If one can write a definition for each category that explains how it’s different from the others, there should be separate categories. — User: Docu at , (UTC)

As if one were to stand in front of it and ask a passer-by «what’s the name of this [

I assume I’m included in the general invitation to participate in the discussion, so please bear with me for a few paragraphs.

Now that I’ve got that off my chest;), I think that the general principle should be that the names of physical, geographical objects (streets, railway stations, rivers and so on) used in categorisation should be the ones used at the location of this object

First, I am willing to accept that English is the working language on Commons. On the onther hand, it would be nice if native English speakers would acknowledge that this means that a sizeable number of users are required to use a -for them- foreign language. As a Dutchman, installment loans no credit check Eagle NE I’m used to this, but how about users who generally speak, write and think in, say, Spanish, French, Chinese, etcetera? At times -though not in the above discussion- I have sensed a tendency of «speak English or shut up».

That means that, in my opinion, a category like Category:Gare de Lyon is correct. Something like «Lyon train station, Paris» would be wrong: there is an excellent categorisation using the local language, and by using a clear category tree (this is a subcat of, among others, Train stations in Paris) any user can find his way up.

Category:Lek River is not quite correct, since the Dutch name for this river is not «rivier de Lek» or «rivier Lek» but just Lek. However, I suggest that we keep it this way, as a courtesy towards non-Dutch speakers.

As to the Cabbage Square-example: I am sure that a Czech user will be able to tell me whether it is likely that I, visiting Brno and asking for directions to the Cabbage Square, would be understood. Читать далее →