Jump to content

Talk:Deaths in April 2007

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bob Clark - 65 or 67?

[edit]

The AP reports his age as 67, our article says 65. Our article seems to match the birthdate shown at IMDb and AllMovieGuide. But should the AP get more clout? I left a note on that article's talk page as well. --Do Not Talk About Feitclub (contributions) 23:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Gonzalvo

[edit]
  • Removed this Barcelona/Spain footballer from April 8 - no news hits of his death, his Wiki article makes no reference to cause of death, and the death dates clash between it and here (it lists him as dead March 8, 2007). What's more, the same user updated both pages just before to note his death. i'm reverting both until there are sources, if he has died. tomasz. 15:41, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He's dead alright [1]. No death date but very recent, i have updated the article, SqueakBox 15:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sound, fair enough then. was hoping to err on the side of caution. tomasz. 15:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely. I have a death date, the 7th, and have put it on this page, SqueakBox 15:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Len Fitzgerald

[edit]

The only reference that says anything about when he died, the first one, says he died "overnight". This is news-speak in Australia for either "last night" (= yesterday night, Monday 16th), or "we're not exactly sure when, or maybe we are, but we want to sound as up-to-the-minute as we can". It almost always means "prior to midnight". In the past, I've seen deaths reported in the media as occurring "overnight", when they turned out to have occurred 2 or 3 or more days earlier. The reference was timed at 9:10 am (local time) today, Tuesday 17th. How likely is it that he died at, say, 3am this morning, and it hit the news only 6 hours later? In my opinion, not very likely at all. He is notable, but hardly famous enough to warrant such a quick response by the media.

This entry was originally put in the list of 17 April deaths; I changed it to 16th for the above reasons; and it's been reverted back. I suspect history will bear me out when we have accurate information as to his time/date of death, but I'll suspend any further changes till then. JackofOz 05:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article [2] says he died in his sleep on Tuesday morning, so 17 April is correct. WWGB 23:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I'm not actually personally convinced by this reference, because papers (and the media generally) have a bad track record of getting the actual date of a person's death correct. But for now, it meets Wikipedia requirements, so I won't change anything. Cheers. JackofOz 02:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Virginia Tech victims

[edit]

Is there consensus (or a majority view) on whether Virginia Tech victims should be listed here? One victim has already been entered. The heinous killer has made himself notable by his actions, but I don't think it appropriate to list all 32 victims. Should some be listed, for example, the dorm victims, academic staff etc? WWGB 14:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Being murdered is fairly notable, especially when there are so many victims, so yes - I believe the victims should be listed. I listed Mr. Librescu due to his other notable qualities. --Calidore Chase 14:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot about the Family name reversal thing. I'll try not to let it happen again. --Calidore Chase 15:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
personally i'm against listing all the victims as it'd be against both precedent (cf Amish school shooting, etc.) and the "deaths of notable people" rule of thumb despite obviously being a tragic and egregious event. Professor Librescu should definitely be there as he was already notable enough to merit an article. tomasz. 15:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dont think they should be on this list nor have a page if they arent notable. Do we name everyone who died on 9/11? I do agree they should be listed on the "Shooting" page --Elg26 21:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This is a good question from WWGB. It's pretty rare to list someone on the "Deaths" page simply because of how they died and not based on their notability before they died. To me, the 9/11 comparison by Elg26 is valid: you would not list the 3,000+ victims on the Deaths page, nor the 33 deaths on 4/16. Que-Can 22:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Many victims of horrific crimes gain enough notoriety in the manner of their death to warrant an article, Sarah Payne is just one example. So I strongly support linking to these folks as the manner of their death has made them notable, if not as individuals then as a group. What is not acceptable is making the perpetrator notable and his victims not and I have deleted him for the moment and will place a POV tag if I am reverted, SqueakBox 22:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Accusing the Deaths in 2007 page of NPOV is bizarre. Cho has a Wikipedia entry, he is probably the most discussed person in the world at the moment, and you want to suppress his death notice? How do you propose that your POV issue be addressed? Only by acceding to your wishes? WWGB 02:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I hardly think it's a neutrality issue listing the shooter instead of the victims. People die every day, what's more, people are murdered every day. As tragic as it may be, it's only notable to the friends and families, not the entire Wikipedia community. Also, because it's so common, we don't note on the Deaths page every time a murderer dies, because in this day and age, being a murderer with a sole victim is not an uncommon occurrence. Being the person who committed the worst school shooting in the history of a nation is, however, a unique and notable individual. As sad as it may be in this case, the perpetrator is notable and the victims, outside of their own personal spheres, are not. Whether or not that is acceptable is part of a much larger debate that is, unfortunately, only partially relevant to an encyclopedic listing of notable figures who died. Canadian Paul 22:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia has a responsibility to report the facts of notable people. Cho's page is currently longer than most other notable people's on wikipedia. According to notability guidelines, "a person is notable if he or she has been the subject of secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent,6 and independent of the subject. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability." Considering that Cho is on nearly every newspaper's front page in the world, I'd say he qualifies as a notable person.... While right now the victims are currently relatively unknown, in time, a few of them will rise from anonymity and meet the qualifications of notability once their stories are told. sharksandwich999 23:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This page is to list deaths of notable people, not groups. Only the victims who already have articles should be listed. Weatherman90 22:40, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any sort of middle ground that could be met? Rather than list each student, could we just link to the list of deaths? Yeah, it's not a person, but the list itself should be notable enough. Gfrank 18:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fact is that the shooter is notable because of his actions, not because of his death; whereas the victims are not notable individually enough to receive mention, even though their manner of death is historic -- but there are exceptions: in that several of the professors killed were quite renowned for their professional work, and therefore should receive individual mention, as the article now stands. This is a technical, not ethical, question. Pablosecca 01:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The precedent set by the entry for the 9/11 victims suggests that a group entry might be appropriate, although the two events are on a much different scale.

