Thread:Adnoam/@comment-26115937-20180812141308

(Replying to Thread:57181, just to keep it clear for future reference)

Yes, I do think it makes sense. In fact we did discuss that originally back at the dawn of the overhaul :) And yes, I do think we shouldn't have it as a default for most qualities. Regarding, "automating" it by means of PAGESINCAT, is there a reason we didn't do something similar for the Gains/Losses categories (which we currently toggle manually)?

There is an overarching structural point here. Category:QualityName serves a dual purpose in some sense. Its predominant use is as if it were Category:QualityName Uses and that's how it's linked on the Quality page. But it also keep track of related sub-categories like Loss and Gain subcategories. Notice, for example, how effectively Connected Gain appears *twice* on the Quality page - once as a result of the template (the "Actions that raise this quality" but) and once as a subcategory in the expandable use.

So in a way Category: QualityName Challenge is already accessible from the quality page but it's not super intuitive.

Might it also be an opportunity to consider whether we should have a more explicitly named Category: QualityName Uses (which would contain all the individual pages currently categorised under Category: QualityName)? And the Category: QualityName would then simply contain the subcategories for Gains, Losses, Sources, Challenges (and potentially, down the road, being used to set the value of rewards for variable results).

I *think* we would only need to change category names in the templates (Unlock, Quality, Quality uses) I don't think these categories are ever manually assigned? 