Category talk:Historians

Discussion moved from Category talk:Historical authors

I do not think we need this category in addition to Category:Historians. As with several other Occupations, practitioners are understood to be writers, intrinsically. To avoid redundancy and inconsistency it might make better sense to cross-list those occupations under Category:Authors by genre, but I don't think even that is really necessary. ~ Ningauble 17:41, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

For the most part, I would tend to agree with you...but what about someone like James A. Michener? I would consider most of his novels to be "historical" and so thus might be tempted to place him in this category. But in no way would I consider him an historian. What do you think? ~ UDScott 18:05, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I think we may need a Category:Historical novelists (not to be confused with Category:Alternate history writers, generally considered a sub-genre of Category:Fantasy authors).

What I would like to avoid are the twin problems of confusing fact and fiction, and subjective assessment of who is a "historian" and who is a "writer." (A similar conundrum arises with Category:Science authors where one could try to distinguish between "scientists" and "popularizers." Don't even get me started on Category:Autobiographers vs. Category:Memoirists!) ~ Ningauble 18:53, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that's a good distinction - and in this case I would then agree with your original point and merge the two. ~ UDScott 19:15, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes someone like C. S. Forester (odd, no article, I must create one) wrote historical novels which are scarcely accurate history so he was no historian.--Ole.Holm 19:16, 5 February 2010 (UTC)