Knowledge talk:Category names/Archive 5

2307:

categories be changed to something different. If there's a consensus on CFD, then so be it. The point of starting with where we are now is to avoid the two step process where we agree and then we have the same discussion in the broader community. Since it's really the broader community that matters, I don't really think there's much point in attempting to bring our "baby steps" to consensus (and I think we're reaching the point where "he who argues longest wins"). Assuming we institute the rule I've proposed (or something similar), the next step is to take any

861:

arbitrary, and/or instruction creep. KISS principle, you know. For a good example thereof, refer to the recent CSD proposal and compare reactions to proposal 1 (relying on common sense) to those to proposal 2 (relying on statistics) or 4 (relying on strict limits). Now I'm not saying this to be argumentative - I'm saying this because the earlier poll, and existing categorization, and common sense, and NC precedent, all indicate that most people think this is a good idea. So no need for further bureaucracy, let's move on and make it actionable.

3148:. However, here is a further thought. Similar to that vote over the European template, we could enshrine the proposal above whilst concurrently opening a poll which would require a 70% consensus either way to enact a standard. The poll would not be closed until such a consensus has formed. This allows discussion to take place and allows an ongoing vote and debate whilst allowing CFD to remain clear of the issue. As soon as one position reaches 70%, that position becomes the standard and all categories fall in line. 1584:, for those I think "of" makes most sence (Départements of France rater than Départements in France), and they are not realy natural objects anyway, but rather man made administrative units so I think those should not be listed alongside rivers and volcanoes. This class also have the additional "problem" of possebly also making sence to categorise by continent, island (in cases like Ireland and other divided islands) or maybe by faultlines and such (volcanoes), but I guess that's a debate for another time. -- 367:"Any categories that go to speedy renaming to be standardised to the agreed format will have a two-day window in which users may state why the category is an exception to said standard. If there is valid objection to the speedy by at least two users, each of these users having been registered before the speedy nomination was made, the category gets the remaining 5 days. Inappropriate reasons include "I want." Appropriate reasons include factual accuracy and length." 664:. As to the procedure for making any standardisation we can agree on a criteria for speedy renaming, since that is the purpose of any standardisation, why do it in two stages? For me it seems just as easy to kill two birds with one stone. I'd also point out that the standard that one wishes to apply would certainly need a consensus. But frankly, I am wearying of this, as it seems we are more intent on filibustering each other than we are on moving forward. 2662:

presenting of lists is something I would still feel obliged to do were we proposing by meta-category, so this seems an admirable compromise to me. It is all well and good tackling all the categories we can agree on, but then we have to tackle the ones we can't agree on, and then we have to present them to the community, and this idea of getting the standard supported first and then agreeing the standard after the event on CSD is a useful idea.

31: 3815:

for overlaps, I generally leave those up to the people who work on those categories to decide what is appropriate, but the advice in the "Dealing with overlaps" section seems useful. I submit it for your approval or dismissal if you think it shouldn't be a part of the convention. (Though it is a common question, and sometimes people object to a proposal because these situations create ambiguity which allows people to imagine the worst.) --

1652:), changing from "of foo" requires renaming 541 categories. Assuming 5 articles per category (I haven't counted the articles, but I'd guess this is the right order of magnitude) and that Pearle runs at her nominal rate of 10 seconds per edit (she's been running 3-4 times slower than this lately), means it would actually take about 7.5 hours to do these. The setup time might be 5 minutes, and perhaps that's what you're referring to. -- 3258:, and if anyone wants to discuss that I propose they take that into account first. I also object to the fact that a poll should be held to determine if there's a consensus for preferring "American topic" or "United States topic" in category naming, when I am in the process of re-igniting that debate. Could we please talk things through here before we make wholesale changes to anything? 3854:. Also, if of Russia refers to the modern day country, how do we refer to the historical country of Russia, and with the category of England, do we refer to the whole of English history, or things as they are now? Do we need to implement historical categories into the structure, as in England (800-1200)? As an example of what I am thinking, recent boundary changes have moved 2646:

sub-consensus? Also, following option #1 seems like it will confuse the community with too many issues at once. Option #2 presents a simple, basically inarguable, rule to the community, followed by "standard procedure" to further standization. Option #1 mixes these two things together at the same time. Is there an option I'm not seeing? --

471:, which is more correct than Monarchs of the United Kingdom would be, since British monarchs covers a greater time span than Monarchs of the United Kingdom would be. It is also far too messy, I would suggest, to have Monarchs of England and so on. This one might need to either be exempted or thoroughly discussed separately. 541:, the wording will need to be less risky. At the moment it sounds like "should we do it this way?". If the answer's yes, that's ok, but if it's no, we don't have anything. We should present a binary question, even if it is unlikely to produce a divided vote. I think the wording of the speedy should be tinkered with a bit, 3366:

I've replaced the text with something more like what I had in mind (previous versions are in the history). Per above, I agree with Hiding about this. Where I think this goes is that the page gets renamed "Naming conventions (categories)" and it includes all category-related naming conventions. The

3139:

How would it be inconsistent? It would either be American people or United States people, wouldn't it? Yes, there would be two standards, and they would be inconsistent with each other, but that's hardly the worst outcome, is it? Note also it doesn't pervent consideration for change, it just moves

3129:

This does seem, fairly explicitly, a proposal to change nothing and admit no consideration of changing it. I'm still not persuaded of any particularly good reason why that's the thing to do. However, in light of the pretty sure no-consensus we'd reach on going either way it may be the only option. If

2661:

Option #2 seems the better idea, yes. I think strong arguments have already been made against too many polls, and KISS seems to be a good rule of thumb. I've been persuaded against having to present huge swathes of lists to the community by arguments further above by Splash and Radiant, however the

2227:

Admit we already have conventions in many cases, but provide a mechanism we can use to institute changes we've talked about to these conventions without either a giant multipart poll or an endless series of smaller polls (attaching the meta-renaming to CFD essentially uses an existing process for the

4030:

1) Keep working on the main page to make it easy to understand and essentially inarguable (specifically removing any even remotely contentious proposals). I've made most of the lists less intrusive. I 'm not sure what to do with the country-name stuff, but it seems far too "weighty" in its current

3512:

These subcategories seem to refer to organizations that are specifically headquartered or active in a physical country. They do not include e.g. an ethnic Swedish interest group operating in the U.S. under "Swedish organizations". Those could be listed in under "ethnic organizations" or somesuch.

2969:

The recent poll we had was reasonably split on using American versus United States. Official documents of the United States government utilise both forms to describe the nationality of its citizens. Common usage does not offer a solution, and systematic bias can be claimed by both sides. Since no

2781:

No, I believe it was something in between. We propose Rick's suggestion which produces a temporary standardization with the way things are. Then, we take our "leanings" through the new-speedy-criterion process, visibly on CfD and they then replace (or augment) the existing standartd. Am I completely

2693:

Ok. (Don't look so surprised.) I think there is a crucial clarification in what Rick Block says that means I can go with this. I think the meaing is (or maybe always was) that we take the italicised paragraph to the community, along with the bit I don't like. But then we can consider the stuff we've

1626:

Whether it's "of foo" or "in foo" seems relatively arbitrary, and with a bot it would take us all of five minutes to change the lot of them if need be, so there's no need to stick to the status quo (which is also an arbitrary one). There are also some features that are part man-made and part natural

3814:

I added these two sections because they seemed fairly well supported and relatively uncontroversial. "How to name the country" is absolutely necessary to have as a reference for whoever renames "Nationality X" categories to "X of country", or else it's ambiguous what the destination should be. As

3436:

I've split the misc. "nationality x" list up into more specific bits, because personally, I don't think all of the things list there belong, and they are certainly not homogeneous. We haven't really asked about these at such a detailed level, so here goes. This is a quick poll to determine which

3389:

Given Rick's message further up, I can subscribe to the present front page, and the procedures underlying it with enthusiasm. The fact that we have a parenthetical warning that things can still change (and that proposals are forthcoming) is important. We might tweak the exact contents of the text a

3113:

I apologise if I gave the impression you had shouted it down and I strike that comment. I was merely attempting to state my intention that I would like discussion on the American/US issue rather than remove it once again after people simply state disapproval without offering an alternative. Do we

2996:

Well, no. You're basically proposing a policy to not do anything. That seriously doesn't require a policy. Also, the previous poll was somewhat confusing as to the usage of "American" vs. "United States" as an adjective. We should definitely hold a poll determining that, since it's a frequent issue

2331:

Well, we're finally making progress and agreeing with a lot of things. That is good. We should be avoiding polls as much as possible, they're generally not helpful. And actually we already have processes for creating and changing general rules - that process is called consensual discussion, as long

642:

Sorry, but I am struggling to understand what you are saying here. There is speedy renaming for categories, I've used it. Also, my understanding of what we are doing here is this: There are categories which categorise by country or nationality that people wish to standardise, and currently do so

620:

I thought that Hiding was talking about article speedy renaming, but I may have understood that. Either way, I would have no objection to simply setting a Naming Convention (in line with existing naming conventions) that would apply to both articles and categories. I would also have no objection to

565:

Could you clarify what you mean here. I thought the whole point was to ask for a standard. I'd rather be up front and just ask a yes or no question than try to gain a back door standard that has no consensus. I think if the answer is no then it does not leave us with nothing. but rather with the

361:

Three. We can discuss other schemas as well, and it would be easiest (if possible) to have a simple definition that we can use as a guideline (e.g. "all categories related to government institutes should use such-and-such schema"), possibly with a stated exception or two. Guidelines should be short

114:

Any categories that go to speedy renaming to be standardised to the agreed format will have a two-day window in which users may state why the category is an exception to said standard. If there is valid objection to the speedy by at least two users, each of these users having been registered before

3067:

Well, the proposal serves well in terms of spelling, which is where I utilised it from, and I believe we should afford the community the benefit of the doubt rather than pre-judge the issue. Further, any categories listed in error can be closed immediately with reference to this policy. No, this

3041:

Ah. Ok. Well, the USA/American bit is really a separate issue from what we've been doing so far. I do not object to a straw poll to find out which of the two has preference since it's clearly a binary issue (as opposed to holding a yes/no policy vote on something that can be reworded if that would

2792:

My intent is precisely what Splash describes. Step 1 is to institute a standards process reflecting current practice (which I expect should be easy) which includes a way to make sweeping changes, and steps 2-n are to adjust/augment via CfD per what step 1 institutes as the "normal" process (which

807:

I don't think Radiant was trying to go backwards or make things more difficult. I think the point of trying to describe a meta-category rather than using a specific list is in support of simple statement #3 (simple definition). Unfortunately, I don't think anyone has come up a meta-category rule

776:

are by nationality, are they man made? I'm really sorry, but it feels like the thrust of the debate keeps getting moved backwards. Are you now suggesting we propose meta categories and how they should be standardised, rather than seeking consensus on hardcoding existing common usage consensus in

375:

Six. Since several countries have changed name (or area) throughout history, categories about history should in some cases be an exception to the naming standard. For instance, the UK and the USSR. A category like "Monarchs of the United Kingdom" would not work well since the country wasn't always

136:

Yes, I think the two proposals should be separated. Mainly because the remit of any speed-rename rule would go beyond just country titles, and apply to future standardisations too (and presumably replace the current speedy rename procedure). Also, since there are at least a couple of proposals for

2061:

As a probably controversial follow on, I'd also propose that the way to proceed from where we are now is to treat whatever existing informal conventions we have as the established convention and move the discussions we're having here about renaming groups of categories to CFD. I think this would

2057:

I think this may be the only actual rule we need to present to the community at large, supported by guidelines like the statements we're working on above. This would give us the flexibility to consistently name the members of each type of "by country" category in whatever way is most appropriate.

