Category talk:American colonial people

Purpose of this category

This category needs clarification. Is it supposed to include everyone associated with the 13 colonies from the first explorer and settler until the American revolution?

If they played a role in the colonies prior to the revolution should be both in this category and the American Revolution people category? What about people who played multiple roles prior to the Revolution? Should they be placed in each subcategory of American colonial people in which they played a roll? Should they also be placed in this category when they did more than what the sub-categories cover? Ideas? Thanks Hmains 19:24, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

I created it because there was no category for American people who lived before the Revolutionary War. My guideline has been that if they qualify for the Revolutionary War people category, not to add them here. As for subcategories, the general categorization rules apply. --Jake 17:34, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Okay, that means that, for example, that Category:People of Massachusetts in the American Revolution should be a subcategory of Category: Massachusetts colonial people. Otherwise, people will double-categorize these people, which they have been frequently doing. —Kevin Myers 21:15, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Instead of going that route, I included a better description of the intention of this category. Unfortunately, the previous description was ambiguous, and so people have basically included almost every person involved in the Revolution in the Colonial category as well. This has created a massive double-categorization which will have to be fixed. I'll do some of the cleanup and hope others will do the rest. I've done Massachusetts as an example, creating Category:People by era in Massachusetts, which, as of this writing, has three subcategories (Colonial, Revolutionary, Civil War). Hopefully some editors will follow suit with other states -- there's lots of work to be done. Thanks! —Kevin Myers 03:11, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

double or single categorization

questions 1) should bio articles be left in the American colonial people category regardless of their placement in one or more of the by-state subcategories? 2) should articles be placed multiple by state sub-cats if they were notable in multiple states; 3) should bio articles be left in the American colonial people category regardless of their placement in other subcategories of this category (other than the by-state sub-categories). Hmains 05:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Good questions; I hope I've understood them correctly. Here's my take; feel free to explain where you disagree:

1. No. Peter Jefferson, for example, is currently in Category:American colonial people and Category:Virginia colonial people. This is double-level categorization which should be avoided. According to WP:CAT, "Articles should not usually be in both a category and its subcategory." This clearly applies here, because otherwise this category (American colonial people) would contain everyone who ever lived in the British colonies up to the Revolution, which is too broad.
2. Yes, though I have no idea how many people were notable in multiple colonies. Even Benjamin Franklin, who famously left one colony for another, only achieved notability in Pennsylvania. He's currently in multiple categories in both Massachusetts and Pennsylvania. Does he really belong in Category:Massachusetts politicians? I don't think so. Sure, put him in Category:People from Boston, and perhaps Category:Massachusetts writers for his anonymous teenage work (a stretch). But that's about it for Ben in Massachusetts, as far as I know.
3. Depends on the category, but it's hard to say without a specific example. If they are in a by-state subcategory, which probably most people should be in, they can be other subcategories of American colonial people, such as the French and Indian war category, which does not identify people by colony. Are there people who would not be sub-categorized by colony?

—Kevin Myers 17:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC) (edited)

What you wrote is pretty much what I think, but it seems that many/most editors are not following these ideas in these categories and many, many others. This just continues to leave all kinds of category rework to do, taking so much time that one rarely has time to work on anything else! And it is boring, too Hmains 04:32, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I hear you! —Kevin Myers 05:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

We should limit this to people in British colonies

we should have categories group people by political divisions at the time. To group them because of the political status of the places at some later time does not make sense at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 11:47, 5 October 2023 (UTC)