Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles/Categories

This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

The Beatles This Beatles-related page is within the scope of WikiProject The Beatles, which focuses on improving coverage of English rock band The Beatles and related topics on Wikipedia. Users who are willing to participate in the project should visit the project page, where they can join and see a list of open tasks.The BeatlesWikipedia:WikiProject The BeatlesTemplate:WikiProject The BeatlesThe Beatles articles To-do list: For WikiProject The Beatles A list of articles needing cleanup associated with this project is available. See also the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects. Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Articles on each Beatle tour (Category:The Beatles concert tours). See: Missing articles. Expand : The Lost Lennon Tapes, notable radio series which has spawned many bootlegs. Apple Records See also: Adopt an article Stubs : See: Category:The Beatles song stubs Update : Pics/Graphics wanted: Kenwood. Verify : Beatle wives Other : Project: Add {{WikiProject The Beatles}} to the talk pages of all Beatles-related articles. Send a newsletter to members, canvas for new members and coordinate tasks. Enter articles assessed as stubs onto this list, also list articles needing cleanup and other work here. This article does not yet have a related to do list. If you can think of any ways to improve the article, why not create one?

Is there a desired ordering to this? Are these in the order you'd want categories to be listed in the classification table category column? Do any of these have articles with identical names? Should this be table-ized? ++Lar: t/c 14:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They're in the sort order as currently formatted, from top to bottom each time. Yes, there will be lots of duplicate entries, e.g. between Beatles songs and singles. Tablei-ised? I don't think so, it's just a list :) --kingboyk 14:22, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hey, I like tables. If we have people take these under their wing like watchlisting articles, and if we track if there are articles that match the category (that was what I meant, NOT whether an article is in more than one category, I catch that and deal with it, see my sandbox) or not, tablelizing may be a good idea... I may do it if I need to. ++Lar: t/c 14:33, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made a list of categories because you asked me to :-) Had no plans beyond that, and I think we could probably do without making more work for ourselves when we have plenty to be going with? But, at the end of the day, do what you like with it (make whatever use of it you will); the flat list will be in the page history until Wikipedia/earth explodes so it's not as if you'd be undoing what I've done :) --kingboyk 14:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry in advance if this sounds like whinging (since you did the work after all, not me!!!!) but as it stands, I have to parse it anyway instead of using it as is, because what I needed is just the names and nothing else (no Category: on the front and no comments on the back, just the names as baretext)... so maybe it makes more sense to have it in a table which carries more info. I'm all about not making more work for myself which is why I started coding this darn thing in the first place but it's one of those "labor saving devices" that maybe is taking more labo(u)r than it saves! ++Lar: t/c 16:09, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you have sed and mastery thereof? Leave it with me! --kingboyk 16:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not unless I fire up cygwin, as this is a wintel box. But perl can do it I guess. Anyway I've just table-ized it with the extra column I want (whether the category has/hasn't an article that has the exact same name) although I need to see if I can fill the table out cleverly (that is, without going schlepping around and checking by hand. ++Lar: t/c 16:40, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]