Yes, at least a couple of other G2G discussions have had recent activity, either directly mentioning Beyond Kin or at least dealing with the topic of Categorization of Enslaved Persons and Slaveholders (American Slaves* and Slave Owners are the current descriptions employed here on WikiTree, unfortunately).
I think it would be a great idea to get a working group together that should include the affected projects/category managers.
Here is a conversation that I have begun with the Beyond Kin Project folks on Facebook. We need buy in, all around, but in order for that to work, we need standardization around the Common Method, and a protocol for how the Slaveholders are connected to Enslaved persons.
Because WikiTree allows for non-biological children to be attached, perhaps we have an opportunity for a simpler solution, whereby we would (with permission) use the Current Last Name to identify the plantation (in a standard way, and then as we come across enslaved persons, create them as children and add sourcing to the "parent" profile as well as to the EP's profile.
RE: Category:American_Slaves
"Example profile" (not using the Beyond Kin Common Method): Isaac Holeman
Note that the example profile does not create profiles for the partially named persons, but sourcing and bequeathal are described.
Hopefully the stakeholders here at WikiTree can take the lead in getting us onto the Common Methodology (using Current Last Name or perhaps using a Free Space Profile/Page to identify an entity of the slaveholder function), and the "nonbiological" child function can be employed in some way?
One of the tasks to also be completed is to move all of the present categorization to the preferred terminology enslaved / enslaved person (instead of slave) and slaveholder, too (instead of slave owner). In this effort, hopefully we can first confirm and validate that Black Americans / African Americans with descendants in America are on board with the BK terminology and methodology.
This latter point is important because otherwise, we would not be building an environment for genealogical exploration that is sensitive to the needs of the very community that we are wanting to better document. Noting, for example, that the example profile shown on the current categorization page leads nowhere for the enumerated persons: they are merely stuck on the list of the slaveholder.
Looking forward to continued conversation and innovation, as well as the stakeholders on WikiTree becoming involved.
Fann
* See for example: Rudolph John Chauncey Fisher. Other categorizations at lower hierarchical levels exist, such as drilling down from Slavery, United States of America to Slavery, North Carolina to North Carolina Slaves to one of 24 subcategories for NC by county, most of which appear to be empty.