New categories/workgroups

[John Stathatos]

Is there an agreed procedure for proposing (and eventually implementing) new categories and workgroups beyond those already chosen?

Apologies if the issue is covered elsewhere - tracking down specific information between forums and other posted material is still rather tricky.

[Zachary Pruckowski]

There isn't, but Larry Sanger has said several times before (not that I'm blaming you for not knowing) that he's not really interested in adding more groups until post-launch.

I assume the procedure would involve going to the chief subject editor of each "overgroup" (Applied Arts, etc.).  We don't want hundreds or thousands of narrow groups like Wikipedia has, but maybe some broader top-level workgroups, and then allow them to organize their own committees as they see fit.

[John Stathatos]

Yes, I can see that undue proliferation is to be avoided like the plague. However, I'm one of the very few editors (so far, anyway) in the Arts/Visual Arts category, and I do feel that the whole field has been perhaps inordinately compressed; there are, for example, cogent reasons why photography, characterised by extensive ramifications which embrace other, non-artistic aspects of the medium, should be given its own category. But whom should I be debating this with?

[Nancy Sculerati]

What change would you make to improve that matter?