Talk:Life partner

Examples?
Are Holmes and Watson or Batman and Robin really examples of this category? Dr Watson is a friend, temporary flatmate and biographer of Holmes, but is married and shares lodgings with his wife and medical practice in many of the stories. Robin is Batman's adopted ward, and therefore the relationship is father-son more than life partner. Shinji nishizono (talk) 22:32, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Romantic?
The definition could be improved to include people who live together for life (such as an old married couple or a pair of friends) but are not necessarily romantically involved. Lou Sander (talk) 18:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Life partner vs. significant other
I don't think the pages "significant other" and "life partner" should be merged. I find that "life partner" implies quite long-term commitment, whereas "significant other" can be (relatively) short term. Adolescents/young adults can date for 3 years and call each other their significant other, but not be partners for life, or adult long-term partners. PurpleManners (talk) 12:00, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Expanded the article
I expanded the article, added several references and many links, and removed the tags regarding Wiktionary. Lou Sander (talk) 13:17, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

What does this mean?
Can someone explain what this means? From the article:

"In western popular culture the term 'life partner' is often humorously ridiculed due to the creative way same sex partners have to describe their relationship in place of the term 'husband' or 'wife'[3]" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.244.31.36 (talk) 05:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Legal implications in the UK
The article says that:

In the United Kingdom, the law includes extensive provisions for life partners who are not husband and wife, regardless of their gender, e.g., a heterosexual couple living together as husband and wife.

I am not a lawyer, but I do live in the UK. As far as I am aware the law provides verry little provisions for life partners in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, although rather more in Scotland. I know a source is mentioned, but what does this source say?77.99.177.8 (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Life Partner
"Partner(s)" is used in Infoboxes for BLP but in this context, people are adding those individuals with whom the subject had significant, committed relationships with (say, 5 years or longer). Sometimes these relationships can last a decade or longer. But they are not "for life". Suppose an unmarried couple, gay or straight, have lived together for 15 years. How is anyone to know if this is a lifelong relationship? This can only be seen in hindsight, after the person has either broken up with their partner or died. But 15 years is still a committed, significant relationship. I'm just arguing that a "life partner" isn't meant to be, literally, for life, because you can't judge in the present what will last into the future. There is not the expectation that marriages last for life so why should there be for unmarried, committed relationships? Liz Read! Talk! 15:44, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Cultural Context
Just passing by here, but thought there was an important point to add.

This distinction between monogamous and polyamorous seems a rather American concept. I know there are polyarmorous traditions in other parts of the world, but they often involve some religious element or tradition. The context here is more to do with the US and the whole monogamy/polygamy American debate is it not? The very fact that such distinction was made is telling. Something like this just is not an issue in many (not all) parts of the world. Maybe it should have some background information of US on it, the history, legal battles, modern liberalism etc? The LGBT, civil partnership, polygamy context?

US has the most English-speakers so most of the editors are probably American too, but is Wikipedia aiming for an American view or an international one with International English?

PS: Not talking about religion, morality, politics, imperialism or anything like that, just the cultural "lens", you know? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.25.15.7 (talk) 23:32, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Tcharooga, Parteezhan
I removed the item

&#042;&#091;&#091;Tcharooga&#093;&#093; and &#091;&#091;Parteezhan&#093;&#093;, strategic &#091;&#091;scholars&#093;&#093;, &#091;&#091;polymath&#093;&#093;s, visionaries&#123;&#123;citation needed|date=December 2015&#125;

from the list as these two fictional characters do not exist. I base that on the fact that there are no hits whatsoever on Google. If you are the person who put them in the list, you need to place here, in this item of the talk page, their origin and significance, before restoring them to the lists. Nick Beeson (talk) 02:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

why this "article" is useless
Whether the creator likes it or not, "life partner" has been in common use for at least the past 30 years to indicate some sort of marriage-like cohabiting intimate relationship, NOT some sort of character pairing.

Speaking of which, why would Laurel and Hardy be "life partners," yet Larry, Moe, and Curly aren't? How about the Marx Brothers? or the Mills Brothers? There's clearly some sort of unfounded presupposition here that couples are "real" and groups are not.

As the list of "notables" cites no sources, I may return and delete it. From there, I'll simply keep paring away the unfounded claims. That ought to leave something more clearly worth of a dictionary, NOT an encyclopedia. Weeb Dingle (talk) 16:11, 16 September 2017 (UTC)


 * All agreed, and also, in what universe are Abbott & Costello and Laurel & Hardy "fictional" (OR life partners!)?? I don't feel comfortable deleting the whole thing at this point either, but I definitely think it needs some work if it stays. -- edi  (talk)  01:03, 8 October 2017 (UTC)