Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mesoamerica/Categories

General principles

1. It should be possible to navigate to every Mesoamerica-related article (at all levels of detail) via a 'Category Tree' which starts from the 'root' category, Category:Mesoamerica.
2. By corollary, every Mesoamerica-related article should be assigned to one or more Mesoamerica-related categories or subcategories.
3. Both Mesoamerica-related articles and categories may also be assigned (or parented) to other non-Mesoamerica categories as well, where appropriate.
4. In general, Mesoamerica-related category names should be guided by the WP:NCCAT conventions, with any exceptions to be noted at WP:MESO guidelines. If any substantial deviation from existing naming conventions is required, it should be proposed at WP:NCCAT talk.
5. The category pages themselves should adequately describe the intended scope and content for that category.
6. Articles should be assigned to the most specific category/categories available, and not in 'parent' categories which wholly contain a viable more-specific category. Exceptions to this may be considered and dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
7. As with articles, sub-categories should be parented by one or more Mesoamerica categories. Most usually the parent cats will be at a higher level, but they can also be cross-linked to categories at the same or even 'lower' levels of a different branch (when seen from the overall Mesoamerica cat)- as long as there is no "circular" referencing.
8. Higher-level categories and sub-categories are proposed to be aligned with the thematic/topical divisions noted at the Project scope subpage.
9. Each category or sub-category will likely have or require a main article on that particular topic. Such main articles should be alphasorted to the top of the category.
10. Many categories or sub-categories could also have at least one List-type article particular to its scope and contents. Lists have an advantage of being able to present additional information, and can also contain 'placeholder' links for missing or to-be-created articles.
11. This proposed category scheme identifies two types of hierarchy:
    1. one based on Mesoamerica by <topic>,
    2. one based on <entity> by <topic>, where <entity> would be one of a specific:
       1. civilization/culture of Mesoamerica (eg Maya, Olmec, Totonac)
       2. sub-region of Mesoamerica (eg Chiapas highlands, Maya lowlands)
       3. site/locality of Mesoamerica (eg Tikal, Tenochtitlan)
       • That is to say, these specific entities are likely to need their own category hierarchies, which will connect into the Mesoamerica by <topic> hierarchy, and mirror (where reasonable) the topical divisions and subdivisions of the overall Mesoamerican category scheme. example: part of the Mesoamerica by <topic> category hierarchy might be Mesoamerica-->Mesoamerican mythology-->Mesoamerican deities. Similarly, part of the category hierarchy for Maya-related articles would be Maya civilization-->Maya mythology-->Maya deities. Each Maya subcategory would have the corresponding Mesoamerica <topic> category as a parent as well.
12. Head categories for entities should be named as per their main article, unless there is an ambiguity or clash. examples: Aztec-->Category:Aztec, Maya civilization-->Category:Maya civilization.
13. In general, <entity> categories and sub-categories can be progressively created and defined as the number of member articles increases- there may be no need to create [[:Category:<entity>]] when the main article [[<entity>]] is the only potential member. In such cases the <entity> article can be left in the appropriate Mesoamerica by <topic> category until there is a need for a category system of its own.
14. Once implemented, there will be an ongoing need to further refine and expand this category scheme. Such expansions should ideally follow these principles.
15. An outline of this category hierarchy scheme is as follows:

Level	Type	Notes
level 0	<entity> - Mesoamerica	Root category
level 1	Mesoamerica by <topic>	where <topic> accords with Scope division, eg Geography of Mesoamerica, History of Mesoamerica, etc.
level 2	Mesoamerica by <subtopic>	further subdivisions of highlevel <topic>s, where needed
	<entity> - Mesoamerican culture	head categories per culture/civilization (eg Maya civilization, Aztec); parent to Mesoamerican cultures & History of Mesoamerica
	<entity> - Mesoamerican region	head categories per region or subregion (eg Chiapas, Gulf Coast); parent to Geography of Mesoamerica
level 3	Mesoamerica by sub-<subtopic>	further refinement and specification of Mesoamerican subtopics
	Mesoamerican culture by <topic>	topical subcats per culture, eg Aztec mythology, Totonac sites
	Mesoamerican region by <topic>	topical subcats per region, eg Archaeology of Central Mexico
level 4	<entity> - Mesoamerican site/location	head categories for sites/localities (eg Palenque, Tenochtitlan), parented by appropriate Mesoamerica, culture and region topical/subtopical cats (mostly levels 3&4)
	Mesoamerican culture by <subtopic>	further refinement of topics per culture
	Mesoamerican region by <subtopic>	further refinement of topics per region
level n	further hierarchy subdivsions as may be required

Specific conventions

To be noted here, any specific naming or other conventions which may apply to the categorisation of Mesoamerica-related articles.

1. Pre-Columbian: in most instances, it should not be necessary to qualify a Mesoamerican category name with the term pre-Columbian, since this is mostly implied by "Mesoamerica" (or "Olmec", "Mixtec", "Maya" etc) in any case.

General discussion

More categories?

I think we could use some additional categories, as we have some article subjects that are either not in Mesoamerican categories or are in some where they fit rather awkwardly.

First, perhaps categories related to modern traditions, culture, and of Mesoamerican peoples. For example Maximón is in the "Maya mythology and religion" with some articles about strictly pre-Columbian subjects. "Caste War of Yucatán" is in the "Maya peoples" category, which seems an awkward fit.

Second, what do people think about categorizing modern works related to Mesoamerica? I suspect we should do something with Chac: Dios de la lluvia and Apocalypto. -- Infrogmation 18:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Aztec

Can I get a clarification on what we're using "Aztec" to mean for categorization purposes? I assume it's "Nahua" or "Central Mexican", rather than specifically Aztec. --Ptcamn 10:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, "Aztec" tends to get used in its broadest possible sense for categorisation purposes, and takes in other Nahua groups of the central mexican region (though I don't think it'd be used for non-Nahuatl speaking groups in cent. mex. This is in the absence of a more refined system (and also in the absence of many articles on "non-Aztec" topics). It's not an optimal arrangement by any means- we never did quite work out guidelines in distinguishing between definitions of Aztec, Mexica, central Mexican, &c. Something we should probably do at some point.

If you have any suggestions for improvement, would be very glad to hear them.--cjllw ʘ TALK 13:50, 12 May 2007 (UTC)