Category talk:American Civil War

message: I have removed redundant categories :Category:United States history and :Category:Military history of the United States from :Category:American Civil War (they are inherited via :Category:United States wars. -- Mwanner 17:00, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)
There are way too many state regiment articles clogging the category. I reorganized them into 
category:Civil War regiments by state
category:Confederate Civil War regiments
category:Union Civil War regiments
Also, there are too many "Fort xxx" dumped in the Am. Civil War category.  Perhaps it would be better to put them in a subcategory:Civil War forts.  Intelligent use of subcategories and sub-subcategories, etc. will make it easy to find information.  Right now it's a dump pile.  There will be enough miscellaneous articles to constitute a trash pile eventually even without these easily classified categories. THB 18:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Both of the above tasks were completed by a WikiGnome before I came along. I did quite a bit more tidying of categories today, too. Still lots more work to do though. Twisted86 10:17, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Currently the category organization for ACW geography from :Category:American Civil War down to Category:Fum Battlefield level includes 7 levels, but 2 of the levels are intermediate nearly-empty categories (with valid names), that require the reader to drill past them to get to a subcategory which has the list of articles.  Those 2 subcategories levels with the verbose names (Campaigns of the… & Battlefields of the…--bold font in the table--close to 100 extraneous categories) can be upmerged to the nearly-empty levels.  Here's a table which, except for the lowest categories unique to the Gettysburg geography branch (which likewise has a "Places of the…" extraneous category), uses generic titles (but with actual hyperlinks).  While perusing you'll notice a different problem not related to this nomination is that some of the categories are overpopulated (e.g., need diffused).  An ugly example is :Category:Battlefields of the Gettysburg Campaign where a reader can hardly discern the battlefields which are non-Gettysburg battlefields because its overpopulated with dozens of Gettysburg Battlefield articles and categories that are appropriate within the empty :Category:Gettysburg Battlefield.  Lake Woodhouse in Denver (talk) 01:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw my comment last week at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012 January 19#Category:Battlefields of the Gettysburg Campaign and here was removed because a different user, Target for Today, is blocked, but what does that have to do with me?   Am I being blocked too for that user's editing (I can't locate information that I'm not supposed to post)?  I haven't anything to do with him/her, so should I make a post somewhere else or call wikipedia to get this straight?  I just started posting in December to a some Civil War pages and then opened an account when I didn't sign a talk post right, so if someone could let me know what's up, I'd appreciate it.  I also just made a post about Template:Campaignbox Maryland Campaign and Battle of Gettysburg, Third Day cavalry battles, so will they be lined out also?  184.99.7.20 (talk) 19:44, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: You should take your concerns about your block to your talk page using the  templates or to the administrator who blocked you. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 20:49, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category tree for ACW geography