Talk:List of oldest and youngest Academy Award winners and nominees

message: I created this article on May 6, 2007.  Please feel free to add comments or suggestions on this Talk Page or on my User Talk Page.  Thanks!  (JosephASpadaro 22:30, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the templates indicating possible violations of WP:V#Sources and WP:NOR.  There are discrepancies between information of ages in this chart re:, e.g., James Dean and no sourcing is given; cf. link (now redirected) to WP:SYN as well.  --NYScholar (talk) 21:35, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  E.g., if James Dean died at the age of 24 years old, it cannot be accurate to say that he was nominated at the age of 25 etc.; one's age does not continue after one dies. One is nominated (even posthumously) for the work that one did when still alive (logic).  The computation of ages seems to be the result of original research and not properly sourced by reliable and verifiable documented third-party published sources.  --NYScholar (talk) 21:37, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  There is no original research here and there are no factual discrepancies.  All of the information in this article is taken directly from the official Academy Awards web site.  The link is found here:  .  This reference source is already included and is listed at the bottom of the article.  I am therefore removing the templates.  Also, the Academy's convention in posthumous nominations (and awards) is to compute a "fictitious age" as if the nominee had actually been alive on the date of the nomination.  That is, the "age" does not refer to the chronological age of the nominee.  Rather, it refers to the elapse of time between the nominee's date of birth and the date of nomination.  The Academy is free to compute "ages" in whichever way that organization sees fit.  Thus, this is not original research ... and there is no factual discrepancy.  Thanks.   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:02, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

text: There is a difference between a "source" in Wikipedia and an "external link"; for the differences pertaining to editing policies and guidelines, please consult: WP:V#Sources and WP:EL, as well as WP:BLP#Sources.  The distinctions are discussed also on talk pages of the policy and guideline pages.  I do understand your confusion; but listing a URL in an EL (External links) section is not the same as providing a "source citation" for material in an article.  This list is an "article" in Wikipedia, and it needs source citations just as other Wikipedia articles do.  It was not clear from your listing of the home page of the Academy Award site what your actual sources of information for the parts of your chart are (they are several separate webpages) and it was certainly not clear how the "Academy Award Statistics" webpages construct "ages" (definitely within quotation marks in the case of deceased persons).  Some of this needs explanation in the lead (lede) of the article (top of the list prior to the charts).  For each section of each chart on which you relied for information from separate webpages from the "Academy Award Statistics" database, it is possible to provide a properly-formatted source citation (others can help you with that process of editing perhaps).  --NYScholar (talk) 01:10, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

text: At your invitation at the start of this section, I added these comments for the improvement of this article's documentation of its (mostly your it seems) sources of information.  You may not agree with them, and others may not agree with them, but I offered the comments in good faith.  (I will be offline after posting this and will not see any replies.) --NYScholar (talk) 01:12, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article 

message: There is some dispute as to whether Peter Finch's birth year is 1916 or 1912.  In fact, discussion about this very dispute exists on the Talk Page under Peter Finch's Wikipedia article.  AMPAS "officially" recognizes 1916 and thus ranks him accordingly in its list of oldest Academy Award winners and nominees.  As AMPAS is the original source material cited for the data in this article, I will contact them to follow up on this disputed information.  I will re-post here, once I hear back from AMPAS as to the their position on Finch's birth year and his resulting rank on the lists featured in this article.  Thanks.  (JosephASpadaro 14:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Peter Finch's year of birth is 1916.  (Source: The California Department of Health Services Office of Health Information and Research Vital Statistics Section) (See http://vitals.rootsweb.com/ca/death/search.cgi) (JosephASpadaro 18:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I contacted the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS), which maintains a database of information on Academy Award winners and nominees.  I contacted AMPAS to inquire about their official position regarding Peter Finch's year of birth in their database records.  The response that I received from AMPAS is as follows:  "We did some research into Peter Finch's birth date and do not find convincing evidence at this time to warrant a change to 1912.  His birth date has been consistently reported as September 28, 1916.  Recently (since 2005), the IMDb has changed the birth year to 1912, apparently to match the dates on Finch's grave marker, but no written documentation has been found to support this date.  The year is given as 1916 in the California Death Records and in a memorial advertisement in The Hollywood Reporter placed by his widow after his death.  Biographies by Trader Faulkner and Elaine Dundy, both published after his death, refer to the circumstances of his birth taking place during World War I.  Both authors interviewed Finch's mother, who survived him.  Dundy's "Finch, Bloody Finch" (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1980) cites marriage and birth records, as well as family correspondence, which all support the 1916 date."  Although the opinion of AMPAS is not dispositive of this issue, I believe that their reasoning (combined with the records of The California Department of Health Services Office of Health Information and Research Vital Statistics Section) is sound.  Furthermore, AMPAS is the original source material cited for the data in this article.  Thus, I propose that this article on Peter Finch should incorporate a birth year of 1916.  (JosephASpadaro 18:10, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As the most reliable sources already cited in the article on Peter Finch support changing the birth year from 1912 to 1916 (as well as the category at the bottom of the page), I've eliminated the previous discrepancies in that article and the chart of this article by correcting the birth year in Peter Finch to 1916; I also annotated the two peer-edited items in the EL sec. in that article to show that they have incorrect dates of birth for him.  --NYScholar (talk) 21:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Peter Finch]] 

