Category talk:Categories of the United States by state

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

Category name[edit]

Please see this category naming discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Countries by category#Categories: Categories. --Timeshifter (talk) 18:49, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

The move discussion was closed with no consensus. See this diff. See also:
That move discussion concerned changing the name to Category:United States by state. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:36, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Better category name[edit]

Category:States of the United States by theme is better than my previous suggestion for renaming the category. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It looks impossible to make the name more clear and less confusing. "States of the United States by theme" is very confusing and has a naming style that is not scalable in other contexts neither. --Foroa (talk) 16:26, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
"By theme" is scalable. As is "By subject" and "By topic." They are used throughout the Commons. I think our disagreements started at Category:Subnational entities. You tried to support the use of this new Wikimedia-only word, "subnational." It is only defined in Wikimedia projects. See:
Most people are using Category:Subdivisions by country instead. Maybe someday "subnational" will become standard English, but right now it is not.
Similarly, your support of "Categories:Categories of" at all levels is supported mainly only by non-native speakers of English. Most native speakers of English only support its use at upper levels. That is how it is used on English Wikipedia. It is kind of annoying when non-native speakers of English try to tell a native speaker how to use English. Especially for United States categories. I think I would know how to use English in my country. --Timeshifter (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support. It makes more sense to native English speakers. Seeing the word "Categories" listed twice at the bottom of a file or subcategory is not clearer. "By theme" is standard, and is clearer. As is "By subject", and "By topic".
By theme
By subject
By topic
See: Commons:Naming categories#Categories by CRITERION.
See: Commons:List of meta category criteria - "theme" is one of the meta category criteria. As is "subject" and "topic." Any one of these would work in this category name. They mean the same thing overall. --Timeshifter (talk) 17:25, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, it is not category of states by theme but category of themes (thematic categories) which are categorized by state. --ŠJů (talk) 04:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
That is what "States of the United States by theme" means. English is not easy. --Timeshifter (talk) 13:32, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
I'm not very good in English but I hope, a distinction between "states by theme" and "themes by state" isn't so incomprehensible and my language isn't so different from English. This category is really sorted by theme (so its name can have "by theme" at the end). But WHAT by theme? It doesn't contain "states" (categories of states) but thematic categories, every of them sorted by state within. So, "Themes by theme"? It is a nonsense. "States of the United States by theme" would mean that every state has some its specific theme and we will sort states by their theme. Such "theme of a state" would be probably something like its character, such metacategory would contain something like Industrial states of the United States, Touristic states of the United States, Farmers states of the United States...
If you check Category:Categories by country subdivision, you can see that Category:Categories of the United States by state is fully in line with this category branch and category names there. Nobody invented more correct names for such categories, and they have their good logic. Just the suffix "by state" have not to be dezinterpreted - it's meaning here is a bit different from categories like "Transport by state". This category itself isn't sorted by state but contain categories (sorted) by state. --ŠJů (talk) 03:44, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Most native English speakers believe it should only be used at the top levels. For example; concerning the use of "Categories:Categories of" one admin wrote: "I agree it should only be used at the top levels." That was written by the admin, Rocket000, on this talk page:
Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Countries by category#Categories: Categories --Timeshifter (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
What exactly do you mean? "The United States" aren't the "top level", in your view? --ŠJů (talk) 19:48, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
That is the problem with using "Category:Categories". It is hard to define the top level. So it is better to avoid using it when there is another easy category name that works. Such as "States of the United States by topic". Or theme. --Timeshifter (talk) 21:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
See above. This is not a category of states by topic. --ŠJů (talk) 22:59, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Yes it is. See this Google category title search of the Commons for similar naming of categories by topic: By topic. English is inconsistent, and it is very flexible. See also this search of Commons titles (not just categories): By subject. --Timeshifter (talk) 00:30, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, per Foroa and ŠJů. I also believe that if any change is made (no that I would support any such change), it should be to every category within Category:Categories by country subdivision, not just as a one-off for the U.S.--Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:56, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Comment. Let me show you where this is going.

Until recently we did without adding "Categories of" to category names. Some people are now starting categories with "Categories of" at lower and lower levels. Where does it end?

A variety of options:

Basically people want a way to consolidate some subcategories. Maybe my suggestion of Category:States of the United States by theme is not the best idea but "Categories of" is not a good idea in place of it.

Another possibility might be "United States by state by theme". Category "by" names can get fairly long: Category:Architectural elements in Italy by region by period. Its parent category is currently Category:Categories of Italy by period. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:36, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry. All of this looks to me like a solution in search of a problem. In your chart above, the middle column contains the best category naming convention. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 18:11, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
It is not a convention. --Timeshifter (talk) 02:43, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes. I think it's very important that you quibble with the wording that I used. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:23, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
It becomes a de facto convention when most users start to use that style and no other style without quibbling, which is the case in point. Such "naturally" growing conventions tend to be the best ones. --Foroa (talk) 15:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind me breaking this thread up a little so I can reply more clearly. How about Category:Italy by century by theme? And Category:Centuries in Italy by theme? Either one could be a subcategory of Category:Italy by century. --Timeshifter (talk) 00:31, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
I think, these current category names are equally or even more undestandable. No reason for a change. --ŠJů (talk) 13:17, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
If they are equally understandable, then it makes more sense to use the current convention for the most part. Use "Categories of" only when nothing else makes sense. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:33, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Ad the third column: Category:Italy by city by theme (as well as Category:United States by state by theme, in case of the category discussed here) would be a real equivalent of the names in the second column. But it would be incompatible with the main structure and standard naming of metacategories (Category:Categories by city, not Category:Themes by city). The current convention have some insolvable problems (I can not think out a suitable name for Category:Countries by category) - but I'm not sure that renaming of all superior metacategories to some new system will not have some other problems, maybe more than the current one. Anyway, the original rename proposal for this category is unacceptable and misleading. Maybe, some improvements can be found, but I think, this is not a promising way. --ŠJů (talk) 22:06, 17 February 2011 (UTC)