Category talk:Countries

Renamed?
Why did this get moved to "countries" from "nation-states"? Nation-states was the far more correct technical term, as anyone having taken international relations classes would tell you, and as far as I recall is also referenced in canon regarding old Earth nations. --OuroborosCobra talk 12:12, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Frankly, it was too confusing for the lay. And, as far as "more correct technical term" consider: "In common usage, [country] is used casually in the sense of both "nation" (a cultural entity) and "state" (a political entity)." So why bother with a redundant "nation-state" when "country" can mean the same thing in the sense we are more or less trying to convey, as it more identifiable to the casual reader. Also, if you really want to split hairs, the term "country/countries" crops up around 40 times in dialog (give or take a few references to "farm country"), and "nation state" crops up a mere 5 times. Therefore, making "country" more common terminology in dialog as well. --Alan 12:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Confusing to who? I haven't seen a problem with this, so is this not a solution seeking a problem? Also, where was this change discussed? I mean, if we are going to make it a requirement that new categories "and the names of them" have to be discussed by the community, shouldn't the same be true of changing the name of an existing category? If not, then I'm going to go ahead and make some category changes right now, since there is some stuff I think was done stupidly. --OuroborosCobra talk 12:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

If we change the name of the category from nation-states to countries, we should be consistent and change the name of the article nation-state to country as well, and also the template. I personally don't have a preference one way or the other. -- Renegade54 13:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)


 * After some thought, I have to come down on Cobra's side. Was there a discussion about this?  If not, I think that it would have been a good idea.  While I agree we should strive to be appropriate for the casual reader, I don't think that neccesarily means using the lowest common denominator of terminology, especially if it appears to not be a problem.  Is there any evidence that this was a problem?  I think a redirect of Countries to nation-states would have been a good idea.--31dot 12:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)