Is this relevant?--Ember Nickel 14:50, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- IMHO, sure. It's going to take awhile to update all the articles, but I don't see why we wouldn't have gender categories.--Lord Mactalon 15:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- I disagree. I think that gender categories are unecisarry (sic) (I'm a bad speller, I admit it). First of all, we need a reason why we should, not a reason why we shouldn't. Who wants a category for "Characters whose names begin with M"? Second, by the time you put EVERY SINGLE male and female in the books and modify the necisarry (sic again) pages, the fourth Castaways would be out. Third, categories are meant to link to lookalike articles. What's the link between Didjety and Tsarmina? This should be deleted. What do you think, LordTBT? --Docbob 01:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
In my opinion, I don't think it's necessarily necessary, but it is certainly useful. It provides a quick-tab approach to looking for characters of specific genders. For instance, if someone can't remember much about a character except it's gender (and perhaps what it's name begins with) they can narrow down their search more. I also think it could help research about general statistics, such as male to female character ratios.
So, no, we don't NEED this category. But it can be helpful in certain situations.
Of course, at the moment, I've just went and tabbed a whole bunch of characters (and counting) for gender so I'm not to keen on erasing all that work! XD - St. Artie 03:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)