Category talk:Glossary

From Fanlore
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Abbreviations?

Question regarding abbreviations of glossary terms - should the page name be the abbreviation, or the full term, with the abbreviation being a redirect? E.g. the page LBD - should it be moved to Little Black Dress, and LBD made into a redirect? I think it makes more sense for it to be written out, both because there might be more than one term with the same acronym, and also because then an acronym link could mouseover with the full reading (e.g. mousing over LBD brings up the acronym's meaning for quick reference.)--Xparrot 15:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Subcategories

I'd like to see more types of subcategories, although I'm not sure how many or what to call them. Some ideas:

All of the labels are "top of my head" and none of them look right to me. --Elf (talk) 20:59, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm all for further developing the categorization system to make it easier to find articles. That said, I don't see an issue with cross-categorization. I think it would be helpful to have Category:Glossary as a kind of junk drawer containing all glossary articles, and also to create narrower sub-categories for finding more specific terminology.
Some ideas spinning off your suggestions:
  • "Fan People" -> We have Category:Fans, so, hypothetically, we could just build more sub-categories off that existing framework. We could have Category:Shippers for different types of shippers. And we could have something like Category:Fan Types, Category:Fan Factions, or Category:Fan Identities for the different fan self-identifications like "Trekkie" and "Fannibal."
  • "Fic Types" -> The closest category on Wikipedia is Category:Narrative forms, so I propose we just use that term for stuff like oneshot, drabble, etc. "Fic forms" is too ambiguous and could encompass genres and tropes (e.g. darkfic). We have Category:Fanfiction and Category:Tropes & Genres, so I'd suggest building off those. Some degree of cross-categorization is inevitable.
  • "Fic Tropes" -> Category:Tropes & Genres is already functioning as this category. Again, some degree of cross-categorization is inevitable. Like, a oneshot could be considered both a trope/genre and a narrative form, so having it categorized as both makes sense.
  • "Fannish activities" -> We have Category:Fan Activities. We could just add more sub-categories to it as needed.
  • "Internal Fandom Terminology" -> This process has already started (we have Category:Harry Potter Glossary‎, and a few others). So we could just add more categories for more fandoms, and put them in a container category like Category:Terminology by Fandom.
Night Rain (talk) 04:27, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
I agree that Category:Glossary should be left as an overarching category, and there is nothing wrong with an article having more than one category on, especially if the term could be both a glossary term and a trope/genre for example. I also agree with the fact that a lot of the discussed sub-categories already exist on Fanlore, it is best to check if one of these categories would fit best before creating more. However, I'm sure that there might be some need for sub-categorization. My only complaint is to make sure there is enough articles for a sub-categorization to be necessary, I think on the category help page it mentions that you shouldn't create a sub-category unless there are already at least 10-15 potential articles for the category. I think this should be kept in mind, because I have occasionally come across categories that are rather scant -- Kingstoken (talk) 10:45, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Categories don't take up any space. They are an inconspicuous link at the bottom of an article. They're there if someone wants to have a look around, but otherwise they don't create clutter or confusion. There isn't a strong argument for requiring a minimum number of articles before a sub-category can be created. Categories can be grown into. I mean, Category:Blake's 7 Tropes & Genres is a bit sparse at the moment, but people familiar with the history of Blake's 7 fandom are welcome to add more articles to it (and hopefully will!). Having narrower sub-categories makes it easier for readers to find what they're looking for than having everything rolling around in one big "junk drawer" category. The idea that I'd have to create 10-15 articles on ships in a fandom before creating a category to contain them all is frankly a bit odd. Some fandoms don't even have that many ships.
This really isn't an issue on wikis with more developed categorization systems than Fanlore. Have a look at Category:Olympic competitors on Wikipedia and you'll see that many countries only have 1-3 articles in them for many sports. There's one article in "Category:Olympic archers of Uganda" because that's how many archers from Uganda have competed in the Olympics to date.
Think of a wiki's categorization system like the database of a library. The more detailed and accurate it is, the easier it is to find what you're looking for. Night Rain (talk) 12:25, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
I get your point, I don't know if I agree, but I get it. However, it does not change the fact that those are the guidelines on Help:Fandom Categories, if you would like to argue that the guidelines should be changed you can do so on that talk page -- Kingstoken (talk) 13:49, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
I am going to be perfectly blunt: that written by someone unfamiliar with how wiki categories are supposed to work. It is an arbitrary imposition that does absolutely nothing except hobble our ability to create a functional and organized categorization system. It can be safely ignored as it seemingly has been for the past decade. Night Rain (talk) 15:21, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Night Rain. I appreciate that you feel strongly about the way that wiki categories are supposed to work, but every wiki is different, and Fanlore has its own approach to categorisation as outlined on our Help pages. We're not Wikipedia and so we don't follow the exact same practices that Wikipedia does, so saying that something is done on Wikipedia doesn't automatically mean it applies to Fanlore. While we're not going to penalise people for creating categories that have a small number of pages because it's a guideline, not a policy, we do prefer that categories have a reasonable number of pages (or potential pages - they don't all have to be added or created immediately) before they're created. This isn't designed to prevent people from helpfully navigating Fanlore, but it is designed to make sure that we have a need for the categories that get created.
Please be mindful of the differences between wikis when you participate in discussions about Fanlore, and try not to automatically assume we are irrational for doing things a certain way. I would also appreciate it if you could try to keep a polite and respectful tone when discussing these issues. We try to ensure that Fanlore is a friendly and welcoming space, and we welcome everyone's opinions, but it's helpful if you can assume good faith from both your fellow editors and those who run Fanlore and create its guidelines.
enchantedsleeper (talk) 20:31, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
If you want to make Fanlore a "friendly and welcoming space" then you might wish to have a word with Kingstoken about their persistently snide and condescending tone. This is not the first time I have had to deal with it. Night Rain (talk) 23:06, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Standard page title for fandom glossary list pages?

X Fandom Glossary is becoming a popular type of page, but I'm seeing some variations and wanted to know if they should all be in the form X Fandom Glossary or something else. I found these patterns so far:

--aethel (talk) 20:33, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://fanlore.org/w/index.php?title=Category_talk:Glossary&oldid=2494544"