Matthew Trump wrote:
I'm not sure if this has been discussed in the
past, but I have been
wondering about categories for images.
I want categories for images too :)
There is no "Category:Maps" right now. I
thought of making one, with
subcategories such as "Category:Historical maps" etc. Then it occured
to me that those categories might be best used for *articles* about
well-known maps (such articles exist), like the [[Zeno map]] article
for exaple.
Yeah, or the [[Tube map]] :)
So what do people think about this situation. I think
images are
worth categorization. Should there be a separate namespaces, or
should this done within the current system of categorization (I would
prefer the latter personally). A bit of policy would be helpful here.
Personally, I would have preferred if there had been extra Category
namespaces for most of the namespaces we already have. I think there
should have been:
* Category:
* Category talk:
* Wikipedia category:
* Wikipedia category talk:
* User category:
* User category talk:
* Image category:
* Image category talk:
I admit that "User categories" would merely be a fun thing and wouldn't
serve much purpose, but "Wikipedia category" and "Image category"
would
be pretty useful, so while we would have been at it, we could as well
have had "User categories".
HOWEVER, since we don't have these extra namespaces, and because I'm
pretty sure there would be too much opposition to introducing them, I
would suggest that we use [[Category:Images:Maps]] etc.
Timwi