Hey everyone, Jasper here. I recently posted a discussion forum about how we should handle our category system and it is now time to take it to vote. To refresh your memories here are the two options.
- All categories that page logically fits in to (e.g. a human in Fallout would be in both "Category: Fallout Characters" and "Category: Fallout Human Characters")
- In only the most specific categories (e.g. a human in Fallout would be in only "Category: Fallout Human Characters).
Please vote yes on the system you agree with the most.
Jspoel 19:39, June 18, 2015 (UTC)See my comment on the forum about this. It's not convenient for the mobile (Wikia app), where it is of much importance to have a fast and clean list, right away, without browsing. Human characters category gets cluttered with mentioned-only characters.
- JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 19:18, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
- 19:19, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Paladin117>>iff bored; 19:20, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Hawk da Barber 2013 - BSHU Graduate 19:21, June 18, 2015 (UTC) pls make it happen
- The Old World Relics (talk/blog/contributions) 19:21, June 18, 2015 (UTC) --
- The Ever Ruler (talk) 19:26, June 18, 2015 (UTC) It always boils down to wording. --
- This system is more precise and makes categories less bulkier. If not that, isn't it more professional? 19:29, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Archmage NekoNeko's Haunt 19:39, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
- Don't give up the ship! 20:01, June 18, 2015 (UTC) I find it easier to locate a page through specific category trees.
- -bleep196- (talk) 02:02, June 22, 2015 (UTC) --
- 04:49, June 22, 2015 (UTC)
The obvious solution to the problem J outlines above is that mentioned-only characters should be in their own category. That way they won't "clog up" the non-mentioned-only humans category. 19:50, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
I'm wondering which one is easiest to fix with a bot. Because the old games use a different categorization than FO3 and FNV, so no matter what we choose, we'll have a lot and really a lot of category work that will have to be done. As we all have other work to focus on right now with FOS and FO4 inbound, my preference goes to the option that can be executed without anyone having to waste time on it. - Greets Peace'n Hugs (talk) (blog) 19:44, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
- I would rather we take the most appropriate route, regardless of effort needed, than choose a method simply because it's easier. That being said, we've discussed whether this could be done with bots. Short answer: yes, but with a lot of oversight. Some articles really should be in a parent category, e.g. Fallout 3 weapons should be in Category:Fallout 3 weapons, which is a parent category for the weapons by skill categories. Just running a bot over these pages could result in articles having their cats changed that don't need it. Using AWB, we'd have to build the list off of existing cats, but then very carefully vet the pages before hitting the "go, bot, go" button. 20:03, June 18, 2015 (UTC)
- There are many users who will happily do the leg work for this. We don't need to make our policies in mind of what bots can do. I am more than capable of removing categories from/adding categories to pages, as are nearly all our users. JASPER//"Do you like hurting other people?" 22:08, June 21, 2015 (UTC)
- I'm indifferent on the options, so it's not like i would pick an inapropriate way over the other just based on laziness. But if 2 options are valued equally, i prefer picking the easiest one. - Greets Peace'n Hugs (talk) (blog) 02:08, June 22, 2015 (UTC)