Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Death/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5Archive 6

Suicide articles

There are a number of articles on the suicides of young people who are not particularly notable. They are often connected with bullying.

My questions is: What encyclopedic purpose do these articles serve? They seem simply news articles to me. I am also concerned about the harm that these articles could potentially do to the living. We must always be mindful of this as per WP:BLP

There are common issues to these suicides that are encyclopedic but I wonder if these would be better covered in another way. Martin Hogbin (talk) 12:52, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

it's a similar problem as 'Murder of' articles. In both cases, one could make an argument that to the family, this was a person who had a rich full wonderful life, and at the end fell into a depression and killed themselves (or was killed), but the family doesn't view them as a 'suicide', rather as their child who died tragically. From wikipedias point of view, the child is not notable, they never did anything worth writing about, and it's only in death that they attracted reliable sources to cover their story - thus we regularly move 'person' articles to be focused on 'crime against/death of person' instead. I really don't know how the family would feel but my guess is if given the choice they'd rather have a biography. But, to what extent should we take their concerns into account? Notability is a strange thing - if you pass GNG we can write about trivial details (eg names of children, who you dated, etc) but if you don't pass notability then we will only write about gruesome endings and sordid details - eg how you committed suicide, how you were murdered, how you were raped. If I were a family member, given the choice I'd much rather be a family member of someone who passes GNG, so they'd get a proper article even if it ends in suicide. No answers here just questions.--Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:33, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I think the answer lies in the word 'encyclopedia'. We should include only things which have some kind of lasting impact on the world. Details of individual suicides do not, in my opinion, meet this requirement. WP:BLP is also quite clear that, 'The possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment', and that 'This policy applies to...material about living persons in other articles'. In articles concerning young people in particular, seemingly innocuous statements such 'there were two groups', 'one of them was innocent' have the capacity to cause real harm. Once you remove them, there is nothing left to justify an article. Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:49, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
  • I am pleased to see the initiation of this discussion. I believe that there is a very necessary decision to be made about this general class of article. There are some things about all the "Suicide of..." articles, but I would remove the Harris/Kleybold one from the discussion.
The "Suicide of Foo" articles were created as having notability at the time, sufficient notability to warrant an article of their own. Despite our assertion to ourselves that notability is not transient, they no longer have sufficient notability to act as stand alone articles. However, they do have merit as redirects into a larger article that has merged into it all the relevant information about the sudden rash of Bullycides in the early 2000s. Perhaps the article might be titles Bullycides of the early 2000s. I recall discussions while I worked on some of these articles that tended to the view that 'These might be highly notable today, but their notability will wane and they will not be appropriate in some years as independent articles." I agreed with that at the time, and I agree with it now.
Part of migrating the relevant facts to the putative macro article will be the valuable job of flattening any remaining journalese, and removal of what now proves to be unimportant detail, detail which, at the time of creation, was important. The articles then documented current events.
I am less concerned of the aspect of harm that such articles might do. I understand but differ from Martin Hogbin's view here. However, I do believe that, absolutely without censoring material one may write with sensitivity to that consideration
I believe that this discussion should be flagged on each article's talk page (though I consider Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold should not be part of the set), and that the discussion should be held widely and as formally as we are able
I believe that these Suicide articles are not comparable with "Murder of Foo" articles. There is a bizarre trend, perhaps a false one, that caused these suicides to come to notice. Fiddle Faddle 15:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm also pleased to see this discussion started. I agree that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold are not part of this set. Of the remaining, the subjects of these articles have had varying long-term impacts (and therefore varying degrees of notability). Some (Kelly Yeomans, Nicola Ann Raphael, Jamey Rodemeyer, and Phoebe Prince) are notable because their deaths raised awareness about bullied teens. The majority (Dawn-Marie Wesley, Ryan Halligan, Megan Meier, Tyler Clementi, Amanda Todd, and Rehtaeh Parsons) are notable because of anti-bullying legislation enacted in their name. Some of the latter group, as well as Suicide of Jamey Rodemeyer, have also been mentioned in popular culture (songs, documentaries, and tv programs). Therefore, I'm not sure that notability has necessarily waned for everyone.
That said, I do think that a larger, meta article on bullycide needs to be written and that the less-notable articles (the ones where awareness of bullying is the only result of the suicide) be folded completely into that article. I'm not sure what to do with the other articles, however; is legislation enacted and/or mentions in popular culture enough to justify individual articles on the subject? Ca2james (talk) 15:55, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I also think that this is a useful discussion. I want to make it transparent, however, that this discussion grows out of discussions at Talk:Suicide of Phoebe Prince, in which Martin Hogbin, Fiddle Faddle, Ca2james, and I have been participants in the discussion. Some of the discussion there has been about Martin's view that such pages are not encyclopedic. There was also a now-archived thread at WP:BLPN, about Martin's concerns about harm to persons who knew the deceased young people; no consensus emerged that there really were BLP issues per se. Some of the discussion at the Prince article has also been about how best to make the page "about the event and not the person", with particular discussion recently about whether or not to have photographs of the deceased on such pages.
As has also been noted, if there is to be any serious consideration of merging these pages together (or even deleting them), there need to be notices on the talk pages of every page being discussed.
Since it is a particular interest of mine, let me also ask the following question. Does this WikiProject have any guidelines about whether or not pages about deaths should or should not have images showing the likenesses of the deceased? Are there situations in which such images are considered either insensitive or violations of WP:NOTMEMORIAL? I ask because, at the Prince page, I have supported retaining a photograph of her, but moving it out of the infobox and into the background section, whereas the other three editors here favor removing the photo entirely. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:47, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Deletion of Category:Death of women

