User blog comment:Wildoneshelper/My reasons to put "artillery", "cavalry" categories into units riding elephants/@comment-127769-20140206162422/@comment-3225604-20140207174746

And by the way, what makes you think that this wiki is overcategorized? Overcategorization should only apply to articles which have too many irrelevant, subjective, precise and general categories. Redundancy should not be the thing you should consider, unless there are a lot of cluttering categories. Well if you insist that categorizing "infantry", "cavalry" or "artillery" is redundant, then it is just the same as emptying the whole category. Every infantry can be categorized into smaller categories, and when we follow your method, the whole "infantry", "cavalry" and "artillery" will be emptied.

I worked in many different wikis, and I never receive complaints from overcategorization even the wiki has more than 10 categories in one page. Therefore, it is GIBBERISH and NONSENSE to say adding these three categories cause overcategorization. I would say it is wrong! I just can't believe why you just can't accept that multipliers don't make good categories. They are the official names from the game, and by using real definition, the wiki is not really depicting about a game! And the biggest problem with using real definition is that when people check the multipliers, the so-called "infantry" resists from the multiplied attack from the other players. However, it receives the same multiplier damage of "artillery" from other units with that multiplier.

And do you know how painful it is to get all the units from the big categories? I mean it would have been a lot easier including the big three categories.

And you are just repeating that multipliers are only properties and do not describe well the article. If it were to be like that, why Age of Empires 3 has to do such categorization? I don't see a concrete evidence to this. It is nonsense!

Lastly, I don't know why you have to insist on being so concise on categorization. According to Wikia, "a category is a group of pages with a similar theme". According to what Wikipedia says considerations 1, when Gunpowder Infantry is a subcategory of Infantry, although Skirmisher is a kind of Gunpowder Infantry, Wikipedia considered Skirmisher not an infantry already. In this case, some people may think of that and get mystified. "Infantry", "cavalry" and "artillery" are not general category, while I can accept "unit" as a general category, which can be omitted or act as the root of all units in this game. The big three categories are vital to distinguish every unit, so no matter what, my advice is to make it to all pages. These three categories each don't account more than 100 articles, while I see some Wikipedia categories account for more than 500 articles. The purpose of setting up categories is to "aid the reader in finding material which may be of interest, or relevant to a particular topic", so definitely we should not argue about being seriously strict in categorization. If I were a founder of a wiki, I would actually allow quite a number of categories in a page.

My conclusion is, stop being too strict on categorization, and I would recommend you to read further in an article about overcategorization in Wikipedia. What it really means by overcategorization doesn't mean in what you think.