Misplaced Pages

:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 August 11: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Categories for discussion | Log Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:44, 12 August 2012 editJonFlaune (talk | contribs)1,260 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 12:45, 12 August 2012 edit undoJonFlaune (talk | contribs)1,260 edits →Category:Antisemitism in PalestineNext edit →
Line 15: Line 15:
**Thank you for demonstrating why you cannot "close" a discussion on an issue on which you hold a strong POV. Er, the category wasn't "empty". It was the ones systematically sabotaging the islamophobia categories who deleted it from various articles. If we are to have Category:Opposition to Islam in Israel instead of Category:Islamophobia in Israel, then we are going to move Category:Antisemitism in Palestine to Category:Opposition to Judaism in Palestine (or perhaps Category:Opposition to Zionism in Palestine) ] (]) 23:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC) **Thank you for demonstrating why you cannot "close" a discussion on an issue on which you hold a strong POV. Er, the category wasn't "empty". It was the ones systematically sabotaging the islamophobia categories who deleted it from various articles. If we are to have Category:Opposition to Islam in Israel instead of Category:Islamophobia in Israel, then we are going to move Category:Antisemitism in Palestine to Category:Opposition to Judaism in Palestine (or perhaps Category:Opposition to Zionism in Palestine) ] (]) 23:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
***Because I deleted a category that was ''empty,'' I hold a strong POV on the subject? Wow, that is a bizarre claim. I said specifically that if there were articles that should be in a ], they should be in there. I just don't know which ones those are. If you have information on that, create ] and put articles in there.--] (]) 00:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC) ***Because I deleted a category that was ''empty,'' I hold a strong POV on the subject? Wow, that is a bizarre claim. I said specifically that if there were articles that should be in a ], they should be in there. I just don't know which ones those are. If you have information on that, create ] and put articles in there.--] (]) 00:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
****It wasn't empty, that's a made up claim. If it was ''technically'' empty at the time, it was ''only'' because you people had sabotaged it. You can't first empty a category, then claim it "was empty". You are the one who deleted a perfectly adequately populated category on "Islamophobia in Israel", while voting to keep "Antisemitism in Palestine", hence demonstrating a striking double standard and a strong POV on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, and the broader topic of Islam/Islamophobia/Zionism (both Islamophobia and Antisemitism are ''equally'' recognised terms, e.g. by the UN and EU). Now you also want to have extremist groups like Kach in a category with the extremist POV title "Opposition to Islam in Israel". It's extremely hard to interpret such a category title as anything else than an endorsement of the extremist views of the groups in question, e.g. Kach. Which is why mainstream Norwegian newspapers recently reported on , and ] Norway's President encouraging people to counter such Islamophobic POV pushing. More news coverage can be the outcome if this unacceptable situation isn't resolved quickly. Labelling islamophobia "opposition to Islam" is ], politically extreme and ]. ] (]) 12:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC) ****It wasn't empty, that's a made up claim. If it was ''technically'' empty at the time, it was ''only'' because you people had sabotaged it. You can't first empty a category, then claim it "was empty". You are the one who deleted a perfectly adequately populated category on "Islamophobia in Israel", while voting to keep "Antisemitism in Palestine", hence demonstrating a striking double standard and a strong POV on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, and the broader topic of Islam/Islamophobia/Zionism (both Islamophobia and Antisemitism are ''equally'' recognised terms, e.g. by the UN and EU). Now you also want to have extremist groups like Kach in a category with the extremist POV title "Opposition to Islam in Israel". It's extremely hard to interpret such a category title as anything else than an endorsement of the extremist views of the groups in question, e.g. Kach, by portraying their racist views as legitimate "criticism of Islam" (a fringe view) instead of prejudice/hatred against Muslims (the mainstream view). Which is why mainstream Norwegian newspapers recently reported on , and ] Norway's President encouraging people to counter such Islamophobic POV pushing. More news coverage can be the outcome if this unacceptable situation isn't resolved quickly. Labelling islamophobia "opposition to Islam" is ], politically extreme and ]. ] (]) 12:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


==== Category:Scholars of antisemitism ==== ==== Category:Scholars of antisemitism ====

Revision as of 12:45, 12 August 2012

< August 10 August 12 >

August 11

Category:Antisemitism in Palestine

Nominator's rationale: POV category. Category:Islamophobia in Israel was just deleted, and then so should this category. Otherwise we will have a striking example of racist and POV double standard. JonFlaune (talk) 21:26, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment - While I agree that the deletion of the Islamophobia categories was wrong and did not reflect a policy-based discussion, tit-for-tat won't get us anywhere. The Israel category was deleted because the closing admin read the consensus as deleting all categories called "Islamophobia," not because there was a problem categorizing incidents in Israel, so perhaps you can create "Opposition to Islam in Israel" and populate it with the contents of the former category. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is a much stronger category than the "Islam and antisemitism" category below, since it focuses on a geographic region. It's possible that the whole Category:Antisemitism by country or region tree could be deleted, but not this one by itself. As per the Israel category, there was an empty category called Category:Islamophobia in Israel. I deleted it because it was empty, but if anyone knows that it was emptied preemptively, let's create Category:Opposition to Islam in Israel and populate that.--Mike Selinker (talk) 23:34, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
    • Thank you for demonstrating why you cannot "close" a discussion on an issue on which you hold a strong POV. Er, the category wasn't "empty". It was the ones systematically sabotaging the islamophobia categories who deleted it from various articles. If we are to have Category:Opposition to Islam in Israel instead of Category:Islamophobia in Israel, then we are going to move Category:Antisemitism in Palestine to Category:Opposition to Judaism in Palestine (or perhaps Category:Opposition to Zionism in Palestine) JonFlaune (talk) 23:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
      • Because I deleted a category that was empty, I hold a strong POV on the subject? Wow, that is a bizarre claim. I said specifically that if there were articles that should be in a Category:Opposition to Islam in Israel, they should be in there. I just don't know which ones those are. If you have information on that, create Category:Opposition to Islam in Israel and put articles in there.--Mike Selinker (talk) 00:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
        • It wasn't empty, that's a made up claim. If it was technically empty at the time, it was only because you people had sabotaged it. You can't first empty a category, then claim it "was empty". You are the one who deleted a perfectly adequately populated category on "Islamophobia in Israel", while voting to keep "Antisemitism in Palestine", hence demonstrating a striking double standard and a strong POV on the Israeli-Palestinian issue, and the broader topic of Islam/Islamophobia/Zionism (both Islamophobia and Antisemitism are equally recognised terms, e.g. by the UN and EU). Now you also want to have extremist groups like Kach in a category with the extremist POV title "Opposition to Islam in Israel". It's extremely hard to interpret such a category title as anything else than an endorsement of the extremist views of the groups in question, e.g. Kach, by portraying their racist views as legitimate "criticism of Islam" (a fringe view) instead of prejudice/hatred against Muslims (the mainstream view). Which is why mainstream Norwegian newspapers recently reported on Breivik sympathizers waging a war on the Islamophobia related articles in the English Misplaced Pages, and Wikimedia Norway's President encouraging people to counter such Islamophobic POV pushing. More news coverage can be the outcome if this unacceptable situation isn't resolved quickly. Labelling islamophobia "opposition to Islam" is racist, politically extreme and WP:FRINGE. JonFlaune (talk) 12:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Scholars of antisemitism

Nominator's rationale: Apparently a discussion on this category is needed per . These two categories must be considered together. JonFlaune (talk) 21:23, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Islam and antisemitism

Nominator's rationale: Islamophobic POV category that must be deleted per previous precedent. It seems to exist only to imply a relationship between Islam and what is now known in Misplaced Pages as "opposition to Judaism". JonFlaune (talk) 21:19, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
  • No need to delete on principle (see also Category:Christianity and antisemitism), but heavily prune contents. The category must not be used to link all antisemitic incidents in which Muslims were involved in order to suggest that they were motivated by Islam (rather than nationalism issues or less contemporary political struggles, or the "he's just a troubled loner" that you get whenever the shooter's white). For instance, country categories must be removed; articles where an incident involving a Jew and a Muslim is labeled antisemitic without any real indication of it being so (Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf for instance); and articles on very general topics in which antisemitism is not a significant part of the article (eg. Nation of Islam - we have a spinoff article on NoI and antisemitism, which would belong) and thus unsuitable (and for that matter, where Islam is not! eg. International Conference to Review the Global Vision of the Holocaust). As well, if I recall correctly, the last big discussion on bias-related categories said that we must remove BLPs who are in the category because they are perceived to hold that bias. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 22:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Delete. I agree that this is an unmaintainable category, because it groups political attacks with hate crimes and possibly some actions unrelated to bias. Regardless of my Islamophobia decision, this is an extremely shaky category.--Mike Selinker (talk) 23:31, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Scholars of Islamophobia

Nominator's rationale: Per this discussion, I wasn't sure what to do with this category. It contains only two articles, so it could be merged into Category:Islamic studies scholars or something else.-- Mike Selinker (talk) 19:24, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Medalists at World Gymnastics Championships

Nominator's rationale: As World Gymnastics Championships states, there are five separate World Gymnastics Championships events, and this category says it is only for those who win medals at the Artistic championships. Courcelles 18:48, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Category:Airship-related lists

Nominator's rationale: Contested speedy as it contains a list of airship accidents currently. Reasoning same as for the speedy: consistency with other categories of this sort, including Category:Lists of aircraft, Category:Lists of aircraft engines, Category:Lists of airports, Category:Lists of pilots, etc. The Bushranger One ping only 16:38, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Years in Cameroon

Extended content
Nominator's rationale: Rename. Following the approach used at Misplaced Pages:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_February_29#Years_in_Benin, the name Kamerun should be used for 1884–1919, and French Cameroons for the years 1920–1960. This is a slightly more complicated situation because of British Cameroons which became divided between Cameroon and Nigeria, but I have created the relevant years in Category:Years of the 20th century in British Cameroons so what remains should all be French Cameroons. Tim! (talk) 08:14, 11 August 2012 (UTC)