Category talk:Anonymous people of Spijkenisse
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Redundant Cat see also?
[edit]Estopedist1 How is {{Cat see also|Events in Spijkenisse|Sports in Spijkenisse}} redundant? I see no connection/link/parent category with this category, while a lot of files (not all) in these two categories also show anonymous people of Spijkenisse. --JopkeB (talk) 19:55, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- @JopkeB: I checked all categories with the name <Anonymous people of ...> (about 70 categories) and no one use such cat-see-also solution. Your suggested solution is unique and redundant; in brief: the relation is too weak--Estopedist1 (talk) 20:08, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: There is no rule that says that you only may use "See also" if at least one other category with the same name uses it. One main goal of Commons is that visitors who are not familiar with the category structure, may quickly find files they are looking for. "See also"'s may help thereby. I use it where ever I see a relationship and there is no direct connection within the category structure. I think the template is made for that reason. Yes, here it may be a unique solution, but not redundant, because (1) there is no direct relationship within the category structure and (2) there are indeed a lot of files in the two See also categories that show anonymous people of Spijkenisse. Someone who is looking for files about (anonymous) people of Spijkenisse should look there also and may not think about them themselves. You still did not proof the reduncancy nor the weakness of the relationship here. --JopkeB (talk) 04:24, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- @JopkeB: please clarify the relation between anonymous people, sports and events of Spijkenisse.--Estopedist1 (talk) 06:13, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: There is no rule that says that you only may use "See also" if at least one other category with the same name uses it. One main goal of Commons is that visitors who are not familiar with the category structure, may quickly find files they are looking for. "See also"'s may help thereby. I use it where ever I see a relationship and there is no direct connection within the category structure. I think the template is made for that reason. Yes, here it may be a unique solution, but not redundant, because (1) there is no direct relationship within the category structure and (2) there are indeed a lot of files in the two See also categories that show anonymous people of Spijkenisse. Someone who is looking for files about (anonymous) people of Spijkenisse should look there also and may not think about them themselves. You still did not proof the reduncancy nor the weakness of the relationship here. --JopkeB (talk) 04:24, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1: As I stated in reason (2) up here, the files/photos in Category:Events in Spijkenisse and Category:Sports in Spijkenisse also show a lot of anonymous (ordinary) people of Spijkenisse. Just as files in other "See also categories" may show related files. --JopkeB (talk) 08:03, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Since there were no objections after 1-12-2021 I concluded that {{Cat see also|Events in Spijkenisse|Sports in Spijkenisse}} is not redudant here and there are no objections anymore against adding it again, so I did. IMO this discussion is closed. --JopkeB (talk) 03:55, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Discussion about the function of this category
[edit]|
|
