User talk:Adamant1

User_talk:Adamant1/Archive_1

Happy Holidays

A1Cafel (talk) is wishing you Happy Holidays! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user Happy Holidays, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Happy holidays}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

A1Cafel (talk) 04:48, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

@A1Cafel: Thanks. You to. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:15, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

CfD

Logos of universities in the United States has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at [[{{{2}}}|its entry]]. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Astros4477 (talk) 02:50, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Postcard series

Hello Adamant1. About your edits in this category. Nikolai Apostoli published postcards of ships of the Russian Empire. There are 2 series of his postcards: one published by himself, the other jointly with the publishing house Golike and Vilborg. These two series postcards from different years, have different images and designs, have their own numbering. I uploaded them into different categories for each seria. You have combined them into one category. If you agree, then I will return the division by series. If you're against it, then let's discuss it here. With respect, --Gandvik (talk) 05:03, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

@Gandvik: It's been a minute, but from what I remember the issue was that you did by created a category named "Postcards of naval ships published by Nikolay Apostoli and Golike and Vilborg." We don't usually create "postcards published by X and Y" publishers when they are published by multiple people because it's just needlessly convoluted and there's no reason to. Looking at this file it's in a category for both publishers and it's clear from the file name that it was published by both of them. So I don't really see what the issue there is. Nothing is being lost, and again, that's how we do it in every instance when a postcard has multiple publishers.

I wouldn't call the postcards a "series" just because they have their own numbering and design either. At least not in the way the term is used for postcards on Commons. Usually a series is confined to a named series of postcards that the publisher published as such, not just ones having to do with the same subject that we're published at a different time through a different company and follow each other in sequence. Otherwise everything becomes part of a series since most postcards are numbered and have to do with similar subjects. So I'd prefer if it we confined categorizing postcards by series to actually named, official postcard series. Or again, it's just to convoluted. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:28, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

@Adamant1: Yes. In this case, these are two series of postcards. One was published in Russia by Golike and Wilborg (No. 1-126 [1]), the second published in Germany by Otto Leder (No. 1-165 [2]). These series differ in publishing, differ in photographs, differ in design, and have their own end-to-end numbering. Nikolay Apostoli is the author of the photo, but not the publisher. I suggest the following names for their categories: Category:Postcards by Nikolay Apostoli published by Golike and Vilborg and Category:Postcards by Nikolay Apostoli published by Otto Leder. Such names comply with the rules of the COM:WPPC project. Perhaps the previous names were unsuccessful, which misled you. --Gandvik (talk) 07:23, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

The categories will be subcategories of the author of the photos and the two publishers.--Gandvik (talk) 07:27, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

I still wouldn't call them a "series" just because they we're published by a different company and they shouldn't be categorized as one. Again, that's not usually how we categorize images of postcards.

Aside from that, I'm not sure what your referring to when you say the categories comply with the rules of the COM:WPPC project. Can you point to a specific place on there where it says it's OK to create "postcards published by X and Y publisher" categories or even talks about it to begin with? Again, that's certainly not how we currently categorize images of postcards (or really anything else) and the universality principle should be followed since it's an official policy. In otherwards "the categorization structure should be as systematical and unified as possible."

Nothing personal, but I don't think this is an instance where it's worth making an expectation to how the categories for postcards are currently structured. As I've said, having "postcards published by X and Y" categories instead of just putting the image in separate ones for both publishers is just convoluted and clearly wouldn't scale. It's also totally pointless. Otherwise I'd be interested to know what exactly the benefit to doing it that way is. Seriously, what actual difference does it make? --Adamant1 (talk) 07:50, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

@Stefan Kühn: I'm interested to know what your opinion about this is. I really don't think it would scale or be maintainable to have "postcards published by X and Y" or "postcards published by X by Y" categories, let alone both. Categories aren't suppose to be stores of basic facts and the category structure for "postcards by publisher" is already hard enough to maintain as it is without adding extra variables on top of it. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:55, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

@Adamant1: This was discussed here (Painter + Publisher). The disadvantage of your approach is that each postcard needs to be categorized by the publisher and the artist (photographer). As a result, we get the "Postcards of publisher" category, which contains tens (or hundreds) of thousands of images, and the "Postcards of artist" category, which contains hundreds (or thousands) of images. Unsorted and in a pile. In my approach, the "Postcards of publisher" category will have a subcategory "...by artist", and the "Postcards of artist" category will have a category "...by publisher". For example, this category. See "... by publisher".--Gandvik (talk) 08:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

