Wikipedia talk:Do not write articles using categories

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Wikipedia essays, a collaborative effort to organize and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. For a listing of essays see the essay directory.Wikipedia essaysWikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia essaysTemplate:WikiProject Wikipedia essaysWikiProject Wikipedia essays
Low	This page has been rated as Low-impact on the project's impact scale.
	The above rating was automatically assessed using data on pageviews, watchers, and incoming links.

Counterargument

Categories can serve as tags, and there is work being done to allow "category math": computing intersections of various categories. Some people may be interested in finding famous people who did not do well at school but received nobel prizes. Or those that were not drafted and are pacifist. Or heterosexual vegetarian violinists. Who knows. --Stevage 08:00, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Categories are not meant to be tags. "Do not rewrite an article with categories" is what I say. Use the search button. :) --Cat out 14:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Searching is less efficient, though. Ab e g92contribs 18:05, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What you call is indexing and is a part of "searching". I do not believe having 6-10 lines of categories is any more efficient than searching. I do not believe categories can ever be more efficient than a google search with "site:en.wiki.x.io" --Cat out 09:33, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a good explanation. By the way I do not believe that at present there is work being done to allow category math. Specifically, I wrote a MediaWiki extension that did just that, but Brion said this would cause server load problems. >Radiant< 15:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear

As written, this essay is vague and ambiguous. The title does not make sense to me, and you seem to be implying more than you are stating. Since I don't know what you are trying to say, I don't understand the essay. Perhaps I would with a little more prose. -- Samuel Wantman 20:33, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am merely trying to say that we should avoid redundant categorization. -- Cat ^chi? 23:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then say that. Your example of Albert Einstein has a few things that a person SHOULD be categorized by, such as his Manhattan Project involvement, his pacifism, and his vegetarianism. --Hemlock Martinis 18:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His "vegetarianism" was deleted via a cfd.
His "pacifism" is not worthy of a category. Pacifism is a subjective term. Even if he has declared himself as pacifist his involvement with the "Manhattan Project" is arguably contradictory. -- Cat ^chi? 10:51, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
His involvement with the Manhattan Project is notable and encyclopedic but we do not categorize people based on projects they have been involved with or movies they played in.

-- Cat ^chi? 14:00, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]