Template talk:Non-diffusing subcategory

(Redirected from Template talk:Non-diffusing subcategory/sandbox)
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Kaffet i halsen in topic Red links
WikiProject iconCategories
WikiProject iconThis template is within the scope of WikiProject Categories, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of categories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.

Rewording

edit

I'd like to propose a rewording of this template, which is currently linked to a few hundred pages ([1]).

Currently, it says all articles can be found in the parent. This isn't the case, however, where the parent also has diffusing subcategories.

For example, Category:American politicians has several diffusing sub-categories, such as by-state. It also has a few non-diffusing children, like Category:American women in politics. We should be able to mark Category:American women in politics as a non-diffusing category, even if the parent is empty. As such, I propose we reword as follows:

  • This is a distinguished subcategory of Category:X. It includes actors that can also be found in the parent category, or in diffusing subcategories of the parent.

I also think we should create a redirect for {{Non-diffusing subcategory}} to this template.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 17:26, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

The suggestion seems good to me.
Do we plan that all categories will be tagged by at least one of the Category namespace templates{{container category}} or {{distinguished subcategory}} among them?
The tool "What links here" formerly provided the option to select redirects only, iirc. Right? What happened? --P64 (talk) 23:52, 10 June 2013 (UTC)Reply
No - some/most categories are just regular old diffusing ones, in which case, no template is needed. A very few categories are non-diffusing, which is where this template comes in handy. Finally, container categories are numerous, but in some cases it's so obvious they are containers that we don't need to put the tag (there are I think 4k cats tagged as container, and I would estimate probably 30-40k that are actually container cats, or more...) - it's really just if people are confused or putting things into those cats that you should consider the container cat tag probably. Not sure about your what-links-here question, perhaps ask at village pump? OTOH, I bet there aren't more than 1000 true non-diffusing cats, but again, just a wild guesstimate. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 03:39, 11 June 2013 (UTC)Reply


Requested move 22 June 2014

edit
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:14, 29 June 2014 (UTC)Reply


Template:Distinguished subcategoryTemplate:Non-diffusing subcategory – The common wording used on Wikipedia to describe categories that may be in both parent and child is "non-diffusing", not "distinguished", categories. This template should be updated to reflect this terminology and reflect the contents of the supporting guideline. SFB 15:27, 22 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Survey

edit
Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
All included is different - all included basically means - every single one of my subcategories is non-diffusing. We also have cases where some subcategories ARE diffusing, while others are NOT - e.g. Category:American novelists has diffusing subcats of Category:20th-century American novelists and non-diffusing subcats of Category:American male novelists.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 06:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
I suppose we could create something like {{Non-diffusing category}} for that purpose, showing the reverse relationship in the template text (which of the subcategory is the one that the non-diffusing relationship exists). But as Obiwankenobi says, I've rarely seen a parent category that is entirely non-diffusing for all its subcategories. SFB 06:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Discussion

edit
Any additional comments:


Intial discussion

edit

Any reason why this template doesn't refer to "non-diffusing" categories rather than the uncommon "distinguished" phrasing? I propose we move the template to Template:Non-diffusing subcategory and reword the template accordingly.

sounds reasonable but I'd propose as an RM to get formal participation.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2014 (UTC)Reply
Done
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Combining diffusing and non-diffusing boxes

edit

FYI see Template_talk:Category_diffuse#Combining_diffusing_and_non-diffusing_boxes.3F. Ottawahitech (talk) 13:53, 8 January 2017 (UTC)please ping meReply

edit

The renaming of Category:Olympic athletes of Great Britain and similar categories to Category:Olympic athletes for Great Britain might have created a couple of redlinks in this template. All uses are probably not needed anymore since most Fooian sportspeople categories have been gendered since the template was added. Would it be possible to create Category:Wikipedia non-diffusing subcategories with red links as a tracking category to find and resolve the errors? Kaffet i halsen (talk) 12:39, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply