Talk:List of African supercentenarians

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Redirect, 23 September 2018, see discussion.
keep, 2 April 2015 (UTC), see discussion.
delete, January 7 2011, see discussion.
delete, November 10 2010, see discussion.

Untitled[edit]

Stifle (talk · contribs), *The Blade of the Northern Lights (talk · contribs)

I'm asking why was the article deleted. I can't see any reasons for this move to have been done. In my opinion, the article hasn't broken any of the Wikipedia guidelines. What is more, this article was not eligible for speedy deletion because it had changed substantially since 2010. Both deletions in 2015 failed to notify the article creator or give sufficient time for the article creator to address any issues or appeal the "prod" before the deletion occurred. The article itself serves as an useful piece of information and educates the society, how long can the people truly live on the African continent. The list contained 8 names of verified supercentenarians to have lived in Africa, which is not to less for a list. For the reasons above, I am to compain about the decision of deletion. I'd wish to hear your explanation, and if my arguments are fair, to have the article recreated. Sincerely, Waenceslaus (talk) 15:32, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 August 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. A clear numerical split in the votes and reasonable arguments from both supporters and opposers. Jenks24 (talk) 06:50, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

List of African supercentenarians → List of oldest African people – The title and Template:Longevity should reflect the oldest Africans, not just Africans aged 110 and up. We have List of oldest living people and List of oldest people but break down into 110 and up by continent, country and year of death while we have notable famous centenarians by occupation (with a living subset). This is part of a view to merge all that into a coherent complete "oldest people" series of lists. The article currently notes that there are no living African supercentarians and thus on that basis, there's no corresponding List of living African supercentarians. However, a re-name to "oldest African people" would allow for this page to include notable centenarians from those articles and to create a corresponding List of living African people to include notable living people, especially living centarians such as Bobbie Heine Miller and maybe even people like Bernard Binlin Dadié who isn't even 100 but if a source says they are the oldest African people, they are the oldest African people and that's more useful than no list just because some people want only 110-years-old and older lists. Discussions about this at the project talk page did not resolve this issue in a productive manner. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:49, 27 August 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 16:17, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adding other continents for complete, combined request.

Generally I prefer to go one by one for a consensus and argue on actual policy grounds but if this discussion is going to go like the 2015 one, I'll list all the continents as well for merger for consistency. There's inconsistency in the current names now anyways. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 07:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

oppose. The GRG is the world's leading expert on longevity and if they don't have Bobbie Miller listed, it would ruin the credibility of Wikpedia to put her there. There are no living Africans who over 110 and we shouldn't lower our standards to include people like Miller. 166.170.45.105 (talk) 23:28, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose 1. What's the problem with having the same standards for every continent?

2. This article is about validated supercentenarians from Africa, not the African people. There are plenty of other articles about Africa.

3. This is not about people notable for reasons other than longevity. That's a completely different sub-topic here. People under 100 being included in an article about the oldest people from an entire continent? Please. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 00:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support move. I'd go further and say that all "List of x supercentenarians" should be renamed to "List of x oldest people". There's no reason to restrict all of these articles to just supercentenarians because what's of interest is who are the oldest person in the region/country, not just who are the oldest supercentenarians. If there are supercentenarians, they'll be in the list. Ca2james (talk) 16:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Adding: many of these articles preface the tables with "This is a list of the oldest people from". I agree that the title standard for these articles should be consistent across all articles. This standard should be "oldest people" over "supercentenarians" for consistency with the oldest people and oldest living people articles, completeness in filling out the tables (the oldest person in a region would be included even though they're not a supercentenarian, which is preferable to having no entry at all), and consistency with reliable sources. "Supercentenarian" isn't as commonly used amongst independent sources as "oldest person" is; even Guinness doesn't list the oldest "supercentenarian" but the "oldest person". Therefore per WP:COMMONNAME, the articles should be "oldest people". Ca2james (talk) 15:02, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I agree with Ollie regarding his first point. It is better to have the same standards/level for all continents. We can see that Africa as a continent has produced few supercentenarians compared to some other continents such as Europe and Asia, but at the same time the oldest people from Africa is still among the oldest ever in the world. Reasons why Africa has produced few verified supercentenarians might be because of poor record keeping and/or that people in Africa generally live shorter lives than the average person in other continents. The fact that Africa still has produced people who are among the oldest ever suggests that the maximum age limit in Africa is probably the same as in the rest of the world. Also note that IF people aged below 110 years old are included, then there is a risk that the reliability regarding their ages might be lower since most research groups focus on validating the ages of people who claim to be at least 110 years old. 930310 (talk) 18:26, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

* oppose just having the continents is insufficient. We still have all the countries and each deaths by year cat. In the end, it's all wrong to include names validated by the GRG with just people who were lucky enough to be 100. 166.176.59.18 (talk) 04:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. As I mentioned at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World's Oldest People#Notes indicating Validation, I think that there are issues with these articles that rise above what has been raised here and that the solution should be deletion over anything else. If they are to be kept, however, then their current names should remain the same for two reasons: 1) List of African supercentenarians provides an objective criteria: you have to be 110 or you don't make the cut. 2) The title "List of oldest African people" would be very misleading and would suggest that these are the oldest people in Africa (as in there is no one older than them or in-between), when in reality the list would be simply made up of a mixture of whomever sources have subjectively deemed to be among the "oldest". In that case, the more accurate title would be "List of people who have been referred to as the oldest in Africa" or "List of people who are among the oldest in Africa", which would of course be ridiculous. Overall, however, since I'm unaware of multiple reliable third-party sources that discuss either the topic of the oldest Africans or African supercentenarians, I think that this should be deleted as a trivial intersection of information that is borderline original research and an indiscriminate collection of information. Canadian Paul 17:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It may turn out that these articles end up deleted but there's no guarantee about that. If it were to turn out that these went to AfD and the broader community chose to keep these articles, which title would you support? Thanks. Ca2james (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Under that logic, List of oldest living people has no end point and could go on infinitely. There's a logical endpoint, namely those people who are in secondary sources as being the oldest people in those continents. The GRG only goes from 110 onward but that doesn't eliminate everything below that. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- In all fairness though, that article used to be called "List of living supercentenarians" until you moved it without (unless I am wrong, in which case I apologize and please point me in the correct direction) discussion, which completely changed the point of the article. It was "here's a list of everyone who claims to be 110", but now it's trying to become "here's a list of people who newspapers arbitrarily and subjectively refer to as the oldest", which I don't see as benefiting the project. If this discussion does not change these titles, I was planning on doing a requested move to send "List of oldest living people" back to its original title, but perhaps the larger issue should, as has been suggested in the many threads that are ongoing on this topic, be discussed with broader community consensus at WP:RSN. Canadian Paul 16:25, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Note that the European list and several of the country-specific articles include a "Chronological list of the oldest living person in region since year" table which invariably includes people who never reached 110 years of age. Ca2james (talk) 18:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Most of those tables can be removed since the names don't have sources. CommanderLinx (talk) 13:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of African supercentenarians. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/query?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.grg.org%2FAdams%2FE.HTM&date=2007-12-01 to http://www.grg.org/Adams/E.HTM

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:31, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]