The category Category:Death of women has been proposed to be merged with Category:Women and death. Please feedback your opinion [here]. I have flagged it here as no-one has thought to notify this project. Ephebi (talk) 14:56, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Ghostly vessels and real derelicts

See categorization proposal here.Alekksandr (talk) 19:04, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to User Study

Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 18:53, 8 April 2014 (UTC).

Discussion at Talk:Massacre_of_Kalavryta#On_categorization_as_Violence_against_men

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Massacre_of_Kalavryta#On_categorization_as_Violence_against_men. Please join this discussion, which has unfortunately gotten a bit heated, on whether Massacre of Kalavryta should be added to the category of "Violence against men". Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 04:31, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject Death At Wikimania 2014

Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project?
We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at Wikimania 2014 for all projects that apply.
For more information, click the link below.
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 10:49, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet for Wikiproject Death at Wikimania 2014(updated version)

Please note: This is an updated version of a previous post that I made.

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

The deadline for submissions is 1st July 2014

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:

Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 12:59, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Gatch gereftani

About ten years ago we had an article on a supposed method of execution, gatch gereftani, which was deleted as a hoax. It's just been recreated by an editor with almost no other article-space edits, though this time sourced to a published book. I have no way of knowing if the reference is genuine or falsified. Perhaps some knowledgeable WikiProject Death members could help investigate? If so, please join the discussion at Talk:Gatch gereftani. —Psychonaut (talk) 17:42, 28 June 2014 (UTC)

Not all decapitations are "beheadings"

The "List of people who were beheaded" currently includes not only executions and other homicides by decapitation, but also many other incidents (such as decapitations in motor vehicle accidents, or posthumous removal of a head as a trophy) which do not fall under the commonly accepted definition of "beheading". The online (and paywalled) Oxford English Dictionary defines "beheading" (the noun) as "the action of cutting off the head; [specifically] of execution by decapitation"; and all the examples given by the OED for both "beheading" and the verb "behead" refer to executions. I would recommend this list be pared down to include only executions or other intentional killings in which decapitation was the intended or actual cause of death. Alternatively, the article should be renamed to "List of people who were decapitated", and perhaps the list should be divided into a section for beheadings and a separate section for accidental or postmortem decapitations. I suggested this idea at Talk:List of people who were beheaded several months ago, but no one responded there. The article continues to be expanded from time to time by people adding accidental decapitation events, so I'm hesitant to just make my proposed change per WP:BRD without some reasonable consensus first. Comments? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:53, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Action T4

The article Action T4 recently got a section about language and the euphemisms used by the Nazis to sweeten the truth. That section gave me an uneasy feeling. Now somebody else adds a hidden comment that absolutely horrifies me.

