User talk:Andy Dingley

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Information icon.svg

This user is, of their own volition, no longer active on Wikimedia Commons.
This is not indicative of breaking any Wikimedia policies.

català | čeština | Deutsch | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | magyar | Հայերեն | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | Simple English | shqip | svenska | Türkçe | 中文 | +/−

2007 2008 October, 2009 April, October, November, December, 2010 January, February, March, April, May, June, July, August, September, October, November, December, 2011 2011 January, 2011 February, 2011 March, 2011 May, 2011 June 2011 2012 2013

TUSC token: a8da1de46b656525564eef5673644a79[edit]

/*Locomotives on preserved lines*/ consistency needed[edit]

Category:Monobloc engines[edit]

Why do you think this category requires {{CatCat}}? The name indicates a general category for that type of engine, and such a category could contain files. Maybe it should be named something like "Monobloc engines by part". --Auntof6 (talk) 19:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

No. This is explained thoroughly by the tag itself, and in the WP article. It was also explained to you a year ago, when you last went through the process of trying to remove the categorisation from this. This is a category requiring permanent diffusion to zero. No files should be added to this: not "no files should be left in here if added", but no files should be added in the first place. There is no useful categorisation of "monobloc engines" because there is no useful or consistent definiton of "monobloc engines": the term is multiply and conflictingly defined. Its purpose is to be a container for the set of sub-categories which do have workable definitions. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:30, 28 October 2016 (UTC)


Geo Swan (talk) 13:44, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Categorisation question[edit]

Hi Andy, while trying to fix the double categorisations in

it seems that Cat-a-lot has a problem to recognise the cats that are added via Template:Scans from 'Rankin Kennedy, Electrical Installations', 1903 (took a while for me to understand that, too). Why did you see the need to double-categorise those files in a redundant (only differently styled) category? And if you still think it's needed, how would you ensure the number of files in both categories be kept at par? --.js 09:03, 20 January 2017 (UTC) PS. Some of those files are also in Category:Electromechanical indicators & Category:Medical electrics & Category:Early telephone instruments, do you want to create the cats or remove the files from them? Also the above mentioned template has a code issue with displaying the "|other_version=" parameter, could you fix that? (see here). I don't find where the bug is. BTW: Thank you for contributing all those great scans! :-) --.js 09:23, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

There are a lot of those scans. There used to be more, but after I had thousands deleted just to annoy me, I no longer contribute here. As there are so many, they aren't catagorized manually, it's done through the template.
The template uses parameters (set on each upload) to get the year and volume right. If there is no other description, they're categorized into /undescribed as well. That's a workflow category, just to see which images still need descriptions adding.
As to the other descriptive categories, then these are appropriate descriptive categories and should be created. But that can take some effort for a large number of files.
You can do what you want with these categories and images, even delete them. I will not let myself worry about what happens to them, otherwise I have let the trolls win. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:27, 20 January 2017 (UTC)