Category talk:Internet

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Internet category is cycled[edit]

Hi, I found this structure:

Is if OK, or should be fixed? ~Нирваньчик~ ⊤άλҟ 21:27, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO it's OK, because the Category:Internet is not a parent of itself. As shown by the category tree, the current structure is:
However, There is an old English proverb, "The Devil is in the details," meaning, among other things, that the specific provisions of a general plan may be controversial. — John Harvey, Wizened Web Wizard Wannabe, Talk to me! 17:34, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, looks like I confused the structure. Sorry for disturbing for nothing. But now I see that Internet is twice in category Computer networks. Is it normal for categories or mistake or kind of exception? I used to the fact that guys usually remove grand-grand-parent category (here Computer networks) from a category (here Internet) if parent of the category is already child/descendant of that grand-grand-parent (or grand-parent). ~Нирваньчик~ ⊤άλҟ 23:34, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As a practical matter, I can see the value of having it both places even though it is logically inconsistent. Since I don't know of any rules, I am planting my feet firmly on both sides of this fence. However, we may get some guidance from Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Categories#Internet_appears_twice_in_Computer_Networks_category_tree. — John Harvey, Wizened Web Wizard Wannabe, Talk to me! 14:12, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The category "tree" isn't a tree at all, it's a directed graph. It is common for a category to appear in multiple places in the "tree". It's also not particularly uncommon to find cycles; for example, Category:Black Sea is a subcategory of Category:Landforms of Romania, which is a subcategory of Category:Geography of Romania, which is a subcategory of Category:Romania, which is a subcategory of Category:Black Sea countries, which is a subcategory of Category:Black Sea. There's nothing necessarily wrong with that. Anomie 17:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The current arrangement makes fine sense to me:
--Pnm (talk) 21:21, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The category "tree" isn't a tree at all, it's a directed graph. - This explains everything. Ok then. Reason and sence are determinative here. Good. ~Нирваньчик~ ⊤άλҟ 11:05, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]