Category talk:Rocky Mountains

Rocky Mountains of Colorado

 * The following was moved from the talk page of Category:Rocky Mountains of Colorado which has since been deleted. RedWolf 06:03, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

This category doesn't make much sense to me. Are there a substantial number of non-Rocky mountains in Colorado? -- hike395 21:43, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC).

I basically created it because the category Category:Rocky Mountains was formerly a subcategory of Category:Colorado geography. That didn't make sense to me, because basically my personal opinion is that all items in a category should be able to be included in any supercategory. I created it basically to rectify that, so that there would be a place to put subranges of the Rockies within the Colorado geography unambiguously (previously, for example, the Absaroka Range was a child of the category Category:Colorado geography). At first I thought of titling it Category:Colorado Rockies, which is what people actually call the Rockies in Colorado, but that has the disadvantage of having the major league baseball franchise of the same name. -- Decumanus 22:00, 2005 Apr 23 (UTC)


 * I agree that Category:Rocky Mountains should not be a subcategory of Category:Colorado geography: that's not right. I have alternative proposal, however.


 * For other states X, mountain ranges and mountains are mixed together in Category:X mountains, each of which is a child of Category:X geography. I propose simply moving all of these mountain range articles into Category:Colorado mountains, so we won't need the separate category. If you like, we can make Category:Rocky Mountains a Related Category to Category:Colorado mountains. -- hike395 22:15, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * Mixing mountain peaks and mountain ranges in the same category doesn't seem quite optimal to me. There are bound to be hundreds of articles on mountain peaks in Colorado created over time, but only several dozen range articles at most. Putting the range articles amongst the peak articles seems like it doesn't take advantage of the fine-grained properties of categories. How about Category:Mountain ranges of Colorado? -- Decumanus 22:20, 2005 Apr 23 (UTC)


 * That's a good idea (or should it be Category:Colorado mountain ranges?) I guess we'll have to make the rest of the states have the same consistent categorization, *sigh*. I would suggest making Category:X mountains and Category:Mountain ranges of X be related categories to each other, both being subcategories of Category:X geography. All of the mountain ranges categories should also be subcategories of Category:Mountain ranges of North America. -- hike395 22:33, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I realize it would go against the established system, but perhaps Colorado is good place to start. I'd certainly be willing to tackle the states where I've contributed ranges/peaks (Colorado, Oregon, Montana, Wyoming, Nevada) in a gradual way over time, as my wiki attention wanders around North America. I'm certainly not up for a mass recategorization all at once. I like your suggestion of having them both be subcategories of the X geography. As far the wording, I am perfectly happy with X mountain ranges, although I am seeing a general trend among categories to be Y of X rather than X Y, and I've begun to adjust my creation of new ones to reflect what I see at the inevitable desire of someone down the line (with more gumption than me) to turn all the names around. But like I said, I'd be happy with your wording. -- Decumanus 22:44, 2005 Apr 23 (UTC)


 * Looking around, I see there was a massive cleanup to Y of X @ Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Landforms, and that, for U.S. States, Volcanoes of X, National Parks of X, Islands of X are the predominant form. So, we should use the Mountain ranges of X form. Please go ahead and do Colorado. I'll start doing some of the other states. Do you want to list Category:Rocky Mountains of Colorado on CfD? -- hike395 01:24, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)the perciting is 36 out of 78

and hi my names is david ross