PathfinderWiki
Log in

Forum:Reorganizing the categories

From PathfinderWiki
Forums: Grand Lodge > Reorganizing the categories


Now that PathfinderWiki has moved to Wikia, we are operating under a newer version of the MediaWiki software. This allows us to more easily make subcategories. While this is great, we already have a pretty extensive category tree and the work involved in remaking that will be extensive. I'd like to call for volunteers to assist in a project to standardize how we set up categories, both to offer suggestions and more importantly to actually implement whatever decision we come to. It's not going to be something that one person can reasonably do alone, and thus, I'd rather not be the one to take on this daunting task by myself.
I guess I'll get it started then.

Currently we are using a pretty clunky system for setting up the category tree. A nation would be listed under Category:Nations of Avistan, Category:Chaotic good nations, and Category:Elven nations, for example, and a person could be listed under as much as Category:Neutral good inhabitants, Category:Clerics, Category:Followers of Shelyn, Category:Inhabitants of Sandpoint, Category:Half-elves, Category:Members of the Pathfinder Society, etc.

What I propose is to make a more concise tree, such that an inhabitant would instead belong to the following categories: Category:Neutral good/Inhabitants, Category:Sandpoint/Inhabitants, Category:Half-elf/Inhabitants, Category:Pathfinder Society/Members (and the subcategory Category:Pathfinder Society/Venture-captains), Category:Cleric/Inhabitants. The benefit of this is that each of these categories would automatically link back to its parent category, such that Category:Sandpoint would contain the subcategories Category:Sandpoint/Locations and Category:Sandpoint/Inhabitants and Category:Lawful good would contain such subcategories as Category:Lawful good/Nations, Category:Lawful good/Inhabitants, Category:Lawful good/Deities, Category:Lawful good/Organizations, etc.

The only issue I can think of with this structure is that one might be searching for Lawful good settlements and then decide they want to look for Lawful neutral settlements instead. It's a little cumbersome to go back two steps in the tree to Category:Lawful good then Category:Alignments to then retrace the steps back to Category:Lawful neutral and then Category:Lawful neutral/Settlements. I guess we could make Category:Lawful neutral/Settlements a subcategory of Category:Settlements/By alignment so that people can always backtrack that way, but therein lies the really complicated part. As new categories are added, we need an easy way to know what they should and shouldn't be subcategories of.

What is the general thought on this change? Does anyone know a good way to carry this out?

I like the idea of the subcategories very much and agree that there needs to be some clear standardization. I think the organization should be by the most logical means in terms of how one would look for something. How would someone look up a settlement, person, etc?

Also, I think there needs to be a "special page" where the category tree is graphically depicted, if that is possible. It can be a trucated tree (heh, heh), that does not have every single subcategory, but I think the major ones should be there. My biggest issue so far in re: categories, is that I have not been sure which ones appy.

I'll write more when I am back from vacay.

The special page you are looking for is here. Just enter any category name into the box and it will show you all subcategories as well as link back to its parent category. Check out what I'm doing with the article for Adril Hestram to see how categories would work under this proposed system.
So I'm undoing all the work I did today. I think I was overdoing the subcategories and it was getting unsightly and cumbersome. I am now thinking that I can reorganize and cross-reference the existing categories to make them more intuitive and helpful. I will be making a Category Bible, so to speak, once I have the core of the tree established to my liking. Sorry to be so flighty.