Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Lakes by country

The following discussion comes from Categories for deletion. This is an archive of the discussion only; please do not edit this page. -Kbdank71 14:48, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Round 1
-Kbdank71 14:48, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Category:Lakes by country
Lakes should be sorted first by continent, as in Category:Lakes of Africa and Category:Lakes of Asia. (Or vice versa. But we should pick one.) -- Beland 07:12, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Are you saying that it is illegitimate to place an English lake in the England menu? That's absurd and totally inconsistent with the whole category system.The country categories should be subcats of the continental ones. Wincoote 15:55, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Categories are a graph, not a tree; you can sort them both ways. Bryan 18:53, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep MadreBurro 17:54, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Round 2
-Kbdank71 17:09, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Category:Lakes_by_country
-- Beland 02:25, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Fooish lakes -> Lakes of Foo
 * (Currently mixed usage.)
 * While I agree at the country level of using Lakes of Foo, I'd prefer using Fooish lakes at the subdivision level (e.g. provinces/territories, states). RedWolf 17:14, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * That does seem to be common practice (which I personally happen to follow) but, for argument's sake, what justifies the inconsistency? -- Beland
 * Category:Lakes of the United States and Category:Lakes of Australia use "Lakes of X" for subcategories. Category:Lakes of Canada has Category:Ontario lakes (the only province subcategory) and Category:Lakes of the United Kingdom has Category:English lakes (the only subcategory). "Lakes of X" seems to be the standard for subdivisions. It certainly makes sense for U.S. states (where the adjective is often unclear or obscure). -Aranel (" Sarah ") 19:12, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * So will it be Manitoba lakes or Manitoban lakes? I think Lakes of [insert province] is better for the same reasons as Lakes of [insert country].  &mdash;Michael Z. 05:14, 2005 Jan 17 (UTC)

FTR, these are not in Category:Lakes by country but represent countries or supranational areas, and don't fit the existing pattern. -- Beland 02:04, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Category:African_lakes
 * Category:Asian_lakes
 * Category:English_lakes
 * Category:Finnish_lakes
 * Category:New_Zealand_lakes
 * Category:Philippine_lakes
 * Category:Romanian_lakes
 * Category:Scottish_lakes
 * Category:Swedish_lakes
 * Category:Swiss_lakes
 * Category:United_States_lakes

May I ask: Why not Category:Lakes in Foo? /Tuomas 08:19, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * In general, man-made places (such as cities and towns) tend to use "in" and landforms (mountains, bays, etc.) tend to use "of". I'm not entirely sure why this is the case; the standard is of necessity somewhat arbitrary. (It's often not important which standard we use, as long as we have a standard.) -Aranel (" Sarah ") 16:17, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * MOVE_CONTENTS_INCL_CATS Category:African_lakes -> Category:Lakes_of_Africa
 * MOVE_CONTENTS_INCL_CATS Category:Asian_lakes -> Category:Lakes_of_Asia
 * MOVE_CONTENTS_INCL_CATS Category:English_lakes -> Category:Lakes_of_England