Could somebody take a look and join the discussion at Talk:Action T4#Language? The Banner talk 19:40, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Madeleine McCann requests for comments

I have started two requests for comments at Talk:Madeleine McCann. 159.92.1.1 (talk) 18:52, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

The RfCs appear to be at Talk:Disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Madeleine McCann redirects to Disappearance of Madeleine McCann, but the talk page does not.--Wikimedes (talk) 19:11, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Requested move at talk:Neanderthal extinction hypotheses

There's a move discussion for Neanderthal extinction hypotheses → Neanderthal extinction, where I'd like to have more input. --Cold Season (talk) 00:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Departures (film) FAC

We've nominated Departures (film) as a Featured Article, and invite you to take part in the review here. Thanks, Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 08:02, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

Feedback request

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Permanent_death#rfc_ADF653E. Please help us determine whether of not Path of Exile belongs on the list of games featuring permanent death. The issue is with semantics, please come and take a look even if you're not familiar with the game, or the concept of permanent death. Thanks. I really need that username (talk) 18:58, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

New article on viral video - From The Doctor to my son Thomas

I've created a new article on viral video From The Doctor to my son Thomas.

Help or suggestions with additional secondary sources would be appreciated on the article's talk page, at Talk:From The Doctor to my son Thomas.

Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 23:18, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal

Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Suicide in South Korea

I am planning on expanding and reorganizing the article on “Suicide in Korea”. Despite the article’s significance, the article lacks in substantial sources and content, and it is rated as “Start Class” in WikiProject Death. I will replace “Trends” section with “Statistics” section, expand significantly on “Causes” and “Response” sections, and add “Consequences” section. I also hope to add more sources on the “References” section, mostly scholarly articles and data from WHO. I would appreciate any kind of suggestions on scholarly readings regarding the “Consequences” section of my article, and any kind of feedback for the article. I hope to get a better rating for this article, since it holds so much significance in the Korean society and is rated as Mid-importance on the project . Thanks!

Lindaticket (talk) 01:35, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Scope of project

I listed the article about Johnny Garrett as being within the scope of the WikiProject Death. Another editor reverted my edit, claiming the article was not within the scope of the project. He is an individual closely associated with the topic of capital punishment. And his is one of the few cases cited in which "an innocent man" was wrongfully executed. Thus, the article is significant with regard to its association with capital punishment. So, is this article within the scope of the WikiProject Death? Or outside of the scope? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:33, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm fairly new to the project, but it seems to me that Death as the topic should be relevant. Since everyone dies, it would be absurd to include one particular death as being within the scope. The only unusual feature about Garrett is the capital punishment aspect. Well, that means that capital punishment as the topic is within the scope. There are 1000 Ways to Die, so there are plenty of topics for project coverage without the articles about individuals who do die either in the ordinary course of events or by extraordinary circumstances. – S. Rich (talk) 02:45, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

As one of the people around when the project started - the removal of death from items related to captial punishment is incorrect. Check earlier talk items for this project - we were quite thorough talking through issues of the scope. It is well worth being gentle with reverters though, they tend to have a barrell to push. I would suggest that anyone who reverts material should be offered the opportunity to come to this talk page to explain why something in context of the project scope might not be so in their way of thinking.... satusuro 08:08, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Life insurance and space tourism

