I am not convinced by the deletion argument (especially the one that said "Too many characters dont have it when they should"). This does not sufficiently justify removing the category. Many categories on this wiki, and even on others, are underpopulated or inconsistently applied. This is primarily just an existing maintenance issue.
Given its a 7K page difference AT LEAST that would be suitable for having it, while it itself is only on 3K pages (significant amount compared to most other populated categories), then i reckon its a strong argument. It just creates inconsistency
There are also several logistical concerns. The "Weapon Users" category exists because not all weapon-specific categories are created or practical to maintain. In many cases, it is unclear whether a specific weapon category is accurate, properly named, or correctly applied, and these would also require ongoing patrols.
Its failed beyond efficient saving if this is what its purpose is though. It literally just says 'Weapon Users' as a super vague term, and theres like 3 other categories that go over weapons. The one that SHOULD be much lower is actually much higher.
Maybe unconventional weapons dont
need to be represented by such a vague category. Any object can technically be used as a 'weapon;, but that doesnt mean we need to make categories for the super unique ones in the first place.
If the "Weapon Users" category were to be removed, we would need to determine the exact weapon type for each affected profile, which introduces further complications. For example, if a character uses a naginata, should they be placed under both "Naginata Users" and the broader "Polearm Users" category, or just one of them? Whatever approach is chosen would need to be applied consistently for it to be more effective than the current practice, which is already a significant task and I believe simply shifts the problem from one maintenance issue to another. If consistency isn't maintained, the usefulness of these categories becomes just as questionable to the one you're trying to fix. This also doesn't account for more unusual or ambiguous weapons that appear in fiction, which would make classification even more complicated.
Thats mainly the fact the wiki allows tons of other vague and samey categories, and doesnt really affect those if we just remove a super significant one (Again, 'Weapon Users' is a much larger and more present category than anything naming specific weapons excluding the obvious sword, guns etc. It shouldnt really be compared to niche ones like Naginata which i didnt even know existed)
I am
NOT suggesting we go over every single unconventional weapon that has 'weapon users' but no specific weapon category and we give it to them. Massive waste of effort if its literally someone using a teapot or something for example. We don't really need to bother to include and replace it if theres genuinely no other specific category.
At best, you can maybe make a 'Unconventional Weapon Users' but it really isnt necessary. I don't think theres any need to appease it, just delete the category that has failed in what its meant to do, sets a vague precedent, and is overall just trimming fat as a QoL.
If you think users are already forgetful or unaware enough to not apply even a simple category like Weapon Users, there is even less assurance that they would consistently remember and correctly apply more specific weapon categories. Not to mention the ongoing maintenance required to keep them consistent as a replacement for said category.
I'm not expecting that or think thats necessary. Just deleting it and moving on with what we've got should be fine. It's not going to matter significantly if a character is missing a category to represent their weapon (Chances are if they're using something mundane, then its a Tier 10-9 profile which dont usually need all that)
Theres always bound to be missing categories that would fit on pages, but we can only hope someone notices and points them out, no point settingn unrealistic expectations.
On the other hand, for characters who simply use a weapon but are not particularly masters for it, the "Weapon Users" category serves as a practical fallback.
It isn't used this way however. Anything can qualify as a 'weapon' (heck even bare fists or bodily weaponry), it is just too vague a term imo and the fact people dont use the category enough is proof it evades the mind compared to 'Weapon Masters'
Not necessarily fully against this, but I am not convinced. Sure, you can introduce more specific weapon categories, but I am unsure with removing the category so that it can be replaced by more specific weapon categories. I think it has a practical use for wiki organization.
It would ideally be practical as maybe a sub-category thats not on any pages, but instead on the category pages (but you've already got Characters by Weapon)
But it isnt. Its failed by 1000s of page margins. Its not efficient trying to fix it to what we're ideally trying to think it can be as opposed to just getting rid of it and removing redundancy from the wiki. If the weapon is too niche for a category, and doesnt fit any of the hundreds or so we already have then it really isnt that big of an issue. If anything, search for profiles with similar weapons to maybe make the justification
Is there an established total number of pages needed to justify a category creation?
