This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
what qualifies a family as political? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.155.53 ( talk • contribs) 06:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
On 22:51, 30 October 2023, I removed [Category:Political families of the United States] from the Category:American politicians, with the rationale, "although political families are related to politicians, they are not politicians".
On 00:49, 3 November 2023 , User:Smasongarrison made a revert, with the rationale, "they may not be politicians themselves, but they are related to politicians. categories are to aid navigation. removing the category makes it much harder to navigate".
I disagree that my edit made it "much harder to navigate". First, [Category:Political families of the United States] has three other parent categories that work fine for purpose. Second, including it in the [Category:American politicians] creates unnecessary complication in the category and navigation problems.
For example, currently I am working in populating a Category:Non-targeted killings of politicians. In order to do that, I am using PetScan, with the intersection of Homicides and Politicians, to try determining politicians victims of homicide. But the inclusion of topics that are not the topics the categories purport to be makes the task much harder. Instead of just getting a list of politicians who are in the homicide category, I get other pages that are related to politicians but are not politicians. I get results such as Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, A Plea for Captain John Brown, and Kansas (Kansas album).
I think this monumental mixing should not be the case and makes the work of categorization much harder. If categories are included in their specific categories this sort of unexpected entries would not happen as much. But if pages are wantonly included in categories only because they are related but are not really the topic of the categories, then this sort of complications happen.
Granted, many categories are hightly subjective, but others are not nearly as much. Such as politicians. Politicians are politicians, not houses, not books, not songs, not families. And only politicians should be included in the Category:Politicians. Sincerely, Thinker78 (talk) 06:46, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
what qualifies a family as political? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.155.53 ( talk • contribs) 06:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
On 22:51, 30 October 2023, I removed [Category:Political families of the United States] from the Category:American politicians, with the rationale, "although political families are related to politicians, they are not politicians".
On 00:49, 3 November 2023 , User:Smasongarrison made a revert, with the rationale, "they may not be politicians themselves, but they are related to politicians. categories are to aid navigation. removing the category makes it much harder to navigate".
I disagree that my edit made it "much harder to navigate". First, [Category:Political families of the United States] has three other parent categories that work fine for purpose. Second, including it in the [Category:American politicians] creates unnecessary complication in the category and navigation problems.
For example, currently I am working in populating a Category:Non-targeted killings of politicians. In order to do that, I am using PetScan, with the intersection of Homicides and Politicians, to try determining politicians victims of homicide. But the inclusion of topics that are not the topics the categories purport to be makes the task much harder. Instead of just getting a list of politicians who are in the homicide category, I get other pages that are related to politicians but are not politicians. I get results such as Harpers Ferry, West Virginia, A Plea for Captain John Brown, and Kansas (Kansas album).
I think this monumental mixing should not be the case and makes the work of categorization much harder. If categories are included in their specific categories this sort of unexpected entries would not happen as much. But if pages are wantonly included in categories only because they are related but are not really the topic of the categories, then this sort of complications happen.
Granted, many categories are hightly subjective, but others are not nearly as much. Such as politicians. Politicians are politicians, not houses, not books, not songs, not families. And only politicians should be included in the Category:Politicians. Sincerely, Thinker78 (talk) 06:46, 3 November 2023 (UTC)