Is there a reason this fails to show up as a subcategory of people? It has the right category tag? -- WhiteFire 21:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- It does. But, perhaps unfortunately, it only does so if you have clicked "next 200" enough times to get to the W's. That is, there is a limit of 200 per page on both subcategory names and regular members of the category, and the alphabetical sorting of each is considered together. That's why we have the box at the top to list all the subcategories instead. --GreenReaper(talk) 21:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, tieing the two listings together for 'next' purposes when one has 2 entries and the other several thousand seems a little... stupid. I'd complain more if I had the urge to actually go FIX this like a good open source programmer, but I've got too many other projects right now. :) --WhiteFire 02:32, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I come from a dreadful academic background, but to me it's rather weird to index a person by their first/christian name, then have their surname an ancillary word.
If someone uses only a nick, that's ok - use that. But my first name is Tim. Nobody I know would search for me under 'Tim'.
But this isn't my call, and I'll go along with whatever is preferred. I'm just noting that searching by first name is unusual in my terrible old world. If it is customary now, then fair enough.
- That was decided early on in the life of this Wiki, and I don't recall what the rationale for it was (or if I had even started contributing yet at the time). True, that is different from how Wikipedia and most other wikis handle it, but to change it now on Wikifur would involve an immense amount of rework. --mwalimu 17:48, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- I recall there being some discussion of this, although I can't see much at Category talk:People or in the Forums. Were we to decide sorting by last names is worthwhile, and willing to put in the major effort of ensuring sorting-in-categories by last name, we would still be faced by article names showing as Firstname Lastname in category lists. -- Sine 22:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm very confused
Ok, I was originally cited as a writer (not by my own request). It appears I have now been removed as a 'writer' (again, without my knowledge).
In what respect am I not a writer, having written stories for furry comics, my own furry stories, radio serials, poetry, and academic literature about anthropomorphism?
- I'm not sure what you're looking at, but I see you listed as a writer. If you look at article Tim Gadd you will see Writers as one of the categories at the bottom (which shows up as [[Category:Writers]] in edit mode). In Category:Writers you will have to use the "next 200" link or the Contents bar to find your entry, but it's in there. --mwalimu 17:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Excessively full/Too broad a scope?
This category has 1171 articles listed (that's a lot of clicks of the "next 200" button). It has a subcategory "Poets" and someone else has already suggested "Comic writers". Should we begin creating and implementing more subcategories? (Category:Artists also has a lot of members in it, but in that case I think it's more a matter of the subcategories not being applied, or being applied in addition to the broader category, which is also worth discussing.) --Equivamp - talk 23:48, 20 April 2017 (EDT)
- Probably. Though it'd be a fun task recategorizing all of them, especially as you can move around a bit (I'm not sure if you can be classified as "just" a comic writer, but maybe so if it's the writing we care about here - artists tend to be generic artists as well as specific). I mean technically Category:Wikifurries should be a subcategory (maybe move it down from Category:People?) since we're all writing stuff. --GreenReaper(talk) 23:51, 20 April 2017 (EDT)