Category talk:Tracks
|
|
Confusion about footprints, pawprints and tracks
[edit]It seems that this category hierarchy is confused. The main problem I see is the division between footprints, pawprints and tracks. The same kind of images are found in all three, and sometimes these are subcategories of each other, e.g. pawprints is a subcategory of footprints, which in turn is a subcategory of animal tracks, while pawprints and hoofprints also are direct subcategories to animal tracks. Also the separate category tree of snowtracks is problematic.
What about this structure under tracks:
- Footprints (individual footprints or individual groups of prints?)
- Human footprints (perhaps also longer tracks should go here?)
- Pawprints (with category see also to animal tracks)
- Hoofprints (with category see also to animal tracks)
- Animal tracks (longer tracks, not individual footprints other than in some subcategories)
- Bird tracks
- Fossile trackways
- [different species or species groups]
- Vehicle tracks
Or should we abandon the division between individual footprints and longer tracks?
What about footprints and tracks in snow? They could be a parallel hierarchy, either with a division snow(/sand/mud)/other or all the images in the main hierarchy and half of them also in the snow hierarchy. Is that useful? Or should we let that one go also?
"Rail tracks" should go to some other category, related to roads.
I find it strange that tracks are in the category Signs, under Signage, with mostly man made signs. Would their be some other main category related to nature? Animal feces, half eaten conifer coins, bite marks on wood and such signs should be collected in one category somewhere (where are those other signs, I find only the feces one? those pictures I can find seem to be categorized only by species).
--LPfi (talk) 13:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
Their should be a category "footpaths" or "pathways" to classify tracks referred to as "sentier" in French and other latin languages