Talk:List of people who disappeared mysteriously: 1990–present

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw 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.

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.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Section sizes

Section size for List of people who disappeared mysteriously: 1990–present (7 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	6,979	6,979
1990s	72,030	72,030
2000s	101,412	101,412
2010s	84,860	84,860
2020s	15,898	15,898
See also	401	401
References	726	726
Total	282,306	282,306

Centralized discussion

A central place to discuss issues related to both this article and List of people who disappeared mysteriously: pre-1970 is Talk:List of people who disappeared mysteriously. -- GreenC 01:51, 6 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Changed Lynne Kathryn Schulze's age at time of disappearance to 17 years old, per her parents' and media's earliest statements. (https://www.scribd.com/doc/259932738/1971-Free-Press-article-Missing-coed-s-parents-ask-aid) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.183.90.13 (talk) 05:34, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why are here some cases listed, that by no definition fall in "disappeared MYSTERIOUSLY"??????

Proposed addition of an edit notice

This article is plagued by editors adding disappearances that do not already have articles. In most cases the editors are adding disappearances that they have seen in some mystery site or blog. There is already a warning to add entries only if an article already exists, but it appears obscurely at the top of the edit page and is not seen if editing only one section. I propose to add an edit notice. These are displayed prominently whenever any part of an article is edited. The proposed wording is:

Every entry in this list must already have an article written about the person or their disappearance. If you cannot link to such an article, your edit will be removed.

To see how effective this warning is, go to List of bus operating companies and open an edit of either the entire article or just one section of it. Akld guy (talk) 06:21, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support sensible. -- GreenC 15:08, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:56, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this as well, but I've noticed this has been implemented as a series of html comments. I think an actual editnotice would work better, since it wouldn't need to clutter up the article source text. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:53, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Seconded. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 02:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@GreenCI, Daniel Case, and JoJo Anthrax:
I was about to make a query about the existing 'edit notice' in a new section when I noticed this discussion.
• It seems that the proposed edit notice has not been added, yet, 2+ years later
-- Akld guy, the proposer, seems to have been absent from WP the last 17 months • It also seems that the claimed "consensus" for the embedded 'hidden' edit notice may not exist, or why this discussio?
• WP:REDLINK allows the addition of redlinks to encourage the writing of new articles, doesn't it?
I was thinking of adding Quanne Diec, a missing person since 27 July 1998, a notable case in Sydney, Australia, and as reported widely today, [1] declared by inquest the victim of homicide.[2]
• Reliably sourced to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, not to "... some mystery site or blog." 220 of ^ßorg 05:54, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see about implementing the edit notice. Just because something didn't have momentum doesn't mean it didn't have consensus.

As for your proposed addition; If I were you, I'd make the article, first. If it's well covered, then it should be simple enough to source enough content for it. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 17:38, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Lucan

Wondering why one of the most infamous disappearances of all time (8 November 1974) is not included. Am I missing something?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:57, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He was transferred to List of fugitives from justice who disappeared. Akld guy (talk) 08:37, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Parking" info to be added to article later

I realiszed that I cannot yet add this entry as none of the three have WP articles yet. May I park this info here for awhile? Seligne (talk) 14:49, 6 August 2019 (UTC) |data-sort-value="2019-05-08"|8 May 2019 |Chucheep Chivasut, Siam Theerawut, Kritsana Thapthai | |Hanoi, Vietnam |Vietnamese authorities reportedly arrested the three Thai activists entering Vietnam from Laos using false documents. They were fleeing Laos in reaction to the disappearance of Surachai Danwattananusorn in December and the murder of Surachai's two aides. They were handed over to Thai authorities by the Vietnamese on 8 May. As of July 2019^[update] they have yet to been seen or heard from. Thai officials deny any involvement. The abduction of a Vietnamese journalist in Bangkok in January 2019 suggests a "quid pro quo exchange" between the Thai and Vietnamese governments according to the Thai NGO, Thai Civil Rights and Investigative Journalism (TCIJ).[reply]

