This page is an archive of the discussion to Restrict user-based categories. The majority (+4) decided to restrict the mainspace/article categories to Articles by <insert name here> and not allow sub-categories, such as "Characters by <insert name here>." Please do not post here. This is an archive. Any further comments may be made on the talk page. --Victortalk 00:57, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
This is something that I have wanted to mandate for awhile but was barely reminded of it right now when I was browsing the recent changes. It's pretty needless when users create subcategories of their main category, "Articles by <insert name here>," such as "Governments by <insert name here>" or "Characters by <insert name here>." I think to achieve more professionalism and keep articles more organized (No, we don't need to see if they're a character, government, and whatnot. That can be figured out through the rest of the article and its in-universe categories. We just need to know the author, in that case mandating user-based categories only be "Articles by <insert name here>.")
Below is what I propose. Please vote and discuss in the proper section below. Also, please note that {{USERNAME}} is being used various times on this page, so I'm not referring to anyone in specific, but you will see your username in several places.
NOTE: A user's real name, such as Victor Dorantes or William Parmele, may be used instead of their username, as the user's right. However, only one such category is needed, as mentioned below.
NOTE DEUX: (I know, I'm forgetful) In case you're wondering, this would not apply to "Templates by <insert name here>" or "Images by <insert name here>" because they are not for articles. "Templates by <insert name here>" is obviously for templates, the template namespace, and "Images by <insert name here>" is for images, in the file namespace. This only applies to article based user categories, such as Articles by, Characters by, etc. in the article (or "main") namespace.
--Victortalk 05:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Proposal
The proposal is basically mandating and restricting users to only one, proper user-based category, that being "Articles by <insert name here>." All articles in subcategories, such as the subcategories "Characters by <insert name here>" or "Weapons by <insert name here>," will be moved to the proper category and the subcategories will be deleted.
(+1)
Support
- --Victortalk 05:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- --Nightmare975 05:37, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- Better this way, I say. — Aiddat (Holonet) (Additions to the archives)
12:49, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- Support, because per JM Jasca would have to fix his articles :-P But no, it's a sensible rule. Vagrant Lustoid 13:36, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Neutral
- Doesn't matter to me either way. Whatever the majority decides is fine with me.
- Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 12:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- Per Rhea. --Arav the Undersith (Contact Me) (My contributions) 05:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
- I see how these categories could get rather annoying, but I also see ways that the ability to use them could be useful so I'm going to have to go neutral on this one. --Kathkira talk 20:50, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Oppose
- Not really a necessary rule, and Jasca would have to fix all of his article categories :P Drewton
(Drewton's Holocron) 12:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- It helps to easily find a specific article, and if I was to join this wiki again, I'd do it Jasca's way. I can't be overly bothered now, of course. However, it's much more efficient with categorization, and helps to find an article much quicker than otherwise. --
(talk) (contributions) 06:54, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
- I don't want too many 200+ categorizies here. Some users created a ton of articles. Subcategories would make searching for articles easier. --Michaeldsuarez
(Talk) (Deeds) 17:58, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Discussion
Please discuss here to avoid clutter in voting sections. Thank you. --Victortalk 05:15, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- Just to be sure, we can keep for example [[Category:Articles by nightmre975]]?--Nightmare975 05:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Of course. That's what this is about; keeping your main category only. --Victortalk 05:40, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- I think that novels alone deserve their own subcategory, because they aren't exactly "articles" in comparison to, Darth Lulz, for example. Everything else I agree with. — JM76 Ask Archives
07:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Well, that's what "Category: Novels" is for, to note it's a novel. Because an article like, say, Star Wars: Knighthood, is an article, not a novel itself. Plus, it's in the article mainspace. They are still articles on the Wiki, and that doesn't take anything away from them being novels as well. --Victortalk 07:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- I think I'll be staying neutral here. Unit 8311 12:27, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- Would this apply to pages like Category:Music by C3PO the Dragon Slayer? Where "Articles by x" could make sense, Category:Music or Category:Songs are kind of broad. PK-10's theme would be next to Palpatine's Motto if the only music-related category I could use was that. --C3PO the Dragon Slayer 6,000,000 forms of communication | Dragons I've Slayed
12:45, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, C3PO, because your music is in the file namespace, such as your "midi" files and such. As for Palpatine's Motto article, that actually is an article and not a file, so you should just put "Articles by C3PO the Dragon Slayer" (and if you don't have that, I suppose keeping the music category on it will work, although it won't exactly work since it's not a music file.) But no, that category wouldn't be deleted - it's very much like "Images by <insert name here>". --Victortalk 17:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
- We'd be able to keep things like Category:Chapters of The Chosen One, correct? - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 16:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Of course. --Victortalk 17:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm teetering on the verge of opposing this, though I acknowledge that if a user gets carried away (Category: Gungans by <insert name here>), it can get a bit annoying. However, I just had an idea that would earn my support: instead of restricting all user-based categories, make it a guideline (not a ban-enforced policy) to have a given number of articles (5? 10?) in a user-based category to legitimize it. Category:Gungans by <insert name here> would make more sense if it turned out <insert name here> made a dozen Gungans. It wouldn't be hard to check for: if an admin sees a user-based category (which should be categorized correctly themselves), all he needs to do is count the number of articles in the category and check the related changes to make sure the author is working on filling it (if it is currently below the number). --C3PO the Dragon Slayer 6,000,000 forms of communication | Dragons I've Slayed 22:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
- There is nothing in here that says this would be a bannable offense. It's just a rule that, if broken, would be enforced and any "damage" would be undone properly. 71.92.72.70 00:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
Not every policy needs to have bans attached to it. - Brandon Rhea (talk) (contribs) 01:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, yeah. That's a part of my point, but mostly what I'm getting at is that we should have a minimum limit for user-based subcategories, such as characters and vehicles, instead of eliminating them altogether. --C3PO the Dragon Slayer 6,000,000 forms of communication | Dragons I've Slayed
23:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
- I agre completely. Categories such as "Characters by <insert name here>" should remain, but I'm opposed to categories such as "Jedi by <insert name here>". Drewton
(Drewton's Holocron) 00:14, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- I agre completely. Categories such as "Characters by <insert name here>" should remain, but I'm opposed to categories such as "Jedi by <insert name here>". Drewton