Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/01/Category:Diagrams

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Category:Diagrams

[edit]

Concerning Template:Diagrams. See:

Here is the version of the template before ŠJů's edit war:

Note: All diagram categories should contain diagrams as defined and illustrated in the Wikidata box at Category:Diagrams: "plan, drawing, sketch or outline to show how something works or the relationships between the parts of a whole". Maps, and basic statistical tables, charts, and graphs, are not diagrams. They should be moved to subcategories of Category:Information graphics such as Maps, Charts, Statistics, etc..

Multiple people (including 2 admins) agreed with the template in August 2020. User:Themightyquill, an admin who agrees with this template, and who initiated the original category discussion, no longer wants to "merge Category:Diagrams by subject with Category:Information graphics by subject." That was his initial proposal (see the original proposal at the top of the category discussion). Instead he prefers this template. As I said this template agreement is a separate agreement. So no one remains who wants the initial category proposal passed. The other admin is User:Royalbroil.

What this comes down to is whether the Commons is going to use English definitions of English words? Or are we going to use German and other definitions of English words.

Most editors of mainstream American, British, Canadian, or Australian publications or media sites would not allow their writers to use the word "diagram" in an article to describe a basic map, or a basic statistical table, bar chart, or graph. The editor would be considered dumb. A map is a map. A table is a table. A bar chart is a bar chart. A graph is a graph.

There are specialized illustrations that are sometimes called diagrams that may have elements of tables, charts, maps, and graphs. See:

But basic maps, tables, charts, and graphs are not called diagrams. The Commons category structure needs to honor the basic understandings of diagrams, maps, tables, charts, and graphs. So that it is easier to find stuff.

Basic graphs are also commonly called charts, too. So the word charts can cover basic statistical tables, bar charts, area charts, and graphs. Area charts are a combination of a graph and a densely packed bar chart. These are all common basic English definitions. All of the above in their basic formats would not normally be called diagrams.

This is the common understanding. For example; at the top of meta:Philip Greenspun illustration project/Requests, an old project, it says:

  • "At this stage, illustration means diagrams. Not photographs, charts, or maps."

Diagrams, in normal English parlance, has a specific meaning. And it is not "photographs, charts, or maps." --Timeshifter (talk) 14:17, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

From the previous discussion and side agreement at Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Diagrams by subject the diagram template is modeled on Template:Propaganda that has been on many propaganda categories since 2010. It solved a lot of problems by clarifying what was allowed in propaganda categories. --Timeshifter (talk) 14:05, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What do you want to change as a result of this discussion, @Timeshifter: ? I agree that "diagram" would not be used in an article to describe a basic map, or a basic statistical table, bar chart, or graph.Royalbroil 13:33, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Royalbroil. I started this specific category discussion to make the diagram template more official. The other category discussion where this was first discussed had a different original focus. --Timeshifter (talk) 07:18, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I Support the diagram template as written above. Royalbroil 14:04, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with the template text above. The categorization "system" we have now, while longstanding, was clearly created without forethought, and as a result, it is a total mess. This seems like a reasonable proposal to fix it. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:07, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Coming into this debate as a native German speaker, I can confirm that in German we understand all charts to be diagrams, and call them "Diagramm" as we don't have another word for it. German "Diagramm" includes all forms of geometrical abstract depictions like pie charts, 2D/3D-graphs, population pyramids but also pyramid diagrams and organizational charts. Specific charts may be called by their type (bar charts = "Balkendiagramm", line charts = "Liniendiagramm", pie charts = "Kreis-/Torten-diagramm")...
What the OP calls diagram (I have to assume) is called "Schaubild" in German, and all charts ("Diagramme") are still a subgroup of those, with other subgroups being technical/anatomical schematics ("Schema"), biological drawings ("Illustration"), maps ("Karte")... Speaking of maps: "Charts" in German refers specifically to (musical) record charts; the related word "Karte" means maps, and a map is strictly not considered a "Diagramm".
I have no problem moving stuff into "Chart"-categories if that is the proper name in English parlance, but consulting dictionaries and the en-WP itself I have come to doubt the original statement presented here. I agree however: the proper categorization of diagrams, charts and other schematic information in Commons is really a mess currently, because there is no overarching structure that an unsuspecting editor will be guided into. Just one example, "Political organization charts" are not charts if I understand the OP correctly, but actually diagrams? --Enyavar (talk) 10:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Enyavar. Thanks for the info. Yes, those are diagrams in Category:Political organization charts. --Timeshifter (talk) 22:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have proposed to resurrect the Charts and diagrams category to resolve the issue on whether an information graphic is a chart or a diagram. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 07:04, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See Category:Information graphics. It is a broad category that includes much more than just charts and diagrams. It also includes maps and illustrative explanatory graphics. As Enyavar pointed out concerning the German definition of "diagramm": "a map is strictly not considered a 'Diagramm'."
The beauty of using "infographics" is that it allows all images with some abstract info in them to be put in one category. Charts, graphs, diagrams, maps, illustrative explanatory graphics, etc..
You created (on May 25, 2024) the category of Category:Statistical graphics. I support the idea of it. But I think Category:Data graphics is better. "Data graphics" is used in the real world. Do google searches of it. An example:
https://dtkaplan.github.io/Lessons-in-statistical-thinking/L02-Pointplots.html
See also: User_talk:Prototyperspective#Diagrams. It may be in the talk archive there by the time you go there. He likes "data graphics" too.
Category:Statistical graphics is a subcategory of Category:Information graphics. As "Data graphics" would be.
Data graphics, unlike "statistical graphics", can eventually be shortened to "datagraphics". The single word is not in this dictionary yet:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/datagraphic
But I think datagraphics will be eventually. Just as "infographics" has ended up in dictionaries. In the meantime we can use "data graphics". It is already happening. --Timeshifter (talk) 18:34, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sbb1413, Prototyperspective, and I have agreed, and so Category:Statistical graphics now redirects to Category:Data graphics. It is a subcategory of Category:Information graphics. --Timeshifter (talk) 22:17, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2021/01/Category:Diagrams&oldid=880479343"