Category talk:Orders of chivalry

Two almost overlapping categories?
Is it really motivated to have two separate categories Category:Orders of knighthood and Category:Chivalric orders (with just one corresponding article, though; Chivalric order)? Chicbyaccident (talk) 17:59, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Would it be motivated to split the contents of Order of knighthood into Dynastic order of knighthood and Chivalric order respectively (the latter the broader definition, including also military orders), while some minor contents could perhaps also be more suitable in the even more parent definition Order (honour) and even State decoration?
 * Thus, to conclude: Order (honour) > Chivalric order > 1) Military order > 2a) Dynastic order of knighthood, 2b) State decoration (including orders, something that would perhaps impose a change on the article name)? Would that make sense? Perhaps also Order of merit could be split as a different article from Order (honour), reliefing its mixture a bit, while more specifically renaming the article with its current contents (2015), instead filling that article name with more generic content? Chicbyaccident (talk) 22:52, 23 December 2015 (UTC)