Category talk:Still GIF files

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Unnecessary category? The file format .GIF doesn't mean it MUST to be animated one? We have 10 000+ GIF files which are not animated. Animated GIFs can be easily filtrated by the bot (exists category:Animated GIF files) Estopedist1 (talk) 09:22, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, there is not a need to sort images by GIF/JPG/etc. The exception is SVGs for certain types of images (e.g. flags and icons). Animated GIFs are their own beast and come under animations. Josh (talk) 19:33, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As Estopedist1 says, GIFs support animation, and most GIFs are animated, but the file format does not force them to be.
That said, we can't assume that all GIF files that are not in the Animated GIF files are necessarily still ones. I see both categories (Animated GIF files and Still GIF files) as complementary subcategories, the same way you can have (to give a synthetic example) a "vertical arrows" category with two subcategories, "arrows pointing up" and "arrows pointing down"; not only it makes sense to cover the entire "pointing direction" space with the subcategories rather than just half of it, but also the fact that an arrow isn't in one of the subcategories doesn't mean it automatically belongs in the other. --Waldyrious (talk) 11:56, 26 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Waldyrious, McZusatz, and Dispenser: I also mention that this discussion is affected by Category:Still GIF files affected by MediaWiki restrictions where is used phrase "Non-animated GIF files". Should we rename this category?--Estopedist1 (talk) 09:15, 1 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it makes more sense to name things by what they are rather than what they are not, so my preference would be against renaming. That said, it's not a deal breaker — I don't feel as strongly about the category's name as I do about its existence. --Waldyrious (talk) 22:03, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Estopedist1 and Waldyrious: Closed (no consensus to delete) Josh (talk) 18:09, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]