Yep, that all makes perfect sense, and the move is uncontroversial with me and the page's creator, with whom I discussed this a bit on the Talk page when I made my initial, ill-fated moves.  Just to clarify what I was after with singular v. plural (so as not to appear a plodding dolt), I meant that if we were to push an article toward being about a genre in which works can be referred to in the singular or plural, the singular seems to be the preferred usage in discussing genre.  A point of general interest: the other, singular pinakes listed in the Suda entry aren't considered parts of the work known as the Pinakes, that being Πίνακες τῶν ἐν πάσῃ παιδείᾳ διαλαμψάντων, καὶ ὧν συνέγραψαν.  I don't know that I believe that interpretation of the testimonia and fragments, but who am I?  Going this route, I'd actually be alright with no mention of the/any Pinakes appearing on the Pinax page: this uncited bit about a map picture is a bit too creative for my taste, considering the other basic meaning and the existence of the πίναξ ἐκκλησιαστικός at Athens.  Thanks for looking at this and I hope that I can get back to that article soonish and will be thinking about the extra-Callimachean angle that need to be pursued—please let me know if any other names come to mind.