Category talk:Sydney

As heavily implied by my having created it, I don't think this is too narrow a category. This is in view of the number of articles contained within Category:Australia, and the articles which specify Sydney as the location of the article subject. -- Sine 17:47, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Given the number of people with articles within Category:Australia, sub-categories don't seem too unreasonable, but I'd have had the same approach as Category:United_States_of_America, and sub-divided into states. So perhaps Category:New_South_Wales instead of Category:Sydney. (Yes, the way Australia is populated, most NSW furs are going to be living in the state's capital, Sydney, but having state-level categories means no-one gets left out.)

I'd also comment that if we have a (New South Wales/Sydney) category, then we should also have cats for (Victoria/Melbourne) and (Queensland/Brisbane). Based on what I've seen in Oz furry discussion groups, they all have similar population levels of furries. --Higgs Raccoon 19:54, 10 August 2007 (UTC)