Category talk:Living people/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Very Large Category

This category does not have Category: Very large categories and needs to be added into the Category: Very large categories page, additional subcategories can be in the value.--GoShow (...............) 06:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Not done: You will be able to edit this page yourself tomorrow. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 15:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Very Large Category

I was issued to have the go and edit the category today. This category does not have Category: Very large categories and needs to be added into the Category: Very large categories page, additional subcategories can be in the value.--GoShow (...............) 06:43, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

GoShow (...............) 16:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Not done: I don't understand your first sentence at all. I am uncomfortable adding the category based on the way you expressed your request and your evident experience despite being a new user. You will be autoconfirmed in about 24 hours. Please just wait until then to make this edit yourself. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 18:24, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

• Thank You

Forgive me about the rush of the second repeat report. The category can be reduce more, although, thank you for the autoconfirmation. ----GoShow (...............) 19:27, 24 February 2012 (UTC) 19:26, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

It says in the header of Category:Very large categories: "Some categories intentionally contain many pages […]; these categories do not need to be tagged." Consequently, I'm not sure it is appropriate to add that category (Very large categories) to this one (Living people). -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:38, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi GoShow - how do you propose that Living people be subcategorized? GoingBatty (talk) 00:41, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

• Proposals

There are alot ways and phrases for a living person, such as ill people, people with health reasons, or people with jobs, any any more situations?--GoShow (...............) 22:29, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

These are temporary time periods of living people and keep these up to date is time consuming and probably would violate BLP. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:34, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Alrighty then, I was about to comment it was fabulous in factual opinion.--GoShow (...............) 22:38, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

I was about to agree with Magioladitis' concerns regarding the Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons policy, but then I saw that one of the subcategories of Category:People is Category:People by medical or psychological condition already exists with many subcategories. Note that these are not subcategories of Category:Living people, meaning these categories contain people who could also be dead. So let me ask my question a different way: what types of subcategories of Living people would be beneficial to Wikipedia users? GoingBatty (talk) 02:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

• Of course, you have observed some of the examples if needed, as there are some category ideas to plan.--GoShow (...............) 02:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Statistic suggestion

Perhaps this article should include an estimated figure of what percent of the world's cumulative population is currently living. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.111.192.210 (talk) 15:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

This is not an article, it's a category; see Help:Category and further links there. The "answer" (about 6%) can be found at World population#Number of humans who have ever lived. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:00, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Should this category exist?

I randomly see this tag on a small portion of Wikipedia articles about people who are alive, but not on most people's profiles. It always strikes me as very arbitrary and haphazardly applied. I've read over the page here on why it exists but it still doesn't seem to be consistently used. Is it really serving its purpose? 69.125.134.86 (talk) 22:34, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

(Don't edit at all outside your contribution.) Can you give an example where an article ought to be so categorised but isn't? -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:11, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Errata

dont know — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.55.243.14 (talk) 00:22, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

We probably have a lot of people here who are dead

Just going down the Salt Lake Tribune's recently published list of "Notable Utah's who died in 2017", I found 2 people in this category who have been dead for several months. I doubt Utah's are unique in at times not having their well publicized deaths included in our project.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:45, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Category optimization

I propose to divide this category in subcategoies for all nationalities, e.g.: Living americans, living frenchs, living russians, living moldovans. We have this feature on romanian wiki. It's very comfortable to use, and to search people by name in ona nationality ;) --XXN (talk) 08:44, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

That will only open the can of worms of people's nationality and therefore impractical. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:39, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

• Nationality is too debated in some cases. For people who are actual dual nationals, which one would they go in? While such is generally figure able for other categories, the answer from this divide would just create a lot of still huge categories. One unified category works here. Anything else will create unneeded category clutter. Basically this category stands in for a year of death category until the person died, and we do not divide year of death categories.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:48, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

List is incomplete

Please add all living people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.22.97.200 (talk) 12:40, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

• I have to second that there are living people not in this category. I try to add them whenever I find such articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:49, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Template discussion of possible interest

Please see this discussion about the Lifetime template. Thanks. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 15:08, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