1874:

common usage among lawyers. If discussing the law that applies within a particular jurisdiction, a lawyer (that is, an English-speaking lawyer) would most commonly refer to "English law" or "New Jersey law" or "Australian law"; and, if they wanted to be particularly formal, would say "the law of

1240:

The consensus above is clear agreement with the proposed "x in foo" form for permanently located man-made objects. Note that I recently added some classes of sports venues (which I think should be considered to be in this grouping) which are currently of "fooish x" form. Anyone have any problem

882:

I agree that the simpler we can make such a rule, the better. Note that even using the list approach, we'll be renaming some things. By my counts (see above), the lists apply to 1440 individual categories with a total of 107 using names not following the existing predominant conventions. Other

600:

So it seems easiest to 1) establish a naming convention in general, then 2) make it a speedy-renaming criterion (not that I would mind doing it another way, but just pointing things out). I should also point out that neither actually requires a vote per se (although the former would require more

3019:

No I'm proposing a policy to clarify the siutation and prevent unneccesary arguments, stopping it becoming a frequent issue on CFD. I also fail to understand why on the one hand you argue against polls because we have too many, and then on the other you argue for a poll in this instance. This

860:

doesn't generally resort to voting, and neither does SR). But if people want a vote nonetheless, knowing this wiki, I predict that proposing a guideline for a simply-defined group is likely to pass, and proposing a guideline for an enumeration of entries is likely to be voted down as confusing,

4056:

4) Politely but forcefully defer any talk about changing by-country category names until we gain consensus for what we've proposed will be the process for doing so (i.e. by using CFD). Note the sneaky ploy here. All we need to get the entire community to agree on is that the naming rules for

2306:

By "CFD renaming consensus" I mean the normal CFD process (as it applies to category renames). We already have some of these that pertain to more than one category. The idea is that anyone, at any time, could suggest the convention for some "fooish x", or "x of foo" (or whatever) grouping of

3985:

All categories whose subcategories are categories by country (roughly all categories that are members of category:categories by country) shall have a naming convention which will apply to all of their subcategories. The naming conventions will be listed at Knowledge:Category titles and should

2645:

In both cases, I think it is the community (rather than us) that will ultimately decide what changes are made, which leads me to question the rationale for further discussion here. Why would we do #1 when #2 will likely have the same outcome but skips the step where we agree to a non-binding

712:

then by all means propose to extend that to articles at a later date, but do not do so now, please, as I have seen no consensus here that it is desired to move it to articles. I would think personally it's more easily applicable in the category namespace than the article namespace anyway.

1701:

Hmm I tend to agree with you on Islands, they seem to require special treatment (what to do with island nations or divided islands). I think "rivers in country" is fine though. For border rivers just put it in both categories, you would have the same problem using "of" in that case anyway.

2875:

to the effect that the term is used to convey the nationality of the United States rather than to denote continental nationality. This would prevent systematic bias which could be argued if either side were chosen, and represents the split that seemed apparant on the issue. Thoughts?

2641:), and submit this to the community at large for comment (note that the comment here is on the rule and whether we've accurately captured existing rules and conventions). Then we (or anyone) submits desirable changes to the community via CFD (per the process I've outlined above). 3270:

Yes yes yes, I already removed that American thing and answered you above. Rick proposed that all categories have a standard that is listed at Category Titles. That is precisely what I'm doing here, listing those standards (as proposed-and-under-discussion, not as set-in-stone).

597:(which tend to be created out of such disputes, if not already existent). Category speedy renaming is written so that it can adopt existing naming conventions (for instance, I've proposed that the "no abbreviations" NC be so adopted, and there don't seem to be any objections). 2629:

to reflect what we collectively desire and, also, a rule like the one I've proposed above, and submit them both to the community at large for comment. Since some of the meta-rules require changes from current practice, IMO we need to let the community comment on each one

808:

that we all agree on (i.e. not "natural resources of foo" since some seem to prefer "in" rather than "of") and includes as members only categories in the list I put together (i.e. not "man-made objects in foo", which includes categories not in the list - in addition to

647:, which is time-consuming and inconsistent depending on who is reading the page at any given time. Therefore, a proposal to standardise names within said categories which can be used as a speedy renaming criteria is desirable, and is what we are seeking to achieve. 119:

I think this is OK, but my understanding is that there are objections. However it turns out, I think it's often more organized to separate the elements under discussion (that is, this part of the discussion from the discussion of which categories to poll on when).

2914:

Fair play. The issue hadn't been raised for a while, I didn't really notice any discussion of it, to be honest, and this suggested itself as a nice compromise. It would be nice to have thoughts on the compromise, but I shall kick it back into the long grass.

3068:

proposal does not make the issue go away, but neither does forcing a poorly supported consensus on the community make it go away, since it will just be resurrected again and again. I accept this is a fudge, but I want to at least hear numerous opinions on it

851:

Whichever standard we agree on, we will eventually have to rename something. "Non-controversial" does not have to mean "entirely matching the present situation". Now personally I think that if something is obvious enough, there is no need to put it to a vote

3045:

Given the way the wiki works, a proposal "do not nominate such-and-such for renaming" is likely to be ignored (or even be unseen) by many. We have several such issues (e.g. the AD/CE debacle) and saying that people should ignore it does not make it go away.

584:

Regarding "isn't there speedy renaming for other principles" - actually, no. The only reason that categories have 'speedy renaming' (or, indeed, CFR voting) is because it generally requires a bot and/or admin to do so. Renaming is generally done by being

3607:

I'm supporting this in the spirit of compromise. The idea is that you have residents, citizens, ex-patriates, and members of the national ethnicity, and these all co-mingle and overlap and it's easier just to put them under the same broad category. --

3412:

Yuk. No need for the quickpoll. We'll get ourselves deleted. We're doing fine as we are, I think. Moreover, as has been pointed out a few times now, any poll we make among ourselves is overriden as soon as we conclude it by taking it to the community.

2744:

I do believe that the point is (after Rick's lines) that we have no standards now and propose them (as we have here). The intent should not be that the standard is to keep to precedent, and attempt to change that standard. For reasons of bureaucracy.

1220:

Personaly I don't see the need for the "man made" distinction though, I would be quite happy with things like "rivers in country", "mountains in country" and such too, but I guess it's best to do this in "baby steps" so we don't drown in exceptions.

2970:

position appears to offer a greater claim, this compromise position seeks to establish that no systematic bias is evident, and given that each position appears of equal merit, it follows to propose that first usage should dictate, as per spellings:

3866:. Do we categorise Mitcham in Surrey? Now expand that question out across politicians who have served in the English Parliament, which has grown over history to cover the whole of the United Kingdom, without ever actually changing its location. 2104:

If there are going to be formal standards, this makes sense overall. And, Rick, my understanding is that any formal titles decided on/standardized/whatever here would be just be added to the project page as they are concluded. Is that right? Also:

2712:

Sounds reasonable, as soon as we get one or two more responses to the summary above, I'd say. Can we agree that this is a discussion rather than a vote? There's been too much voting recently (see Jimbo's talk page for discussion, to my surprise)

2380:, not at the level of "man-made objects in foo") be handled by the same process. This process currently has a 2-day objections window, with acceptable reasons for objections not well defined (which I think means "common sense" rules apply). -- 834:

Okay, I apologise for any misunderstanding. I think the reason I see it as easier to knock up lists is that the hardcoding of standards by meta category seems too rigid for the way we actually talk about things, and thus categorise them.

2014:

Sports are to be considered. Airports and landmarks and theme parks, however, are clearly man-made objects, and I don't see why they should be an exception, except that you seem not to want to change anything from what it currently is.

3401:

Glad to see some progress here. I suppose we can just submit the proposal to align non-conforming categories with the specific conventions listed to WP:CFD as a block nomination, which will officially "bless" those conventions? --

3451:

I'm supporting this in the spirit of compromise. The general idea is that the cultural influences of a country leak outside its physical borders, and include non-resident people of the national ethnicity, and others, as well.--

570:, which is to use existing policies. As to the speedy criteria, I thought that the clause we were discussing was just to apply to these standards. Isn't there already a speedy renaming policy in place for other principles? 2205:. Why did we bother with the above stuff, that seemed to be working only to turn on our heels, and say "to hell with it, let's not change anything". I just don't get it. There. You've got my first angry Wiki message. Pah. - 2279:

says below, we are "leaning" reasonably clearly in the direction of a numer of decisions (or recommendations, at least), and my feeling is we should give ourselves a few more days on that. I am not saying I disagree with

2158:) a repository for discussions that occur at CFD. Given that the category naming convention page will have a talk page, I suppose the reality will be that changes will be discussed both at CFD and on the talk page. -- 1296:

The following categories contain categories which are greatly dominated by the "thing OF country" ("of foo") pattern. The "thing BY country" structure is not being discussed at this point. — list introduction added by

2827:

Sorry, but that's a specific issue and we're talking about broad issues here. There was a poll earlier, though. What'll probably happen is that some categories are "thing of Uzbek" and others are "Uzbekistani thing".

2051:

and should generally follow the guidelines specified on that page. Conformance to these naming conventions shall be treated as "speedy renaming" CFD criteria. Changing these conventions shall require a CFD renaming

3020:

proposal is not up as a poll, but rather for discussion. If the consensus is to leave well enough alone, which is the basis for this proposal, then that should be at least a guideline which can prevent people from

3986:

generally follow the guidelines specified on that page. Conformance to these naming conventions shall be treated as "speedy renaming" CFD criteria. Changing these conventions shall require a CFD renaming consensus.

4018:(above, at least until it gets archived), it seems like we had a nice friendly agreement that we'd first establish the one meta-rule with the broader community, and then (meaning later, like not at the same time, 3140:

it away from being individual arguments on cfd. If anyone wants to propose that we standardise American or United States it would then have to be done at a higher level, either here or on the talk page of either

753:

presently use "thing in country", thus this should be pretty uncontroversial. Thus, are there any objections to using this simpler phrasing rather than the list? And can we do something similar for statement One?

1565:

Whether it's "of foo" or "in foo" seems relatively arbitrary, and "of foo" is the existing de facto rule (supported by numerous previous CFD discussions). I don't see any need to institute a different rule. --

3349:

I don't believe you have to do anything, Radiant, and as stated above, I believed the standards were to be decided at CSD rather than here. However, I feel it is fruitless to edit war anymore over this issue.

4026:

establishing a way to create and enforce reasonable rules (whatever they may be) sure seems like it's been counter-productive. I'm not going to claim to be in charge, but here's what I think we ought to do:

1485:

Splash has a point. Actually, Geography and Subdivisions aren't "physical features" (at least not the way mountains and libraries are) so they don't actually belong in this list. Islands is a good exception.

150:

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was trying to say that discussion should of the speedy renaming exception should fall under its own header on this page. I'm not sure whether it needs to be separated in the voting.

3177:

Please see the mainpage; I've attempted to summarize what we've got so far. It should be consistent with the above bunch of summaries, and would be something we can show to the community. Thoughts welcome.

680:

Yes, it is getting annoyingly bureaucratic. Sorry if the above post was confusing. My point is simply - if we're setting a naming standard, why restrict it to categories and not articles as well? I don't

2620:

Please don't take this the wrong way, but can sombebody let me know what are we going to do next with our leanings if not pretty much exactly what I've proposed above? Seems like the alternatives are:

816:). I think we perhaps could come up with such a rule, but I suspect we're tired of talking about this and would like to actually accomplish something. For the initial step, I'm fine with a list. -- 177:

One. The list of categories below (which was originally proposed by Hiding) uses the schema "thing of country", and it is desirable that any future additions to those categories use the same schema.

3422:

The intention at present is a two step process 1)make ourselves a new-speedy-rename-rule process and standardize as we are 2)re-standardize as discussed further up, and to be discussed imminently. -

2077:

I like the idea of the proposal, and am quite happy to standardise along the common usage lines already inherent within many categories, and to establish a standard for inconsistent ones elsewhere.

4053:

and wait for the consensus to develop (this talk page seems as good a place as any for this discussion). It might be good to have a target date for when we're going to do this. How about Sept 7?

3229:

The above guidelines can have exceptions when the proposed naming doesn't make sense gramatically. For instance "islands in country" sounds strange, so it should be "islands of country" instead.

1111:

The category classes covered under this proposal include all the "in foo" from Hiding's list above, plus the following (with total number of subcats and number not conforming to "x in foo"):

3547:

Again, a media organization is either headquartered in, primarily broadcasting to, or primarily publishing in a given country, or it isn't. Many media organizations are "international". --

3825:

I think the way this page is currently written is too confusing. There are too many lists, and it's hard to tell whether they are arbitrary or not. I really believe it should be changed to

3254:, which did not involve the listing of any suggested standards. Also note that categories of people by country are actually categorised by nationality as dictated by the existing policy at 2855:

issue we could propose to allow the term American to be used to represent the United States on the basis of first usage, similar to the British/American spelling. If the category is named

1278:- it seems most of them currently use "thing OF country". Should we 1) keep it that way, 2) change it to "thing IN country" for consistency with the man-made things, or 3) don't care? 2889:

This seems to presuppose the discardment of the perfectly good discussions and progress we are making chunk-by-chunk above. I don't see the reason for the sudden changing of heart. -

2556:

Music, literature, art, etc. seem to be a more contentious case than, for instance, law, as common usage strongly leans toward a nationality modifier for these sorts of things, e.g.

1687:

I'm not sure "islands in" makes sense. Lakes and rivers are often national borders so for these as well "in" seems somewhat peculiar. I think in all cases "of" works fine. --

731:

Anyway. It seems we're mostly agreed on the above simple statements, at least I haven't heard any objections other than to the exact wording of #4. So. Regarding #1 and #2 - we

1905:

Categories in which the preponderance do not follow the standard(s) suggested here (This list is not necessarily inclusive, but the ones I noticed from information above) --

1787:

Most of these already use the "of country" form (except law), and IMHO that makes the most sence. These are things that are literaly "of" a country rather than just in it. --

2702:

of existing nomenclature is not seen to be overriding what we "lean to" here since we can present our leanings in bite-size chunks straight(ish) afterwards? Is that right? -

744:

Two-B. Categories for "man-made objects in country" use the schema "thing in country" and it is desirable that any future additions to those categories use the same schema.

524:

I agree with No. 5 and 6. I agree in principle with No. 4, but possibly the wording can be tweaked. I lean against No. 1, 2 and 3. But that's OK. We can agree to disagree.

4110:

Is it time to archive basically all of this, and invite the entire community to comment on the proposed convention page? If no one else does this by tomorrow, I will. --

559:, the wording will need to be less risky. At the moment it sounds like "should we do it this way?". If the answer's yes, that's ok, but if it's no, we don't have anything. 3001:

such categories (and making CFD the proverbial lottery) is consensus on that. In fact, a good third option on the poll would be "don't care as long as it's consistent".

115:

the speedy nomination was made, the category gets the remaining 5 days. Inappropriate reasons include "I want." Appropriate reasons include factual accuracy and length.

458:

Yes, I do agree with all four points, and would like to add a fifth: That these naming standards we agree here are applied only to category titles and not to articles.

3214:

Categories of businesses, governmental agencies and statistics directly related to a country (e.g. history, economy, demographics) should be called "... of country"

2638: 3130:

that is so, how would we use the proposal to help us with future categories? Simply accept whatever possible inconsistent styling the first editor comes up with? -

1034:

The only category-group (we need a name for these) I'm aware of that fits this rule and is not already predominantly (as opposed to universally) in this format is

4022:) use the process that this one meta-rule establishes to straighten out the namings. Our goal here is to establish sensible rules. Getting mired in the details 3159:

Although the page started out talking "U.S.", "American", etc., it has since taken a big detour. I still prefer to defer. Too much going on at once for my taste.

3240:

In addition to the above, a poll should be held to determine if there's a consensus for preferring "American topic" or "United States topic" in category naming.

3688:

Most of these are for national parks, which have a clear physical location. Others are clearly related to the politics of a specific governmental entity. --

2108:

I'd suggest that the speedy renaming conditions outlined above (or whatver we decide on for exceptions, etc.) be included with the proposal to the community.

2062:

allow us to move the discussion to the community at large, in reasonable sized chunks, without convening "extra" polls for each meta-rule we come up with. --

3312:

Radiant, it's not that I object to the recent edit, it is that I would rather we discuss such things here before we make a presentation on the project page.

284:

Two. The list of categories below uses the schema "thing in country", and it is desirable that any future additions to those categories use the same schema.

243: 137:

how to work speedy renaming, there wouldn't be much harm in firming each of them up (I count about 3 of them) and present them all to an approval vote. -

372:

Five. This discussion is about category titles, not about article titles. We do not intend here to place any restrictions on the renaming of articles.

4083: 4050: 2155: 892:). Can we do a quick poll right here, right now (with any comments below the vote list, please just agree/disagree in the list) on this one rule? -- 883:

than "this isn't what I thought we agreed to do" is there anyone here who disagrees with the meta-rule "<man made objects permanently located: -->

1083:

I removed my previous edit per how I would do it as I missed Rick's post whilst making it and mine now seems superfluous. Hope that is acceptable.

288: 97: 4057:

by-country categories can be changed via CFD. Then, changing these naming rules only requires a CFD consensus (not a community-wide consensus).

2134:

I suggest changing "Changing these conventions shall require a CFD renaming consensus" to "Changing these conventions shall require a consensus at

1974:

Um, what are you suggesting them as exceptions to? Given all the lists on this page I'm getting very confused deciding what I am even agreeing to.

2813:

And what about this situation? I think we should rename "Kazakh" or "Uzbek" categories to "Kazakhstani" and "Uzbekistani". For my explanation see

89: 84: 72: 67: 59: 2528:

Also there's "abstract concepts" (please tell me a better name?) like Law, Religion, Music etc, which appear to be best as "Law in country" etc.

2224:

Provide a process, and specifically one the community may agree to, for creating and changing the general rules using an existing process (CFD).

2115: 2997:

on CFD. This poll will likely not result in consensus, but I'm not going to assume that in advance. The only thing that will stop people from

2476: 2471: 1776: 1771: 213: 3514: 3024:

such categories (and making CFD the proverbial lottery). I fail to understand why you believe this proposal would not prevent people from

2359:

I'm not clear on whether Rick's proposal would make speedy renaming automatic, or allow for exceptions if a reasonable objection is made.

888:, which currently uses "fooish" and if we're going to change from "fooish" sounds better to me as "of foo" rather than "in foo" matching 2525:

I believe we could combine most of the second part (the "of foo") into "government and organizations" of country. Any obvious exceptions?

1809:

and so on. Law is generally thought of as existing within a society or country, being dependent on those to exist. A government exists

1348: 1324: 1126: 913:

Categories of man-made objects with a permanent location divided by country, shall use names of the form <objects in countryname: -->

2972:

If all else fails, consider following the spelling style preferred by the first major contributor (that is, not a stub) to the article.

354: 4091: 3255: 3141: 2943: 1336: 1132: 464: 263: 225: 4015: 1913: 1204: 1120: 4087: 1933: 1162: 4067:

If we can manage to stay focused on getting the rules in place, I think we'll make it a lot easier to make further progress. --

3847: 2492: 2311:

we'd like to make directly to the community via CFD in whatever sized chunks we think the community might be able to swallow. --

2218:

Codify a naming convention we can all agree on, removing category-by-category naming issues for "by country" categories from CFD.

201: 3675: 3639: 1938: 1174: 3251: 2461: 2150:

I prefer CFD for this, since CFD is where all other category related naming issues are discussed. This would basically make

2135: 2044: 1899: 1761: 1342: 306: 219: 1853:

in cases where that doesn't make sense gramatically. I'd probably agree with Hiding that "law" would make a good exception.

270: 2047:) shall have a naming convention which will apply to all of their subcategories. The naming conventions will be listed at 1849:

See a couple paragraphs up for a longer list. I would propose that all of these use "of country" rather than "in country",

1180: 3219:

Categories of abstracts and cultural items by country, such as law, music and religion, should be called "... in country".

3201: 2481: 2446: 2377: 1943: 1781: 1714: 1645: 1542: 1467: 1366: 1330: 1306: 1186: 324: 237: 207: 195: 47: 17: 1666:

Yes, I meant it's not a lot of work. It may take a couple of days, this discussion has already taken longer than that :)

330: 4038: 3875: 3633: 3372: 2980:, of which all citizens of the United States of America with articles upon Knowledge are nominally sub-categorised in. 2466: 1766: 885: 809: 257: 2250:

I'm sorry I allowed myself to post an angry comment. I shouldn't have done that; it never ever progresses discussion. -

318: 3851: 2456: 2451: 2284:

established convention — at least many of them are perfectly sensible but, as I said before, we should arrive at them

2111: 1751: 1718: 1649: 1581: 1546: 1524: 1471: 1463: 1400: 1360: 1312: 889: 348: 294: 277: 231: 4060:

5) In chunks the CFD community might be able to swallow (perhaps no more than one chunk a week), propose changes via

3088:

I'm not shouting anything down, I simply stated my reasons for disagreeing with it. I believe this to be on par with

4090:, as it would also apply to article naming, I would think. I've also amended the front page to include detail from 2332:

as it's done in a central and visible place. Sorry if that sounded stupid but it's generally the best way. See also

2091:

I don't understand why the controversial bit needs to be thrown in when we're doing just fine in baby steps above. -

1948: 1192: 402: 250: 1923: 1725:

just sounds wrong Islands aren't always part of a nation's borders, but are always part of a country's territory.

