Blog talk:Adnoam/Restructuring Qualities and their categories/@comment-26115937-20180314194449/@comment-25219384-20180314201418

1. First, I'm not sure if this can/should be automated. I still need to learn how to go about his (starting the link you've recently provided), but much of this will likely require human supervision. As you noted, sometimes it will make sense to keep some info in the category page.
2. The Gain/Loss/Sources categories are a different issue that I didn't plan to touch with this particular proposal, but you're right that it's similar. I'm not sure we need/should create them in all cases. If we do, though, it shouldn't be difficult (I guess) to have a bot scan all pages with the Quality template, and create Gain/Loss/Sources categories if they don't exist yet. At a minimum, if the usage of the {{Quality}} template indicates the these should be presented, then it will show a red-link which would help create them manually whenever encountered.
3. I think the original idea behind not categorizing thing under "Locked with" was that it usually means that the specific storylet/action does *not* require the quality so shouldn't categorize under it. There are exceptions, of course.
4. One other thing I though of after my post: I should probably create a {{Quality uses}} template for the category pages, instead of manually adding them all to Category:Quality Usages. A combination of {{Item Uses}} and {{Item Sources}}, which will also help with consistency.
5. For now, I'm fine with both Qualities and Items being categories under Category:Content. DO you have a better hierarchy in mind? Also, as long as the entire wiki structure differentiates between items and qualities, it would be weird to categorize certain items under Social Qualities. I'm personally fine with this distinction.