Category talk:Humans of unknown or variable occupation

Prop delete
I've added a tag to this category because I don't feel it is necessary.

We have Category:Humans with unknown names and Category:Humans from unknown eras to take care of categorizing any human. This is all that is necessary to make sure every human is categorized. Not everyone even has a job/occupation, especially in the far future of the DWU.

Keeping this category could lead to other unnecessary categories like "humans with unknown parents".

I just don't think it's a good idea to have too many categories where we use the word "unknown". Shambala108 ☎  21:48, June 5, 2016 (UTC)


 * I've created this category after unsuccessfully trying to identify Beatrix Butcher, David Tyler and Heinz (The Silver Turk) as humans. Nothing is known about Beatrix and David's jobs, despite having full names and exact century, which prevents using the above two categories. Heinz worked as a helper/usher at performances of the Silver Turk at the Vienna Exposition. Again, we know his first name and exact year. I went through the whole subtree of Category:Humans and could not find anything for them. My first solution was to put them directly into "Humans". I was soon sorted out by MystExplorer: Humans is a supercategory and does not admit page members. So this was my second attempt: given three pages that cannot be humanised any other way, I thought of collecting such individuals in a catch-all job category. I'd be happy if a cleaner solution exists. I mean it might be possible to invent some description for Heinz's job although it was never named. But then there would be no guarantee to have three individuals with the same job. But Beatrix and David defy any categorisation by job. They're not stated to be unemployed. But their job is also not stated. This really must be a common occurrence: somebody's child, somebody's sister if mentioned in passing would fall into this group (somebody's mother, however, would not as she would be Category:Human biological mothers. Let me get back with more examples.

Inhuman heroes of Doctor Who
So I wrote a careful post with nine people who are currently not humans from the credited cast of the First Doctor era. And it got lost in the upload. Here are some of the best representatives of these nine: Hur, Morton Dill and Flash. Clearly, credited cast from this well-studied era is just the tip of the iceberg. Even simple extrapolation would put the totals among credited cast alone at more than 100 humans-to-be.

But maybe it's for the best that my first post got lost. Instead of listing the cases, let me give you a profile of these inhumans. A sweet innocent child remains human until somebody says its name (unless it's an Aztec or Saxon child). A good housewife who supports her husband but isn't politically active herself will become human if she gives birth. You might say that Category:Human children and Category:Human housewives could take care of that. I do not disagree (although Hur is more of a cavewife and they're not married). But let's go on. A young and decent girl loves a man. She would be a human if she dies of plague or is of noble birth. A tourist is generally not human (there may be something here). Drunkards stop being human when they lose their job and become human again when they lose their house.

Generally speaking, to become human, one needs to do something and have people talk about it. Things like "I really miss my brother John" fall through the cracks. Category:Males and Category:Females could have been used as catch-all but they are supercategories just like "Humans". I seem to remember a discussion of why Category:Human males and Category:Human females are violating some policy or other. To me, they are also a worse solution to the inhuman problem because their introduction creates an enormous amount of work: they catch all humans, instead of all not-yet-human-categorised humans.

I am open to suggestions and would be happy if this category is deleted, provided that the above-mentioned types get to easily be human. Amorkuz ☎  00:02, June 6, 2016 (UTC)