1354: 1150: 312: 300: 38: 4082:

On my part, I'd like to apologise for being tough. It also seems we have been pre-empted once again and moved to

1580:

As mentioned abowe I think the "in country" form makes the most sense for this "class" too. With the exception of

2634: 2626: 2564: 2151: 2048: 1510: 1318: 601:

feedback than we have here, but whichever way we take it's easier to have an agreement amongst ourselves first).

468: 342: 336: 2976:

I have considered the idea of proposing that sub-cats follow their parent category, but that idiom leads one to

2871:

should however, be renamed to United States, and we could also propose placing a notice on categories which use

2038:

I hope this doesn't sidetrack the productive discussions above, but can we agree on a generic rule of the form:

1478: 1442: 1407: 3943:

Make this page an accurate summary of the status quo (which it may already be, I haven't entirely read it yet))

2977: 1928: 1918: 1156: 1144: 1138: 3328:

I have to list only those points that I believe have consensual backing here. Further discussion is welcome.

3114:

really believe a binary poll is the best answer to this problem, and if it isn't, what are the alternatives.

1292:

09:16, August 28, 2005 (UTC) (the term "natural object" may not be the clearest, better suggestions welcome)

3711: 2561: 2432: 2376:. I'm suggesting conformance to the category family rules (at the level of individual category class, like 1756: 1507: 1276:"Categories of natural objects with a permanent location divided by country, shall use names of the form..." 418: 3294:

I believe it would be courteous to allow Rick to publicise his proposal, and decide what he meant by it.

2786: 2706: 2669: 1953: 1210: 1198: 174:

Okay. Before we propose anything to the community, can the lot of us at least agree on some statements...

4004: 2043:

All categories whose subcategories are categories by country (roughly all categories that are members of

2514:

I don't understand the distinction between "by country" and "by nation". Do you mean "by nationality"? -

1902:-- "Of" at least implies national government, in contrast to government at any level within the country. 3149: 3940:

Okay. We're exhausting ourselves and running around in circles. This is bad. I propose the following:

4116: 4073: 3871: 3381: 3224:

Categories of nations at sporting events (e.g. the 2000 olympics) should be called "country at ...".

2799: 2652: 2386: 2317: 2265: 2242: 2164: 2124: 2068: 1693: 1658: 1599: 1572: 1555: 1533: 1388: 1247: 1168: 1103: 1044: 935: 898: 822: 185: 3790:

We haven't talked about this much, but it would seem to make semantic sense, and aid navigation. --

3757:

We haven't talked about this much, but it would seem to make semantic sense, and aid navigation. --

414: 4101: 3997:

All the other stuff on the project page is overwhelming. I can't follow all the discussion above.

3980:

Apparently I misunderstood. I had the impression that "the proposal" was what Rick had suggested:

3909: 3893: 3819: 3794: 3761: 3728: 3692: 3656: 3612: 3581: 3551: 3521: 3486: 3456: 3426: 3417: 3406: 3394: 3357: 3319: 3301: 3265: 3166: 3152: 3134: 3121: 3079: 3035: 2990: 2922: 2909: 2893: 2883: 2821: 2773: 2737: 2685: 2582: 2551: 2518: 2502: 2405: 2366: 2301: 2292: 2254: 2209: 2187: 2145: 2095: 2084: 2007: 1981: 1967: 1844: 1791: 1732: 1706: 1588: 1263: 1225: 1090: 1073: 1021: 1009: 997: 985: 953: 842: 800: 784: 720: 671: 577: 549: 531: 518: 478: 432: 158: 141: 130: 4001: 3961: 3922: 3833: 3332: 3275: 3182: 3163: 3096: 3050: 3005: 2906: 2832: 2749: 2717: 2682: 2601: 2557: 2534: 2402: 2363: 2340: 2184: 2142: 2019: 2004: 1964: 1879: 1857: 1670: 1631: 1611: 1490: 1419: 1282: 1018: 965: 865: 797: 758: 689: 625: 605: 528: 497: 443: 383: 155: 127: 3209:

Categories of natural features or man-made objects by country should be called "... in country".

2637:

any existing "meta-rules" and the de facto conventions we can infer from existing practice (ala

3482:

Sports teams seem to be pretty concretely tied to a specific political entity or territory. --

2114:

defines what has to happen to add a new criteria for category speedy renaming (i.e. discuss at

1908: 1114: 1035: 813: 773: 2935:

Since we seem to have come to consensus on the issue above, could we now turn to this issue?

2511:

Can we also agree that the parent categories should be "by country" rather than "by nation"?

1627:(e.g. diverted rivers, man-made islands) so it's easier to have the same guideline for both. 4098: 3906: 3890: 3354: 3316: 3298: 3262: 3118: 3076: 3032: 2987: 2919: 2880: 2770: 2666: 2499: 2231:

Conclude this seemingly interminable subgroup. I suspect we're all running out of patience.

2081: 1978: 1841: 1729: 1439: 1087: 1070: 1061: 950: 839: 781: 717: 668: 574: 475: 429: 1038:(currently "airports of"). If anyone knows of any others please mention what they are. -- 439:

I've stricken it for now. Should I take your statement as agreeing with these four points?

4111: 4068: 3994:

I had the impression that the next step was to take that proposal to the wider community.

3376: 2958:

to refer to the nationality of those people of the United States should not be renamed to

2950:

to refer to the nationality of those people of the United States should not be renamed to

2942:

In categories where we categorise by nationality, such as people as dictated by policy at

2794: 2647: 2381: 2312: 2260: 2237: 2159: 2119: 2063: 1688: 1653: 1594: 1567: 1550: 1528: 1383: 1242: 1098: 1039: 930: 893: 817: 410: 406: 180: 2275:

I agree fully with all but the interpretation of the first grammatical clause of #4. As

3863: 2508:

Good. I've combined the top one to 'natural features', that seems to be the gist of it.

2333: 586: 3235:

Note that the vast majority of categories already conform to these proposed standards.

2589:

Regarding "by country" or "by nation" - most categories are called e.g. "Economies by

2221:

Allow for whatever general guidelines we'd like, with as many exceptions as necessary.

749:

I have not been able to find any categories for 'man-made objects in country' that do

4061: 4042: 3998: 3958: 3919: 3830: 3652:

Either they're made in a given country, or they're not, or they're international. --

3329: 3272: 3179: 3160: 3145: 3093: 3089: 3047: 3002: 2903: 2829: 2818: 2814: 2746: 2714: 2679: 2598: 2531: 2399: 2373: 2372:

CFD already has a speedy renaming mechanism, with an exception process, specifically

2360: 2337: 2181: 2139: 2016: 2001: 1961: 1876: 1854: 1667: 1628: 1608: 1487: 1416: 1279: 962: 862: 853: 794: 755: 686: 657: 644: 622: 602: 525: 494: 440: 380: 152: 124: 735:

propose them as they stand, involving a list of categories. Alternatively, we could

4046: 3867: 3368: 1788: 1703: 1585: 1404: 1298: 1222: 1006: 994: 857: 661: 594: 590: 1960:

Given the above, it could be good to at least consider sports venues separately.

4095: 3903: 3887: 3816: 3791: 3758: 3725: 3689: 3653: 3609: 3578: 3548: 3518: 3483: 3453: 3423: 3414: 3403: 3391: 3351: 3313: 3295: 3259: 3131: 3115: 3073: 3029: 2984: 2916: 2890: 2877: 2783: 2767: 2734: 2703: 2663: 2579: 2575: 2548: 2515: 2496: 2298: 2289: 2276: 2251: 2206: 2092: 2078: 1975: 1838: 1726: 1475: 1436: 1260: 1084: 1067: 1058: 982: 947: 836: 778: 714: 665: 571: 546: 515: 472: 426: 138: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2259:

No offense taken. Like I said, I think we're all running out of patience. --

512:"Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition. Our chief weapon...our two weapons..." 2698:

those changes after having established a way for us to do so. So the adoption

1833:

would also work. Foreign relations can not really be grammatically said to be

1363:(of foo) (71 top level subcats, all "of foo" - many subsubcats, not analyzed) 1274:

Okay, we have consensus on man-made objects. Now what about natural objects?

537:

Ok, so I don't think I have any much problem with polling along these lines.

179:

List annotated with number of subcats, and number of non-conforming subcats.

3513:

The distinction is useful to make for navigational purposes, I think. Note

543:

and it must be presented clearly as having application beyong country titles

3964: 3925: 3836: 3335: 3278: 3245:

Categories of people by country may be debated at some point in the future.

3185: 3099: 3053: 3008: 2835: 2752: 2720: 2604: 2537: 2343: 2022: 1860: 1673: 1634: 1614: 1493: 1422: 1285: 968: 868: 761: 692: 628: 608: 500: 489:

up above (slighly reworded, feel free to word back if you want), and added

446: 386: 772:

What is wrong with using the lists? What problem are you seeking to fix?

4086:. It occurs to me that the country-name stuff might be better housed at 3878:. Note also the United Kingdom is a nebulous term, describing both the 3371:

and I think this page should be referred to from there (as well as from

2547:

Hmmmm. How about "abstract concepts such as law, religion, music etc"? -

2429:

Categories of physical natural features in a country, except for islands

1739:

Things that are integral parts of, or directly linked to a nation state.

3953:), post a link on RFC and the village pump, and see what reactions are. 3918:

Eep. Edit conflict. My edit was in response to Beland's, not Hiding's.

3855: 3577:

Clearly associated with a specific political or territorial entity. --

3390:

little here and there, but I don't think I have anything substantive. -

1593:

Rather than "natural objects" I suggest we use "natural features". --

3859: 2597:" while it seems that the categorization is intended to be the same. 1097:

Should I enumerate the categories this proposal would pertain to? --

1997:"Government of Foo" unless we mean just the national government, and 2215:

Perhaps an explanation is in order. This proposal is intended to:

3949:

Take the things we're mostly agreed on (e.g. Rick's proposal, and

3204:, should be called "... by country" (rather than "... by nation"). 1717:

should be of rather than in. I think I would apply the same to

3747:

Rename all "Nationality X" meta-categories to "by nationality"

25: 2766:

This then, is where we disagree, as I believed the opposite.

