Talk:Winston Moseley

Categorization
Please see WP:Categorizing redirects. The categories on this redirect perform a useful function, and there is no policy-based reason to remove them. It is necessary that they be on the redirect rather than at Murder of Kitty Genovese because the latter article is not specifically or exclusively about Moseley, though his acts described there are the sole reason for his notability (hence he does not qualify for a standalone article). However, the eligibility of Moseley to reside in the categories is clearly established by visiting the target, where reliable sources are cited that do so. There will be little or no element of surprise if Moseley's link is clicked from one of the category pages, since the target section is specifically about Moseley. Two different editors have now reverted your removal. If you have further questions about this, discuss them here or start a discussion at WT:Categorizing redirects.  General Ization  Talk   22:34, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * And, in fact, see discussions here and here, which explain the very specific issues arising from the Kitty Genovese article.  General Ization  Talk   22:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm in agreement with the above written by General Ization. Because Moseley's page is a redirect, the only content which should be in the body of the page is the redirect template, and therefore, nothing described in the categories is verifiable on his own page. Of course, the redirect's target, which is the section about him on the murder case's page, cites reliable sources which verify it instead. As far as cluttering goes, the birth and death date cats are of course full of thousands of pages, so cluttering them isn't really possible; the Queens one has hundreds, same principle; in the murderers one it's clear to see all the redirects are in italics and readers can easily click on the standalone articles. Linguist talk&#124; contribs  12:15, 13 June 2017 (UTC)