Category talk:Anti-Catholicism

message: There needs to be a definition for inclusion into this category.  Currently, it seems that it is being abused by those with a POV agenda. -- Cat Whisperer 01:52, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried to put in a definition and I'll see if anything is here unnecessarily.--T. Anthony 02:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I see that most every article here did fit. It's mostly just people who made laws against Catholics, made bizarre irrational statements about them, or actively killed them for their religion.--T. Anthony 03:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I already removed Rosie O'Donnell, Bill Maher, Barbara Walters, and a few others from this category.  Thanks for the definition! -- Cat Whisperer 03:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I see, good job.--T. Anthony 03:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for delisting Susan Deacon, et al. -- Cat Whisperer 04:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defintion for Inclusion 

message: So long!--T. Anthony 23:49, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ugh, terrible decision. -- Kendrick7talk 00:02, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I got the sense there is some dissension. I'm not sure how I feel about the decision myself.--T. Anthony 00:50, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems the debate was revived.--T. Anthony 17:16, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category kaput? 

message: Can we say weasly-worded? "[N]otable for their connection" would include all the Popes wouldn't it? And "subjects that have been accused by notable individuals or organizations of engaging in anti-Catholicism" thus includes everyone that the Catholic League has named which is almost everyone who's famous or newsworthy du jour. It's hard to accept the validity of anyone's inclusion with vague language as such and it does a disservice to Wikipedia as well as to those who are actually fighting anti-Catholicism and mitigates the real damage of those who are anti-Catholic. Benjiboi 20:27, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. I've taken out all the scrupulous language. -- Kendrick7talk 20:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, much better now. Benjiboi 21:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please fix the description 

message: Wikipedia:BLP#Categories.2C_lists_and_navigation_templates - "Category names do not carry disclaimers or modifiers." This is a wink and a nod to including people in a light to give them a poor reputation. This whole area if being tightened up. Thus: {Subjective category} I just put on. Note that the issue of how to treat groups/media and their allowable disclaimers under discussion, though this note from :Category:Homophobia may be promoted to antibigotry categories. This category is for issues relating to homophobia. It must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly homophobic. So just to clarify. CarolMooreDC (talk) 15:24, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Disclaimers vs. BLP policy

message: People (i.e. biographical articles) should not be categorised here. A separate sub-category for people was deleted, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_20#Category%3APeople_involved_in_anti-Protestantism. 
See also Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_21#Category:Anti-Catholic_propagandists. – Fayenatic London 06:58, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  People