2625:

We continue this discussion, we write up our "meta-rules" on

3946:

Wait about a week since we're likely all tired of the matter

2966:

The thinking behind the first part of the proposal is this-

2426:

Categories of man made objects which are permanently located

2288:

rather than because that's what we already happen to have. -

4049:

and wherever else may be appropriate that this page become

3195:

I've reverted the changes. Radiant's text was as follows:

2633:

We write up the one rule I've proposed above, document on

3886:. These issues need to be looked at by someone, I feel. 3780:

Rename all "X of country" meta-categories to "by country"

3724:

Clearly associated with a specific political entity. --

3252:

Knowledge talk:Category titles#proposal for generic rule

1875:

England and Wales," or "the law of New Jersey", etc. --

3950: 3846:

Please enlighten me as to how this proposal deals with

3250:

I believe that the consensus was forming behind Rick's

1817:, and I can agree with Politics and Economies as being 656:

My understanding is also that categories are listed at

2851:

In that mind, it occurs to me to propose that on the

1518:

Comments on "natural objects of/in foo" proposed rule

1066:

This comment is nonsensical, I misread the question.

3880:

United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

3829:(e.g. "natural features" rather than listing them). 463:

Here's what might be an example of an exception in *

2297:What would "a CFD renaming consensus" look like? - 110:This is copied from ]'s proposed poll question. 1825:. Political parties come from a country, so are 355:category:Universities and colleges by nationality 3991:That seemed pretty simple and relatively clear. 2902:I'm not sure about this. I suggest defering it. 2578:'s summary thus far, and with sporting events. - 2639:Knowledge:Category titles/Categories by country 1351:(9 subcats, 7 "of foo", 1 "in foo", 1 "fooish") 704:Because the whole thrust of this discussion is 3810:How to name the country, Dealing with overlaps 1236:Consensus is clearly "man-made objects in foo" 401:list, I've had a look and am now unsure about 593:. The latter, and any disputes, use existing 397:That's a great help, yes. However, from the 8: 4088:Knowledge:Naming conventions (Country names) 3070:before I allow people to shout it down again 1934:Category:Football (soccer) venues by country 1374:Vote here ("of foo", "in foo", "don't care") 1163:Category:Football (soccer) venues by country 685:to that but it may be simpler to not do it. 4016:Knowledge talk:Category titles#What's next? 3884:United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland 3848:Category:Court systems in England and Wales 2112:Knowledge:Category_renaming#Adding_criteria 1435:see below. Do not interpret as don't care. 244:category:Manufacturing companies by country 3437:way we lean on these specific categories. 3155:(Hiding, I apparently became logged out.) 1415:for consistency with the man-made things. 4084:Knowledge:Naming conventions (categories) 4051:Knowledge:Naming conventions (categories) 2156:Knowledge:Naming conventions (categories) 2000:that the places in my list not "in Foo". 1990:Good point. I'm suggesting that it not be 514:. And I'll write a proper answer later. - 2593:". A select few are called e.g. "Art by 777:certain categories, using Rick's list? 289:category:Archaeological sites by country 3367:first two sections I included are from 3092:(check its history, it's now a redir). 1644:Based on my count above (and excluding 1357:(139 subcats, 134 "of foo", 5 "fooish") 1333:(131 subcats, 130 "of foo", 1 "in foo") 708:. If we can get an agreed standard on 3200:Parent categories by country, such as 2116:Knowledge talk:Categories for deletion 271:category:Lists of subnational entities 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 3502:Organizations "of country" (proposed) 2477:Category:Foreign relations by country 2472:Category:Political parties by country 1895:I'd like to suggest some exceptions. 1777:Category:Foreign relations by country 1772:Category:Political parties by country 1339:(50 subcats, 49 "of foo", 1 "fooish") 1181:Category:Indoor arenas by nationality 214:category:Foreign relations by country 7: 3515:Category:International organizations 1117:(125/125) (all currently "x of foo") 3567:Politicians "of country" (proposed) 3441:Cultural "nationality x" (proposed) 2491:for sporting events, example being 1349:category:Protected areas by country 1325:category:Mountain ranges by country 1127:Category:Amusement parks by country 331:category:Museums grouped by country 4092:Knowledge:Categorization of people 3876:Category:MPs of the United Kingdom 3597:People "by nationality" (proposed) 3432:Quick polls on undecided proposals 3256:Knowledge:Categorization of people 3142:Knowledge:Categorisation of people 2954:, and any category curently using 2944:Knowledge:Categorization of people 2859:, do not rename, and the same for 2793:may be significantly harder). -- 2336:, which basically does just that. 2154:(which I think should be moved to 1801:. It's common usage, we refer to 1337:category:National parks by country 1165:(40/40) (all currently "fooish x") 1133:Category:Art museums and galleries 465:category:Heads of state by country 425:, which to my eye seems natural. 264:category:Postal systems by country 226:category:Heads of state by country 24: 2946:, any categories currently named 1914:Category:American football venues 1205:Category:Sports venues by country 1121:Category:American football venues 545:, which I presume is the intent?- 319:category:Hospitals by nationality 2493:Category:Nations at the Olympics 2457:category:Subdivisions by country 1752:Category:Subdivisions by country 1650:category:Subdivisions by country 1582:Category:Subdivisions by country 1525:category:Subdivisions by country 1464:Category:Subdivisions by country 1401:Category:Subdivisions by country 1361:category:Subdivisions by country 1195:(6/6) (all currently "fooish x") 1177:(7/7) (all currently "fooish x") 1159:(9/9) (all currently "fooish x") 349:category:UN World Heritage Sites 202:category:Demographics by country 29: 4078:02:01, September 2, 2005 (UTC) 3676:Category:Environment by country 3640:Category:Aircraft manufacturers 1939:Category:Golf clubs and courses 1175:Category:Golf clubs and courses 4121:02:00, September 8, 2005 (UTC) 3971:08:32, September 1, 2005 (UTC) 3932:08:29, September 1, 2005 (UTC) 3874:, he could never be a part of 3843:07:56, September 1, 2005 (UTC) 2462:Category:Government by country 2286:because we think they're right 2136:Knowledge talk:Category titles 2045:category:categories by country 1949:Category:Motor racing circuits 1900:Category:Government by country 1762:Category:Government by country 1343:category:Peninsulas by country 1259:, with both the above lists. - 1193:Category:Motor racing circuits 403:category:Militaries by country 307:category:Cemeteries by country 251:category:Militaries by country 220:category:Government by country 1: 4102:19:23, 3 September 2005 (UTC) 4005:07:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3910:07:57, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3894:08:15, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3882:and the historical state the 3820:05:06, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3795:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3762:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3729:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3693:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3657:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3613:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3582:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3552:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3537:Media "of country" (proposed) 3522:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3517:is here, and I like that. -- 3487:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3472:Sport "in country" (proposed) 3457:04:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3427:05:02, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3418:05:02, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3407:04:08, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 3386:19:01, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 3202:Category:Geography by country 3192:11:23, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 3167:07:38, 1 September 2005 (UTC) 2727:10:09, August 30, 2005 (UTC) 2657:20:36, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 2567:05:14, 2005 September 3 (UTC) 2544:13:41, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 2482:Category:Economies by country 2447:category:Geography by country 2378:category:Geography by country 2247:00:13, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 2073:19:46, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1944:Category:Landmarks by country 1867:18:38, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1782:Category:Economies by country 1715:Category:Geography_by_country 1698:18:20, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1663:18:07, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1646:Category:Geography_by_country 1641:16:42, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1604:16:06, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1543:Category:Geography_by_country 1538:15:58, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1513:05:05, 2005 September 3 (UTC) 1468:Category:Geography by country 1367:category:Volcanoes by country 1331:category:Mountains by country 1307:category:Geography by country 1252:16:13, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1187:Category:Landmarks by country 1108:15:26, August 26, 2005 (UTC) 884:in foo" (I'm trying to avoid 768:15:04, August 25, 2005 (UTC) 393:10:57, August 24, 2005 (UTC) 369:, or some variation thereof. 