Talk:List of last words

A word of advice

Alright, I'm going to publish this into mainspace in a short while, and I can already feel the amount of rage from serious business activists and other WikiSnobs calling for deletion. So let me state my case for keep right away:

• It is notable:

• 'Famous last words' googles to 30 000 000
• '"Famous last words"' googles to 430 000
• '"last words of"' googles to 500 000
• Loads and loads of books have been dedicated to the subject of last words of famous people

• It is already on Wikipedia:

• '"last words"' gets 3500+ hits
• Many, many biographies contains the person's last words, especially if doubted or frequently misattributed
• Final statement#Examples is a list big enough to almost warrant its own article.

• It does not belong solely on WikiQuote. Although they already have an article on this subject (which is disturbingly messy and unreferenced), Wikipedia is not by a long shot free from quotations, including stand-alone articles about quotations. Consider Category:Sayings of Jesus, Category:Shakespearean phrases, AFI's 100 Years...100 Movie Quotes and all the stand-alone articles linked from there. And don't forget the gigantic content of List of Latin phrases which almost makes us look like a dictionary. But it does not, because I'm sure we can agree that it is a notable topic. As is this.

So please think twice before shouting at me to get back(?) onto WikiQuote. Thank you. Gaioa (t,c,l) 11:45, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

And by the way, the WikiQuote entry is an absolute mess, and way too big. I intend to make a proper article that can meet good standards: sourcing, imagery, non-arbitraryness, sourcing again, notability-conscious, and sourcing again. That's why I just felt entitled to remove the PROD. Feel free to start an AFD if you feel like diving into it, but I will state my case. Thank you. Gaioa (t,c,l) 17:30, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Inclusion

What will be the standard for inclusion on the list? Trivialist (talk) 23:13, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Um, didn't really think of that. So far, I just added quotes I could find and knew about. But let's at least make sure the subject has a standalone article. And maybe require a standalone Wikiquote page as well? Plus sources, of course.
Also, that's just for the current section we have, "Last words spoken by famous people". As seen in comments back down, I also considered including "Last words made famous" for gallows humour and other humorous things, plus "Last words of people sentenced to death" as a potential relocation of Final statement#Examples. But let's think about one thing at a time. Only one sublist for now. Thank you. Gaioa (t,c,l) 06:40, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

It should be enough that they have a Wikipedia article to be notable. Wikiquote does not have as many contributers as Wikipedia. As such it tends to be deficient in historical figures, getting worse as you go back in time (at least when compared to bios on Wikipedia).--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 00:34, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Hey @Epiphyllumlover:, I really appreciate your work to include these protestant martyrs and I wish God's blessing to go with you. But please remember that the criteria I proposed was a rule of thumb to test if a subject is notable enough and that it is sufficiently sourced. Therefore, I would like to remind everyone that notable subjects still requires reliable and significant sources to back them up. I'd happily support altering the criteria, but not if others can use it as an excuse to be lax with sources. Also, consider the list heading reading "famous people", and remember that the existence of a Wiki article asserts notability but not fame. Thank you. Gaioa (T C L) 10:18, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Captain Smith

I suggest that the Captain Smith words are actually suited here, and that while Binksternet does point out Harold Bride's testimony, we must consider the timing of Edward Brown's account; while Harold Bride's testimony is reliable, we have to remember that his last talk with Captain Smith occurred a few minutes before the ship sank, and Smith was seen by other people after that, carrying out a final tour of the deck, telling crew members to save themselves. Brown's testimony is corroborated by several others who testified to seeing Smith telling them to save themselves, and that it was just before the ship took its final plunge. His testimony is also significant because he says that after Smith walked onto the bridge, the ship took its final plunge, just a "few seconds" later, and the bridge and boat deck was quickly covered with water. This part matches all the survivor accounts (see enquiry testimonies! http://www.titanicinquiry.org/) that are unanimous in saying that the fore end of the boat deck, where the bridge was, was submerged in a very quick and violent manner, like a "tidal wave" had struck it: this makes Brown's sighting of the Captain, almost certainly, the last reliable sighting of Smith, and his last known words, rather then Bride's, especially since Bride's talk with him occurred a few minutes before the plunge (Bride confirmed that he and Phillips did not the leave the wireless room for at least ten more minutes). Brown's sighting, like I said, occurred just immediately before the plunge.

To deal with this issue, I put a footnote detailing some of the more popular myths of Smith's last words, like his supposed "Be British" statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.146.99.114 (talk) 07:35, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Vader

The article mentions he's portrayed by David Prowse and voiced by James Earl Jones, but in the scene in question, he was portrayed and voiced by Sebastian Shaw. That's going to be confusing to address in the article though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.186.125 (talk) 23:10, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Reversion of my latest edits

Just now, @Gaioa: reverted my latest edits to the article. While some of the people whose last words I added are arguably less notable (I'm thinking of Inocêncio Francisco da Silva and, to a lesser extent, Miguel Bombarda), it's silly to say any of the others aren't notable (namely, a head of state, a queen consort, a Roman Catholic saint, and one of the greatest figures in Portuguese literature). The inclusion criteria were arbitrarily decided and not at all discussed, if this the above contents of this talk page are any indication (though I do agree that it is reasonable to require the subjects have a stand-alone Wikipedia article, I think it's hardly necessary for them to have a Wikiquote entry to establish notability, for the reasons pointed out already by Epiphyllumlover).

