Category talk:Farms by country

Related category discussions

Expand to view current and archived category discussions related to this category

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted. Category:Farms by country Principal aspects: Categories named "Farms in …" invite to enter very different things, such as buildings, farmland, animals, technical supplies etc. Most of them can be categorized under “Agriculture in …" as well. So the existence of "Farms …"-categories beneath "Agriculture …"-categories is redundant. Therefore more specific categories are afforded, worldwide and for the various countries. If a photo or graphic shows different items, it has to be subsumed to more than one category. If there is too much of a category tree, people put very similar uploads in very different storeys of it, and somebody has to recategorize them to maintain the survey. Special aspect: Especially in densely populated regions of Europe there are lots of farmhouses, that are nowadays inhabited by people of urban profession and not by farmers. Nevertheless these farmhouses are important documents of regional tradition. If there is a useful possible storey between “Farmhouses" and "Agriculture", it is "Farm buldings". --Ulamm 13:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC) I have moved the request from Template:Farms by country. Note that there is a deletion discussion at Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Farms by country as well. --rimshottalk 14:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC) To avoid the spreading of discussions allover the place, I copied underneath the reactions on the Template:Farms by country deletion request. Currently, all farms are categorised under farms unless modified recently byUlamm. --Foroa 16:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)  Oppose - this whole Farmhouse thing is a very strange category. It would rather be that one that could be deleted. So IF one would want a rather detailed category like "farmhouses", it would rather be a subcategory of "farms". Secondly: it makes NO sense whatsoever, to move a picture form a category, and put it in a (wrong) subcategory AND a parent category... [1] it seems that you're missing the entire categorization concept then and something is seriously wrong. Some strange things have been done: a pic with a farmhouse, a barn, the farm grounds, some animals, the farmer is an archetypal image of a farm. So that's where it belong. See also the remarks of user:Royalbroil [2] Thirdly: a valid category tree like farms should NOT be just emptied and destroyed before putting the deletion template. It will do fine without destroying the work of other people and just tagging it with the request template.  Oppose - This category should remain for pictures that contain numerous structures commonly found on a farm. For example, any picture at least two of the following: a barn, silo, farmhouse, and/or shed belong in this category. Contributors can add optional categories if appropriate. So if a silo is prominent, the contributor has the option of adding the image to the silo category, farm category, or both. This category should be a child of the agriculture category and a parent of any of the previously mentioned categories. Royalbroil 01:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)  Oppose I think that we all can agree that the word farm is a wide definition that covers many aspects, and I can understand that some people find the definition too wide. In that category, there is possibly space for subcategories such as farmhouses, barns, stables, silo's, the typical gates, entrances, fences, bell towers (angelus) and other architectural details ... etc. But the deeper one categorizes, the more problems one is going to have. If one looks to the pictures of Category:Fiefdoms in Ingelmunster, a very old farm, one can see a potential wide collection, none of them being the actual farmhouse as it is hidden as private territory. In fact, for many old farms, especially in Europe, the most characteristic elements of the farms that remain contain still many elements in which the farmhouse itself is only a small aspect. Today, most farms are only containing the "postcard" type of pictures that shows mainly the farmhouse (which is a debatable term as the older ones contain stables too). As we see a general trend towards more encyclopedic and detailed pictures, the farmhouse category will be more and more contested as being too restrictive. Similarly, in Category:Ten Bogaerde, only one of the four pictures pertains to the farmhouse. ((Interposition:)) Ten Bogaerde is the agricultural estate of an abandoned abbey. So I've to admit, that categorization was wrong. But it shows as well, that it would be wrong to rename and move to category:Farmhouses by country to category:Farms by country. It is the same thing with Category:Manors by country – manors have an other social context than farmhouses, which are part of vernacular architecture.--Ulamm 17:19, 26 November 2007 (UTC) As my conclusion: farm covers farmhouses and other items related to farms, farmhouses is too restrictive and cannot have logical subcats such as farmgate, barns, etc.... After all, the farm is the top level geographical item which is known by the people, all the rest are components of it. --Foroa 16:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC) If you would have read my request exactly, you would have read my proposal to use regional subcategories of Category:Farm buildings, which ought to be subordinate to both Category:Agriculture and Category:Buildings. "Farm buildings" excludes many "Agriculture"-items which are included by "Farms". So it is more specific. For many countries Category:Farmhouses is necessary as well, according to the amount of interesting farmhouses, there. ((written after the next))--Ulamm 17:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC) On Top of the Category:Farms itself, I've written a guideline how to categorize more specificly. Surely this guideline ought to be accomplished. Uploading their photos, many users woun't look at the page of the category. When they see that the category is shown in red, they will look at Category:Farms and read the guideline.