Category talk:Randomness

Is it really necessary to have both this category ("Randomness", first edited on Jan. 8, 2005) and Category:Random numbers (June 2, 2004)? Conceptually, they certainly have a lot in common, which would seem to guarantee endless categorization problems going forward. Even now, "Randomness" is a subcategory of Category:Probability and statistics and "Random numbers" is a subcategory of Category:Cryptography, Category:Probability and statistics, and Category:Randomness, and both categories contain the articles Randomness and Random number. Ugh. I would prefer to just have this category and have it contain all the stuff relevant to both concepts. - dcljr 06:02, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

It is not clear to me what this category is for and in what way it differs from the Probability and Statistics category. On the other hand, the Random Numbers category serves a clear purpose: it contains articles on the generation of (pseudo)random numbers. Thus, my first reaction is to delete this category. -- Jitse Niesen 12:39, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I decided to move all of Cateogy:Random numbers to this category instead, as randomness is not just about random number generation. A subcategory for random number generation could be created, though. But now at least we don't have concurrent overlapping categories, it's more a question of subcategories. Flammifer 13:37, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and boldly added this category to the Category:Cryptography since randomness is a very important concept in cryptography in many ways. --David Göthberg 03:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]