This category is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
This category and subcategories are misleading to the subject at hand - they emphasize "magnates" as a major category in business, implying that individual ownership and wealth are the main driver in the formation of business. This is an obsolete and misleading representation. --Leifern 23:23, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)
I disagree. This is a category of business people / people in business; there's no attached commentary on how these people are the drivers of the economy. Since wiki articles are supposed to be about people of note, there will likely never be articles about stock room boys, mail clerks, etc. There is already Category:Labor unions, which includes sub-cats on unionists, etc. I don't see any practical/realistic way this cat could be expanded or renamed to satisfy your NPOV complaint.
Feco 23:46, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The rejoinder is valid, because the POV is intrinsic to business biography as an endeavor, or to biography as a method in business studies, or whatchamacallit. --P64 16:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
