Forum:Categories dealing with species and individuals of a species
If this thread's title doesn't specify it's spoilery, don't bring any up.
For a long while, categories having to do with individual members of species have had inconsistent nomenclature, as illustrated by these two cases:
- Sometimes, the plural form of the species name was used, as was the case with category:humans.
- Most of the time, though, the nomenclature has been "Individual <plural form of the species name>", as in category:individual Daleks.
To achieve consistency, the bot is now making all "individual of species" categories match case #2.
This means that the simple, plural form of the species name is the parent category of all things having to do with that race. It therefore won't have too many pages organised underneath it, but will instead be a parent category that mainly houses other categories.
Meanwhile, categories with the form of "Individual of x species" will organise pages of individual representative of that species. Again, most species categories already follow this rule. But the one category that didn't prior to today was the biggest individual category of them all: category:humans.
From today, category:humans is a parent category only. Individual humans are now in category:individual humans.
[Of course, it should be pointed out that category:individual humans is sort of a "category of last resort" anyway. Putting a character into that category means that there's no better category for them. In general, you should try as hard as possible not to use that category. But there are some cases where we don't know enough about minor characters to put them any place else.]
The following category tree demonstrates the standard organisation for a species category:
The key thing to note here is that, following the rules laid out above, category:Individual Sontarans is a sub-category of category:Sontarans.
