Commons:Categories for discussion/2023/09/Category:Lost specimens
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Anyone know exactly what a "lost specimen" is or have a less ambiguous name for the category? Otherwise I think I'm just going to up-merge the images to somewhere else if no one can provide a better alternative. Adamant1 (talk) 22:33, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, it is a scientific specimen that has been lost/disappeared one way or another, and is now only documented by illustrations or casts. The name could perhaps be clearer, but it's a thing. FunkMonk (talk) 07:43, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I assume your talking specimens for instinct species, not specimens that have been lost in a drawer somewhere or something since the category seems to exclusively contain images of instinct animals. If that's the case then why not just create specimen categories for the individual animals like Category:Raphus cucullatus specimens for specimens of Dodo birds? Otherwise it seems kind of pointless to have a unique category for "lost" animals (whatever that means) since it's kind of inherent to animals like the Dodo bird that they aren't around anymore. Or should images of specimens for every currently non-exiting, pre-modern animal be put in the category? Doing so would be rather redundant but that seems to be where this category system is leading. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- No, it is not exclusive to extinct animals. All animal species, including living ones, have type specimens, or other important specimens that are used to define them, and in some cases, these are lost. What this category does is give an overview of such specimens. It could be changed to "Lost scientific specimens" or similar. FunkMonk (talk) 11:06, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'm sure not sure what "lost" means in this context. Is the specimen lost or is the animal that it's a specimen of lost? Category names should be unambiguous and not be about multiple subjects. Neither of which is really satisfied by the name of this category. Let alone whatever is suppose to go in it. Since at this point it could contain anything from images of specimens for extinct animals or ones of stolen and missing Moon rocks, which you'd have to agree have nothing to do with each other. So I don't think the word "lost" is really helpful here. I'd be open to changing it to something like Category:Extinct animal specimens since it's essentially what the category currently contains images of, but it seems like you wouldn't be open to that. Changing it to "Lost scientific specimens" or similar doesn't really solve the ambiguity issue though. Let alone the fact that missing Moon rocks have absolutely nothing in common with extinct Dodo birds. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:24, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- But "extinct animal specimens" is not what this is about at all, yet again, it is specimens of any animal, extinct or living, that have become lost one way or the other, either by destruction, misplacing, theft, etc. If we want the name to be more specific, we should not make it even vaguer. FunkMonk (talk) 17:36, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'm sure not sure what "lost" means in this context. Is the specimen lost or is the animal that it's a specimen of lost? Category names should be unambiguous and not be about multiple subjects. Neither of which is really satisfied by the name of this category. Let alone whatever is suppose to go in it. Since at this point it could contain anything from images of specimens for extinct animals or ones of stolen and missing Moon rocks, which you'd have to agree have nothing to do with each other. So I don't think the word "lost" is really helpful here. I'd be open to changing it to something like Category:Extinct animal specimens since it's essentially what the category currently contains images of, but it seems like you wouldn't be open to that. Changing it to "Lost scientific specimens" or similar doesn't really solve the ambiguity issue though. Let alone the fact that missing Moon rocks have absolutely nothing in common with extinct Dodo birds. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:24, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- No, it is not exclusive to extinct animals. All animal species, including living ones, have type specimens, or other important specimens that are used to define them, and in some cases, these are lost. What this category does is give an overview of such specimens. It could be changed to "Lost scientific specimens" or similar. FunkMonk (talk) 11:06, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
- I assume your talking specimens for instinct species, not specimens that have been lost in a drawer somewhere or something since the category seems to exclusively contain images of instinct animals. If that's the case then why not just create specimen categories for the individual animals like Category:Raphus cucullatus specimens for specimens of Dodo birds? Otherwise it seems kind of pointless to have a unique category for "lost" animals (whatever that means) since it's kind of inherent to animals like the Dodo bird that they aren't around anymore. Or should images of specimens for every currently non-exiting, pre-modern animal be put in the category? Doing so would be rather redundant but that seems to be where this category system is leading. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC)