User talk:Earflaps

flappy ears are what results when you place your head down too low wobbling too and frow, id be more more careful next time earflaps

Contact, archives

In the off-chance you're here because I said or did something that peeved you, you're likely justified; I can be a stubborn little shit. Just know that I also have a hearty respect for assume good faith and the power of compromise, so please don't hesitate to argue with me; it's not in my nature to report you to the Wiki cops or accuse you of COI simply because we have a different outlook, knowledge base, or style of editing. Earflaps (talk) 14:02, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

@This user can be reached by email.

Category:Sports festivals has been nominated for discussion

Category:Sports festivals, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. PanchoS (talk) 13:10, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Kuttin Loose.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kuttin Loose.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:50, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Play Date Imagination.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Play Date Imagination.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:02, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Xavier and Ophelia album.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Xavier and Ophelia album.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:XXX Jimmy Edgar album cover.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:XXX Jimmy Edgar album cover.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:35, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Categories

Hi Earflaps. I'm contacting you because the community is expressing concerns about some of your edits (there does seem to be rather a lot of messages on your talk page). I am sure you believe that what you are doing with categories is correct but you might possibly not have fully understood how our categories and category tree systems work. Believe me, I do appreciate how complicated it is. I have found at least one page that does not belong among festivals such as, to cite just one example, Brass Monkey Motorcycle Rally (Australia). I noticed also that the CfD at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 June 22 seems to have stagnated with only one admin, BrownHairedGirl, commenting, and a decision needs to be made. Could you please take a moment to explain either here, or to me by email if you prefer, what you are attempting to achieve with the majority of your 9,000 or so category edits, otherwise I'm rather afraid that some community members might escalate and I think that would involve a lot of unnecessary time-consuming work for us all. Regards, --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:21, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Greetings! Do you have a specific category you would like to discuss? I have not heard any other complaints that have not been resolved (or left unresolved in friendly discussion, due to lack of consensus overall), so am not quite sure what "community" problems you are referring too, unless I missed a discussion somewhere? I would be happy to explain my edits to you, in detail if you like. Earflaps (talk) 05:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, I rather hoped that you would tell me what your goal is with the categories, then I might be able to better understand what you are doing and that the community is worrying about nothing..

Are you aware that you might be creating creating a complexity of dual category trees with this for example, and that these sports events are neither carnivals nor festivals. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:08, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Kudpung, the sports festival tree is particularly contentious - I knew it would be when I recreated it, as I could see prior deletions. However, previously the tree was being used for a different purpose (a container, inaccurately, for basically all types of sports events), so a new fresh discussion needed to happen. I'm not going to spell out my reasons for recreating that category again here - I'm tired of rewording the same common sense arguments. If that is your only issue with my 9000 edits, then it would be more productive if you take your worries to category talk page, or start a new deletion discussion so it gets new eyes. Earflaps (talk) 14:25, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm going to ask User:PanchoS, BrownHairedGirl, and JarrahTree to chime in here.Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:21, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Kudpung, maybe you didn't notice that PanchoS currently has a discussion going already, with quite a few people contributing good thoughts. That would be a better place for worries about the sports festival cat. I'm content with my contributions to that tree, and frankly have washed my hands - it is up to the community to decide what to do next. I get tired of doing everyone's work for them, while people talk in endless circles. Earflaps (talk) 01:29, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm here in response to the ping by Kudpung. I commented tentatively at the CFD, without much research, simply on the imprecision of the name. Looking at this again, the alarm bells ring more loudly.

My first visit was to the linked Category:Sports festivals in Nigeria (permalink). It raised 3 alarm bells with me: first that so much explanation was needed, secondly that it acknowledged so much overlap with pother categories, and thirdly that it had only one article.

None of those trait is desirable in a category.

An explanation may be helpful to clarify technical terminology, but if any such explanation sets out to clarify a lack of precision in the title, then we have a problem. Categories are usually applied through tools like HotCat, which do not display any of the text in the category page, so if the title isn't clear, we get miscategorisations.

Overlap is also a bad thing, because it causes category clutter on article pages. A well-designed set of categories has minimal overlap.

The single-article category alarmed me, so I looked a little further: it turns out to be one of six single-article sub-cats of Category:Sports festivals in Africa. That's not good. So I looked further at the parent Category:Sports festivals by continent, and I see a wide spread of categories with few contents.

Many of the contents look problematic. For example, the first-listed subcat of Category:Sports festivals by continent is Category:Dance festivals by continent. But dancing is entertainment and/or art, rather than sport, Category:Dance is not a subcat of Category:Sport. So that's a miscategorisation, and a widespread one.

Another subcat is Category:Motorcycle rallies by continent. I notice there that the parent Category:Motorcycle rallies was not categorised as a "festival" until Earflaps added[1] a set of categories. But the head article Motorcycle rally (permalink) doesn't mention the word "festival" other than in the category[2] added by Earflaps. I think I'd want to see some sort of reliable sources for describing these rallied as "festivals".

So I see a lot to worry about. I am sure that Earflaps is doing this work in good faith, but the fate of the 2016 June 22 CFD (stalled, no sign of consensus) shows that for good or ill, the community doesn't have any consensus yet on whether this all adds up to coherent concept under a clear name.

I suggest that this would be a great point for Earflaps to take a break from building this category tree, and have some wider discussions about whether and how to proceed. This is potentially a very big category tree, and since questions have already been raised, it is much better to resolve them now, rather than risk putting a lot of work into a big edifice which gets demolished later.

And one last thing. Earflaps, I was sorry to see your comment I get tired of doing everyone's work for them, while people talk in endless circles. I hear your frustration, and I empathise with it (I've been there) ... but please do remember than en.wp makes decisions by consensus, and the first subsection of WP:BOLD is headed Be careful. You don't yet have a clear consensus for what you're doing, and while that's not a red light, I do see a few amber lights.

Hope this helps. Best wishes, --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 02:26, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

I endorse BrownHairedGirl's comments about giving it a break. For many additions to the questioned category structure, long after concerns have been raised and CFD's started, I fail to see that as good faith, or understanding the importance of waiting before consensus is arrived for specific concrete decisions, before adding more.

Pointing to a CFD page is a problem - this is a wikipedia wider issue that needs to be in a wikipedia space, not a CFD page space, this is up in RFC or somewhere where the wider ramifications of category creation and the issues of categories that are overlaps and misunderstandings - maybe category creation needs to be reviewed. JarrahTree 02:43, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

I've been very tactful with creating this category tree, I wish some of you would recognize that instead of the constant negativity. Look at the history logs. I created the page, then created the country/continents skeleton with two sample country pages, to see how that would be received. Then I politely waited for the initial deletion discussion to finish its course, and modified the page as the community talked, to try and incorporate people's various opinions. I expanded the tree a few days ago because my blueprint was finally ready, and I felt confident the new variation incorporated people's worries as best as possible. I won't apologize for expanding it to its current size, and will continue to add more country trees if I see the need, unless the community decides the tree needs to go (if they can come to a consensus). If the community can't decide, that's not my fault, and you shouldn't dump on me in frustration. Kudpung, you should know better than to act like I own this category simply because I recreated it. Earflaps (talk) 02:52, 30 July 2016 (UTC)