Category talk:Location not applicable
I am active in categorisation and recategorisation of images (contributions), but it is today when I came to this category at the first time. IMHO it is a good idea to invent a machine readable attribute of location-applicability, but apparently this realization was failed. There are many abstract images which does not contain [[Category:Location not applicable]] tag, and even if you will put it there, then thousands of new abstract images will be uploaded soon.
|Are categories relevant to geography?||All||Some||None|
|C.:L.n.a. not present||Location is applicable||Location is not applicable|
|C.:L.n.a. present||Location is not applicable|
But a simpler and more useful solution is possible. Each category related to geography must have some tag, such as metacategory Category: Categories with geographically locatable files. A file included to one of such categories should be considered as location-applicable unless the file is included to Category: Location not applicable. So, this category should be kept, but not to include millions of abstract images, and used only for particular files to override the location-applicability implied by one or more of its categories. Don’t make complications to the image uploading process for abstract pictures. Improve the category system instead. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)