Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Liberal leaders

Category:Liberal leaders and all subcategories
There was recently a consensus to delete Category:Liberal leaders in the United States, which is archived at Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Category:Liberal leaders in the United States. Based on that consensus, I started deleting the similar categories (Category:Liberal leaders in Albania, Category:Liberal leaders in Sweden, etc.), but I think I was too hasty. So for the record, should Category:Liberal leaders exist? Should any of its subcategories exist? (Please see the archived discussion of Liberal leaders in the United States for cogent arguments for and against.)


 * Delete all for reasons given above   – Quadell (talk) (help)   22:26, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. (Although don't delete Category:Leaders of the British Liberal Party, which is different). john k 00:20, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 02:40, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete some, keep some. Please note that unlike the United States of America, some countries in the world, Liberal is not synonymous with liberal. Particularly, in countries of the British Commonwealth, there are politcal parties following the form of Britain of the last century, where there were a Liberal Party and a Conservative Party, neither of which are definitively liberal or conservative. The category Liberal leaders should not be deleted but a clarifying note should be added that this category is only for leaders of Liberal Parties. And the only subcategories should be of party leaders of actual Liberal parties, and not non-NPOV opinons of what the political views of political leaders are. For instance, Category:Liberal leaders in Canada is a category for leaders of the Liberal Party in Canada Liberal Party of Canada. See liberal party for more info. I don't recall the US ever having a Liberal Party... however the British Liberals are often called the whigs and there was an American political party by that name. Big-L and small-l liberal are two different sets and in some countries may even be disjoint. In New Zeleand, at one point the Liberal Party was more conservative than the conservative party (the National Party). 132.205.15.42 17:26, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * You make some good points, but please sign in for your vote to be counted.   – Quadell (talk) (help)   16:05, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete all those listed and where appropriate, move contents to category with better names. There should only be categories for leaders of actual parties. There should not be a general category of Category:Liberal leaders as there is generally no connection between the Liberal parties that exist in various countries and no reason they should be grouped together into a category. The party should be clearly identified in the category name. Thus Category:Leaders of the Liberal Party of Canada is better than Category:Liberal leaders in Canada. older &ne; wiser 18:53, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete all. Postdlf 21:56, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Why all? As others have noted, the category Category:Liberal leaders in Canada is a completely NPOV categorisation referring to an actual, existing party.  --Saforrest 00:02, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete all categories which do not correspond to actual parties. There is no point having a category if there is no guiding ideology between these parties, and there is little in common between, say, the Liberal Party of Canada, a centre-leftist party, and the Liberal Party of Australia, an (apparently) right-wing one.  --Saforrest 00:02, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Not beeing too informed about this Category-system, I nevertheless feel that if there is a reason to have any category with leaders for political parties and/or ideologies, then Liberal, Conservative and Socialist parties can not be excluded on the basis that some of them or their opponents may find the lable belittling. On the other hand, these categories must be used in accordance with established usage in each of the respective nations, and can't be applied just since some visible media figures refuse to make distinctions that are made by most others. /Tuomas 11:47, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)