Category talk:Triple spiral

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


A semicircle is not a spiral... AnonMoos (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

IMHO difference is insignificant. Smooth curve (contrasted to angles in triskelions, which I not cleaned yet) is important. Do you propose to create a category: Triple semicircle indeed? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 21:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
Too bad that you seem to be venturing into an area which involves classifying images on mathematical/geometrical grounds, when you seem to have little practically useful knowledge of the mathematics or geometry involved. I propose to reclassify images which have curves, but not spirals as such, back into Category:Triskelion, since in the common usage of the word "Triskelion" in the English language, there is no requirement that a triskelion be angular. And it's rather strange that there are over a dozen images with indubitable triple mathematical Archimedean spirals which for some reason you haven't placed into this category... AnonMoos (talk) 04:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Why do you think that classification of images on Commons should be based on common usage of the word [] in the English language? Almost every chiral shape with 3-fold symmetry was classified as triskelion (i.e. "three legs"). I think that Commons should not use so expanded meaning of this word in the English language. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 07:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
And thank you for suggestion about Archimedean spirals. They are to be categorised of course. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 10:47, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, but the question "Why use common meanings of English words in categorization?" pretty much answers itself. And in common English usage, pretty much anything with three-fold rotational symmetry (but without reflectional symmetries) classifies as a triskelion, if it has outer protrusions and/or a clear internal spoke structure. (Things like the Borromean Rings, which have neither, are less obviously triskelions.) I'm sure you have very good intentions, but the combination of your diligence in classifying many images which don't contain spirals into "Category:Triple spiral" and your lackadaisicalness in classifying many images which actually do contain spirals into "Category:Triple spiral" does not necessarily inspire me with great confidence... AnonMoos (talk) 20:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)