Category talk:American criminals: Difference between revisions
David in DC (talk | contribs) Recent additions DO NOT belong |
John celona (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
== Recent additions == |
== Recent additions == |
||
This category has recently been inflated with a number of subjects whose main claim to notability IS NOT their crime. I urge that this wholesale change in the nature of the list be reviewed by fair-minded editors and administrators. Where the subject does not belong in the category, I urge that the subject be speedily deleted. Bullies don't get to change policy wholesale by calling edits to their eadditions censorship. [[User:David in DC|David in DC]] ([[User talk:David in DC|talk]]) 21:55, 19 April 2008 (UTC) |
This category has recently been inflated with a number of subjects whose main claim to notability IS NOT their crime. I urge that this wholesale change in the nature of the list be reviewed by fair-minded editors and administrators. Where the subject does not belong in the category, I urge that the subject be speedily deleted. Bullies don't get to change policy wholesale by calling edits to their eadditions censorship. [[User:David in DC|David in DC]] ([[User talk:David in DC|talk]]) 21:55, 19 April 2008 (UTC) |
||
: This category has LONG contained the names of literally scores of political, musical, sports and other figures who have been convicted of crimes, without the slightest protest by you. For instance Tonya Harding and Joey Buttafuoco, to name just 2 out of untold dozens long placed in this category, were famous in their own right well before being convicted. Just because their fame preceded their well-sourced convictions surely doesn't mean they must be censored from this category. Such as result would be absurd. If there is a question as to the source that is a different matter. However, if a musician, athlete, etc. has a subsequent criminal conviction well sourced in the national media, that person is quite properly placed in this category and any speedy deletion from the category without following Wikipedia dispute process should be treated as vandalism. [[User:John celona|John celona]] ([[User talk:John celona|talk]]) 22:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:44, 19 April 2008
A reasonable request
Why don't we have a sub-category for elected officials? God knows there are enough of them and it's a relatively clear delineation. Ich (talk) 21:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Add every elected official who was a criminal? The list would become so long it would become unusable! As said below, anybody who is not primarily known for their criminal activity should be removed from the list. No reader should have to say, "What is that person doing there?... Oh yeah, I see now." In other words, this list should include Al Capone but not Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton (all of whom broke laws). Mdmcginn 17:17, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Is it just me, or does Lohan's inclusion in this category stretch its credibility? Were it not for his daughter's celebrity, here is a person who would be of no note whatsoever. I've met the man, and I assume he hopes to change that (preferably for the better) someday; for now, however, notability is (literally) relative... RadioKirk talk to me 20:09, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Criteria
We do need to set up some criteria for this category. Do we include those guilty of misdemenors, such as DWI, minor drug offenses and domestic violence? How about someone like O. J. Simpson? Jonny Cash? Anyone else who shows up at http://www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/ ? -- Pinktulip 10:51, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
How about Randal L. Schwartz? Convicted felon, but served no jail time. -- Pinktulip 17:36, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Randal just today got his felonies expunged; is he exempt now? Ysth 05:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Criminal by occupation? That is ridiculous.
Folks: Many Americans have criminal records but very few Americans can fairly be characterized as having an occupation of "criminal". We need much more clear criteria in this category. If we want to drag in the many more Americans who have misdemenors on the records (and then get into issues such as criminal record expungement, since misdemenor punishment is usually not intended to ruin someone's legal occupation as a felony conviction might), perhaps a new category of "American petty criminal" would be appropriate. -- AWM 68.164.245.60 21:53, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
Certain criminals can. However, after a year and a half, we will accept your suggestion :). WatchingYouLikeAHawk 15:24, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
A suggested criteria
A category like this simply must have a limiting criteria on inclusion, since "criminal" can be highly pejorative or controversial. A proposal:
- All people in this category must have been convicted of a crime or in a situation where their having committed crime is otherwise totally unambiguous, and the crime must be one which is not today considered to be a crime of conscience or something like that (i.e. not just an abuse of the legal system).
- All people in this category must be primarily known for their criminal activities. That is, their inclusion in Wikipedia at all must be primarily because of their criminal acts.
That would keep the category fairly trim and fairly useful, weeding out everyone who had minor offenses or questionable crimes and keeping mostly the hard-core "criminals" or people whose notability is defined by their criminality. Thoughts? --Fastfission 00:41, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
- OK, here's what I'm posting, obviously feel free to edit if you have a reason to improve it:
For inclusion in this category, a person must have been duly and lawfully convicted by one or more United States federal courts or State courts, or else the person must have committed distinct, infamous, verifiable criminal acts but have gone unconvicted for reasons other than lack of proof. --M@rēino 16:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- What's "infamous"? Eugene Hasenfus is apparently in the category for exposing himself in a parking lot. Phr (talk) 01:29, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
I think we badly need the second part of Fastfission's criteria. The category becomes useless (and unwieldly) if every bad American needs to be added to it. This lists need to include only Americans who are primarily known for their criminal activities. Right now it becomes a great tool for political and personal vendettas: we could add several US Presidents and staff members simply because they were indicted, convicted, or should have been convicted. But that's not what they were known for. Mdmcginn 17:11, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Category name
With the word "American" in the the title, casual readers can only assume that it pertains to the nationality of the criminals, not the locale of the crime or context of any conviction. I think that the current definition is too expansive and misleading. Including foreign nationals who committed crimes in the US (i.e. 9/11 hijackers) contradicts the usage of all other Wikipedia category names starting with "American". --Hooperbloob 22:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I have a further problem with the title being "American" because the U.S. is not the entirety of America. I understand that it is common usage, but doesn't this inheirently include Mexico, Canada, and even Brazil? I suggest the U.S. be referred to as the U.S. & not America. Then there's the aforementioned issue about what is included. Those of that national origin, those who committed crimes in that area, or some combination of both? If I do not hear any further discussion on this topic after 1 week I will take it upon myself to rename the article & add defining criteria. --Duemellon 22:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Elliott Abrams
What's Elliot Abrams doing on this list? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.33.158.121 (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC).
He's off the the list as he was pardoned. Thank you. WatchingYouLikeAHawk 23:50, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Incarcerated Celebrities
This category has apparently been deleted. Can someone tell me how and why this was done? John celona (talk) 01:19, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Because it was in bad taste and did not further the aims of the project? David in DC (talk) 05:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Too bad. [redacted] John celona (talk) 00:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- That would be a shame. And tendentious. David in DC (talk) 01:22, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
- Too bad. [redacted] John celona (talk) 00:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
Definition
How was the decision made to include only those who are "solely" notable for their criminal convictions? Sure, Christian Brando and the former Mayor of Atlanta don't fall under that, and others as well. If this is for people only notable for their criminal convictions perhaps the title ought to be changed as well. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
Recent additions
This category has recently been inflated with a number of subjects whose main claim to notability IS NOT their crime. I urge that this wholesale change in the nature of the list be reviewed by fair-minded editors and administrators. Where the subject does not belong in the category, I urge that the subject be speedily deleted. Bullies don't get to change policy wholesale by calling edits to their eadditions censorship. David in DC (talk) 21:55, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
- This category has LONG contained the names of literally scores of political, musical, sports and other figures who have been convicted of crimes, without the slightest protest by you. For instance Tonya Harding and Joey Buttafuoco, to name just 2 out of untold dozens long placed in this category, were famous in their own right well before being convicted. Just because their fame preceded their well-sourced convictions surely doesn't mean they must be censored from this category. Such as result would be absurd. If there is a question as to the source that is a different matter. However, if a musician, athlete, etc. has a subsequent criminal conviction well sourced in the national media, that person is quite properly placed in this category and any speedy deletion from the category without following Wikipedia dispute process should be treated as vandalism. John celona (talk) 22:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)