| Revision as of 16:49, 27 January 2007 editLudvikus (talk | contribs)21,211 editsm moved Talk:Category (philosophy) to Talk:Categories (philosophy): The Plural is the correct form. See User:Hairy dude.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 03:35, 31 January 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB | ||
| (16 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| The plural is the correct usage. --] 01:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC) | The plural is the correct usage. --] 01:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :On reflection I think you're right. But then this article ought to be at ] in my opinion, with ] redirecting to ], since just "Categories" is ambiguous. ] 13:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC) | :On reflection I think you're right. But then this article ought to be at ] in my opinion, with ] redirecting to ], since just "Categories" is ambiguous. ] 13:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ::With with your support, I've just made the Bold Wiki move. --] 16:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
| First, Misplaced Pages naming conventions require the singular. Secondly, though, the article is inaccurate and pointless as it stands: two bare lists, not even linked to relevant articles, of Aristotelian and Kantian categories, which misdescribes Kant's notion of a category, and ignores other philosophical uses of the term. | |||
| Thirdly, I've also just seen ], which is also far from perfect, but which includes everything that this one does and much more. Luvikus' confusion about the use of singular and plural in article titles notwithstanding, I'll make this a redirect. --] (]) 23:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 03:35, 31 January 2023
Usefulness of Misplaced Pages
--Ludvikus 01:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages should not only be relevant to the world, it should be especially relevant to Misplaced Pages users. As such a user, when I search for "categories" I would find the information hidden away at Misplaced Pages:Category schemes much more useful than a word game. Perhaps this entry can be appended to indicate its context.
Category of being
--Ludvikus 01:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Why isn't this and Category of being the same article? /Popperipopp 12:30, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
- One reason is that the above is merely a single category. --Ludvikus 01:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Categories
The plural is the correct usage. --Ludvikus 01:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- On reflection I think you're right. But then this article ought to be at Categories (philosophy) in my opinion, with Categories redirecting to Category, since just "Categories" is ambiguous. Hairy Dude 13:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- With with your support, I've just made the Bold Wiki move. --Ludvikus 16:52, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
First, Misplaced Pages naming conventions require the singular. Secondly, though, the article is inaccurate and pointless as it stands: two bare lists, not even linked to relevant articles, of Aristotelian and Kantian categories, which misdescribes Kant's notion of a category, and ignores other philosophical uses of the term.
Thirdly, I've also just seen Category of being, which is also far from perfect, but which includes everything that this one does and much more. Luvikus' confusion about the use of singular and plural in article titles notwithstanding, I'll make this a redirect. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)