While I'm sure this list seemed like a good idea when it was started in 2015, it is no longer practical to keep it updated. According to Wikidata, there are about 1000 non-binary people with Wikipedia articles. This list only includes about 200 of them (including some that probably don't belong, like
Prince). The number of notable non-binary people is growing at a rapid rate and I think this information is better handled via Wikidata and categories (the same as we handle other genders). By only listing a small fraction, we are giving the false impression that there are a much smaller number of notable non-binary people than there really are. If you disagree, please elaborate on how you think this list can be realistically kept up-to-date into the future.
Nosferattus (
talk)
16:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak support: Seems reasonable to handle the same as other gender identities. Is it possible to redirect to
Category:Non-binary people (even though it's out of the article namespace)? The downside would be that there's no central list: categories organize things as trees, and it's impossible to view an actual list of all the people. But that may be inevitable. If wikidata gives a list view, maybe it's possible to link to wikidata somehow?
Mrfoogles (
talk)
16:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Under that same logic, there are a lot of lists that should then be deleted. There are plenty of lists on Wikipedia that I would consider to meet the logic laid out in your standards, such as the ones other users have already mentioned.
And, yes, we have category listings but those are really a difference of formatting. One is a list on a singular page and the other is a directory that leads to a list. See, Lists of Women (
/info/en/?search=Lists_of_women) which leads to several sub lists with a formatting that exactly matches the list whose deletion is being proposed.
Annabelledempsey97 (
talk)
19:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. We maintain a list of the 1,025 Pokémon, so why not the
roughly 900 pages in
Category:Non-binary people? That's a large but not intractable number of entries, and not even close to the largest
stand-alone list on Wikipedia (I've personally touched
List of women authors which includes over 8000 entries). Updating the article to include all current English Wikipedia biography subjects in that cat (excluding the dozen which are fictional, like
Toad) is a perfectly feasible task for a motivated volunteer with a spreadsheet. There is
no deadline. –
RoxySaunders 🏳️⚧️ (
💬 •
📝)
19:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
If it's helpful at all, I got an LLM to spit out
a SPARQL query, which retrieves the relevant data for whatever set of article subjects are correctly tagged as being non-binary humans in Wikidata (875, at time of writing). –
RoxySaunders 🏳️⚧️ (
💬 •
📝)
20:09, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
@
RoxySaunders: That's a good start, although there are also 46 gender identities in Wikidata that are subclasses of non-binary. Plus we need references for all of them (or at least the living ones, which is most of them).
Nosferattus (
talk)
23:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
While I'm sure this list seemed like a good idea when it was started in 2015, it is no longer practical to keep it updated. According to Wikidata, there are about 1000 non-binary people with Wikipedia articles. This list only includes about 200 of them (including some that probably don't belong, like
Prince). The number of notable non-binary people is growing at a rapid rate and I think this information is better handled via Wikidata and categories (the same as we handle other genders). By only listing a small fraction, we are giving the false impression that there are a much smaller number of notable non-binary people than there really are. If you disagree, please elaborate on how you think this list can be realistically kept up-to-date into the future.
Nosferattus (
talk)
16:06, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Weak support: Seems reasonable to handle the same as other gender identities. Is it possible to redirect to
Category:Non-binary people (even though it's out of the article namespace)? The downside would be that there's no central list: categories organize things as trees, and it's impossible to view an actual list of all the people. But that may be inevitable. If wikidata gives a list view, maybe it's possible to link to wikidata somehow?
Mrfoogles (
talk)
16:22, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Under that same logic, there are a lot of lists that should then be deleted. There are plenty of lists on Wikipedia that I would consider to meet the logic laid out in your standards, such as the ones other users have already mentioned.
And, yes, we have category listings but those are really a difference of formatting. One is a list on a singular page and the other is a directory that leads to a list. See, Lists of Women (
/info/en/?search=Lists_of_women) which leads to several sub lists with a formatting that exactly matches the list whose deletion is being proposed.
Annabelledempsey97 (
talk)
19:01, 10 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. We maintain a list of the 1,025 Pokémon, so why not the
roughly 900 pages in
Category:Non-binary people? That's a large but not intractable number of entries, and not even close to the largest
stand-alone list on Wikipedia (I've personally touched
List of women authors which includes over 8000 entries). Updating the article to include all current English Wikipedia biography subjects in that cat (excluding the dozen which are fictional, like
Toad) is a perfectly feasible task for a motivated volunteer with a spreadsheet. There is
no deadline. –
RoxySaunders 🏳️⚧️ (
💬 •
📝)
19:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
If it's helpful at all, I got an LLM to spit out
a SPARQL query, which retrieves the relevant data for whatever set of article subjects are correctly tagged as being non-binary humans in Wikidata (875, at time of writing). –
RoxySaunders 🏳️⚧️ (
💬 •
📝)
20:09, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply
@
RoxySaunders: That's a good start, although there are also 46 gender identities in Wikidata that are subclasses of non-binary. Plus we need references for all of them (or at least the living ones, which is most of them).
Nosferattus (
talk)
23:21, 8 July 2024 (UTC)reply