Category talk:Wikipedians in Norway

Norway Category‑class

	Norway portal This category is within the scope of WikiProject Norway, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Norway on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NorwayWikipedia:WikiProject NorwayTemplate:WikiProject NorwayNorway articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Subcategorization?[edit]

I find the term "Wikipedians in Norway" a wee bit misleading - I am certainly associated with Norway (being a native of Norway, etc.), but I am not usually physically in Norway. Would it make sense to create a subcategory called "Expatriates of Norway" or simply "Norwegian abroad?" We could come up with some pretty cool graphical image for it as well. --Leifern 20:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would be helpful indeed. I was born in Norway, and despite living in the Untied States still heavily define myself as a Norwegian. (USMA2010 20:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Circular categorisation[edit]

Part of the code, probably the user template, makes the category a sub-category of itself. I think we need to remove the template to avoid circular categorisation. --Eddi (Talk) 23:12, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there are any dubious side effects, I might have solved it now, using the <noinclude> tag in the template code. --Wernher 23:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A side effect is that people who use the template don't appear in the category, unless the category is also in the user page explicitly. Currently this affects 3 users ([1], [2], [3]). I can think of a few ways to solve this: (a) categorise those 3 users explicitly, (b) remove <noinclude> from the template and remove the template from the category code, (c) remove <noinclude> from the template and subst: the template in the category code and then take out the circular category tag, or (d) none of the above but let users categorise themselves. I would go for (b) or (c). --Eddi (Talk) 01:08, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Wernher's comments about his additional rash, unsuccessful, just-before-going-to-bed edits removed by himself. For a look at the not particularly interesting comments, see the history log).

Argh. This should teach me not to edit stuff in a hurry when I'm tired. I fixed the problem using your (c) method above. Hopefully, this will let users categorize themselves easily by including one or both of the two strings listed in the category information text. --Wernher 11:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]