On a whim, I checked out the pages with the most categories here. I saw there were four at the top: Morgan Le Fay, Drek, Hadi, and Demoness Fornax. I thought it was a little weird they would have so many, so I looked at the articles. All I found on those four pages were empty character templates and a lot of maintenance categories.
Why did you create those pages if you did NOT intend to write the articles? An empty template does NOT mean the article is created!
If you have seen all of the articles I have written, you will notice I did not need to use a single template, because most of the templates here are so poorly written that they make the pages they are on look awful.
Please go back, delete those four pages, make them red links again. When I come back here, I will write actual articles that do NOT need poorly written templates.
Oh, and articles that are redlinks were a way I was keeping track of where I was. There are at least 1,500 more character articles to go. I had a computer problem a while back and lost track. Now I am further lost because the pages that need prose are now EMPTY INFOBOXES! Lady Aleena (talk) 17:26, September 16, 2017 (UTC)
They are called stubs and they are there so that new editors (not YOU) have something to work with. One of the advantages of the stub is it generates categories that YOU can use to find which pages need work.
I am not deleting anything if you want the pages complete write them otherwise leave them alone. I do feel bad for you if 4 stubs get you so lost that you have to yell at me about it.
Ten years ago I began writing articles on Wikipedia about Xanth. One thing I knew was I would not get away with creating articles on every character in the Xanth series, so I created lists of characters by types. I am surprised they have survived this long.
Many of the articles I started there are here, without the histories which bugs me. One of those articles is Magicians of Xanth. The article is no longer needed as all of the magicians, except three which aren't listed on Magicians of Xanth, have their own articles now. So you can delete the article, since a list of magicians is in the article Magician and are in Category:Magicians.
There are also 69 magicians and sorceresses these days, and that will probably keep going up. Trying to keep Template:Magicians up to date and looking tidy with so many magicians would be your headache since it is protected. I suggest deletion.
I have also found two nearly identical articles From the Gourd of Xanth and Gourd Realm. I stated From the Gourd of Xanth on Wikipdeia, however, it looks like it was copied to Gould World. The list of night mares is also in the article night mare now and the Bones will get have their own articles in due course. So for now, would you pick one and delete the other? Please delete both.
Almost all the characters listed on Other characters of Xanth, Minor Xanth characters, and Mundanes in Xanth have their own articles too. I suggest they be deleted too. I can knock out the articles for those who don't have them in a few hours. All the characters on it them have articles or are handled in other articles or lists.
Also, which navigation do you like better for Xanth books, Template:Xanth or Template:Xanthbooks? Xanthbooks looks like the template I wrote on Wikipedia years ago which was also changed to a navbox there.
I wrote a lot of the Xanth material on Wikipedia years ago, all of the family articles mostly. Too bad the histories didn't make it here.
Really, I hope you don't mind me diving and looking behind the curtains with a broom.
Aug 27: I delinked and put strikes on those you deleted.
I saw you editing Books <alpha> lists. Wouldn't it be easier for you to have just a Bibliography by alpha list? There could be its companion page Bibliography by year list. Both could go into the Category:Bibliography. Some of the Books <alpha> lists will probably only have one of two items on it. And the years categories will always be just one or two items in them.
I believe maintaining two bibliography lists would be much easier than maintaining 27 alpha lists, 27 alpha categories, and 30 or more year categories.
I do not think we need that page either. There are so many articles and categories which I believe were started because there was a link or something which came over when some of these were imported from Wikipedia. As long as we have Category:Bibliography, we don't need all the Books <alpha> pages, since the category shows the books by alpha. I can pound out a list of publications by alpha in less than an hour.