Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/SOC Occupation categories

The following discussion comes from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion, where it is currently listed as unresolved. It may be reviewed again in the future in the light of evolving standards and guidelines for categorization. 21:47, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

SOC Occupation categories

Has been divided in more sensible Category:Science occupations and Category:Social science occupations. - SimonP 03:18, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

As there is no reason to cram four different things into one non-intutive category it has been replaced with Category:Sports occupations. Category:Entertainment occupations. Category:Media occupations, and Category:Arts occupations. - SimonP 03:05, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

• Keep - This was already discussed here on CFD (Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/unresolved#Category:Occupations and all its subcategories) and the majority at the time prefer a "pre-packaged" system of top-level Occupation categories. The "new ones" Simon created can be housed with no conflict under that system, using only slightly different names. More discussion is being held at Category talk:Occupations. -- Netoholic @ 03:39, 2004 Sep 21 (UTC)
  • Comment, I am combining these related items. I'd also like to point out that User:SimonP has gone ahead and jumbled the entire Category:Occupations tree - before allowing sufficient consensus to be reached. Only two people disagreed with the SOC system (now at Category:SOC occupations, thanks to Simon). I feel the formal SOC system, with its built-in occupation->category look-up, is a far better candidate to occupy the root "Occupations" category - and it's an excellent fit for WP. -- Netoholic @ 22:25, 2004 Sep 21 (UTC)
  • I wouldn't say that Category:Occupations is "jumbled"—there are only 36 subcategories of it, and it's much easier to find everything by not having arbitrary conglomerate subcategories. BTW, consensus on this page means that a category is deleted or not deleted—if it is not deleted, that doesn't mean that its contents are forever locked in. SimonP was bold and fixed the system. Kudos. Postdlf 20:33, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. This is an arbitrary grouping of categories, whether or not it's an arbitrary grouping that the U.S. government happens to use. It's much more helpful to see the variety of subcategories all at once under Category:Occupations than it is to submerge and obscure them under these undigested lumps. Postdlf 06:30, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Don't see the harm. Keep. anthony (see warning) 13:01, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• I do see the harm, delete. Arbitrary groupings serve no real purpose. Gentgeen 04:09, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Arbitrary grouping. Andris 07:26, Sep 23, 2004 (UTC)

Comments

There are 23 categories defined as part of the SOC groupings (Category:SOC occupations). To arbitrarily pick two to delete makes the whole categorization scheme break. The SOC categories (all 23) were already posted on CFD and survived. -- Netoholic @ 19:17, 2004 Sep 26 (UTC)

And now someone has wisely bypassed them with better categories—surviving CFD in no way prevents that. Postdlf 22:12, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)