nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 162:
Line 162: − + − + − + − + − + − + − + Line 180:
Line 180: + + + + + + + + + +
Conservapedia talk:Editing article and talk pages (view source)
Revision as of 08:01, March 9, 2008
, 08:01, March 9, 2008→New Categories: My comments
::::'''Appropriate'''
::::'''Appropriate'''
:::*Every article should have at least one category.
:::#Every article should have at least one category.
:::*Large categories should be broken down when size becomes combersome or difficult to manage.
:::#Large categories should be broken down when size becomes combersome or difficult to manage.
:::*Appropriate for our target audience (conservative and Christian).
:::#Appropriate for our target audience (conservative and Christian).
:::*Make a logical link within the overall category structure.
:::#Make a logical link within the overall category structure.
:::*New editors should discuss appropriate categories on the articles' talk page <u>prior</u> to adding categories.
:::#New editors should discuss appropriate categories on the articles' talk page <u>prior</u> to adding categories.
:::*Categories are to be in title case (e.g. Australian Cities and Towns, not Australian cities and towns)
:::#Categories are to be in title case (e.g. Australian Cities and Towns, not Australian cities and towns)
:::*Categories are to be plural where applicable (e.g. Planets, not Planet, but Rail Transport).
:::#Categories are to be plural where applicable (e.g. Planets, not Planet, but Rail Transport).
::::'''Inappropriate'''
::::'''Inappropriate'''
::::This is a start. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 03:45, 9 March 2008 (EDT)
::::This is a start. --[[User:Crocoite|Crocoite]] 03:45, 9 March 2008 (EDT)
::::: Thanks for the comments. I've changed Crocoite's bullets to numbers for easy reference. I have a few concerns with the suggestions, however.
:::::* Learn together says that "Any new contributors who jump in with creating a number of questionable categories and altering current category designations before even adding new articles should be looked at carefully". Well, anyone, new or not, who adds ''questionable'' categories should be looked at carefully. So let's leave that point out. That leaves "Any new contributors who jump in with creating a number of categories and altering current category designations before even adding new articles should be looked at carefully". Now this I have a problem with. I know I'm at odds here with others, including Andy, but what's wrong with a new editor's first contributions being to add or alter categories, and even new ones, ''assuming that they are appropriate''? The point we should be focusing on is providing guidelines as to what is appropriate, not whether or not the editor is new.
:::::* Requiring editors to always discuss categories on talk pages is just bureaucracy, in my opinion (which is not to say that such things should ''never'' be discussed on talk pages).
:::::* Crocoite's points 1 to 4 are all good, except of course that points 2 to 4 could be somewhat open to interpretation (how large is too large, for example).
:::::* Crocoite's points 6 & 7 are valid, but already in the Manual of Style.
::::: I'm not commenting on Crocoite's "inappropriate" points, as they are mostly just the negatives of the first list.
::::: Perhaps we should be putting some numbers on things. Something like "any categories with fewer than x entries should not be broken down without prior discussion".
::::: I realise that my comments are probably not very helpful (and of course they should be taken as being from me as an editor, not as an administrator), but perhaps I'll have better ideas after some more feedback. Please feel free to disagree with me.
::::: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 04:01, 9 March 2008 (EDT)