Per [1] insurance companies are thinking about space tourism exclusions and policy riders, where would we cover this? -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 08:31, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Railway accidents

Do fatal railway accidents, such as the Quintinshill rail disaster, fall within WikiProject Death? --Redrose64 (talk) 10:12, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

No. -Pollinosisss (talk) 22:29, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
OK, just wonderin'. I'm hoping to get that article up to FA-class in time for its centenary on 22 May 2015. --Redrose64 (talk) 22:33, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
I disagree. The sixth bullet point under Scope is "Man-made disasters: Transportation disasters (when at least one person died)" --Geniac (talk) 23:53, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
True. Check the front page of WP:Death for articles that fall within and outside the scope of the project. - Boneyard90 (talk) 16:35, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Flight insurance

We have an article aviation insurance, but currently has no coverage on personal passenger flight life insurance. This used to be commonly sold at airports in the 60s/70s for passengers to buy prior to boarding, should this be covered at "aviation insurance" ? -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 08:38, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Moved to talk:aviation insurance
Don't see why not. If it's not currently sold, it could be added as part of a "History" section. Not sure this project would be involved, when the focus of the article is something other than the life insurance policy. - Boneyard90 (talk) 16:37, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Murder of Leigh Leigh FAC

The article Murder of Leigh Leigh, which is listed under the scope of this project, is currently nominated for featured status. See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Murder of Leigh Leigh/archive1. It currently has two people supporting it, but more reviews are needed. For those unfamiliar with FAC, reviews most be reasonably thorough; one line reviews are not very helpful. I would be ever so grateful if someone could review my nomination. Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 13:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

The article now has enough reviews to pass per se, though as one of the FAC coordinators has noted, none of the reviewers did a source check for accuracy and/or close paraphrasing. This is now needed in order for the article to pass. If someone could spare the time to do some source checks I would appreciate it. The article uses many offline newspaper and journal sources; I can email pdf copies of these to anyone on request, though there are plenty of online source which can be used for source checks as well. Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 03:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
The nomination is now at the bottom of the list, and is liable to be closed without further notice. It still requires a source review; I would be eternally grateful if someone could give it one. Please state your intention to review at the nomination before reviewing as the nomination may be closed soon otherwise. Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 09:57, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Request for linking categories

All the categories in the category Category:Murder by year, should be link to its year of death category. I started with the most recent ones but I don't have time to do them all.
For example: Category:Murder in 2009 should be in the category Category:2009 deaths. Thanks, Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 11:02, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Rates comparison issue at Suicide among LGBT youth article

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Suicide among LGBT youth#Hate Speach - masquerading as 'psychology' & 'Balance'. A WP:Permalink to that discussion is here. Flyer22 (talk) 02:53, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!

Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to Wikipedia:WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Death for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (rap) @ 19:38, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

well done to the 3 who related to rcsprinter - it reads well, although I got into the conversation after the signpost actually came out - apologies to anyone whom I might have been critical of, teaches me to reduce my watch list - so I pick up on messages like above... also a very strong point of recognition as to the vast range of categories created by user:Good Ol'factory which isnpired this project, and also to user:polinossis who did amazing work on the portal - thank you!! satusuro 15:43, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Question about a video game industry murder/suicide

Rather than split this into two threads, I am asking for advice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Joseph and Melissa Batten murder/suicide. BOZ (talk) 18:35, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Copy of post to talk page - list of recent deaths (april 2015)

This suggestion was posted to the talk page for the recent deaths in April 2015. apologies for the repost - this is probably a more appropriate area in which to make the suggestion.

This is my suggestion regarding the information retrieved via the "recent deaths" link on the front page. I have some suggestions for the format:

My intent in coming to the page was to check up on recent unfortunate losses of notable persons. Whilst meaning no disrespect to those listed, I feel that the list is overburdened with persons of note in highly specialized fields.

