Thread:Uskok/@comment-1616746-20170802223347/@comment-1616746-20170803153401

Shabook wrote: Those categories were chosen years ago as a way to categorize all character articles, because the vast majority if not all characters have a hair and eye color to be categorized under.

As to why those particular two, you should ask to either the founder or the former bureacrat, but they are not around anymore.

The reason not to categorize characters under their religious orientation, sexual orientation or ethnicity (to cite examples that are similar in this context) is that we can't possibly know them for a vast majority of characters, only for a few of them, and thus that makes that particular ítem unable to be chosen for our categorization system. Okay. That's a completely different explanation to the "simplicity" thing. And while I disagree with how it's handled, I finally got an explanation that makes sense and didn't have the words "Wiki Policy" thrown at me without consistent reasoning. Thank you.

Also, just because something has been done a certain way for years, doesn't mean it makes sense if "trying to keep things simple". But that's another discussion.