Jocelyne Couture-Nowak

[edit]

Is there consensus to remove her name (reason: non notable) from April 16? Professors Granata and Librescu have been speedily declared notable in their own right outside the events at V-Tech, so their inclusion is unquestioned. Pablosecca 07:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think her notice should remain until such time as her main wiki entry is deleted or redirected WWGB 07:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
yeh, what he ^ said tomasz. 10:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Jocelyne Couture-Nowak is notable in Canada (Nova Scotia) for her very public work re minority (French) language rights and schooling. Her profile in Virgina, however, was much lower.Que-Can 20:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

V-Tech Killer

[edit]

Now I know someone will just put it back up, but I don't think he's worthy of mention on Wikipedia, seeing as how hundreds die all the time in Iraq due to suicide murders, and this person really doesn't deserve to have his name everywhere, which was pretty much why he did the crime.

That's a real head-in-the-sand position to adopt. He has a Wikipedia article, plus more than 3000 hits on Google News, yet you want to suppress the listing of his death? WWGB 03:47, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
not only is it not a matter of "deserving" to be on the page (since we're in the business of facts and nor ethical judgements), but being responsible for modern US history's deadliest spree killing confers a certain notability on this individual. "which was pretty much why he did the crime"... yeh? got a verifiable source on that? tomasz. 09:37, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, "doesn't deserve" is an emotional response. And understandable. Meanwhile, the other gut-wrenching decision is AfD-ing victims' articles for not being notable. I agree not to give the killer his "platform," but that's not the policy here. He's clearly notable in his deplorable, despicable way. —Twigboy 13:37, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
i realise it's an emotional response, but like i said, we're not in the emotional response business. and surely he doesn't have a "platform" considering he's dead. tomasz. 13:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

VT Murderer

[edit]

the virginia tech murderer should not be listed as a famous person dying, because that is what he wanted, to glorify his evil scheme.

1. you don't know what "he wanted". 2. wikipedia is not censored and a person's moral fibre is not a criterion for having an article on them or getting rid of one. if it were, there'd be no Adolf Hitler articles, no Augusto Pinochet, etc., etc. 3. he's dead, so it's hardly like we're giving him some sort of satisfaction. 4. he's kind of become famous whether we like that or not. 5. read the paragraph above before you make exactly the same points again. tomasz. 11:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dick Vosborough

[edit]

Has anyone any info about this writer, who died recently? The only thing I could find online is that he wrote for The Marx Brothers in "Flywheel, Shyster and Flywheel".

Paul

194.73.99.107 10:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

he was writing partner to Barry Cryer and Ronnie Corbett early in his career. He was born in Plainfield, New Jersey i think. he was said to be a very solispsistic man happiest working independently, and he was a great lover of wordsmithery. there was an obit. on BBC Radio 4's obituary show The Last Word last week, should be streamable online as 'Listen Again' for a couple of days if you're interested. tomasz. 12:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rene Mailhot

[edit]
  • People that keep changing (French) to (Canadian) – The word (French) at the end of the line refers to the language that the corresponding source is in, not the nationality of the person. The page linked to is written in French, as "Canadian" is not per se a language. Please familiarise yourself with this concept before you "correct" it again. tomasz. 12:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Deaths in April 2007. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 11:09, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Deaths in April 2007. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 16:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 31 external links on Deaths in April 2007. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 09:58, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Deaths_in_April_2007&oldid=1204915831"