Category talk:Date of birth missing
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Category | This article has been rated as Cat-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
Contents |
[edit] Confusing
Resolved. Category's intent clarified.Wouldn't it be best to merge this with Category:Year of birth missing? I've been using both interchangeably and have no idea what I should be doing. --kingboyk 21:57, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
- I was just wondering the same thing. I'm trying to find a WikiProject or Help article that might have an answer. —Helfaery 21:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- No luck so far. I think the category is meant to be used when the year of birth is known but the exact date is not, though some of the articles in the category contain no year or date of birth. Probably the best thing is to use "Year of birth missing" if there's no information at all (or if there's the month and day but no year, I suppose), and "Date of birth missing" if only the year is given. —Helfaery 21:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, that's precisely what it's for. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 11:22, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- No luck so far. I think the category is meant to be used when the year of birth is known but the exact date is not, though some of the articles in the category contain no year or date of birth. Probably the best thing is to use "Year of birth missing" if there's no information at all (or if there's the month and day but no year, I suppose), and "Date of birth missing" if only the year is given. —Helfaery 21:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Some issues
Resolved. Other categories exist to handle such cases.Has the implementation of this category been discussed at all? There seems to be no clear policy on where to use it. If I understand correctly it is supposed to point out missing biographical information and thereby prompt constructive editing. In an article such as Jane Johnson (c. 1813-1872), however, it is meaningless; she was a slave, we're not even sure what year she was born, we'll certainly never know the date. The same is the case with most people born before the modern period, like Amr ibn Hishām. Here the category serves no purpose at all, because the information simply doesn't exsist. Including it won't prompt any useful editing, it will only stand as a reminder of the article's inadequacy for ever and ever and ever. If I've created a good biographical article, incorporating all available modern scholarship, I certainly don't want that scar on it.
It is iportant to distinguish between information that is missing and that which is simply unavailable, and these issues must be adressed before any wide-scale implementation (we're talking of tens, maybe hundreds of thousands of articles here) is started.Eixo 16:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
- Information that is simply unavailable is handled with Category:Year of birth unknown, Category:Place of death unknown, etc. — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 16:53, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Time to deprecate this category?
Resolved. No deletion consensus at WP:CfD. Birthdate concerns per WP:BLP covered in category documentation.Based on the deep privacy concerns which led to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of birthdays, the Wikipedia community has decided that it is inappropriate to add birthdates to articles about most living people. Spot-checking the current members of this category, it appears that most of them fit the criteria for concern. Yet the existence of this category implicitly urges users to find and fill in the birthdate, either in ignorance or contradiction to policy. Given the grave potential for confusion, I believe that this category should be retired from use. Rossami (talk) 14:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Having read your concern here I have voiced my thoughts at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of birthdays (and I notice there's also a thread at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Category:Date of birth missing). From my Norwegian perspective this concern seems a bit alien to my frame of mind as date of birth in this country to a large degree is a matter of public availability. My inclination is therefore to keep this category (and to keep categorizing biographies accordingly), and I would also like to see the addition of text in the blurb added by Rossami here removed again. However, my perspective is not a general one and I am open to see a consensus form on this question. __meco 19:45, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Responded at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of birthdays in order to keep the discussion from fragmenting more than necessary. Thanks for your patience. Rossami (talk)
- I figure you meant Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons#Proposed change/clarification to privacy of birthdays. I have also responded there. __meco 18:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Responded at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Privacy of birthdays in order to keep the discussion from fragmenting more than necessary. Thanks for your patience. Rossami (talk)
- dealt with at CfD, where the consensus was that that Category:Date of birth missing (along with other "non-defininging characteristic" cleanup categories for details, such as Category:Date of birth missing (living people), Category:Place of birth missing and Category:Place of death missing) should be used on articles' talk pages, while the "defining" Year-of (birth missing, birth unknown, death missing) categories go in the article.
[edit] Should not go on articles but on articles' talk pages
Resolved. Consensus at WP:CFD is that this belongs on talk pages.This is an administrative category that is of no value to readers, so it should really be on the talk pages. Alex Middleton 17:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, this is precisely the conclusion that WP:CFD arrived at; it is considered "non-defining". — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 16:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
