User talk:Jim.henderson

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
  • Use the +comment tab to tell or ask me something

Fort George Hill Tunnel[edit]

Jim: I hope you had a great holiday season, and that you are well and completely healed from your wound earlier this year.

Just a quick note: the Fort George Tunnel is the one on the IRT #1; the north portal of it is right at the Dyckman Street station on that line. The 181st and 190th Street stations on the A line are a couple of blocks further westward, and there's no tunnel portal per se - the line ends underground at 207th St.

All the best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:00, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

Eek! I mistook IND for IRT! Shame, shame on me! Jim.henderson (talk) 02:51, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, but all the 1 train stations between the well photographed north portal and the not yet captured south one are in that tunnel, which suggests to me that they all belong in the category. Oh, and congrats on Category:Fort Tryon Jewish Center. I was too lazy to identify or hunt the "hanging building". Maybe someone can get there on a sunnier day. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:58, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

New York City commons category update[edit]

I suspect you've been moving the occasional image listed in Category:New York City, and you know I've been doing it. I'd just like you to know that tonight I brought the number of images in that category to Under 1000! As you can see there are still plenty of images that belong in Category:Governors Island, and its sub-categories, and I've considered a few subcats of Governors Island myself. ----DanTD (talk) 01:34, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

re: The Dime Savings Bank of Williamsburgh[edit]

Hey Jim, thanks for the photo upload to Wikipedia. Dime celebrated its 150th Anniversary on April 19, 2014.

Pierrepont Family Memorial in Green-Wood Cemetery[edit]

Jim: If you get out to Green-Wood Cemetery any time soon (I've never been there), could you keep it in the back of your mind to get some shots of the Pierrepont Family Memorial, designed by Richard Upjohn? I can't find any free or licenseable ones, and I'd like to add it to the article I just wrote on en:Hezekiah Pierrepont. I'd appreciate it (but don't freeze your butt off on my account). Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:00, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

As it happened I walked by the front gate ten days ago on a nearby errand. Certainly won't go tramping up a snowy, grassy hill until my minor wrist injury heals. Drat; probably looks good in the snow. Anyway in a few weeks I'll attend a family dinner at 65th Street, and with good weather will be glad of an excuse to exercise my recovered powers in a couple miles walk including slightly rugged terrain. It's a big cemetery, about the size of Prospect Park and with vaguer maps but I think the target is about here.
Object location 40° 39′ 12″ N, 73° 59′ 40″ W View this and other nearby images on: OpenStreetMap - Google Earth info
Many other memorials in the cemetery have artistic or historic interest; maybe I should look to buy a guidebook. Jim.henderson (talk) 12:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Coincidentally, it turns out that I may have to go out to the Greenwood Heights area of Brooklyn, not too far from the cemetery, to get some additional shelves for my kitchen cabinets. I may or may not be able to try and get a shot - it depends on whether I'm by myself or with my wife, what the temperature is, etc. I'll keep you updated. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:41, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
@Jim: I was able to take shots of the Pierrepont Memorial yesterday, so there's no need to go to Green-Wood on my account. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:48, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
P.S. you were a bit off on the location of the memorial, it's at approximately (hard to tell because of the tree cover in the Google Earth image)
Object location 40° 39′ 13.86″ N, 73° 59′ 37.09″ W View this and other nearby images on: OpenStreetMap - Google Earth info
. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:55, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

Image re-use[edit]

Hi Jim, What are the requirements around re-use of your images for presentation purposes?

