Template talk:MetaCat/i18n

Consensus

Please do not revert blindly, Cwbm. --Timeshifter (talk) 22:43, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Text should stay in small. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 07:41, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Many people will have difficulty reading the text. If they put the font/text size at a larger setting in their browser, then the box becomes even longer from top to bottom.

The box takes up too much space from top to bottom when there are 2 paragraphs. Combining the paragraphs shortens the length of the box from top to bottom. When all the text is in one paragraph there is no need to make any of the text small. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:44, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The small font is a compromise between having a not really helpful explanation of what metacats are and none. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 15:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Combining the two paragraphs into one paragraph solves the problem. --Timeshifter (talk) 15:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that the explanation is not good and it is doubtful that the explanation should be in the template. That's why it is in small print. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 16:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

As usual you did not reply to my point. You do not want to improve the various categorization templates. You ignore what I write in the talk pages for the various categorization templates, and you keep the poorly-worded templates rather than improve them. --Timeshifter (talk) 16:58, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

You said "solve the problem". I don't konw which problem you mean. You said "people have difficulties reading the text". That's true but the text is not important so people do not need to read it. So like I said: we can also remove the sentence. If that's what you prefer. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 18:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

If you have a better sentence then we can substitute it. But you still haven't addressed my point about the problem of the length of the template. You are not a native speaker of English. Maybe you don't understand what I am talking about. Please do not revert the template until you understand. If you want to edit the German translation of the template, then I wouldn't interfere. I believe German is your native language. --Timeshifter (talk) 05:49, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

So I don't understand English. I'm just a second class person then of course. I mean how can somebody who does not properly speak English dare to edit on commons. These people should get lost. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 06:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

No, I think you should use common sense. I know some French. I would not tell a native French speaker what is better French. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:22, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Help for creating new subcategories

I see no good reason to remove Commons:How to create new subcategories. It is linked via existing template text, and so it does not make the template longer.

Having a shorter template is something we all agree on (compared to the long 2-paragraph version).

If you want a German version of the page, Cwbm, then write one. The amount of text to translate is very small. --Timeshifter (talk) 07:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

There are a couple of reasons. One is in fact that the page exists only in English. This would not be an argument if it would make sense to translate it. But it does not for a couple of reasons. Here one of the central reasons is that it would be a waste of resources. Also [1]. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 07:32, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Maybe it would be a waste of your resources since you said you don't believe new editors should create subcategories. The link in your comment does not make sense here. Why did you link to my reply concerning your seeming way of giving orders instead of discussing things? --Timeshifter (talk) 07:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Because explicitly ordered me and in effect also ordered 20 other people to translate the 100 % redundant page you created. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 07:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I apologize if what I wrote sounded like an order. The page is not redundant. This short help page is very specific, and is what many new editors want and need to know right away.

There are many, many pages on the Commons that are not translated. --Timeshifter (talk) 08:01, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

So you think it is good that the page is not translated? --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 06:01, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to translate it. All this time complaining, and it could have been translated by now. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

So you are ordering me again to translate? --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 12:12, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

See the problem? You don't understand English well enough sometimes. "Feel free" is a request. I apologized previously if it sounded like an order before. But it wasn't an order then or now. So the problem is in your understanding of English. Which is why you have many of these problems in editing the English versions of various templates. --Timeshifter (talk) 08:54, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Commons:Categories

Commons:Categories

We agreed to the COM:CAT link elsewhere for another categorization template. The "What is a meta category" link is a necessary link, but it is not the overall category help page, Commons:Categories. --Timeshifter (talk) 06:11, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

We have not agreed on anything concerning this template. I don't see the necessity of the link here. But if you think it is you might want to argue for it. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 06:22, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

You agreed to it being on another categorization template, {{CatDiffuse}}. You said there (Template talk:CatDiffuse/en#End of the discussion) that a specific help page is not needed there, and that Commons:Categories is all that should be linked on {{CatDiffuse}}.