Besides, a quick search reveals there are a couple of other people listed in the article with no Wikiquote entry (English Wikiquote, at least): Franz Ferdinand, Edward Smith, Jack Daniel, Emerson H. Liscum — are we to get rid of those interesting quotes, too? -- RickMorais (talk) 21:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Agree with you on this subsection.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 18:15, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

RFC: Inclusion criteria for this list?

As the original author of this article, I formulated some (kinda out-of-thin-air) inclusion criteria reading that "subjects should have both a standalone WP article and a standalone WQ article". Later, someone objected to that, and I was too busy with non-WP matters to discuss so I let it be. Now it feels like the article is becoming a dump for everyone's favorite historical people and literary works, so therefore I ask for consensus on this matter. We need one criterium for real people and one for fictional works. Gaioa (T C L) 19:27, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Comment - I'm not even sure if it's a good idea to have both real people and fictional characters on the same page. I think the way the page is now does a disservice to both categories and splitting the page would go a long way towards improving both resulting articles. For example, the fictional last words section now included two characters from Shakespeare, but 14 from Across Five Aprils, the sort of thing that would probably not happen if the section wasn't tucked away at the end of a longer page. PraiseVivec (talk) 12:34, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Good point, I was afraid that very thing would happen. But I don't feel on a whim like it warrants its own article, perhaps we should just scrap that section. Gaioa (T C L) 13:41, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Pinging useres who have contributed to the article and might want to share their opinion: @RickMorais: @Epiphyllumlover: @157.52.54.11: @Petrandreev13: Gaioa (T C L) 14:53, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Comment Yes, fictional people should to have their own article (although I must admit that since I don't feel like setting up that new article, maybe just a community draft, linked to on this talk page. At least then we would have something to redirect people to when they try to add in fictional people), other than that, any person notable enough to have a wikipedia article should qualify. Over time this page should become quite large, and then can be organized alphabetically, by subject, or chronologically. Wikiquote articles about the people should not be required in my opinion. Doubtful quotes can be included too, but the doubt should be noted in this article.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 17:02, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Beg to differ If only a WP article is needed for inclusion, the article might grow exponentially due to the 5,894,320 pages on our Wiki. Not that each and every one can or will be added, but it still feels like a question on article size should the criteria be that loose, and organizability is not the only problem we would face. Perhaps we should require a non-stub article for each subject?
Also... When I first started this article, I intended it as a list of "great words by great people", or "famous last words" if you wish. In other words, I meant to collect the last words which are actually notable for the words themselves and not for the person uttering them (e.g. Julius Caesar, Jesus, Marie Antoinette, Oscar Wilde), plus last words uttered in connection with highly notable historical events (e.g. Julius Caesar, Abe Lincoln, JF Kennedy) - a sort of legend-dispelling reference work. Now I'm not saying this is the article's destiny set in stone, I'm merely clarifying my intentions. Gaioa (T C L) 17:55, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

If non-fictional and non-stub are the only requirements (beyond it being sourceable), I will quickly back that.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:29, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

• IMO, this article should contain only real people. The rest can be deleted or moved to a new article. It is rather bizarre to have historical figures in the same place with imaginary ones. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:01, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Having a Wikipedia article should be sufficient for inclusion in this article. Ktrimi991 (talk) 20:03, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Jesus

We should use Jesus' last words in the earliest source, rather than later ones. Temerarius (talk) 19:41, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

What is this "earlier source" of which you speak? Gaioa (T C L) 18:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Mark was written earlier than the other gospels. Temerarius (talk) 18:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

John Lennon

I think I read somewhere that John Lennon's last words were "Of course I do. I am John Lennon." Is there any truth to this? JIP | Talk 10:13, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

According to contemporary news reports in 1980, a policeman asked "Are you John Lennon?" and he replied "Yeah." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.116.37.205 (talk) 22:30, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

Vespasian

Suetonius gave the first half of his last words in Latin and the second half in Greek. Here it's all Latin. Temerarius (talk) 20:52, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Context, NN

• Some of the individuals here are non-notable, so their entries are a waste of space.
• Many of the entries here lack context. Who cares what cryptic dying comments are attributed to them, if readers lack the context to understand why the dying comment is itself notable? Honestly, I doubt whether all these dying comments are notable.
• Some of these dying comments, like Che Guevera's, are not, in fact, their dying comments. Guevera's call for his enemies to shoot him may be his last publicly recorded comment. But they didn't shoot him. They took him away, and tortured him. Whatever confessions they choked out of him may not be publicly recorded, but they would have been his last words.
• I think this article should (1) be pruned of the non-notable and uninteresting entries; (2) be reformatted into a table, with an explicit field for the cultural significance of the phrase, and another field for its context. Currently the context is explained, or hinted at, in just some of the entries. Geo Swan (talk) 02:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)