Help talk:Creating category pages

Category modernization

Hi Oz, I am beginning to notice a lot of non-standard category pages you've set up, enough to realize they're likely no longer aberrations. As I said on the latest one I standardized, if we want to change what goes on a god's category, or any other category tree for that matter, fine, but then please let's discuss as these are big changes, which we should write up and make consistent throughout the wiki. Thanks --Fleanetha (talk) 00:13, 29 March 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unlike nearly every other kind of deity, a hero-god is also a person, has {{Person}}, and is arguably a person first and foremost before and beyond their becoming a deific entity. I categorized Category:Diaphorea as a person, as common sense dictates and as an uncontroversial positive change in alignment with guidance, so therefore without seeing any need to discuss it anywhere.

I've reverted your change, and I would suggest avoiding any further removal of person categories from any other hero-god. ~~If you feel this exception is not obvious, I'll specify that hero-gods and other mortals with deific powers are a special case;~~ just did this anyway.

If you have specific other concerns, I would appreciate specifics rather than a vague missive that relies on my sifting through edit summaries in Recent changes to guess at which change has triggered this. Recent changes is not a reliable communication tool, now more than ever. Specific and actionable feedback is deeply appreciated. -Oznogon (talk) 00:47, 29 March 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd want to call hero-gods out then specifically, Oz, as there are very few 'Persons' within the category structure, as we don't categorize individuals unless we need to do so; we don't have any help for categorizing Category:Person here for people to follow; and we don't have a Category for pulling all categorized individuals together, which both latter points could be useful. Outside the hero-gods, I can find Tar-Baphon, for instance. If we get a guideline here, then we can standardize, as many of the hero-gods are not categorized in this 'new' way so there's inconsistency creeping in. If it's agreed and documented, we can all work to help standardize once more.

The more I look, though, I can see you've been adding every possible category to some pages recently. Category:Arazni being the most obvious. I recently updated the help to ask for pantheon information to be added to the Category:Deity but you've added domain, class, alignment, pretty much every category on Arazni. That is a significant change. It looks like domains have been added to many other Category:Deity pages too, for instance Category:Etaris, which happens also to be inconsistent with its page Etaris, now I look (but we know that happens).

Reviewing 15 February 2025 last night, I also standardized Category:Thalassic behemoth, where you'd added subtype, alignment, and terrain cats to it. That's not the guidance here for that category tree either.

So, to my point above, are these non-hero-god pages aberrations I'll just continue standardizing, or do you actually want to propose changing the various category structures to have a lot more categories added to more match the page categorization? --Fleanetha (talk) 13:46, 29 March 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've put all the examples you provided in Category:Please check categories. Feel free to add any other examples into that category to surface them for maintenance or discussion.

I'd much rather overcategorize on unclear or exceptional subjects and iterate on their categories through discussion about those subjects, than undercategorize out of a sense of obligation to generalized help page guidance that is not enforced as policy. The harm of overcategorizing category pages is unspecified and questionable in nature.

I'll also add Category:Please check categories to category pages I create going forward that seem to be exceptions to the help page guidance.

However, I don't think changes or additions to help page guidance will reduce the growing number of exceptional situations such as hero-gods (the subject of an upcoming AP), major AP antagonists (such as the thalassic behemoth Ousmariku), and newly ascended or deactivated gods who were or are becoming people, creatures, or other entities (a very recent, complex, and actively evolving set of exceptions).

The policies and guidelines best suited for such exceptions are to be bold in updating pages, assume good faith, and amend, edit, discuss. -Oznogon (talk) 02:49, 30 March 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks Oz. I'm prepared and want to keep the guidance up to date, otherwise it provides no guidance and will just lead to the free-for-all and inconsistency of the past that took a long time to tidy. So I disagree there, I'm afraid - having an authoritative source for category categorization a. is something to point folks at for help; b. provides the consistency; c. helps editors/admins more simply check things are consistent. I'll add something later about hero-gods and look to the points above too about People as a start.

Considering domains, they seem a reasonable addition too you've made, and in a similar vein to adding in the pantheons. I think I'll make an update for that too for 2E. It would then make sense to add in all the 1E material too, but that's a hell of a job for little gain. From your knowledge of bots, would that be a task a bot could achieve? --Fleanetha (talk) 13:40, 30 March 2025 (UTC)Reply[reply]