You include a specific help page link on this categorization template, {{MetaCat}}. But you do not link to the overall category guideline page, Commons:Categories. --Timeshifter (talk) 08:41, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Compromise

Here is a compromise:

This meta category should contain only other categories. Files should either be in the relevant subcategory or in the parent category. If necessary, additional subcategories may be created. What is a meta category? See also the overall category guideline page.

--Timeshifter (talk) 08:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

You can't just say this is a compormise accept it. We can talk about a compormise. But you have to give me confindence that you will respect it. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 10:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Will you accept the above template or not? --Timeshifter (talk) 10:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

It depends on what happens with the other templates. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 10:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

It is rude not to answer the question. --Timeshifter (talk) 10:21, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Answer is no. The problem of metacats is usually not that they contain too few subcategories. Often all sensible direct subcategories allready exist. The link to COM:CAT does not serve any spcific purpose here. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 11:29, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Not all "by country" subcategories have been created. There are many countries. I have created many "by country" subcategories for various nations. Many more are needed. So COM:CAT or Commons:How to create new subcategories is needed. --Timeshifter (talk) 11:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

But you create these pages from the country cat and not from the by country cat. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 11:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I said subcategory. See Category:Categories and Category:Categories by country. See also: Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:MetaCat. Many of those categories with the MetaCat template need many more subcategories. --Timeshifter (talk) 11:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

This template has not and can not have the function to advance the development of the cat system. This is just another burden you want to put on these templates that is close to being ridiculous. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 11:50, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

It is a categorization template. Sorry that you don't understand. Maybe if you get more experience here you might understand more.

You haven't replied to my point that many subcategories need to be created. Therefore there needs to be a link to a help page that explains to some people how to create subcategories. --Timeshifter (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

The creation of categories is not the main issue at the moment. There are nearly 1 million categories already and only 5 million files. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 22:05, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

A file can not be sub-categorized if the correct subcategory to put it into does not exist.

So the template needs to link to Commons:Categories#Creating a new category or Commons:How to create new subcategories. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:23, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Stop that generel blablabla. A file needs a whatever. You need to start to _prove_ you claims. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 07:23, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Please be civil. You are going against your own logic.

You agreed to Commons:Categories being linked on a similar categorization template, {{CatDiffuse}}. You said it at Template talk:CatDiffuse/en#End of the discussion.

Here you link to Commons:Naming categories#Categories by CRITERION (What is a meta category?). But that does not help categorize or subcategorize. It only describes meta categories.

This version is much more helpful to editors:

This meta category should only contain other categories. (What is a meta category?) Files should either be in the relevant subcategory or in the parent category. If necessary, additional subcategories may be created. For help see the overall category guideline page.

--Timeshifter (talk) 05:08, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

This version is much more helpful:

This meta category should contain only other categories. Files should either be in the relevant subcategory or in the parent category. (What is a meta category?)

--Cwbm (commons) (talk) 07:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposal

Why don't you edit this template, and I will edit Template:Resources? --Timeshifter (talk) 04:46, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

You don't realise that this is not a solution to the problem? --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 07:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Nothing's perfect. It would be similar to our agreement at Template talk:CatDiffuse/en#Proposal and new users. --Timeshifter (talk) 07:49, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

This is bullshit. But for the sake of peace I agree. But I warn you. We might get to a point where this does not work anymore. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 08:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Peace and love. ;) --Timeshifter (talk) 20:33, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Request

See Docu request: Template talk:Categorise/layout#New versions. Waiting at least 12 hours between reverts sounds reasonable to me. That means both of us though, Cwbm. --Timeshifter (talk) 07:15, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

You are not gonna wait t12 hours for your next revert so why should I? --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 07:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Your version stayed up for almost two days last time. I reverted and revised only a little while ago, and you almost immediately reverted. --Timeshifter (talk) 07:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

You are not gonna wait 12 hours for your next revert so why should I? --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 07:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

It is called an agreement. We both have been honoring our previous agreement from several days ago at Template talk:CatDiffuse/en#Proposal and new users. --Timeshifter (talk) 07:48, 29 October 2009 (UTC)