Knowledge (XXG):Categories for discussion/Log/2007 April 9

3053:"Trolling is a deliberate, bad faith attempt to disrupt the editing of Knowledge (XXG). Ignorance is not trolling. Genuine dissent is not trolling. Biased editing, even if defended aggressively, is in itself not trolling. By themselves, misguided nominations, votes, and proposed policy are not trolling. They are only trolling when they are motivated by a program of malice rather than ignorance or bias. This requires a judgment of the personal motivation for another's action. Such a judgment can never be made with anything approaching certainty. This fact should always be kept in mind when one is tempted to label someone a troll." Please provide an accurate reference to a WP article that outlines a policy of banning editors who reveal personal information about themselves (as opposed to others). W. Frank was wrong to ask any Republican member to confirm or deny their point of view or political affiliations but should not be banned because he reveals his own personal details. 5453:— I am aiming that individual entries will be diffused down into sub-categories and that this will mainly be a holder for sub-categories and articles that need narrower categories in general. The category currently already has some sub-categories (not mentioned above) and I would propose more as the structure becomes more apparent. The articles have been selected less randomly that might be inferred from the first comment above. The articles are all projects in some sense and many articles with "project" in the title that are not actually projects have not been included. This is work in progress that I am happy to continue if the category remains. But I guess I don't want to put in the effort if it will be deleted. So let the Knowledge (XXG) process commence! — 3435:. I think that when you put an article into a category it should be based on 100% fact, e.g. People from XXXX place, People elected to the 7th Dail, People who appeared in a World Cup final etc - to put something into a category presents it as being 100% fact. It is relatively controversial to state that the IRA killed the people in Omagh since although it was an "IRA" bomb that killed these poor people some may argue it was a the actions of the RUC/British Army that killed them as the "IRA" targeted the centre and gave warnings - therefore "IRA killings" sounds pretty POV and unencyclopedic from that perspective, I hope you can understand the point I am trying to make here.-- 3978:, and including the by-seasoin episode list articles within that same category sorted to the top. The reason is that this set up would allow for the optimal navigation for the reader. If you wanted to search for an episode by season, you would click on the list article link for that season. If you wanted to search for an episode alphabetically by episode name without knowing which season it's in, then you could use the episode category for that purpose. Therefore this is a case where it's probably not necessary to subdivide the category due to size. 2111: 1997: 1924: 1767: 1694: 1616: 3209:

the article where they can then read sourced and referenced points of view. (I have no objection to an article bearing simultaneous categories of IRA killings and RUC killings and BA killings - the article itself will then reference the differing points of view. If and only if categorisations become excessive do we need to start wittling them down.)

2185:, Well your first post here was "shouting" about them being terrorists so if we combine that with the fact the you were hand picked and canvassed to come here it is in my opinion safe enough to say that you may be biased. Please try and be balanced in your contributions. A category which states anything less the 5550:" has a perfectly good Knowledge (XXG) article defining the essence of a project, linked from the category. I have filtered all the articles into more appropriate sub-categories so many of the arguments above no longer apply. Instead (not mentioned above) the sub-categories given different domains of projects. — 1912:

the IRA (whether the article is named for a person or for a place or for a date) should be categorised. The purpose of categorisation is to assist readers to explore topics and the purpose of the requested deletion would hinder rather than assist readers in assessing the scale and paramaters of the killings.

5626:- The functionality of a science museum and an art museum is very similar, which is why they should be grouped together. The functionality of a research project and a construction project are not similar, which is why categorizing them together is inappropriate. (I really do not think I need to explain.) 4000:

As I mentioned above, though, a better scheme would seem to be having by-season lists at the top of the category and the episodes themselves alphabetically by name. That way a reader can search for episodes in two way, either by episode or by episode name. Under the current system, though, a reader

3208:

It is a specious argument to say that an article should not be categorised in IRA killings because there is argument as to whether the perps were continuity IRA, real IRA, mothers home brewed IRA or RUC pretending to be IRA. People interested in the subject will be steered by the category facility to

3139:

