User:DePiep/classification rules (YBG)

Criteria for categorization (the so-called "YBG rules")
 These criteria were originally summarized as a part of the long discussion about categorizing nonmetals, but I believe they are just as easily applied to any categorization effort. I first added these three points in April 2013 in a discussion later archived here:
 * 1. Clear. The criterion for division should be easily explained
 * 2. Unambiguous. It should be (relatively) obvious which category each element fits into
 * 3. Meaningful. The categories should have significance more than just dividing for the sake of dividing.
 * There should be enough within-group similarity and enough between-group dissimilarity so that each group could be the subject of a separate encyclopedia article

In November 2013, User:Sandbh (in a discussion archived here) named these the 'YBG rules', but I think they were really just summarizing the thoughts of others. Other criteria mentioned in that discussion, not previously summarized, include these:
 * 4. Referenced. Categories and their names are supported by reliable sources
 * 5. Specific. Catch-all, none-of-the-above terms like 'Other X' are avoided (unless properties are not sufficiently known)
 * 6. Unique. The categories are mutually exclusive (a bit stronger than Unambiguous)
 * 7. Complete. The categories are jointly exhaustive (a bit stronger than Specific)’

I am writing this here to have it for reference and perhaps application in other areas. User:YBG ( 07:47, 6 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Added links to original edits. User:YBG 07:23, 22 August 2016 (UTC)