JAY JG wrote:
I've been have a months-long debate with
another editor on this
topic. I've been stating that we include people in "Criminals"
categories if
they have been convicted of a crime by an independent judiciary. The
other editor insists that we have to decide (by some means) whether or
not they have actually committed a crime, conviction is not enough a
good enough yardstick. I'd be interested in other thoughts here.
I have a simple thought. My simple thought is that of course you are
right. :-)
I agree with you, but community consensus doesn't. I recently tried
to get the criminal categories renamed to include the words convicted
but was told that was unworkable since Butch Cassiday was never
convicted, or something.