Museums NA‑class | |||||||
|
United States: Kentucky Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
I hope you enjoy it. TableManners U· T· C 17:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
The organization can be improved in my opinion. Right now we only have two groupings, and they are not necessarily the best groupings. We might consider geographic, or refining the Art, History, and religion. Comments? TableManners U· T· C 17:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Placing the template instead of articles in Category:Museums in Kentucky would appear to be both idiosyncratic & unhelpful. I would recommend against it. Hrafn Talk Stalk 17:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Organized by | Pros | Cons |
---|---|---|
Museum type | Could work out well...but | May end up with some museums types that only contain one museum (unless we establish a catch-all "Other" category, e.g. for categories that would have two or less museums, and cannot be cleanly accommodated by expanding some other category to include related fields) |
Region | ???? | ???? |
Number of visitors per year | Can set threshold for three different groupings. E.g., 5,000 or less, 5,0000-15,000, and 15,000 and above. | Would probably have to indicate museum type with piping, e.g., [[museum name|museum name (technology)]] Would tend to be unstable (as numbers would vary from year to year). How useful a categorisation is it for readers (it's effectively a major vs minor museum division)? |
Feel free to modify the above table. TableManners U· T· C 04:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Museums NA‑class | |||||||
|
United States: Kentucky Template‑class | ||||||||||
|
I hope you enjoy it. TableManners U· T· C 17:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
The organization can be improved in my opinion. Right now we only have two groupings, and they are not necessarily the best groupings. We might consider geographic, or refining the Art, History, and religion. Comments? TableManners U· T· C 17:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Placing the template instead of articles in Category:Museums in Kentucky would appear to be both idiosyncratic & unhelpful. I would recommend against it. Hrafn Talk Stalk 17:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Organized by | Pros | Cons |
---|---|---|
Museum type | Could work out well...but | May end up with some museums types that only contain one museum (unless we establish a catch-all "Other" category, e.g. for categories that would have two or less museums, and cannot be cleanly accommodated by expanding some other category to include related fields) |
Region | ???? | ???? |
Number of visitors per year | Can set threshold for three different groupings. E.g., 5,000 or less, 5,0000-15,000, and 15,000 and above. | Would probably have to indicate museum type with piping, e.g., [[museum name|museum name (technology)]] Would tend to be unstable (as numbers would vary from year to year). How useful a categorisation is it for readers (it's effectively a major vs minor museum division)? |
Feel free to modify the above table. TableManners U· T· C 04:37, 24 December 2007 (UTC)