I have sent several thousand pictures, and each has a license box according to Commons:Copyright tags. The majority are CC0; some are something else. All may be reused without notifying me or asking me or paying me. Many people who reuse any Commons picture like to credit both Wikimedia Commons and the photographer. That's a nice thing to do. I also would like it if they put a notice here in my talk page, though nobody has.
Some of my pictures actually require crediting me. A few are labeled as Public Domain. Even if you falsely claim to be the author of those, you aren't violating my rights, though of course a lie is still a dirty thing to do and you might be violating someone else's rights. Jim.henderson (talk) 03:56, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
I have seen perhaps a dozen of my pictures used with credit in various websites including neighborhood newspapers, and somewhat fewer without. Since the credit is the main way the credited uses came to my attention, I figure the uncredited ones greatly outnumber them. Either way, these uses don't violate my rights, under the release I gave for most of my pictures. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:30, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Category:Audubon Terrace[edit]

I notice that this cat belongs to Category:Archer M. Huntington, which belongs to Category:Hispanic Society of America, which in turn belongs to this cat. Can that be right? Thanks a lot. Vzeebjtf (talk) 05:40, 3 March 2015 (UTC) On further inspection I see there is a whole category of categories like that, so the answer must be yes :). Vzeebjtf (talk) 07:32, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

Gravely I must have sinned, for I seem to have been punished by being appointed expert on New York category loops. Anyway, indeed such circularity is a bad thing. Someone cut another loop involving these cats last winter, but either another one grew or one survived. This will require studying the man and his connections to the place and institution. This will indicate a resolution by proper diffusion or plain cutting or perhaps a lateral link. Pleasant task, for which I hope to find time today or tomorrow. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:30, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Fixed. I just reversed the category relationship between Category:Archer M. Huntington and Category:Hispanic Society of America. Sorry to rob you of a pleasant task :). Vzeebjtf (talk) 17:08, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Splendid; thak you. If the likes of you and our friend @Epicgenius: take over the major cat wrangling, I can tend to geotagging which somehow is attractive for me. And if our friend @Beyond My Ken: gets more company in that field, I can just process my own photos. Always we have more for the thoughtful to do, than thinkers to do it. Jim.henderson (talk) 21:35, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't really see anything that needs to be done. Can you point me in the right direction? Epic Genius (talk) 02:32, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

If I remember correctly, Huntington was the force behind the building of the entire Audubon Terrace complex, which included buildings for already-existing organizations, but he also founded the HSA, which didn't exist before that time, and was created around Huntington's collection. The "circularity" comes about because of the nature of Huntington's relationship with these institutions. I, myself, have absolutely no problem with this kind of corss-hierarchical relationship between categories (I know Jim disagrees with me). HSA is part of Huntington because he founded it, but is also part of Audubon Terrace because it's physically part of that complex. Audubon Terrace is part of Huntington because he was the prime mover behind it. This makes perfect sense to me, because I'm not hung up on the notion that the "category tree" has to be a strictly hierarchical one. That idea is hardly revolutionary: think of a corporate tree which is primarily hierarchical, but also has dotted lines presenting other relationships that cross hierarchical lines to show responsibility upwards or elsewhere that is normal, or relationships sideways into other departments. Human relationships are complex, and there's no reason that our category system can't reflect that complexity -- but that's an argument which, although entirely correct, I know will not be acceptable here, so you folks go ahead and figure out what makes sense to you. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:40, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

The way the cats regarding HSA and Audubon Terrace stand now is completely consistent with what you wrote. Vzeebjtf (talk) 09:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC) What you're saying is that the cat structure mirrors the real-life relationships, which legitimizes the over-categorization. I came to the same conclusion myself. I do think, however, that over-categorizations should always have a specific justifying reason, as in this case. Vzeebjtf (talk) 10:10, 5 March 2015 (UTC) (The circularity was a different problem, now eliminated.) Vzeebjtf (talk) 10:25, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
I understand the issue now. I guess that since Huntington comes first, his category should be the parent category, and the HSA category the child. Epic Genius (talk) 14:33, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, we're dealing with an inadequate tool. Neat, regular hierarchical trees work well enough in the encyclopedia but that's partly because they just aren't very important there. Here, we get our nose rubbed into the fact that the world mostly doesn't want to fit into a neat, regular hierarchy. So, we fuss and change or mind and insert work arounds such as lateral links. Real Photo sharing sites use a non hierarchical atomic tagging system with a search engine that can find reliably relevant hits for searches like "Manhattan Huntington Statues 1934-2012" even though a million pictures are tagged as Manhattan but the ones we want are tagged as "National Hispanic Institute". I imagine a smart programer could bolt on such a search engine to Commons, and devise a quick, semiautomatic way to make and insert the best tag templates. However, with our developers mostly working for free, I expect this to be a low priority. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:04, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you![edit]

