Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 June 19/Wikipedians by politics

This is an attempt to organize the main arguments being advanced for deletion and keeping, to assist editors in making decisions. Please improve it, in order to show each argument at its very best. Please try to state arguments is as neutral terms as possible, and try to avoid prejudicial and emotive language, which can distract from the content. Please thread responses using multiple bullets (*** as a response to **, etc).

Arguments for deletion, and responses

Factionalism

• User categories by politics encourage factionalism.

• However, they also encourage pluralism, and prove that Wikipedia is a tolerant place that is open for many different people with various opinions.

Cats vs. AGF

• User categories by politics encourage the assumption of bad faith when seen by an editor with an opposing point of view.
  • But, we should be able to work with people of differing points of view. Wikipedia is not censored to protect the sensibilities of intolerant editors.

"Vote-stacking"

• User categories by politics enable "vote-stacking".

• There may be much better solutions (rather than deletion) to adress this problem such as the one I have proposed on the main discussion. Tal :) 10:02, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Obsolete

• User categories by politics are less encyclopedic than user categories by editing interest and should be obsoleted by them.

No encyclopedic value

• User categories by politics are not useful for building an encyclopedia, and Wikipedia is not a free webhost.
  • Pretty much all the arguments for keeping are responses to this.

Arguments for keeping, and responses