Category talk:Flora of Western Asia

Asia Category‑class

	Asia portal This category is within the scope of WikiProject Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Asia 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.AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject AsiaTemplate:WikiProject AsiaAsia articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Plants Category‑class

	Plants portal This category is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

2012[edit]

removed from middle east category to prevent a circular categorization. --KarlB (talk) 02:57, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming opposed[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Moved from WP:CFDS

– – Fayenatic London 07:29, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Western Asia to Category:West Asia – C2D: per main article West Asia which was moved to its current title per move discussion. Givennames (talk) 05:44, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose all those changes which relate to flora/organisms. "Western Asia" is the correct name in the WGSRPD, used throughout for distributions. Other categories, e.g. Category:Flora of Northern America, have recently been changed to agree with the WGSRPD, not away from it. Any change to these categories must be discussed at relevant Wikiprojects. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- @Peter coxhead: My apologies for I wasn't aware of that rule for flora and its child categories. The only categories where "WGSRPD" applies here is Category:Flora of Western Asia and its child category Category:Trees of Western Asia (but then what about Category:Trees of Southeast Asia as "Southeast Asia" isn't used by WGSRPD?). I've stricken through those two above. All the other categories are unrelated to plants and there's no reason they should be treated differently from those of the other Asian regions: e.g. Category:Biota of East Asia, Category:Fauna of East Asia, Category:History of East Asia, Category:Invertebrates of East Asia, Category:Religion in East Asia, Category:East Asian literature, not *Eastern Asia/*Eastern Asian. Givennames (talk) 09:34, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  @Peter coxhead: Ymblanter (talk) 05:42, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  @Givennames: thanks. (Yes, some of the 'specialized' categories like "Trees of ..." have been set up wrongly according to the advice for flora categories, and need to be sorted.) For me it's a problem that "Flora of ..." categories and "Fauna of ..." categories use different systems, but then get combined under "Biota of ...", when one or the other is often not the same biogeographical unit, but it seems to be something we're stuck with. Peter coxhead (talk) 06:25, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  To summarize, are we ready to process non-crossed-out categories? Ymblanter (talk) 14:57, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  I have processed most of the listed categories. I struck Category:Western Asia articles needing expert attention for now, as that is part of Category:WikiProject Western Asia articles.
  
  @Peter coxhead: Lichens has a WGSRPD parent, so I struck that one. Fungi are not categorised under Flora but do they come under the WGSRPD scheme? – or even if not, is it more helpful to keep their category name aligned with flora & lichens? – Fayenatic London 10:10, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  @Fayenatic london: they do come under the scheme, and lichens are now treated as a group within fungi, so I think it's best to leave the category at "Western". Peter coxhead (talk)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.