Category talk:Assassinated people

In this article, we will explore the topic of Category talk:Assassinated people in depth, addressing its multiple facets, impact and relevance in today's society. From its origin to its evolution over time, we will delve into the exhaustive analysis of Category talk:Assassinated people, unraveling historical, cultural, social and economic aspects that have contributed to shaping its meaning and scope today. Through research, studies and opinions of experts in the field, we will seek to shed light on the most pertinent questions related to Category talk:Assassinated people, in order to offer a comprehensive vision that enriches knowledge and understanding of this topic of unquestionable relevance.

early comment

I've put this as a subcategory of 'crime victims'.

It seems reasonable to me that any assassination is by definition a crime, but I could imagine someone attempting to make a case (a person assassinated in somewhere where no law holds, or where the killing was for some reason not illegal).

This is consistent with other parts of Wikipedia, as the category Assassinations is a subcategory of Crimes. Anyway, feel free to debate either side. --Saforrest 07:41, Sep 2, 2004 (UTC)

cat and subcats

Thw categorization is becoming overly broad, to the point that murder victims are almost equated to assassinated people. I suggest Category:Assassinated people to only refer to assassinatations of people who either held some form of government position (diplomats, generals not active in a war situation, mayors) or are politicans. Clearly this would rule out the Category:Assassinated journalists and Category:Assassinated activists, as an example. Intangible 15:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)