Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:06, 1 August 2006

Originally, this guideline was developed in response to some dragging Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion procedures that debated the categorization of people. As has been proven since, this guideline can be helpful for other "delicate" categorization issues.

Categorisation schemes

Currently, people tend to be categorized by the following broad categories. There is currently no consensus about the order in which these categories should be placed at the bottom of an article.

By association

Currently, the Misplaced Pages supports categorizing Persons by educational institution, Persons by company, and Persons known in connection with religion or philosophy, as well as numerous more specific categories.

By sex, religion, race or ethnicity, and sexuality

Currently, the Misplaced Pages also supports categorizing Persons by religion and Persons by race or ethnicity. The placement of persons in these categories may be problematic.

Note: Wikipedians are divided about whether categories should be used for such topics, and might propose such categories for deletion.

By the person's name

In certain very notable cases, persons are being categorized by the name of the person itself, for example Category:Abraham Lincoln. However, this should not be done simply to reduce the number of categories displayed at the foot of an article. The best solution to this problem is to reduce the number of categories to those most applicable to the person.

Categories using the name of a person hold articles directly related to that person. Remember this when placing the article in larger categories. If the person is a member of a category, put the article about the person in the larger category. If articles directly related to the person are also members of the larger category, put the category with the person's name in the larger category. This often results in the article and category being categorized differently. For an example of this see George W. Bush and Category:George W. Bush.

By nationality and occupation

People are usually categorized by their nationality and occupation, such as Category:Ethiopian musicians. The template {{Fooian fooers}} is used to provide navigation on each category page, such as:

Please note that this template may need to be modified for some categories, because some nationalities are listed as "People of Foo" instead of "Fooian", such as Category:Musicians from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Category:Musicians of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

By residence

People are sometimes categorized by notable residence, in the form People from Foo (not "Natives of Foo"), regardless of ethnicity, heritage, or nationality. Residential categories should not be used to record people that have never resided in that place. Nationality is reflected by the occupation category (above), not country or county or city of residence. The place of birth is rarely notable.

The category page of People from Foo may mention the most commonly used names for residents ("Fooians", or "Fooers"), assuming that common usage is verifiable (e.g. by Google). Such names may also helpfully be used to redirect towards People from Foo. For an example of this, see Category:New Yorkers.

By year

People are categorized by their year of birth and year of death. See Misplaced Pages:People by year for how to categorize people by their years of birth and death.

The report "People by year/Reports/No other categories" lists articles that haven't been categorized in any other category than births by year, deaths by year, 1911 Britannica, people stubs, etc.

Ordering names in a category

It is possible to change the default order in which the articles in a Category are displayed on the Category: page. For general instructions and conventions about this, see Misplaced Pages:Categorization#Category sorting. Conventions specific to articles and categories relating to people are:

• If the article is titled "Forename Surname" the category should be added to the article as ] so that it will be sorted by Surname.
  Exceptions:
  • Chinese names are generally written with the family name first: Mao Zedong is sorted ]
• People with multiple-word last names: sorting is done on the entire last name as usually used in English, in normal order and not (for example) according to the Dutch system that puts some words like "van", "vanden", etc... after the rest of the last name. Example: ]; ] → ]
  Exceptions:
  • Note that some people are typically called this way in English, for example: Beethoven, ]; similarly: Montesquieu, ]
  • Beware of middle names that look like surnames; e.g. Peter Maxwell Davies, Ricky Van Shelton - and equally beware of parts of a surname that look like a middle name, e.g. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (Mies is part of the surname).
• In categories dealing with peerage, British peers are sorted by name of the title rather than surname, e.g. Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of Salisbury is alphabetized under "Salisbury", not "Gascoyne-Cecil" or "Cecil":
  ]
• Sometimes what follows after the given name is not a surname: it is preferred to sort on first name in these cases. Example: for Augustine of Hippo: ] or simply ]
• Similarly, for monarchs with their monarchical name as article name: e.g. on the Louis IX of France page: ] (without category sort key), but also: ] (in this case the ordinal number is converted to an Arabic numeral with a leading zero to get the up to XVIII "Louis" kings in the right order in the French Monarchs category)
• Get rid of the epithets: e.g. "Saint" in Saint Alban: ]
• Combined example (omitting epithet; sorting on given name; ordinal conversion): Pope John IX: ] (ordinal numbers up to XXIII for popes with the name John)

General considerations

See also NPOV tutorial: Categorization of people

Be aware that mis-categorizations are more sensitive for articles on people than for articles on other topics.

Example: Categorizing a politician involved in a scandal as a "criminal" would create much more controversy than categorizing a behaviour or act as "criminal".

Furthermore,

• Categories should not be automatically assigned: Categories are only assigned as the result of an individual assessment of the content of an article (lists are easier in this sense, because a doubtful assignation can be marked as such). See also Misplaced Pages:Bots for a general discussion of contra-indications regarding robotized operations.

• Not all categories are comprehensive: For some "sensitive" categories, it is better to think of the category as a set of representative and unquestioned examples, while a list is a better venue for an attempt at completeness. Particularly for "sensitive" categories, lists can be used as a complement to categorization. See also wikipedia:categories, lists, and series boxes.

• Double check: Always check after saving an article whether the categorization strikes you as offensive or indelicate. The wikipedia system allows anybody to edit the article and remove a questionable categorization. In order to avoid that, follow your intuition in finding those categories you think most to the point and inoffensive. Create a new category that better serves what you want to communicate, rather than using an existing category that is (partly) inconsistent with the content of the article.

• Limit the number: Try to limit the number of categories. For example, a film actor that holds a law degree should be categorized as a film actor, but not as a lawyer unless his or her legal career was notable in its own right. However it is also important to ensure that categories contain all of the most relevant articles. This means that some prominent people, such as senior politicians who have held many different offices, will be in a considerable number of categories. Apart from these factional categories, for those categories that require an assesment of personal characterisitics (e.g. art movement style...), try to limit the number of categories to what is most essential about this person, something in the vein of: "give me 4 or 5 words that best characterize this person."

Creating a new category

Finding a good category name for sensitive people-related topics is not a "mathematical" science, but relies on good taste, and more than often on a bit of creativity to find a good solution that satisfies all. A good name is generic, gender-neutral, and neither too long nor too short.

Before creating a new category

Before creating a new category, please be sure a similar category does not exist.

Example: You might want to list someone in Category:Canadians. Before creating that category, try to find it under a similar name. By starting at Category:People by nationality, you will discover that Canadians are placed in Category:Canadian people.

Consider making a list

Consider whether a list or other grouping technique would be more appropriate:

• for trivia (such as "dog owners" etc..., see also general trivia policies)
• for categories whose members would require frequent notes to explain the reasons for each inclusion.

Note: Wikipedians are divided about whether categories should be used for such topics, and might propose such categories for deletion. Nonetheless: always follow your own gut instinct in this matter.

Clearly define the category

It is preferable that the category definition (on the category page) tries to exclude vague and/or non-Neutral point of view (NPOV) cases. In many cases, only referencing a wikipedia article explaining the term is not sufficient as a definition for a category. This is true for almost every sensitive category. If the article you want to use as definition is problematic in itself, consider improving the article. Otherwise, or if that is not sufficient, write a definition of what goes in and what goes out of the category on the category page, with the reference article(s) as background information.

Example: "Atheist" can be used as an offensive term (people living under a Fatwa are still today often called atheist by their condemnors, irrespective of whether they consider themselves atheist or not). Some of the vague (and non-NPOV) edges of an "Atheists" category are about the unclear distinction between "strong" and "weak" atheism (see atheism article) and about whether only outspoken followers of atheistic beliefs should be named or everyone generally considered to be an "Atheist". See Category:Atheists for how the category is currently defined.

Place the new category in another category

See the general rules regarding categorization, and try to position the new category in a suitable place on the tree of "people" categories.

Experiencing a problematic categorization

Improper categorization

If a person has an "incorrect" categorization, remove the category from the article and replace it (if applicable) with a correct category.

If the categorization is both "correct" and the category is reasonable, but still seems problematic, please list it here:

1. Resolved people categories, 2004 - April 2005
2. Unresolved people categories, 2004 - April 2005
3. Category:People by surname: see Misplaced Pages talk:Category schemes
4. Category:Dramatists and playwrights (as a solution to the problems mentioned previously on Category talk:Dramatists, discussion now copied to Category talk:Dramatists and playwrights)
5. ...

Improperly named categories

If the category name has an obvious typographical error, please list it for speedy renaming at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Speedy.

Redundant categories

If the category name has an obvious and unnecessary redundancy with another existing category, please list it for deletion or merging at Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion.

Inappropriate categories

If the problem is not about accuracy, but about an "(in)appropriateness" for a single article to be in this category, you can remove that categorization from that article, but also consider the following:

• Check whether you can solve (part of) the problem by making (a) better category definition(s);
• If still needed, find or create a more appropriate category, for re-categorizing this single article.
• If it seems clear to you that there are more articles to which this category is applied "inappropriately", add the {{SCD}} disclaimer to the bottom of the text or the {{CategorisationDisputedPeople}} dispute notice to the top of the text of the category description. Allow some time for this notice to take effect—possibly help with some manual recategorization (if you are familiar with the topics of the articles to which this categorization was applied). Remove the "disclaimer"/"dispute notice" if the use of this category seems OK again.
• If you have a proposition for a better name for the category and/or a proposal for a wider re-arrangement of the categorization scheme and/or if you see a more general contradiction with wikipedia policies and guidelines regarding this category, participate in and/or post new discussions on the discussion page of the category. Consider whether you can invite more people that might be interested, to take part in the discussion, for example by leaving messages on their user talk pages (check, for example, the discussion page of the category and history tabs to find out who might be concerned by this category—also try to contact project people if the category is part of one or more wikipedia projects).
  • If there is no agreement within a week or so, and you are in the middle of a conflict-like situation, see Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution for what to do next. When reaching the "voting" (or "poll") step, Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion is the usual platform to proceed with such a vote.

Category namespace templates

Most of the templates that can be found at Misplaced Pages:Template messages/Category namespace are about sorting and organising categories. Here are two that can be used for problematic "people" categorisations:

What to type	What it makes
{{SCD}} Talk Note: unlike other templates, this note is placed at the bottom of the category page	This category may inappropriately label persons. See Misplaced Pages:Categorization and WP:BLPCAT for advice on how to apply categorization to articles relating to people. See also the policy at Misplaced Pages:Categorizing articles about people regarding categorization by ethnicity, gender, religion, sexuality, or disability. This template should only be transcluded in the category namespace(s).
{{CategorisationDisputedPeople}} Talk	The inclusion of certain people in this category is disputed. Please see the relevant discussions on the talk pages of those individual articles. Consider rewording the inclusion criteria of this category if they are unclear. See also the guidelines at WP:BLPCAT and Misplaced Pages:Categorizing articles about people. This template should only be transcluded in the category namespace(s).

See Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion/Howto instructions to use the templates for deletion ({{cfd}}), for renaming ({{cfr}}), or for merging ({{cfm}}). æ

• Misplaced Pages categorization
• Misplaced Pages how-to
• Misplaced Pages style guidelines