Category talk:Integers

We use the following sort key system (please correct errors of this system):

number	sort key
0	0
1	01
2	02
...	...
9	09
10	10
11	11
12	12
...	...
29	29
30	30
31	31
...	...
99	99
100	19E02 100 (to make it become after 19, but first by power of 10)
101	19E02 101
...	...
299	29E02 299
300	39E02 300
301	39E02 301
...	...
999	99E02 999
1000	19E03 1000
1001	19E03 1001
...	...

Deletion[change source]

With 68 pages in this category, I don't think it should be quick deleted. If you would like it deleted, please suggest a method for categorization of these numbers. With a little bit of discussion, I think we can come to a solution that will be suitable for all interested parties. · Ty grrr... 21:38, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My proposal is that we should keep this category, but that the numbers should not be in both Category:Numbers and Category:Integers, because there are other types of numbers and also articles about number in general in the numbers category. Having all the number articles there makes it hard to see what else is there. adit 21:43, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal[change source]

Here is my solution to this problem:

All numbers pages are listed under numbers category.
Integer category has the page about integers in it and that is it.
Integer category links to numbers category.

What do you guys think of this solution? -Razorflame (contributions) Talk 22:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A category with one article is pointless. I am not sure what you mean by linking the interger and numbers categories. Far easier to have the actual integers in a subcategory with the category numbers including related articles - eg names for numbers, definitions. Also, ordinary set theory tends to have the category integers as a subcategory of category numbers.

Mixing the pages of a large number of integers makes browsing the numbers category and thus finding the many other articles difficult, another argument for using an integers subcat -- Barliner talk 22:48, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I am fine with having them under the subcat integers now. Sorry for causing so much trouble and sorry for the edit war. I shouldn't have done that. Now I think I've ruined my chances of becoming an admin :(. Razorflame (contributions) Talk 22:49, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]