message: Wasn't William Friedkin younger than Mike Nichols when he won an Academy Award for Best Director?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.170.106.30 (talk) 00:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Great question!  Actually, it looks like William Friedkin and Mike Nichols were only 2 months apart in age (69 days to be exact) when they won their Best Director Oscars.  All of the specific details are laid out in this page: List of Best Director winners by age at win.  So, if the information in that article is correct -- which I believe it is -- then Nichols was age 36 years, 156 days old when he won his Oscar and Friedkin was age 36 years, 225 days old when he won his Oscar.  Thus, Nichols was 69 days younger than Friedkin.  So, as of the 79th Academy Awards for 2006, Nichols was the tenth youngest Best Director and Friedkin was the 11th youngest.  Thanks.  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[William Friedkin]] 

message: If someone can be bothered, the  template would work well here. —Moondyne 04:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello.  Well, I can -- and will -- be bothered.  It is quite coincidental that you mention that.  That project has been on my back burner for a long time (cleaning up this page ... and incorporating the age template).  Literally, just yesterday, I started to clean it up -- using my Sandbox pages for the drafts until I have dotted all the i's and crossed all the t's.  Funny coincidence that you should mention it today.  So, basically, look for it here soon.  Thanks.  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Perhaps having the age in days is not such a great thing to have around right now, considering there are some entries that have been alive for 0 days, or other amounts that make no sense whatsoever. Or at least whoever was going to fix this should get to work on it soon.  --24.226.62.161 (talk) 04:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Can you clarify your above post?  I don't understand what you are saying.  Thanks.  In the current chart, you do realize that there is a column called "Age in Days" ... but it is immediately preceded by a column called "Age in Years", correct?  So, you should not be reading the "Age in Days" independently of -- or separately and apart from -- the "Age in Years".   For example, the very first name on the chart is Clint Eastwood.  And it says that his age in days is 272.  This does not mean that he is 272 days old.  It means that he is 74 years and 272 days old ... in conjunction with the "Age in Years" column directly to the left of the "Age in Days" column.  Is this what you are referring to?   Thanks.   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I reformatted the age columns, so as to clarify the above issue.  This is a good temporary fix, for now, until I complete the incorporation into the chart of the "age in years and days" template as suggested above.   Thanks.   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I was (finally) able to re-format this page, using the  template.  This project is now fully completed at this point.  This project took much longer than expected to get off of my "back burner" and onto my "front burner".  But, in any event, it's now done.  Thanks.   (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:17, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age template 

message: After taking some time to add the citations for sources used throughout this article and sections of its charts, I removed the template that I added yesterday.  --NYScholar (talk) 18:06, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Corrected problem of missing citations

message: To avoid the possibility of future confusion and the appearance of discrepancies pertaining to ages of Wikified-linked articles on persons listed in this article (its charts), I also added a note clarifying how the AMPAS computes the ages of the persons that it lists in its Awards Database (currently in note 1 of this article).  (Scroll up for earlier discussions). --NYScholar (talk) 20:53, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Computation of ages

message: Jeff Bridges was 60 years, 3 months, and 4 days old when he won his Oscar for Crazy Heart. (Born Dec 4th, 1949, won on March 7th, 2010) This should be in the box (I think it's 7 or 8), but I'm not exactly sure how to edit the box, so I didn't want to try. Vyselink (talk) 01:25, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jeff Bridges in the "Oldest to Win" section 

message: For a while now I've been wondering how intresting it would be to see who the most recently born and the earliest born winners/nominees would be in any cat.
I know the earliest is May Robson for nominees and the most recently born winner is Paquin. While the most recently born is either Abigail Breslin or the girl in Atonement (Can't remember her name!) And yeah most recently could be beaten this year with the True Grit girl.
But I think it be intersting to see a lists for these.
Also possibly oldest/youngest in other fields as well.
174.50.65.177 (talk) 04:19, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earliest born/Most recently born 

