Category talk:Computer scientists

CfD discussion
The various computer scientist by nationality categories were listed for deletion at Categories for deletion. The consensus was to keep the categories, by a narrow margin (5 delete votes, including one anonymous; 4 keep votes). It may still be appropriate to reevaluate the use of this category and its subcategories. -Aranel ("Sarah ") 22:27, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

(Nationality) computer scientists
Category:American computer scientists and Category:Polish computer scientists have one article each, and the other two (Category:British computer scientists and Category:Canadian computer scientists) each have four. Meanwhile, the parent category Category:Computer scientists has more than 100 articles. Given the very marginal relevance of nationality to their chosen profession, I suggest that these subcategories be removed. 18.26.0.18 05:43, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: The same thing is true for a lot of scientists. Maybe this discussion should be about all {nationality} {science} categories, not just this one. / Uppland 06:45, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * To repeat what I wrote concerning Category:Botanists by nationality: Delete, but deletion has to be consistent with every other scientist subcategory to be meaningful. I think we should have categories for scientists by nationality and for scientists by discipline, but not for every intersection of these two (i.e. an oceanographer from Liechtenstein should be found both in Category:Liechtensteinian scientists and in Category:Oceanographers, but not in a Category:Liechtensteinian oceanographers, which will likely be far too small to be useful). (I might add that I think nationality is more justified as a categorization criterium in many disciplines in humanities and social sciences.) / Uppland 20:55, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Neutralitytalk 01:24, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think that a "(Nationality) scientists" category might be good (if it doesn't already exist), in which case I would suggest that contents to be primarily scientists that a) are associated with that country and b) had a major impact on that country.  Something in that category might be Wernher von Braun (to pick the first name to oddly come to mind) who had historic impact on both the German and US rocketry programs.  However, I don't think that a finer grained categorization to the sub-discipline that a scientist is associated with is necessary. Courtland 14:00, 2005 Feb 21 (UTC)
 * Keep. Wikipedia is already loaded with "(Nationality) (occupation)" categories, most of which occupations are probably marginally relevant to nationality. There's also categories to boot. Trying to make fine distinctions as to precisely how relevant a particular person's occupation is to their nationality is a waste of energy and time. --Calton 02:19, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think its better that categories containing many articles are divided.--Jyril 16:56, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Concur with Courtland, Delete, Radiant! 21:02, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep This is part of a well established practice. All people articles should be accessible from both the nationnal menu and the subject menu. Some people instinctively use one and some the other, as is demonstrated by the hundreds, or probably thousands or biographical articles placed in each sort of category but not the other. What is needed is the completion of the dual categorisation process so that no one can be overlooked due to this split, not the elimination of it. Wincoote 08:34, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete a scientist nationality has very often a little to have with it's work, this might be different for writers or philosophers for example which work which might be is very influenced by it's culture. Ideally Wikipedia will be better without this nationality thing, which must be kept only where it's really relevant to the person work, I see also a risk of cluttering some entries because of rampant nationalism !--Khalid hassani 18:21, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Women computer scientists
We now have a Category:Women computer scientists and people have been moving all women out of this category into that one. Is that really appropriate? For one thing, it leaves direct inclusion in this category entirely male. For another, unless someone follows up systematically, it will probably decrease the chance of any of these women being also placed in other breakdowns from this category, such as their technical specialty. - Jmabel | Talk 06:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)