, etc, but it's really easier to build without subcategories. As a sample, I added a bookmarklet to Category:Facing to help expanding it. If you want to do intersections, you can still use CatScan. -- User:Docu at 07:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Well, "Category:Facing left" has more than 2000 images, so I think some subcategorization is appropriate. I find a useful indicator for possibly useful new categories is when we have multiple images in two existing categories. I hadn't thought that was controvercial. I'm ignorant about "CatScan", could you provide a useful link and/or suggestion about what I should be doing differently? Thanks much for your time. Cheers, -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

</moved from usertalk:Docu>

I wouldn't worry about the number of files in a category. There can't really be too many files in category, just too many under-categorized images. Maybe if one creates a few additional categories and doesn't find any new files to add, one probably shouldn't have created them. Anyways, I don't mind if you add the same images elsewhere too, but I prefer the current overall structure.
I tend to think that people who create a lot of subcategories use CatScan extensively, but maybe it's the contrary. Not sure how they keep track of all that stuff though. Anyways, if you haven't discovered it yet, you might be served better with internal search, try the bookmarklet mentioned above. -- User:Docu at 20:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)