message: Okay I thought this be intresting to bring up. But who are some frontrunners that can appear in any of the top 10s?
Well for supporting actress we have Hailee Steinfeld for True Grit who will be the 3rd youngest if nominated. Then for lead actor we have Jesse Eisenberg for The Social Network who will be among the 10 youngest nominated. Then if Robert Duvall gets nominated for Get Low he will be the oldest ever. Of course some rumors are saying that Steinfeld is being pushed for lead, if that happens she will be the youngest ever.
No director looks to make it on to either list.
Something I found intresting is how less then 10 actresses over the age of 50 have won lead. I mean I have noticed that there are younger then actor there, but wow.
Kamkek (talk) 02:52, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible changes with nominations this year (2010)

message: This page needs lists for youngest/oldest to win second, third, etc.  E.g., Kate Winslet.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  05:14, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe you mean nominated, since yeah Kate has only one once, and also only Katharine Hepburn and Jack Nicolson have one 3 or more times for actors/actresses.  Kate though is the youngest to have 2nd/3rd/ect nominations. Kamkek (talk) 16:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  O.K. so you could make charts for winning twice and being nominated 2-6 or 8 times. Maybe only top 5 for each.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  16:36, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hello.  Please let me add my two cents.  I see two problems with the suggestion.  First, we would need reliable sources (i.e., no original research).  All of the information in this article comes from the official Academy Award website.  The official website does not contain lists such as those suggested in the above posts.  Perhaps other reliable sources do, but I would tend to doubt that they do so in any organized, consistent, and updated manner (as the Academy does for this present list).  Second ... if indeed we were to create a list like that, it would simply be the names Katharine Hepburn; Jack Nicholson; Meryl Streep; (and the like); over and over and over again.  As a general rule (yes, there are some exceptions) ... there are very few people who get multiple nominations, much less, multiple awards.  So, to break them down and to categorize them as the Top Five Oldest / Youngest to Win 2 nominations / 3 nominations / etc ... would simply be a list of the same names over and over again.  Not too interesting, I'd think.  Plus, again, the problem of citing reliable sources.  If anyone wants to create such a list, add it to this Talk Page, so that we can see if it does indeed contain interesting data ... or if, as I suspect, it merely re-hashes the same (expected) names over and over again.  Thanks!  That's my two cents!  (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:04, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As I recall, Kate broke a different person's record each time (not one of the names you mentioned above).  However, I do not know a source for the data.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  17:39, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Age chart for multiple nominations 

message: Well I was right about Stienfeld and Eisenberg, didn't realize they appear so down low though on the nominations!
While Lawrence is the 2nd youngest lead actress!
Okay now, for winners:
Lead actor:
If Jeff Bridges wins he will be the 5th oldest.
If Jesse Eisenberg wins he will be the youngest.
If James Franco wins he will be somewhere between the 8th and 10th youngest (I saw he was born in 78. Let me check again to see where he was)...Okay looks like 10th youngest.
Lead actress:
If Jennifer Lawrence wins she will be the youngest.
If Annette Bening wins she will be the 8th oldest.
Supporting actress:
If Hailee Steinfeld wins she will be the 3rd youngest.
If Jacki Weaver wins she will be the 8th oldest.
(Amazing since I don't think that many of us have heard of her before!)
No changes in supporting actor/director.
Kamkek (talk) 17:59, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes that might happen this year (2010-winners) 

message: I was just wondering why Morgan Freeman is not on the list for oldest Best Actor winners. When he won for Million Dollar Baby, he was in his mid sixties. That would make him somewhere in he top 5, right?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.192.14.51 (talk) 02:38, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: He won for supporting, not lead, thats why.  Kamkek (talk) 03:24, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

text: He won for supporting not leading where he would have been among the oldest.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR)  03:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morgan Freeman 

message: I am intrested in seeing a chart for this.
I know Rainer and Burns be the 2 longest life spans for winners, but some other things be intresting.
Maybe I'll try this over the weekend if nobody minds.
Kamkek (talk) 19:33, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Longest lived winners/nomination 

message: Nominated for Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close (film) (supporting actor) and he is currently 82, making him the oldest ever academy award nominee for that category.  Also, Christopher Plummer was nominated in the same category, and he is also 82!  Beginners.
CrocodilesAreForWimps (talk) 20:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: They are both already in the article - and actually Hal Holbrook is still the oldest in that category. For An Angel (talk) 21:07, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Must've been looking at the wrong table. CrocodilesAreForWimps (talk) 21:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Max von Sydow and Christopher Plummer 

