User talk:Auntof6

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from User talk:Auntof6Bot)
Jump to: navigation, search

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Auntof6!

Rd232 (talk) 14:29, 26 November 2011 (UTC)


There is an endless issue with fly by visitors of little or no geographic or naming knowledge identifying things as Perth, Australia - no such thing exists, as there is more than one Perth in Australia (ok not as many Springfields as there are in the US) - your help with cats is appreciated - pity so few eds to keep up the basic maintenance tasks on things these days. thanks again JarrahTree (talk) 09:30, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for also for the removing the misplaced see also... JarrahTree (talk) 10:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

@JarrahTree: You're welcome. I appreciate your note. Working on geographical things is one of my favorite things to do here. I suspect that people from my country (the US) are among the biggest offenders in this regard: many Americans are not knowledgeable in geography of places outside the US, maybe even outside their own state. This kind of issue is why I've been arguing that the names of categories for populated places should all be qualified. --Auntof6 (talk) 10:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for responding. A relative used to live in the Toronto (north of your locale :) ) area, and in later years could not say any place name without qualifier London, England - as so many place names in Ontario were simply replica names from the UK/GB. In Australia on wp en we have had close to serious war over qualifiers/or not - I hate with a passion the idiocy that put Perth, Western Australia - to Perth. However some eds have almost come to very serious grief over the attempts to get rid of the primacy policy. I wait in hope JarrahTree (talk) 10:35, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Well, if you're interested, there are one or two current category discussions going on here about that issue. They started about specific individual places, but have grown to be about the more general case. --Auntof6 (talk) 11:17, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip JarrahTree (talk) 12:22, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Category:Historical images of Italy by photographer[edit]

Hi Auntof6. Can you stop please to change all what I do? I work hard on cats about old photographs of Italy, by author, by location, by monument; you follow me and nullify a lot what I've done laboriously. You know that I make a big work on historical images of Italy since years, so please, if you want to make big changes, please discuss first with me. Thank you. Best regards, --DenghiùComm (talk) 04:27, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

@DenghiùComm: Can you be more specific? Today I renamed some categories to have the correct names on metacategories. Was there something else? --Auntof6 (talk) 04:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
OK, I just saw the issue with the text on the category saying what you were going to work on next. That kind of thing doesn't belong on the category. You could put it either on the category's talk page or in your own userspace. --Auntof6 (talk) 04:46, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Of course I have nothing to say about the changing of category names that are incorrect or have a mistake. I have a basic level of English. BTW categories that are uncorrect named have to be deleted, not made a redirect. About the little text saying what I am going to work on next, could be a kindness towards me to leave it, since I work on category and not you. But this is nothing of importance. What really you had not to do was to remove the "Category:Historical images of Italy by photographer" by a lot of photographs categories of different photographers showing historical images of Italy. And you removed them only because the category names were not the same of the upper cat. Is this reasonable? It would have been better to look before the content of those categories. --DenghiùComm (talk) 08:22, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

D.C. / states[edit]

Nyttend's removal of D.C. from a "by state" category: I'd be interested in your opinion on this, since it's an area in which I know you've worked a bit. - Jmabel ! talk 15:41, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I approve of the edit. As you can see from Commons:Categories for discussion/2015/08/Category:Washington, D.C., I don't think DC should be categorized as a state. Although it can be considered a first-level subdivision of the US because it's not part of any other subdivision (the same is true of the territories), there are many differences between DC and a state. I'll let you read the discussion if you'd like more of my opinion. --Auntof6 (talk) 16:49, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Category:Jewish cemeteries in Bavaria[edit]

Please, before reverting blindly. Take a closer look at the category which has categories for each governement district. So it is clearly a metacat, because all entries belong to one district. I just try to categorize the entries so yout edit is not very helpful because at the end it will be a metacat anyway. Andy king50 (talk) 16:40, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

@Andy king50: To be a metacat, the category name would have to include words like "by government district" or "by district". It is not enough that it contains categories for each district, the category name must specify what the subcats are grouped by. If you look at the categories for the other states, you will see that they are not metacategories, either. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:00, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
"in Bavaria" is de facto the same and cannot by missunderstood. It ist absolutely common for german categories to have Metacategories "xyz in governement district". Please show evidence, that Metacategories must contain phrases "by government district" or "by district" - else it would be only your own view. Andy king50 (talk) 17:04, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure I understand you. I see other "in Bavaria" categories that specify "by district", for example Category:Hotels in Bavaria by district, and those are metacats because they say "by district". If the category name doesn't say what the grouping is, then it's not a metacat. This naming is explained at Commons:Meta category. You could use the {{categorise}} template if you want, which says that files should be in subcategories, but doesn't require it. --Auntof6 (talk) 17:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Galleries in category of categories[edit]

I see that you removed a gallery that we (from Commons:WikiProject Nature and conservation in India) had put in one of the sub-categories of the super-category that we have: Category:WikiProject Nature and conservation in India. This is a bit problematic for us because we've been holding several Wiki-workshops and events where we have gotten contributors motivated to contribute to this project showing them that such categories could be created to organise galleries of photos contributed by particular conservation/research organisations. For e.g., you seem to have removed Category:Media contributed by NCF from several tens/hundreds of images. If I understand right, your concern is that images were being directly placed under a category of categories. Is this really a problem? Could you please point me to guidance which says this? Secondly, if such is the case, how do we (from the Wikiproject) ensure that people are able to see galleries of photos in particular sub-categories? Let me know as this step is interfering with public messages that we have given to several new contributors and may discourage future contributions. Thanks! I ask this on behalf of User:Shankar Raman & myself and other members of Commons:WikiProject Nature and conservation in India. Prashanthns (talk) 05:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

@Prashanthns: I'm sorry if I caused you problems. If I understand you correctly, you are mentioning two issues here.
  • Issue 1: Removal of a gallery Can you tell me what gallery page you're referring to? Or were you referring to the files in a category as a gallery?
  • Issue 2: Removing files from Category:Media contributed by NCF I did that in line with the policy at COM:OVERCAT. The files I removed were already in subcategories of Category:Media contributed by NCF, so that policy says they shouldn't be in the higher-level category. After removing the files, the three remaining subcategories seemed to cover all possible files, so I then added the {{catcat}} template: that template was not there before I removed the files, so being a category of categories was not the reason I removed the files.
All that being said, it seems to me that the policy I mentioned above is more important for other types of categories than for this type, and I didn't take that into account at the time. Therefore, let me know if you would like me to put the files back in Category:Media contributed by NCF. If I need to get the information from my edit history, I can, but it would take me a while to do that and I won't have time for a day or two. If the files needed are all the files at all levels under that category, I could do that sooner and more easily. Let me know, and I apologize again for the problems. --Auntof6 (talk) 06:34, 20 February 2017 (UTC)