Category talk:String quartets

Category contains two different things
I think we should have a category Compositions for string quartet and another category String quartets, each contianing a disambig notice pointing to the other one. It seems odd to have a category where we have both the Borodin Quartet and the String Quartet No. 2 (Borodin)!

My argument is mainly from a usability point of view. It seems to me that someone looking for string quartet ensembles is not going to want to see compositions, nor vice versa. There is also the string quartet article which I suggest should be in both categories.

I'm quite happy to do the split manually and tidy up afterwards if there's agreement. Does anyone else have a view? --RobertG &#9836; talk 16:48, 27 May 2005 (UTC)


 * I've made attempts to come up with good category names for this before, only to give up. Your suggestion sounds fine, though. I hereby agree. :-) &mdash; Pladask 10:16, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)


 * What about renaming this category to Category:String quartet ensembles, so that both could be a subcategory of Category:String quartets? &mdash; Pladask 10:10, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)


 * I respectfully disagree with this suggestion, because then we would be back to the original problem of having a category "string quartets" with two different things in it! (And what else would the category contain?  And what would be its parent category?)  I think the current arrangement is fine&hellip;  --RobertG &#9836; talk 12:07, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * You're completely right, it was a silly idea. To my defense I had just gotten out of bed. :-) BTW, nice job on the splitting. &mdash; Pladask 12:40, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)