Forum:Settlements established in 1626 etc

Forums: Index > Watercooler > Settlements established in 1626 etc

We have the following categories (based on Wikipedia names): Settlements established in 1626, Settlements established in 1760, Settlements established in 1880. The word "established" must be a potential cause of confusion with the formal establishment of places. And the category names would be more in line with many of our other time and place categories if they used a verb or participle: "Settled in 1626" etc. Just like "Born in" - we do have both dates and places following.

Before they get too numerous to be worth changing, how about changing? (I can do the necessary template-changing, I think.)

Matching higher-level categories would include Settled in the 1620s, Settled in the 17th century, ...

A place may, of course, have more than one settlement date. Parts of Australia, for example, were settled by aboriginal people 40,000 years ago but can still be categorised by the dates of first European settlement. Parts of Canada may have the French date as well as the British date. South Africa, Dutch and British dates. England was settled several millennia ago but can still have "1066" as the date for settlement by a distinct new wave of people from overseas.

Robin Patterson 00:47, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

So do we want Category:1790s settlements or Category:Settled in the 1790s for the next level up? I notice that Category:Established in 1793 is still a subcategory of Category:1790s establishments. Shouldn't that be Category:Established in the 1790s? If yes, the fix is (mostly) a change to a template (okay, someone still has to create the new categories). I notice that Category:18th century establishments does redirect to Category:Established in the 18th century, so there seems to be just one level missing. Thurstan 02:13, 7 November 2008 (UTC)