message: The age is wrong for this entry. It says he was 29 years old, but this is obviously not true, because he died when he was 28. He would have been 29 if he was still alive, but since he wasn't, the age is misleading. Also, the date of award instead lists his date of death. Tad Lincoln (talk) 02:46, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct.  But this is how the Academy "computes" his age (and any deceased person's age) for purposes of these records.  They use the age as if the person were still alive at the time of the award/nomination.   Thanks.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:19, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

text: Also, at the very bottom of the article, see the References section.  In the first reference, it says:  N.B.: Ages (including for those persons receiving nominations and/or awards posthumously) are computed by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS); for nominations, all ages are computed "from date of birth to date of nominations announcement"; for awards won, all ages are computed "from date of birth to date of awards ceremony".  That is what I was explaining in my post above.   Thanks.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:22, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heath Ledger 

message: Oldest Best Supporting Actress Winners
Josephine Hull is 74 years (and 85 days), winning for Harvey (1950).
See AMPAS Database for this:
74 years, 85 days. *Josephine Hull, Harvey (1950)
[January 3, 1877 - March 29, 1951]
The information on Hull is inaccurate in these Wikipedia pages.
Tim Dirks  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.215.95.115 (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error in Best Supporting Actress ages 

message: Anna Paquin was 21 years old when she won the Oscar in the movie The Piano  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.250.30.78 (talk) 21:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Why do you say that she was 21?  She was 11.  One of the youngest ever, in fact.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:26, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anna Paquin 

message: Okay so yes Luise Rainer is by far the winner here (though I think Jackie Cooper has the record nomination wise), I was thinking of a list for the longest lifespan after nomination/win (James Stewart has the record for best actor)
While I'm at it-the longest lifespan total (Think someone brought that up already)  Wgolf (talk) 23:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There's this: List of oldest living Academy Award winners. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:23, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there a  list for longest lived after nomination/win 

message: Hey I like that idea, can we have it to see even further like how long some were held? (Well unless if it just goes back to 1 or 2, like best actress its amusing that it was so long)
Wgolf (talk) 18:59, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length of records 

message: Records are broken in 2015 Oscars, including best director and best supporting actor. Perhaps more.
Princetan (talk) 18:28, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs updating 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Academy Awards which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 13:20, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: I'm considering adding a section on oldest and youngest producers to be awarded Best Picture, and possibly doing it for other categories later. This information is not in the original source, so I am the first person to gather this information. Any opinions? Should I, shouldn't I, etc.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbb618 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best Picture 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of oldest and youngest Academy Award winners and nominees. 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  tag to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090301005626/http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/helpMain.jsp?helpContentURL=statistics%2FindexStats.html to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/helpMain.jsp?helpContentURL=statistics%2FindexStats.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090301005626/http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/helpMain.jsp?helpContentURL=statistics%2FindexStats.html to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/helpMain.jsp?helpContentURL=statistics%2FindexStats.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090301005626/http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/helpMain.jsp?helpContentURL=statistics%2FindexStats.html to http://awardsdatabase.oscars.org/ampas_awards/help/helpMain.jsp?helpContentURL=statistics%2FindexStats.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:43, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm a bit confused by this article. The superlative category indicates that it's only for "standard competitive categories." Is writing considered a "standard competitive category"? If so, James Ivory (Call Me by Your Name) just became the oldest winner yesterday, winning the award at 89-years-old. I wanted to check in with the community before editing because it wasn't clear to me whether writing is included in this article or not. Thanks! 76.218.12.208 (talk) 20:19, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is writing excluded from the superlative heading? 

message: I think the overall youngest winner is Shirley Temple. 夏瑾凉安 (talk) 03:56, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overall youngest winner 

message: Was 22 when she won the Oscar for Best Actress, making her the 3rd youngest recipient, before Patty Duke 101.53.217.112 (talk) 13:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: WRONG. Patty Duke won Best Supporting Actress, while Jennifer Lawrence won Best Actress. Lawrence is the second youngest winner of the latter award; Marlee Matlin is the youngest. $chnauzer 17:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jennifer Lawrence 

message: John Williams has become the oldest person ever nominated for an Oscar , though since it's not in one of the "big five" categories for acting or directing, I don't know whether it belongs on this page. —Mahāgaja · talk 16:02, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Williams 

message: Billy Eilish has won a second award for Best Original Song at, by my count, just 22 years of age - which means the section on "youngest to win two" is missing a name and a category. I'll keep an eye out for a notable source that supports this calculation. C37H67NO13 (talk) 02:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Youngest to two...