I know there's already a subject-matter category (meta), but I nonetheless am very wary of having more subject-matter categories (like Hebrew). Where does it end, then? How are categories different from tags? I think anything that fits as a tag in Judaism Q&A should be included in the Judaism Q&A category or should be excluded from the site altogether. (Now of course someone will think of an edge case where I'm forced to concede that that rule doesn't work.)

@msh I agree that we should use categories very sparingly but that doesn't mean we don't use them at all. Hebrew is often not sufficiently Judaism related to fit in the regular Judaism QA but the expertise is clearly sufficiently closely related that we can capitalize on shared expert attraction. Seriously, what else are categories for but very large scale division that allows for more important useful related content? Something as inane as Purim Torah is better for the site than this??

We envisioned categories (for Q&A) for where the scope and/or expectations of posts are different somehow. Meta isn't about the topic of the site but about the site itself; that's a scope difference. On Scientific Speculation Rigorous Science category, more is expected of both questions and answers; that's an expectation difference but not a scope one (those same questions would be on-topic in Q&A). Categories can also do other things (e.g. wiki).

@Monica Here I propose a scope difference (and potentially a language of discourse difference). (Ping @msh above)

@AA understood. I just wanted to clarify what we intended for categories, for context. That doesn't limit how communities use them, of course.

@A A FYI your pings to me didn't. And I'm really not sure about a Purim Torah category.

@msh210 did this ping you?

@A A yes it did.

Oh I bet it's because I tagged two people @msh @Monica