Talk:Michael Loewe

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Michael Loewe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719020248/http://www.ames.cam.ac.uk/~rs10009/new_page_2.htm to http://www.ames.cam.ac.uk/~rs10009/new_page_2.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719020401/http://www.ames.cam.ac.uk/~rs10009/loewe_scholarship_fund.htm to http://www.ames.cam.ac.uk/~rs10009/loewe_scholarship_fund.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:51, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Centenarian Question

@Jkaharper: In this edit, you referenced a "policy" that centenarian birthdays require specific source attribution. I'm not aware of such a policy. Can you direct me to it, please? I'd like to take a look at it. Thanks in advance.  White Whirlwind  02:32, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi @White whirlwind:, there is no specific policy on centenarian categories to my knowledge. However, WP:BLP and WP:RS apply. A centenarian category is a loaded assertion i.e. it states within their page that the subject reached that age. As such, a reliable source must be provided within the body of the article to support this. Far too many times in the page have bios been in these categories and it's subsequently been discovered that they died weeks, months, even years prior to what would have been their 100th birthday (see the histories of Margie Hines, Dusty Anderson, Berniece Baker Miracle, Günther Schwägermann etc. etc.). Therefore it's only appropriate that we're cautious. Furthermore, any individual aged 90+ on Wiki is listed in the Living people category and their infobox contains an age template provided that there exists a citation that they were alive at some point during the last 10 years. If they surpass 90 and their living status falls into limbo after 10 years, they move to the living person's category. Adding a centenarian category without a source is in direct violation to this rule, as it reaffirms living status without providing supporting evidence. I hope I've explained this well enough for you. Thanks --Jkaharper (talk) 15:45, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

@Jkaharper: I see. That seems unnecessarily cautious to me, but I'll leave the issue to you and the other editors who are active in that area. Thanks for replying.  White Whirlwind  05:11, 1 December 2022 (UTC)