nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 19:
Line 19: +
Talk:Immanuel Velikovsky (view source)
Revision as of 19:54, February 15, 2009
, 19:54, February 15, 2009→Category:Authors: Agree wotj sib=categorising
::Oops, you are correct. Currently we are looking at Essayists, Historians, Journalists, Playwrights, Poets, Slavic Authors, and Women Authors. We could break what is left in the Authors category down by, say, Science Authors, Science-Fiction Authors, Religious Authors, Novelists, etc. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 11:13, 15 February 2009 (EST)
::Oops, you are correct. Currently we are looking at Essayists, Historians, Journalists, Playwrights, Poets, Slavic Authors, and Women Authors. We could break what is left in the Authors category down by, say, Science Authors, Science-Fiction Authors, Religious Authors, Novelists, etc. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 11:13, 15 February 2009 (EST)
:::It would make sense to sub-categorize "authors", and all sorts of categories are possible, including their subject (science writers, science fiction writers), No. 1 best-sellers, etc etc. --[[User:Eric2009|Eric2009]] 11:29, 15 February 2009 (EST)
:::It would make sense to sub-categorize "authors", and all sorts of categories are possible, including their subject (science writers, science fiction writers), No. 1 best-sellers, etc etc. --[[User:Eric2009|Eric2009]] 11:29, 15 February 2009 (EST)
:::: I didn't previously comment on this issue because, at the stage the discussion was at, I was undecided. However, I agree that sub-categorising the "authors" category is a good idea, and Valikovsky could then be included in one of those sub-categories. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 14:54, 15 February 2009 (EST)
==Category:science fiction==
==Category:science fiction==