325:category:Libraries by country 301:category:Buildings by country 238:category:Languages by country 208:category:Economies by country 196:category:Companies by country 18:Knowledge talk:Category names 4039:Knowledge:Naming conventions 4037:3) Propose on the talks for 3634:Category:Aircraft by country 3342:12:05, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 3285:11:35, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 3106:11:56, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 3060:11:29, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 3015:11:09, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 2842:10:48, August 30, 2005 (UTC) 2804:18:09, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 2759:12:00, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 2611:09:50, August 30, 2005 (UTC) 2467:Category:Politics by country 2391:18:23, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 2350:13:44, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 2322:16:59, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 2270:16:59, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 2169:14:04, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 2129:14:04, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 2029:13:46, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 1882:15:35, August 31, 2005 (UTC) 1803:the law in England and Wales 1767:Category:Politics by country 1680:18:18, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1621:16:42, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1577:15:58, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1560:17:42, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1500:13:24, August 29, 2005 (UTC) 1429:16:42, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1393:15:58, August 28, 2005 (UTC) 1049:14:29, August 26, 2005 (UTC) 975:15:07, August 26, 2005 (UTC) 940:14:29, August 26, 2005 (UTC) 903:14:29, August 26, 2005 (UTC) 886:Category:Aircraft_by_country 875:13:48, August 26, 2005 (UTC) 827:23:01, August 25, 2005 (UTC) 810:category:aircraft by country 699:15:04, August 25, 2005 (UTC) 635:14:44, August 25, 2005 (UTC) 615:14:25, August 25, 2005 (UTC) 507:13:49, August 24, 2005 (UTC) 453:12:54, August 24, 2005 (UTC) 421:all seem to be standardised 258:category:Politics by country 190:04:22, August 26, 2005 (UTC) 4034:2) Archive this talk page. 3870:can be declared a part of 3852:Courts of England and Wales 3395:20:12, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3358:12:19, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3320:11:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3302:11:46, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3266:11:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3153:13:41, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3135:13:17, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3122:12:09, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3080:11:40, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 3036:11:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 2991:11:05, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 2923:20:24, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 2910:20:20, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 2894:20:17, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 2884:20:05, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 2822:10:44, 30 August 2005 (UTC) 2787:13:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 2774:12:05, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 2738:01:18, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 2707:03:49, 30 August 2005 (UTC) 2686:02:52, 30 August 2005 (UTC) 2670:21:26, 29 August 2005 (UTC) 2583:16:41, 29 August 2005 (UTC) 2552:16:41, 29 August 2005 (UTC) 2519:16:41, 29 August 2005 (UTC) 2503:22:45, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 2452:category:Islands by country 2406:02:51, 30 August 2005 (UTC) 2367:17:01, 29 August 2005 (UTC) 2355:Speedy renaming exceptions? 2302:16:36, 29 August 2005 (UTC) 2293:16:36, 29 August 2005 (UTC) 2255:16:36, 29 August 2005 (UTC) 2210:21:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 2188:17:01, 29 August 2005 (UTC) 2146:20:32, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 2096:20:14, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 2085:20:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 2008:20:37, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1982:20:26, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1968:19:55, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1845:18:31, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1821:since they describe facets 1792:16:26, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1733:19:13, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1719:category:Islands by country 1707:18:33, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1589:16:02, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1547:Category:Islands_by_country 1479:20:12, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1472:Category:Islands by country 1443:19:13, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1408:16:02, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1373: 1313:category:Islands by country 1309:(173 subcats, all "of foo") 1264:20:04, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1226:16:22, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 1091:15:05, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 1074:15:19, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 1064:15:05, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 1022:06:25, 28 August 2005 (UTC) 1010:16:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 998:16:22, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 986:15:42, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 954:15:05, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 890:Category:Weapons_by_country 843:13:35, 26 August 2005 (UTC) 801:16:50, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 785:16:28, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 721:16:19, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 672:14:55, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 578:14:19, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 550:13:15, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 532:07:37, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 519:14:41, 24 August 2005 (UTC) 479:13:33, 24 August 2005 (UTC) 433:12:51, 24 August 2005 (UTC) 362:and easily comprehensible. 295:category:Bridges by country 278:category:Weapons by country 232:category:History by country 159:07:29, 25 August 2005 (UTC) 142:17:57, 23 August 2005 (UTC) 131:17:39, 23 August 2005 (UTC) 4138: 1924:Category:Basketball venues 1527:belongs in this list. -- 1369:(72 subcats, all "of foo") 1355:category:Rivers by country 1327:(12 subcats, all "of foo") 1321:(89 subcats, all "of foo") 1315:(41 subcats, all "of foo") 1151:Category:Basketball venues 313:category:Cities by country 3042:make it more consensual). 2694:been nodding at here and 2635:wikipedia:category titles 2627:wikipedia:category titles 2152:Knowledge:Category titles 2049:Knowledge:Category titles 2034:proposal for generic rule 1345:(7 subcats, all "of foo") 1319:category:Lakes by country 1139:Category:Athletics stadia 469:Category:British monarchs 343:category:Towns by country 337:category:Roads by country 2978:Category:American people 1929:Category:Cricket grounds 1919:Category:Baseball venues 1157:Category:Cricket grounds 1145:Category:Baseball venues 3850:, reason for which see 3714:"of country" (proposed) 3712:Category:Law by country 3678:"in country" (proposed) 3642:"of country" (proposed) 3636:"of country" (proposed) 3628:Miscellaneous proposals 2433:Category:Law by country 1757:Category:Law by country 1456:in all cases; EXCEPTING 1270:Another simple question 2938:The proposal is this: 2847:American/United States 2374:WP:CFD#Speedy_renaming 365:Four. As Hiding said, 2615: 2574:I agree in full with 1743:That is things like ( 1450:. My 'vote' is thus: 1448:This list is too wide 793:I agree with Hiding. 589:, or sometimes using 419:Category:Marine Corps 42:of past discussions. 3975: 3872:Category:British MPs 2809:Kazakh / Kazakhstani 2487:Can we also lean to 1954:Category:Theme parks 1891:Suggested exceptions 1211:Category:Theme parks 1199:Category:Racecourses 1169:Category:Ghost towns 493:per your reasoning. 2678:Sounds reasonable. 1545:. Note I've added 643:by listing them at 415:Category:Air forces 4020:non-simultaneously 4014:OK. Referring to 3373:naming conventions 3028:such categories. 2562:Christopher Parham 2558:British literature 2438:We are leaning to 2418:We are leaning to 1747:a complete list): 1508:Christopher Parham 660:for renaming, not 595:naming conventions 405:. The subcats of 4120: 4077: 3385: 2803: 2656: 2390: 2321: 2269: 2246: 2203:for goodness sake 2168: 2128: 2072: 1909:Category:Airports 1807:the law in France 1697: 1662: 1603: 1576: 1559: 1537: 1392: 1251: 1115:Category:Airports 1107: 1048: 1036:category:airports 939: 902: 856:a democracy, and 826: 814:category:airports 774:category:Aircraft 303:(in foo) (193/12) 274:(mostly articles) 189: 170:Simple statements 106:Speedy renaming 3 103: 102: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 4129: 4114: 4071: 3969: 3930: 3841: 3379: 3340: 3283: 3190: 3104: 3058: 3013: 2840: 2797: 2757: 2725: 2650: 2609: 2542: 2384: 2348: 2315: 2263: 2240: 2162: 2122: 2066: 2027: 1865: 1691: 1678: 1656: 1639: 1619: 1597: 1570: 1553: 1531: 1498: 1427: 1386: 1290: 1245: 1101: 1042: 973: 933: 896: 873: 820: 766: 697: 633: 621:not doing that. 613: 505: 451: 391: 357:(in foo) (79/14) 315:(in foo) (142/4) 183: 81: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 4137: 4136: 4132: 4131: 4130: 4128: 4127: 4126: 4012: 3978: 3966: 3927: 3838: 3812: 3630: 3599: 3569: 3539: 3504: 3474: 3443: 3434: 3337: 3280: 3187: 3175: 3101: 3071: 3055: 3010: 2933: 2849: 2837: 2811: 2754: 2722: 2618: 2606: 2539: 2416: 2357: 2345: 2228:smaller polls). 