Hi Jim - thanks so much for taking some shots of the MoMA show "This is For Everyone" this week. Creative Commons will use one or more of those shots in an upcoming blog post (@, and I also know that thousands and thousands of people in the Creative Commons global community will appreciate getting a better sense of what that exhibition is all about. Can't thank you enough! JayWalsh (talk) 17:16, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

I am pleased that you say so. Belatedly looking at my uploads, I'm appalled by the obvious uselessness of some and disappointed at others, but offer the excuse that my studies, such as they are, have been in outdoor and architectural work. Anyway nobody's demanding their money back, so I can chalk up the failures as inexpensive lessons to be applied to future pictures. Jim.henderson (talk) 21:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
They were great! We really liked this one for the post. It was also posted on Medium. Thanks again! JayWalsh (talk) 17:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Neighborhoods in Yonkers[edit]

User:Beyond My Ken wants to delete your categories for Category:Northwest Yonkers, New York, Category:Northeast Yonkers, New York, Category:Southwest Yonkers, New York, and Category:Southeast Yonkers, New York. His reason seems plausible, but they should stand as placeholders until they can be moved to more selected categories. ----DanTD (talk) 01:57, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Sorry Jim, I didn;t know these were your cats.

No "placeholder" is needed. Just create the actual neighborhood name category. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:18, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Jim: Here's a map of Yonkers' neighborhoods. It looks like I was wrong regarding NW, NE,SW & SE which are actually given as neighborhood names: Counter-clockwise from, about 10:00, the neighnborhoods are
  • Northwest Yonkers
  • Getty Square
  • Ludow, and above it
    • Park Hill, above it
    • Nodine Hill
    • Southwest Yonkers (these last two are directly east of Getty Squre
  • (returning to the clock, to the east of Ludlow) Lincoln Park, and above it
    • Dunwoodie, above it
    • Bryn Mawr
  • {returning to the clock, to the east of Lincoln Park) Southeast Yonkers
  • (still moving counter-clockwise) Northeast Yonkers
  • Colonial Heights
  • Crestwood
  • {now jumping over NE Yonkers to the next area to the left) Homefield
    • (south of it) Runyon Heights (and south of that is Bryn Mawr
  • (back to the west of Homefield) Nepara Park

Sixteen neighborhoods. Since I depopulated the NE, NW, SE and SW neighborhoods, what do you want me to do? Were these the valid categorizations in line with these neighborhood, or are they, as I thought at the time I moved them, only geographic decriptions pf the general area?. If you want me to restore what you did, I'll be glad to do that. Please let me know, Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:49, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Blest if I know. I'm usually confused about neighborhoods that have no authoritative existence, and biking in Yonkers I've often gotten lost anyway. Along the way I learned that Yonkers people often use this quadrant system, and it seemed a simple way to thin out the crowded municipal category without tedious study. When my fellow cat wranglers, and you two studious fellows in particular, tackle such questions, you usually do a better job than I could even if I were to pay attention. As it happens, my attention is especially scarce these few days, as I led a small group ride yesterday, intend to mount up in another hour to join the massive 5 Boro Tour, and will spend tomorrow in Essex County NJ where municipal boundaries take care of such questions except in Newark. And later in the week, coaching new Wikkans at Channel 13's headquarters. So on this question, I'll be pleased with whatever comes from fitter minds than mine. Restore the quadrants as an intermediate level, or leave them as abolished. Those are the choices I've guessed at. Minor point, though I wouldn't have a strong opinion even if I had time, this is the kind of change that ought to be proposed a day or two in advance in case someone does have an opinion. Jim.henderson (talk) 11:26, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, just to let you know, I brought the other three back. ----DanTD (talk) 20:42, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
That's good. Please be careful when populating them to do so on the basis of the Yonkers neighborhood map, the URL for which I cited above. Although the names of the "geographical" neighborhoods roughly correspond with the geographical descriptions, they're not exactly the same. The neighborhood "Southeast Yonkers" is not in the southeast corner of Yonkers, for instance, "Ludlow" is, and two neighborhoods -- "Crestwood" and "Colonial Heights" -- are farther north and east than the majority of "Northeast Yonkers". So please do not asssume that because a place is in the northeastern part of Yonkers it is necessarily in the neighborhood "Northeast Yonkers", etc. If you can't identify exactly in what neighborhood a place is located, I suggest just leaving it in the main cat and allowing someone else who may know the aea better to determine it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:47, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes, and I'd love to find more stuff from Crestwood and Colonial Heights, as well as other more specific neighborhoods. Has anybody considered the houses that were once the former stations of the Park Hill Incline? ----DanTD (talk) 01:57, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


