Category talk:Trees in Bangalore

Subcategories

initiated at User talk:Forestowlet as of April 10, 2014, kindly regards, Roland zh (talk) 19:03, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, some proposals, so you interested to establish: p.e. Category:Trees in Bangalore by month (or by India-related 'season'), Category:Trees in Bangalore in flower (instead by 'color') etc. btw: 'Lane Trees of Bangalore' is imho not a naming as used within Wikimedia Commons > "Street trees in Bangalore". Kindly regards, Roland zh (talk) 23:58, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for the suggestions. Ok, i was not aware of the naming convention. I will go ahead and create the category name as Street tree in Bangalore and will deprecate Lane Trees of Bangalore. As for the category of colors, i would like to maintain it as it is meant for a specific purpose. The purpose is to let a common man who gets fascinated by the flowers he sees in Bangalore to locate and identify the tree. There is nothing easier and better than the color of the flower for locating the tree. By month or by season may not fit in for all trees as there are tree which are perennially flowering ones which will not fit in into these categories. I have created the various categories in Trees in Bangalore for a specific purpose. The purpose is elaborated in User:Forestowlet. I am also pasting the comments i had put in my user talk page for reference here.

"Thanks Roland for the comment. There is a specific need for the categorization's that i am making. The need is elaborated in my user page clearly. Please check user:forestowlet. To put it briefly, my objective is to create a repository of images of trees and also to evolve it as a properly bucketed collection which can be used as a reference. The category for color is created to suit the second purpose. It will evolve into a category which later can be referred to see the flowering trees of bangalore based on color. This will make it easy for common man to locate and identify the tree. I thought about the category and the names and for example, the reason why i did not want ot put the trees into a category called Raman Reasearch Institute is because it is abroad category and anybody can put any content into this category. It dilutes my purpose. I want only trees of Raman research institute to be categorised and located by the discerning user. Some categories are empty because i am creating a kind of template and i am in talk with various other contributers who are going to start uploading images into these categories in large numbers. I am creating an FAQ for this and i am yet to finish on that. Let me know whether its still not making sense."

Also wanted to elaborate with some examples. The category created for Trees of IISc should contain specific photos of trees of IISC. After the re-categorization, i can see many pictures which are pictures of the campus which has some trees have made it into this category, It does not make it a candidate to be in this category unless the photographer is wanting the trees to be the focus. The pictures in the category are generic campus pictures which can very well reside in Indian Institute of Science category. I also see that a category called Trees of FRLHT has been deleted. Kindly get that back and i can expand if required. Request you to please get back all the categories. We can discuss and then decide deletion. Rgds --Forestowlet (talk) 07:13, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

{moved from your talk as reasons already are given quotation start:}

Hi Forestowlet, honestly i appreciate very much Wikimedians taking care of and/or respecting the existing category tree :-)
Maybe there's a tiny 'but': Are you really convinced, that there is a need to categorize additionally (as of today p.e.) Category:Trees in Bangalore by the colour of their flowers or establish p.e. a subcategory of trees at the numberours Bangalore lakes ??
imho by location in Bangalore may much more user-friendly.

In fact, there is much more than a handfull subcategories, of course just 'sub-locations' at Bangalore and around, but personally i don't think there's a need to establish one-file categories as p.e. Category:Trees of Raman Research Institute instead of (as of 9 April 14) missing Category:Raman Research Institute ;-)

Please reflex about much more categories to establish as the mentioned ones ... let's talk about and find a consense with other Wikimedians within Category talk:Trees in Bangalore (iniated) ...
btw: at least half a dozen categories were empty, therefore i added {speedydelete}. What about p.e. Trees in Bangalore by species instead of color ??

{moved from your talk as reasons already are given quotation end:}

{moved from my talk, as started here, quotation start:}

Hi, I just now saw that the categorizations have been modified and some images which are not of trees have made its way into the categories. For example the pic of Subway of IISc has no place in "Trees of IISc" category. Not sure how that has come about. Can we work out a best way of categorization together before making the changes? I am quite new to Wikimedia and am not full aware of the do/donts and hence feel free to ping me and inform me if you feel i am violating any norms/rules of categorization. We can discuss and arrive at a conclusion. I am working on Trees in Bangalore and sub categories with very specific and special focus. I am looking at specifically having only Tree images in all the categories under Trees in Bangalore and every sub category that i am creating is serving a specific purpose. I would also want the category of trees in lakes of Bangalore as there are a limited set of lakes in Bangalore and having a specific category for it makes a lot of sense from the perspective of visual documentation and and as well as for the ease of upload for folks taking pictures of lake trees. Hope you understand. Rgds Ajit User:Forestowlet

{quotation end}

Hi User:Forestowlet, thank you for your feedback and your comprehension; but we do not agree, p.e. within Wikimedia Commons specie-related categorization of "Trees in Bangalore" follows the rules of definition of "Trees" in general, therefore there are no additional or different rules for the content of a category on sublevel, i,e. the category "Trees in Bangalore" follows the same definitions as the root-category "Trees". In short: Wikimedia Commons defines the rules of categorisation and what media may be categorized on root hierarchy, and there is no special focus within a category. Kindly regards, Roland zh (talk) 11:31, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi User:Forestowlet, remarked that you 're-setted' my past re-categorizations not awaiting a 'consense' ... so trying to explain in other words by a 'longyear-experienced Wikimedian': Personally i have no problem with additional – as pointed before at User talk:Forestowlet as of April 10, 2014 – categories on lower levels as p.e. "Trees in Bangalore". But in general, on that level we have to handle with the same 'rules' definied on the root-level, p.e. "Trees". That's why 'instructions' for "Trees in Bangalore" remains the same as for "Trees" in general. Therefore absolutely no further 'instructions' have to be definied by a single Wikimedian for "Trees in Bangalore", imho these are not helpfull.

So you would like to re-fine the categorization of Category:Trees in general, please >discuss< at the level Category talk:Trees, thx and regards, Roland zh (talk) 12:15, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation, User:Roland zh. So i guess my basis purpose (which is elaborated in my user page) cannot be met if i remain in this category tree. So i guess i will have to create a new category itself which is not related to the parent trees. Kindly tell me whether that is the correct route? Its a pity that i am not able to use the existing one. Some placements still don't make any sense to me for example how can the image "Enterance to Tata auditorium IISc" be placed under Trees of IISc. IMHO, either the description or the file name should be descriptive of the intent of the image and this ideally should be there in Indian Institute of Science category. Just because the image has some trees, does not qualify it to be in Trees of IISc. However i leave it to you. Rgds Ajit -- Forestowlet (talk) 12:34, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi User:Forestowlet, your'e welcome :-) In short, referring to your past question: In fact, within Wikimedia Commnons we try to categorize the content of a media, i.e. what p.e. a photograph in fact is showing to the viewers. Sometimes or maybe often,t hat may differ from the media's description and/or name given by an uploader. In principle very simple, but at least for me not easy to explain ;-) For the file you mentioned, of course it may be also placed in a 'sub-category' p.e. "Tata auditorium" ;-) Sorry not having better explainations, and of course, for my bad English. Kindly, regards