@Lugnuts: Since the decision was made to delete the template, any idea why it's still around four months later? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Good question! Will log it at WP:AN for further action. Thanks for the ping. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 17:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

This category is an embarrassment to Wikipedia. Somebody must be protecting it. With all the rules and guidelines, how does this survive? What time and energy must be wasted. I know my time has been wasted. The superbowl is just sad. Eschoryii (talk) 02:42, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Scope of this category

Is this category for all living people, or just for people with no birth dates given? Fuddle (talk) 12:50, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

@Fuddle: It should contain all living people biographies, or people assumed to be living. If birth dates are unknown, Category:Year of birth missing (living people) or Category:Date of birth missing (living people) can be added in addition to this category. --Animalparty! (talk) 15:00, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

@Animalparty: Thanks. I'm not sure that that is clear on the page. I'd guess that more often than not, bios don't have this category.

Category request for deletion

I'm sure you could argue there's something different between the two but anyways, I don't understand how this gets it's full category and the dead people category can only have subcategories. Cinefan Cinefan (talk) 03:54, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Cinefan Cinefan: This category is more of a maintenance category, in a class separate from almost all other content categories: it ensures that articles in this category get warning messages whenever someone tries to edit them, to remind them of WP:BLP policy. And it allows monitoring of changes that may violate BLP. Granted, it doesn't fit nicely withinthe concept of defining category, as people are not commonly referred to as "a living actor/artist/politician, etc.", but creating subcategories like "living people born in 19XX or "living Spanish actresses" is even more arbitrary, creates more effort to maintain, and dilutes or hinders the purpose of the category, which is to monitor changes to BLPs. Please read the explanatory text at Category:Living people and the previous discussions on this Talk page. --Animalparty! (talk) 20:12, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Category order

Is there any consensus on where to place this category on an article, ie. should it always precede birth year? Thanks, --Mondo Beer (talk) 18:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

last decade vs. last ten years

This category currently offers the following message:

I imagine the intention of this message is to say that if Person X become 90 years of age during 2021 then the period of no new documentation covers 2011-2021. And that if Person Y become 90 years of age in 2029, the period intended is 2019-2029.

But the phrasing used leads to another outcome. The current decade is the 2020s and the last one is the 2010s. This is true both today in 2021 and in eight years time in 2029. So if the last document is dated 2012 it will prevent transfer into Category:Possibly living people for both person X and Y, even though 2012 is seventeen years before person Y's 90th birthday.

The easy solution I suggest is:

change "for whom there has been no new documentation in the last decade"

to

"for whom there has been no new documentation in the last ten years"

PS. I couldn't understand if it was sourced from a policy (or other authoritative discussion) so I am bringing up this matter here. Cheers CapnZapp (talk) 15:29, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done CapnZapp (talk) 14:25, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Scope of this category, redux

Does the scope of this category extend to e.g. music bands (which on the one hand are made up of living people, and which on the other hand are not biographies of those living people, but rather, err, a band.) I estimate several thousand band articles are in the category. I'm not finding that a very useful thing, since I'd like living people to equal 'a biography of a living person' and to exclude 'something a person is involved in'. I'd either like cover for removing the category; or else to be dissuaded from removing them. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:24, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Not really, as this a subcategory of Category:People, which is for individual humans, but all articles must still follow WP:BLP policy, regardless of subject or which categories they're in. Living band members should be in this category if they have their own article, as should redirects of living members who may or may not satisfy notability criteria, per Wikipedia:Categorizing redirects. Talk pages of band articles with living members, can be tagged with {{BLP}}. As the article topic and scope drifts further away from living people, the necessity to include {{BLP}} lessens: Democratic Party (United States) covers some living people, some of whom may be controversial, while Canada is a broad topic, and no participants of the American Civil War are still living, but BLP policy still applies to any mention of living people (politicians, historians, etc.) in said articles. --Animalparty! (talk) 20:52, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Having said all that, I'm sure everyone here will agree: "Living People" is one dang big category. I expected to fill up my phone's RAM trying to view it. I suppose it's just as well it's not actually laid out that way—but it was an exciting prospect. – AndyFielding (talk) 13:08, 7 November 2022 (UTC)