Commons-emblem-issue.svg Category:Southwest_Yonkers,_New_York has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.

If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.

In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | עברית | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Polski | Português | Русский | +/−

Basvb (talk) 13:38, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Chevra Linas Hazedek Synagogue of Harlem and the Bronx[edit]

Since I have plans to add more picture to the gallery of Morrison Avenue – Soundview (IRT Pelham Line) on my next trip to the NYC Tri-State area in mid-summer, I thought that while I was in Soundview, I'd grab a shot or two of the Chevra Linas Hazedek Synagogue of Harlem and the Bronx, which is listed on NRHP. From what I remember, you went to Soundview when you took some pics of Starlight Park a couple of years ago. I took a Google Street View scan of that and I noticed the synagogue had a Christian Cross over the sidewalk. Do you know anything about this? Did some church buy the synagogue out or something? --DanTD (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

No idea. I was in Port Morris and Melrose on Saturday, but haven't crossed or even seen the Bronx River in weeks. I'll spend today and tonight downtown (late already for McSorley's) and tomorrow at Adam's barbecue in New Brunswick, and the next day probably in Upper West Side and Harlem, but I'll see if I can find time for a Bronx visit during the week or at least some web searches. And perhaps we'll be able to meet during your visit. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:06, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Copyright violation of public art?[edit]

Hi Jim, wanted to get your guru expert photog advice here. I took pictures of some public sculptures near MoMA after the editathon. I uploaded them to the Commons but they have just now been flagged for copyright violation. I thought if I took the picture it was okay. Here's the link -- there are 4 of them: User_talk:BrillLyle#File:SEED54_by_Haresh_Lalvani_01.jpg. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 20:58, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

✓ Jim.henderson (talk) 22:01, 3 September 2015 (UTC) Alas, no FoP in USA

Unidentified Location in NYC[edit]

It's kind of familiar. Got a location for this old house?

Your welcome about my location for an alleged "Unidentified Location in New York City." But now I've got a problem with another one. I think this looks like it's somewhere in Fort Tryon Park, but if I'm wrong, it still looks like something from the Upper West Side. Oh BTW, I'll be in the Tri-State Area about two weeks from now. ----DanTD (talk) 17:48, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

