This category is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Tibet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tibet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TibetWikipedia:WikiProject TibetTemplate:WikiProject TibetTibet articles
This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
'Tibetan Buddhist art and culture' is narrower than and should not circularly include 'Tibetan art'[edit]
Clearly 'Tibetan Buddhist art and culture' is a subaspect of Tibetan art. It should not circularly include the broader category. Skyerise (talk) 16:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That is to say, not all Tibetan art is Tibetan Buddhist art. Skyerise (talk) 16:24, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And do we have any articles on Tibetan art that aren't "Tibetan Buddhist art"? I don't think so. If "Tibetan Buddhist art and culture" is preventing the proper categorization of articles, it should be deleted. We don't have categories like "Italian Catholic art and culture". There is no tree for "art and culture by country and religion". Johnbod (talk) 17:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. There is also Tibetan Bon art. Nobody seems to have created a category for it. I assume there is also completely secular art such as fabric arts, indigenous musical instruments, contemporary artists, etc. Tibetan Buddhist art is full of symbolism and it makes sense to subcategorize it. It also needs to be a subcategory of Buddhist art so shouldn't have secular art. I wouldn't object to chopping off the 'and culture' if that's what's bothering you. Skyerise (talk) 18:14, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well then about 2/3 of the category would fall away. There is indeed Tibetan Bon art, but to repeat, do we have any articles on it?. Even Tibetan rug is not completely secular, as the tiger rugs are for meditating on. The whole of Tibetan art can go under Buddhist art - that would be fine. It is ridiculous of you to object to one article you happen to spot being categorised as art. Johnbod (talk) 00:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have to justify how the categories currently are. You have to propose and justify what you want to do about it, preferably via discussion on all the relevant project pages, and with formal categories for discussion proposals. Skyerise (talk) 14:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look into it further and check whether all the articles are properly categorized. If you want to simplify things, I'd look further up the tree. Do we really need both Category:Arts in Tibet and Category:Tibetan art? I'm not sure whether this is normal on the arts side but it seems we could do with one or the other... Skyerise (talk) 14:46, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All I want to is categorize ONE article in a category where it clearly belongs, and reduce the crazy convoluted path between two closely-related categories. Don't worry, I have plenty of experience at getting rid of bad cats at Cfd. If you'd bothered to look, you'd know that Category:Arts by country has 229 national sub-cats, with the subcats in Category:Art by country for visual art making 174, and other sub-cats for music, dance & so on. So don't bother thinking about changing that. Johnbod (talk) 15:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
