Category talk:Unidentified Lepidoptera specimens
Photos by Hsu Hong Lin[edit]
The disaster that happend to this category is a perfect example why Commons' upload tools should strongly encourage the use of image sets for bulk uploads. See Commons:Image sets#Relevance It is virtually never the right choice to throw a large number of images into a category that already exists. But this is the most extreme case I have ever seen. Three years ago this category was flooded with thousands of similar images. (It does not help, that all their names seem to start with "A".) Since then it is essentially impossible to find any other images in this category. (File:Butterfly4.JPG is one of the buried images.) Right now there are 10309 images in this category, and there is not even a feasible way to find out how many of them belong to this set.
I created Category:Moths on squared paper (photo series) and moved a few hundred images there, before I realized that there is no end in sight. (I am not sure that these are all moths, BTW. Maybe Category:Lepidoptera on squared paper (photo series) should be used instead.)
@Rudolphous: You made this gigantic upload. Can you tell your bot to move these images to a subcategory? Greetings, Watchduck (quack) 00:25, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hello Watchduck, for your information this category was much bigger. But Hsu Hong Lin is still in the process of identifying these moths. A couple of weeks ago I moved many photographs (around 2000) to their species name. Earlier I did also such updates. Of many species on Wikipedia these are the only photographs we have. The terms Moths is omitted on Commons for a long time because it is not clear enough. Many butterflies fly during night and many moths during daylight. Your square paper proposal can have again the opportunity to have images burried again so I'm moving them now into Category:Unidentified Lepidoptera specimens photographs taken by Hsu Hong Lin. Rudolphous (talk) 05:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
.jpg)
.jpg)
- Thank you. Now the 175 other images in this category can be found again, so the main problem is solved. But there is still the aspect, that these images form a set. They have more in common than just motive and photographer. Admittedly, in this case it would not be terrible to just ignore that. But I would prefer to keep them in one category, even when they are identified. BTW, could you ask Hsu Hong Lin what the grid size of the paper is? Watchduck (quack) 18:13, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- In this category only the "unidenfied lepidptera" are stored. The full set is huge - maybe even 50.000 images. Not sure if it makes sense to create a category for this. About the grid size. I think your assumptions are correct (checked a few species), but I don't have a flickr account to ask. Rudolphous (talk) 18:32, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you. Now the 175 other images in this category can be found again, so the main problem is solved. But there is still the aspect, that these images form a set. They have more in common than just motive and photographer. Admittedly, in this case it would not be terrible to just ignore that. But I would prefer to keep them in one category, even when they are identified. BTW, could you ask Hsu Hong Lin what the grid size of the paper is? Watchduck (quack) 18:13, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- I am not sure either. (This is not a clear case like Symmetry Blendings or Annotated regular polygons.) But the advantage would be, that it would make Photographs by Hsu Hong Lin more usable. Generally, this is not what image sets are for, but in this case it would be a useful side effect. So if these grid paper images can be identified by a bot, I recommend creating Lepidoptera on grid paper (photo series by Hsu Hong Lin). Watchduck (quack) 10:43, 11 September 2020 (UTC)