Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/11/Category:Walking paths

This discussion of one or several categories is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Category:Walking paths edit

I'd like to merge this category with Category:Public footpaths and call the result Category:Footpaths. That's the name used in the English WIkipedia, and found in dictionaries. "Public footpath" has a legal meaning in some countries such as the UK, but I don't think attempting to make this distinction on Commons is very useful. See also Commons:Categories for discussion/2014/04/Category:Public footpaths in the United Kingdom. --ghouston (talk) 22:40, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense to me. Certainly, one can run or jog on a footpath. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:33, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is this intended to cover "sidewalks", or just paths that aren't along a road? Because in the UK those are often called "footpaths" (especially on signs about dogs "fouling the footpath"), a usage that is not used in the U.S. (I'd have no problem with sidewalks as a subcat of footpaths, just not lumped in with the distinction lost.) - Jmabel ! talk 01:33, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sidewalks will still be a (sub)subcategory. I'm not sure exactly what Category:Walkways encompasses and whether they belong there, but it's a separate issue. --ghouston (talk) 02:34, 28 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sidewalks is wrong for the UK as they are not called that but Pavements. We also have a Pavements category which looks to be for the materials used to make sidewalks but is a bit of a mixture and some sub-categories should be under the sidewalks tree. On the original suggestion I think that the UK distinction for Public footpaths should be retained. Keith D (talk) 18:26, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Would you say the status quo is fine, and we can close these two discussions, or are there useful changes that can be made? Ideally, for a top-level category X, we should name its subcategories the same way, e.g., X in the United States and X in the United Kingdom. Commons doesn't support multi-lingual categories. The original complaint was that there's no such thing as a public footpath in Scotland. --ghouston (talk) 21:12, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We can merge Category:Walking paths and Category:Public footpaths into Category:Footpaths but leave Category:Public footpaths in the United Kingdom as it is, and placed as a sub-category of Category:Footpaths in the United Kingdom. In this case, Category:Footpaths in Scotland would be a sub-category of "Footpaths" not "Public footpaths". Category:Sidewalks (by any name) can remain a subcaategory, that's a separate issue. - Themightyquill (talk) 08:14, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That would be OK, except "Sidewalks" isn't a separate issue, because they are also known as "footpaths" so by renaming "walking paths" to "footpaths" it becomes ambiguous. --ghouston (talk) 10:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghouston: I respect your concern, but I disagree. Jmabel, who raised the issue, said "I'd have no problem with sidewalks as a subcat of footpaths, just not lumped in with the distinction lost." Sidewalks are sometimes called footpaths in the UK because they are a type of footpath, which is why Category:Sidewalks would be a sub-category. Walking paths through the woods in the UK can also be called footpaths. Sidewalk is globally unambiguous, no? Using footpaths to refer strictly to sidewalks is (globally) confusing. So in this case, I think it makes sense to use the broadest term for the broadest category, and use the least ambiguous term for the subcategory. If Category:Sidewalks in the United Kingdom is such a problem (despite being in existence for nearly 8 years), someone can propose merging it with Category:Pavements in the United Kingdom or some other solution. Or maybe I've overlooked some more fundamental problem? - Themightyquill (talk) 12:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's unusual to use "footpath" for unpaved surfaces in Australia and NZ. But the categories have to be named something, and maybe Footpaths / Sidewalks is the best compromise. Pavements wouldn't necessarily be footpaths or next to a street, but again it depends on how you define the word, and it seems to vary. --ghouston (talk) 22:26, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghouston: What about just Category:Paths ? - Themightyquill (talk) 09:15, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Possible, it looks like another one that should be merged. --ghouston (talk) 09:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then d:Q5004679 and d:Q3352369 could also be merged. --ghouston (talk) 10:16, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ghouston: But could we merge into Category:Paths instead? - Themightyquill (talk) 14:46, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It wouldn't bother me. --ghouston (talk) 19:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I like it. Paths and Walking paths already share many of the same subcategories, and it avoids the "footpaths are sidewalks" issue. --ghouston (talk) 20:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it makes sense. Several of the Category:Paths in country x categories only contain Category:Walking paths in country x anyway. I'm going to merge unless anyone objects. - Themightyquill (talk) 19:25, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to Category:Paths along with national subcategories, though subnational subcategories could still use some work. Themightyquill (talk) 16:38, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I removed {{Category for discussion|1=Category:Walking paths|month=11|year=2018}} from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Paths Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:21, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]