User talk:Andy Dingley

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 * 2014 * 2015 * 2016 * 2017 * 2018 * 2019 * 2020 * 2021 * 2022 * 2023

DenHelderyear

Since you made one of these templates and commented on my talk page before, I will ask you. Is one of these a duplicate? Template:DenHelderyear & Template:DenHelderYear I have no understanding of these templates so if something is redundant please fix it.

Also, can you fix the year sorting in this cat: Category:Den Helder by year they sort like this: 2000, 2001, 2011, 2002, 2003... This means 2011 doesn't end up in Category:Den Helder in the 2010s but in Category:Den Helder in the 2000s.

Thanks --Larshei (talk) 09:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

The 2011 issue is fixed by correcting the input variables on the page. Kind Regards. Peli (talk) 11:17, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Please use sub-categories

---

When categorising files, please avoid placing them into several categories that are directly linked within the same tree (e.g. a parent category and a child category – like Category:United Kingdom and Category:London), to prevent over-categorization of files and over-population of categories. Usually, only the most specific category should be used. See Commons:Categories for more details. Thank you.

Category:Scans from 'Lord Montagu of Beaulieu, Cars and Motor-Cycles, Vol III', 1928

Hi, Any idea what's this about? It was in Category:Undelete in 2024, but it is currently empty. Yann (talk) 18:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

And you wonder why I have such a low opinion of WM admins?

This is when I was threatened by The Cabal (the one at Wikipediocracy) because their good friend the Duke of Manchester had taken against me. See WP:AfD/Alexander Montagu, 13th Duke of Manchester, and other locations too tedious to enumerate. I was given a choice: delete pretty much everything I'd uploaded here, or be banned. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:43, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm restoring them now. --Rosenzweig τ 19:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

[1] [2] Andy Dingley (talk) 22:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Plenty more of these too:

Commons:Categories for discussion/2013/07/Category:Scans from 'Gloag, Time, Taste and Furniture', 1925

Category:Scans from 'Gloag, Time, Taste and Furniture', 1925

{{Scans from 'Gloag, Time, Taste and Furniture', 1925}}

Andy Dingley (talk) 02:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Sóller tram

[3] I don't see why should here be an exemption from COM:OVERCAT, as the image is still easy to find via FS car №4. You are editwarring for void reasons, quite an unbecoming behaviour, not the first time from you. Regards --A.Savin 12:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

I have given you reasons already: this is the best (and almost the only) clear image we have (had!) in Category:Sóller-Port trams with bow collector. But you prefer to 3RR edit-war instead, just citing OVERCAT over and over, and casting aspersions on the editor, not the edit. But of course, I did have the temerity to disagree with you on an admin board just before your last edit. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

An exemption from OVERCAT only makes sense if it helps to find it on search of a certain subject depicted. A classical example is what described on Commons:Categories#Exception_for_images_with_more_categorized_subjects with the Merkel example. However this isn't the case for the photo of Sóller tram with bow collector. If you sort it additionally into the Category:Sóller-Port trams with bow collector, the only effect is that someone who is clicking on this category sees the photo straightaway. But someone who is clicking on this category also sees the subcat (Category:FS car №4) and can click and see the images therein. That means, someone who is searching for images of Sóller trams with bow collector will easily find the Category:Sóller-Port trams with bow collector, the Category:FS car №4, and all the photos of Sóller trams with bow collectort that are correctly categorized and available on Commons. No need for overcategorization. --A.Savin 13:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

First convince me that this is about content at all, and it's not just you taking offence at lèse-majesté against an admin and anyone disagreeing with you, same as you always do, and why your judgement is regarded so poorly by editors here. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't like your repeated personal attacks, so I'm not commenting here anymore. --A.Savin 03:32, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

SmallCat

Can you direct me to a Commons policy or guideline on SmallCat. I know where it is in Wikipedia but I can't find the equivalent in Commons. Thanks Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

• Hmmm, maybe there isn't one? We are certainly poor at cross-linking these policies, even as contrasts. BTW, WP no longer has SMALLCAT (which was only ever a guideline, not a formal policy).

Is this in reference to something specific? Sensible responses to specific cases are always more important than vague handwave 'policies' (OVERCAT being the absolute worst). Andy Dingley (talk) 22:35, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

My question relates to an editing dispute with User:Микола Василечко about ecclesiastical parishes in Ukraine. See also the discussion on that user's talk page here. I think that it fair to say that he is refusing to address the substantive point. In my view, there are not enough members to justify the grand scheme that he has created. There are multiple levels of state administrative territorial entities; at bottom, we get to a couple of parishes in a single city. At best, this warrents a "by region/oblast" category structure. As I wrote on his talk page, "It does not need sub-categorisation by different levels of territorial administration. If other parishes are created later, we can look at this again. Right now, there is no need for such micro categorisation.". His present parent / child structure is:

Category:Ecclesiastical parishes in Buchach Hromada -> Category:Ecclesiastical parishes in Chortkiv Raion by hromada ->Category:Ecclesiastical parishes in Chortkiv Raion -> Category:Ecclesiastical parishes in Ternopil Oblast by raion -> Category:Ecclesiastical parishes in Ternopil Oblast -> Category:Ecclesiastical parishes in Ukraine by region -> Category:Ecclesiastical parishes in Ukraine

What do you think? If SmallCat existed, would this be an example of it? Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

You create Category:Ecclesiastical parishes in January 8, 2024. Until now, this category was not. Was a category Category:Parishes. There was a discussion without consensus. Why did you create new metacategory? --Микола Василечко (talk) 17:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

• Probably not. One of the classic exceptions to SMALLCAT (which doesn't exist anyway) has been for when the category represents an obvious intersection between notable categorizations, even when that then gives a very small number of members for that intersection. Very often this is <foo> in <location>, where <location> is a subdivision such that a useful level of some of them will contain multiples (i.e. "parishes by street" would not be useful). We don't then start excluding the others because they only contain one example.

Beyond this I cannot say, as my knowledge of Ukrainian geography isn't strong enough. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:47, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but can you please clarify what "propably not" means? Is the structure as created excessive? Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:31, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

• Sorry, but I can't really judge the structure, I don't know enough about these terms as they're used locally.