I would like to clarify/see clarified Category:Beasts vs Category:Animals. Currently: Any animal is a beast (and a vermin! I wouldn't call Elekks vermin...) Many Animal subcats are also Beast subcats.
For me: (1) Beasts represents anything that appears in World of Warcraft (MMO) under the beast mob type. Animals, on the other hand, would be restricted to 'critter' variety mobs. (Among other things, tab targeting does not consider them.)
Does this follow your expectations as well?
An alternate description could be: (2) anything that is a real-world animal, not a fantastic creation.
In answering that, consider a few categories:
- Boars - are there any non-beast boars? They WERE in both beasts and animals. Following "avoid redundant heirarchy", I removed them from 'beasts'. Under (1) I should have removed them from animals instead.
- Beetles - again under both categories currently. Under both (1) and (2) they would be classed animals and not (specifically) beasts.
- Elekks - under (2), they would be beasts. They are also mounts, which confuses the issue.
Anyone care to weigh in, or should I just Be Bold and start tossing? --Eirik Ratcatcher (talk) 19:32, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- /shrug, its a term used in the Monster Guide in which it specifically states most often beasts... Seems like its backwards... the beasts category should be in the animal category not the other way around. That way any marked with Beasts will be in the Animal cat.
(Sssss/Slithered) 20:44, November 5, 2009 (UTC)
- I basically agree with Coobra. Which is to say definition-set (1), except that all beasts are also included as animals (by inheritance). I'd leave mounts as a separate category hierarchy (some are beasts, some are just animals, some are mechanical). But I'm not sure how to then categorize the species categories (Boars, etc.). If Boars belongs under Beasts, and then we find one non-Beast boar, then Boars has to move to Animals. Maybe they (the species categories) should all just go under Animals, with specific instances under Beasts also if necessary? Or we have more categories like Boar Beasts? Ugh. -- Harveydrone 19:15, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- I believe the categories should reflect the mass population of the group. Since maybe 90% or more Boars (as an example) are Beasts, with few being Critters or Undead, that their main category should be under Beasts. As the cat system is right now, all Animals are Beasts and Vermin. So technically Boars are in the Animal category already.
(Sssss/Slithered) 19:25, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
- I believe the categories should reflect the mass population of the group. Since maybe 90% or more Boars (as an example) are Beasts, with few being Critters or Undead, that their main category should be under Beasts. As the cat system is right now, all Animals are Beasts and Vermin. So technically Boars are in the Animal category already.