Talk:Jimmy Wales/Birthdate

History

The issue of Jimmy Wales date of birth has been a frequent topic of discussion. Try for instance, this search of the talk archives. Previous threads:

May 2006. Started by this edit by Jimmy Wales, which refers to the circularity of the sourcing.
June 2006. Discussion of privacy issues.
July 2006. "Why no birthdate?" question.
July 2006. Started by this edit by Jimmy Wales, where he states his date of birth is not August 8th.
July 2006. Discussion of the need for independent sources.
January 2007. Started by this edit by Jimmy Wales stating that his birth certificate contradicts the given date of birth. There's a diff in this section which fails: an unreliable source has been quoted in discussions for the alleged content of this diff, which suggests a discrepancy between the date of JW's birth as accepted within his family, and that recorded on the birth certificate.
January 2007. Birthdate removed because reliable sources may be relying on unreliable ones.
February 2007. Discussion of the privacy issue.
May 2007. Started by this edit by Jimmy Wales stating that the Britannica source doesn't match his birth certificate and he is writing to them.
August 2007. Started here, but has multiple contributions from Jimmy Wales: may continue to have fun with this?; bloglink, presumably referring to this blog post; brown hair illustration; fun being cryptic, but points to "first reliable source".
August 2007. See also: this comment by Jimmy Wales on his talk page.
November 2007. About discussion of the DOB controversy in the the article.
January 2008. Discussion of the 7 vs. 8 debate, mentioning both reliable and unreliable sources for both dates.
March 2008. More of the same.
February-March 2009. Proposed resolutions.

Discussion

I very much appreciate this fascinating collection of evidence. I will here try to puzzle through the mystery.

I detect a thread here. Wales apparently enjoys playing with words, and pushing people to think about things like circularity, sourcing, and reliability through a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor. He is also known, within natural human bounds of course, to prefer to speak and write precisely. Therefore, it seems likely that in his past statements, we can tease out some clues as to what is going on here.

First, note well that he sometimes talks about what his birthday *is* as opposed to what his birth certificate *says*. One might logically conclude that there is some discrepancy between what he and his family know to be the fact (based on the first hand reporting of his parents - he has, in fact, mentioned here and there that he might like to someday post a note from him mother) and what the original legal documents - and documents directly based on those - have to say. (Some very clever persons have picked up on this and speculated a late-night birth, a tired doctor, and a family tradition at odds with the paperwork.)

Let's see... driver's licenses and passports require a document to be produced to verify date of birth, and for most people the birth certificate is the document that does it. One might conclude that all those documents are likely to agree. According to the Oregonian reporter, who says he looked up the driver's license records, that date must be the 8th.

And then a marriage certificate typically requires someone to sign something saying that the information is actually true. For this, we might suppose that Wales, knowing that the truth is different from the birth certificate, might reasonably feel that the best answer to give is the actual date. That date must be the 7th.

Now, it is additionally possible, despite his known desire to speak precisely about the matter, that he may have at some point spoken in a way at odds with this theory. If so, now would be a good time to analyze that and perhaps ask him for specific clarifications.

Otherwise, it seems that all the evidence before us can be logically unified with 3 observations. Apparently, Wales has a birth certificate and related documents which say the 8th, but regards his actual birthday to be the 7th. And he has, evidently, a wry sense of humor about such things.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 02:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you talking about yourself like it isn't you writing? Did somebody spike your tea :). Seriously, don't you have better things to do with your time? I know threeafterthree doesn't, but that is just him :) Cheers and Happy Birthday! Tom 03:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, good point. I do have better things to do, but I indulged myself in a few moments of whimsy. :) --Jimbo Wales (talk) 04:22, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why is anything more accurate for an encyclopedia entry of DOB actually needed than Month and Year? Unless people use WP for their birthday card lists, or to devise astrological charts... Riversider (talk) 09:39, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"I indulged myself in a few moments of whimsy. :)"

I wonder whether you are familiar with these guidelines: WP:NOT#HOST and WP:NOT#SOAP? Riversider (talk) 13:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you're joking.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 17:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just trying to help - building an encyclopedia is a serious business you know...River sider (talk) 09:54, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lets not lose focus by discussing editors; any comments that might help improve the article are welcome. Concerning the above analysis (which is the obvious interpretation in my view), the only fly in the ointment is that both the Britannica researcher's note and the Oregonian article have Jimmy Wales stating that the birth date/day given by Britannica is incorrect, without any nuance about birth certificates. This may be a case where he has spoken "at odds with this theory". Any clarification would be welcome, but doesn't change the fact that what the article says should be based on reliable sources. Geometry guy 19:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

I'm simplifying the related references in the bio into a concise list of related and conflicting cites. This isn't a big deal in an otherwise concise biography, and the cites are clearer combined. +sj +