BoyWiki:Agora/10 November 2015: Difference between revisions
From BoyWiki
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
At Wikipedia there is mostly a sound understanding concerning the appropriate use of categories. One of the consensus conclusions there with which I totally agree is that very small categories should be avoided and articles should instead be migrated (upmerged) into a relevant parent category. A summary count I just made divulges that we have 34 biographical articles for people born in the 20th century. These are categorized into 27 categories which specify the year of birth, an average of 1.26 articles per category. I propose that we upmerge all of these category entries to birth by decade for the 20th century. I propose the same for 19th century births. Before that we simply have so few names, less than a handful, the they should just be lumped into one container category, Births before 1800. __[[User:Meco|meco]] ([[User talk:Meco|talk]]) 15:20, 10 November 2015 (UTC) | At Wikipedia there is mostly a sound understanding concerning the appropriate use of categories. One of the consensus conclusions there with which I totally agree is that very small categories should be avoided and articles should instead be migrated (upmerged) into a relevant parent category. A summary count I just made divulges that we have 34 biographical articles for people born in the 20th century. These are categorized into 27 categories which specify the year of birth, an average of 1.26 articles per category. I propose that we upmerge all of these category entries to birth by decade for the 20th century. I propose the same for 19th century births. Before that we simply have so few names, less than a handful, the they should just be lumped into one container category, Births before 1800. __[[User:Meco|meco]] ([[User talk:Meco|talk]]) 15:20, 10 November 2015 (UTC) | ||
:I would welcome adding them to birth by decade but I still want to keep what we have for technical reasons. The problem is Meco, you come to BoyWiki with a very strong understanding of how Wikipedia is categorized as well as how to wiki, most people don't have that expirance. I have had a bear of a time getting people to understand that we need to categories starting with a general category and then becoming more specific as naturally indicated. Some people have said that they don't like our category hierarchy of Encyclopedia, entertainment, and life which I am not willing to change because that is how our creators intended it to be set up and I would to try to maintain their vision as much as possible. Also keep in mind that BoyWiki is not primary an encyclopedia, it is the archive/museum of our history, culture, and heritage and of our expirance. However if you wanted to work on categorizing Category:Encyclopedia that would be welcome. --[[User:Etenne|Etenne]] ([[User talk:Etenne|talk]]) 15:58, 10 November 2015 (UTC) | :I would welcome adding them to birth by decade but I still want to keep what we have for technical reasons. The problem is Meco, you come to BoyWiki with a very strong understanding of how Wikipedia is categorized as well as how to wiki, most people don't have that expirance. I have had a bear of a time getting people to understand that we need to categories starting with a general category and then becoming more specific as naturally indicated. Some people have said that they don't like our category hierarchy of Encyclopedia, entertainment, and life which I am not willing to change because that is how our creators intended it to be set up and I would to try to maintain their vision as much as possible. Also keep in mind that BoyWiki is not primary an encyclopedia, it is the archive/museum of our history, culture, and heritage and of our expirance as boylovers. However if you wanted to work on categorizing Category:Encyclopedia that would be welcome. --[[User:Etenne|Etenne]] ([[User talk:Etenne|talk]]) 15:58, 10 November 2015 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 15:59, 10 November 2015
Agora/10 November 2015
Underpopulated categories
At Wikipedia there is mostly a sound understanding concerning the appropriate use of categories. One of the consensus conclusions there with which I totally agree is that very small categories should be avoided and articles should instead be migrated (upmerged) into a relevant parent category. A summary count I just made divulges that we have 34 biographical articles for people born in the 20th century. These are categorized into 27 categories which specify the year of birth, an average of 1.26 articles per category. I propose that we upmerge all of these category entries to birth by decade for the 20th century. I propose the same for 19th century births. Before that we simply have so few names, less than a handful, the they should just be lumped into one container category, Births before 1800. __meco (talk) 15:20, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- I would welcome adding them to birth by decade but I still want to keep what we have for technical reasons. The problem is Meco, you come to BoyWiki with a very strong understanding of how Wikipedia is categorized as well as how to wiki, most people don't have that expirance. I have had a bear of a time getting people to understand that we need to categories starting with a general category and then becoming more specific as naturally indicated. Some people have said that they don't like our category hierarchy of Encyclopedia, entertainment, and life which I am not willing to change because that is how our creators intended it to be set up and I would to try to maintain their vision as much as possible. Also keep in mind that BoyWiki is not primary an encyclopedia, it is the archive/museum of our history, culture, and heritage and of our expirance as boylovers. However if you wanted to work on categorizing Category:Encyclopedia that would be welcome. --Etenne (talk) 15:58, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
