Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Category:Marines


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: move to Category:United States Marines. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 04:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Category:Marines
Only four members of category. Category:Military leaders only has 51 members.
 * Vote closed: Move (simulate) (1 delete, 3 move) ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 04:43, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete little used category. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 09:06, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Only one member of category. Category:Military leaders only has 51 members, I do not feel it would be useful to split currently (and splitting along military occupation would not be my first choice at any right: surely splitting along nationalistic boundaries for a nationalistic thing like an army would be better?). ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 09:06, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


 * The Marines Category has only one listing so far, because I have just started. Marine is not a military occupation, it is a Branch of Service, and for a Marine a way of life.  Marines as a Subcategoy of the Military have a very different take on things especially in contrast to services such as the Air Force.  Marines will produce quite different quotes. Also they are many Marines worth quoting that are not traditionally consider Military Leaders. Sgt Maj Dan Daily, winner of two Medals of Honor has many good quotes.  Many of his quotes are as a junior enlisted Marine.  I think you will find that for the most part people will only put generals in the category of Military leaders.  If nothing else this has encouraged add more Marine Quotes.  :-) --Chalko 10:31, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Question Are pages allowed to have multiple categories? Is it incouraged?  I think many  pages will have multiple categories,  so worry about splitting a category is unnecessary--Chalko 10:35, 23 November 2005 (UTC).
 * I went through and grabed the crossovers from Category:Military leaders. There are now 4 links. --Chalko 10:31, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Administrative note: I've moved the comments to std. comment format to make discussion easier. ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 11:51, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I fear I do not see the relevance of these arguments. Being a military leader is what made Lt. Gen. Mattis notable, which is why he is in that category. Multiple categories are encouraged -- but not links to supercategories. Every category, and category split, has a cost, and a value. Currently, our category system has very rough divisions except where categories grew extremely large. Again, a more basic subdivision of military leaders is along national boundaries, and after we do that, further splitting will not be justified -- for a very long time. Even if you add 20 more marines, it will not change the situation significantly. But do note that if we later find out we need the category later, reconstructing it is easy enough :) ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 11:51, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Subdividing by nations does not seem relevant to me. Books of miltary quotations do not divide by nation.  I read about leaders from all nations.  The profesion of arms is much the same for all nations.  However Marines, Saloirs, Soldiers and Airmen have very different perspectives on things.  However I do concede that I need to find notable Marines that are not considered Military Leaders.  I will continue to look.  My initial take on Officer vs Enlisted is not really enough.  --Chalko 08:15, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Zell Miller is a Notable Marine that would not be considered a Miltary Leader.  He attained the rank of Sergeant.  Although Sergeants lead and have a very demanding leadership task.  Sergeants or not usually listed amongst notable Military Leaders. --Chalko 08:26, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure why, though. Sergeants do have the responsibility to lead troops in combat...that is what I consider military leaders :) (Also, you are aware that "marines have their own view" is a US-centric view, right? I doubt US marines and other marines would see eye-to-eye...) ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 09:24, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Sergeants are more of the "foreman" or shift supervisor level. Don't get me wrong I have been both a Sergeant and Major in a Combat zone.  I lead both times.  However I am confident that if you picked up a book called "Military Leaders"  It would list primarily Generals, and very few enlisted members.--Chalko 11:43, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * "marines have their own view", I am confident that the Thai, ROK and British Marines think different than there Army counter parts, but the USMC trains with them quite often.  I do agree that US Marines and other Marines think different, but I still feel Marines lend a unique perspective that leads to a distninct kind of quote.  I would consent to changing the Category to United States Marines but I don't think there is a need to distinguish on national boundries.  The profession of Arms respect profesional no matter where they come from.--Chalko 11:43, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Is there a general discussion page on the desired scope of a category?--Chalko 11:43, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to Category:United States Marines under Category:Occupations (a reasonable approximation to "way of life" for categorization purposes), much like we have for Category:United States First ladies. (BTW, that latter needs a capitalization fix, either to USfl or USFL.) Current category is U.S.-centric, permitting only USMC personnel (who I happen to think are the finest fighting force in the world!) while inappropriately assuming the generic term "Marine". The alternative, allowing inclusion of Marines of all nations, past and present, seems less than optimal, for the following reasons:
 * It's clearly not the intent of the category creator, who is actively adding USMC quotee articles.
 * It might be difficult to define what makes a "Marine" for such an all-encompassing group, but it would be required for our worldwide, history-wide quotation compendium.
 * We do allow ad-hoc creation of categories based on growing content (though we try to get them integrated into a scheme), but there's no point in widening the category (at least at this time) if we're not expecting any other articles outside the current definition.
 * I have no inherent objections to a USMC personnel category, as I'm sure there are many notable ones with sourced quotes who might not be considered "leaders" per se. (But when can we expect the Chesty Puller article, Chalko? &#9786;) I'm willing to let this develop and revisit the status down the road, if necessary. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 13:29, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to Category:United States Marines is a reasonable solution--Chalko 17:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Admin note I moved my vote up to the top to make the current count more obvious--Chalko 17:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC) (cancelled by Jeff Q; see below)
 * Chalko, please do not create novel structures for WQ:VFD entries. I'm sure you wanted to provide an easy-to-read summary, but in the process, you missed my vote and added work for the sysops to ensure the votes and discussions were in sync. I have reverted this VFD entry to the official WQ format and removed the apparent double-vote from Achilles caused by this desynchronization. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:09, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to Category:United States Marines. Though we as yet have few pages of military leaders, the category can be expected to grow, and hopefully other sub-categories will as well. ~ Achilles † 18:15, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Move to Category:United States Marines under Category:Occupations UDScott 23:55, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Poor NPOV. Not all Marines have participated in a Occupation. But why do I bother with  facts.  Feel free to add category Occupations and then carefull select those Marines who have quotes about an Occupation. --Chalko 15:29, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Chalko, I'm not quite sure why you're continuing to argue -- I'm agreeing with the move to Category:United States Marines, which you agreed with earlier. Granted there can be several interpretations of the word Occupation, but for the purposes here, we are treating someone who is in the Marines (or any other branch of service) as having that as his or her occupation. In the end, I don't think we are advocating doing anything different from each other. UDScott 15:50, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I read Occupation as Occupation of Iraq.  Agree Marine is a Occupation (Job)--Chalko 20:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I hope everyone voting Move understand that in this context it is short for "Create new category, redirect Marines to it, and edit all articles to contain new category", since physically moving categories is IIRC impossible. Thanks ~ MosheZadka (Talk) 04:57, 4 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.