Category talk:Buffers

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Incorrect use of term[edit]

Most of the items depicted in the images in this category are not buffers but rather buffer stops, sometimes known as stop blocks. Buffers are devices fitted to rail vehicles themselves to cushion the impact of two vehicles coming together. Geof Sheppard (talk) 07:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Buffer stops
    Buffer stops
  • Buffers
    Buffers

Our Czech-English dictionary claims that "buffer" is a term for both, vehicle buffer as well as the buffer stop, in British English. Indeed, the technical and visual similarity is obvious. In some types, the metal part of buffer stop is almost identical with the vehicle buffer. However, it is also true that in some of buffer stops, this part is completely missing – they can be a simple concrete block, transverse beam or bent rails without this part.--ŠJů (talk) 22:46, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Agree with Geof. This needs a rename (or more likely, a sub-cat).
Using an unsourced online Czech dictionary as a defining source for English langauge terms? Why do we even bother! Andy Dingley (talk) 15:24, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed reorganisation of this category tree[edit]

This category tree is a mess, covering multiple things at a range of different levels. To tidy it up I propose to reorganise the tree completely. My first suggestion is below. Some existing categories will be renamed while others will be created new:

(not all examples at every level are shown, and more granularity than country can be added where desirable). Pinging those people who commented on the initial suggestion that led to this proposal: @ŠJů and Geof Sheppard: . Other people should be notified as well but I don't know the best place to do that on Commons. This is just a first draft I'm looking for comments, suggestions and improvements before making any requests to implement anything. Thryduulf (talk) 16:38, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need to think about the very top levels more carefully. The logical parent for 'Rail vehicle buffers' is Category:Rail vehicle parts while for 'Buffer stops' it is Category:Rail transport infrastructure. This suggests that Category:Buffers should be just a disambiguation page. Geof Sheppard (talk) 06:14, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good suggestion actually - let's see what others think but I am leaning in that direction. Thryduulf (talk) 10:59, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Make it so! -- Herby (Vienna) (talk) 18:24, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not, that's an erroneous conclusion. Of course, rail vehicle parts should be linked with rail vehicle parts and rail infrastructure parts should be linked with rail infrastructure parts, as described above. But this fact doesn't implies that rail vehicles buffers should be not grouped with trail track buffers under their common umbrella category of buffers. Wiki categorization is not a simple hierarchy, but a structured multicriterial modular system. While a real paper card can only be in one drawer, the wiki category usually belongs to more than one parent category. There is no need to smash what is right and what works well just because some people cannot understand it.--ŠJů (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As regards the proposal itself:

  • Category:Buffer stops by location has a confusing name which collide with Category:Buffer stops by country.
  • As I noticed previously, I can see no feel a need to add a quite new criterium to sort images of buffers to two groups according to the fact they are in stations, or they are in sidings. Do you mean, stations buffers are in principle technically different from buffers used on sidings? And that any buffers used possibly outside the station and outside the siding should also be kept separately? I don't think so. We can tacitly assume that buffer stops (and dead-end tracks at all) are usually used in stations and that sidings are usually also connected in stations, ie in general, buffers can be perceived as a typical part of stations, but that is not a reason why outside-station buffer stops categorize apart.
  • Category:Buffer stops by type has a confusing name which collide with Category:Buffer stops by design. Really, the proposed "by design" means "by type", while "by type" means "by track type".
  • The proposed name Category:Rail vehicle buffers by type doesn't correspond with the proposed content. The subcategories differ not by type of the buffer, but only by type of coupling.
  • I think, disused (abandoned) buffer stops are a bit different from discarded buffers. Discarded means dismounted. Disused buffer stop is usually not discarded.

--ŠJů (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, no need to reorganize (and disrupt) all, it is sufficient to change just that, what needs to be changed.

  • rename "Station buffers" to "Buffer stops"
  • separate "Railway buffer stops" to a subcategory of "Buffers stops"
  • rename "Tram track buffers‎" to "Tram buffer stops" and subordinate under "Buffer stops"
  • rename "Funicular buffers‎" to "Funicular buffer stops" (and "Funicular vehicle buffers", if needed) and subordinate under appropriate parent categories
  • standard meta-categories (by country, by type) should be created as soon as they are needed, there is no need for a special discussion

There is surely not a valid reason to delete or smash the existing categories "Buffers" and "Buffers by country". The two main types of buffers (vehicle buffers and stationary buffer stops) should be their subcategories. --ŠJů (talk) 22:37, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category_talk:Buffers&oldid=676420130"