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. WjBscribe 01:08, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of people who died on their birthdays (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Interesting yes, but encyclopedic? I don't think so. Seems like a list of loosely associated people. Clarityfiend 16:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Wikipedia isn't a trivia guide. Otto4711 16:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. That's pretty cool. But it's hard for me to think of a situation in which this information might be useful, so it's seeming like a indiscriminate collection of information to me right this second. One thing that would change my mind would be some evidence that the subject of people dying on their birthday has been considered as important by some reasonably significant sources somewhere. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 16:36, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Statistically almost everyone has a 1/365 chance of dying on their birthday. May not seem high, but when you intersect that with the sheer number of articles that the project does or can have on various dead people the list coulde potentially be very large. And still be very trivial. - TexasAndroid 16:38, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all above despite the fact that I like it. Smashville 16:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:ILIKEIT. I want my wikipedia experience to be as masochistic as possible. Looks like this may be heading for SNOW.... No more bongos 17:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep - let me explain. It does have some notability in my opinion, however it would need an extensive rewrite, and if the page is available in four other langauges (Korean, Bahasa, Portuguese & Swedish), could it be satisfactory enough to meet their standards? Rudget _{Contributions} 17:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. It may very well be that the page will be deleted in those other four languages as well. --Blanchardb 17:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. It's not 1/365.25 chance of dying on your birthday, it's a 1/365.25 chance of dying on a particular day. That day has a 1/365.25 chance of being your birthday. So, really, the chance of dying on your birthday is 0.0000749%, or 1 in about 133,400. Much rarer, but it's still an indiscriminate list, which is a no-no. Delete per nom. ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 18:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Fatuous reply. So what you're saying is that, statistically, this list is of no more use than, say, a list of people who died on October 7? ;) -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not great at statistics, so I cannot debunk Ultraexactzz systematically, but I'm pretty sure he is wrong. Once you fix the birthdate, at birth, you only have one random value in play, the death date, which should have a 1/365 chance of ending up on *any* *specific* day, including the birthday. (And let's leave leap days out of an already messy discussion. :)) - TexasAndroid 18:33, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A little more. Let's examine the same problem in a world with only two days in a year, to simplify things. If my birthday is on day 1, then I can either die on day 1, or day 2. In either case, I have a 1/2 chance of dying on my birthday. If we take a random person on this weird world, then there are only four cases for b-day/D-day combinations: 1:1, 1:2, 2:1, or 2:2. But again, even though we do not know what the B-day is of this random person, there is still a 1/2 chance of both days being the same. 2 hits out of 4 possibilities, for 1/2. This expands out. For a random person in a world of a 3-day year, the pairs are 1:1, 1:2, 1:3, 2:1, 2:2, 2:3, 3:1, 3:2, and 3:3. Again, 3 hits out of 9 possibilities, for a 1/3 chance of the two being the same. And it corresponds directly up to the 365 day real world. 133,400 possibilities, 365 of those are hits, so for a random person, they have 365/133,400 or 1/365 chance of the two being the same. - TexasAndroid 18:48, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer Utraexactzz's line of reasoning - I'd have only a 1/365 chance of dying, period. Clarityfiend 18:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Twould be nice if it worked like that. :) - TexasAndroid 18:56, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Math = the fail. With a fixed birthdate, which everyone has, you're right, it's only one in 365.25 (averaging for leap year). So much for me being clever. ^_^ ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 19:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:] Rudget _{Contributions} 20:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete — statistics aside, why is this a notable, or important means of classifying people? It seems trivial to me. --Haemo 20:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, preferably on september 4. Martijn Hoekstra 20:58, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete; A list of coincidences, and lists of random coincidences aren't encyclopedic, however interesting they are. Masaruemoto 21:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - For the statistics buffs above, I submit to you the fact that the odds of dying while in a streetcar are almost 1 in 4 million, much rarer than dying on one's birthday. If this article is here because it's rare to die on one's birthday, then I say that we must write List of people who died while riding in a streetcar. (Seriously, though, the article has got to go, as Wikipedia articles are not supposed to be collections of loosely-associated items.) --Hnsampat 23:23, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge into birthday. Two suggestions: (1) It would be more interesting if you were to put their birth and death dates (such as Machine Gun Kelly-- July 18, 1895 to July 18, 1954); (2) We should also nominate for deletion the list and category called List of people who were born on their birthdays. It's way too long as it is. Mandsford 02:39, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• My grandma wasn't born on her birthday. Also, she was my grandpa's sister. Funny stories, both of them; take me out for pad thai sometime and I'll tell you all about it. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 23:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete it's mildly interesting as trivia but isn't encyclopedic. Carlossuarez46 00:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Put this into a category. ''[[User:Kitia|Kitia'']] 20:30, 11 November 2007 (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.