Category talk:Geography of New Zealand

message: * The following was moved from the original main geography category talk page. RedWolf 03:44, Jan 15, 2005 (UTC)
Oh, boy, this could have a LOT of articles - and it already needs a few existing ones (and a category or two) added. We're all too busy writing good articles...
Do we make "Category:New Zealand flora and fauna" a subcategory of this or a stand-alone one? (I wanted to put the sea lions in it but it hadn't been created!) Robin Patterson 01:07, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: If you categorise it under the two systems, shouldn't the top category of each system be on the same level?  Like, Locations of New Zealand should be under the New Zealand category, leaving this one for types; or, the listing by type should be a sub-category of this one.  I'd prefer Locations of New Zealand be under New Zealand, it's simpler.  It just seems a bit odd to have to go through the first system to get to the second - they should be on the same level. Neonumbers 08:56, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, of course - and that's why "Locations" is a subcategory not only of this category but also of the main "New Zealand" category. So it is both at the same level (for people who want them both at the same level) and at different levels (for people who want to hunt for a place via the Geography category).  Grutness|hello?  01:10, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category talk:New Zealand geography 

message: The Great New Zealand Geography Revamp is well and truly underway!
The New Zealand geography category now houses all geography related articles about New Zealand places. Each should eventually have at least two sub categories: a location and a type. 
*Locations: Each article should be categorised according to the region of New Zealand that it relates to. These categories are all subcategories of "Locations in New Zealand"
*Types: the article may be about a town, a river, a lake... they should be categorised as such. these categories are subcategories of the "New Zealand geography" category.
Some articles may refer to two or more locations or two or more types. They should be categorised accordingly. Thus, for example, Waitaki River is categorised in New Zealand rivers (type), Otago (location), and Canterbury, New Zealand (location).
Please categorise all new geography files you create following this scheme. If a "type" doesn't exist for a particular file, categorise it in "New Zealand geography" for full categorisation later. Thanks!
Grutness
:If you categorise it under the two systems, shouldn't the top category of each system be on the same level?  Like, Locations of New Zealand should be under the New Zealand category, leaving this one for types; or, the listing by type should be a sub-category of this one.  I'd prefer Locations of New Zealand be under New Zealand, it's simpler.  It just seems a bit odd to have to go through the first system to get to the second - they should be on the same level. Neonumbers 08:56, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, of course - and that's why "Locations" is a subcategory not only of this category but also of the main "New Zealand" category. So it is both at the same level (for people who want them both at the same level) and at different levels (for people who want to hunt for a place via the Geography category).  Grutness|hello?  01:10, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rationalisation of New zealand geography articles 

message: Are the state highways categorized in this category?  Some are, and some aren't. Who can help me? Greetings, Dick Bos (talk) 02:50, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  State Highways