Category talk:Books by year

Related category discussions

Expand to view current and archived category discussions related to this category

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted. Category:Books by century made For consistency with the English Wikipedia I think we should rename this category Category:Books by year ([1]), and its descendant categories Category:Xth century books, as opposed to Category:Books made in the Xth century. Given that Category:Books by year already exists, I think they should be merged. They are both basically categories for books sorted by the time they were published. Perhaps the Wikipedia name 'year' is too specific too; Category:Books by date of publication or something like that may be better. I'll have to bring this up at en.wiki too. Richard001 11:39, 9 May 2008 (UTC) I agree with eliminating the very awkward "Books made ..." titles. There are other problems that should be cleaned up. The existing Category:Incunabula should be merged with Category:XVth century books as they are identical. (My assumption is that "books" here includes only printed books, not manuscripts, which should be separately treated.) There's also Postincunabula which covers books printed from 1501-1520 (in theory). Then there's the Category:Early printed books, which could cover books through the 17th century and possibly 18th century. These need some coordination. Ecphora (talk) 13:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC) Well, the problem with 'early printed books' for me is that it's one of those categories that has no Wikipedia analogue and no description, so what an 'early book' is seems totally subjective. If Wikipedia (despite its generally larger number of book categories than us) doesn't have such a category, which it doesn't, then I don't see why we need one, and would support a deletion nomination for it. Richard001 (talk) 08:57, 25 September 2008 (UTC) Makes sense. If there are categories for books by century, then there's no need for early printed books category. Ecphora (talk) 12:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC) I think that a classification by century is much more useful than a classification by years. What en.wp is doing is irrelevant to what we do here. Yann (talk) 13:49, 21 November 2008 (UTC) What Wikipedia does is entirely relevant to what we do here. Unless there is a specific reason why the situation is different, we should both be doing the same thing. Richard001 (talk) 07:50, 22 January 2009 (UTC) Oblivious to this discussion, I've been rolling out more general parent categories for text (i.e. books, journals, newspapers, etc) using Category:Texts by century, Category:19th century texts, etcetera. I favour the books-by-century category conforming with that, although I'm not much fussed. Hesperian 23:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC) I am doing the original moves to remove the awkward "made" wording (from Category:Books by century made and its subcats). For the rest, another COM:CFD can be opened or a request at User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands. Wknight94 talk 10:40, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Untitled comment

Most of the images in this Category are not books but single or small multiples of page images and book covers. These are being moved to appropriate Categories. The Books by year subcategories should not have any images and should be placed in their appropriate Categories. Category:1816 books has been completed for an example.WayneRay WayneRay (talk) 01:29, 7 March 2016 (UTC)