Category talk:Preserved buses in the United Kingdom

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

Category:Preserved buses in the United Kingdom[edit]

There are numerous (small) issues relating to this category:

~~Only has Category:Buses in the United Kingdom as a parent, but does not have its other logical parent (the global preserved bus cat)~~ I've added Category:Vintage buses
Is the category for buses in the UK, or buses of the UK? eg Would an American Greyhound at a British museum belong here? How about a London Routemaster in an American museum? Looking at the content (cats for individual buses), I'd suggest of is appropriate correct conjunction - if a British bus is bought by an American, its still a British bus. Likewise if it goes on a tour of France, its still a British bus when its in Calais.
The sub-category names are poorly laid out. Category names should be of the form "<natural name of subject> (<disambiguator>)", like with Category:Venus (planet), Category:Venus (dea). Aircraft and ship cats are a better analog to the subject matter and also conform: eg Category:Titanic (ship, 1912) and Category:G-ABDW (aircraft)‎. That would suggest "9 RDV (Preserved bus in the UK)‎" not "Preserved bus in the UK (9 RDV)‎"
Why "in the UK" in the sub-cat names? Again it introduces the is it in UK or somewhere else confusion, and isn't necessary to describe a bus - its a bus surely that's what matters?
For that matter why "preserved"? Won't that exclude historic images of the bus in service - before preservation, when it was in regular service? The cat is for the bus, not the bus in the second half of its life?
That would leave "9 RDV (bus)" as a cat name. That might be ok, if minimal. However, it could be built to a more useful category name like, which indicates the model type. "AEC Reliance 9 RDV (bus)" "AEC Reliance (bus, 9 RDV)""AEC Reliance (bus, registration 9 RDV)" are possibilities and give more useful cat names.

I realise that the reg number may not be sufficient to uniquely identify the bus in question. In such cases "British" or "Northern Irish" could be prefixed to the reg number?

Nilfanion (talk) 22:40, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Geof Sheppard: I'd appreciate your thoughts on this (and ping other editors who may be interested?). I believe my proposal above would result in a substantial improvement, but will take a lot of work. Its daft to leave this CFD open, and have the category tagged, if no-one is going to comment. In that case, I'll interpret lack of comment as silent consensus for change.--Nilfanion (talk) 14:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ultra7: @Davey2010: may have views and be able to help with changes.

This category has been worrying me for a while now. Any with more than 1,000 sub-categiories needs some attention and this has (right now) 2,267.

2) I think it needs to remain as 'in' the UK as that matches its parent Category:Buses in the United Kingdom. If you wnat to find pictures of preserved Routemasters in the USA then there is Category:AEC Routemaster buses by country.

3) I have removed images of preserved buses before preservation from these sub-categories and left a link in the description area, for example Category:Preserved bus in the UK (LEU 263P). I would like to keep them out of the preserved bus sub-categiries as they aren't preserved.

6) If were were rename all the individual bus categories then their parents should logically be sub-categories of Category:Body on chassis buses in the United Kingdom, e.g. Category:Preserved ECW on Bristol VRT/SL3 bus (LEU 263P).

7) Unless you know a bus by registration, just listing them as they are is no help at all. As a minimum they ought so be sorted into sub-categoiries that match those found under Category:Open top buses in the United Kingdom by configuration, i.e. Category:Preserved buses in the United Kingdom (double-deck, flat front)‎. I also think that we should use sort keys based on their registration so that the list of sub-categories is broken into smaller groups.

Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:40, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the sub-categories really should be for the individual buses, and not just the period when they are preserved. The bottom tier of the bus category tree as a whole ought to be categories for individual buses. For example, these images could be grouped together. The naming scheme for individual bus categories be systematic for all British buses - preserved and not.

The category that is most similar to this one has to be Category:Preserved locomotives of Great Britain, and the final sub-categories there are for the entire lifespan of the locomotives (eg Category:LNER Class A3 4472 Flying Scotsman‎, not Category:LNER Class A3 4472 Flying Scotsman in preservation).

Sub-categorising this one as you suggest makes sense.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:34, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Geof Sheppard: , Ultra7, Davey2010: Based on above I've created two new cats (one is a preserved bus, the other in regular service):

Personally, I feel the first is much better than its previous title of "Preserved bus in the UK (LTA 729)"; and the latter should be workable for almost all buses (but needs an expert to properly categorise).--Nilfanion (talk) 23:56, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that it needs an expert to categorise - LTA729 isn't actually a Brsitol L. I've created Category:Bristol on Bristol LL bus (LTA 729) which is what this should be. Geof Sheppard (talk) 08:40, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorted that move - it was based on how it was already categorised; I'll restrict any efforts I make to where the model has already been identified. By the way, you should have been able to move the category page (to preserve edit history etc).

I wonder if the most useful way to break down Category:Preserved buses in the United Kingdom would be manufacturer cats (eg Category:Preserved Bristol buses in the United Kingdom). It would certainly be easiest to curate. Additional schemes such as the configuration, date of manufacture, and so on will also work, no need to restrict it to one way. Having individual buses in the category is clearly unsustainable.--Nilfanion (talk) 09:06, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think that breaking down the category into what a bus looks like (single deck, half cab; double deck, full front; etc.) would be more useful for general viewers than categorising by manufacturer, especially as most have two manufacturers! Geof Sheppard (talk) 13:30, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

True enough, and I see no reason for why we cannot have multiple parallel schemes; as elsewhere. My thinking behind using manufacturer is: 1. If you are looking for a preserved bus, you are probably looking for a specific bus, and probably know the manufacturer already (if not exact model) 2. its easy to implement, if the individual buses already specify the manufacturer(s) in their cat's title.--Nilfanion (talk) 00:08, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Nilfanion and Geof Sheppard: It seems clear that this category is fine in and of itself, but that there are still some issues, so here is feedback to the OP list of items:

Category:Preserved buses in the United Kingdom is an intersection of Category:Buses in the United Kingdom and Category:Preserved buses (indexed there in Category:Preserved buses by country). It does not however belong under Category:Vintage buses, as vintage vehicles are defined to belong to a specific period (1919-1930) and preserved buses may be from any period.
This category is for all buses, regardless of origin, which are depicted in a preserved condition while located within the United Kingdom. It is fine to also have categories for buses by country or origin, manufacturer, operator, or whatever else is worthwhile to cover those aspects.
The sub-cats should absolutely be renamed. A simple "(natural name) (dab)" format is correct, and aircraft are a good reference generally. For example, Category:Preserved bus in the UK (1 RDV) should simply be Category:1 RDV (bus) (in this case we only have media of it in preserved state so no sub-division is required, but if warranted a specific category for the bus in preserved state could be create to differentiate between that and files depicting it in operational service in the past, if we had both for the same bus).
As with number 3, 'in the United Kingdom' would only be useful if we have files depicting the bus in preserved condition in both the United Kingdom and in some other country. Not sure if this case even exists. Otherwise, 'in the United Kingdom' should not be part of individual bus category names.
"Preserved" is a specific condition. Categories for other conditions should be used for files depicting buses in those conditions. Files under the "preserved" tree should only be those actually depicting buses in preserved condition, not during other periods of the life of a bus.
As with number 3, the main cat for an individual bus should be as simple as possible, of Category:1 RDV (bus) is absolutely fine. There is no need or value to adding a bunch of descriptive text into the title of the category, as this will be a constant game of how much to add, what does or does not belong, and whether or not what is there is accurate. Instead, the minimum necessary to uniquely identify the topic is preferable. Category:Superbus Type 15 Mark V with optional air conditioner now preserved at the Awesome Bus Museum with plate number 123-ABC in grey and blue Fast Line Bus Service livery (1938 edition) is obviously not where anyone wants to go with category names. Ideally, information about the bus type, history, operator, etc. will be maintained in a Wikidata item and {{Wikidata Infobox}} can be used to add this all to the category page display to give users all of that juicy information.

Josh (talk) 16:56, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree that the huge number of individual buses in this category needs to be resolved. I still believe that sub-categories by broad types, e.g. Catgeory:Single-deck half cab preserved buses of the United Kingdom, are needed so that browsing can be a bit easier.

My instinct is that we should specify preservation in the disambiguation, e.g. Category:LEU 263P (preserved bus). While only a few preserved buses have Wikimedia pictures showing it in service, this is starting to grow as more recent buses are withdrawn and taken into preservation. Some buses have previous operators as parent categories, so perhaps we should deal with that too: Category:P701 BTA (preserved Stagecoach Devon bus)?

Moving the registration number to the start of the category name will help us get away from having several thousand sub-categories listed under the letter 'P' for preserved!

Geof Sheppard (talk)

@Geof Sheppard: For a particular bus, "Category:REG 123 (bus)" is proper for its parent category name, containing all images of that bus. If there are more than a handful of files depicting different stages of its life, sub categories can be used:

Category:756 KFC (bus)

Category:756 KFC in City of Oxford service (for files depicting it while in active service with an operator)
Category:756 KFC at the Oxford Bus Museum (for files depicting it as preserved/displayed)

Closed Josh (talk) 02:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Category talk:Preserved buses in the United Kingdom

Category:Preserved buses in the United Kingdom[edit]

Navigation menu

Search