Category talk:Locations

Categorization

Hello, all. I am admittedly a little confused by the heirarchy decided upon. Why would we not want to also put cities, e.g. San Fierro, into Category:Locations in GTA San Andreas? Isn't San Fierro a location in the game? As is stands, it seems a little jumbled to me to have individual cities only listed in Category:Locations, but not in the appropriate game subcategories. If I were a new player of GTA San Andreas, looking through Category:Locations for the Calton Heights district of San Fierro, I would most likely not start by looking through the numerous (IMO, too many) articles listed at the bottom, but would instead look under Category:Locations in GTA San Andreas to find the city and specific entity I'm looking for in this particular game. Furthermore, it seems to me a little more succinct to have the heriarchy go Category:Locations --> Category:Locations in GTA San Andreas --> Category:Locations in San Fierro --> Calton Heights. According to the pre-defined heirarchy, I would only be able to find Calton Heights by going to Category:San Fierro. What does everyone else think?

All that having been said, I am most likely confused by what is being considered as a location, and what constitutes gaming info., and what is simply general interest. Can someone enlighten me? :-) Eganio^Talk 20:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it would be easier just like that. --Tsukaji 20:37, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I like your idea of subcategorizing within the cities, such as Category:Businesses in San Fierro. The only problem I can foresee is overcategorization, something I have definitely been guilty of! However, I am of the opinion that categories that tend to become too full of articles and subcategories should be parsed in favor of clarity and ease of navigation. So far, there is so much information that will end up in categories such as Category:Locations, that I think it would behoove us to discuss how to subdivide things. For instance, I go into Category:Locations, see the jumbled mess of articles at the bottom, and immediately go to the top, because it seems organized much more succinctly. Thoughts? Eganio^Talk 21:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Categorisation 2

I think that Tsukaji makes a good suggestion for the categorisation of business in the Locations categories. As they aren't really locations, merely businesses, a sub-category is logical. However, I would suggest that the categories have qualifiers in brackets because, for example, businesses in Liberty City could refer to either GTA 1, GTA III, GTA Advance, GTA Liberty City Stories and/or GTA IV. A-Dust 21:15, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, yes, that's more or less what I had in mind. Howerver, it might be better to subcategorize within game designations, as is already being done here, i.e. Category:Locations in GTA San Andreas --> Category:Locations in San Fierro --> etc. I think the same should be done for businesses, i.e. Category:Businesses in GTA San Andreas --> Category:Businesses in San Fierro --> etc. That way we don't have to distunguish between games in the subcategories. Thoughts? Eganio^Talk 21:19, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, we still do have to distinguish between games for Liberty City, don't we? I see your point. Eganio^Talk 21:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

How about this: because [[San Andreas]] is only a city in GTA 1, and is an entire state in only GTA San Andreas, it would be alright to say Category:Businesses in San Fierro, since San Fierro exists in only one game. For Liberty City, then, how about just creating categories like Category:Businesses in GTA IV, without subdividing, since no subdivisions are necessary, owing to the fact that GTA IV takes place in only one city. What does everyone think? Eganio^Talk 21:34, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Well despite the fact that in GTA IV Liberty City is only a city, it's only slightly smaller than San Andreas. However, it could be done by borough... ie. Category:Businesses in Algonquin. Thoughts? Biggest GTA Fan Ever^Talk 11:22, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Locations and Places

I'm confused on what should be there. To me those two words mean the same thing. It's the same problem with Locations in GTA IV and Liberty City in GTA IV.--Spaceeinstein 17:01, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

You're (still) right that this is all messed up with many overlapping categories. The intention with all these categories was to separate areas (districts etc), with specific places that have a purpose (parks, harbours), with locations being specific buildings with a function (from police stations to gas stations), and the various types of buildings, structures and businesses. The reason locations was per-game (not per-city or per-era) was because many things were different in each game, and I didn't want each article to have 10 categories of an endless string of "Locations in city in game". But it all needs rethinking.

I think this might be the simplest way of separating things:

Category:Liberty City in GTA IV Era should only contain named areas of the map. This should not include any buildings (except where one building defines a whole area, like Cedar Ridge Observatory or Area 69).
- Each sub-area can have its own category (eg Category:Bohan), containing any features of that area, such as roads, parks and other transport systems - but not buildings/businesses.
Category:Locations in GTA IV should contain all functional/accessible/notable buildings and locations in each area - everything from hospitals to tourist attractions (i.e. places the player could go to). This should not include inaccessible shop fronts, but it can include major inaccessible buildings that are not businesses (such as hospitals, government buildings, skyscrapers etc), as that is more than just a flat shop-front texture. The specific game doesn't matter, just city (and era if required) - game that can be specified in the article.
- There should be subcategories for each area, such as Category:Locations in Bohan in GTA IV (or perhaps just Category:Locations in Bohan where the area only features in one game)
- There could be subsubcategories within each area for any large groups, such as Category:Roads in Bohan
Category:Businesses in GTA IV should contain any business, company, shop or service operating/mentioned in the game, whether or not they have a building
- There should also be a top-level category for each type of business, such as Category:Airlines, but these can be broken down per game when there are dozens (like Category:Shops in GTA IV)
Note that the top-level categories (locations/places) should never be used - always be as specific as possible (use Category:Locations in Bohan, rather than Category:Locations in GTA IV or Category:Locations)
Note that for expansion packs/DLC (like TLAD and BOGT), locations/business should just be in the main-game's categories (GTA IV/Bohan). We'd only need to use specific categories for TLAD/BOGT where there are significant numbers of differences (if it's just the odd bar/club/safehouse that's only accessible in one expansion, it can be mentioned in the article rather than needing an extra category). We could even have an additional category specifically for locations accessible ONLY in TLAD, to make that easier.

Just a suggestion, but probably worth another community discussion! gboyers ^talk 03:21, 31 October 2011 (GMT)

Why not use the same style of categorization as vehicles/weapons/characters? The site already has "Locations in GTA III", "Locations in GTA Vice City", etc., for the structures and areas in the games.--spaceeinstein 04:28, 31 October 2011 (GMT)

Yeah that does make more sense. Fixed the suggestion above. However, this does mean that (for example) each location will have to be in both the VC and VCS categories; and others the GTA IV, TLAD and BOGT categories . gboyers ^talk 14:16, 31 October 2011 (GMT)