Category talk:Presidents of the United States
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
We have a few "missing" presidents that could have a lot of links to them - eisenhower and jackson, for two, as I recall from my searching. ħuman
19:48, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
Reorganise[edit]
Can I suggest a reorganisation of this category, and related ones. Something like:
I bring this up because we don't seem to have a navbar specifically for this subject, and I believe this set-up would aid in its creation. Also, there is no category for candidates both current and former. Thoughts? PeterQuasniki 2012! 08:31, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Alternatively, each campaigns candidates could have their own category under that years campaign category. PeterQuasniki 2012! 08:34, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- The candidates one is a good idea. Former presidents, though, is too pedantic - even a child would know, out of any list of presidents, who the current one is. So I suggest not having that one. And maybe not current candidates, but that one's a little greyer. Rennie McGreet (talk) 08:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- I would only separate them so that a random list of 'former presidents' doesn't turn up the current one. And you could put stuff relating to them specifically in that category too, but I don't know how well that would work come to think of it. PeterQuasniki 2012! 08:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Grouping candidates by campaign year is a good idea. I find it the most natural way to think about candidates, actually—certainly George McGovern is synonymous with the 1968 Presidential race.
Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 08:43, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I've changed it to that. PeterQuasniki 2012! 08:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- "Bump" and all that. I might get bored and just do it unilaterally, you know. PeterQuasniki 2012! 02:58, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'll try to do it tomorrow. Try. Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 08:42, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'm bored enough now. PeterQuasniki 2012! 23:59, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
- "I might get bored and just do it unilaterally" is the story of how things get done on RW. Blue (is useful) 00:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
- Part of the story. You forgot the complaints. Anyway, I've done it, although we could possibly do with a 2000 and 2004 category aswell. PeterQuasniki 2012! 00:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
- "I might get bored and just do it unilaterally" is the story of how things get done on RW. Blue (is useful) 00:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'm bored enough now. PeterQuasniki 2012! 23:59, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'll try to do it tomorrow. Try.
- "Bump" and all that. I might get bored and just do it unilaterally, you know. PeterQuasniki 2012! 02:58, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, I've changed it to that. PeterQuasniki 2012! 08:54, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- Grouping candidates by campaign year is a good idea. I find it the most natural way to think about candidates, actually—certainly George McGovern is synonymous with the 1968 Presidential race.
- I would only separate them so that a random list of 'former presidents' doesn't turn up the current one. And you could put stuff relating to them specifically in that category too, but I don't know how well that would work come to think of it. PeterQuasniki 2012! 08:42, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
- The candidates one is a good idea. Former presidents, though, is too pedantic - even a child would know, out of any list of presidents, who the current one is. So I suggest not having that one. And maybe not current candidates, but that one's a little greyer. Rennie McGreet (talk) 08:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC)