No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
* I believe that in the case of Vassal Houses they deserve their own categories if their members actually appear like the Cleganes, the Freys, the Mormonts... those that have only been mentioned, like the Redwynes or Cerwyns, for example, don't merit their own category since these new categories would be severely underpopulated.[[Special:Contributions/201.230.103.117|201.230.103.117]] 04:45, March 8, 2012 (UTC) |
* I believe that in the case of Vassal Houses they deserve their own categories if their members actually appear like the Cleganes, the Freys, the Mormonts... those that have only been mentioned, like the Redwynes or Cerwyns, for example, don't merit their own category since these new categories would be severely underpopulated.[[Special:Contributions/201.230.103.117|201.230.103.117]] 04:45, March 8, 2012 (UTC) |
||
| + | |||
| + | **I agree that there would likely be only one or two articles in some of these categories. But for houses like the Whent's where a character appears there will still only be 2 or 3 articles. I don't see a category only having a few members as problematic personally and don't see it as a reason to remove tags or delete a category.--[[User:Opark 77|Opark 77]] 10:41, March 8, 2012 (UTC) |
||
| + | |||
| + | ** How weird, I was sure I had logged in when I made the above comment.--[[User:Gonzalo84|Gonzalo84]] 13:03, March 8, 2012 (UTC) |
||
Latest revision as of 13:03, 8 March 2012
I have created categories for some Vassal Houses following the precedent set by existing Vassal House categories. User:Gonzalo84 has removed the category tags for Category:House Harlaw. Should we have categories for each Vassal House? I don't have strong feelings either way but think we should be consistent. I tend towards inclusion and think we should. What do our other editors think?--Opark 77 01:17, March 8, 2012 (UTC)
- I believe that in the case of Vassal Houses they deserve their own categories if their members actually appear like the Cleganes, the Freys, the Mormonts... those that have only been mentioned, like the Redwynes or Cerwyns, for example, don't merit their own category since these new categories would be severely underpopulated.201.230.103.117 04:45, March 8, 2012 (UTC)
- I agree that there would likely be only one or two articles in some of these categories. But for houses like the Whent's where a character appears there will still only be 2 or 3 articles. I don't see a category only having a few members as problematic personally and don't see it as a reason to remove tags or delete a category.--Opark 77 10:41, March 8, 2012 (UTC)
- How weird, I was sure I had logged in when I made the above comment.--Gonzalo84 13:03, March 8, 2012 (UTC)