Board Thread:Support Requests - Community Management/@comment-23932365-20141129182929/@comment-452-20141130173343

I had thought saying "In my situation" was enough of a disclaimer, but apparently I need more. Lady Lostris wrote:

It's just a difference of opinions and it seems quite clean that you will not be able to be convinced of the useful application of image categories in the same way that you won't be able to convince me about galleries. It's a difference of application, because different wikis have different needs. I was not asking to be convinced, I was only asking for information. I am not attempting to convince you about galleries, and would not attempt to, as you have already stated that you simply use image categories instead of galleries.

Lady Lostris wrote:

To answer your last question though as to what is the difference between perusing a category and a gallery: there isn't. Oh well, thanks anyway.

DEmersonJMFM wrote:

Our category structure prevents overlap in this way by excluding categories that could be used in an either/or fashion. Ah, now that makes sense. For the benefit of myself, M.J. Daniels, and anyone else considering doing this, could you give an example?
 * How would you categorise "File:Bob holding the Cosmic Sword of MacGuffin in the Castle Dungeon level.jpg"?
 * How would you categorise "File:John and Dave at The Bar during Mission X.jpg"? (Where all 4 subjects are equally important, see below.)

Tupka217 wrote:

Imagine you have an image of Bob holding the Cosmic Sword of MacGuffin in the Castle Dungeon level. The specific page is derived from the purpose of the image.

Assuming that the "Cosmic Sword of MacGuffin" is acquired in the "Castle Dungeon" level, the image would be included in both articles, as an example of when the weapon is first acquired, and as an important event in the mission.


 * Any other images featuring the first acquisition of Cosmic Sword of MacGuffin would also at least be included in the "Cosmic Sword of MacGuffin" article.
 * Any other images featuring the events of the Castle Dungeon level would also at least be included in the "Castle Dungeon" article.

Personally, I would consider Bob's presence in the image to be incidental. "File:Bob's facial expression when holding Smelly Sword.jpg" would be a different matter.

Tupka217 wrote:

If instead you categorize the image by character and/or level (or even item), it's much easier to find. I don't understand how it's easier. As far as I can tell, both solutions have equal merit.
 * What happens if the image is only added Category:Bob and not Category:Castle_Dungeon level?
 * If Bob is a popular character, featured in the majority of missions in the game, then there are hundreds of images of him, spanning the entire game, (and possibly the entire suite of weapons), how does a category containing hundreds of images make duplicates of him holding that weapon in a certain mission easier to find?

To use a more specific example which I actually dealt with recently: I found 3 duplicates of "File:John and Dave at The Bar during Mission X.jpg", each of the same scene, one in each article, each added at different times.

This scene is an important event in Mission X, and the final appearance of John, Dave and The Bar in the game, so not adding the image to any of those articles isn't an option. (Spoiler: Everyone dies.)

This is more or less what actually happened:
 * UserA uploaded "File:John at The Bar.jpg" and added it to John#Gallery
 * UserB uploaded "File:Dave at The Bar.jpg" and added it to Dave#Gallery
 * UserC uploaded "File:The Bar in Mission X.jpg" and added it to The_Bar#Gallery
 * I looked at Mission_X#Gallery, saw there was no image, and uploaded "File:John and Dave at The Bar during Mission X.jpg" for Mission_X#Gallery

But as far as I can tell, the exact same situation could have occurred with Categories:
 * UserA uploads "File:John at The Bar.jpg" and adds it to Category:John
 * UserB uploads "File:Dave at The Bar.jpg" and adds it to Category:Dave
 * UserC uploads "File:The Bar in Mission X.jpg" and adds it to Category:The_Bar
 * UserD uploads "File:Mission X - John and Dave at The Bar.jpg" and adds it to Category:Mission_X

In both of these examples, assume that each of these users actually looked at the images in the gallery/category before adding the image, and that if UserA had also added the image to Dave#Gallery or Category:Dave, then UserB would not have uploaded the duplicate.
 * (In reality, I often see users adding duplicate images to the end of the same gallery, which is a different matter entirely, and something that neither solution solves.)

I acknowledge that image categories are a perfectly acceptable method of sorting and displaying images, I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything, or to be convinced.

I just don't understand how using categories makes finding duplicates easier than how I do it.

To help me understand, could you please tell me how I could have used categories to avoid the problem of the duplicates of "File:John and Dave at The Bar during Mission X.jpg"?