<ref>{{cite web |title=Thailand: Critics Feared ‘Disappeared’ |url=https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/05/09/thailand-critics-feared-disappeared |website=Human Rights Watch |accessdate=23 July 2019 |date=9 May 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Thailand: Authorities must investigate abduction of Vietnamese journalist |url=https://www.tcijthai.com/news/2019/6/english/9151 |website=Thai Civil Rights and Investigative Journalism (TCIJ) |accessdate=23 July 2019 |date=22 June 2019}}</ref>

Sam Todd

Sam Todd was a Yale Divinity student who disappeared on NYE 1983/1984. He does not have a WP article. but his disappearance received media coverage.

<ref>{{cite web |title=NYT:New York Observed - Without a Trace’ |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/29/nyregion/new-york-observed-without-a-trace.html |accessdate=27 October 2019 |date=29 December 2002}}</ref>
<ref>{{cite web |title=The Charley Project: Samuel Arthur Todd’ |url=http://charleyproject.org/case/samuel-arthur-todd |accessdate=27 October 2019}}</ref>

Hannah955 (talk) 04:19, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 12 April 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. There's no consensus for the proposed title and also no consensus for the alternative destination (non-admin closure) – Ammarpad (talk) 10:19, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of people who disappeared mysteriously: post-1970 → List of people who diappeared: post-1970 – The adverb "mysteriously" is subjective and does not better define the existing scope, which includes disappearances such as crime bosses who never came back from a drive and pilots whose planes crashed. Better just to remove the term and use the clearer "people who disappeared" styling. SFB 20:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I have with this formal request is that the destination article title is misspelled, rendering it a certain NO from me. Anastrophe (talk) 21:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Anastrophe: Hahaha, diapered people would be a very different list indeed! I've fixed it now. SFB 00:09, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sillyfolkboy: :^) Anastrophe (talk) 00:20, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sillyfolkboy: Please notify List of people who disappeared mysteriously: pre-1970 the other half of this epic-long list. -- GreenC 00:51, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Mysterious is subjective, but that is OK, we make the decision if it's mysterious is an editorial decision like so many others that are subjective on Wikipedia (include this sentence but not that fact etc.) Otherwise the list is open to anyone who disappeared under any conditions which is an endless number. If there are non-mysterious entries they should be removed, many already have been. The mysterious criteria is a tool to keep the list size manageable which arguably is already too long requiring a split into two articles. If we open it to any disappearance of any type, it could easily be 5 or 10 times as long ie. 10 to 20 articles. It would fail WP:INDISCRIMINATE. -- GreenC 00:51, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GreenC: I haven't really seen this level of subjectivity in a Wikipedia list before to be honest. As for mysterious, taking five of the first six cases on the list: defeated army colonel disappearing after a civil conflict, child witnessed as kidnapped, two foreigners enter a Cambodian war zone, investigative journalist goes missing in Palermo. None of those disappearances are remotely mysterious to me as there are very obvious reasons why someone might disappear in those circumstances. This list is already including disappearances of any type and the truly mysterious ones would reduce the article size by 90%. It's clear that some people want a general disappearance list. SFB 01:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sure subjectivity exists in list criteria. I think your sense of what is mysterious is not typical, this list has existed for years and no one takes it that far. We are trying to avoid the obvious cases that would flood the list. This list has been around a long time and has many old discussions. But when the article split happened a year or two ago the talk page archives disappeared, it is a mystery where they went. There was also an AfD involved I think on the concern of indiscriminate. Ahh here it is: Talk:List_of_people_who_disappeared_mysteriously -- GreenC 01:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll to leave it to others to assess how my idea of "mysterious" compares, just I've never found it mysterious that journalists investigating crime syndicates disappear. I think your sense of the word "indiscriminate" is not typical. Indiscriminate doesn't mean excessive, it means a lack of apparent logical cohesiveness in the selections. This list is clearly logically cohesive and each entry is well explained, so WP:INDISCRIMINATE is irrelevant to this discussion. SFB 11:19, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:LISTPEOPLE: "editors choose even more stringent requirements... This is commonly used to control the size of lists that could otherwise run to hundreds or thousands of people". According to WP:SPLAT "To keep the system of lists useful, we must limit the size and topic of lists." Your proposal would be an order of magnitude increase in size, instead of 2 very long lists it would be 20 lists with many thousands of entries. This is not what our list system was designed or meant for. We have "stringent requirement" but with a subjective word 'mysterious' so that it is also flexible on a per case basis. -- GreenC 14:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Move to List of people who disappeared (before 1970) and List of people who disappeared (1970–present). "Mysteriously" is not a necessary or objective qualifier. List of people who disappeared mysteriously at sea should be moved to List of people who disappeared at sea. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 04:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone whose body was not recovered at sea, which is most people who died at sea. We have categories Category:People who died at sea, such a list would be a mirror of those categories. -- GreenC 14:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is a move proposal, but also a change in list criteria which would have significant impact on the list size. -- GreenC 14:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Move to List of people who disappeared (before 1970) and List of people who disappeared (1970–present) Rreagan007 (talk) 22:39, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That would include war-time disappearances where the body was not recovered. See previous discussion Talk:List_of_people_who_disappeared_mysteriously/Archive_1#Wartime_disappearances. That would include people who disappear from the historical record. See previous discussion Talk:List_of_people_who_disappeared_mysteriously/Archive_1#Disappeared_from_history (most notable people prior to the about 1400 disappear from the record before they die). A large percentage of people who have died their body was never recovered, or their ultimate fate unknown. -- GreenC 00:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Previous discussion why we chose "mysterious" Talk:List_of_people_who_disappeared_mysteriously/Archive_3#A_lot_of_these_seem_not_very_mysterious. -- GreenC 00:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Previous discussion on the definition of "mysterious" Talk:List_of_people_who_disappeared_mysteriously/Archive_4#Mysterious_Definition -- GreenC 00:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging currently-active previous-participants on the topic of the title and criteria. Because the page move a year ago it was removed from watchlists and many regulars disappeared. @Daniel Case, Koplimek, Tagishsimon, Britmax, Sundayclose, DoctorJoeE, David J Johnson, Vaselineeeeeeee, Alex 21, Shinerunner, Andrew Davidson, The Anome, and Michael C Price: -- GreenC 00:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for the reasons discussed in previous discussions, to wit: "Mysteriously" may seem hokey here, but legally it makes an important distinction, and this is a better way of saying it than, say, "without explanation". Without that qualifier, we really had no grounds to exclude, say, Jesus Christ, when some wag added Him. Daniel Case (talk) 01:01, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, for the reasons given by Daniel Case above. Perhaps a move that changed from using "disppeared mysteriously" to "unexplained disappearances" might be better? -- The Anome (talk) 20:31, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

