Category talk:Geography of Amsterdam
This category "Geography of Amsterdam" is redundant and overbodig.
All its present and former geographical sub-categories are now under Category:Amsterdam
All its present and former thematical sub-categories are now both under Category:Amsterdam and under their respective thematical category for the province (NH) and/or the country (NL).
- Sorry, I'm only reading this now. My mistake. I don't see why this category is redundant. I saw you earlier sorted all subcategories in this category under Category:Amsterdam, so that they are all over the place (Amsterdam-Centrum under C, Amsterdam-Zuidoost under Z). In my opinion, Category:Amsterdam should contain as little subcategories as possible, so you keep a clear overview. This category therefore is far from redundant. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 11:28, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Oc, if you feel strongly about this and/or this is general policy. Maybe i was bit too fanatic in my efforts to make the category hierarchy clearer and less inconsistent.
But then also the text that i added on the category page itself should be deleted.
(The text was: "This category is redundant and overbodig. All its sub-categories are now under Category:Amsterdam This super/sub-category should be deleted.")
So i will delete that text now to avoid confusion.
yours , Paulbe (talk) 16:36, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Vincent, you did not react to my main point: what to do with the thematical sub-categories of a geographical nature? That is:
- Maps of Amsterdam and
- Canals, Parks, Rivers, Roads, Squares, Streets, Villages and Water in Amsterdam.
If Category:Amsterdam should contain as little subcategories as possible, many of them should only be under Geography. I can see strong reasons for having maps, parks, roads, villages and water under the main category, but not for the other sub-categories. Paulbe (talk) 17:09, 13 July 2009 (UTC)