Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Elections by year"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:Any particular reason? I kind-of like it by year, as it will be really easy to see all election articles for a given year (3-4 articles) once I have done more of them. But then again, I guess it wouldn't be that much harder to sort them out of the 12-15 that would be in a decade-based category. Whatever you want to do, I don't feel strongly about it. '''[[User:Dscosson|dscosson]]''' ··· '''[[User talk:Dcosson|talk]]''' 13:14, 4 May 2008 (CDT) | :Any particular reason? I kind-of like it by year, as it will be really easy to see all election articles for a given year (3-4 articles) once I have done more of them. But then again, I guess it wouldn't be that much harder to sort them out of the 12-15 that would be in a decade-based category. Whatever you want to do, I don't feel strongly about it. '''[[User:Dscosson|dscosson]]''' ··· '''[[User talk:Dcosson|talk]]''' 13:14, 4 May 2008 (CDT) | ||
::I was just thinking that 10-20 articles is a pretty good "category size," and [[:Category:Elections by decade]] would have a more manageable number of subcategories than [[:Category:Elections by year]]. But you've really been tackling all these elections, so whichever you prefer is fine. --[[User:Admin|Admin]] 08:24, 5 May 2008 (CDT) | ::I was just thinking that 10-20 articles is a pretty good "category size," and [[:Category:Elections by decade]] would have a more manageable number of subcategories than [[:Category:Elections by year]]. But you've really been tackling all these elections, so whichever you prefer is fine. --[[User:Admin|Admin]] 08:24, 5 May 2008 (CDT) | ||
| + | :::I really don't care :-)... if you want to do the work to change it to your preference, go ahead, but I don't care enough to do it myself. '''[[User:Dscosson|dscosson]]''' ··· '''[[User talk:Dcosson|talk]]''' 11:10, 5 May 2008 (CDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 16:10, 5 May 2008
What would you think of grouping elections by decade instead of by year? --Admin 12:38, 4 May 2008 (CDT)
- Any particular reason? I kind-of like it by year, as it will be really easy to see all election articles for a given year (3-4 articles) once I have done more of them. But then again, I guess it wouldn't be that much harder to sort them out of the 12-15 that would be in a decade-based category. Whatever you want to do, I don't feel strongly about it. dscosson ··· talk 13:14, 4 May 2008 (CDT)
- I was just thinking that 10-20 articles is a pretty good "category size," and Category:Elections by decade would have a more manageable number of subcategories than Category:Elections by year. But you've really been tackling all these elections, so whichever you prefer is fine. --Admin 08:24, 5 May 2008 (CDT)