oppose. Removal of adverb is stupid, since everyone disappears after they die. cheers, Michael C. Price ^talk 22:33, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support removal of mysterious—an inherently subjective descriptor. b uidhe 18:18, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no guideline or policy concerning 'subjective' list criteria. We often use them to avoid lists that are too long per WP:SPLAT "To keep the system of lists useful, we must limit the size and topic of lists." -- GreenC 19:24, 19 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Whether a disappearance is characterized as "mysterious" can be determined by looking to sources describing the disappearance. BD2412 T 03:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Post 1970?

post means after, following, etc. The first five entries on this list should not be here. Moriori (talk) 19:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The articles are named pre and post 1970 I think readers understand what is meant without creating a non-concise title. -- GreenC 21:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. People don't always know that a list is part of a series of lists. At face value, this list is about people who disappeared on or after 1 January 1971. The other list is for those who disappeared up to 31 December 1969. Those who disappeared during the year 1970 are apparently excluded from both lists. Except, they're not; they're in this list, because, despite its current title, this list is for people who disappeared from 1970 onwards. The title should reflect that, instead of its present misleading wording. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 16:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting List of people who disappeared mysteriously: post-1969 or List of people who disappeared mysteriously: 1970 onward? -- GreenC 17:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I propose we move it to: List of people who disappeared mysteriously: 1970 onwards. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 17:13, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've never used onward/onwards very much. According to this [3] there is a slight difference, is this usage of the word an adverb or adjective? -- GreenC 17:24, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brandon Lawson