Personally, I feel the need for at least the following categories as navigation aids: Terrorism associated, Terrorism associated 1500's, Terrorism associated 1600's, Terrorism associated 1700's, Terrorism associated 1800's, Terrorism associated 1900 - 1949, Terrorism associated 1950 - 1999, Terrorism

1911:

I note that there has been a concerted (and successful) attempt this evening to remove this categorisation from more than a score of articles BEFORE the verdict here. Presumably this is so that it then can be argued that the category is redundant. My POV is clear: All articles referencing killings by

2480:

No problem, I wouldn't particularly class a rape committed by a Loyalist or Republican (or anyone else for that matter) to be a Loyalist/Republican rape. I'm more concerned about the addition of the new category to articles for the sole purpose of adding the word "killings" to the article, when it's

1988:

That word "largely" is very weasel in the context that in the space of a few hours the categorisation of MAJOR articles as "people killed by the IRA was removed because they bore the name of a pub or another place rather than a human being. It was this concerted campaign of obfuscation that prompted

3598:

Interesting discussion. Is there some 'master list' of categories in Wiki that one can look up? I ask this because of something W. Frank said above: surely there should be a category ? It would be vast but there is no reason not to do it; one of the major debates raging in our culture at the moment

3074:

Even if A. Hilter is resurrected or genetically cloned and becomes a WP editor, the rules and procedures of WP should ensure that his and other nazi's sourced and referenced points of view are accurately reflected in relevant articles. WP is not here to make value judgements on political parites or

3007:

There is no obligation for any editor to reveal any RL (real life) information on wiki, including denial of such, and it should certainly not be presumed as ONIH points out below. It is, for the record, strictly forbidden to claim to reveal such information (whether true or false) and can lead to a

2102:

Since we're not really interested at this stage in the killings of Gerbils or fish I suggest that the artificially narrow category of "People killed by the IRA" be renamed "IRA killings". Then such articles as the Birmingham Pub and Brighton bombings as well as articles on named individual victims

3990:

There are 400 episodes, 18 (soon to be 19) seasons and if they were all in one category, it would be hard to keep track of. Futurama is a little different because there are only 60 some odd episodes. Please point out the policy that says that the episodes can't be categorized by season. You can't

3096:

However, categories are not articles. Categories are navigation aids and should be brief and pointed and not mislead. On this test the word killings succeeds. The word IRA is more difficult. Several users here are trying to both have their cake and eat it. Either the word IRA is descriptive of a

3605:

Someone above mentioned the distress of some families if "the redtops" got hold of a Wiki attempt to facilitate obfuscation re IRA killings. As NPOV is so critical to Wiki, not just within but (as we see by this debate) also across articles then I think that before we conclude the discussion of

3230:

If the spin doctors succeed in removing "IRA killings" then a similar subset of articles will still have to be categorised simultaneously as Provisional IRA killings, Continuity IRA killings, Provisional IRA pretending to be real IRA killings, RUC pretending to be IRA killings, not really IRA

2995:

I'm also genuinely puzzled by your strike-thru of the word comrade. From reading your user page, user talk and the focus of your edits I (mistakenly?) understood that you were a Republican. You have my instant apology and retraction of the error if you tell us now that you are not, in fact, a

2776:

I prefer neither of the proposed new categories, as they add nothing that the existing categories do not already. As you agreed above the only purpose of the category is to add the word "killings" to articles which are already clearly stating that people died, and are categorised as terrorist

724:

The classification of pre-1950 (approx) muckrakers is not really controversial, and tho the name was originally meant as pejorative, it ha been generally accepted in historical context. But the present list includes IFStone,who doesnt count as "early" I think he might have been pleased to be

3252:

IRA killings does the job of steering people to relevant articles if they are interested in then reading the various points of view. As Hackney says, once they have arrived at the article they can then make up their own mind. Otherwise Hackney's arguments are arguments for abolishing all

3299:

sub-category, which really needs renaming to include Provisional. All the IRAs are seperate and distinct organisations, so their actions should not be categorised in this way. This category has been specifically created to add the word "killings" to articles, so is inherently POV.

3936:

I don't have too strong an opinion here, but it seems to me that subdividing a long running's show's episode article by series is a natural way to go about it. Otherwise you end up with 100+ episode articles in the same category with only alphabetic sorting for the read to use.

