| advertise add site services publishers database health videos | ![]() | about toolbar stats live show health store more stuff JOIN/LOGIN |
Talking Watch, Talking Watches, Talking Clock, Talking Bible, Talking... independentliving.com | Talk Radio Show Tooth Talk Dr. Mitchell A. Josephs D.D.S.Featured Sponsor radiotoothtalk.com |
[edit] branched discussionA branched discussion is at Category talk:Organizations. --Lquilter 00:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Non profits/NGOs/Charities etc - what a mess!I am joining this project due to frustrating with the disorganization of categories related to the above. As I posted in Project Human Rights, this is just an example of the myriad places that organizations are thrown into at the moment. Presently, human rights organizations can be found in:
and I'm sure myriad others. Ideas on where to start or where this problem has been discussed before? Scarykitty 08:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC) Ideas on where to start? I am concerned that some of the existing trees being proposed perpetuate the unnecessary distinction between NGO and non-profit organization Scarykitty 08:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Charities, Non-Profits, etc.There is a major overlap of organizations within the following categories:
What would a good category structure be like for these? Definitional problems:
(Anybody else, please note other complicating factors that may affect the organizational structure.) Just to get started, I'm going to throw out a possible organizational structure.
I realize that Category:Charities is more commonly used in some places than "non-profit organizations" but because Wikipedia is international, the term is ambiguous (internationally speaking). I hope that "non-profit organizations" is sufficiently unambiguous and well-enough understood internationally. Orgs may be in both the gov/NGO tree and the nonprofit tree. This I think is proper, because governments can (of course) establish or operate for-profit orgs; and because NGOs might be for-profit or non-profit. --Lquilter 18:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC) Thoughts? [edit] Academies of different kindsI've found the categorisation of various national academies of sciences rather inconsistent and confusing. I put a suggestion for clearing up a bit at Category talk:Scientific societies#Continuing and further confusion; a proposal, which no one has commented; and (linking to this) at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 November 12#Create subctegories, move most items to these, which got some positive reaction and advice, but also a "should you really discuss this here?" reaction. At that time, I had not found out any project whis is relevant for the categorisation of academies; now I think that this project is. Since I got no negative reaction (and my proposed changes didn't involve deleting or renaming categories), I've gone ahead. Thus, most of the national academies (wherever I succeeded to find them, within or without the category:National academies) now are distributed into Category:National academies of sciences and Category:National academies of arts and humanities; in many cases I put an item in both categories. I've simultaneously removed them from direct membership in Category:Scientific organizations, Category:Scientific societies, and Category:Learned societies. I left a few doubtful cases for the time being; I'm thinking of putting some of them in a new Category:National academies of engineering or Category:National academies of applied sciences and engineering or something similar. If I've confused a clear strategy for how the academies should be categorised, I apology; however, from the confused state of matter, I do not think this was the case. Anyhow, I'll certainly listen to any advice or opinions about these categorisations; and will stop working with this, if you think I should. JoergenB (talk) 20:53, 26 November 2008 (UTC) |
| ↑ top of page ↑ | about thumbshots |