Whilst I do not advise removing them, and it would be a cause of unending friction to attempt to list them in order of the noteworthiness of their contributions, I do feel that it would be a good idea to be able to have deceased persons arbitrarily listed in order of relative fame (or infamy).

I therefore suggest that it would be a worthwhile effort to reformat the page, so that these kinds of lists can be reordered by last name, age, etc. and also to add to the criteria for each entry, the number of visits to the entrant's page within a given time frame.

Whilst this would not be a perfect or fair method of ordering the entrants to the list, it would give the reader the chance to filter the list in order of recent media coverage, (Wikipedia page visits being a fairly good gauge of a person's level of public attention).

Thanks for taking the time to read my suggestion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.173.86.61 (talk) 10:32, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

A selected list of the more notable individuals is available at 2015. MilborneOne (talk) 10:50, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
understood - my idea is to be able to order the individuals by entry field, in a similar manner to the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_urban_population
Noteworthiness based on page visit volume if possible should be automatically derived so that when ordering by any of the fields for an entrant, more note worthy entrants appear above less well recognized entrants.
e.g. I just reordered this list according to the "profession" category
Sir Terry Pratchett / 28 April 1948 / Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire, England / Writer / etc
Joe Atkinson / 28 April 1948 / somewhere else / Writer / etc
and despite their sharing similar data in some fields Terry Pratchett was listed at the top because he gets more visits to his WP entry.
I think this would speed things up for most visitors who are not looking for a specific entrant, and also make it easier for people with specific interests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.173.86.61 (talk) 03:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Requesting comments at Blackfriars Massacre

There is an ongoing requested move discussion at Talk:Blackfriars Massacre. Please comment. RGloucester — ☎ 02:07, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Capitanian Extinction/Middle Permian Extinction

End-Capitanian extinction event might be profitably turned into an article, since it is about a Big-6 extinction level event, or deleted as a WP:REDLINK; per [2] elevating its status to one of the major extinctions. doi:10.1130/B31216.1 -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 13:12, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Impalement

Impalement‎, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.--I am One of Many (talk) 19:15, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Categorising by place of burial

Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography#Categorising by place of burial. – Fayenatic London 13:40, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Now archived at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 50. 17:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Moscone–Milk assassinations listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Moscone–Milk assassinations to be moved to Moscone–Milk killings. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 22:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Boston Marathon bombings listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for Boston Marathon bombings to be moved to Boston Marathon bombing. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 23:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Talk:Bijeljina massacre#Request for comment

Could interested editors consider commenting on the above RfC regarding the use of witness testimony? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 10:33, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

"King of Hell"

The usage and primary topic of "King of Hell" is under discussion, see talk:King of Hell (disambiguation) -- 67.70.32.190 (talk) 05:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Question

Are the Wikipedia templates that concern death (such as "Date of death and age at death", located here: Template:Death date and age) under the umbrella of this WikiProject Death? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:53, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

You can find other Death-related templates here. - Boneyard90 (talk) 01:01, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. But, I was asking if that particular template (Template:Death date and age) falls under the umbrella of this WikiProject Death. Please advise. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:18, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Request for additional input

We're having a discussion about the Death of Caylee Anthony article. I feel like it's reasonable to put the date of death as June 16th. The indictment lists the 16th as the date of death. The prosecution argued that the death took place on that date. The defense conceded that the death took place on that date. There has never been any argument that the death took place on another date. Another editor feels that there is not conclusive proof that the death took place on that date and we should leave it out. Any opinions would be welcome. Hit us up on the talk page for that article. Bali88 (talk) 17:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Category and article titles regarding lists of massacres

A quick look at the category for lists of massacres reveals an inconsistency with regard to naming convention. The category is called "Lists of massacres by country". The vast majority of entries in the list are indeed countries. One exception is the historical region 'Mandatory Palestine'. There are also two islands listed: Ireland and Great Britain. As there have been many massacres in the United Kingdom since its formation, then the articles should list those killings in full - as is consistent (it seems) with the vast majority of other articles. Any massacres that took place after the creation of the Irish Free State, in that jurisdiction, should be listed in a separate article for the Republic of Ireland, and omitted from the UK article. Any massacres that took place in Northern Ireland should also be included in an article for the UK. It's quite a simple solution. --98.122.20.56 (talk) 18:07, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Help with a draft page?