That conversation was referring to painters and artist postcards. We don't generally consider artists of postcards to be publishers. Whereas we do consider photographers to be. So it works to have something like Category:Postcards by Elizaveta Bem published by Ilya Lapin, because it doesn't create a intersectional "published by X and published by Y" category that both X and Y are the same subject. Both Nikolay Apostoli and Golike and Vilborgand are publishers though. So it doesn't work in this instance. "postcards by publisher by publisher" is just nonsensical. "Postcards by artist by publisher" is totally fine though.

Categories with tens (or hundreds) of thousands of images is an issue, but that's easily resolved by subcategorizing the images by subject, location, or some other criteria. I'm not sure what the answer to that would be in this instance, but there should be some way to sub-categorize the images besides your solution. Maybe you could subcategorize the images by battle or something.

Although, I don't think having a hundred images in a top level category of postcards by publisher really that much of a problem to begin with. Most people expect to find a general overview of postcards of naval ships published by Golike and Vilborg in a category for "postcards of naval ships published by Golike and Vilborg." If their looking for an image of a specific ship, instead of just wanting a general overview of what postcards are published by Golike and Vilborg, then they will likely just go to the category for the ship to begin with. I'd support subcategorizing the images by battle or something though if you think the category has to many images. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:11, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't think that in this case, artists are any different from photographers. Both are categorizations "...by author". Nikolay Apostoli is a photographer, not a publisher.

I have a suggestion. Our opinions in this discussion are clear. Let's wait for an Stefan Kühn opinion. He can be an authoritative and neutral arbiter in this discussion.--Gandvik (talk) 09:36, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm pretty neutral. My only agenda here (to the degree that I have one) is following the policies and not making the category system harder to work with. I agree with you that photographers aren't any different from artists, but in this case Nikolay Apostoli is the photographer as well as the publisher. They aren't mutually exclusive and a photographer can often be both. When someone is both the photographer and publisher of a postcard we just call them the publisher. So it's a distinction without a purpose. Otherwise you end up with duplicate categories for "postcards published by X" and "postcards photographed by X" that contain the same images. We don't really have information about who took a photograph versus who published it in most case anyway. A lot of times photographers stole or bought images that they later published as postcards under their own name. I'm more willing to see what Stefan Kühn has to say about it though. --Adamant1 (talk) 09:49, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm taking a pretty neutral approach too. My only goal here (to the extent that I have one) is to follow the rules and not complicate the work with the category system too. An important rule of Wikimedia Commons is that large categories potentially containing thousands of images should be divided into subcategories. In this case: by date, by publisher, by subject, by author (artist, photographer, etc.). The opinion that Apostoli was the publisher is debatable. We know for sure that he was the author of the photographs and we have the backs of the postcards, where there are two publishing houses, which means that in the category "Postcards of Nikolay Apostoli" we need two subcategories "...by publisher" and include them in the categories of these publishers.--Gandvik (talk) 10:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

@Gandvik: This whole thing is rather pedantic to begin with since your whole argument comes down to meaningless semantics but Apostoli released other postcards that weren't also published by Golike and Vilborg right? If so, then he's clearly a postcard publisher. He'd still be a postcard publisher even if he didn't, but he obviously is one if he published his own postcards and/or published them separately from Golike and Vilborg. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Our opinions have been clarified. Perhaps it's worth waiting for an @Stefan Kühn: opinion?--Gandvik (talk) 10:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Hello @Gandvik and @Adamant1. I am confused. Sorry I had hard two weeks. Today maybe I am not in the shape to give a good advice. When I read my old comments then I am skeptical about all. - I wish we can do this problem with SDC. But how? I think the categories are a problem in his self. - Maybe today the best is to to it without combined categories. So we can do it atomic. Like "PC published by XY" and "PC printed by XY" and "PC ... by XYZ". So we can today filter various combinations with Elasticsearch in Commons. Like "Give my all PC published by XY and printed by ABC". Later maybe we can easier transport this category-information into SDC. --sk (talk) 19:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)