The moment I saw the house, I said, "Fort Green Park!" Then I checked my own pix and no, this is a proper house, even a mansion, more than twice as big in each dimension. I know the parks of Manhattan pretty well by biking through them, and this does not ring a bell. Fort Tryon Park is the least familiar of them for me, being a dead end for a biker, but I don't recall any lawn this big there, nor a large, Greek Revival house.
From vegetation the season seems to be late winter / early spring . . . Oh. Obviously it's got EXIF, and it says late March. Duh; how can anyone be so smart and so dumb at the same time? And it says early afternoon, which by shadows would make the camera heading due north or slightly west of north. This is consistent with the distant water and hills being the Hudson and Palisades; at the moment I can't think of another nearby location where a similar heading would produce a similar background. Relying on this rusty chain of logic brings us north of the Harlem River, where my wheels less often roll. Wave Hill is the only ostentatious old estate I know in the western Bronx, whose two houses are similarly grand but not at all Greek. So, the rusty chain leads to the grand old mansions in Yonkers and beyond. Sunnyside and Lyndhurst are also not Grecian, but I could easily fail to know about other candidates, and of course the water doesn't even have to be the Hudson River.
Category:Media needing categories as of 27 April 2015 still has many remnants of Wikiphoto contests of several years ago; perhaps there's a record somewhere on-Wiki of what the various target numbers mean. With that, we could pin down many vaguely or wrongly categorized pictures.
Middle September has no scheduled Category:Wikimedia New York City events but when a well respected Wikkan visits we can probably scare up two or three for dinner or something. Every Saturday afternoon I lead a free bike tour from an Upper East Side bike shop. Strong riders become impatient because it's slow, with frequent stops for me to lecture about the General Slocum disaster or Third Avenue El or, umm, the Category:Evelyn Nesbit scandal went over well, the one time I did it. The last three Sunday mornings of September I intend to bike up to White Plains on the Bronx River Parkway when it's closed to cars. That will be more vigorous. Hmm, I ought to visit Dover, Connecticut and Tarrytown for photos of situations that won't go on for much longer.
Oh. en:Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC is Sept 15, two weeks from yesterday. Last time, tourists from Mexico and Finland were there. We will similarly welcome a visiting Floridian. Jim.henderson (talk) 22:00, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

John Howard (public health administrator)[edit]

hi, nice photo; nice to meet you at wikiconference usa. hope you don't mind the ad hoc category maintenance. i find adding a person category for public people is helpful for linking to wikipedia and wikidata, but we don't have a systematic process for photo subjects. cheers. Slowking4Richard Arthur Norton's revenge 12:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Sure; @Slowking4:, Commons in general has so many inadequately categorized pictures that we needn't worry terribly about how it really ought to be done. I took few pictures, daunted by the task of remembering who everyone was and what topic was at hand. We'll get much of it straightened out in coming weeks, and perhaps as usual much will remain difficult to find because we didn't properly describe and categorize. For me, I returned home and found my self pretty much hitting the ground running. Errands will probably keep me busy on the single off days between now and our Thursday Guggenheim edit-a-thon and our all-weekend openhousenewyork photo contest. Jim.henderson (talk) 20:18, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Open House New York Weekend cat wrangling[edit]

The photo contest didn't make me as busy on the weekend as I expected. However, it has produced a big crop of good pictures, providing me much to do anyway. I have dropped my diffusion work on old pictures in Newark and various other places until the ones in Category:Open House New York Weekend 2015 are pretty much properly sorted. I expect peak time of adding pictures will be Saturday, since the deadline is midnight that day.

The photography is mostly far above our, or at least my, usual standard, but just about all contestants are new to Wiki, don't know beans about categorizing, and probably never will. The Manhattan subcat is the biggest, and I figure it ought to be subdivided at the same lines as our Manhattan Landmarksand NRHP categories. It's sort of a Commons standard or convention. Two of the other boros are also growing quickly, and I wrongly named the Bronx cat. Hmm, come to think of it, maybe justice calls for me to be the one who fixes that particular mess. Jim.henderson (talk) 00:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Jim: I don't know what your position was in relation to the open house, but if you're involved in the future, and are placed to make suggestions, you might let the photographers know how much easier it is to categorize the images if their titles and descriptions contain the name of the subject matter, as well as their own more artistic titles. I do agree with you that the quality of the images is very good, so it would be nice if people had easier access to them by having them in the proper cats. Best, Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:13, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

I was only peripherally involved, @Beyond My Ken:. @Pharos:, President of WMNYC did most of the negotiating and coordinating and I did none. Participants did not have to sign in ahead of time or go to a central place. Presumably, most learned of the contest from the OHNY Weekend Website and Page 2 of the widely distributed brochure which pointed them to that site, which said photos should

“Be properly labeled in the “description” field with the name of the site or tour in which the photo was taken. Photo descriptions that do not name the site will not be eligible.”

Seems to me, we got a high degree of compliance on that. Telling them about categories strikes me as useless, with wikioutsiders. Maybe that paragraph can say something about filenames next time, since many names are indeed too impressionistic, or plain silly. Anyway, thanks for your help today. Tomorrow, Sunday I expect to be offline most the day, and probably swamped trying to handle new pictures the next few days, depending on how much further help we get.

