Template talk:Non-diffusing subcategory Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:Non-diffusing_subcategory

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:14, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Distinguished subcategory → Template:Non-diffusing subcategory – The common wording used on Wikipedia to describe categories that may be in both parent and child is "non-diffusing", not "distinguished", categories. This template should be updated to reflect this terminology and reflect the contents of the supporting guideline. SFB 15:27, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

• Support; renaming the template makes sense to me. I don't understand why some of the examples given at the guideline page should be non-diffusing, but that's another matter. – Fayenatic London 16:39, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Fayenatic london: I agree this is another area that needs explaining better. I would argue that non-diffusion should occur where the subject is not always the subcategory in all respects, but is always the parent more broadly. For example, Mike Scioscia is one of the Category:Manager of the Year Award winners, but that is not his job – it is not what he does; in all circumstances, he is more broadly the parent category: Category:Major League Baseball managers. The same goes for Category:Female heads of government and its parent Category:Heads of government. Another case is Category:Czech logicians – that is only one aspect of what people in Category:Czech philosophers do; the same people are also philosophers in a non-logician way. I will propose some changes when this is done (I'm getting involved in lots of discussions at the moment!). SFB 19:45, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• support makes sense.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 21:09, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment – I understood that non-diffusing subcategories are those which are not diffused, i.e. where all members of its member-categories are categorised additionally. E.g. the Category:Bridges in New York City contains all Category:Bridges in Manhattan where Category:Bridges in New York City is the non-diffusing category and Category:Bridges in Manhattan is the distinguished category. The template for the former is Template:All included. I think moving this category to Template:Non-diffusing subcategory might confuse that relationship. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:54, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All included is different - all included basically means - every single one of my subcategories is non-diffusing. We also have cases where some subcategories ARE diffusing, while others are NOT - e.g. Category:American novelists has diffusing subcats of Category:20th-century American novelists and non-diffusing subcats of Category:American male novelists.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 06:08, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we could create something like {{Non-diffusing category}} for that purpose, showing the reverse relationship in the template text (which of the subcategory is the one that the non-diffusing relationship exists). But as Obiwankenobi says, I've rarely seen a parent category that is entirely non-diffusing for all its subcategories. SFB 06:40, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Any additional comments:

Any reason why this template doesn't refer to "non-diffusing" categories rather than the uncommon "distinguished" phrasing? I propose we move the template to Template:Non-diffusing subcategory and reword the template accordingly.

sounds reasonable but I'd propose as an RM to get formal participation.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.