--Ulamm 16:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC) Also see the discussion as Category talk:Farmhouses by country. In short my opinion (as voiced over there): I think that "Farms" should stay and that "Farmhouses" should be a subcategory of Farms. "Farms" should be subcategory of "Agriculture". Deadstar (msg) 11:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC) I agree with the opinion above. Some of the "Farms in Portugal" have been moved to "Manors in Portugal". I can not agree with this, since those buildings belong to a "Farm XX" (Quinta de ...). When looking for them the word "Farm" will be used for research. No one calls them "Manor of..." but "Farm of...". Lusitana 15:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC) Agree with Deadstar. As I too suggested on some discussions page, "farmhouses" would merely be a subcategory of "farms". (It might be a level too deep however, and an unpractical extra level of categorisation... I don't know, maybe it is, maybe it's not) --LimoWreck 20:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC) You ought to understand, that the words of different languages aren't congruent. If some people say: "Everybody knows, what a farm is", that is wrong. Everybody has his imagination of "farm", but these imaginations are quite different. Many contries of Europe had a "liberation of farmers" in nineteensth and the first half of twentieth centrury. In that view farmers were and are rural lower and middle class. The owners of those Portugese "qintas" presented in the commons are upper class, obviously. Farms owned by upper class persons in England are called "manors". Such questions are the reason, why I urge for a better specification than "farm", which is 90% identcal with agriculture.--Ulamm 01:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC) No action. 哦，是吗？(висчвын) 20:39, 18 May 2008 (GMT) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted. This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. Under "Farms in Xland" uploaders have catgorized images of almost all objects that also (and better) can be subsumed under "agriculture". For farm buildings more specific categories are afforded. Depending to history and conditions of farming in various contries, in some countries "farmhouses" is better, in other countries "farm buildings". It also can be "farm buildings" with subcategories. Where the pictures of barns show traditional barns, I'd prefer to subsume barns or the category "Barns in Xland" under "Farmhouses in Xland".--Ulamm 22:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)  Oppose - this whole Farmhouse thing is a very strange category. It would rather be that one that could be deleted. So IF one would want a rather detailed category like "farmhouses", it would rather be a subcategory of "farms". Secondly: it makes NO sense whatsoever, to move a picture form a category, and put it in a (wrong) subcategory AND a parent category... [3] it seems that you're missing the entire categorization concept then and something is seriously wrong. Some strange things have been done: a pic with a farmhouse, a barn, the farm grounds, some animals, the farmer is an archetypal image of a farm. So that's where it belong. See also the remarks of user:Royalbroil [4] Thirdly: a valid category tree like farms should NOT be just emptied and destroyed before putting the deletion template. It will do fine without destroying the work of other people and just tagging it with the request template.  Oppose - This category should remain for pictures that contain numerous structures commonly found on a farm. For example, any picture at least two of the following: a barn, silo, farmhouse, and/or shed belong in this category. Contributors can add optional categories if appropriate. So if a silo is prominent, the contributor has the option of adding the image to the silo category, farm category, or both. This category should be a child of the agriculture category and a parent of any of the previously mentioned categories. Royalbroil 01:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)  Oppose I think that we all can agree that the word farm is a wide definition that covers many aspects, and I can understand that some people find the definition too wide. In that category, there is possibly space for subcategories such as farmhouses, barns, stables, silo's, the typical gates, entrances, fences, bell towers (angelus) and other architectural details ... etc. But the deeper one categorizes, the more problems one is going to have. If one looks to the pictures of Category:Fiefdoms in Ingelmunster, a very old farm, one can see a potential wide collection, none of them being the actual farmhouse as it is hidden as private territory. In fact, for many old farms, especially in Europe, the most characteristic elements of the farms that remain contain still many elements in which the farmhouse itself is only a small aspect. Today, most farms are only containing the "postcard" type of pictures that shows mainly the farmhouse (which is a debatable term as the older ones contain stables too). As we see a general trend towards more encyclopedic and detailed pictures, the farmhouse category will be more and more contested as being too restrictive. Similarly, in Category:Ten Bogaerde, only one of the four pictures pertains to the farmhouse. Anyway, as there is clearly a different view on this category scheme, a minimum of courtesy to the many people that put significant effort to that worldwide farm categorisation, is to generate clear definitions and documentation and bring it up in Commons:Categories_for_discussion before doing massive changes. --Foroa 07:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)  Comment There is a category discussion at Commons:Categories for discussion/Current requests/2007/11/Category:Farms by Country now. Shall I close this deletion request and put a link to the cfd on the category page? --rimshottalk 14:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC) If Category:Ten Bogaerde were catgorized in Category:Farmhouses in Belgium and Category:Agricultural buildings in Belgium or Category:Barns, it were easier for other users to find those photos, they are searching for.--Ulamm 14:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)  Comment Re:Rimshot - I think that would be best: Close this request. I also think that the outcome of the discussion on the category page is that the category "Farms by country" is going to stay. Deadstar (msg) 11:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC) Kept Closing this part of the discussion at least. --rimshottalk 10:03, 2 April 2008 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted. Please handle Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Farms in the United States, Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Farms in Switzerland, Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Farms in Hedmark‎, Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Farms in Finland‎, Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Farms in Bavaria accordingly. --Foroa 15:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC) Done that, thanks for the hint. --rimshottalk 15:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC) Great cleanup. I think I forgot the Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Farms in Canada and Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Farms in Portugal --Foroa 15:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC) I did that now. --MGA73 (talk) 21:23, 13 July 2009 (UTC)