Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Japanese Prime Ministers by longevity

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 no consensus. Mailer Diablo 09:39, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Japanese Prime Ministers by longevity

Just an unsourced and basically abandoned list. Buckner 1986 05:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, listcruft. A perfectly good List of Prime Ministers of Japan exists; not sure of organization based on longevity is of any use. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. -- H·G (^words/_works) 05:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All sorts of lists like this exist, including a List of Canadian Prime Ministers by longevity. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 07:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unnecessary and indiscriminate. I might bring List of Canadian Prime Ministers by longevity up for AfD for the same reason - it's not necessary. --Core des at talk. o.o;; 07:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a harmless and interesting list - we also have List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom by longevity. This isn't listcruft - it would be different if this was List of American Idol contestants by longevity or something, but being Prime Minister of a major country is quite an important thing, and people are interested in this information. It's not difficult to maintain either. As for verification, all the information in the list seems to have been sourced from other Wikipedia articles. I don't see any reason to delete this. — sjorford ++ 08:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all Indiscrimilistcruft. What's next, U.S. Vice Presidents by shoe size? ~ trialsanderrors 08:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- That'll be you comparing longevity and shoe size there, then. — sjorford++ 09:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Uh, evidently. I can see a list of popes or emperors by longevity, as they tend to hold office until death, but prime ministers are mostly long out of office by the time of their death. Indiscriminate applies. ~ trialsanderrors 09:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Passes WP:LIST and WP:LC. Tevildo 09:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- TheFarix (Talk) 11:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A list ordered by length of time in office would be more interesting. Fg2 12:10, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Agree - Che Nuevara: ^{Join the Revolution} 12:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Longevity is irrelevant to holding the office of Prime Minister, and Wikipedia is not a data mining operation. flowersofnight (talk) 12:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article is completely accurate. And as for the comment comparing longevity of life to shoe sizes, may I say this: your immaturity and complete lack of appreciation for human life is rather disgusting. Further, the simple fact that similar lists have been compiled for Canadian and British prime ministers, and that neither list has come into question, shows a rather sad trait found occasionally on these forums. Just because the public official is not from an English-speaking country (i.e. Britain or America) does not mean that their life span is "unnecessary and indiscriminate." The fact that this article is even being considered for deletion is rather sad. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.159.15.53 (talk • contribs) .
- With your approval I'm posting this on my talk page. ~ trialsanderrors 16:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment 69.159.15.53 has a point. Don't we all need to look deep into our hearts and come to terms with the fact that we're all horrible racists who have a disdain for human life? At first I was just voting "delete" because this list is ridiculous and useless, but then I realized it was just my own prejudices and hatred. Thank you, 69.159.15.53 AdamBiswanger1 20:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per HumbleGod and flowersofnight. --David Mestel^(Talk) 15:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Question Any chance of putting the longevity charts for this and Canadian and similar lists in with the main listing? It seems pretty frivolous on its own, but it might be an interesting way of sorting the information if part of the main article. GassyGuy 16:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but add source. --Aguerriero (talk) 16:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOR. Whispering 17:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment How the heck is someone's lifespan a violation of WP:NOR? There are sources all over the place for the birthdate and death date of various famous people. The only thing missing is an actual citation. Dark Shikari 18:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I fail to see the usefulness of this list. Can anyone give me a possible application of a list sorted by longevity? AdamBiswanger1 20:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about someone writing a paper on the history of Japanese Prime Ministers, and could include data on who lived to be the oldest? I know people compile statistics on US Presidents like that - who's still alive, who died early, who lived to be an old fart, etc. I can't substantiate this, but I know people study the effects of holding high-stress jobs on one's health. People that hold those offices tend to die younger. Wouldn't an article like this be of use to a person like that? --Aguerriero (talk) 20:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If someone actually carried out a study like that of US presidents, the sample size would be so small as to make the study invalid. Even assuming the researcher were to include all 43 presidents, its still using only a sample of 43 to make claims about a very large group of people (people with high stress jobs, which numbers in the millions), and the researcher still have to deal with all the very wide historical differences in healthcare, diet, environment, operational role etc etc etc not to mention individual genetics and so on. The people you know who are compiling these statistics are compiling trivia. About the only practical use I can think of for this kind of information is if it were for a pub quiz or perhaps some kind of number puzzle, both of which are themselves trivial pursuits. Bwithh 22:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Since List of Prime Ministers of Japan covers this info already, it is just looking at the same information. --Ragib 20:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note I have nominated the rest of the similar articles at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom by longevity AdamBiswanger1 20:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have added a citation to the article, that lists the history of prime ministers and their birth/death dates. I don't think the compilation of statistics from a secondary source is considered OR. --Aguerriero (talk) 20:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is interesting. Ramseystreet 20:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So is www.pray4ray.com, but that's going out the window. AdamBiswanger1 01:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete It's trivially interesting and useless encyclopedically and in every other way, or are people going to try a prove a correlation between a politican's policies and his lifespan? Its a meaningless list like List of Argentinian professors by shirt collar size or List of Ugandan footballers by hair length. Bwithh 22:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per my comments in the mass nomination on the same topic. The longetivity of ex-heads of state is discussed, at least in the US. As part of fighting systemic bias, we therefore need to keep this list. --JJay 01:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a duplicate of List of Japanese prime ministers, per Ragib. Creating multiple versions of lists for the sole purpose of sorting them differently is a waste of time - it's a maintenance nightmare, as well as not particularly useful. Zetawoof^(ζ) 07:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is wonderful and interesting. Trunk 18:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete per HumbleGod and trialsanderrors. 'by term length' would be more pertinent. - Wickning1 20:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Interesting list. -- User:Docu
It's certainly interesting. Actually, it's hilarious, because it's riddled with blatantly, stunningly wrong "information". But even if it were right it would be mere primeministercruft. Delete. -- Hoary 07:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm .. indeed. That's why I had added {{verify}} in the first place. I fixed some of the entries. Any additional corrections needed? -- User:Docu
Keep, notable and useful. This sort of close comparison is fine when it is about a Head of State of a major country. NoSeptember 17:24, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
Keep--Rye1967 18:36, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, their relative longevity is irrelevant. --Huon 16:00, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Japan has the highest life-expectancy in the world exempting possibly Andorra. (Conflicting info on that nation) And I think it's probable some of these are the oldest leaders of any nation anywhere ever. That could be of real interest. A List of longest lived politicians, non-nation specific, might be better but probably harder to do.--T. Anthony 13:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.