Category talk:Leo Tolstoy

Removal of categories

(In response to the request in an edit summary.)

Russian literature

I removed this category because the guidelines at Wikipedia:Categorization say that items (with a few exceptions) shouldn't be in a both a parent category and its subcategories, and it's certainly standard practice among many projects and individual editors to remove redundant categories. This category was still in "Russian literature" as it was in included in its subcategory Category:Russian writers through Category:Russian novelists and Category:Russian short story writers. If this categorization is incomplete as far as his writing, then a case could be made for it being in both "Russian writers" and its subcategories, but I don't see how it's an exception to the guideline otherwise. Aitch Eye 19:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for explanation. I don't care about dates, but I would insist that Category:Leo Tolstoy should be included directly into Category:Russian literature, as it contains 2 or 3-pages-long short stories, which I would not like to see littering the general category for Russian literature. If we relegate this cat to Category:Russian writers only, than these stories would be lost to those who search for Russian short stories in Category:Russian literature. Sorry if my statement is not so clear, I have no time to explain myself at large, suffice it to say that current categorization works fine for me. I shall probably return to the subject in a few days, when I start the cat for Dostoevsky. --Ghirla | talk 20:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

I apologise for not spotting the issue of the short stories, your reasoning makes sense. I'd been considering creating a category for Russian short stories as there seem to be enough in Category:Russian literature category to justify it. There is already a Category:German stories and Category:British short stories, so there are precedents for that type of subcategory. Do you think this would be a good idea, and if so, would "Russian stories" or "Russian short stories" be a better name? You've put more thought and work into the subject area than I have, and I don't want to cause problems with any changes I make. I won't remove the categories on this again unless you agree. Aitch Eye 04:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

OK, let me think... In Russia, we distinguish between short stories and long short stories. Although I like Category:Russian short stories better than Category:Russian stories, would The Overcoat (about 50 pages long) or The Torrents of Spring (about 100 pages) qualify for this cat? --Ghirla | talk 09:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Years of birth and death

I removed these categories because this and Category:Boris and Arkady Strugatsky were the only categories I had seen where the years of birth and death were included. Before making the change, I checked Wikipedia:People by year, which only mentions adding the categories to articles and pictures. The only specific mention of whether to apply them to categories I could find was in this comment on the talk page, where the editor who started the project said:

"The various queries work much better if the categories are on the article (e.g Nikola Tesla), rather than the person's category (e.g Category:Nikola Tesla). Thus, I'd prefer if they are added to the article. Besides, with the category on the article, it's more likely some corrects a year."

I also went through and checked a number of authors and major political and scientific figures with their own categories, and the births and deaths categories of a number of years at random, and I couldn't find any other examples. Doing some more checking before writing this, I now see that Category:Aleksandr Pushkin and Category: Benjamin Franklin have them, but that's all I've been able to find. It doesn't seem to be standard practice, and a lot of prominent people who receive a fair amount of attention (such as Gandhi, Newton, Washington) have not had them added, and I would expect major figures to be targeted if it was intended that catgories be included. In the absence of clear instruction on the relevant page, I'm not going to put up a fuss about their inclusion, but I didn't make the edit in an offhand manner. Aitch Eye 19:29, 24 February 2006 (UTC)