Category talk:People from Tendring (district)

Archived renaming proposal

 * Category:People from Tendring (district) to Category:People from Tendring District – C2D per Tendring District, for the same reasons as Gedling.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 21:28, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Category:People from Tandridge (district) to Category:People from Tandridge District – C2D per Tandridge District, for the same reasons as Gedling.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 21:26, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Category:People from Gedling (district) to Category:People from the Borough of Gedling – C2D per Borough of Gedling, see the recent RM. Note that Category:Gedling is a combined category for both the village and district, similar to Category:Rotherham. Category:People from Gedling should be created for the village if needed.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 21:24, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * For the 3 above, are the villages and districts coterminous? If not, why are their categories combined? And if they should remain combined, should we not follow the parent categories' naming conventions—i.e. Category:People from Gedling, Category:People from Tandridge, Category:People from Tendring? -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:34, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No the districts cover a far larger area than the villages. Although separate categories for the villages and districts are unlikely to be needed anytime soon (few villages at all have cats at all, let alone those that share the name with a district). However its more likely that separate categories will be created for the people from categories, see Category:Blaby for example which also has Category:People from Blaby.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:38, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose if the parent categories (, & ) are not renamed too. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Why do you oppose? The current names of the people from don't match either the category or article, as noted the main categories probably don't need renaming since I doubt we need separate parent categories for both village and district.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 11:37, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The category for the smaller entity shouldn't contain people of the larger entity. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:43, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Well both the smaller and larger entity have 1 main category with the shorter names. However as noted its more common to have "people from..." categories for smaller places so we could just preform the renames and leave titles like Category:People from Gedling available for just the village. However I don't really object to moving them to Category:People from Gedling and adding Category:People by city or town in England to that CAT.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 11:52, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with Armbrust, a category for the village shouldn't contain a category for the district. Category:People from Gedling would be an elegant solution if everyone in the category is from the village of Gedling and not from other parts of the district. If that is not the case, I would recommend splitting Category:Gedling to create a separate category for the district (Category:Borough of Gedling) and then placing the "People from" category therein. If there is not enough content to justify two separate categories, then we should merge everything to the district level. -- Black Falcon (talk) 06:03, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Its normal for a settlement and administrative diversion to have a single category for (at least some levels) even if there are separate articles. Compare Rotherham/Metropolitan Borough of Rotherham which shares a single Category:Rotherham. But there are separate Category:People from the Metropolitan Borough of Rotherham and Category:People from Rotherham. As noted I would recommend creating Category:People from Gedling but I doubt we need Category:Gedling and Category:Borough of Gedling since its unlikely that there is sufficient articles to split them.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 11:56, 7 December 2018 (UTC)