Category talk:Women

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

A lot of the people in here will need to be linked to other categories as well. --Jeremiah4-22 16:33, 2 April 2007 (EDT)


What's the point of having a 'Women' category? We don't have a 'Men' category.

Something smells like feminism --BenjaminS 12:14, 11 April 2007 (EDT)

I'm not sure how I feel about this category. If someone isn't historically noteworthy other than the fact that she is a female, then I doubt they belong in an encyclopedia.

A list like this can be very useful for school/homeschool assignments. For example, some schools and homeschool co-ops have "come dressed as your favorite historical character" day - a page like this gives girls a quick list of people to choose from. Girls often want to choose a female as a topic for a presentation or research paper - a famous female scientist, or a famous woman of the Civil War era, etc. A list like this can be very helpful, as many of the women are fairly minor figures in history/science/etc., so are not as well-known as the men. It can also be helpful to a teacher who is looking for research topics, etc. for her students. Hopefully, there will eventually be enough articles to subdivide this list, perhaps by time period, etc. With only 64 entries, this is a pretty small category at the moment. Of course, many of these women belong in other categories too - scientists, or artists, and so on.
We don't have a 'Men' category. We could certainly have a "people" category, which could then be divided into "men" and "women", if anyone thinks that may be useful - I have no opinion either way. I just know that, as a teacher, (especially when teaching girls) I've used lists of famous women like this in the past and found them to be very handy.
If someone isn't historically noteworthy other than the fact that she is a female, then I doubt they belong in an encyclopedia. True - but the women listed here are noteworthy. Some may be in smaller categories, though - it's going to be a while before CP has enough "important midwives" to warrant a category, for example, so it's nice to have them included in the "women" list. (Pioneering midwife Mary Breckinridge is an important start, as she was hugely influential, and in fact has been on a US postage stamp.)
I've noticed that the alphabetization of the list is horrible, though - I'll see what can be done about that.--Hsmom 17:25, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
Alright, I can get behind that.
Currently, this is how these categories are set up - Biographies is the main category, with Women as a subcategory, as well as things like Musicians, Political People, Artists, etc. Do you think that we need to add these divisions within the Women subcategory? Personally, I think at least for the time being, that we should leave the Women category as it is, and try to tag as many of them as we can with other Biography subcategories. That way, if I go to Biographies, and then click on Musicians, I can see a complete list of musicians, not just males/females, and you still have a preserved masterlist of women that are listed in the encyclopedia.
I'm not sure I'm making sense there, let me know what you think. And I agree, I'm trying to fix the alphabetization on these lists as I categorize. --Colest 17:42, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
Personally, I think at least for the time being, that we should leave the Women category as it is, and try to tag as many of them as we can with other Biography subcategories. I completely agree that this is the best way to go at it, at least for the time being. I've added a few of the DEFAULTSORT tags to various women, and will do a few here and there as I have time. Should each of them also have a "biographies" category tag, or does that come automatically with the "women" one?--Hsmom 17:48, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
There is no need, in my opinion, to have biographies on there if you have added one of the subcategories. Just so you can get a better feel of things, find an article with the Woman subcategory and click on it at the bottom of the article. You will see everything in that subcategory, and then at the bottom you will see the "parent" categories that it has branched off of. So if you Click Women, you'll see Biographies at the bottom, and if you click Biographies, you'll see all the uncategorized biography articles, as well as all the main subcategories off of it. And then some of those subcategories go deeper, etc.
That being said, I think some people will warrant having multiple subcategories (say a Singer and an Actor), but it is my opinion you don't need to have the most generic (Biographies) as well as a more specific (Musician) on any given article, the more specific one should suffice. --Colest 17:53, 30 May 2007 (EDT)

One minor point - I think most people who have triple names (like Julia Ward Howe) are generally alphabetized based on the last name (Howe) rather than the last two (Ward Howe), unless the last two are hyphenated. There seem to be some folks on the Women list who are alphabetized by the last two - if I've got it right, we need to fix this. (I'm guessing, too, that there are some exceptions. We'll need to check carefully.) --Hsmom 10:30, 1 June 2007 (EDT)

Personal tools