Category talk:People convicted of murder

RfC
Should persons who were legally deemed or pardoned as being "wrongfully convicted of murder" be in the category "persons convicted of murder"? 22:49, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

discussion
Except where one or more convictions remain on the books, I would suppose that being on both lists makes little sense. Collect (talk) 22:49, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Pages should be categorized on both lists. Meatsgains (talk) 01:00, 23 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. I'm not clear on what is being discussed. We're talking about categories, not lists, right? Since is already a subcategory of, via subcategorization all of those in the former are already in the latter. Hardly any articles are placed directly in  (indeed, it currently contains no articles directly); they are typically subcategorized by nationality or criminal jurisdiction. Good Ol’factory (talk) 02:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it odd to have anyone in two subcategories of the same main category for the same event - which is why I posed the issue at a top level one.  Cheers. Collect (talk) 03:13, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not at all unusual for this tree for someone to be in two or more subcategories. In fact, most are categorized in at least two basic ones—a subcategory of (for the convict's nationality) and a subcategory of  (for the legal jurisdiction). Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:23, 23 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Subcategory the wrongfully convicted. Add a subcategory called "People wrongfully convicted of murder" and and place those who are legally deemed or pardoned as wrongfully convicted of murder in that subcategory. --Mr. Guye (talk) 21:24, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Just for clarity, that's essentially how things are set up now. Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:54, 3 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. As a former federal prosecutor, I find it confusing to include those subcategorized as wrongfully convicted in a subcategory of convicted. It would be apparent that if they were wrongfully convicted, they would have been convicted. I suggest listing them only in the wrongfully convicted category. Madeinmontana (talk) 04:23, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Having one as a subcategory of the other is simply for ease of navigation. I don't think it should be taken as implying any particular legal status, and I don't think most readers would take it that way given the names of the categories. Good Ol’factory (talk) 04:53, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Support. Summoned here by bot. Yes, Richard Kimble and others so situated were convicted of murder, however wrongfully. Coretheapple (talk) 20:47, 5 March 2015 (UTC)


 * It is not clear to me what the options under consideration are, but I support Mr. Guye's suggestion of putting wrongfully convicted people in a subcategory (which is apparently the status quo). —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:54, 20 March 2015 (UTC)


 * The current set up appears initially to work. Were they convicted of murder? Yes. Were they wrongfully convicted? Yes. But is a subcat of, which those who were wrongly convicted were clearly not - unless they did murder one person, but were wrongfully convicted of a different murder. Anyway, the tree does not flow accurately if non-murderers are grouped as murderers. That's simply not factual.  It seems more appropriate to put   directly into  so that it sits alongside .  SilkTork  ✔Tea time  12:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)