Hi, please stop doing a mass-editing such as the mass-categorizing you did today. Next time, discuss similar edits with admins. First, we would like to decide if similar action is needed, second, we have a bot account for mass-editing which doesn't spam Special:Recentchanges.
Stop being a tyrant. If the categories are deemed incorrect, they can always be changed. The majority of them had no category to begin with, as I used reports generated from Specialpages. I would suggest that you try being a little nicer to people you don't know, especially editors who make meaningful contributions. Remember that a wiki is not owned by any one person. If I was making edits with malicious intent, then I could understand a reason for concern.
Remember that a wiki is not owned by any one person.
You're right that no one person owns a wiki - however, admins are generally the ones who have the most experience on that particular wiki, and over here, that experience is what allows us to decide the needs of the community, including (as Spike said) whether a particular action is needed.
We do appreciate your help in cleaning up double redirects, however, one reason we request that you ask before doing mass edits like these is because we do have a bot on our wiki; much of your effort in categorising image categories for instance, could have be saved by posting a request over at Thread:20414. And if, as you say, the categories are incorrect, then not only will you have wasted your own time, but you'll also be spending ours in checking whether anything else was done incorrectly.
NB: Not everything is doable by bot, but many things are.
If I was making edits with malicious intent, then I could understand a reason for concern.
We had a user a while ago who had good intentions in bringing over new templates to our wiki, but good intentions didn't stop the templates from breaking over here because he didn't understand properly how they worked, and because he didn't check with us beforehand. This is different from adding categories obviously, but my point being that yes, intentions are important, but what we are concerned about is whether they may bring along unintended action as well.
Your recent edits were fine, but all that we ask is a little heads up before making a change like this to a good number of our pages.
(Rewording grammatically incorrect sentences in articles? Rewording a paragraph so it makes more sense? Expanding article stubs with relevant information? Be my guest!
Making massive structural changes to an already-lengthy, well-developed page, or adding a particular phrase or category to a good number of our pages? We'd prefer if you checked beforehand.)
So the edits are acceptable. Instead of a "Wow, awesome job on cleaning up all those database errors that no one has gotten around to doing", a decision was made to demand I stop making edits. Makes sense.
I am not a political admin, but I think your edits are not unacceptable. Spike144's complaint, however, is that he would rather that any massive editing proposals be done via request to an admin that is able to run a bot account.
Did Spike144 resolve all of these issues and errors? Did SW8573 resolve all of these issues and errors? Did Qwertyxp2000 the second resolve all of these issues and errors? No, N00bKing dedicated his time to resolve all of these issues and errors. So why am I being accosted for doing nothing wrong? I dealt with arguably the most important issues affecting this wiki, yet 3 different people have engaged me here simply for being a bold editor - a core principle of almost every wiki.
In other words, Special pages are available to everyone, so the fact that I was the one who took care of those reports means that none of you did. If any of you wanted to create a bot to do what I did, all you had to do was reference those reports, but you didn't, so there's no reason to leave a message that amounts to saying "I don't like that you edited so much and I want you to stop". I think we can all agree that Admins should be encouraging, not discouraging, right?
Yes, the issues haven't been dealt with. Yes, they certainly need to be. But no, I certainly wouldn't call them the most important issues on our wiki, mainly because our wiki is relatively small (in my opinion), and because efforts doing mass categorisation could be better spent on expanding our articles and populating them with information so that they are more appealing to the public to read - and that's the primary purpose people visit a wiki, for information that is accurate and easily read.
However, as I've said - your help is most certainly appreciated - but the REASON why we want a heads up before doing similar actions is, as I've said, the potential of having done something incorrectly on a widespread wiki-wide scale. Perhaps your edits were fine this time because you were systematic and checked our policies and the names of similar categories before adding them. Perhaps you didn't. We don't know, because we don't know you. And it's because we don't know you that we can't say "I trust this editor to add the right categories" (for instance). (And as mentioned, in the future, if you wanted to add categories like so, you can ask on the bot request thread to see if it's doable by bot first, but instead allowing you to spend your time on other issues, however pressing.)
I haven't said anything against fixing double redirects, nobody here has said anything against fixing double redirects.
I was strictly talking about the categorizing. I don't think it is either good or bad to categorize uncategorized pages, still we would like to discuss doing mass-edit changes before doing them.
Anyways, try to see things from the other side:
Let's say some stranger comes to Bloodborne Wiki and they start adding some category to 100+ pages simply because they believe it is fine. I guess you have no problem with it as "If the categories are deemed incorrect, they can always be changed." (your words). Still, if you don't like it and tell the person they should stop doing it, they can simply tell you "I would suggest that you try being a little nicer to people you don't know, especially editors who make meaningful contributions" (your words) and "Remember that a wiki is not owned by any one person." (your words).
The reason why every page on a wiki should have a category is to build a database that is complete and accurate. Obviously, a wiki is a database of information. The fundamental building block of the database is the concept of categorization. Uncategorized pages then exist in somewhat of a 'void', because they aren't included on any category page or in the wiki's category tree / categories list.
It's a disservice, to the community, not to categorize pages - it limits access to those pages through direct search and page links (assuming the uncategorized page is even linked).
How effective do you think the homepage would be if the majority of pages had no category? So it's boggling to me when someone says they don't think it is either good or bad to categorize pages.
Categorizing of mainspace pages is definitely helpful in the way: Some page about a track is in "Tracks" category while another page about a track is not in the "Tracks" category, then: Perfect, let's add it! Anyways we aren't discussing this, as you have done no such edit. You said "I fixed 99% of the Uncategorized pages (approx. 30 issues)", but I have really found no single edit like that on the mainspace in your contributions.
We are discussing two different things here: Categorizing of category pages and mass-editing:
About the categorizing of categories: I don't think uncategorized categories are a problem. Still, I'm not either against it, and it is fine to do it when the community decides to do it. In other words, doing a large change in the current system of categories, such as adding all image categories to the image category is something nobody does here on their own, including admins. Whenever anybody, including admins, thinks that such a change should be done, we discuss it first.
About the mass-editing: When we finally decide to do a large change in the category system or any similar action such as doing one simple edit on many pages, we program a bot to do it. Doing it manually is tedious and it spams the Special:RecentChanges page which makes tracking of possible spam and vandalism more difficult.