Category talk:Monuments and memorials by country
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Skeezix1000
Actual name is pure pleonasm. Correct would be: category:Monuments and other memorials by country. Similarly, sub-categories. Greetings. --Starscream (talk) 14:14, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Arguably, yes. But not everyone agrees. It's been debated so long, with so many opinions as to what is a monument and what is a memorial, and many images categorized as if the two concepts were distinct (others double-catgorized, etc.), that the simplest route was to adopt the same category scheme as en-wiki. "Monuments and other memorials" assumes that monuments are a subcat of memorials, and we couldn't even get consensus on that point. This is the problem when you work with category titles on a multilingual project with global reach - people in different places sometimes have differing ideas as to the meaning of words. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Ok. I do not want edit war. Although I am surprised that it could be. The monument is a sculpture. Memorial everything that serves as a monument, but it is not sculpture. Easy. Cultural difference does not matter. Maybe next year by the new discussion on this issue. For now, I can suffer through this pleonasm. --Starscream (talk) 19:25, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Funny, I had a discussion two weeks ago here where the other contributor insisted monuments were buildings and structures, while sculptures were memorials. It's not as straight forward as you think. Everyone has strong opinions, and they all differ. We tried to come up with something everyone could agree on, and failed. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:11, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Ok. I do not want edit war. Although I am surprised that it could be. The monument is a sculpture. Memorial everything that serves as a monument, but it is not sculpture. Easy. Cultural difference does not matter. Maybe next year by the new discussion on this issue. For now, I can suffer through this pleonasm. --Starscream (talk) 19:25, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- Arguably, yes. But not everyone agrees. It's been debated so long, with so many opinions as to what is a monument and what is a memorial, and many images categorized as if the two concepts were distinct (others double-catgorized, etc.), that the simplest route was to adopt the same category scheme as en-wiki. "Monuments and other memorials" assumes that monuments are a subcat of memorials, and we couldn't even get consensus on that point. This is the problem when you work with category titles on a multilingual project with global reach - people in different places sometimes have differing ideas as to the meaning of words. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)