No entry or article on him? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:23, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph A. Spadaro: He has been added to the list, and YES and article about him DOES now exist. Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:50, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Add

Disappearance of Jennifer Dulos. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:39, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Joseph A. Spadaro: I now have added Jennifer Dulos to the list. Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:46, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disappearance of Jason Landry — Preceding unsigned comment added by Michael in Ohio (talk • contribs) 15:04, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 February 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 23:29, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of people who disappeared mysteriously: post-1970 → List of unexplained disappearances (post-1970) – The current name is subjective, and a bit of a mouthful. This seems to suit it better. Eridian314 (talk) 20:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC) —Relisting. DannyS712 (talk) 21:20, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, since this about people who disappeared, not objects that disappeared. Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:41, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support move as the current title is unwieldy and inconsistent with other such pages. ƒirefly ( t · c ) 10:41, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Fate of Harry Domela

The fate of Harry Domela has recently been resolved. See my comment on the discussion page there. The German Wikipedia article has already been updated. --Marcus Schätzle (talk) 16:04, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since there hasn't been a reaction, I have removed him now from the list. --Marcus Schätzle (talk) 23:04, 20 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disappearance of Lauren Cho

I have added Lauren Cho to the list. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you, Thriley (talk) 20:39, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tetsu Inoue

Tetsu Inoue

Japanese musician missing since 2007. Surprised to see him missing from the article. Yodabyte (talk) 08:49, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Almost a year late but added it, you're welcome. Doyouknowpie (talk) 03:51, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deanna Brooks

JoJo Anthrax recently "(Undid revision 1116380412 by Bluejay Young (talk) rm entry; the missing Brooks (70 yr old antique dealer) is not the same person as the linked BLP (a 48 yr old model))" - I don't understand why JoJo Anthrax didn't just correct this rather than deleting it. My references were specific articles about the disappearance of Deanna Brooks (70-year-old antique dealer) which I checked before including them. Checking the links, they still refer to the antique dealer and specifically state that she's 70. I think when I put in the "{{sortname|Deanna|Brooks}}" code, it must have connected to the Deanna Brooks article and I didn't notice. I am not sure how to fix it so it doesn't connect to her, but could look it up, it must be a relatively easy fix. The thing to do is fix it, not remove it entirely. Since I don't want to create editing wars by just putting my edit back again, I'm clarifying here before doing anything. --Bluejay Young (talk) 14:42, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does the 70-year-old antiques dealer have an article? This page lists disappearances of notable people (ie ones with Wikipedia articles). If she does, feel free to re-add the content linked to the correct article. Lard Almighty (talk) 14:49, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why JoJo Anthrax didn't just correct this rather than deleting it. Because, as mentioned by Lard Almighty immediately above, "your" Brooks does not have a stand-alone page on enWiki. I suggest that you, Bluejay Young, fix the situation yourself by creating an article about this Brooks (see WP:WTAF), and then adding material to this page. You can do it! JoJo Anthrax (talk) 14:55, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Madalina Cojocari

Last seen November 21. Is this enough coverage to list? [4], [5], [6]— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zebb Quinn

As cited on the full article discussing his disappearance, the 2022 "conviction [of Robert Jason Owens] legally establishes that Zebb Quinn was murdered." Is this sufficient to remove Quinn from the list, as the cause of his disappearance has been established (as of now), or does the lack of a body and/or a specific convicted perpetrator mean he should remain? 2601:8C:4780:1840:3DE4:4708:6879:9652 (talk) 03:09, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Missing James Hunter

Last sighted Cctv in Dubbo Feb 2020 He is still missing 101.191.14.17 (talk) 10:54, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]