User:Smack has listed [[list of exponential topics]], a list I originated and maintain still, at VfD, on the sole ground that he has added an equivalent category. In his words, it has been 'superseded'. I contest this. It is silly technologists' thinking, without any basis in common sense.
I have posted a couple of times here already about the harmful (as I see it) effect of talk assuming that categories are in some way now the de facto standard. That's quite wrong. I won't rehearse all the reasons again.
I intend to make this a test case at VfD, so that the ludicrous idea of removing a list that serves a proper purpose on WP can be knocked on the head, once and for all.
Charles
Charles Matthews wrote:
I have posted a couple of times here already about the harmful (as I see it) effect of talk assuming that categories are in some way now the de facto standard. That's quite wrong. I won't rehearse all the reasons again.
I've seen your arguments, but I don't see how they apply to this list. It's not organized in any particular way except a flat list of articles. That's exactly equivalent to a category, the only difference being a technical one of which end it's maintained on ("edit this page" on the list, or add/remove articles to the list from the article's side).
Other lists that have some organization I can see an argument for, but if it's just a list whose only distinctions are "it's on the list" or "it's not on the list", then category membership is equivalent.
-Mark
Delirium wrote
I've seen your arguments, but I don't see how they apply to this list.
How about the two red links that will go?
It's not organized in any particular way except a flat list of articles. That's exactly equivalent to a category, the only difference being a technical one of which end it's maintained on ("edit this page" on the list, or add/remove articles to the list from the article's side).
Other lists that have some organization I can see an argument for, but if it's just a list whose only distinctions are "it's on the list" or "it's not on the list", then category membership is equivalent.
How about the fact that RelatedChanges on a category gets you changes related to the header text only (as far as I can see)?
And please explain which recognised category of articles for deletion this falls under?
Charles