Category talk:War crimes in Sri Lanka

Relation to massacres
We currently have the following structure:


 * Branch 1: Category:Massacres by country and  Category:History of Sri Lanka
 * Category:Massacres in Sri Lanka
 * Category:Civilian massacres in Sri Lanka
 * Category:Terrorist attacks attributed to the LTTE
 * Category:Prison massacres in Sri Lanka
 * Branch 2: Category:War crimes by country and Category:History of Sri Lanka
 * Category:War crimes in Sri Lanka

Many articles can be found in both branches of this "tree", and it's often a judgement call which one fits better. What can we do about it? Merge categories? Which exactly? &mdash; Sebastian 23:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Hi Sebastian we can use this policy which justifies duplication Categorization and subcategories says: Reasons for duplication There are some good reasons why duplication is not a problem, but a benefit The basic principle is the duplication makes it easier, not harder, for users to find articles. Different users may think of different categories when they look up their targets, multiple listing or locations enable users to spot their target easily

Wikipedia's categorization scheme allows for multiple taxonomies.This is a good thing and a powerful feature. The categories act as indexes, facilitating users to browse through subjects. Dutugemunu 01:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Therefore anyone looking through the category civilian massacres in Sri Lanka shoudl be able to see all civilian massacres in Sri Lanka done by Government and LTTE. Ditto for the suicide bombings and war crimes. It is a case where we duplicate to make the it easier for the user to browse all related articles Dutugemunu 01:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

"terrorist incidents" shouldn't be under "civilian massacres" (From Dutugemunu's talk page)

 * The thing is that "Terrorist incidents" includes all suicide bombings, assasinations and civilian massacres. Its better not to slot "terrorsit incidents" under "civilian massacres" beuase then we are misleading the user to think that extrajudicial executions ,assasinations , ethnic cleansing etc:- come under civilian massacres. I woudl suggest you remove "terrorsit incidents" as a subcategory of "civilian massacres" and simply add "civilian massacres" tag to the relevant pages to preserve the integrity of the taxonomy. Ditto for suicide bombing and war crimes categories. To use your example it would be like slotting engineering pages in the bridges category Dutugemunu 02:38, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Good point. I'll look into that and will be back in a few minutes. &mdash; Sebastian 02:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The reason I didn't add "civilian massacres" was because I wanted to keep the distinction between LTTE incidents and others. But maybe we should give this up? Another idea, on a higher level: This is actually a similar concern as the one I described in Category talk:War crimes in Sri Lanka. What do you think: Would it make sense to combine Category:War crimes in Sri Lanka and Category:Massacres in Sri Lanka? Excuse my ignorance, but I'm not even so sure what the difference is. What would be a good name for the combined category? &mdash; Sebastian 02:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I guess war crimes include stuff like Killing a surrendered combatant, Unlawful deportation, confinement or transfer , Using civilian shields , Summary execution. Your suggestion makes sense. We could make civilian massacres a subcategory of war crimes in Sri Lanka or we coudl remove the civilian massacres entirely and just have these pages as war crimesDutugemunu 03:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes, both are relevant. But if we end up adding more than half of the articles to both categories we should rather combine them. What percentage of articles do you estimate would fit in both? &mdash; Sebastian 03:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, edit conflict! Actually, I like the idea of removing it completely. (But it isn't my idea!) Let's keep it simple! To be honest, you had a point above; each subcategory means that the reader has to click one more time, and open yet another page. But what about the distinction between LTTE and other crimes? Would it be OK to keep that only in the list? &mdash; Sebastian 03:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I posted the question at Category talk:War crimes in Sri Lanka - such a decision should be made in a public place. For the time being, I it addresses your concern, and is very easy, if I just move the whole category under Category:War crimes in Sri Lanka. Let's discuss there if that's good enough. &mdash; Sebastian 04:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

"Terrorist attacks" shouldn't be under "civilian massacres"
Dutugemunu convinced me above that it was a bad idea to create Category:Terrorist attacks attributed to the LTTE under Category:Civilian massacres in Sri Lanka. For the time being, I'll just move it under Category:War crimes in Sri Lanka. But we also discussed just deleting it, and moving the articles directly into Category:War crimes in Sri Lanka. (This could be a speedy deletion since I as the creator could nominate it.) &mdash; Sebastian 04:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * You can put Category:Terrorist attacks attributed to the LTTE under Category:Terrorist_incidents. I think it belongs there Dutugemunu 08:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * It already is in that category via category:Terrorism by country → category:Terrorism in Sri Lanka. You may not be completely happy with that, since it's two clicks removed. But that's the way the overwhelming majority of terrorist incidents is organized, with two exceptions. If you want it to be in that category, then I would recommend to make your case on Category talk:Terrorist incidents, and if nobody objects after 3 days, then you can put it there. &mdash; Sebastian 09:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categorization#How_to_create_categories, it is actually desirable to have at least two parent categories for a subcategory.


 * When writing the description for a category try to give it at least two parent categories. For example, Category:British writers should be in both Category:Writers by nationality and Category:British people. A few categories do only merely subdivide their parent category, but unless the parent category has many potential articles under it, or many potential subdivisions, if you can't think of a second parent category, it might be a better idea to fold your smaller category into the parent.


 * It is already in more than two categories. &mdash; Sebastian 09:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Terrorist incidents and War Crimes should be the two parent categories for the Terrorist incidents attributed to LTTE. I have added it under Terrorist incidentsDutugemunu 08:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Please don't be so fast. I was just replying to you with the above, and then I had an edit conflict. What do you think you achieve by doing things before others agree? There are so many other things you can do, why pick the one you know I disagree with? &mdash; Sebastian 09:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, the policy says at least 2 parent categories but it doesnt limit it to 2 categories Dutugemunu 09:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Discussion about definitional issues
A discussion has been initiated to examine definitional and other issues with this category. Interested editors are invited to comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sri Lanka Reconciliation. – Black Falcon (Talk) 18:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)