Talk:Deaths in June 2021

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Years Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dubious Dushman

David Dushman wasn't the "last surviving" Auschwitz liberator, per his own article, despite what the BBC says. That is apparently Ivan Martynushkin. Wylie pedia @ 02:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As Martynushkin survives Dushman, how can there be a meaningful discussion as to the inappropriate claim in Dushman's descriptor line? Which false claim I have therefore removed, and also the Dubious tag. Ref ^(chew)(do) 05:23, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I should've used the {{disputed-inline}} template, rather than tagging the notability as dubious. That said, my point was made and the topic noticed/resolved. Wylie pedia @ 05:39, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging was fair enough, but I preferred to be bold in this instance, as the claim was rendered flimsy at best but clearly incorrect, despite parrot websites perpetuating the myth. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 06:24, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nationality

The assignment of a birth nationality for the above is becoming a thorny issue. If you call him German, it's largely guesswork - if you call him Russian, it's exactly the same. You can't call him Soviet-born, because the USSR was a political system of unification which no longer exists anyway. He is one of those born in a truly "grey area" ("gray area"). He was, if you examine the truth of it, a "Free City of Danzig Jewish-born personage", who simply chose to ally himself with the Russian side because of his Jewish roots, most obviously due to the persecution of the Jews by the German Nazis which was rife. I'm sure this bears further discussion, so feel free. If anyone has a brilliant demonymic solution to this, speak up. Ref ^(chew)(do) 16:28, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that his entry should begin with "Danzig-born". Given his parents' background, I suggest either "Danzig-born Russian" or "Danzig-born Soviet". WWGB (talk) 03:40, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would repeat my resistance to anything "Soviet", as someone or other will no doubt soon remove or alter that part, given what I said above. Ref ^(chew)(do) 03:47, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Champ's age

I've seen six edits so far today by a user to change Champ's age at death from 12 to 13. This doesn't tally with Champ's accepted birth date as being in October 2008 ([1]), which made him 12. But virtually every news outlet is giving his age as 13. The White House statement mentions his 13 years with the family ([2]). Since he had passed his 12th birthday, he was indeed in his 13th year of being owned by the Bidens. A human, or anything else for that matter, that passes their twelth birthday is in their 13th year being alive, though not turning 13 until a year after their 12th birthday. This is the only reason I can think of to square this, and the media outlets have take the '13 years' with the family to mean Champ was 13 at the time of this death. So either the birth date is wrong. Or the news outlets are taking the thirteen years of Biden family ownership to mean that he was 13 years old at time of death. Let's discuss this here rather than continue to edit war. Spokoyni (talk) 18:17, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All we need the source to do is confirm the person/animal/tree indeed died. We can fine tune the additional details if things come along the change, like exact age. @TomCat4680: I don’t know why edit warring heavily over this was warranted, but as I pointed out in a previous edit summary it is sourced on Champs page he was born October 2008. And being in their 13th year doesn’t equate to being 13. I’ve seen that phrase used in a lot of obituaries then upon further inspection they were actually just shy of the age they’d have been in “their x year”. So since it’s sourced it was October 2008, he was 12. Until that is corrected or proven false, it’s impossible Champ was 13. Rusted AutoParts 18:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If he was 12 we need to find a source that says so. We can't say he was 12 if the sources say he was 13. The info on the page has to match the source. TomCat4680 (talk) 18:39, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We really don’t. It is factually incorrect he was 13 as per this source used on his article. They adopted Champ when he was six weeks old in November 2008. And even then, only a couple months ago news were reporting Champ as 12. So it’s a fallacy on the sourced ends as they’re operating off the 13th year part. So putting the age as 13 just due to the source provided is factually incorrect and dishonest. Rusted AutoParts 18:58, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Link

As a side issue to this, why is the linking to the shared article for Champ being piped rather than the common use of the redirect from Champ (dog) to the shared article Champ and Major? I inserted the redirect link but someone reverted it. Similar redirects have often been allowed to stand rather than employ unnecessary piping. Ref ^(chew)(do) 19:19, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps someone sees it as a double redirect? Wylie pedia @ 21:41, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's clearly only one. I wouldn't use a double myself. Champ (dog) to Champ and Major is a single. Doesn't matter in the scheme of things, it was just a question. I don't do continual reverts unless it's crucial. Ref ^(chew)(do) 03:47, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abdalelah Haroun

How is finishing last in an Olympic semi final more notable than a bronze medal in the world championship? We should list athletes' greatest achievement, not their participation in the Olympics above all. Nukualofa (talk) 11:31, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When we state that an athlete has been an Olympic competitor, we provide whatever linked evidence we can to back it up, and that's what has been done. His participation ended in the result you mentioned. As for world championships, in my opinion only gold medals should be mentioned in those contests, the same as for European championships etc. Don't forget we're dealing with a one line description which, for technical reasons, always has to be as short as possible. (The total hidden piping coding in these pages already makes for massive bandwidth requirements for web surfers and consequent slow page-loading times.)

We cannot possibly ignore their Olympic credentials in favour of any other global competition. In short, I maintain that we should stick to the present focus on Olympic participation and add in notable wins in other championships. This is definitely a matter for consensus, so why not start here? Ref ^(chew)(do) 11:55, 26 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to agree with Nukualofa on this one. The Olympics are the world championships in all but name, the only difference being that they consist of many more than one sport. If you finish last in an Olympic semi final, optimistically that makes you ninth (or in this case only 23rd apparently, to reinforce the point) in the world (there are usually eight finalists). Therefore a world championship bronze medal (third) is clearly more notable. The Olympics are obviously important, but not always the be all and end all. Since the Olympics are, in effect world championships I believe the same rules should apply i.e. that any medallists are notable, not just gold medallists. However, for anything less than a world championship, such as European championships only gold medallists should be mentioned. The athletes' greatest achievement should take precedence. After all, that's what they'll probably be remembered for. Editrite! (talk) 02:21, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is in danger of finishing no consensus and changing nothing, for those who wish things to change. Ref ^(chew)(do) 22:56, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]