User talk:Elkost/Archive4

Airports are not buildings

Regarding your edit in Category:Sofia Airport, please, notice that while airport terminals, airport towers etc. are buildings, airports themselves are not, and thus Category:Sofia Airport should not be placed in Category:Buildings in Sofia. This is also consistent with the root category Category:Airports which is not a sub-category of Category:Buildings. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 17:58, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Dear Apalsoa, you should be right, but it depends on convention... Look at Category:Airports by continent, which is a subcategory to Category:Buildings by continent. These interconnections should be first regulated in the supercategories and later - in subcategories. As we say, "A fish smells from the head, therefore, the change must start from there." Regards, --Elkost (talk) 19:25, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster's definition for a building is "a structure (such as a house, hospital, school, etc.) with a roof and walls that is used as a place for people to live, work, do activities, store things, etc.". So, a roof and walls are mandatory for a structure to be a building. In contrary, definition for an airport is "a place where aircraft land and take off and where there are buildings for passengers to wait in and for aircraft to be sheltered": it has buildings but it is not a building itself (no roof and walls).

Thanks for pointing out the incorrect parent categories of Category:Airports by continent. I fixed them. ––Apalsola ^{t • c} 20:56, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to you for the continent category! --Elkost (talk) 21:11, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Why are you removing my categories?

I have seen you have been removing some categories from my picture (see the edit). Can you please explain me why you decided to remove them? Or point me to a guideline where is written how to use these categories? Because I see that the picture is much harder to find now, without these categories. So I would like to understand why they have been taken away. This would also be helpful for future uploads. Thank you, Dreirik (talk) 11:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

@User:Dreirik. Dear Dreirik, the guidelines on categorization are in the page Commons:Categories (abbr. C:Cats). I will explain why I have removed some categories, which I had considered as unsuitable.

1. Category:Mosques in Syria & Category:Damascus - according to the Modularity principle in C:Cats (subsection Principles) these both categories are parent categories (supercategories) to the preserved most specific Category:Umayyad Mosque (otherwise these supercategories would be overpopulated and it would be difficult to find a propre picture);
2. Category:Qur'an - there is no evidence that sitting men are reading the Qur'an or that the picture is otherwise connected to the book;
3. Category:Koran - not in English (see subsection Category names of the same C:Cats);
4. Category:Bookshelf - in singular, not in plural as required by C:Cats (subsection Category names), but you can add the propre Category:Bookshelves. --Elkost (talk) 14:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Ruins

Not sure I agree with this since we have photos of it from before it was a ruin. - Jmabel ! talk 22:32, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

@Jmabel. No problem: for these categories the most important is the shown buildings to be in ruins today. If a building has been ruined and further restored, only photos of its ruins should be in these categories. --Elkost (talk) 06:46, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

But the picture of the building when it wasn't in ruins and the picture of a stained glass window from the building are (appropriately) in this category, which is simply a category for the building. So shouldn't you be making a separate subcategory for the ruins, if you want that condition to be at the category level rather than the photo level? - Jmabel ! talk 15:17, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Dear Jmabel, as I understand you, we should have "Ruins" categories, full of pictures of various remains, fragments, pieces, but separated from the very useful notion of the whole building; and if we get such general view pictures, we would be obliged to create new categories of higher/lower rank for the buildings. Such new categories are useless. Actually, if these categories were named "Ruined ...(building)..." or "...(Building)... in ruins", you would not start this discussion, I suppose. --Elkost (talk) 18:20, 14 July 2016 (UTC)