Category talk:Art works
"Cement works in 1904" and "Buildings destroyed in Indonesia" listed at "Art works"? It's a NO-NO-NO!
Category:2009 works in Canada features:
- Category:Built in Canada in 2009;
- Category:Destroyed in Canada in 2009 and
- Category:2009 maps of Canada.
This category is indirectly hosted, however, at Category:Art works. Somebody here apparently has assumed "works" would always spell "art works", and has built a huge category scheme consisting of tons of such sub-subs all abiding by the theoretical idea that "works" are by-definition "art works". As shown, bottom-categories of each "Works by country"/"Works by continent" tree may display items which have nothing to do with arts: this is perfectly fine, what isn't fine is the ill-titled, ill-structured and ill-maintained roof-scheming of the two categories "Works by country" and "Works by continent" both pretty longstandingly listed under Category:Art works while on their bottom floor there's items that may be associated with art - and equally may not. Another example: Category:Built in Spain in 1709 is (the only) resident of Category:1709 works in Spain. Across a tortuous clickway uptree you harbour (again) at Category:Art works, and ask yourself whether we should have considered construction as art..? My own answer is no. "Category:Built in ..." is perfect under "Category:Works in ...", but "Category:Works in ..." is very mistakeful when placed under Category:Art works, which restrains it in a strange, upside-down way.