User talk:Ma'amiyn

Manual of Style
I noticed on your page you posted a link to the Manual of Style for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Please be aware that Wikipedia has the community created Manual of Style that can be found at WP:LDSMOS. It does not always follow the Church's Manual of Style, generally following the lead of respected news outlets. There is always debate on how to change it that you can read and participate in on the talk page. Epachamo (talk) 21:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Why?
You have added Category:American Latter Day Saints to dozens of categories that were already categorized in Category:American general authorities (LDS Church) and/or Category:American leaders of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and/or a by-U.S. state Latter Day Saint category, like Category:Latter Day Saints from Utah. Why? Why do we need such redundancy? Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:21, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Why did I spend two days adding “American Latter Day Saints,” “British Latter Day Saints,” “Canadian Latter Day Saints,” “English Latter Day Saints,” “Scottish Latter Day Saints,” etc., and alphabetize the hodgepodge list of categories at the bottom of each page when I could have been enjoying the Lower Mainland’s rare sunny weather? The reason is linked to the very purpose of Categories. They form lists of pages relevant to the titles of those categories. It matters little whether there is any overlap since each category is unique in some way. It’s not as if I had added “American Latter Day Saints,” “U.S. Latter Day Saints,” “Latter Day Saints in the U.S.,” “American Mormons,” etc., which conversely could be regarded as redundant. When someone wants to find all Canadian Latter-day Saints, he or she doesn’t want to find that Hugh B. Brown and N. Eldon Tanner have been eliminated just because they’re already listed under “Canadian general authorities (LDS Church),” especially when a nonmember user who has clicked on “Canadian Latter Day Saints” probably has never even heard of the term “general authority.” We need MORE categories, not fewer. Categories are not created for users who have already read the pages and thus are already aware of the categories under which the person may be classified. They are available for users to find similar pages according to very specific criteria after they’ve read the page, and even more for users who have arrived directly at the Category in accordance with his or her search criteria specifically to find a single list of relevant pages. As a fellow Canadian, I hope you can appreciate the need to include both “British” and “English”/“Scottish”/“Welsh” as separate categories of Saints, which would both need to be attached to the page of one historical figure, and then if the person emigrated, settling first in Pre-Confederation Canada before moving on to the U.S., to also list the same historical figure further among “Canadian” and “American” Saints—categorizing him or her under as many as four nationalities of Saints. This is not redundancy; it’s specificity. Ma&#39;amiyn (talk) 04:49, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

Good Ol’factory Answer: Quite simply because someone clicking on the category to find the list of American Latter-day Saints wants to find that specific list rather than having to click on multiple separate lists that may not even come to mind for any user. The categories are not for the benefit of someone who has already read the page on which it appears at the bottom. The categories are available for people to click on category pages and find a list of relevant pages linked to that categorization. If someone not a member of the Church wants to find some famous “Mormons” such as Mitt Romney or Orson Scott Card, they’re extremely unlikely to think of making a separate additional search for leaders of the Church. Redundancy is irrelevant when one is looking at a category list of pages. The user will see only that list and have no idea of whether the same page happens to be listed in other categories as well. By your logic, Mitt Romney would appear only under American Latter Day Saint Politicians, and Orson Scott Card would appear only under American Latter Day Saint writers, but you’d leave them off American Latter Day Saints just because there is some overlap. I fail to see how that would benefit any user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3D08:5180:AD00:71A4:3B09:50D0:A65B (talk) 03:35, 24 May 2021 (UTC)


 * You're essentially arguing that the categories are non-diffusing, but I'm not sure that's the case. To cite the example there, we don't put every album in, except as subcategories. I don't think it's terribly helpful to have as a non-diffusing category, since there are hundreds of articles. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:14, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It may. Not be helpful to you, but it would certainly be helpful to many others. I’d like to have the category available for myself, and I’m sure others would appreciate it as well. This is not equivalent to listing all albums as albums, but I could see the merit in that as well. A closer equivalent would be to list all religious believers on one page, and this is far from something that general. Ma&#39;amiyn (talk) 04:20, 26 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Why stop at by-nationality categories though? Why not place every Latter Day Saint directly in ? Where do you draw the line? Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:59, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not stopping at any point, nor am I drawing the line anywhere. Sure, I can create a Latter Day Saints category, which could be useful as well, but that would be an afterthought. As I've stated already, the more the categories, the better. They're all useful to people who are seeking content for such categories. Nothing about it should offend you. Maybe you want to go through the content of each page and delete anything that is not of particular interest to you as well. Ma&#39;amiyn (talk) 05:13, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think your approach is out of line with general practice regarding categories. "The more the categories, the better" is a blanket statement that is obviously not generally applicable. And please do not place all articles about Latter Day Saints directly in . That would go well beyond accepted practice. I'm not offended by anything, I'm just curious about your rationale, since your practice is outside the norm. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:00, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

IP Address Inaccurately Identified as a Web Host
Ma&#39;amiyn (talk) 00:15, 13 August 2023 (UTC)