Category talk:19th century establishments in South Dakota

What preceded South Dakota?[change source]

South Dakota got statehood late in the year 1889. So the following subcategories have problematic names:

These category names do not have items in Wikidata. When the correct substitute categories are found, they need to be manually added where these have been used, or treated by a purpose-designed bot. -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:17, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edited to add: See en:Category:Dakota Territory for suggested category and subcategory names. -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:20, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the names should reflect what an area was called at the time specified. If an entity -- whether state, country, or whatever -- didn't exist in a given timeframe, there shouldn't be categories for it in that timeframe. I see we have some categories for establishments in the Thirteen Colonies: things should be similar to thst. We may need a category subtree for these former US territories. Over on Commons, there's a similar discussion that's been going on for a while (category discussions there can take a while to get decided). --Auntof6 (talk) 20:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should they? It becomes complicated for things in other countries (what was Germany versus the German Republic and others) so that's why I went by the current location since the Dakotas are both Dakotas, Montana, Wyoming and Nebraska which becomes a mess for categories. Do we want to start a centralized discussion somewhere and then we can propose renames for a bunch of these? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:41, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah its standard wiki practice to use the names they were at the time you are talking about. For example if you are talking about where someone was born you use the name of the country at the time it was born as it would be factually incorrect to use the current name. It would be an anachronism. -DJSasso (talk) 14:55, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]