Forums > Senate Hall archive > SH Archive/Categories for corporations?

Recently, I've been looking at articles such as Trade Federation, InterGalactic Banking Clan, Techno Union, etc., and some of them have a lot of links under "Associates", with the Trade Federation article having a lot. So, should categories such as Category:Trade Federation, Category:Techno Union, etc. be made to remove these long lists from corporation articles? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 23:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

  • We already have Category:Czerka employees. I don't see why having any more would be a problem. We could keep them in the faction category or create an Individuals by employer category to hold them. Then again, I created the Czerka category. ;) Havac
    • Well, it would probably better to have a more general category (like Category:Czerka Corporation rather than Category:Czerka employees). That way, more could be added, and there would be no need for more categories for the same corporation. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 12:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Good idea with corporation categories. I think the Czerka eployees category should be retained as a subcategory, and that all other caorporation categories should have similar subcategories. KEJ 13:24, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  • You could maybe do the corporation categories but the employees ones should also be done as well. Personally, I hate the grab-bag "stick anything vaguely related to this topic in the category" cats. They just aren't very useful and don't fit well into the system of categorization. They're certainly no replacement for more focused cats. Havac
    • But we shouldn't have categories like "Trade Federation aquatic vehicles" and such. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 12:17, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
      • If we have the articles to populate them we absolutely should. Havac
        • That would only set a bad example. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 21:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
          • Whatever do you mean? Havac
            • I'd say that depends. I don't want Rogue Squadron under Category:X-wings, I want it under Category:Squadrons or even Category:Rebel Alliance Squadrons. However, I do see the point that excessive categorizing is somewhat redundant. Maybe a general guideline of at least a dozen articles per category would be a good idea. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Audience Chamber) 05:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
              • Havac: As Ataru said, excessive categorizing is redundant. What I had in mind was just putting all the affiliations for one corporation under one category on that corporation. Now, if there was a point in the near-future where there were so many Trade Federation aquatic vessels, then we could have a Category:Trade Federation aquatic vehicles. I just don't think it's necessary now. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 12:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Case in point, there are a number of Trade Federation aquatic vehicles, ala Galactic Battlegrounds and maybe from Starfighter, but probably not enough to merit a category. Confederacy aquatic vehicles would probably work if there's not already a category for it. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Audience Chamber) 15:57, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Sixteen aquatic units? That's enough for a category. Redundant categorization is bad, but we hardly need to have 100 articles on something before we create a cat. Again, Category:Trade Federation would be so broad as to almost useless without more specific categories also available. On the other hand, categories for TradeFed employees, TradeFed aguatic vehicles, TradeFed ground vehicles, and TradeFed starcraft would cover almost all the articles in the associates section while actually being useful and placeable as meaningful subcats instead of being stuck outside the categorization system as some sort of grab bag of anything vaguely associated with one topic. I don't see why that should be a problem when there are clearly enough articles to sustain categories. Havac
    • Making all of those categories would be bad because there'd be no need for a Category:Trade Federation then. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 23:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Exactly. Category:Trade Federation doesn't do anything, doesn't tell you anything. That's like complaining that Category:Rebel Alliance members makes Category:Individuals less useful. If a handful of narrower categories make a broad category less useful, so be it. The increased usefulness of the narrower categories far outweighs the lost usefulness of the overcategory which can still have the others as a subcat within it. When someone comes here and wants to find the AAT, do they want to look in Category:Trade Federation under a government heading or do they want to look in Category:Trade Federation ground vehicles under the vehicles heading? Havac
        • Category:Trade Federation is more relevant than Category:Trade Federation vehicles. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 13:37, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
          • I'd say let's just use the subcategories for the various items, all as subcategories of Category:Trade Federation. It would be obvious by the qualifier "Trade Federation aquatic vehicles", etc. that the item was somehow affiliated with the TF. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Audience Chamber) 15:17, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
            • But there's the problem—what would be in Category:Trade Federation? Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 22:23, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
              • The Trade Federation article and all of the Trade Federation subcategories, at the very least. jSarek 03:58, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I don't get it. Why are you so hung up on having the overcategory? All the subcats could go in it. Why are the subcats a threat to the overcategory? Havac
    • Because there would only be one article in the Trade Federation category if the subcategories were created. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 14:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
      • And for the record, I have no problem with having subcategories. However, when there is only one article in the main category, I don't think there should be subcategories. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 14:12, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
        • I don't see anything wrong with it so long as there are enough subcats to justify it, which there would clearly be here. It organizes the subcats to make them easier to locate for someone who's looking for something Trade Fed related. jSarek 14:15, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
          • So we only have one article in the main category? That seems pointless to me. Grand Admiral J. Nebulax (Imperial Holovision) Imperial Emblem 14:20, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
            • We can put it up on CT if you like, but I think consensus will favor a more specific categorization. As long as its not ridiculously small. In all honesty, Category:Trade Federation doesn't tell the viewer nearly as much as Category:Trade Federation vehicles does, and it's still a subcat, so it's not like the Category:Trade Federation page would be empty. Plus, that big category would provide a general category for items that are too specialized to have their own subcat, etc. Atarumaster88 Jedi Order (Audience Chamber) 05:23, 24 December 2006 (UTC)