Category talk:Non-fiction

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WikiProject iconLiterature Category‑class
WikiProject iconThis category is within the scope of WikiProject Literature, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Literature on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
CategoryThis category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
WikiProject iconBooks Category‑class
WikiProject iconThis category is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
CategoryThis category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

--JLaTondre 23:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian non-fiction books
Category:Non-fictional British literature
Category:Non-fictional French literature
Category:Non-fictional Greek literature
Category:Non-fictional Irish literature
Category:Non-fictional Portuguese literature
Category:Non-fictional Spanish literature
Category:Non-fictional Swedish literature

This proposal is twofold.

  1. Some of the sub-cats of Category:Non-fiction books use non-fictional [country] literature and some use non-fictional [country] books. (And then there's Canada.) Literature would be more inclusive (i.e. encompassing short fiction, essays, etc.), while to me books means, well, books only. I propose the cats be re-named reorganized accordingly, i.e. Category:Non-fiction books would be renamed to a sub-cat of Category:Non-fiction literature.
  1. There's been some discussion over the use of "non-fiction" vs "non-fictional". Can we get a consensus on a decent naming convention? Maybe: Category:Non-fictional British literatureCategory:British non-fiction literature

See also:

Respectfully submitted, Her Pegship 22:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - see what you mean by "whole new can of worms". There are number of different issues here. (I do dislike combined discussions! difficult to unravel!). Firstly the natural, logical heirarchy would be xxxx literature with sub cats of xxxx books, xxxx magazines, xxxx comics, xxxx pamphlets, xxxx newspapers, xxxx booklets, xxxx manuals, etc. (although you might argue some of those). The next has more to do with content than form. So also below, xxxx literature we can have xxxx novels, xxxx novellas, xxxx plays, xxxx poetry, xxxx short stories, xxxx essay, etc.

Secondly, "fictional xxxx" should in my view never be used it is far too ambiguous. Similarly "non-fictional xxxx" should never be used as it is just cumbersome and an almost unused English construction. :: Kevinalewis : (Talk Page)/(Desk) 09:27, 8 August 2006 (UTC) So my vote below is:[reply]

Opposed speedy move request[edit]