Category talk:Fictional locations

RFM discussion: November 2015–February 2016
These categories include words like and, which are not exactly fictional locations (or rather, they are not fictional in the same sense of fiction that we use in our context labels). We should rename it into something like Category:Fictional and mythological locations. — Ungoliant (falai) 23:17, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Support renaming the category into any name that is more accurate than "Fictional locations". Maybe Category:Fictional, mythological and religious locations?
 * I suppose calling Heaven and Hell "mythological" is bound to offend someone who believes in these places? If that's not an issue, I'd be happy enough with Category:Fictional and mythological locations. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 23:28, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You’re right about that. The name religious locations describes words like and, which are not what this category is about, but I can’t really think of something else. — Ungoliant (falai) 23:32, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Possibly we could have three separate categories, if that's not too much granularity: Category:Fictional locations, Category:Mythological locations and Category:Afterlife locations. I'm aware that it would lead to some repeated categorization: Hades is both "mythological" and "afterlife". --Daniel Carrero (talk) 23:39, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * This might be a good use of finer granularity than we would normally have, ie, for something like the 'afterlife' category. However, I would think that the Garden of Eden would belong in a category that had heaven, limbo, and hell, so 'afterlife' is too restrictive if we are to have such a religious category. DCDuring TALK 00:28, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Interestingly, Wikipedia's w:Category:Mythological places does contain subcategories named "Garden of Eden" and "Heaven", in addition to the article "Tower of Babel".
 * The category description starts with: "Mythological places are legendary places from a relatively cohesive set of myths." Well, if it's good enough for Wikipedia, maybe my comment above about offending people is really not an issue as I thought? We could simply have 2 separate Category:Mythological locations and Category:Fictional locations, without any "afterlife" distinction. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 01:00, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps so. Is Asgard mythical because the religion it is associated with was polytheistic and is no longer practiced (apologies to heathenry)? DCDuring TALK 02:21, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't try to split "religious" from "mythological", since the distinction is (as DCDuring suggests) pretty much just "do (m)any people still practice the religion?" (and the answer to "any" is usually "yes"). I don't know whether it would be better to have one category for "fictional and mythological places", or two. - -sche (discuss) 04:48, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep: There should be a category with this title and it should contain at least some of the entries currently in it. Maybe we need additional categories such as Category:Mythological locations and a supercategory for both fictional and mythological locations, but the current category should remain and should contain entries. Pur ple back pack 89   21:25, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I actually agree with Purplebackpack89 that the category should be kept, but some of its entries removed. --WikiTiki89 22:44, 4 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I've split off Cat:Mythological locations. If someone wants to create a category to contain both the fictional location category and that new category, I guess that's fine, as long as the two category continue to also categorize into Cat:Mythology etc as they do now. - -sche (discuss) 04:19, 29 February 2016 (UTC)