Category talk:River Wye

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

It seems unnecessarily silly to have to maintain two separate category trees for the same river; if some form of distinction is required, subcats by area can be created, e.g. "River Wye in Monmouthshire", "River Wye in Herefordshire", etc. but right now I don't see a need to duplicate work without good reason. Rodhullandemu (talk) 02:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

As you can see in En:River Wye (disambiguation), there are Wye Rivers as rivers and places in other continents. According to that, it looks as if there are two distinct Wye rivers in the UK too. --Foroa (talk) 06:12, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes "River Wye" is ambiguous, and its also ambiguous within the UK. It is worth noting that it can be reasonably asserted that this river is the primary meaning for "River Wye" in the UK.
However, that is not the point here. The problem is this River Wye flows through both Wales and England. Therefore "River Wye (Wales)" is an incorrect description, just like "River Rhine (Germany)" would be inaccurate for the whole of that river. If it needs disambiguation (which I'd say not because its Primary anyway), it should at least have an accurate disambiguator.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
There seem to be close to 100 images for the Wye in Derbyshire. Fine if you have a better disambiguation name that does not conflict with the other Wye in the UK, otherwise I'll move it to River Wye (Wales) till you find a better term. --Foroa (talk) 11:44, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Don't move it to an inaccurate term, just because this one is ambiguous. It is better to be accurate (if ambiguous) than inaccurate (but precise), a factually wrong name is a factually wrong name and should never be used. There are alternative names that could be used here, and the options should be discussed first (Rodhullandemu can probably think of an appropriate one).
Incidentally however disambiguated, comma disambiguation is more appropriate for UK geographic subjects than parentheses. In the UK context, "River Wye (Wales)" implies this is the part of the Wye in Wales (and "River Wye (England)" is the other bit of it). "River Wye, Wales" doesn't have the same implication.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
To clarify above - I mean "River Wye (Wales)" is itself ambiguous (and is hardly appropriate for a "disambiguated" category!) as it could mean "the part of the River Wye in Wales" or "the River Wye that flows through Wales". "River Wye, Wales" doesn't have the same risk of confusion.
Alternative disambiguators are things based on other properties of this Wye as opposed to the fact it flows through Wales. eg Its a tributary of the River Severn, it flows into the Bristol Channel, it goes along part of the Wales-England border, it goes through both England and Wales. My inclination is to use the first of these somehow.--Nilfanion (talk) 23:04, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I've found with Scottish and Welsh rivers in the same county that disambiguation by nearest major settlement usually works, except that if there are two, neither of which flows close to a settlement, DAB by source or sink will work. I tend to think that Wye (Severn) would be clear enough for most readers with dablinks to other Wye rivers, or use River Wye as the disambig page- the problem with this is that I think most readers would be looking for the Severn Wye rather than the more minor rivers elsewhere and might resent a level of indirection. Rodhullandemu (talk) 23:27, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
I would be inclined to use the sink as in Wye (Severn) if country or region dab is not sufficient. As stated, Category:River Wye, Derbyshire should contain close to 100 images, so from the point of view of Commons, it cannot be seen as a minor river. Moreover, it is sufficient to have a number of famous cities/buildings/curiosities/activities along a minor river to make it "major". Alternatively, it is sufficient that a person makes a detailed study/reportage/touristic promotion along a minor river to make it major here on Commons. --Foroa (talk) 08:06, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
Not really - the Derbyshire Wye is minor relative to the Severn one. That would still be true even if I got in a canoe and took a picture every 50m (c500 pictures). Number of pictures is a rather minor measure, as it doesn't really reflect the relative importance of the two terms.
The whole point of the primary topic concept is when the potential harm to the majority (of readers) is more serious than the potenial harm to the minority (of readers), that should be reflected in the choice of names. The harm to the majority is in the form of an inconvenience and possibly frustration for obvious cases. There's also the risk of "pollution" from misplaced files in a primary topic category, although this won't occur if properly maintained. The harm to the minority is more serious, if they end up looking at the wrong topic without realising, cannot find what they do want, and possibly mild irriation at their term being demoted behind something else. As the harm to the minority is more severe, it is not about a simple majority of readers. The majority term should be much more important in all relevant contexts.
The potential harm to majority can be reduced (but not eliminated) if the effort is made to correct inward links from other WM projects. For instance, if/when this Wye is moved to one with (Severn) w:River Wye should be edited to point to the right place - users of Commons should act responsibly and change inward links ourselves, as opposed to leaving it for WP to sort out. If we do this properly, most of the "majority" gets to the right category immediately (not all of it, not everyone comes here from WP), reducing the harm and making the primary topic concept less important, if not totally irrelevant.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:44, 22 December 2011 (UTC)