Provide a quick-way to remove page from all parent categories
Problem: Ideally, pages are pushed down the category tree as far as possible. Once this is done, haviing a tool that "walks the category tree" to the root and removes the page from all parents would be useful.
Proposed solution: Add a tool that allows removing the current page from all parent categories.
Who would benefit: Users pushing pages down the category tree
When adding a category, you can easily remove one or all other categories just by deleting those lines - not exactly sure what you'd want this to do? Also note, there is not a enforced "category tree" - categories can intersect or even be circular with other categories. — xaosfluxTalk 14:57, 20 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm guessing in some cases, you may not be able to infer that a category is a parent category of another category the page belongs to, hence the need for automation. Pinging Eptalon for clarity. I concur with Xaosflux that this concept of only using the most specific categories, and no parent categories, is a social construct and not necessarily true on all wikis. Even on wikis where it does hold true, there could be exceptions. As a quick example, on English Wikipedia we have fine-grained maintenance categories that are subcats of en:Category:Living people, yet you'd never want to remove the "Living people" category itself. I.e. en:Ramiro Navarro at the time of writing is a member of en:Category:Living people on EN wiki who are dead on other wikis from October 2016 and en:Category:Living people. MusikAnimal (WMF) (talk) 22:29, 20 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose at first sigt, looks fine; but ... it could disturb complex cat-trees with parallel subbraches. Removing a item from the higher parent cats could also remove it from parallel branches. --Havang(nl) (talk) 15:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose There are multiple reasons why certain pages should be in a certain parent category as well as a sub-cat. Fayenatic london(talk) 22:21, 4 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose The idea is useful, but as described here this takes no account of non-diffusing subcategories where an article will validly be in a category and also a category further up the tree. PamD (talk) 16:26, 5 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support Per Pppery, very good idea for global renamers, the concern by Havang could be alternatively hold up by AbuseFilter. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:48, 6 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Can you explain how global renamers benefit from a categorisation tool? ~~~~ User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:32, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Imagine the picture of two Italian violinists, one of them very prominent and another one relatively obscure. Naturally there is the personal category for the former (as far as there are many pictures of him) and no personal category for the latter (no more pictures of him). Consequently this picture must be placed both into the personal category of the former and into the general category of Italian violinists for the latter. Bingo, this item is in the cat and its parent cat and this is not a mistake. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 01:57, 10 February 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support * Pppery * it has begun 18:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose at first sigt, looks fine; but ... it could disturb complex cat-trees with parallel subbraches. Removing a item from the higher parent cats could also remove it from parallel branches. --Havang(nl) (talk) 15:33, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
