Category talk:Year of death unknown

Should not go on articles but on articles' 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 17:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is precisely the conclusion that WP:CFD arrived at; it is considered "non-defining". —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 16:11, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
 * PS: In the particular case of this category, the article itself should indicate in the lead that the year of death is unknown, and this category will to most readers other than WP:BIOgraphers not be understood to be different from Category:Year of death missing, implying wrongly that the article is incomplete, if applied to the article itself rather than its talk page. —  SMcCandlish  &#91;talk&#93; &#91;cont&#93; ‹(-¿-)› 17:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Added qualifier
I've added the qualifier that contemporary individuals may be added to this category if they are widely considered to be dead but we don't have a reliable source as to when they died. To me, "less remote past" means the early modern era (e.g. 1600 to 1900 CE), not the second half of the 20th century. Many editors were adults in the second half of the 20th century and don't see it as a "less" remote past, because it isn't remote at all. --NellieBly (talk) 23:01, 27 July 2009 (UTC)