2036: 2024: 1893: 1862: 1741: 1675: 1636: 1616: 1520: 1495: 1424: 1376: 1287: 1272: 1241:with these? -- 1238: 1053:Put them under 970: 870: 763: 729: 694: 630: 610: 502: 448: 411:Category:Navies 407:Category:Armies 388: 351:(in foo) (60/0) 345:(in foo) (49/4) 339:(in foo) (16/3) 333:(in foo) (44/0) 327:(in foo) (15/0) 321:(in foo) (21/0) 309:(in foo) (35/0) 297:(in foo) (41/0) 291:(in foo) (31/2) 172: 108: 77: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4135: 4133: 4125: 4124: 4123: 4122: 4105: 4104: 4011: 4008: 3989: 3988: 3977: 3974: 3973: 3972: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3947: 3944: 3936: 3934: 3933: 3915: 3914: 3913: 3912: 3897: 3896: 3864:London borough 3844: 3811: 3808: 3807: 3806: 3798: 3797: 3782: 3781: 3776: 3774: 3773: 3765: 3764: 3749: 3748: 3743: 3741: 3740: 3732: 3731: 3716: 3715: 3707: 3705: 3704: 3696: 3695: 3680: 3679: 3671: 3669: 3668: 3660: 3659: 3644: 3643: 3637: 3629: 3626: 3625: 3624: 3616: 3615: 3598: 3595: 3594: 3593: 3585: 3584: 3568: 3565: 3564: 3563: 3555: 3554: 3538: 3535: 3534: 3533: 3525: 3524: 3503: 3500: 3499: 3498: 3490: 3489: 3473: 3470: 3469: 3468: 3460: 3459: 3442: 3439: 3433: 3430: 3410: 3409: 3399: 3398: 3397: 3363: 3362: 3361: 3360: 3344: 3343: 3325: 3324: 3323: 3322: 3307: 3306: 3305: 3304: 3289: 3288: 3287: 3286: 3232: 3231: 3226: 3221: 3216: 3211: 3206: 3174: 3171: 3170: 3169: 3127: 3126: 3125: 3124: 3108: 3107: 3085: 3084: 3083: 3082: 3069: 3062: 3061: 3043: 3017: 3016: 2932: 2929: 2928: 2927: 2926: 2925: 2912: 2897: 2896: 2848: 2845: 2844: 2843: 2810: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2779: 2778: 2777: 2776: 2761: 2760: 2742: 2741: 2740: 2691: 2690: 2689: 2688: 2673: 2672: 2643: 2642: 2631: 2617: 2614: 2613: 2612: 2586: 2585: 2572: 2571: 2570: 2569: 2568: 2529: 2526: 2523: 2522: 2521: 2509: 2485: 2484: 2479: 2474: 2469: 2464: 2459: 2454: 2449: 2436: 2435: 2430: 2427: 2415: 2412: 2411: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2393: 2392: 2356: 2353: 2352: 2351: 2328: 2327: 2326: 2325: 2324: 2323: 2295: 2273: 2272: 2271: 2234: 2233: 2232: 2229: 2225: 2222: 2219: 2199: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2195: 2194: 2193: 2192: 2191: 2190: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2132: 2131: 2130: 2099: 2098: 2088: 2087: 2055: 2054: 2035: 2032: 2031: 2030: 2011: 2010: 1998: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1991: 1985: 1984: 1971: 1970: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1951: 1946: 1941: 1936: 1931: 1926: 1921: 1916: 1911: 1903: 1892: 1889: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1884: 1883: 1815:of the country 1813:and therefore 1797:Law should be 1785: 1784: 1779: 1774: 1769: 1764: 1759: 1754: 1740: 1737: 1736: 1735: 1711: 1710: 1709: 1685: 1684: 1683: 1682: 1681: 1624: 1623: 1622: 1591: 1578: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1519: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1501: 1483: 1482: 1481: 1457: 1445: 1433:Case dependent 1430: 1410: 1394: 1375: 1372: 1371: 1370: 1364: 1358: 1352: 1346: 1340: 1334: 1328: 1322: 1316: 1310: 1303: 1302: 1271: 1268: 1267: 1266: 1237: 1234: 1233: 1232: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1228: 1218: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1208: 1202: 1196: 1190: 1184: 1178: 1172: 1166: 1160: 1154: 1148: 1142: 1136: 1130: 1124: 1118: 1094: 1093: 1077: 1076: 1050: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1019:Samuel Wantman 1012: 1000: 988: 976: 956: 941: 919: 918: 917: 916: 907: 906: 905: 904: 877: 876: 848: 847: 846: 845: 829: 828: 805: 804: 803: 788: 787: 747: 746: 728: 725: 724: 723: 701: 700: 677: 676: 675: 674: 651: 650: 649: 648: 637: 636: 617: 616: 598: 581: 580: 562: 561: 535: 534: 509: 508: 482: 481: 460: 459: 455: 454: 436: 435: 359: 358: 352: 346: 340: 334: 328: 322: 316: 310: 304: 298: 292: 282: 281: 275: 267: 261: 255: 247: 241: 235: 229: 223: 217: 211: 205: 199: 171: 168: 166: 164: 163: 162: 161: 145: 144: 107: 104: 101: 100: 95: 92: 87: 82: 75: 70: 65: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4134: 4118: 4113: 4109: 4108: 4107: 4106: 4103: 4100: 4097: 4093: 4089: 4085: 4081: 4080: 4079: 4075: 4070: 4065: 4063: 4058: 4054: 4052: 4048: 4044: 4040: 4035: 4032: 4028: 4025: 4021: 4017: 4009: 4007: 4006: 4003: 4000: 3995: 3992: 3987: 3983: 3982: 3981: 3970: 3963: 3960: 3957: 3952: 3948: 3945: 3942: 3941: 3939: 3938: 3937: 3931: 3924: 3921: 3917: 3916: 3911: 3908: 3905: 3901: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3895: 3892: 3889: 3885: 3881: 3877: 3873: 3869: 3865: 3861: 3857: 3853: 3849: 3845: 3842: 3835: 3832: 3828: 3824: 3823: 3822: 3821: 3818: 3809: 3805: 3804: 3803: 3802: 3796: 3793: 3789: 3788: 3787: 3786: 3779: 3778: 3777: 3772: 3771: 3770: 3769: 3763: 3760: 3756: 3755: 3754: 3753: 3746: 3745: 3744: 3739: 3738: 3737: 3736: 3730: 3727: 3723: 3722: 3721: 3720: 3713: 3710: 3709: 3708: 3703: 3702: 3701: 3700: 3694: 3691: 3687: 3686: 3685: 3684: 3677: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3667: 3666: 3665: 3664: 3658: 3655: 3651: 3650: 3649: 3648: 3641: 3638: 3635: 3632: 3631: 3627: 3623: 3622: 3621: 3620: 3614: 3611: 3606: 3605: 3604: 3603: 3596: 3592: 3591: 3590: 3589: 3583: 3580: 3576: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3566: 3562: 3561: 3560: 3559: 3553: 3550: 3546: 3545: 3544: 3543: 3536: 3532: 3531: 3530: 3529: 3523: 3520: 3516: 3511: 3510: 3509: 3508: 3501: 3497: 3496: 3495: 3494: 3488: 3485: 3481: 3480: 3479: 3478: 3471: 3467: 3466: 3465: 3464: 3458: 3455: 3450: 3449: 3448: 3447: 3440: 3438: 3431: 3429: 3428: 3425: 3420: 3419: 3416: 3408: 3405: 3400: 3396: 3393: 3388: 3387: 3383: 3378: 3374: 3370: 3365: 3364: 3359: 3356: 3353: 3348: 3347: 3346: 3345: 3341: 3334: 3331: 3327: 3326: 3321: 3318: 3315: 3311: 3310: 3309: 3308: 3303: 3300: 3297: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3290: 3284: 3277: 3274: 3269: 3268: 3267: 3264: 3261: 3257: 3253: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3246: 3242: 3241: 3237: 3236: 3230: 3227: 3225: 3222: 3220: 3217: 3215: 3212: 3210: 3207: 3205: 3203: 3198: 3197: 3196: 3193: 3191: 3184: 3181: 3173:The proposals 3172: 3168: 3165: 3162: 3158: 3157: 3156: 3154: 3151: 3147: 3143: 3137: 3136: 3133: 3123: 3120: 3117: 3112: 3111: 3110: 3109: 3105: 3098: 3095: 3091: 3087: 3086: 3081: 3078: 3075: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3059: 3052: 3049: 3044: 3040: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3034: 3031: 3027: 3023: 3014: 3007: 3004: 3000: 2995: 2994: 2993: 2992: 2989: 2986: 2981: 2979: 2974: 2973: 2967: 2964: 2963: 2961: 2957: 2956:United States 2953: 2952:United States 2949: 2945: 2939: 2936: 2930: 2924: 2921: 2918: 2913: 2911: 2908: 2905: 2901: 2900: 2899: 2898: 2895: 2892: 2888: 2887: 2886: 2885: 2882: 2879: 2874: 2870: 2866: 2862: 2861:United States 2858: 2854: 2846: 2841: 2834: 2831: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2820: 2816: 2808: 2801: 2796: 2791: 2790: 2789: 2788: 2785: 2775: 2772: 2769: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2762: 2758: 2751: 2748: 2743: 2739: 2736: 2732: 2729: 2728: 2726: 2719: 2716: 2711: 2710: 2709: 2708: 2705: 2701: 2697: 2687: 2684: 2681: 2677: 2676: 2675: 2674: 2671: 2668: 2665: 2660: 2659: 2658: 2654: 2649: 2640: 2636: 2632: 2630:individually. 2628: 2624: 2623: 2622: 2610: 2603: 2600: 2596: 2592: 2588: 2587: 2584: 2581: 2577: 2573: 2566: 2563: 2559: 2555: 2554: 2553: 2550: 2546: 2545: 2543: 2536: 2533: 2530: 2527: 2524: 2520: 2517: 2513: 2512: 2510: 2507: 2506: 2505: 2504: 2501: 2498: 2494: 2490: 2483: 2480: 2478: 2475: 2473: 2470: 2468: 2465: 2463: 2460: 2458: 2455: 2453: 2450: 2448: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2441: 2434: 2431: 2428: 2425: 2424: 2423: 2421: 2414:Quick summary 2413: 2407: 2404: 2401: 2397: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2388: 2383: 2379: 2375: 2371: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2365: 2362: 2354: 2349: 2342: 2339: 2335: 2330: 2329: 2319: 2314: 2310: 2305: 2304: 2303: 2300: 2296: 2294: 2291: 2287: 2283: 2278: 2274: 2267: 2262: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2253: 2249: 2248: 2244: 2239: 2235: 2230: 2226: 2223: 2220: 2217: 2216: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2211: 2208: 2204: 2189: 2186: 2183: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2166: 2161: 2157: 2153: 2149: 2148: 2147: 2144: 2141: 2137: 2133: 2126: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2110: 2109: 2107: 2106: 2103: 2102: 2101: 2100: 2097: 2094: 2090: 2089: 2086: 2083: 2080: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2070: 2065: 2059: 2053: 2050: 2046: 2041: 2040: 2039: 2033: 2028: 2021: 2018: 2013: 2012: 2009: 2006: 2003: 1999: 1996: 1995: 1989: 1988: 1987: 1986: 1983: 1980: 1977: 1973: 1972: 1969: 1966: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1952: 1950: 1947: 1945: 1942: 1940: 1937: 1935: 1932: 1930: 1927: 1925: 1922: 1920: 1917: 1915: 1912: 1910: 1907: 1906: 1904: 1901: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1890: 1881: 1878: 1873: 1869: 1868: 1866: 1859: 1856: 1852: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1843: 1840: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1824: 1820: 1816: 1812: 1811:of the people 1808: 1804: 1800: 1796: 1795: 1794: 1793: 1790: 1783: 1780: 1778: 1775: 1773: 1770: 1768: 1765: 1763: 1760: 1758: 1755: 1753: 1750: 1749: 1748: 1746: 1738: 1734: 1731: 1728: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1713:I agree that 1712: 1708: 1705: 1700: 1699: 1695: 1690: 1686: 1679: 1672: 1669: 1665: 1664: 1660: 1655: 1651: 1647: 1643: 1642: 1640: 1633: 1630: 1625: 1620: 1613: 1610: 1606: 1605: 1601: 1596: 1592: 1590: 1587: 1583: 1579: 1574: 1569: 1564: 1557: 1552: 1548: 1544: 1540: 1539: 1535: 1530: 1526: 1523:I'm not sure 1522: 1521: 1517: 1512: 1509: 1505: 1502: 1499: 1492: 1489: 1484: 1480: 1477: 1473: 1469: 1465: 1461: 1458: 1455: 1452: 1451: 1449: 1446: 1444: 1441: 1438: 1434: 1431: 1428: 1421: 1418: 1414: 1411: 1409: 1406: 1402: 1398: 1395: 1390: 1385: 1381: 1378: 1377: 1368: 1365: 1362: 1359: 1356: 1353: 1350: 