Category talk:American anti-abortion activists

message: I noticed that the alphabetical order on this page is off a bit. Most of the people added alphabetically are done so by last name. However, in some instances (specifically Charmaine Yoest) the person's name is put under the letter corresponding with the first letter of the first name instead of the last name.ProLifeDC (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 13:45, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Alphabetization Issues

message: An editor recently added articles on individuals who have committed acts of abortion-related violence to this category. I do not feel that this categorisation is appropriate, as the precedent at the article Abortion-related violence, as well as throughout other abortion-related articles, has been to use the self-identifying terms "pro-life" and "pro-choice," per WP:MoS#Identity, but to use the terms "anti-abortion" or "pro-abortion" when refering to those use use violence, so as to distinguish them from the non-violent mainstream. In WP:CAT, it is stated, "Categories appear without annotations, so be careful of NPOV when creating or filling categories. Unless it is self-evident and uncontroversial that something belongs in a category, it should not be put into a category." I think this is probably the reason why NAMBLA is not listed in :Category:LGBT organizations in the United States. Categories, by their nature, are not capable of accommodating all the nuances of a topic, so I believe that we should avoid making potentially controversial categorisations, as this category cannot cover all the aspects of the subject, as the articles Abortion debate, Pro-life, or Abortion-related violence could. -Severa  (!!!) 02:10, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm concerned that this represents a form of sanitizing of the movement.  While many pro-life people really do believe that all killing is wrong, others seem to believe that "killing the killers" is acceptable.  Joie de Vivre 02:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think the NAMBLA/gay comparison makes sense.  Pedophiles don't profess to be gay... they use made-up words like "boylover".  Pro-life clinic bombers do sometimes claim to be pro-life.  Joie de Vivre 02:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Categories are supposed to be for things that uncontroversially fall into the category. If we have some sources that say person X is pro-life and some sources that say person Y is not pro-life, then I think we should not include them because there is doubt. If we have no soures that say a person is pro-life, then again, we shouldn't include them.  But if we only have sources that state individual Y is pro-life, then I think it would be fine to include them. I think in application, this would exclude the radicals who have taken another's life. What might  be best is to list the controversial figures who may or may not be pro-life, look at what the sources say, and if they ever were associated with the pro-life movement.-Andrew c 03:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: An anonymous editor recently inserted this comment into the article Shelley Shannon. -Severa  (!!!) 04:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue is not if the individual holds pro-life views, it is whethere they should be considered an activist, in other words known for repeated and vocal involvment in the pro-life movement. Not just stating their views.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.247.166.29 (talk) 03:35, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

text: I argue that people who should be classified as activists as either pro-life or pro-choice depends on peoples affiliations, Anyone who is very very vocal about those issues, or in my opinion, they vocally supports Crisis Pregnancy Centers, mentions it prominently on their website or is a member of a known anti-abortion organization is a pro-life activist and vice-versa for the other side.--Jack Cox (talk) 03:19, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Category scope