Wikipedia:Categorization/Sorting names
 | This page documents an English Wikipedia editing guideline. Editors should generally follow it, though exceptions may apply. Substantive edits to this page should reflect consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page. |
Originally, this guideline was developed in response to some dragging Wikipedia: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.
Keep people categories separate
While some categories validly contain both people articles (biographies) and other types of article, categories with a title indicating that the contents are people should normally only contain biographical articles and lists of people, and perhaps a non-biographical main article, though this can also be added in a text note at the top of the category. This is for clarity and ease of use, and to preserve the integrity of trees of people articles.
Biographies of living people
Categorization 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, Wikipedia supports categorizing People by educational institution and People by company, as well as numerous more specific categories.
By gender, religion, race or ethnicity, and sexuality
By the person's name
In certain very notable cases, people 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 in 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 place
The place of birth is rarely notable from the perspective of an individual, although it may be notable from the perspective of local studies.
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 who have never resided in that place. Nationality is reflected by the occupation category (above), not country or county or city of residence.
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:People from New York.
The place of death is not normally categorized; consider using a list if this relates to a specific place or event. If it is relevant to identify the place of burial (either from the viewpoint of the person or the burial place), then someone buried in a less notable cemetery, or in a place with just a few notable burials, should be recorded in a list within the article about the burial place. However, if the burial place is notable in its own right and has too many other notable people to list, then burials should be categorized. Such a category will be recorded in the form Burials at Foo Cemetery.
By year
People are categorized by their year of birth and year of death. See Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:Categorization#Category sorting. Note that there are two techniques for defining a sort order different from the sort order that would result from the page name:
- Adding {{DEFAULTSORT:<category sort key>}} in the article sets the category sort key for all categories without sort keys in that article, before or after it. Alternatively {{lifetime}} can be used as a shortcut to create a sortkey and birth and death categories with minimal typing;
- Per listed category, overriding the DEFAULTSORT, [[Category:Type X people|<category sort key>]]
The sort key should mirror the article's title as closely as possible. Some exceptions are made, however, to force correct collation:
Sort by surname
If the article is titled "Forename Surname", the category should be added to the article as [[Category:Type X people|Surname, Forename]] (or: {{DEFAULTSORT:Surname, Forename}}) so that it will be sorted by surname.
- Note that, for example, Chinese names are generally written with the family name first: Mao Zedong is sorted [[Category:1976 deaths|Mao, Zedong]].
- People with multiple-word last names are usually sorted by the first capitalized element, though this is a complex field and there are exceptions and inconsistencies. But for coding reasons the first letter of each word is capitalized in the actual sort text. The French and Spanish "de" or "du" and German "von" are usually not sorted on, except for some examples living in English-speaking countries, like Corne Du Plessis (D). But the Italian "De" or "Di" usually is sorted on. Dutch/Flemish/Belgian/South African names are especially unpredictable. Often, historical European figures with local names are treated differently from modern figures with the same name living in English-speaking countries - thus Anthony van Dyck and Steve Van Dyck are sorted on D and V respectively. Some additional examples: "Ludwig van Beethoven → Beethoven, Ludwig Van", Otto von Bismarck → "Bismarck, Otto Von", Giuseppe Di Stefano → "Di Stefano, Giuseppe", Jan van Eyck → "Eyck, Jan Van", Guy de Maupassant → "Maupassant, Guy De", Martin Van Buren → "Van Buren, Martin, and "Jean-Claude Van Damme " →Van Damme, Jean-Claude".
- Beware of middle names which look like surnames: e.g. Peter Maxwell Davies (surname: "Davies"), and conversely parts of a surname which look like middle names, e.g. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (surname: "Mies van der Rohe").
- Sometimes a given name is combined with neither a surname, nor with a peerage title; it is preferable to sort on the first name in these cases. Example: for Augustine of Hippo, use [[Category:Christian philosophers|Augustine of Hippo]] or simply [[Category:Christian philosophers]]
Nobility
- 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": [[Category:1830 births|Salisbury, Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, 3rd Marquess of]].
- Some peers are almost invariably known by some name other than their peerage (which will not, in such cases, appear in the article title); for example, Frederick North, Lord North (who was 2nd Earl of Guilford) or Anthony Eden (who was 1st Earl of Avon). This should be followed for most categories, sorting them under North,... and Eden,...; but categories directly relating to the peerage should still sort them under it. [[Category:Earls in the Peerage of Great Britain|Guilford]] and |Avon]], respectively.
- Similarly, for monarchs with their monarchical name as article name: e.g. on the Louis IX of France page, use [[Category:Saints]] (without category sort key), but also: [[Category:French monarchs|Louis 09]] (in this case the ordinal number is converted to an Arabic numeral with a leading zero to get up to XVIII "Louis" kings in the right order in the French Monarchs category).
- For the sake of clarity, Baronets and Knights should be sorted under "Surname, Forename" rather than "Surname, Sir Forename".
Other exceptions
- Get rid of epithets: e.g. "Saint" in Saint Alban: [[Category:Saints|Alban]].
- Suffixes to names, such as "Jr." or "III", should be placed at the end of the sort key, rather than with the surname: Robert J. Smith II sorts as [[Category:New Jersey politicians|Smith, Robert J., II]], not [[Category:New Jersey politicians|Smith II, Robert J.]].
- Punctuation, such as apostrophes and colons (but not hyphens or periods/full stops) should be removed, and accented letters and ligatures should be replaced by their unaccented or separated counterparts. (Without these alterations, all punctuation marks would be sorted before A, and all accented characters and ligatures would sort after Z.)
- The first letter of each word should be in upper case, and all subsequent letters should be in lower case, regardless of the correct spelling of the name. Thus, Lena D'Água sorts as [[Category:Portuguese female singers|Dagua, Lena]]. (Upper and lower case letters sort separately.)
- For a surname which begins with Mc or Mac, the category sort key should always be typed as Mac with the remainder of the name in lowercase—for example, Macdonald, Maccluskey or Macmorris—regardless of how the surname is actually spelled.
General considerations
- See also NPOV tutorial: Categorization
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 Wikipedia:Bots for a general discussion of contra-indications regarding automated 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 who 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 factual categories, for those categories that require an assessment of personal characteristics (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."
- Exert extra precaution with regard to the categorization of living people: see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Categories.
- Categorize by characteristics of the person, not characteristics of the article: The most common mistake of this type is adding an article to Category:Biography. That category may legitimately contain articles about biographical films or biographical books, but should not contain articles about individual people. The article is a biography; the person is not.
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 the former consider themselves atheist). 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:
- Resolved people categories, 2004 - April 2005
- Unresolved people categories, 2004 - April 2005
- Category:People by surname: see Wikipedia talk:Category schemes
- 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)
- ...
Improperly named categories
If the category name has an obvious typographical error, please list it for speedy renaming at Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for what to do next. When reaching the "voting" (or "poll") step, Wikipedia: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 Wikipedia:Template messages/Category namespace are about sorting and organising categories. Here are two that can be used for problematic "people" categorizations:
| What to type | What it makes | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| {{Subjective category}} Talk Note: unlike other templates, this note is placed at the bottom of the category page |
| ||||
| {{Categorization of people disputed}} |
|
See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Howto instructions to use the templates for deletion ({{cfd}}), for renaming ({{cfr}}), or for merging ({{cfm}}).