No, I agree that catesucgories are probably too esoteric, but getting the broad description in the title and a more specific one in the "Information" box - with the name of the place, location, and other useful info -- would be helpful. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
BTW, having a "Categorized" sub-category in each of the sub-cats (Manhattan, Bronx, etc) would be helpful in keeping track of what's been done and what hasn't been done.. Once all the images have been categorized, and the borough category is empty, they can be moved back into the borough category and the "uncategorized" sub-cay can be marked for deletion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:19, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Boy, that was a convoluted statement, I hope it made sense. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:20, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Heading for the Bronx pretty soon, so I'll be hasty. We got a great success in sweeping in better pictures; probably nil in recruiting new regular contributors. The OHNY people were terrific; had at least a hundred bright people at the various venues. So, it didn't turn out an equal partnership; instead they pulled us behind their mighty engine.
We could create OHNY cats for each venue, like "OHNY 2015 at City Hall" though I started out making subcats mostly just for cutting a huge category into manageable bites. My tentative plan was to cut them a little finer but not all the way to the subjects and, after a few weeks, turn the OHNY cats into hidden categories. Umm, Oh, I see now that you mean subcats to indicate the status of pictures, as finished and unfinished. That's a better idea than the conclusion I jumped to. Haven't time to pick holes in that idea, but I'll think about it on the road. I've got no more half baked ideas; ta-ta. Jim.henderson (talk) 12:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
All right, got myself all worn out chasing a woman half my age. Eventually she seemed tired of the game and, in a different sense, so was I, so I bade her go up Hutchinson River and Pelham Bay Parkways with our few thousand friends while I continued alone down Westchester Avenue and up Kingsbridge Road. After thirty miles bicycling, a subway ride and few hours restful cat wrangling, I'm ready to think a little.
The idea of status cats is a good one and maybe we'll incorporate it at the beginning, next time. Now, my estimate is we are about half way through the categorizing process, and introducing a new theory midstream will produce more tangle than clarity. Could be worse. Indeed, our previous "Category:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan" efforts went much more badly, producing great numbers of poor pictures badly sorted, which is why we haven't done that kind of thing again in the past few years. That's enough thinking for tonight; we'll probably discuss the OHNY adventure at the Wednesday evening WMNYC meeting on 14th Street. Jim.henderson (talk) 01:32, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
My own process has been to add the OHNY borough categories and the topical categories at the same, which is a sort of informal way of marking status (only the "checked" images have the borough categories). I think we've pretty much gone through them all now with at least basic topical categories (i.e. which building it is), and I've also gone through the ones that the both of you, Beyond My Ken and Jim.henderson, have sorted by borough too, to ensure these have the basic topical categories (which you are usually better at sorting than I). Of course, these is always additional categorization that could be done - several of us have started new categories for different buildings during this campaign, and it strikes me that we would also benefit from having a stronger system of Category:Architectural elements in New York City.--Pharos (talk) 14:54, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Yes, the three of us seem to have done most the sorting. As usual with wikiness, nothing is ever really finished as someone can always come along with another idea of sorting or reconciling various local trees with national or world ones, or a need to subdivide a category when it becomes overstuffed. Meanwhile we all check each others work. The lack of overall assignments or even progress lists causes overlaps, which is maybe a good thing, and omissions which tends to be a fairly small bad thing. And thanks to both of you for catching some of my errors and omissions in the usual wiki way. Oh, am I the one who decides it's time for another Manhattan regional subcat? So, that will be a few hours from now. Jim.henderson (talk) 17:59, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Done. Daytime I intend to make the probably last split of Manhattan. The remaining square, a bit over 2 miles on a side, can be approximately halved at either 34th Street or 5th Avenue. Seeing no precedent in the Landmark or Register categories, and mildly disliking making individual target cats in this tree, leaves halving. I'm leaning towards 34th. Any opinions? Jim.henderson (talk) 02:06, 27 October 2015 (UTC)