Category talk:Currencies of Australia

message: It seems a strange argument to be edit warring on whether this category goes into :Category:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific or :Category:Currencies of Oceania. Australia is part of Oceania and the former category is a parent category of the latter. I favour the daughter category but the choice should be discussed here. --Bduke 03:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just figured Austrialia is a country and a continent, it should be a little more predominant.  And with :Category:Currencies of Oceania only having one daughter cat (:Category:Currencies of Australia), seems like one step to far.  Doesn't matter to much to me, change it back, if ya wanna.  Joe  I 03:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not have a strong view either. Some articles are in both Oceania and Australia cats as the oceania currencies template adds the Oceania one. I have just edited Template:AUD to add any article that contains it into the Australia currencies cat. I have also put the Australian banknotes cat into the Australia currencies cat. I'm inclined to agree with you, to rationalise having articles in both cats, but let us see what the other editor has to say if anything. I'm leaving it as you edited it. --Bduke 03:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi there. It wasn't my intention to begin an edit war, rather than there should be more clarity about currencies in this particular continent/region of the world. Thus I have created a new template, and category for them. I'm not sure what you mean about :Category:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific being a parent of :Category:Currencies of Oceania?? Is that just because it predates it?? I'd intended that :Category:Currencies of Oceania would become a category in its own right. (Extra3 13:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I now notice that :Category:Currencies of Oceania has been moved inside :Category:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific, rather than as an independent category?? Maybe we can talk about that?? If the latter is meant to be the parent category, which isn't the template renamed as , rather than just  (which is where the category derives from)??(Extra3 13:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I think that Austrialia and Oceania are part of Asia for some reason.  I know they are not, but can't help myself from jumping the gun sometimes. :)  Joe  I 17:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But what about Fiji, and Nauru and places?? The further east one travels, the weaker the links to Asia become. I suspect Aus & NZ were only included because of the term Australasia which hasn't really been used much in recent decades. Oceania is a continent of island states, so Aus & NZ fall into that category. (Extra3 17:31, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I wasn't able to follow up on everything on my watch list. It seems to me that a split is done here and Oceania has equal status as other continents. Shall we rename :Category:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 06:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you're referring to whether Australia, NZ, and other countries should be moved back to :Category:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific, then I would disagree. The category :Category:Currencies of Oceania has now been re-allocated under :Category:Currencies by region, and this seems satisfactory to me, as the continent is listed in its own right. (Extra3 15:28, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I'm not proposing putting AUD or NZD back to :Category:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific. I'm just saying now that Oceanian currencies have its own category, then the name :Category:Currencies of Asia and the Pacific is no longer accurate since it doesn't contain Pacific. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 22:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: comments