Talk:List of people who disappeared mysteriously

Page size (again)

A discussion at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#A_different_page_load_problem -- User:Sphilbrick is an OTRS volunteer and reports a ticket was submitted regarding a technical problem with this page. Users in different countries are having trouble loading the page, intermittently. Sphilbrick believes it could be due to page size. I agree. The page size is now interfering with users ability to load and read it. -- GreenC 13:23, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

The article half-way point is roughly 1970 with about equal amounts before and after. So we could have List of people who disappeared mysteriously (pre-1970) and List of people who disappeared mysteriously (post-1970). 1970 is also conveniently unix time "day 0" so there is some logic to it, though the split can always be re-adjusted in the future as the post-1970 list gets longer. -- GreenC 13:28, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

I agree that it ought to be considered for splitting, even if someone were to conclude that the recent problem wasn't size related. Per article size guidelines: Wikipedia:Article_size 100 K is a suggested upper bound. The guideline notes that list articles might be an exception, but I believe the rationale for that exception is that the nature of some it list articles is that there may not be convenient break points. Given the chronological nature of this article, time periods could be used.

This article is currently about 350 K. With a suggested upper bound of 100 K, it might be better to consider breaking into four time periods which would allow a little room for growth. If you would like an example, take a look at List of colors: A–F, List of colors: G–M, and List of colors: N–Z. Note that they have a common talk page, which I think makes sense.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

4 lists of about equal size would be:

• List of people who disappeared mysteriously: pre-1940
• List of people who disappeared mysteriously: 1940-1979
• List of people who disappeared mysteriously: 1980-1999
• List of people who disappeared mysteriously: 21st century

Would need some tuning on creation to check article size. Changed "(pre-1940") to ": pre-1940" because parenthesis are usually used for disambiguation and this is a part of the article title, similar to List of colors: A–F-- GreenC 14:48, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

100k is for "readable prose (found by counting the words, perhaps with the help of Shubinator's DYK tool or Prosesize) and not to wiki markup size (as found on history lists or other means)"; the article is actually not that big; Barack Obama is 335k (and an FA). Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:13, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

It's currently about 150k for readable prose. And one thing we can count on, this list is going to continue growing. It's already a beast to load and save. Since multiple users are reporting they can't read it at all, now would be the time to split it up. Could split in half if 4 is too many. -- GreenC 13:36, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

It loads fairly quickly here but I agree with splitting into multiple lists, as was done at List of fires back in January beginning with this edit when it was 157741 bytes. I suggest creating the following articles:

• List of people who disappeared mysteriously: pre-1940
• List of people who disappeared mysteriously: 1940-1979
• List of people who disappeared mysteriously: 1980-1999

with this article retaining the post-1999 entries. Sections in this article would refer the reader to the other articles, as was done at List of fires. This article would then consist of the most recent disappearances. Akld guy (talk) 16:56, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

Readers may have equal interest across all time periods, and prioritizing one presents a problem that someone may later argue the earliest period should come first. Similar to List of colors, there can be a List of people who disappeared which aggregates all the different lists and articles dealing with disappearances (probably at least 10). This article would redirect there creating a dual use solution. -- GreenC 20:16, 17 August 2018 (UTC)

I made a bold move by splitting the list in half which is the most conservative option while staying withing guidelines for list size. I also followed the suggestion of keeping this talk page and redirecting both new article talk pages here. An attribution statement is below since this common talk page serves both lists. -- GreenC 00:13, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

This behemoth is a level of absurdity, that Wiki just doesn't see. There is no barrier for "mysteriously" and this page has been expanded to basically include all missing persons ever. A straightforward abduction is not a mystery. Why is any editor essentially attempting to copy the entirety of every missing persons database in first world countries? Many of the linked articles are created stubs, with no real information either. It creates a loop that basically sends you to a main page for - missing persons everywhere. In fact, the pre-80's list is more in line with mysterious disappearances, situations which have been covered in media by appearance, whereas the omnibus post 70's is a generic listing of any age. There should be criteria for inclusion for "mysteriously" disappeared, or separate pages delineating general missing persons against mysterious circumstances should be created. Not finding remains isn't equal to "mysteriously disappeared" (see: Stacy Ann Peterson). 24.96.115.214 (talk) 03:50, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

References

Content attribution for list split per WP:COPYWITHIN

Two articles were created List of people who disappeared mysteriously: pre-1970 and List of people who disappeared mysteriously: post-1970 by copy and paste from the original article List of people who disappeared mysteriously -- all content is attributed to the original article history. The talk page is retained -- GreenC 00:10, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

James Litterick and Liu Menggeng

James Litterick (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Liu Menggeng (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Are these really disappearances? Or just someone who we don't have a contemporary record of their later years? I think this is just a case of someone who, at best, their date of death is unknown. I've Googled them, and it doesn't seem to be a missing persons case. I would like some feedback on whether we can remove them from this list, and update their Wiki page to denote that simply their date of death is unknown, not that they disappeared. StrangeApparition2011 (talk) 04:03, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Possible, in the case of James Litterick. Liu Menggeng is rather more mysterious.--Auric talk 23:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Inclusion query

Hey there, I was just browsing the list, and I couldn't help think that perhaps Etan Patz's case should potentially be moved to List of solved missing persons cases, as his kidnapper/murderer did confess, and besides that, he has since been declared legally dead, leading me to beleive that his case could be regarded as solved, however, I'm seeking consensus first. Fhsig13 (talk) 19:55, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Since there's been a conviction in the case, yes. Daniel Case (talk) 18:14, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Constantine XI Palaiologos

As of this edit, if not earlier, the last emperor of the Romans is included. However, except for those who believe he was supernaturally taken away to a mysterious place to fulfill some prophecy, it is clear that he died in combat when the Ottomans conquered Constantinople. There is even one account that his headless corpse was identified by the purple boots on the feet. So the likelihood that he did not disappear mysteriously is quite good & he should be removed from this list. -- llywrch (talk) 16:07, 16 October 2018 (UTC)