Per WP:OC#Opinion_about_a_question_or_issue: "...holding an opinion is not a defining characteristic, and should not be a criterion for categorization, even if a reliable source can be found for the opinion." "Anti-Islam sentiment" is by deifnition an opinion on Islam (negative in this case) and thus must be deleted as a clear example of overcategorization. Beit Or 20:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Empty. Crosses over with both ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Television programs based on Marvel Comics and ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Films based on Marvel comics. Duplicate of ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Marvel Comics animation. ~ Zythe Talk to me! 17:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because
User:Epeefleche has left a message on your talk page, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Overcategorization. Covered under Jewish sportspeople. No reason to have seperate category. Why seperate figure skaters by religion? (Edited to add: I know LGBT figure skaters exists as a category. However, due to the overwhelming stereotype of all figure skaters as gay, I think that category is useful to categorize the skaters who have actually come out of the closet. However, I have never seen a stereotype of all figure skaters as [insert religion here], so seperating by religion makes no sense. Should we categorize Michael Weiss under Methodist figure skaters?) Kolindigo 16:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
1. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories) Categorization of people (3.3 Heritage), which demonstrates that something such as "Jewish figure skaters" is clearly contemplated by Wiki policy. It says: Heritage
People are sometimes categorized by notable ancestry, culture, or ethnicity, depending upon the common conventions of speech for each nationality. A hyphen is used to distinguish the word order: ....The heritage should be combined with the occupation, replacing the nationality alone (for example, Category:African-American actors).
Concurrent citizenship may be reflected by duplicating the occupation (for example, Category:Jewish American actors and Category:Israeli actors)."
2. Nationality. Also, if the Jews are (as appears to be the case) a nation (and not just a religion), it would clearly not be appropriate to delete.
The Wikipedia entry for " Jew" indicates, inter alia, that Jews are "members of the Jewish people (also known as the Jewish nation ...)."
The Wiki definition of " nationality" states, inter alia: "Generally, nationality is established at birth by a child's place of birth (jus soli) and/or bloodline (jus sanguinis)."
Thus, in the (unusual) case of Jews, who consist of a nation that has largely been dispersed from its homeland, it would not be appropriate to delete.
Other religions are in the "normal case" distinct from the nation. In other words, there was not a Protestant, or Buddhist, or Christian, or Hindu, or Aethiest nation per se. They are not a "people." They are not a "nation." Jews, peculiarly, are not just a religion. They are also a nation. Dispersed (largely) for a couple of thousand years.
3. Notability. Wiki policy calls for a sensitivity towards "notability."
To determine what notability means here, one must go to Wikipedia:Notability (people), the notability criteria guideline for Wikipedia. That guideline states, inter alia, that "Notability on Wikipedia for people is based on the following criterion: The person has been a primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, scholarly papers, and television documentaries ...."
Thus, where one is noted as being a Jew in multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, and the like, they meet the notability requirement. And thus it would be appropriate to have a distinct category. These already exist for Black Jews and various types of Jewish athletes other than Jewish figure skaters ... see Category:Jewish sportspeople.
And, importantly, there are a number of Halls of Fame and lists and articles relating to Jewish athletes. "Jewish Sports Legends" is a book that one can find at [1]. The International Jewish Sports Hall of Fame Jewishsports.net bios can be found at [2]. Jews in Sports bios can be found at [3]. National Jewish Sports Hall of Fame bios can be found at [4]. Jews in the Olympics can be found at [5] and medalists can be found at [6]. The Baltimore Jewish Times runs articles on Jewish athletes: [7]. The Holocaust Museum runs articles on Jewish athletes in the Holocaust: [8] and [9]. "From the Ghetto To The Games: Jewish Athletes in Hungary" focuses on certain Jewish athletes [10]. It is mentions such as these that demonstrate the importance of this classification ... which is what Wiki policy focuses on. -- Epeefleche 00:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Delete as non-defining per numerous precedents. No-one has an article because he belongs to a college fraternity. Haddiscoe 15:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Upmerge, no consensus to delete but individual categories too small to be viable. -- Xdamr talk 11:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Umbrella nom for this and all subcats. Pejorative category. Out of the less than 20 articles in the entire cat + subs, only 1 or 2 were actually famous for being bigamists (for religious reasons or in spite of them), and the others were just footnotes in the lives of people who were famous (or notorious) for other things, and thus isn't a very useful category. MSJapan 04:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was speedy delete by Natalie Erin as recreation of deleted content. — coel acan — 22:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
