Category talk:American people convicted of tax crimes

What are the criteria for inclusion?
Dear fellow editors: Based on the names included in this category, the criteria for inclusion seem to be pretty broad.

Tax evasion is a term of art under United States law. See. Some of the people on the list have never been charged with or convicted of tax evasion, but instead have been charged with or convicted of other tax crimes.

Any thoughts from anyone on what the criteria are or should be? Famspear 19:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

PS: The discussion of the proposed deletion back in the summer seems to imply that the category should include both convicted and unconvicted persons. There are really a couple of issues: one, Does the category included unconvicted persons, and two Does the category include persons convicted of any tax crime, even if it wasn't tax evasion. Currently, it appears the answer to both questions is yes. My question is, should the criteria be debated, decided, and based on editors' consensus clearly stated? Yours, Famspear 19:12, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Post-post script: I am concerned that Wikipedia is labeling some people as tax evaders who not only have not been convicted of tax evasion or any other tax crime -- but have not even been charged with tax evasion. As an example: Wesley Snipes, who has not been charged with tax evasion, and whose trial won't even begin until next year. Yours, Famspear 19:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Another is Kent Hovind, who was neither charged with nor convicted of tax evasion. Yours, Famspear 19:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, I tend to agree it probably should be a bit more strict but I do kind of like the fact that I can find all the lawless types here (even if some I tend to be more favorable to). Maybe there should be a category called "Trouble with the law or something. Strawberry Island (talk) 21:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)