File talk:A surfer in the air 2.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Please do not COM:OVERCAT - it is detrimental to the category system. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 17:11, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- It is not overcat.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:13, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- Of course these six categories are severe overcategorization. This belongs in Category:Surfing in California and maybe in Category:Rainbows in the United States. Any surfing photo will show water waves, wetsuits, and surfboards, but that does not mean that all surfing images should be in category:Water waves, category:Wetsuits, and category:surfboards. There is no way of telling whether the person on the image belongs to the category:Surfers from America. This image does not show Santa Cruz. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 17:24, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- If you are to look at COM:OVERCAT, you will see that the very first statement is: "Over-categorization is what happens when an image is placed in several categories within the same tree". That image is not placed in the several categories of the same tree. I agree that the image does not show Santa Cruz, but it is a very important information for the surfers to know, where the image was taken. I was not including that info before and I was getting emails from surfers with the same question "Where is the wave?" I agree to replace category:Surfers from America with category:Surfers. Honestly I believe that some categories are rather stupid. For example what is the difference between rainbow in Canada and rainbow in USA. IMO we should have had one category Category:rainbows. Same with the surfers. Who cares where a surfer is from? The only time it could be an important info is a surfing competition --Mbz1 (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- Of course Category:Surfboards is in category:Surfing, and you are damaging the category system by adding all your surfing photos to that category. That is a category for photos of boards. Same for category:Surfers - it is meant for recognizable people, not for this photo. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- Okay I do not mind removing category surfboards.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:52, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- Of course Category:Surfboards is in category:Surfing, and you are damaging the category system by adding all your surfing photos to that category. That is a category for photos of boards. Same for category:Surfers - it is meant for recognizable people, not for this photo. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:14, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- If you are to look at COM:OVERCAT, you will see that the very first statement is: "Over-categorization is what happens when an image is placed in several categories within the same tree". That image is not placed in the several categories of the same tree. I agree that the image does not show Santa Cruz, but it is a very important information for the surfers to know, where the image was taken. I was not including that info before and I was getting emails from surfers with the same question "Where is the wave?" I agree to replace category:Surfers from America with category:Surfers. Honestly I believe that some categories are rather stupid. For example what is the difference between rainbow in Canada and rainbow in USA. IMO we should have had one category Category:rainbows. Same with the surfers. Who cares where a surfer is from? The only time it could be an important info is a surfing competition --Mbz1 (talk) 17:56, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
- Of course these six categories are severe overcategorization. This belongs in Category:Surfing in California and maybe in Category:Rainbows in the United States. Any surfing photo will show water waves, wetsuits, and surfboards, but that does not mean that all surfing images should be in category:Water waves, category:Wetsuits, and category:surfboards. There is no way of telling whether the person on the image belongs to the category:Surfers from America. This image does not show Santa Cruz. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 17:24, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