1940:- so there is no need for this category. There already in a sub category for "People killed by IRA" which is used for people (individuals) who were killed by the IRA therefore this makes this new category redundant as it is just doing what is already done by existing categories!-- 3186:

Until and unless, articles begin to fall into more than 40 categories there is no need to prune a helpful category like IRA killings. People can read the articles themselves if the number of the victims or the flavour of the perpitrators is in dispute - once they have navigated

4262:- the title as it exists is US-centric especially since the category is capturing families from outside Hollywood and the US. I'm unsure what to suggest as a new name, though, because the categories include family members known for a variety of disciplines and mediums. 2489:

which according to the category description shouldn't be in there anyway as it's before the arbitrary cut off time of 00:01hrs 1 January 1948 UTC. So it's quite clear it's not being added to articles for any navigational purpose, but simply to add the word "killings".

4026:. I remember how it was when it was all in one category. It was hard to find anything. This is in my opinion much more useful. The argument that "if Futurama can't then everybody is not allowed to do it" is invalid, because Futurama doesn't have that many episodes. -- 2704:

It is entirely permissable to remove articles from that category - the issue at hand here is the category itself - so ifarticles are incorrectly added then they can be removed. I just think that this is a poor category and adds nothing that is already provided by

1794:

Please stop with the incivility and personal attacks. I chose to concentrate the majority of my time on a particular group of articles, which to be fair, were generally in a very poor state. Using your argument I suppose it's safe to assume that anyone who edits

320:

The overwhelming majority of the articles are about tertiary institutions, and that is the intention based on the definition of the category. If it is desirable to have a separate category for elementary and secondary institutions, it should have a clearer name.

5638:— I disagree. Projects have many common aspects such as start and end dates, deadlines, tasks, devilerables (e.g., services, products, etc.), organization through project management for critical paths, etc. None of this depends on the domain of the project. — 1989:

my creation of a new category that emphasised that any article that referenced an IRA killing was appropriate. Please think of how the victims families will feel if the Red Tops report that there has been a successful campaign of obfuscation here on WP...

3277:. Not all "IRA 'actions'" resulted in killings so proper categorisation demands a sub-category as a navigation aide. The category name is entirely factual so I fail to understand how adding NPOV tags to articles where its been added can be justified. 3599:

is whether Western claims of moral superiority over other cultures stand any scrutiny; how incredibly useful it would be for anyone engaged in this debate to have all the crimes collected in a single category/sub-cats (I envisage here such as sub-cats

2410:

I ask that you strike through rapes, unless you can provide evidence that a rape has been committed in the republican cause? The category was removed to maintain some level of NPOV, given it was created purely to add the term "killings" to articles.

1915:

This category was only started because of the wholesale campaign of removal from the pre-existing category "People killed by IRA" of such obvious articles as the Birmingham pub bombings on the ( narrowly correct grounds that a pub was not a person!

4316:

I suppose that you could try "Show business families", but does Show Business include Music, which is a sibling category? I see how this fits in the tree, and understand that you don't want to delete. Perhaps "Families in Film and Television"?

150:, to reflect the convention that organisations are categorised by the locality where they operate, rather than to all the localities where they operate, in line with other recent renamings of categories of organisations for English counties. 3482:. This new category was created purely to add the word "killings" to a category, and it's now trying to be used to group the actions of different and distinct organisations under one category, which should not happen. I also refer you to 3555:, which it was prior to the creation of this unncessary and superfluous category. The constant need to add "deaths" or "killings" to the names of categories is unnecessary, the articles already make this abundantly clear and we should 2944:

Not all provo actions resulted in death. Some recent non-lethal actions have been agreed as highly laudable by all communities (such as the recent provo actions taken to support and help the Police Service of Northern Ireland at long

1654:- clearly the removal of this one particular category which you chose to create rather than use the existing category is not "censorship" or "spin", but the removal of a superfluous category. You've already falsely claimed that the 3376:

is for articles on individuals who were killed by the IRA, each of the articles that were removed from that category do not apply as the articles do not relate to an individual. I ensured that the articles that were removed from

1629:- the category does not accurately reflect these events and they are already in the parent category of "Provisional IRA actions" which is more neutral and a better description of the events. It is therefore superfluous (sp?)-- 2862:

Don't you think that you have misunderstood the purpose of classification, which is not to provide a handy précis or summary of the article, but rather to provide navigational links that will be helpful to our readers?

2451:(sorry if I've got the spelling wrong) that do detail "Loyalist Rape"s but I am happy for you to strike through the word "rape" if you find it misleading (I can't since I'm too ignorant to know hoe to use strike thtru.) 3602:; ; and so on with similar for Iraq, Tasmania, Malaya, Nova Scotia, New England, The Falklands, South Africa, India, China, Egypt, Palestine, France, Germany, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Sudan, Nepal, Afghanistan and so on. 3991:

just say delete because you don't think they should exist. It's not overcategorization and there is good reason to have the categories. And if memory serves, the categories were created as the result of a CFD. --

264:, as it is stated to be for post secondary institutions, ie universities and colleges, rather than schools, and is therefore the same as the target category. Some of the subcategories are double-categorised. 2075:

How are we attempting to hide the acts of terrorists by deleting a duplicate category? I've already demonstrated exactly how many terrorist related categories one article is in above, hardly hiding is it?

4041:

is hard to define. What other shows have 400+ episodes though? Why one rule for them and one for another? What is the cut-off point when a show gets broken down by series? 100 episodes? 500? 1,000?

2336:

into the latter since the numbers (tens of millions) are too great if that is proposed as a serious category for all documented killings by one of the greatest terrorist forces the world has ever seen.

3400:

I am not saying it is an underhanded action - merely stating what you are doing. Do I take it from this reply, then, that you disagree with ONiH's comment above (made at 22.52 last night) that the

4947: 1936:

The problem with this category (which was only created today) it that it is redunant - each of the articles which the editor wants to to put in this category are already categorised in the

1759:

from its super categories. I predict that you will steadily remove its other super category parents and then finally kill the orphan. I think your edit logs already clarify your agenda....

3903: 2740:

And, since you believe that the category is not needed, is it also consequently your position that there is no article, and never will be an article that should have the categorisation

5667: 42: 37: 3786:- another eponymous category without the volume of material to necessitate it. The articles are all interlinked and the images are properly categorized in image-related categories. 5047: 3412:

for articles named for a pub, bus or town centre bombing/shooting rather than those named for people, to differentiate between non-fatal actions, and ones resulting in murders.

5775: 4935: 4799: 3508:

I am certainly open to compromise, ONiH. What would you propose to replace the category to be used in articles named after places/events which resulted in deaths, seeing as

3165:

article summaries or badges of ethical correctness or bragging badges. They are merely navigation aids and this discussion should address itself to the utility of navigation.

308:

per nom, and start again if necessary. These are overwhelmingly and deliberately tertiary institutions. Retention would preserve systematic duplication and factual error.

3354:

another category such as this one is needed. I'd settle for either. (The naming is a separate issue - maybe 'Category:People killed by Volunteers (Irish Republican)'?)

294:

but the two should be distinct, and the double posted ones should go where they belong--although there are a few,such as Julliard, which combine both & do go in both.

3423:

Just because ONiH says something does not mean that I will agree with him - we are independant editors and have disagreed on many issues. At the moment I think that the

1336:

both to standardize these categories, and to make sure pidgins have a place to go. (I don't think separate categories for pidgins and creoles would be a good idea.) --

1703:

Maybe you should have discussed it before jumping in with two feet and creating this Catogory - p.s. watch you tone and language in the edit summaries and remember

127: 3474:, although it could possibly to with renaming to include the word Provisional. Prior to this, biographical articles were in both categories, which was redundant. 1716:

Firstly, I object to your use of "comrade" in your edit summary, secondly if you had read the nomination you would realise why VK's edits do not need reverting.

1317: 5059: 4811: 4699: 2651: 2364: 163: 4159:- Lightly populated category with little chance of growth. The various articles are already well-interlinked with each other and the main Goonies article. 2941:

Not all IRA killings were carried out by admitted members of the provos. There are certain addresses in Dundalk which you can visit to confirm that truism.

683:- the term also has perjorative meanings (far more common ones), and unless there is some definitive usage of the term, this is likely to only remain POV. 139: 1326: 1281: 21: 2234: 1299: 1290: 1263: 3140:

associated 2000 - to date as one temporal series, together with another geographical series such as "Terrorism associated, Ireland", etc, as another.

3231:

killings because there was sufficient warning given killings, not really IRA killings because the intended victims were nor civilians killings, etc.

2231: 1308: 1272: 3031:

does not adequately cover this, rather than vague references to "certain addresses in Dundalk" perhaps you'd like to provide examples of articles?

1362:

per nom. Having both pidgins and creoles in the same category would also avoid the problems of whether a given language is a pidgin or a creole. --

5911: 3677:, both of these keep !votes make no sense as how can you combine articles from Provisional IRA actions in which nobody died into IRA killings!?-- 2186: 2527:

I agree with you and others that we should be bold and call a spade a spade. The reasons we have articles on these incidents at all includes:-

17: 2010:

I think that any attempt to hide, or downplay terrorism should always be resisted, whether that terrorism be by Irish, Muslims, or whatever.

2435:

Rapes are an example of non-lethal actions and the word rape is contained in a sentence that introduces my suggested two new categories of

869: 3513: 4687: 4304:- I strongly oppose deleting the category. It is serving as a proper parent for articles and categories about families in show business. 2873:

Or is that the real source of your concerns? You don't wish users to be able to easily navigate to articles that reference IRA killings?,

4931: 4428: 4379: 3486:

which categorises articles in the exact same way as the IRA ones were prior to the creation of this unnecessary and duplicate category.

1864:

IRA? And, given Knowledge (XXG)'s downer on abbreviations, wouldn't the full title of the Irish Republican Army make more sense anyway?

5602:

would be more descriptive and better. So I have done some recategorization and am happy for this category to be deleted as a result. —

1777:

1. You do not predict anything - you have no crystal ball! 2. I will remind you for the last time about your tone and suggest you read

1155:- another eponymous category with all its material extensively interlinked through the main article, making the category unnecessary. 753: 738: 705: 5043: 3118:

If it is not, there should not be any IRA categories whatever. If it is, then, the category IRA killings is a useful navigation aid.

4403: 2636:

has been removed from more than a dozen major Knowledge (XXG) articles involving multiple killings by the same two participants of

2358:

has been removed from more than a dozen major Knowledge (XXG) articles involving multiple killings by the same two participants of

1962:

you should have proposed it for renaming, instead of creating a new largely duplicate category that goes on all the same articles.

1525:

cannot include articles that are named for a geo-location as opposed to named for victims (according to the proposers for deletion)

742:- I prefer using this more straightforward term, as it includes both the original "muckrakers" and their modern-day counterparts. 5771: 4795: 4683: 3606:

categorisation of killings by the IRA we should pave the way by facilitating the research into the most prolific terrorists first.

1277: 3621:

British Airways fly to that many destinations? (Sorry, couldn't resist) FWIW I'd certainly have no objection to such a category.

2316:

There are (and will be more in the future) Knowledge (XXG) articles that detail actions that are not provisional ira actions but

5501:

per nom. There is no essential connection between the disparate articles to which the very vague term "project" may be applied.

4395: 254: 5915: 5884: 4553: 123: 5978: 3906:. Limited categories with a maximum of about 24. Data already presented in a list. I've tagged the other 17 categories too. 3888: 3800: 989: 250: 3975: 3919: 3892: 3568: 3495: 3309: 3040: 2917: 2897: 2796: 2499: 2420: 2294: 2246: 2146: 2085: 2042: 1971: 1897: 1846: 1808: 1733: 1667: 1608:

I think that any successful attempt to hide these deaths will result in grossly unfavourable publicity for Knowledge (XXG)...

1550: 1501: 1322: 1030: 865: 5892: 4561: 4251: 1576:

To eliminate this category is to censor the facts and to belittle the deaths of the people that died in all these incidents:

1295: 1259: 4386: 2481:

already made very clear in the article that people died. With one exception every single article it's been added to was in

1304: 1268: 997: 135: 5949: 5933: 5875: 5853: