Category talk:Freight transport

comment from 2004=

Wouldn't this more simply be Freight transport. Too bad we can't simply rename categories. dml 02:42, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I thought about the category name for a little while before creating it. I added the "distribution" part because that involves a number of areas outside simple transport, such as wholesaling, retailing, inventory, and supply management. I used "commercial item" rather than "goods" because I ran into the example of oil pipelines, and while oil and other commodities could technically be "goods," that word tends to imply discrete widgets, and the items being transported and distributed aren't always discrete. Oil and other pipeline commodities also aren't really "freight", either. So I tried to come up with something generic enough to capture it all, while being definite about what was being covered and what was not being covered (like passenger transport, for instance). The end result was a rather long phrase, but I think it fits. --Gary D 03:46, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I really dislike this category title. I really had to think about what it meant. It is both a little too broad, judging from the topics in here, and little to narrow. I think we should only have articles in their most specific categories. Burgundavia 09:02, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC)

If it's both too broad and too narrow, we may have it just about right. ;-) Anyway, see my response to your comment on my talk page, the gist of which is that the sector this category captures is specific, and unitary. --Gary D 09:56, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I would think that the title of this category is just a definition of "Logistics." It seems that all the articles and subcategory of "Commercial item transport and distribution" could fit in the Logistics category. What do you think? Chob (talk) 15:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)