Category talk:Sectors

Moved from Memory Alpha talk:Category tree
Using List of sectors, (all sectors). Cid Highwind 00:28, 2004 Dec 28 (CET)
 * Support, though should be named Sector -- we don't have this in MA/en -- Kobi 17:56, 25 Dec 2004 (CET)
 * Support, although there is a point Kobi, in singular or plural. However, every wffort we've seen to date has been pluralized (Planets, Performers, etc.) we should stick to one form for the entire tree. -- Captain Mike K. Bartel
 * Wikipedia uses both singular (to list "topics relating to", similar to "see also" sections) and plural category titles (to list "instances of", a.k.a. "list categories") - in our case "Planets" would be a list of all planets (but nothing else), while "Planet" could contain articles like planetary classification (but probably wouldn't link to each and every planet). We may choose a different naming convention, of course, but I think it makes sense if we are allowing "list categories" to exist. -- Cid Highwind 20:26, 2004 Dec 25 (CET)
 * Support. -- EtaPiscium 22:07, 25 Dec 2004 (CET)
 * Support. Same as Planets. -- Redge | Talk 22:01, 27 Dec 2004 (CET)
 * Support. -- Balok 02:02, 28 Dec 2004 (CET)

Accepted - category will be created. -- Cid Highwind 00:29, 2005 Jan 2 (CET)

Ordering sectors
Shouldn't Sector 23 appear before Sector 1045? In other words, shouldn't the sector key be 5 digits long for all sectors? This way 00023 would appear before 01045. And what should we do with Sector 001? It's currently under the S of Sol, but it could also appear as 00001. -- Harry 12:12, 5 Jan 2005 (CET)


 * I thought about that, too - but in that case, all sectors with less than 5 digits would appear in section --0--, sectors with 5 digits would appear in sections --2-- to --9--. We could use a 6 digit sort key, in that case at least all "numbered" sectors would appear in the same section...
 * Regarding Sector 001, that article is a redirect to Sol sector - I tried categorizing that one as well, but apparently categories don't work for redirect pages. We can either live with that, or remove the automatic redirect. -- Cid Highwind 12:37, 2005 Jan 5 (CET)
 * Are there any objections to a 6-digit key? It's not much work, and it clearly makes the list more sensible. -- Harry 16:50, 10 Jan 2005 (CET)
 * I agree with that. It makes more sense for the numbers to be sequential. -- EtaPiscium 16:56, 10 Jan 2005 (CET)