1347: 1344: 1341: 1338: 1335: 1332: 1329: 1326: 1323: 1320: 1317: 1314: 1311: 1308: 1305: 1304: 1300: 1295: 1294: 1293: 1291: 1284: 1281: 1277: 1269: 1265: 1262: 1258: 1255: 1254: 1253: 1249: 1244: 1235: 1227: 1224: 1219: 1212: 1209: 1206: 1203: 1200: 1197: 1194: 1191: 1188: 1185: 1182: 1179: 1176: 1173: 1170: 1167: 1164: 1161: 1158: 1155: 1152: 1149: 1146: 1143: 1140: 1137: 1134: 1131: 1128: 1125: 1122: 1119: 1116: 1113: 1112: 1110: 1109: 1105: 1100: 1096: 1095: 1092: 1089: 1086: 1082: 1079: 1078: 1075: 1072: 1069: 1065: 1063: 1060: 1056: 1051: 1046: 1041: 1037: 1033: 1032: 1030: 1027: 1023: 1020: 1016: 1013: 1011: 1008: 1004: 1001: 999: 996: 992: 989: 987: 984: 980: 977: 974: 967: 964: 960: 957: 955: 952: 949: 945: 942: 937: 932: 928: 925: 924: 923: 922: 921: 920: 914: 911: 910: 909: 908: 900: 895: 891: 887: 881: 880: 879: 878: 874: 867: 864: 859: 855: 850: 849: 844: 841: 838: 833: 832: 831: 830: 824: 819: 815: 811: 806: 802: 799: 796: 792: 791: 790: 789: 786: 783: 780: 775: 771: 770: 769: 767: 760: 757: 752: 745: 742: 741: 740: 738: 734: 726: 722: 719: 716: 711: 707: 703: 702: 698: 691: 688: 684: 679: 678: 673: 670: 667: 663: 659: 655: 654: 653: 652: 646: 641: 640: 639: 638: 634: 627: 624: 619: 618: 614: 607: 604: 599: 596: 592: 588: 583: 582: 579: 576: 573: 569: 564: 563: 560: 558: 554: 553: 552: 551: 548: 544: 540: 533: 530: 527: 523: 522: 521: 520: 517: 513: 506: 499: 496: 492: 488: 484: 483: 480: 477: 474: 470: 466: 462: 461: 457: 456: 452: 445: 442: 438: 437: 434: 431: 428: 424: 420: 416: 412: 408: 404: 400: 396: 395: 394: 392: 385: 382: 377: 376:called that. 373: 370: 368: 363: 356: 353: 350: 347: 344: 341: 338: 335: 332: 329: 326: 323: 320: 317: 314: 311: 308: 305: 302: 299: 296: 293: 290: 287: 286: 285: 279: 276: 273: 272: 268: 265: 262: 259: 256: 253: 252: 248: 245: 242: 239: 236: 233: 230: 227: 224: 221: 218: 215: 212: 209: 206: 203: 200: 197: 194: 193: 192: 191: 187: 182: 175: 169: 167: 160: 157: 154: 149: 148: 147: 146: 143: 140: 135: 134: 133: 132: 129: 126: 121: 117: 116: 111: 105: 99: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 80: 76: 74: 71: 69: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 4066: 4059: 4055: 4036: 4033: 4029: 4023: 4019: 4013: 3996: 3993: 3990: 3984: 3979: 3951:this summary 3935: 3883: 3879: 3868:Isaac Newton 3827:descriptions 3826: 3813: 3800: 3799: 3784: 3783: 3775: 3767: 3766: 3751: 3750: 3742: 3734: 3733: 3718: 3717: 3706: 3698: 3697: 3682: 3681: 3670: 3662: 3661: 3646: 3645: 3618: 3617: 3601: 3600: 3587: 3586: 3571: 3570: 3557: 3556: 3541: 3540: 3527: 3526: 3506: 3505: 3492: 3491: 3476: 3475: 3462: 3461: 3445: 3444: 3435: 3421: 3411: 3244: 3243: 3239: 3238: 3234: 3233: 3228: 3223: 3218: 3213: 3208: 3199: 3194: 3176: 3150:84.92.54.229 3138: 3128: 3025: 3021: 3018: 2998: 2982: 2975: 2971: 2968: 2965: 2959: 2955: 2951: 2947: 2941: 2940: 2937: 2934: 2931:Resurrecting 2872: 2868: 2864: 2860: 2856: 2852: 2850: 2812: 2780: 2730: 2699: 2695: 2692: 2644: 2619: 2616:What's next? 2594: 2590: 2488: 2486: 2439: 2437: 2419: 2417: 2398:OK, thanks. 2358: 2308: 2285: 2281: 2202: 2200: 2060: 2056: 2042: 2037: 1894: 1871: 1850: 1834: 1830: 1826: 1823:of a country 1822: 1818: 1814: 1810: 1806: 1802: 1798: 1786: 1744: 1742: 1722: 1506:per Splash. 1503: 1459: 1453: 1447: 1432: 1412: 1396: 1379: 1275: 1273: 1256: 1239: 1080: 1054: 1052: 1028: 1014: 1002: 990: 978: 958: 943: 926: 912: 750: 748: 743: 739:them. Thus, 736: 732: 730: 709: 705: 682: 567: 556: 555: 542: 538: 536: 511: 510: 490: 486: 485:Ok... moved 422: 398: 378: 374: 371: 366: 364: 360: 283: 269: 249: 178: 176: 173: 165: 122: 118: 113: 112: 109: 78: 43: 37: 4010:tough crowd 3902:I give up. 1837:, I think. 1829:, although 1257:No problems 254:(see below) 36:This is an 4112:Rick Block 4069:Rick Block 3377:Rick Block 3026:nominating 3022:nominating 2999:nominating 2983:Thoughts? 2795:Rick Block 2648:Rick Block 2382:Rick Block 2313:Rick Block 2261:Rick Block 2238:Rick Block 2160:Rick Block 2120:Rick Block 2064:Rick Block 2052:consensus. 1721:, because 1689:Rick Block 1654:Rick Block 1595:Rick Block 1568:Rick Block 1551:Rick Block 1529:Rick Block 1384:Rick Block 1243:Rick Block 1099:Rick Block 1040:Rick Block 931:Rick Block 894:Rick Block 818:Rick Block 710:categories 706:categories 568:status quo 399:of country 181:Rick Block 123:Comments? 98:Archive 10 2696:represent 1877:Russ Blau 1055:transport 812:consider 90:Archive 7 85:Archive 6 79:Archive 5 73:Archive 4 68:Archive 3 60:Archive 1 3999:Maurreen 3976:I'm lost 3161:Maurreen 2960:American 2948:American 2904:Maurreen 2873:American 2857:American 2853:American 2819:Darwinek 2782:wrong? - 2700:de facto 2680:Maurreen 2400:Maurreen 2361:Maurreen 2182:Maurreen 2140:Maurreen 2002:Maurreen 1962:Maurreen 1399:(except 1029:Comments 795:Maurreen 737:describe 727:Step two 526:Maurreen 260:(113/25) 228:(104/27) 153:Maurreen 125:Maurreen 3856:Mitcham 3785:Support 3752:Support 3719:Support 3683:Support 3647:Support 3602:Support 3572:Support 3542:Support 3507:Support 3477:Support 3446:Support 3375:). -- 2591:country 2334:WP:CENT 2309:changes 1789:Sherool 1704:Sherool 1607:Agree. 1586:Sherool 1541:... or 1504:Depends 1405:Sherool 1299:SEWilco 1223:Sherool 1007:SEWilco 995:Sherool 587:WP:BOLD 240:(203/4) 234:(108/4) 39:archive 4096:Hiding 4062:WP:CFD 4043:WP:CFD 4031:form. 4024:before 4002:(talk) 3962:adiant 3923:adiant 3904:Hiding 3888:Hiding 3860:Surrey 3834:adiant 3817:Beland 3801:Oppose 3792:Beland 3768:Oppose 3759:Beland 3735:Oppose 3726:Beland 3699:Oppose 3690:Beland 3663:Oppose 3654:Beland 3619:Oppose 3610:Beland 3588:Oppose 3579:Beland 3558:Oppose 3549:Beland 3528:Oppose 3519:Beland 3493:Oppose 3484:Beland 3463:Oppose 3454:Beland 3424:Splash 3415:Splash 3404:Beland 3392:Splash 3352:Hiding 3333:adiant 3314:Hiding 3296:Hiding 3276:adiant 3260:Hiding 3183:adiant 3164:(talk) 3146:WP:CFD 3132:Splash 3116:Hiding 3097:adiant 3090:WP:NIS 3074:Hiding 3051:adiant 3030:Hiding 3006:adiant 2985:Hiding 2917:Hiding 2907:(talk) 2891:Splash 2878:Hiding 2833:adiant 2815:WP:CFD 2784:Splash 2768:Hiding 2750:adiant 2735:Splash 2718:adiant 2704:Splash 2683:(talk) 2664:Hiding 2602:adiant 2595:nation 2580:Splash 2576:Hiding 2565:(talk) 2549:Splash 2535:adiant 2516:Splash 2497:Hiding 2489:at foo 2440:of foo 2420:in foo 2403:(talk) 2364:(talk) 2341:adiant 2299:Splash 2290:Splash 2277:Hiding 2252:Splash 2207:Splash 2185:(talk) 2143:(talk) 2118:). -- 2093:Splash 2079:Hiding 2020:adiant 2005:(talk) 1976:Hiding 1965:(talk) 1880:(talk) 1858:adiant 1851:except 1839:Hiding 1727:Hiding 1671:adiant 1632:adiant 1612:adiant 1511:(talk) 1491:adiant 1476:Splash 1470:, and 1460:Of foo 1454:In foo 1437:Hiding 1420:adiant 1413:In foo 1397:in foo 1380:Of foo 1283:adiant 1261:Splash 1207:(49/0) 1183:(24/0) 1135:(25/0) 1085:Hiding 1068:Hiding 1059:Hiding 983:Splash 966:adiant 948:Hiding 866:adiant 854:WP:NOT 837:Hiding 798:(talk) 779:Hiding 759:adiant 715:Hiding 690:adiant 683:object 666:Hiding 658:WP:CFD 645:WP:CFD 626:adiant 606:adiant 572:Hiding 547:Splash 529:(talk) 516:Splash 498:adiant 473:Hiding 444:adiant 427:Hiding 423:fooish 384:adiant 280:(29/1) 222:(24/4) 216:(20/0) 210:(49/0) 198:(48/3) 156:(talk) 139:Splash 128:(talk) 4047:WP:CG 3968:|< 3967:: --> 3929:|< 3928:: --> 3862:to a 3858:from 3840:|< 3839:: --> 3369:WP:CG 3339:|< 3338:: --> 3282:|< 3281:: --> 3189:|< 3188:: --> 3103:|< 3102:: --> 3057:|< 3056:: --> 3012:|< 3011:: --> 2839:|< 2838:: --> 2756:|< 2755:: --> 2724:|< 2723:: --> 2608:|< 2607:: --> 2541:|< 2540:: --> 2347:|< 2346:: --> 2282:every 2026:|< 2025:: --> 1870:It's 1864:|< 1863:: --> 1827:of it 1677:|< 1676:: --> 1638:|< 1637:: --> 1618:|< 1617:: --> 1549:. -- 1497:|< 1496:: --> 1426:|< 1425:: --> 1289:|< 1288:: --> 1213:(3/2) 1201:(5/2) 1189:(7/5) 1171:(2/0) 1153:(2/1) 1147:(5/4) 1141:(7/0) 1129:(2/0) 1123:(2/1) 1015:Agree 1003:Agree 991:Agree 979:Agree 972:|< 971:: --> 959:Agree 944:Agree 927:Agree 872:|< 871:: --> 858:WP:NC 765:|< 764:: --> 733:could 696:|< 695:: --> 662:WP:RM 632:|< 631:: --> 612:|< 611:: --> 591:WP:RM 504:|< 503:: --> 450:|< 449:: --> 390:|< 389:: --> 379:HTH. 266:(4/0) 246:(7/0) 204:(5/0) 16:< 4117:talk 4099:talk 4074:talk 4045:and 4041:and 3907:talk 3891:talk 3382:talk 3355:talk 3317:talk 3299:talk 3263:talk 3119:talk 3077:talk 3033:talk 2988:talk 2920:talk 2881:talk 2869:U.S. 2867:and 2817:. - 2800:talk 2771:talk 2667:talk 2653:talk 2500:talk 2442:for 2422:for 2387:talk 2318:talk 2266:talk 2243:talk 2201:Oh, 2180:OK. 2165:talk 2125:talk 2082:talk 2069:talk 1979:talk 1842:talk 1730:talk 1694:talk 1659:talk 1648:and 1600:talk 1573:talk 1556:talk 1534:talk 1462:for 1440:talk 1403:) -- 1389:talk 1248:talk 1104:talk 1088:talk 1081:Note 1071:talk 1062:talk 1045:talk 951:talk 936:talk 899:talk 840:talk 823:talk 782:talk 718:talk 669:talk 575:talk 487:five 476:talk 430:talk 417:and 186:talk 3144:or 2863:. 2733:. - 2731:Yes 2236:-- 2138:." 1872:not 1805:or 1745:not 1474:. - 1382:-- 1017:-- 751:not 557:But 539:But 491:six 4094:. 4064:. 3072:. 2865:US 2560:. 2495:? 1835:in 1831:in 1819:of 1799:in 1723:in 1702:-- 1466:, 1221:-- 1057:? 1031:. 1005:- 993:-- 981:- 961:- 946:- 929:- 467:- 413:, 409:, 94:→ 64:← 4119:) 4115:( 4076:) 4072:( 3965:_ 3959:R 3926:_ 3920:R 3837:_ 3831:R 3413:- 3384:) 3380:( 3336:_ 3330:R 3279:_ 3273:R 3186:_ 3180:R 3100:_ 3094:R 3054:_ 3048:R 3009:_ 3003:R 2962:. 2836:_ 2830:R 2802:) 2798:( 2753:_ 2747:R 2721:_ 2715:R 2655:) 2651:( 2605:_ 2599:R 2538:_ 2532:R 2389:) 2385:( 2344:_ 2338:R 2320:) 2316:( 2268:) 2264:( 2245:) 2241:( 2167:) 2163:( 2127:) 2123:( 2071:) 2067:( 2023:_ 2017:R 1861:_ 1855:R 1696:) 1692:( 1674:_ 1668:R 1661:) 1657:( 1635:_ 1629:R 1615:_ 1609:R 1602:) 1598:( 1575:) 1571:( 1558:) 1554:( 1536:) 1532:( 1494:_ 1488:R 1423:_ 1417:R 1391:) 1387:( 1301:) 1297:( 1286:_ 1280:R 1250:) 1246:( 1106:) 1102:( 1047:) 1043:( 969:_ 963:R 938:) 934:( 915:. 901:) 897:( 869:_ 863:R 852:( 825:) 821:( 762:_ 756:R 693:_ 687:R 629:_ 623:R 609:_ 603:R 501:_ 495:R 447:_ 441:R 387:_ 381:R 188:) 184:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

talk:Category names/Archive 5 - Knowledge

Index