344:
Okay, but what sources discuss the group of toddlers who were in a movie in 1929 that are still alive???? All sources here are about their appearances, nothing about this group or the importance of a 92-year old former extra! This is entirely arbitary, one could select any sort of occupation or event
725:
we need reliable sources which discuss the list as a group; as far as I can tell, there are no such sources. I will note that I disagree with the argument that because this list will eventually become obsolete it fails notability due to a lack of enduring notability; its obsolescence wouldn't be due
469:
because time will not take care of this article. Sadly, it is quite likely that the deaths of at least two people on this list will go unnoticed, and we'll simply have an unreferenced, inaccurate list, which some day someone will have to bring back to AfD with the comment 'these people, if they're
470:
still alive, must be 150 by now...' Any list of living people must be maintainable; i.e. there must be a good chance of someone actually being aware the people are alive and curating the list; otherwise it's just a list of people who were alive at some arbitrary and ill-defined point in the past.
299:
According to this argument any "list of living people" article should be deleted because eventually they will all die. A discussion on whether or not these kinds of lists should exist can happen elsewhere but not here. I don't think the nominator has given a valid reason to delete this article.
439:
Not sure what the point of this page was in the first place, no indication they are discussed as a group per LISTN. Two were child actors not even notable enough for their own articles, and the third is also a coincidentally long-lived person who was just a baby in these films as an extra and
314:
The valid reason is that the topic is not notable. If we agree that the list will eventually become empty and be deleted, then we are saying that in a few years it will not be notable. Since notability is not temporary, the topic was never notable and should be deleted immediately.
56:, particularly because it is an everchanging group, is a persuasive one, and those arguing to keep have not addressed it. A radical reworking of the topic of the list is outside the scope of the AfD, but if someone wants to work on such, they may request a draftspace copy.
751:
make it clear that a topic must have enduring significance to be notable. While "last living" lists maintain significance longer than a typical event or news item, I think they fail reasonable tests of endurance. I presume nobody would argue in favor of lists of living
726:
to its notability vanishing, but because the condition for membership stopped being true. The point is academic for this discussion, given that other reasons for deletion exist, but I mention it to avoid providing precedence for the deletion of articles such as
788:
on the grounds that notability is not temporary and this could easily be empty by the end of next year since there’s only three people in their 90s on it. Whichever one survives longest could potentially be given credit on their individual page after they die.
329:
Notability is determined by existing sources, so I would argue the topic could be notable even if the list is empty. If the community decides the topic is not notable based on sources, that's fine, but I'm not swayed by the NOTTEMPORY argument.
204:
542:
were for the most part just extras. Not really sure what sort of an encyclopedic article that would be just due to being centenarians, something that occurs with people of most any occupation. But that's not
256:
768:. These topics are only interesting for a few decades: admittedly much longer than the kind of flash-in-the-pan topics we usually think of, but they're still ephemeral and lack lasting significance.
239:. There are only three actors on the list and the youngest included actor is 92 so in a few years this list will be empty. If a topic won't be notable 20 years from now then it's not notable today.
398:
different concept, since this were child actors to be alive now, but that would include then-adult actors who died long ago. Looking forward to wasting time on another AFD when this is soon empty!
418:. These are all child actors who fell out of the spotlight many decades ago so their deaths might not be widely publicized. Only one of the three actors has her own Knowledge (XXG) page. The
198:
276:
165:
590:
which includes Baby Peggy, but I would still say this is an unencyclopedic cross-categorization of child actors – performed in the 1920s – had unusual longevity. Good source for
138:
133:
142:
394:
Agree that that's utterly trivial. There are some other "Longest lived..." lists, but we shouldn't have that for any arbitrary subset of any occupation. Moreover, that's a
125:
363:
per Rhino. As a side note, this list should be re-worked to the longest living list of actors from the silent era, to avoid it becoming empty in the near future.
97:
565:'s comments. Yes, the last ones will die, but the subject of who the last surviving ones are has clearly been a notable topic of significant press coverage.
345:
and give the oldest remaining unrelated individuals, but that's not a notable list. Your !vote contests the nom but is not a valid reason to keep the page.
608:
607:
article is whatever we make it into! I'll perhaps remake a better one if this one gets deleted, along the lines I suggested. Articles in this genre like
112:
566:
516:, but rework towards the last surving silent film actors from a historical perspective (who was the last living silent film star?, for example). --
219:
632:
This is either very incomplete or at the wrong title. There have been a number of silent films made way more recently than the 1920s, such as
186:
496:
709:
727:
440:
wouldn't have had speaking roles at this point even if they weren't silent! I fail to see the usefulness or encyclopedicness of this.
92:
85:
17:
798:
777:
738:
713:
685:
664:
647:
620:
598:
577:
551:
525:
508:
479:
461:
444:
431:
414:. None of the keep !voters have argued that the topic meets our notability guidelines. Furthermore, I suspect that this list may be
402:
389:
371:
349:
339:
324:
309:
288:
268:
248:
67:
180:
492:
176:
129:
106:
102:
655:. Utterly trivial and not defining of the subjects, nor does it define a segment of any consequence in the film industry.
226:
814:
121:
73:
40:
753:
693:
673:
380:
Is it really interesting how long they lived, when they are known for something else? Seems somewhat trivial...
236:
705:
192:
491:. These thespians aren't discussed as a group. At best, there are occasional articles about individuals, e.g.
734:
504:
493:
The Last Living Silent Star: Child
Actress Baby Peggy Made the Equivalent of $ 14M a Movie and Lost It All
422:
page indicates that Billy and Garry are both "living as of 2021" but provides no citation for that claim.
748:
810:
521:
62:
36:
730:
794:
660:
643:
639:
385:
744:
676:, not a separate sub-article with just three members grouped together just because they are living.
471:
701:
475:
212:
457:
335:
305:
722:
697:
488:
500:
81:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
809:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
773:
681:
591:
562:
535:
531:
517:
427:
320:
284:
264:
244:
58:
790:
656:
381:
415:
765:
613:
595:
570:
548:
453:
441:
419:
399:
346:
331:
301:
452:
No reason to delete, and sadly, time will take care of this article in a few years.
634:
365:
696:. No reliable source which discusses this as a notable grouping, either, so fails
159:
769:
677:
423:
316:
280:
260:
240:
757:
761:
52:. The argument that there is no treatment of this group of people
805:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
538:, the last two were were subjectively child stars. The rest of
257:
list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions
694:
Trivial cross-categorisation of no encyclopedic interest
587:
539:
155:
151:
147:
547:
list, and this !vote should be discounted in closing.
497:
List of living actors from the Golden Age of
Hollywood
211:
582:
Interesting article, but not relevant whatsoever to
277:
list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions
225:
728:List of notable surviving veterans of World War II
760:veterans, nor would they support lists of living
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
817:). No further edits should be made to this page.
275:Note: This discussion has been included in the
255:Note: This discussion has been included in the
743:I would also support deleting that page. Both
8:
113:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
609:List of last survivors of historical events
274:
254:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
764:actors or surviving veterans of the
24:
122:List of living silent film actors
74:List of living silent film actors
98:Introduction to deletion process
530:The answer to the question is
1:
799:16:22, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
778:16:35, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
739:06:54, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
714:21:54, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
686:07:55, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
665:06:58, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
648:04:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
621:16:29, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
599:04:56, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
578:16:15, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
552:04:56, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
526:13:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
509:05:07, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
480:17:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
462:15:00, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
445:14:26, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
432:14:08, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
403:04:56, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
390:14:09, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
372:13:56, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
350:22:16, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
340:20:57, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
325:18:53, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
310:13:36, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
289:13:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
269:13:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
249:13:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
68:18:18, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
754:English Renaissance theatre
88:(AfD)? Read these primers!
834:
674:List of silent film actors
586:article. You could revert
807:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
672:per nom. I'd support a
499:for the same reason.
86:Articles for deletion
756:actors or surviving
611:intrigue me a bit.--
619:
576:
291:
271:
103:Guide to deletion
93:How to contribute
825:
618:
592:Diana Serra Cary
588:the page to 2015
575:
536:Diana Serra Cary
532:Lassie Lou Ahern
368:
230:
229:
215:
163:
145:
83:
66:
34:
833:
832:
828:
827:
826:
824:
823:
822:
821:
815:deletion review
366:
237:WP:NOTTEMPORARY
172:
136:
120:
117:
80:
77:
57:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
831:
829:
820:
819:
783:
782:
781:
780:
716:
702:RandomCanadian
688:
667:
650:
627:
626:
625:
624:
623:
556:
555:
554:
511:
495:. Also delete
482:
464:
447:
434:
408:
407:
406:
405:
392:
375:
374:
358:
357:
356:
355:
354:
353:
352:
293:
292:
272:
233:
232:
169:
116:
115:
110:
100:
95:
78:
76:
71:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
830:
818:
816:
812:
808:
803:
802:
801:
800:
796:
792:
787:
779:
775:
771:
767:
766:War on Terror
763:
759:
755:
750:
746:
742:
741:
740:
736:
732:
729:
724:
720:
717:
715:
711:
707:
703:
699:
695:
692:
689:
687:
683:
679:
675:
671:
668:
666:
662:
658:
654:
651:
649:
645:
641:
637:
636:
631:
628:
622:
616:
615:
610:
606:
602:
601:
600:
597:
593:
589:
585:
581:
580:
579:
573:
572:
567:
564:
560:
557:
553:
550:
546:
541:
540:the 2015 list
537:
533:
529:
528:
527:
523:
519:
515:
512:
510:
506:
502:
498:
494:
490:
486:
483:
481:
477:
473:
468:
465:
463:
459:
455:
451:
448:
446:
443:
438:
435:
433:
429:
425:
421:
420:Watson family
417:
413:
410:
409:
404:
401:
397:
393:
391:
387:
383:
379:
378:
377:
376:
373:
370:
369:
362:
359:
351:
348:
343:
342:
341:
337:
333:
328:
327:
326:
322:
318:
313:
312:
311:
307:
303:
298:
295:
294:
290:
286:
282:
278:
273:
270:
266:
262:
258:
253:
252:
251:
250:
246:
242:
238:
228:
224:
221:
218:
214:
210:
206:
203:
200:
197:
194:
191:
188:
185:
182:
178:
175:
174:Find sources:
170:
167:
161:
157:
153:
149:
144:
140:
135:
131:
127:
123:
119:
118:
114:
111:
108:
104:
101:
99:
96:
94:
91:
90:
89:
87:
82:
75:
72:
70:
69:
64:
60:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
806:
804:
785:
784:
749:WP:EVENTCRIT
731:BilledMammal
718:
690:
669:
652:
635:Blancanieves
633:
629:
612:
604:
583:
569:
558:
544:
513:
501:Clarityfiend
484:
466:
449:
436:
411:
395:
364:
360:
296:
234:
222:
216:
208:
201:
195:
189:
183:
173:
79:
53:
49:
47:
31:
28:
563:Clibenfoart
518:Clibenfoart
199:free images
791:Dronebogus
745:WP:NOTNEWS
721:. To meet
657:Geschichte
640:TompaDompa
382:Geschichte
54:as a group
811:talk page
638:in 2012.
472:Elemimele
59:Vanamonde
37:talk page
813:or in a
758:Boer War
723:WP:LISTN
710:contribs
698:WP:LISTN
614:Milowent
596:Reywas92
594:though.
571:Milowent
549:Reywas92
489:WP:LISTN
454:Bkatcher
442:Reywas92
400:Reywas92
347:Reywas92
332:Rhino131
302:Rhino131
166:View log
107:glossary
39:or in a
762:3D film
630:Comment
412:Comment
396:totally
367:Lugnuts
205:WP refs
193:scholar
139:protect
134:history
84:New to
786:Delete
770:pburka
719:Delete
691:Delete
678:Ajf773
670:Delete
653:Delete
603:Well,
485:Delete
467:Delete
437:Delete
424:pburka
317:pburka
281:pburka
261:pburka
241:pburka
235:Fails
177:Google
143:delete
50:delete
416:WP:OR
220:JSTOR
181:books
160:views
152:watch
148:links
16:<
795:talk
774:talk
747:and
735:talk
706:talk
682:talk
661:talk
644:talk
605:this
584:this
561:per
559:Keep
545:this
534:and
522:talk
514:Keep
505:talk
487:per
476:talk
458:talk
450:Keep
428:talk
386:talk
361:Keep
336:talk
321:talk
306:talk
297:Keep
285:talk
265:talk
245:talk
213:FENS
187:news
156:logs
130:talk
126:edit
63:Talk
712:)
227:TWL
164:– (
797:)
776:)
737:)
708:/
700:.
684:)
663:)
646:)
617:•
574:•
568:--
524:)
507:)
478:)
460:)
430:)
388:)
338:)
323:)
308:)
287:)
279:.
267:)
259:.
247:)
207:)
158:|
154:|
150:|
146:|
141:|
137:|
132:|
128:|
793:(
772:(
733:(
704:(
680:(
659:(
642:(
520:(
503:(
474:(
456:(
426:(
384:(
334:(
319:(
304:(
283:(
263:(
243:(
231:)
223:·
217:·
209:·
202:·
196:·
190:·
184:·
179:(
171:(
168:)
162:)
124:(
109:)
105:(
65:)
61:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.