User talk:Look2See1: Difference between revisions

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Content deleted Content added
Look2See1 (talk | contribs)
Line 27: Line 27:


::Hello? Anybody out there? I'd still like to understand your views on this. Any feedback? --[[User:Sanfranman59|Sanfranman59]] ([[User talk:Sanfranman59|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:59, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
::Hello? Anybody out there? I'd still like to understand your views on this. Any feedback? --[[User:Sanfranman59|Sanfranman59]] ([[User talk:Sanfranman59|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:59, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

:::Hi Sanfranman59, I'm sorry to be slow in responding here, I mistakenly thought my last edit note clarified my action. When I created [[:Category:Jackson Street, San Francisco]] recently, at first for some HABS images at Jackson Square, I then went to populate the cat. with images and sub-cats for other sections of the street. [[:Category:Whittier Mansion]] went in of course. This 1 image of the residence, [[:File:Whittier_Mansion_(San_Francisco)_2.JPG]], has the City's Jackson street sign in it, and so to me 'rationally' merited the 2 categories. In a 'non-rational' way, the cars at a rakish angle indicate its 'Pacific Heights ridgetop' topography that could give a sense of setting for those unfamiliar, but that is certainly not a stand alone reason for [Cat:Jackson Street]. This and the [[:File:Roos House 3500 Jackson St San Francisco 3-7-2010 12-50-26 PM.JPG]] are the only 2 images of western sections of Jackson I could find uploaded, and so my rvt/recats of the Whittier. At first I assumed it was obvious why (how dumb), finally realized I was wrong and then thought my edit note would clear it up, and was wrong again.<br>
:::If [Cat:Jackson Street] is offensive to you on this Whittier Mansion image, let's just leave it off. Neither of us need the drama, and I apologize to you Sanfranman59, for the distress my assumptions caused. Please know I appreciate your ongoing efforts to photograph so many architectural and historical landmarks of the City and upload them. In my experiences they are a large and notable documentation that would be missing otherwise, and a pleasure to frequently see when exploring images of the San Francisco.<br>
:::Thank you, [[User:Look2See1|Look2See1]] ([[User talk:Look2See1#top|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 17:12, 9 April 2015 (UTC)


== [[:File:Arbutus menziesii-2.jpg]] and other ==
== [[:File:Arbutus menziesii-2.jpg]] and other ==

Revision as of 17:13, 9 April 2015

en-3

A Barnstar for you !

Well hello-ooh there !

  • File:Great white shark south africa with Teeth by David Shankbone sml welcome.png

Notificaiton

Whittier Mansion category

Hi Look2See1 ... I don't understand how this edit isn't exactly what COM:OVERCAT says we should avoid. The photo is already in Category:Whittier Mansion, which is already in Category:Jackson Street, San Francisco. It seems to me that this is the whole reason for COM:OVERCAT. Is your view that the photo belongs in Category:Jackson Street, San Francisco because there's a street sign in the photo? I'm just trying to understand your reasoning. If that's it, shouldn't all of the categories that Category:Whittier Mansion is in also be on every photo that's in that category? Should we also put the photo in the category that Category:Jackson Street, San Francisco is in and all of the other categories that are in that tree?

I see that you've been involved in back-and-forth with a fair number of other users about this type of thing previously. Can you direct me to some kind of community consensus that's been reached wherein this type of categorization is supported? It doesn't make any sense at all to me. --Sanfranman59 (talk) 00:49, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, Look2See1 ... I'm just following up on this message I posted last week. I'd like to understand why you think the photo I referenced should be in both Category:Whittier Mansion and Category:Jackson Street, San Francisco when the former is already a subcategory of the latter. --Sanfranman59 (talk) 19:05, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hello? Anybody out there? I'd still like to understand your views on this. Any feedback? --Sanfranman59 (talk) 15:59, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sanfranman59, I'm sorry to be slow in responding here, I mistakenly thought my last edit note clarified my action. When I created Category:Jackson Street, San Francisco recently, at first for some HABS images at Jackson Square, I then went to populate the cat. with images and sub-cats for other sections of the street. Category:Whittier Mansion went in of course. This 1 image of the residence, File:Whittier_Mansion_(San_Francisco)_2.JPG, has the City's Jackson street sign in it, and so to me 'rationally' merited the 2 categories. In a 'non-rational' way, the cars at a rakish angle indicate its 'Pacific Heights ridgetop' topography that could give a sense of setting for those unfamiliar, but that is certainly not a stand alone reason for [Cat:Jackson Street]. This and the File:Roos House 3500 Jackson St San Francisco 3-7-2010 12-50-26 PM.JPG are the only 2 images of western sections of Jackson I could find uploaded, and so my rvt/recats of the Whittier. At first I assumed it was obvious why (how dumb), finally realized I was wrong and then thought my edit note would clear it up, and was wrong again.
If [Cat:Jackson Street] is offensive to you on this Whittier Mansion image, let's just leave it off. Neither of us need the drama, and I apologize to you Sanfranman59, for the distress my assumptions caused. Please know I appreciate your ongoing efforts to photograph so many architectural and historical landmarks of the City and upload them. In my experiences they are a large and notable documentation that would be missing otherwise, and a pleasure to frequently see when exploring images of the San Francisco.
Thank you, Look2See1 (talk) 17:12, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that sometimes you forget to close language template, so {{Information}} become broken. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:06, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

COM:AN/U

Please see COM:AN/U#Look2See1_again. Nyttend (talk) 23:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]