Category talk:Crime

Philosophy: Ethics / Social and political

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics
	Social and political philosophy

Crime and Criminal Biography

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related

Law

This category is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw

CfD discussion

The following discussion comes from Wikipedia:Categories for deletion. The consensus was that this category should be kept. However, some restructuring or reevaluation may be appropriate. -Aranel ("Sarah") 02:24, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Category:Crime

Summary: 8 Votes - 2 Support Merger, 5 Oppose Merger, 1 Neutral; I've added how I interpreted votes below in several cases, so please change if I got it wrong.

I vote it to be merged into Category:Crimes, which grew large (hence sounds more natural) and overlaps "crime", bot in terms of content and "chapter". Mikkalai 02:06, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Crime should talk about crime, where Crimes should list types of crimes and such. These seem different to me. ---ssd 07:55, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

interpreted as an Oppose vote

I was thinking that Category:Crime should be the category for articles defining crime or talking about it in the abstract, and Category:Crimes the category for specific acts of crime. Thus Murder and Arson and such would go in Category:Crime; an article about the murder of Kitty Genovese would go in Category:Crimes. Thoughts? -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:56, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

interpreted as an Oppose vote

In this case I suggest the category name should be category:Acts of crime (subcategory of "cat:Crime") or similar, to avoid confusion (which is the case right now) with very similar names. In any case, the two are for significant cleanup. Also, clear charters must be written for these categories. Mikkalai 20:08, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I originated the above mentioned category, believing that Crimes had not been covered in our categories. I believe a merge would be the most intelligent thing to do. Merge. "Antonio Daisy Martin"
I agree they should merge, but I think "Crime" is the more appropriate single category name. At a later date, it might be appropriate to have a subcategory of "Fameous crimes" or the like. --agr 17:53, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
I also agree that "Crime" should be the top category. Philip 02:53, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

interpreted as an Oppose vote

Keep Crime, make Crimes a subcategory for individual crimes or types of crime. -03:27, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)
Instead of just Crime and Crimes to differentiate the two, can we have category:Acts of crime as mentioned above, or category:Crime cases? I was quite surprised to discover we do not have a filing for specific crime cases which are of significance and worthy of having an entry here. Sorting crime cases by country and by case classification would be useful too subsequently.--Huaiwei 23:39, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Keep Category:Crime as it is, and separate from Category:Crimes —ExplorerCDT 19:48, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Either merge or keep, with pretty definitions at the top of each explaining what they are, and links to the other. -Kbdank71 19:10, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

interpreted as a Support vote

My apologies. I just re-read what I wrote, and I can go either way. Neutral. I've fixed the counts above. -Kbdank71 21:42, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)