Talk:Susannah Mushatt Jones: Difference between revisions
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
I've changed this back to "19th century". 1800s may be used by journalists who struggle to remember whether to add or subtract one but "nineteenth century" is the normal way of referring to that century. Given that in a few years we will have to talk about the last surviving people born in the 1900s, meaning the first decade of the twentieth century, we're creating an unnecessary and confusing inconsistency if we start using this non-standard dating convention. WP:CENTURY speaks of avoiding ambiguity and WP:MOS speaks of avoiding contested terms, which this one certainly is. --[[User:Lo2u|Lo2u]] <sup>([[User talk:Lo2u|T]] • [[Special:Contributions/Lo2u|C]])</sup> 16:22, 5 September 2015 (UTC)<p> |
I've changed this back to "19th century". 1800s may be used by journalists who struggle to remember whether to add or subtract one but "nineteenth century" is the normal way of referring to that century. Given that in a few years we will have to talk about the last surviving people born in the 1900s, meaning the first decade of the twentieth century, we're creating an unnecessary and confusing inconsistency if we start using this non-standard dating convention. WP:CENTURY speaks of avoiding ambiguity and WP:MOS speaks of avoiding contested terms, which this one certainly is. --[[User:Lo2u|Lo2u]] <sup>([[User talk:Lo2u|T]] • [[Special:Contributions/Lo2u|C]])</sup> 16:22, 5 September 2015 (UTC)<p> |
||
And this too from the main [[WP:MOS]] "Avoid forms such as the 1700s that could refer to 10 or 100 years"... --[[User:Lo2u|Lo2u]] <sup>([[User talk:Lo2u|T]] • [[Special:Contributions/Lo2u|C]])</sup> 17:57, 5 September 2015 (UTC) |
And this too from the main [[WP:MOS]] "Avoid forms such as the 1700s that could refer to 10 or 100 years"... --[[User:Lo2u|Lo2u]] <sup>([[User talk:Lo2u|T]] • [[Special:Contributions/Lo2u|C]])</sup> 17:57, 5 September 2015 (UTC) |
||
:But according to [[List of oldest living people]], there are ''five'' people born in the 19th century (in 1900). It is now unclear whether the statement means the other three are unverified, or if it is not counting 1900 as part of the 19th century. <font face="Century Gothic"> → [[User:Michael J|Michael J]] [[User talk:Michael J|Ⓣ]] [[Special:Contributions/Michael J|Ⓒ]] [[Special:Emailuser/Michael_J|Ⓜ]]</font> 20:30, 5 September 2015 (UTC) |
:But according to [[List of oldest living people]], there are ''five'' people born in the 19th century (in 1900). It is now unclear whether the statement means the other three are unverified, or if it is not counting 1900 as part of the 19th century. (There is a similar statement in the article for [[Emma Morano]].) <font face="Century Gothic"> → [[User:Michael J|Michael J]] [[User talk:Michael J|Ⓣ]] [[Special:Contributions/Michael J|Ⓒ]] [[Special:Emailuser/Michael_J|Ⓜ]]</font> 20:30, 5 September 2015 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 20:32, 5 September 2015
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Susannah Mushatt Jones article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article was nominated for deletion on April 2 2013. The result of the discussion was delete. |
 | Biography Start‑class | ||||||
| |||||||
 | Longevity Start‑class High‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Previous Article
I never saw the previous article that was deleted, but after doing a Google search on Susannah Mushatt Jones, I discovered that she was notable having received tribute for a long life from both the US House of Representatives and the Alabama House of representatives. So, I wrote a new article.--I am One of Many (talk) 07:34, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
What is appropriately encyclopedic content for longevity related biographies
There is currently a discussion about what constitutes encyclopedia content on longevity related biographies at Talk:Gertrude Weaver#What is appropriately encyclopedic content for longevity related biographies please comment. I am One of Many (talk) 19:05, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
1800s/nineteenth century
I've changed this back to "19th century". 1800s may be used by journalists who struggle to remember whether to add or subtract one but "nineteenth century" is the normal way of referring to that century. Given that in a few years we will have to talk about the last surviving people born in the 1900s, meaning the first decade of the twentieth century, we're creating an unnecessary and confusing inconsistency if we start using this non-standard dating convention. WP:CENTURY speaks of avoiding ambiguity and WP:MOS speaks of avoiding contested terms, which this one certainly is. --Lo2u (T • C) 16:22, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
And this too from the main WP:MOS "Avoid forms such as the 1700s that could refer to 10 or 100 years"... --Lo2u (T • C) 17:57, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
- But according to List of oldest living people, there are five people born in the 19th century (in 1900). It is now unclear whether the statement means the other three are unverified, or if it is not counting 1900 as part of the 19th century. (There is a similar statement in the article for Emma Morano.) → Michael J Ⓣ Ⓒ Ⓜ 20:30, 5 September 2015 (UTC)