![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Sorry to vote against your nomination, even though I had suggested it. I should have checked the nameing conventions before I said anything about it. -- Eric ProveIt (talk) 14:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Please revisit Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 June 8#Category:Lists of schools sharing the same name to Category:Lists of educational institutions sharing the same name and if necessary, modify your vote. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- Usgnus 04:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the messages and the chance to clarify or change position. I don't like the construction. I don't like the alternative much either; both seem to allow for the possibility of a person being both dead and alive. Without being metaphysical here, people tend to be either dead or alive, so that they are not "possibly living" and are not "maybe alive". It's just that the collective *we* don't know. For example, Jimmy Hoffa is either dead or alive he's not "possibly living" and he's not "maybe alive".
Perhaps the clunkier but more accurate view is something akin to Category:People who have disappeared and not returned. I think the have could also be moved following the "and" and sound more like USA-English. Carlossuarez46 03:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
I have pointed out in the discussion that Category:Anthropological categories is a duplicate of Category:Anthropology, which contains a wide range of categories which are not about peoples. Osomec 13:54, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
You may not have been aware that we already have Category:Streets and squares by city. This category is effectively a duplicate and what is the point of having a separate category with the word "names" in the title? I see little value in this category, and the fact that it has started with two cities in Eastern Europe at this late stage shows that it is eccentric. Streets can be also categorised by country within Category:Roads by country. That system is well established too. I have proposed a merger and would ask you to consider that option. Chicheley 23:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm seeing this sort of varying content shift when looking back at things? I definitely saw maps combining on the en.wikipedia page when moving stuff ten days back. Now things no longer seem to be an 'AND' list here, so to speak. Puzzling! // Fra nkB 12:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Sorry to vote against your nomination, even though I had suggested it. I should have checked the nameing conventions before I said anything about it. -- Eric ProveIt (talk) 14:26, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Please revisit Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 June 8#Category:Lists of schools sharing the same name to Category:Lists of educational institutions sharing the same name and if necessary, modify your vote. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- Usgnus 04:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the messages and the chance to clarify or change position. I don't like the construction. I don't like the alternative much either; both seem to allow for the possibility of a person being both dead and alive. Without being metaphysical here, people tend to be either dead or alive, so that they are not "possibly living" and are not "maybe alive". It's just that the collective *we* don't know. For example, Jimmy Hoffa is either dead or alive he's not "possibly living" and he's not "maybe alive".
Perhaps the clunkier but more accurate view is something akin to Category:People who have disappeared and not returned. I think the have could also be moved following the "and" and sound more like USA-English. Carlossuarez46 03:07, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
I have pointed out in the discussion that Category:Anthropological categories is a duplicate of Category:Anthropology, which contains a wide range of categories which are not about peoples. Osomec 13:54, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
You may not have been aware that we already have Category:Streets and squares by city. This category is effectively a duplicate and what is the point of having a separate category with the word "names" in the title? I see little value in this category, and the fact that it has started with two cities in Eastern Europe at this late stage shows that it is eccentric. Streets can be also categorised by country within Category:Roads by country. That system is well established too. I have proposed a merger and would ask you to consider that option. Chicheley 23:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm seeing this sort of varying content shift when looking back at things? I definitely saw maps combining on the en.wikipedia page when moving stuff ten days back. Now things no longer seem to be an 'AND' list here, so to speak. Puzzling! // Fra nkB 12:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)