On 6/6/06, Bryan Derksen <bryan.derksen(a)shaw.ca> wrote:
Steve Bennett wrote:
Do you have any examples? What would they look
like? Perhaps:
{{thematic category|name of subject}}
I don't think we should make things unnecessarily complicated by making
the templates take parameters, just use {{PAGENAME}}. If the category's
name isn't suitable for use in the template describing it then I suspect
it's an indication that the category's name might need changing. :)
Mmm...you may be right. In any case, the text on the category page
should provide enough context to clarify. There may be cases where a
category is forced to obey a particular naming scheme which isn't the
most descriptive for what it is, but I can't think of any immediately.
How about "Members of this category should be specific examples of
{{PAGENAME}}"
I'll try a couple of random examples:
Members of this category should be specific examples of Districts of Berlin.
Members of this category should be specific examples of Billboard Hot
100 number-one singles
Members of this category should be specific examples of Russian and
Soviet polar explorers
[an example where the text would be better as "Russian *or* Soviet
polar explorers"?]
Members of this category should be specific examples of Cities in Kentucky
Members of this category should be specific examples of Pakistan
movement activists
Members of this category should be specific examples of Lists of state
leaders by year
[this article also had the presumably "thematic" category 730s - a
counterexample to the plurals rule]
Members of this category should be specific examples of United Kingdom
court systems
Members of this category should be specific examples of Members and
associates of the US National Academy of Sciences
[another and -> or]
Members of this category should be specific examples of Rivers of Indonesia
["Rivers in Indonesia" would be more natural]
Members of this category should be specific examples of Pejorative
names for people.
I guess in general it works, but some other ideas:
Articles in this category should describe individual
Articles in this category should be
Only ___ should be in this category.
Only articles about [specific | individual] ___ should be in this category.
Also note there is a capitalisation issue to deal with...
There is also a problem with "1923 births" type cats - these don't fit
comfortably into any of these sentences.
(incidentally, with this distinction between taxonomic and thematic,
is it time to up the ante and say that every article should have at
least one taxonomic category? by random article I come to "Chrysler
Phaeton" which only has the thematic category "Chrysler" - whereas it
really should have at least the taxonomic "Cars" or something)
and "Members of this category or its subcategories
should
be about the topic of {{PAGENAME}}"?
Members of this category or its subcategories should be about the
topic of... Education in New York
...Huntingdon County, Pennsylvania
...Oslo T-bane
...Baseball
...Isle of Man
I don't think it works - [[The Buchan School]] is not "about the topic
of The Isle of Man". What is the relationship exactly? "should have a
strong connection with"?
I'm deliberately leaving the "or
its subcategories" off of the is-a template, so that we can continue
having things like [[Category:Seattle]] be a subcategory of
[[Category:Cities in Washington]] (or whatever the real category names
are) like we do now.
I think we just decided in the long thread that that's a bad idea as follows:
Cities in Washington is a taxonomic category
Seattle is a thematic category
Thematic categories should never be subcategories of taxonomic
categories (although the reverse is ok)
If your proposal is to allow for a graceful changeover, then I understand.
Steve