Category talk:Pages with maps

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

Related category discussions[edit]

Expand to view current and archived category discussions related to this category

Category:Pages with maps[edit]

Rename to Category:Pages using Kartographer maps. The current name sounds like that of a content category (as if it's meant to hold map-related pages), but this is a tracking category for a specific extension. Nyttend (talk) 23:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Agree. Seems a reasonable change to me. Acabashi (talk) 14:12, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

@Nyttend, Acabashi: Closed (no objections; rename Category:Pages with maps to Category:Pages using Kartographer maps) Josh (talk) 21:58, 10 July 2019 (UTC)


@Nyttend, Acabashi: Re-opened I am concerned that this move may have far-ranging effects. In fact it appears to be a hard-coded maintenance category. See Tracking categories and Template:Location for more info. Unless we a confidnet that such a move won't break a whole bunch of templates and functions, I think this one is best left alone. Josh (talk) 22:22, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

It’s not hard-coded—the category’s name is the content of MediaWiki:kartographer-tracking-category, which can be changed at any time by a sysop. It should not cause any issues (if it does, that’s a software error, which should be fixed, but this scenario is really unlikely), except that updating 14.5 million pages causes significant load on servers, but it should be manageable (and has nothing to do with software-level tracking category status, moving e.g. Category:CC-BY-SA-4.0 would have similar impact). —Tacsipacsi (talk) 16:05, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
@Tacsipacsi: Thanks for clarifying! You are right, 'hard-coded' is not the right terminology to use. It sounds like it is doable, but I wanted to raise a little visibility and give the chance for some more input on this CfD before we close and make such a far-reaching change. Josh (talk) 17:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Tacsipacsi, would you mind voting, if you have an opinion on the proposal itself? It would help if we could have a second "move" or if you could balance out the first one by explaining why this is a bad idea. Nyttend (talk) 04:32, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
@Nyttend: I don’t know. I don’t think this to be a such huge issue that’s worth the effort moving it, but I understand some do think so. So I don’t want to prevent the move, but I can’t support it, either. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 21:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Understood, and thank you for explaining. Nyttend (talk) 11:10, 17 July 2019 (UTC)


Untitled comment[edit]

We have had Category:Media with locations for a long time. What do we need this new category for? It seems that most files with locations are now in both categories. Is this really helpful? -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 21:03, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Auto(mis?)categorization[edit]

The page File:Wpdms 20020923b bowling green composite.jpg is in this category, though not directly (that is, the category name is not in the page source). Presumably there is some template that adds it. The problem is that the page doesn't actually have a map. Matchups (talk) 02:08, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

P.S. How do I link to an image without causing the image to display here? I can see that piping doesn't work.

@Matchups:: First, you can make a link to a picture like this: File:Wpdms 20020923b bowling green composite.jpg (see source for how I did it). Second, I think the map involved is the one you get by clicking on the WMA button2b.png icon to the left of the location, or the Openstreetmap logo.svg button on the right. --bjh21 (talk) 15:19, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Limit content to manually added maps[edit]

I want to find examples of manually added mapframes etc, but since this category currently includes tons of pages with nothing but object locations or wikidata boxes, it's useless for that purpose. Is there a chance only actual mapframes can be included in this category?--Hjart (talk) 16:48, 8 July 2018 (UTC)