Thank you for fully describing your classification method, and giving me some sources to look at.
I'm looking at your article right now and I'm not sure that I agree that all the current iterations of Dredge are following a similar strategy as Comer's Type 1.5 deck unless you are painting a very broad brush. Certainly game 1 is typically going to be similar for most variants of Dredge (and they have that game in common with Comer's deck and the other "reanimator" core concepts), but I think it falls apart when you go to games 2/3 for certain builds of Dredge.
Any version of Dredge with a transformational sideboard becomes a dramatically different deck (which I think are much more common now with the Hollow One printing than any traditional anti-hate build). That may or may not use its graveyard, and may or may not even care about reanimating a single creature. The Hollow One builds just want to drop a quick free, or cheap creature off of Bazaar (Again if a broad enough stroke I guess that's the same as reanimator?), but you also have the Dark Depths builds don't even use the graveyard one lick! Some of my builds of Dredge even function more like a "Control" deck games 2/3 setting up Strip Lock + Countering/Discarding Spells than anything resembling a true "Combo" deck. Eventually I'll win, maybe by comboing off, but also maybe by just attacking with a hardcasted 1/1. Again, you can put these into your "Reanimator" shell with a broad brush, but otherwise they are distinct decks.
At what point does a classification system simply become useless though? Why classify at all if there are so many categories that no aggregation of data can be done? To give a little more background, as a statistician, the only times I even resort to classification is if I need to. The reality is that they are all artificial and you lose information by making that classification. The problem is that almost always you need to make that classification. Its simply impossible to make any sense out of the data at all without it. So I certainly understand your gripe about me "painting a broad brush", but at the same time, I'd like to actually make some sense out of the data instead of just say, yeah that's nice, but you can't actually classify any of these decks as the same. So what I'd ask is what is a meaningful classification system that is also useful for data aggregation? Instead of Workshops, Dredge, Storm, Xerox, ect, in your opinion, what should we be using? Are there few enough schools (without painting too broad of a brush) where they could even really be used in analysis?