Wikipedia:Ethnicity is not notable
|This essay contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. Essays are not Wikipedia policies or guidelines. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.|
Possibly one of the easiest and fastest "go-to" excuses to keep an article, category, or list relating a person's ethnicity with their career or ability, is the "ethnicity is notable" argument. Much like other crap exists, ethnicity is notable is a sure-fire way of supporting the creation of numerous categories, ignoring the actual problematic and trivial aspects of the entity.
In fact, ethnicity is not in and of itself notable (or defining). The policy requirements are:
- Wikipedia:Naming conventions (categories)#Heritage
...should only be created where that combination is itself recognized as a distinct and unique cultural topic in its own right.
- Wikipedia:Biographies of living people#Categories (and Wikipedia:Categorization of people)
The subject publicly self-identifies with the belief or orientation in question;
The subject's beliefs or sexual orientation are relevant to the subject's notable activities or public life, according to reliable published sources.
- Furthermore, Wikipedia:Overcategorization states
If a substantial and encyclopedic head article (not just a list) cannot be written for such a category, then the category should not be created;
Likewise, people should only be categorized by ethnicity or religion if this has significant bearing on their career.
Therefore, a mishmash of ethnicity with any occupation or ability category is not inherently notable.