[WikiEN-l] User categories and the fear of becoming a social network

[Ned Scott]

The last time I tried to get some additional comments on a user  
category there was little to no response, so I thought some of you on  
the mailing list might be able to bring some additional views on this.

I noticed a user pointing to [[Wikipedia:User categories for  
discussion/Archive/October 2007#Wikipedians by mental and  
physiological condition and subcats]] the other day, and I was a bit  
surprised to see all of those categories did get deleted. I personally  
know of a few times such categories were used to help out with article  
collaboration, and even once during a debate about the handicapped  
sign being used in templates. In the past I've recommended to people  
that they were a good way to contact someone who wouldn't be bothered  
by someone asking questions related to their condition. It's been my  
assumption that when a user put themselves in such a category (or uses  
the associated userbox) they were basically listing themselves as a  
resource, as if to say "I have this condition, and I am inviting any  
editor that is interested to ask me about it, or ask me about what  
resources I know of that might help said articles". A lot of  
Wikipedians have conditions, but don't have an active interest in  
working on the related articles, but are still willing to help when  
asked.

It also reminds me of something [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and  
manga]] has done, where it has made a magazine and book listing where  
users can list what books and magazines they have. So when someone  
knows that an anime was talked about in a book, they can find who owns  
the book and ask them for help, or how to cite the information.

While I agree with a great many of these deletion discussions, I think  
people are not being reasonable in how things can and have been used,  
or are not considering some of the points I've brought up.

I'm also confused as to why people seem to think that [[WP:MYSPACE]]  
applies to anything that they don't see as helping Wikipedia.  
Certainly, useless categories should be deleted, but being useless  
does not mean something is being (or is even practical to be) used for  
social networking. It also seems to set people off, in that since they  
are assuming these categories are being used for social networking,  
reasonable arguments that demonstrate wiki-related use will not be  
given proper consideration.

Like I said, a lot of these deletions are dead on, but we're also  
losing a lot of categories that were realistically usable. Should some  
be taken to DRV? Should a kind of "rationale" page be created to help  
avoid confusion? Are any of these categories realistically being used  
for social networking, or are we overreacting? Are babies in lurking  
in the bath water? Is it bath water in the first place? Green or  
yellow? Up or down? Paper or plastic?

-- Ned Scott