Thread:The S/@comment-995426-20150930093401/@comment-995426-20151006190332

Thank you for your responses.

And yes, I tend to use "ninja" as a plural myself. However, I realize that I'm in a minority. Shortly after I moved all the articles back to Category:Ninja, there was another unrelated editor adding Category:Ninjas to articles. It's undeniable that "ninjas" is overwhelmingly the more common English plural than "ninja", especially among viewers of the 2012 TV series, and especially since "ninja" became humorously fashioned as an in-show stand-in for a certain other N-word for in-groups with N-word privileges. (Trigger has noticed and acknowledged this too, but considers that underlying reference too mature to mention in non-mature article trivia.) I figured that, by renaming Ninja to the more common plural Ninjas, it would confuse less people whose primarily language is English. People are taught the plural of "sheep" is "sheep", and the plural of "deer" is "deer", but they are not necessarily taught that plural of "ninja" is "ninja"&mdash;it's an exotic, mostly foreign plural. That's all I was considering. I didn't know the issue had come up before, or I would have sought consensus in advance.

As for categories, I'm familiar with the considerations of unnecessary categories. But my rule of thumb is, if a category has two or more entries (even if they're all just different versions of Bebop or something), it is categorizable. There's also the question of how relevant a category is. "Characters who wear plaid" is decidedly irrelevant. But "Mammals" does have relevance. Of course, the dividing line of relevance vs. irrelevance can be a fine one. For instance, 2012 Irma mentioned obliquely how humans and rats are kinda closely related (in reference to ), but if she hadn't said that, most viewers might have never known it, so Category:Supraprimates may not be relevant enough to justify a category. So yeah, I have lots of experience with category maintenance. :)

But I do strongly suggest that categories should not be too cluttered or unwieldy. If an article can be delegated (and even cross-referenced) to relevant subcategories, it probably should be. Category:Images is a huge category whose massiveness makes it virtually useless for browsing. Category:Non-Humans is necessarily a category of exclusion rather than inclusion, and it makes more sense just to put entries in their species categories. Category:Mammals doesn't need to directly contain every article already placed in its subcategories. I believe categories should contain two things&mdash;subcategories for more specific topics, and only direct article listings if they can't go in any of the relevant subcategories. So Cerebus as an aardvark can go directly in Mammals, because there really aren't other insectivore characters in TMNT. I already purged Category:Foot Ninja, because the vast majority of Foot are Ninja, and it makes more sense to cross-categorize them in Category:Foot Clan and Category:Ninja at the same time.

Anyway, I appreciate your real world complications (and health issues), and how you can't always be available here. I don't want to step on your toes or anything. And considering I've mainly been active since December 2013, I don't really know how much more active this wiki has been before that, but yeah, I can see how there are currently just a handful of regular active users. I figure the competition for achievements isn't too stiff when I'm already ranked #4 in most achievements on the wiki. That said, even if the wiki became more active, I don't think I'd want to be an administrator. I like editing wikis and improving them and reaching consensus, but I hate running wikis, because that adds an extra layer of responsibility I never bargained for. I'm more of a manic librarian than a reliable bureaucrat.