Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Something by country

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Some categories have subcategories as "category:Something by country" or "category:Xers by nationality", while some do not. Should it be standardised that all category:Something of Foo or category:Xers of Foo/category:Fooish xers be categorised under "category:Something by country" or "category:Xers by nationality"? Or should all "category:Something by country" or "category:Xers by nationality" be deleted? — Instantnood 17:50, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)

category:Islands vs. category:Peninsulas/category:Peninsulas by nation,
category:Rivers vs. category:Lakes/category:Lakes by country, and
category:Trade unionists vs. category:Economists by nationality/category:EconomistsInstantnood 19:03, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
  • No to both. Gene Nygaard 20:25, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment: If you think they shouldn't be deleted, then should they be created for all categories of the same sort? (e.g. category:Islands by country created as a subcategory of category:Islands) — Instantnood 21:00, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
      • Those the two things you proposed. Those are the two things I say no to. Different factors are involved in different categories, including number of elements. Lakes are usually in one country or shared by a couple; rivers are often in several countries. You are also being dishonest about Category:Trade unionists which has had subcategories by country created on an as-needed basis; there is no reason just to make them for all countries. Gene Nygaard 22:42, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
        • Why can't "category:Fooian trade unionists" be arranged under "category:Trade unionists by nationality"? — Instantnood 13:29, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)
          • Whether it can or not is totally irrevant to both points you were making here. Gene Nygaard 16:45, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • No to both. We should and do have some standards for naming of categories, but categories should not be made just because other categories like them exist; let the weight of content and need drive category formation and not adminstrative rules. This particular discussion has shown up in multiple forms and I personally don't think a blanket one-rule-for-all is the way to go. Courtland 21:19, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)
    • Comment: Agree. But some sort of guidelines seem necessary. The situation has now ended up with category:Islands vs category:Peninsulas/category:Peninsulas by nation, and category:Rivers vs. category:Lakes/category:Lakes by country, which is clearly confusing. — Instantnood 21:54, Mar 26, 2005 (UTC)
      • You are using the "Categories for deletion" resource as a forum for hashing out guidelines, then, rather than as a place to propose and discuss deletions of categories? Courtland 22:48, 2005 Mar 26 (UTC)
        • Umm. If the decision is not to delete these categories, we should proceed to elsewhere to discuss on whether they should be created for cases alike. — Instantnood 13:29, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)
          • agreed; suggestions? Courtland 17:45, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)
            • First thing to agree on is the suggestion "we should proceed to elsewhere". Abandon this discussion which is going nowhere and send it to the archives. Gene Nygaard 17:49, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • no to both, I agree with everything Courtland said. Thryduulf 00:07, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Oppose No such sweeping change required. Sensitivity to context it more important. Wincoote 01:04, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • no to both, I agree with everything Thryduulf said. -Kbdank71 14:36, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • It's a good idea in principle but wouldn't currently work in practice. See the WikiProject on categorization. Radiant_* 08:43, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)