Category talk:Women's cricket in England

+Women
Bad idea. What is wrong with having "Women's cricket in England" under W in a category called "Cricket in England"? What does such a "standard key" actually achieve? Some people on here would do better to try and improve articles instead of tinkering with trivial issues like that. Jack | talk page 16:15, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 * @User:BlackJack, that trivia claim cuts both ways. If you feel that is a trivial issue, why bother to revert it?
 * The reason for using a standard sort key for gendered categories is simply so that both gendered categories sort alongside each other. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:34, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 * @BHG. I reverted it because it makes a mess of the category by giving women's cricket an apparent importance which, frankly, it does not have. Introducing a key of that sort is pedantic, a better word than "trivial", and the people responsible should find more productive ways to spend their time on here. Surely a category about cricket is best managed by people who know and understand both the game and what people browsing the categories are actually looking for. Someone searching for "women's cricket" is not going to look under +, they will look under W. Sometimes, I despair. Jack | talk page 16:55, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Jack, I am still very amused that you don't spot the irony og your insistence on reverting something which you find trivial. If you believe that it's trivial, why don't you find sometging better to do with your time?
 * Anyway, thank you so much for setting out your view of women's sport. It does explain why you are so keen using to use a sort key which places women's sport at the end of the list, rather than placing both genders near the top, as in other sports. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:02, 6 April 2017 (UTC)