Don’t know what lower level category to put him

+6 votes
Stephen Mack (and I suppose 102 others in that category] is on my suggestions naughty list for being in a high level fur traders category. Non of the sub categories seem to fit and I couldn’t begin to guess what category to make for him
WikiTree profile: Stephen Mack
asked in Policy and Style by Joelle Colville-Hanson G2G6 Mach 3 (35.7k points)
retagged ago by Aleš Trtnik
I wouldn't worry about that "suggestion." In fact, I'd mark it as a false suggestion.

Although some fur traders were aligned with a particular trading company or "club," we can't assume that everyone in this occupational group had an affiliation of that sort that can be used to categorize them.
I think it's ridiculous that the Fur Traders category is top-level. Other occupations are not top level.

2 Answers

+12 votes
Best answer
I followed the "Be bold an experiment" principle and removed the {{Top Level}} template from the Fur Traders category. It did not seem to make any sense. (I notified the Categorization group of this change, by the way, and the rationale is this: fur trader is an occupation, like orthodontist or barrel maker, and occupations categories are not supposed to be top level).
answered ago by Isabelle Rassinot G2G6 Pilot (243k points)
selected ago by Amy Gilpin
indeed, fur traders was an occupation of many who were ''independents'', ie not affiliated with any specific company.
Thank you
+7 votes
Personally,  after reading his biography,  I would say he is more of a town founder than a fur trader.  Not sure if there is a category for that.
answered by Amy Gilpin G2G6 Mach 1 (19.7k points)
Can’t he be both?

Sure he can smiley

Related questions

+1 vote
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer
52 views asked Jul 18, 2017 in Policy and Style by Richard Shelley G2G6 Pilot (109k points)
+4 votes
2 answers
67 views asked Mar 9, 2018 in The Tree House by Deborah Talbot G2G6 Mach 3 (38.1k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright