Knowledge (XXG):Categories for discussion/Log/2012 August 26

3606:. We don't typically have "level" categories for such a thing. Presumably these additional categories are to indicate proficiency level, although there is no explanation as such. Presumably the collaborative use for this category is for someone to have an audio file they need edited for a particular article - If users are not proficient enough to do this then they should remove themselves. Additionally, totally subjective criteria to self-classify in one of these categories. It makes more sense to just have it a single category. 1383:- Yes, so what? Knowledge (XXG) is not here to appease anybody. Knowledge (XXG)'s encyclopedic mission encompasses the inclusion of material that may offend. Knowledge (XXG) is a work in progress, and will always remain so. One may easily de-categorise an irrelevant article or discuss on its talk page. It's not a violation of any Wiki-policies. Knowledge (XXG) cannot guarantee that articles or images will always be acceptable to all readers, or that they will adhere to general social or religious norms. 5636:. Unencyclopedic category. "The people in this category have decided to call themselves WikiNomad. They normally travel through topics in often occurrence of short times; during this time however, they may make crucial edits to the page that have been missed, and leave before they even receive credit for it. They are very modest also, not normally listing themselves as the best unless to provoke humour." Violates 4596:: There is absolutely no reason to believe that this wouldn't help collaboration. If I wanted to write an article about military history in India, I might go here to ask for collaboration. Why is finding all of these user categories so fun for you anyways? I'm not arguing to keep any of the other ones because they do no harm, but I am arguing that you should quit wasting your time because they do no harm. 3471: 1352:

terrorism in order to get elected. In that case, it would be a perfectly valid addition to the category based on the name. Simply named as "allegations" is too POV. I have no personal gripe against any of the articles in the category, I just think it is too subjective (not the current articles necessarily, but future articles have to be considered as well).

2723:. There have been cases, such as the one in Turkey, but also a few in India, where Christians have been killed because they were Christians in the 21st century. The same might be said of some victims of Boko Haram in Nigeria. This is part of a well established category tree and should be left. I would support 4571:

The majority of that tree are active military, not veterans. There are only 2 "who served" categories, and I was planning on nominating the other if this one resulted in deletion. I don't think active military categories are particularly helpful for the encyclopedia either, but slightly better than

3014:

there is quite a difference between helping at the Teahouse and being a host. That being said, I don't personally know what are the important aspects about categories and users, I think people created "helping out" to express their participation at the Teahouse. I think it's great that you (VegaDark)

2602:

I'm aware this is part of a category tree, but does anyone else feel that categorising people in the modern era as 'martyrs' is POV? I'm fine with the category for people in earlier centuries who have been designated martyrs by religious tradition; but for someone who's only just died, calling them a

1753:

according to outcome of recent Pakistan discussion. State-terrorism would need to be limited to events beyond the borders of the state. Heavy-handed repression of opposition (as currently in Syria) may be designed to terrorise citizens into obeying the government, but it is something differnet from

1421:

The essay you linked is meant for articles, not for categories. The problem with this category is not that someone may not like it, but that it does not provide a topic that allows to clarify as an undisputed fact if any given article belong in it or not. That problem, that it is subjective to decide

2968:

No, I want to rename things so it's clear it's a user category. Editors who help out at the Knowledge (XXG) teahouse? Perhaps the category is for mainspace pages of people who are editors as a profession who help out there. Knowledge (XXG) teahouse hosts? Perhaps this is a mainspace category for

2936:

The first category mproperly uses "editors" vs. the standard "Wikipedians." Additionally, "who help out" is not standard nor particularly encyclopedic. The second category also does not use standard user category language. There is no reason to distinguish "hosts" from other participants, so these

2990:

Various userboxes don't even put editors into the correct specific category and the Teahouse has it's own page for keeping track of hosts. That being said, I don't know that the rename is correct. Teahouse guests participate in the Teahouse but are not part of the original categories. The rename

1659:

in here, although it does not mention any state or body that represent a state make any allegations in the matter (the Human Rights Watch isn't either thing). And don't try to impress me with link overload: the notability guideline (which is about which topics deserve an article and which topics do

1596:

In those other categories, my question "by whom?" has an answer, which prevents spurious categorization. If there is a trial on sexual abuse, then the existence of that trial clarifies who is alleging that, and that the alleging is a notable thing. Same goes for terrorism allegations, which must be

2261:

This is similar to the 'Christian martyrs' categories nominated below, but problematic for a different reason: if calling someone a 'martyr' in the modern era is controversial, surely calling someone a 'Nazi martyr' is extremely so! Most people would not consider these people 'martyrs' at all, and

1351:

If an organization is designated as a terrorist, that's an indisputable fact, a particular country has put it on a specific list of terrorist organizations. Allegations, however, is very very broad, and could be anything, such a politician accusing a political opponent of pursuing state-sponsored

5156:

I thought of that too, actually, but neither the categories this is in nor the category description indicates it as a religion category. Even if it were, I would have a hard time justifying that being allowed under the religion category. The religion categories aren't particularly useful for

2352:

these are people who were killed while carrying out a revolution. That they were praised for doing such does not make them "martyrs". If they had been executed for their policial beliefs, instead of killed in a shoot out, it might be different. This is just a totally wrong description of

4576:

issue. Additionally, there may be veterans who have no interest in collaborating on military articles, and there may be non-veterans who have a strong interest in collaborating on such articles. If collaboration is the real purpose of user categories, then a better named category that's

2969:

people who are hosts for some sort of real-life teahouse (99% of people I would guess, including myself, had no idea what the WP teahouse was before following the link). This is a rename to conform with standard Knowledge (XXG) user category naming conventions to reduce confusion.

5270:

in this case is a fictional determination. Also, as we learned in the zodiac situation, people in such self-identification categories, are not necessarily interested in collaborating on the related topic, so this should not be merged, else we may be miscategorising Wikipedians. -

5332:

I have been persuaded by Jc37 that this is not at all a colaboration category. If there was an organized Jedi religion that people actually participated in, the issue would be different, but there is not, so it is fictitious, until people have actual organized participation in

4519:. Categorizing users by previous service to various militaries has no collaborative benefit I can think of. Do we want one of these for every country's military? For what purpose would someone go seeking through this category for encyclopedic purposes that doesn't involve 1899:

There is a whole list of cases where categories with "alleged" in their name have been deleted. The use of alleged works in articles with footnotes where it can be stated who has made the allegations. Bald assertions of such in category names generally do not

4807:. Grouping editors by a partucular interst is helpful for collaboration; but grouoing them by personal employment experience is a means of creating networks of people who sahre a particular perspective on a topic, which impedes wider collaboration. -- 2331:, and purge if necessary. All the articles that I looked at were stubs, and I suspect that most were NN activists, of whom we would know nothing had Main Kampf not been dedicated to them. I suspect that most of the articles need to be merged into a 2630:

21st-century Christian martyrs-- that would be POV. Many martyrs of any century can be considered POV, but to have a martyr from this century tends to only make more information available-- not less information, and so tends to be less POV.

2706:-- Persecution of Christians is widespread in certain countries, mostly Muslim dominated ones, but also India, Burma and China. Sometimes this involves murder or execution. This is a legitimate category and needs to be populated better. 2305:), and it is clearly a defining characteristic in relation to their notability. Wessel's article also uses "posthumous hero"; renaming to use that phrase might be a more acceptable alternative, and clearer, but could be wider in scope. – 1153:. No decision since the point was raised that the two categories mentioned need to be discussed together to reach a fair decision. So, as a part of this close, both of those categories will be nominated for deletion in one discussion. 4552:, or re-nominate the entire tree. I would have thought there is plenty of scope for these editors to collaborate on military topics. The top category is very large so dividing it by nation could make the whole thing more useful. – 1513:"Alegations" by whom? Who will clarify the difference between state terrorism and mere authoritarian governments? Some leftist groups have an annoying ease to say the worst things about just any government that is not on the left. 1397:

Please, understand that as long as something is not a direct violation of Wiki-policy it can be on Knowledge (XXG) even if it unknowingly offends somebody. There is no deadline, nor there is a limit on the size of categories.

3090: 3222:

Improperly uses "Knowledge (XXG) users" vs. the standard "Wikipedians". However, I'm not sure that it's helpful to categorize such users, so I would have no issue (and possibly would prefer) deletion for each of these.

1917:

per John. The categorization guideline says that categories appear on articles without an explanation, so they should not sound something that needs explanation. About the policies and guidelines in the box at the top:

2655:, and as is often the case with such subjects, we should not throw out careful religious definitions because of careless common usage, but to refine the names of the former and to refine the scope of the latter.- 5137:

isn't this a religious category? I seem to recall the US Census can break down statistics by the Jedi religion. (or are people applying this category without actually being members of the real-life church?) --

3739: 5649: 5478: 4946: 4030: 3875: 3239:

The cat is used bz the AFCH script for checking if a user has already recieved an invitation. For the case that the cat is renamed, please wait until I'm back from my vacation to modify the script (or ask

1841:

That page is actually talking about the use of the word "allegation". Categories come with articles which have their own respective subjects. Nobody is talking about "someone's opinion" and yeah it indeed

5645: 5474: 4778: 4740: 2684:, so the word is used objectively. (I have omitted the second half of that headline, as page 2 of the article mentions unrelated regimes where Christians are also "imprisoned, abused and murdered"). – 2954:

It does look like you are wanting to rename things just for the sake of doing so. Has there been any discussion at the individual project itself (in this case, Teahouse) before proposing these here?

5653: 5482: 4949:. Categorizing users by this will not support collaboration and it is unlikely that grouping such users for the purpose of finding a like-minded individual will be for a project-benefiting purpose. 4029:. Too narrow of a subject for collaboration. This is for users who like a single movie. Collaboration is better served on the article's talk page. Strong precedent to delete categories like this 1315:

does. An article can be added to, or removed from, any category at any point of time based on personal POV, but that doesn't necessitate the deletion of the category. This CfD is a demonstration of

296:

which already indicates it is also for associations. If both categories are wanted, then a clear designation must be established in the descriptions so that articles can be sorted appropriately.

3190: 3086: 1215:

This category is extremely POV. A category containing only allegations of terrorism could allow for any country to be added, simply because someone once said that they were being terroristic...

3365:

I forgot to subst it, which will be fixed momentarily. The tag was placed, so I don't think procedurally there should be an issue even if the link didn't go to the correct day the entire time.

1597:

based in official government lists or regulations. So, I repeat my question: which is the rationale here? Who has the authority to say which state makes state terrorism and which one does not?

2120:

to keep one of these flawed categories but not the other. A further nomination for the deletion of both of them would allow a proper decision on whether this form of category is acceptable. --

3478: 5641: 5470: 2821: 5052:

is free to list themselves. The consensus is clearly to eliminate the category, but none on whether or not to merge; I think that since this is a user category, this result is reasonable.

42: 37: 5118:. Unencyclopedic category name, although it seems the intention is to collaborate which would be better accomplished at the already existing, much more encyclopedically named category. 1827:

That page is talking about the use of the word within articles. Categories come with no footnotes or inclusion explanations, so the words that imply someone's opinion should be avoided.

4034: 2061:. If that were the case, I would vote "rename". Frankly, articles on terrorism-related subjects are now impossible to navigate. And remember that the only purpose of categories is to 4800: 4621: 2262:

would be offended by the very idea of it. (Besides anything else, the name is ambiguous: it refers here to people killed for being Nazis, but it could equally mean people killed

759: 4754:

I don't really agree with that discussion, hence the nom. I'd like to delete all the military cats, active or past, but this nom was an attempted first step towards that end.

1496:

The title is completely neutral, I am in fact unable to think of a more neutral title for it. It is also a necessary cat given there are no category's which cover this at all.

741: 1394:, etc) now we could also quibble about what does "Islam" means and who gives someone the right to label anybody as "terrorists" as opposed to "freedom fighter" or "martyrs". 434: 422: 410: 617:: at the time of writing there are 9 articles in the category, all of which are in other non-stub Guantanamo categories, so this category has probably served its purpose. – 1859:

created on subjects which themselves represent points of view, as long as the title clearly indicates what its subject is, the point-of-view subject is presented neutrally”

3713: 3163: 1866:

to categories as well, when naming a category, it's perfectly okay to include the word allege as long as the article explicitly alleges what the category alleges. Cheers!

1802:

when wrongdoing is asserted but undetermined, such as with people on trial for crimes. When alleged or accused is used, ensure that the source of the accusation is clear.”

3155: 2112:

However, Mrt3366 is right to point out that Knowledge (XXG) already accepts the categorisation of entities by unspecified allegations involvement in terrorism, through

5218:

per nom. The category descriptor makes it clear this is for people interested in Star Wars, not limited to those who have tried to embrace it as a basis for religion.

4624:

would be far better for such purposes rather that seeking veterans of the Indian army who may have absolutely no interest in actually collaborating on such articles.

3015:

found the Teahouse this way, letting people know about it is one of the hardest things we face. I support changing things to "Wikipedians" if that is the standard.

3203: 3146: 1713:

in this category was inappropriate. Both India and Pakistan have accused each other of sponsoring terrorism there and you are saying that it's inappropriate? WOW!

774:

already uses the adjective. If this is agreed, then sub-cats for most countries, and all the existing sub-cats for US states, can follow as Speedy nominations. –

4314: 3705: 2286: 1652: 1302: 418: 1322:"A category containing only allegations of terrorism could allow for any country to be added, simply because someone once said that they were being terroristic" 4188:. Unlikely to foster collaboration. "Cartoons" is extremely general and can cover a huge range of things. "Who like" does not imply a collaborative interest. 1664:

and each one of the words we use have a definition, linking to that definition is a pointless exercise, unless someone here misunderstood what the other said.

5111: 5049: 3696: 3207: 2592: 2566: 2371: 2332: 3121: 4654:. There are already categories/lists of Wikipedians interested in collaborating on topics: they are called WikiProjects and Knowledge (XXG) Task Forces. – 4572:

categorizing by past service. As for "I would have thought there is plenty of scope for these editors to collaborate on military topics", that goes to the

4306: 3129: 4494: 3742:. Seems to be a duplicate or substantially similar to the latter category, which is more encyclopedically named and more in line with naming conventions. 2925: 2428: 1556: 729: 406: 21: 3186: 3112: 4297: 3603: 1058: 1046: 1034: 755: 4486: 2886: 2852: 1070: 5910: 3403:, I just revised the situation: a bot would have to do many (10k? Dunno, too lazy to check) edits simply to change the cat... Is that really wise? 2557: 4362:

per nominator. Editors should collaborate on topics based on their interest and their access to sources rather than their personal experience. --

5902: 4804: 4477: 2860: 5963: 4699: 4659: 4557: 3849: 2917: 2843: 2689: 2436: 2310: 779: 622: 1194: 17: 4980: 4819: 4374: 3841: 2473: 2132: 2025:. And how does my two comments relate anyhow? I think closer should take into consideration your understanding of policies and guidelines. -- 1975:

WP:POVTITLE is talking about an article. Come on! If you cite pov-title then I also can site WP:SUBPOV. Mrt3366 09:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

1186: 5893: 5465:. Unencyclopedic joke category. "A WikiChef is a user who expands Knowledge (XXG), and provides delicious creations to users." Violates 2403:

on Amazon, and it contains 22 instances of "martyr", several of which use the phrase "Nazi martyr"; so the phrase (however unpalatable) is

891: 4687: 2921: 2877: 2681: 1545:

You think the problem is the word "allegation" really? On basis of what policy/guideline do you say this? If there can be categories like

5179: 5139: 4920: 4912: 4743:. Unless/until the rest of the "by occupation" subcats go (which I would probably support), we should probably keep this one as well. - 4543: 3832: 2399: 1422:

which articles belong in it and which ones do not, is not fixable, and can't be improved merely by editing (as is the case of articles)

1387: 1042: 293: 271: 175: 5201:

the United States census does not track religion data at all, thus there are no US census statistics on the Jedi or any other religion.

1565: 1177: 737: 4643: 3581: 3573: 3547: 3539: 3513: 3505: 1391: 1324:- that seems to me like you're point to a content dispute, and if that happens you'll be urged first to revise the content neutrally. 4782: 4683: 1066: 4903: 3996: 2454: 2407:. The stubs on the deaths in the Putsch should be merged into a list page, and the category would then contain the list plus three 2328: 2199: 4004: 4155: 3564: 3530: 3496: 3386:

unmodified until those dealing with Teahouse invitations, scripts and metrics have a chance to discuss the importance. Thank you

3251: 771: 595: 561: 152: 2574: 4691: 4620:"If I wanted to write an article about military history in India, I might go here to ask for collaboration" - A category named 4163: 3352: 2673: 1655:, this category contains no rationale written inside it. And your proposed rationale contradicts your actions: you categorized 887: 717: 569: 3987: 5241:. I created the category because it was a redlink on my userpage, thus, I really don't care what happens to it :) -- Cheers, 1710: 1697: 1656: 1030: 763: 725: 430: 4146: 2113: 1546: 1311: 1054: 552: 5077: 2090: 1872: 1811: 1719: 1631: 1574: 1467: 1404: 1330: 770:

use an adjective rather than a noun modifier in the name, and it seems that museums of archaeology generally follow them.

2724: 5432: 2894: 2058: 1306: 267: 5987: 5862: 5834: 5732: 5704: 5561: 5533: 5390: 5362: 5085: 5033: 5005: 4872: 4844: 4444: 4416: 4264: 4236: 4113: 4085: 3954: 3926: 3799: 3771: 3663: 3635: 3457: 3429: 3072: 3044: 2807: 2779: 2526: 2498: 2185: 2157: 1138: 1110: 996: 968: 855: 827: 679: 651: 519: 491: 372: 344: 235: 207: 78: 5967: 5944: 5884: 5814: 5754: 5684: 5665: 5585: 5513: 5494: 5414: 5342: 5320: 5294: 5277: 5258: 5227: 5210: 5187: 5166: 5147: 5127: 5068: 5059: 4985: 4958: 4894: 4824: 4791: 4763: 4749: 4726: 4708: 4668: 4633: 4611: 4586: 4566: 4532: 4468: 4396: 4379: 4352: 4288: 4216: 4197: 4137: 4065: 4046: 3978: 3906: 3887: 3823: 3751: 3687: 3615: 3488: 3409: 3395: 3374: 3356: 3325: 3301: 3283: 3260: 3232: 3104: 3024: 3006: 2978: 2963: 2946: 2835: 2759: 2736: 2715: 2698: 2664: 2639: 2612: 2548: 2478: 2445: 2385: 2362: 2344: 2319: 2275: 2213: 2137: 2094: 2043: 2012: 1944: 1909: 1883: 1836: 1822: 1780: 1763: 1730: 1673: 1642: 1606: 1585: 1522: 1505: 1478: 1431: 1415: 1361: 1341: 1293: 1259: 1224: 1162: 1090: 1022: 948: 929: 879: 807: 788: 705: 631: 607: 543: 471: 452: 398: 324: 305: 259: 187: 164: 100: 2622:: If there are some people in these two categories that you think are martyrs only from one POV, then bring it up on 798:-- WP is too prone to use nouns as if they were adjectives. Where there is a suitable adjecitve it should be used. 2066: 5959: 5581: 5440: 5423: 5410: 4705: 4665: 4563: 4284: 4133: 3974: 3819: 3683: 2695: 2442: 2316: 1316: 875: 785: 628: 539: 255: 118: 713: 5680: 5509: 5338: 5223: 5206: 4976: 4815: 4392: 4370: 4212: 4061: 3902: 2732: 2469: 2358: 2128: 1905: 1776: 1501: 944: 467: 4686:, to widen it to include current as well as past military service personnel. I would likewise favour nominating 2231: 1771:

we do not categorize things as alleged, allegations etc. Not every possible way to group things is worth doing.

594:. Found very few stub articles in the main category. Propose deleting this category, and upmerging template to 2753: 2379: 2086: 1016: 767: 699: 392: 5772: 109: 5603: 2285:: these are valid points, but I'm not persuaded that they should result in deletion. I have added a redirect 5251: 5183: 5143: 4464: 3391: 3100: 3020: 2831: 2711: 2340: 2209: 1970:

Delete per WP:POVTITLE. This POV pushing needs to end in this topic area. --SMS 09:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

1759: 925: 917: 803: 126: 2222: 1832: 1669: 1602: 1518: 1461:

I hope this helps. I may not reply I am de-listing this page from my watchlist. I have said what I could.

1427: 5763: 4387:

this is not likely to help colaboration. Knowledge (XXG) categories are not meant to merly group people.

5983: 5955: 5858: 5830: 5728: 5700: 5594: 5577: 5557: 5529: 5406: 5386: 5358: 5029: 5001: 4868: 4840: 4695: 4655: 4553: 4440: 4412: 4339:. Why should we care, exactly? No collaborative use for seeking out users in such a category. Violates 4280: 4260: 4232: 4129: 4109: 4081: 3970: 3950: 3922: 3815: 3795: 3767: 3679: 3659: 3631: 3453: 3425: 3068: 3040: 2803: 2775: 2685: 2522: 2494: 2432: 2431:, which I suggest would be (i) of encyclopedic value, (ii) less ambiguous & (iii) less offensive. – 2306: 2239: 2181: 2153: 2102:. I was going to say that it should be deleted because the inclusion criteria cannot avoid being either 1158: 1134: 1106: 992: 964: 871: 851: 823: 775: 675: 647: 618: 535: 515: 487: 368: 340: 251: 231: 203: 74: 1246: 1083: 445: 5780: 2652: 5881: 5751: 5676: 5505: 5334: 5290: 5219: 5202: 5056: 4969: 4891: 4808: 4604: 4388: 4363: 4208: 4057: 3898: 3485: 3318: 3276: 3245: 2999: 2728: 2545: 2462: 2354: 2121: 1901: 1772: 1497: 1443:

an array of articles that allow for clarification. Apart from that there are two solutions (isn't it

940: 463: 97: 5637: 5611: 5466: 5304: 4340: 1919: 1791: 1619: 1368: 1238: 1234: 3348: 2749: 2375: 1012: 909: 895: 695: 388: 289: 1923: 1849: 1242: 5940: 5810: 5661: 5490: 5316: 5243: 5162: 5123: 4954: 4759: 4722: 4629: 4582: 4528: 4460: 4348: 4193: 4042: 3883: 3747: 3611: 3387: 3370: 3297: 3228: 3096: 3016: 2974: 2942: 2827: 2707: 2608: 2336: 2271: 2205: 1755: 921: 913: 799: 285: 2289:; if the individuals in that list were removed from this category, it would leave the list plus 4801:

Category:Wikipedians interested in collaborating on topics related to military history in India

4622:

Category:Wikipedians interested in collaborating on topics related to military history in India

5982:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5829:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5699:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5528:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5357:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5000:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4839:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4411:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4231:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4080:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3921:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3766:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3630:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3424:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3039:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

2774:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

2660: 2493:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

2152:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

2074: 2006: 1877: 1828: 1816: 1724: 1665: 1636: 1598: 1579: 1514: 1472: 1423: 1409: 1357: 1335: 1220: 1105:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

963:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

822:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

646:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

486:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

339:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

202:

Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5857:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5727:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5556:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5385:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

5028:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4867:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4439:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4259:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

4108:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3949:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3794:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3658:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3452:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3067:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

2802:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

2745: 2521:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

2180:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

2117: 2018: 1532:"Who will clarify the difference between state terrorism and mere authoritarian governments?" 1133:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

991:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

850:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

674:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

514:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

367:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

230:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

73:

Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's

3405: 3256: 2412: 2290: 1154: 603: 320: 301: 183: 160: 5178:

per VegaDark, if this isn't a religious category, then it is clearly named incorrectly. --

4573: 4520: 2404: 1979: 1863: 1703: 1444: 1250: 5878: 5748: 5286: 5053: 4888: 4597: 3482: 3311: 3269: 3241: 2992: 2542: 1287: 94: 4651: 4647: 2107: 2103: 1706:

and think it was an honest mistake. That's not a ground for deleting the whole category.

1618:— same goes for this category, yes believe it or not. The answer is other nations and/or 2078: 1437:"this category .. does not provide a topic that allows to clarify as an undisputed fact" 3341: 2416: 2294: 2070: 1087: 449: 5285:- useful identification category. User categories need not have "encyclopedic" names. 5936: 5806: 5657: 5486: 5312: 5158: 5119: 4950: 4755: 4718: 4717:

I could support this proposal - it's certainly better than keeping it/them outright.

4625: 4578: 4524: 4523:? If kept, would prefer a rename to Wikipedian veterans of the Indian Armed Forces. 4344: 4189: 4038: 3879: 3743: 3607: 3366: 3293: 3224: 2970: 2959: 2938: 2604: 2267: 2026: 1927: 1660:

not) has no relation with this discussion. And a wikionary definition, even less so.

2085:

called themselves terrorists (!) are not classified as such. This is absurd indeed.

3874:. "Wikipedians by video game" category, which have a unanimous history of deletion 2656: 2420: 2298: 1998: 1867: 1806: 1714: 1695: 1682: 1626: 1615: 1569: 1462: 1436: 1399: 1353: 1325: 1274:

per nominator - also a completely random collection of articles. There is too much

1255: 1216: 1926:

are not applicable on categories in any way. These guidelines are for articles. --

599: 316: 297: 179: 156: 2301:. All three articles use the word "martyr" (in Gustloff's case it is piped as 1280: 3204:

Category:Knowledge (XXG) users who received a Teahouse invitation through AfC

3147:

Category:Knowledge (XXG) users who received a Teahouse invitation through AfC

5273: 5157:

collaboration purposes either and I wouldn't mind seeing those go, as well.

4787: 4745: 2647:

In addition to tahc's points, I will add that the Catholic understanding of

2633: 5851: