Talk:Moses Dobruška

Categorization as a Freemason
WP:Categorization of people instructs us to "Categorize by those characteristics that make the person notable" - We don't even have a source to support the claim that Dobruska was a Freemason, so his membership in the fraternity is secondary (or even trivial) to what made him notable. The category should be removed. Blueboar (talk) 15:43, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * There is a problem with citation but if that's sorted then the line "one of the main conspirators of the “Knights of St. John the Evangelists for Asia in Europe,” " seems to belie the idea that this was a trivial fact in his life. Are you reading these articles before you take the categorisation out? This is the second example I've seen where you say it's secondary or trivial but this is belied in the article. JASpencer (talk) 22:03, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Perhaps... but if that is the case, the categorization rests on two bits unsourced (and potentially unverifiable) information... 1) that Dobruska actually was a member of the "Knights of St. John the Evangelists for Asia in Europe", and 2) that the Knights actually were a Masonic group. We definitely should not categorize people based on unsourced information. Blueboar (talk) 17:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)