Category talk:Iraqi al-Qaeda members

Untitled

al-Qaeda is a loose coalition of different organisations. One of them is al-Qaeda in Iraq. Should this cat be Members of al-Qaeda in Iraq? AndrewRT(Talk) 21:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I would think any Iraqi who self-identifies as a member of al-Qaeda could be placed in the category. That would include AQ in Iraq members. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:50, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

But what's with non-Iraqis that are members of al-Qaeda in Iraq? --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

They could be assigned to the appropriate nationality al-Qaeda members category, I suppose. I don't think there's yet a category for al-Qaeda in Iraq members, though. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 06:38, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I just wanted to be sure that they were not included in this cat. What do you think about a cat for al-Qaeda in Iraq members? If you think its a good idea, what do you suggest should be the exact name, "Categoy:Members of al-Qaeda in Iraq"?--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 22:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

An example of a non-Iraqi who was a member of al-Qaeda in Iraq would be Abu Qaswarah. I suppose that category you propose could be created; the name you propose is probably the most obvious one, though some might complain it's ambiguous. Some might also claim it to be overcategorization—I'm not sure. I suppose if that's created, this category for Iraqi a-Q members should no longer be a subcategory of Category:Al-Qaeda in Iraq, since not all Iraqi a-Q members were necessarily members of AQII. If that makes sense... Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:08, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Makes sense. However, if Category:Iraqi al-Qaeda members refers to al-Qaeda members that are Iraqi nationals but aren't necessarily part of al-Qaeda in Iraq then it should not be a subcat of Category:Al-Qaeda in Iraq regardless of any new cat. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:36, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. I haven't gone through each article in this category. Maybe they all have been members of AQII, but in theory they wouldn't have to have been. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 01:38, 17 October 2008 (UTC)