Category talk:Art movements

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Socrates
Philosophy Portal
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Category This article has been rated as Cat-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

Art is art. If you want a list of visual art please call it visual art. Hyacinth 21:42, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I would, but it is a similar problem to Category:Art (as opposed to Category:Arts) which arguably should also be moved to Visual Art. -- Solipsist 10:34, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Great to hear, now what is the easiest way to move categories?Hyacinth 19:55, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I don't think there is an easy way (unless a sysop can help). I would recommend starting by canvassing support at Category talk:Art -- Solipsist 20:43, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
You might also want to coordinate with User:Pethan and User:Spinster who are doing a fair bit of categorisation in the Arts and related subjects. -- Solipsist 08:31, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] gettings a full list

I'm working first on getting a good list together, there were several pages which sort of listed some movements. Extremely confusing. I'm first consolidating the list here in Art movements. Clubmarx 18:25, Nov 27, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] tree

This is already part of Cat:aesthetics via Cat:Arts - there is no point duplicating it at a level further down, when this cat is not more closely related to Aesthetics than tons of other sub-cats of Cat:Arts. This just creates category clutter and confuses people. I think you need to read the categorization guidelines. Johnbod 04:29, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] forcing some categories to the front

Usually, this isn't done for "important" categories and not to order them. I've seen categories like lists and facets (Foo by country, Foo by genre) moved to the front. I think these are ordering in info boxes, which seems to be the proper place for that type of ordering.

Any objection if I remove this? Clubmarx 23:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

  • i'm not sure - it seems useful to me, though perhaps less so since I have just removed some duplicate head & sub-cat inclusions, so there are fewer cats altogether now. If it was just me I'd leave it, but if you feel strongly .... Johnbod 03:02, 11 November 2007 (UTC)