Category talk:Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

CfD consensus

@BrownHairedGirl: What was the consensus regarding this category's scope (i.e. should biographical articles be included)? ^Falling_Gravity 23:33, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

@FallingGravity: No consensus on that. But a deletion discussion is rarely a good way to establish consensus on scope. Most editors will focus on the keep/delete choice, as they did here. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:38, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

I'll just go ahead and decide for each article then. ^Falling_Gravity 23:52, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

FallingGravity, please stop de-populating this category without explaining at each page why you think it should be removed, and allow editorial consensus to form. Thank you. KalHolmann (talk) 00:38, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think every article mentioned in Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections deserves to be in this category. For example, the John O. Brennan article doesn't even mention Russian interference. ^Falling_Gravity 03:24, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

FallingGravity, Mr. Brennan is mentioned by name 8 times in Wikipedia's Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections. That makes him a notable figure, and justifies including his WP:BLP in this category. In any case, the issue should not be decided here, but at Talk:John O. Brennan. KalHolmann (talk) 03:32, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, and Donald Trump is mentioned hundreds of times in that article, but does that justify listing his BLP in this category? I guess we could try, but I highly doubt it. ^Falling_Gravity 03:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Conspiracy theory

Should be categorised as such as well. Conspiracy theories can later be proved to be true (though rarely so). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.84.101.248 (talk) 09:50, 27 July 2018 (UTC)