Also, is Category:Insane Aristocrats really necessary?

Question

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Category:Insane_Aristocrats

Bumped into this and I think it's not really a helpful category. It was created by a former WT'er and that person added it to the profiles.

If Magna Carta project or European Aristocrats wants to keep it, that's fine. If not, I'll delete it.

Answer 1

As co-leader of European Aristocrats and Medieval projects, I don't see any need to retain Insane Aristocrats as a category.  It doesn't seem to have any genealogical purpose and the terminology is now outdated.  

Anything to do with mental health issues, where it is reliably proven and appropriate, seems better left to the biography.

Comments

Thank you, John. I'll leave it up for another day or so, but then I'll delete. 

"Anything to do with mental health issues, where it is reliably proven and appropriate, seems better left to the biography." COMPLETELY agree.

Answer 2

My Thoughts on the Matter

I think the category is very helpful.

Otherwise, I wouldn't have known there were any Aristocrats who suffered from mental illness and other neurological conditions.

Interesting the category has been on WikiTree for five plus years and it only takes one person bumping into it to think that it serves no purpose or "not really a helpful category".  It certainly served a purpose to the person who requested it ... just like every other category that exists on WikiTree.

Does a category have to be helpful to more than one person in order to exist on WikiTree?

Comments

Tommy,

I do understand your point of view but the category is not called aristocrats with mental health issues, it's called insane aristocrats.

First of all, people with mental health issues are not insane!!

Then how is a mental health issue diagnosed retrospectively? By whom? So what standard would there be to be put into that category?

It's taken so long to bring awareness to the issue, stigmatising any group of people with insanity feels like more than one step backwards.

And lastly what genealogical purpose would it serve? If I want to find out which aristocrat was struggling with any other health issue I would certainly not expect a genealogical platform to be my go-to source. In my opinion personal struggles, physical, mental or any other way, should be dealt with in a very respectful way whether the person is prominent or not. Labeling them, especially with a term that is widely used derogatory today, is not that way. Just my thoughts....

---

If it was felt that there needed to be a 'mental health' category, (which personally like Christiane I don't think is necessary) then it seems more logical to place it under the Overall Health Category rather than apply it to one particular group of people.

---

Agree Christiane, especially for this profile, who diagnosed him? Given his approximate birth and death dates of abt. 1467 - 1538

---

"Does a category have to be helpful to more than one person in order to exist on WikiTree?" In a few words, yes, otherwise it can be a personal category if you are researching something. There are things to consider, though. [https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Help:Personal_Categories#Caution:_Please_Read]

As others have pointed out, the label of "insane" is quite subjective and sensitive. How is this to be proven in older profiles? Are there records which state these things or have books been written? Often, these were just opinions of others, with no basis in science or medicine. 

Answer 3

As co-leader of the Magna Carta Project, which manages the profile of George Tailboys, we definitely would like this category deleted. I agree entirely with what John Atkinson has said in his answer.

Comments

Thank you, Michael.