Difference between revisions of "Category talk:Dragons"
From TemeraireWiki
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | I know it would be a serious pain to do, and if people think it's a good idea I volunteer to make a start as I've been daft enough to suggest it, but should articles be placed in two categories, when the second is a sub-category of the first? To make this clear with an example should [[Accendare]] be in both the category [[ | + | I know it would be a serious pain to do, and if people think it's a good idea I volunteer to make a start as I've been daft enough to suggest it, but should articles be placed in two categories, when the second is a sub-category of the first? To make this clear with an example should [[Accendare]] be in both the category [[Dragons]] and it's subcategory [[Individual Dragons]]? My though was that if entry directly into the Dragons category was restricted to items with no subcategory then these articles would stand out more. --[[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 03:25, 15 February 2007 (PST) |
| + | |||
| + | Hmm, I don't seem to be able to link directly to the Category pages within the text of these comments. --[[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 03:28, 15 February 2007 (PST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Category:Dragons]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Individual Dragons]] | ||
Revision as of 11:28, 15 February 2007
I know it would be a serious pain to do, and if people think it's a good idea I volunteer to make a start as I've been daft enough to suggest it, but should articles be placed in two categories, when the second is a sub-category of the first? To make this clear with an example should Accendare be in both the category Dragons and it's subcategory Individual Dragons? My though was that if entry directly into the Dragons category was restricted to items with no subcategory then these articles would stand out more. --Andrew 03:25, 15 February 2007 (PST)
Hmm, I don't seem to be able to link directly to the Category pages within the text of these comments. --Andrew 03:28, 15 February 2007 (PST)
