Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nobel laureates in Chemistry by age


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   Delete. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

List of Nobel laureates in Chemistry by age

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Several months ago an article that listed the ages and lifespans of Nobel laureates in literature was deleted. The Consensus was that the list was original research and an indiscriminate collection of information. However, similar pages also existed for the other Nobel Prizes. The reasons given apply to these lists as well, so the lists should be deleted. I am also nominating the following related pages besides the chemistry page, as they are all similar in content.

Dagko (talk) 23:31, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge Chemistry and Physics together into 'List of Nobel laureates in Sciences by age. That way, the articles together may become more notable. Adam mugliston  Talk  14:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:22, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as duplication. Put age/lifespan info on the lists of names if needed, not in separate articles. Tables can be sorted by most desktop browsers (Help:Sort). --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 14:35, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. Subtracting a date from another to work out how old someone was when something happened is not OR. ― A. di M.​plé​dréachtaí 15:15, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   ArcAngel    (talk) ) 17:06, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep/merge No_original_research specifically allows the computations that were performed to order these lists: "This policy allows routine mathematical calculations, such as adding numbers, converting units, or calculating a person's age, provided editors agree that the arithmetic and its application correctly reflect the sources." Chester Markel (talk) 01:27, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to the lists of laureates, making those lists sortable tables. Not OR Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:42, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - I thought this would be an easy call for a merge, but there are so many irrelevant fields in the database that it's going to be somewhat difficult to do and a pretty big mess if it isn't done. Birthdate, date of award, age at time of award, death date, out... Instead we've got fields for "Number of Minutes between Publication of Dissertation and Return Home From Awards Ceremony" and such. The database needs to be pared back if there is to be a merge. Include instead stuff that matters like Country of Origin, University, and so forth.. Carrite (talk) 14:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge - the cleanup of irrelevant details should be part of the process, but there is no reason for a separate table.--70.80.234.163 (talk) 16:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Delete and include a sortable table in the article of the list of nobel laureates with an "age" field. --Forich (talk) 18:13, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not original research, but clearly an indiscriminate collection of data (indiscriminate in the sense that what makes this different from "List of Nobel Laureates in Chemistry" is an aspect that has no influence on the prize, the person, ... Why age? Why not height, weight, number of siblings, etcetera?) Fram (talk) 13:39, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:IINFO, obviously. -Atmoz (talk) 15:48, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * It seems pretty clear that the connection between age and winning a science Nobel prize is notable - here are some reliable sources :, . Therefore, I support keeping all apart from List of Nobel Peace Prize laureates by age, as the correlation between age and winning the Peace Prize hasn't been discussed in reliable sources. --Anthem of joy (talk) 17:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm lukewarm to the idea of "merging" by simply adding further information to the various lists, but that should only be limited to DOB & DOD--the main lists risk being cluttered and the calculations presented in these are of completely trivial interest. With respect to Anthem of joy's links, the sources discuss the age at which Nobel-worthy research was accomplished, not when the awards were distributed...this collection of lists details only award dates in contrast to DOB/DOD. &mdash; Scientizzle 20:00, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete all and make the various Nobel laureates lists sortable by age. There is no need for a separate list by age when an existing list can serve the same function. Harley Hudson (talk) 22:17, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as indiscriminate. I can see that the editor believes that the information is of interest, but I am unclear as to the reasons. There is a view that the age of Nobel prizewinners has increased, and the table would bear that out. And some prizewinners are living to a good age. There are several possible explanations for each and neither piece of information is informative is itself. The piece of information that is of most obvious interest is the age at which they were when they did the work that got them the prize, That is absent and the most difficult to include without OR and judgement. --AJHingston (talk) 23:32, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.