First, please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 March 24#Famous and Rare bibles. This seems like recreation of deleted material. It was created a day after the discussion closed. The previously deleted cat was Category:Rare special bibles. Removing the word 'special' was not part of the consensus reached at the previous CfD. Besides, there is only a single article in this category. Andrew c 00:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Per WP:OC#Opinion_about_a_question_or_issue: "...holding an opinion is not a defining characteristic, and should not be a criterion for categorization, even if a reliable source can be found for the opinion." "Anti-Islam sentiment" is by deifnition an opinion on Islam (negative in this case) and thus must be deleted as a clear example of overcategorization. Beit Or 20:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Empty. Crosses over with both ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Television programs based on Marvel Comics and ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Films based on Marvel comics. Duplicate of ‹The template Cat is being considered for merging.› Category:Marvel Comics animation. ~ Zythe Talk to me! 17:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
![]() | If you came here because
User:Epeefleche has left a message on your talk page, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Overcategorization. Covered under Jewish sportspeople. No reason to have seperate category. Why seperate figure skaters by religion? (Edited to add: I know LGBT figure skaters exists as a category. However, due to the overwhelming stereotype of all figure skaters as gay, I think that category is useful to categorize the skaters who have actually come out of the closet. However, I have never seen a stereotype of all figure skaters as [insert religion here], so seperating by religion makes no sense. Should we categorize Michael Weiss under Methodist figure skaters?) Kolindigo 16:49, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
1. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories) Categorization of people (3.3 Heritage), which demonstrates that something such as "Jewish figure skaters" is clearly contemplated by Wiki policy. It says: Heritage
People are sometimes categorized by notable ancestry, culture, or ethnicity, depending upon the common conventions of speech for each nationality. A hyphen is used to distinguish the word order: ....The heritage should be combined with the occupation, replacing the nationality alone (for example, Category:African-American actors).
Concurrent citizenship may be reflected by duplicating the occupation (for example, Category:Jewish American actors and Category:Israeli actors)."
2. Nationality. Also, if the Jews are (as appears to be the case) a nation (and not just a religion), it would clearly not be appropriate to delete.
The Wikipedia entry for " Jew" indicates, inter alia, that Jews are "members of the Jewish people (also known as the Jewish nation ...)."
The Wiki definition of " nationality" states, inter alia: "Generally, nationality is established at birth by a child's place of birth (jus soli) and/or bloodline (jus sanguinis)."
Thus, in the (unusual) case of Jews, who consist of a nation that has largely been dispersed from its homeland, it would not be appropriate to delete.
Other religions are in the "normal case" distinct from the nation. In other words, there was not a Protestant, or Buddhist, or Christian, or Hindu, or Aethiest nation per se. They are not a "people." They are not a "nation." Jews, peculiarly, are not just a religion. They are also a nation. Dispersed (largely) for a couple of thousand years.
3. Notability. Wiki policy calls for a sensitivity towards "notability."
To determine what notability means here, one must go to Wikipedia:Notability (people), the notability criteria guideline for Wikipedia. That guideline states, inter alia, that "Notability on Wikipedia for people is based on the following criterion: The person has been a primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person. This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, scholarly papers, and television documentaries ...."
Thus, where one is noted as being a Jew in multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person, such as newspaper articles, magazine articles, books, and the like, they meet the notability requirement. And thus it would be appropriate to have a distinct category. These already exist for Black Jews and various types of Jewish athletes other than Jewish figure skaters ... see Category:Jewish sportspeople.
And, importantly, there are a number of Halls of Fame and lists and articles relating to Jewish athletes. "Jewish Sports Legends" is a book that one can find at [1]. The International Jewish Sports Hall of Fame Jewishsports.net bios can be found at [2]. Jews in Sports bios can be found at [3]. National Jewish Sports Hall of Fame bios can be found at [4]. Jews in the Olympics can be found at [5] and medalists can be found at [6]. The Baltimore Jewish Times runs articles on Jewish athletes: [7]. The Holocaust Museum runs articles on Jewish athletes in the Holocaust: [8] and [9]. "From the Ghetto To The Games: Jewish Athletes in Hungary" focuses on certain Jewish athletes [10]. It is mentions such as these that demonstrate the importance of this classification ... which is what Wiki policy focuses on. -- Epeefleche 00:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Delete as non-defining per numerous precedents. No-one has an article because he belongs to a college fraternity. Haddiscoe 15:59, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was Upmerge, no consensus to delete but individual categories too small to be viable. -- Xdamr talk 11:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Umbrella nom for this and all subcats. Pejorative category. Out of the less than 20 articles in the entire cat + subs, only 1 or 2 were actually famous for being bigamists (for religious reasons or in spite of them), and the others were just footnotes in the lives of people who were famous (or notorious) for other things, and thus isn't a very useful category. MSJapan 04:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was speedy delete by Natalie Erin as recreation of deleted content. — coel acan — 22:27, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
First, please see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 March 24#Famous and Rare bibles. This seems like recreation of deleted material. It was created a day after the discussion closed. The previously deleted cat was Category:Rare special bibles. Removing the word 'special' was not part of the consensus reached at the previous CfD. Besides, there is only a single article in this category. Andrew c 00:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)