The scale thing, that's a somewhat bad area to get into. I read that the complete opposite.
To me, small scale means a small area, and large scale means a large area.
We need more clarity per category, not less.

As to the whole hand drawn, traditional, etc....
I start some maps traditionally, and "hand drawn" and then move into digital.
How's that going to be categorized?
This is one of the inherent problems with categorizing arty things.

I also feel like we need to focus on the medium, or the kind of map, but not try to do both.
Because we could have any given kind of map done in a variety of mediums.

If we want to include something that doesn't fit a category well, then maybe we just make that a category.
Though even then we are hitting problems, such as Best Hand drawn or traditional.
CP is right about color usually beating black and white.
So, not sure how we would handle BnW, or linework maps, or maybe non color maps... idk.

I know we also don't want to create a ton of categories either.
And also, if we have categories that are exclusive, should the maps that fall in the exclusive category be limited from other categories?
I mean, a traditional regional map can be in a variety of categories, but a similar map done digitally can be in at least one less category.
It basically says we believe traditional to be better or more than the others by giving it a special category.
Or are we saying that it can't compete with digital and needs special treatment?
Just something to think about, from someone who does both.