User talk:Sinigh

Archives 1

Why was Category:Hendrik Koolwijk (1800-1885) wrong? Is there a rule on Commons about the character to separate years? - Robotje (talk) 05:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Robotje Those are good questions. I don't know of any comprehensive style guide on Commons, unfortunately.

The dash is generally preferred over the hyphen when it comes to indicating ranges rather than compounds. The universal hyphen (or hyphen-minus) is only common in informal text because it is the most readily available option on our keyboards, and as such a remnant from our beloved but limited typewriters. In a modern digital context, however, it seems like an odd choice not to make a distinction between hyphens and dashes (and minus signs). I see no reason why Commons typography should be simplified or inconsistent. I also find the dash more visually distinct than the hyphen in these situations, and useful in other ways, so I hope it gets to stay. Sinigh (talk) 13:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, there is not even a rule about what language should be used when naming a category. Your typographical preference don't make the name of the category I created wrong. I have a very strong preference for the original name of that category. So please respect the name that somebody else choose when creating that category and restore it. If you want consistency in the naming of categories, better first try to convince the community a naming style guide is very important and there should be rules about using or avoiding hyphens, dashes, etc. - Robotje (talk) 19:05, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Robotje I hope this addresses your points clearly:

1. "Category names should generally be in English, excepting some of proper names, biological taxa and terms which don't have an exact English equivalent." See Commons:Language policy and Commons:Categories#Category names. The above edit reflects the most common (and most commonly prescribed) use of the en dash in formal English text.
2. This matter is not, and should not be, about personal preference. That idea also clashes with the CC license under which categories are licensed.
3. Only you have objected so far. Another user helped me adjust a template in order to rename a category in the same manner, and three other users simply sent their thanks. It would not appear that my edits are controversial, partly because I should have received more negative complaints by now if that were the case, and partly because the one complaint I have received doesn't make a very strong case. You didn't even look for a language policy.
4. The dash is very much in general use on Commons and I am not the only one who makes (or has made) the specific type of edit we're talking about.

If you have something substantial to add, feel free to do so, but know that I'm obviously not going to be convinced by what you've said so far. If you insist on simply telling me what to do, I will ignore you.

Sinigh (talk) 12:13, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm objecting, too. I was driven here by https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Iraqi_Army_in_the_Gulf_War_(1990%E2%80%931991)&diff=prev&oldid=929749309. Commons:Categories says, "Basic English characters (ISO/IEC 646) are preferred over national variants or extension character sets (for instance, 'straight' apostrophes over 'curly'), where reasonable." I don't see anything gained here in changing from ISO/IEC 646 character "-" to "–", which is not ISO/IEC 646 and cannot be typed on a standard keyboard. This seems to me to go against policy as stated at Commons:Categories. - Jmabel ! talk 20:25, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel That is indeed a very relevant complaint to the topic at hand, and it's what I thought I would be discussing when the matter was first brought up. I have two main things to say and then a bunch of general stuff than you can skip since it's perhaps not strictly on topic. I just want to let people know where I'm coming from.

• I definitely agree that it's a problematic situation we're in, where several common characters still aren't easy to type, even though they're basically just one shortcut away from being a non-issue. But that in itself doesn't seem to be very important in the policy in question, which also says that "Latin alphabets are used in original form including diacritics and derived letters" – instantly allowing for innumerable categories that a majority of readers can't type.
• I also don't see how typeability (if that's a word) is relevant in this case. I find it very unlikely that anyone would ever type the full category names we're talking about here, and they would never really need to anyway, right? It's still going to show up below the search bar or at the top of the search results, even when there is no redirect. What you're saying still makes sense, of course, but I'm not entirely sure that it describes an actual problem. And if it does, it's just as much (or little) of a problem with diacritics and language-specific Latin letters too, yet they are allowed.

Furthermore, I'm a little concerned that the universal hyphen-minus throws the baby out with the bathwater. As you know, the en dash isn't just used to indicate ranges, but also various other non- or semi-compounding relationships, such as in Category:Dunning–Kruger effect, where it shows that Dunning and Kruger are two different people, as opposed to what a hyphen would indicate. This is useful in category names too, perhaps especially since it can be used to lower the word count. Even if I were of the opinion that the dash shouldn't be used because it can't be easily typed, I would still have to consider it a loss.

Finally, it is the universal hyphen-minus that fundamentally represents a change, not the dash. The dash was well-established before the generally simplified typography of typewriters-cum-computers, and it has remained in use both within and outside of that context. By now, there is no need for that type of simplification, and the limitations of the standard keyboard are steadily becoming easier to circumvent.

When it comes to Commons specifically, I've been under the impression that the dash is used more often than not, and I know for a fact that it's not rare, which has also guided my decisions. The hyphen seems to be most common in cases where one or few users have created a large number of similarly named subcategories. As for the category policy, I still think it makes sense, especially given the specific example they use. I find straight quotation marks to be a reasonable compromise, which should include straight apostrophes for consistency. Otherwise we would most likely end up with a mix of curly, straight, and differently oriented and positioned characters, depending on what language users are influenced by. For example, American English uses “…” while Swedish uses ”…” and those two get mixed up a lot. I'm glad we don't have to deal with stuff like that!

Sinigh (talk) 15:37, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I suggest we take this to a broader discussion, maybe at the Village pump? All we are really likely to establish here with just two of us is that we disagree about what is preferable in a case like this. Meanwhile, I would seriously discourage you making changes like this (just like I don't make changes in the opposite direction) without a much clearer consensus. - Jmabel ! talk 07:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]