17
edits
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Shunai Bridge"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
no edit summary
m |
|||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
::Eh? Did you mean to say [[:Category:Structures]], or are you saying this article can be categorised in [[:Category:Buildings]]? Whichever it is, feel free to follow up on it yourself (though I really don't think bridges qualify as "buildings"). --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 04:49, 27 February 2008 (GMT) | ::Eh? Did you mean to say [[:Category:Structures]], or are you saying this article can be categorised in [[:Category:Buildings]]? Whichever it is, feel free to follow up on it yourself (though I really don't think bridges qualify as "buildings"). --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 04:49, 27 February 2008 (GMT) | ||
:::"build·ing /ˈbɪldɪŋ/ 2. anything built or constructed. 1. Building, edifice, structure refer to something built. Building and structure may apply to either a finished or an unfinished product of construction, and carry no implications as to size or condition. Edifice is a more formal word and narrower in application, referring to a completed structure, and usually a large and imposing one. Building generally connotes a useful purpose (houses, schools, business offices, etc.); structure suggests the planning and constructive process." I suppose it can work as a stretch. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 14:01, 27 February 2008 (GMT) | :::"build·ing /ˈbɪldɪŋ/ 2. anything built or constructed. 1. Building, edifice, structure refer to something built. Building and structure may apply to either a finished or an unfinished product of construction, and carry no implications as to size or condition. Edifice is a more formal word and narrower in application, referring to a completed structure, and usually a large and imposing one. Building generally connotes a useful purpose (houses, schools, business offices, etc.); structure suggests the planning and constructive process." I suppose it can work as a stretch. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 14:01, 27 February 2008 (GMT) | ||
::::I went by Cambridge Dictionary's definition though ("a structure with walls and a roof such as a house or factory, or the business of making these"), which makes bridge seemingly not qualify as a building at all. --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 16:31, 27 February 2008 (GMT) | |||
:::::Hence semantics. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 17:02, 27 February 2008 (GMT) | |||
What other things would go in here if the category was renamed to Structures? I don't want it to be too broad and end up another useless category that has everything in it. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 17:04, 27 February 2008 (GMT) | |||
:Well, the thought initially occurred to me because I was trying to decide where [[Lantis' Crossing]] could go. [[Living Spire]]? Nothing strikes me at the moment. --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 21:41, 27 February 2008 (GMT) | |||
::Yeah, "Structures" might open it up too large that it would presume the addition of things like the Living Spire, Icons, Proper Temples, famous statues, landmark structures, CTF effigy, relics, all the city improvements... [[User:Asara|Asara]] 02:22, 28 February 2008 (GMT) | |||
If worse comes to worse, we could just make a "Bridges" category or rename the buildings category to "Buildings and Bridges" =P. [[User:Asara|Asara]] 13:46, 28 February 2008 (GMT) | |||
:Heh, that idea occurred to me, too, but I thought for sure somebody was going on rail on giving bridges special treatment. --[[User:Krypton|Krypton]] 15:28, 28 February 2008 (GMT) | |||
::Yes, I'm still not sold on the idea either. =D [[User:Asara|Asara]] 17:18, 28 February 2008 (GMT) | |||