I need some new opinions in on the article Draft:Executions in the United States by Governor, which was created by an IP. I think that there's absolutely merit in having a page of this nature on Wikipedia, but I'm slightly unsure if this is exactly the right format for it. User:FoCuSandLeArN brought up a good point: that listing executions by governor could be seen as potentially non-neutral, something that didn't occur to me at the time but now seems like it'd be worth looking at as a BLP concern. My concern was more whether to list it by governor or to have a large list page that went to each state specifically and whether or not we should use "capital punishment" rather than "execution", since many of the things I'd looked at used the term "capital punishment".

I want to approve this, but I don't want to do this if there's a chance that it could get deleted or taken to AfD, which would make it potentially more difficult to bring back in some format. If any of you guys think that it's OK and want to accept it, feel free. I just want to make sure that all of the Ts are crossed since executions can be a sensitive topic on here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:39, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

From The Doctor to my son Thomas - featured article candidate

I've nominated the article about the video From The Doctor to my son Thomas for Featured Article consideration.

The article is about a message sent from actor Peter Capaldi in-character in his role as the Doctor on Doctor Who, to console an autistic young boy over grief from the death of his grandmother.

Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/From The Doctor to my son Thomas/archive1.

Thank you for your time,

— Cirt (talk) 01:05, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

RfC

Light bulb iconB An RfC: Should the article mention that the firearm used in the shooting is a SIG Sauer P320? has been listed at Shooting of Samuel DuBose. Interested editors are invited to comment.- MrX 02:09, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Help with List of events named massacres

I've started a discussion on talkpage about a recent massive ip insertion of events not commonly named massacres to the list. Does anyone here have an opinion one way or the other? BusterD (talk) 21:32, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

A suggestion

That has been made away from this page, has suggested that a possibility of a murder/homicide task force similar to the suicide task force. Originally I thought it would be better with crime/criminal biography. But a closer look at the Death template - murder/homicide looks as though it would fit better here. Anyone interested in supporting the task force and helping with setting up ? JarrahTree 13:31, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Project not DEAD and this is the place to discuss changes to things

Hi this project is not dead (sic), and at least one editor has chosen not to come here to discuss how the project and its subject is portrayed.

Numerous cultures have a wide range of represenations of death, as a means of coping with it. (see Death_(personification))

One editor has spoken for this project without coming here. The issue of representation of this project has been discussed before.

Any watchers or lurkers are invited to offer their appraisal of a project that has lost its image due to a sensibility of one ed.

JarrahTree 00:40, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

I have been doing some reading, thinking and image viewing about war memorials, in my case WWI ones, appropriate now because we are in the 100 thing. Would memorials to the dead, either individually or en mass be an appropriate topic for this project/ Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 00:54, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
To User:Carptrash: Yes, subjects like cemetery, tombstone, and cenotaph, or specific examples of each are within the scope of this project. But I think User:JarrahTree is talking about something else. - Boneyard90 (talk) 02:57, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Totally JarrahTree 06:29, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Death Template Image Deletion

Project members may have noticed that the image in Template:WikiProject Death has been deleted. This is a major change without discussion. Please see the explanation at Template talk:WikiProject Death#Images, and weigh in if possible. The template is protected, so that only an editor with Admin status can alter it. - Boneyard90 (talk) 03:01, 25 November 2015 (UTC)


For anyone prepared to get out of the smelly template talk page to a more open point of contact/conversation like here, Archive 1 of this page, about December 2010 through to January 2011 shows that a lot of time and effort can get lost arguing about template images.
It is patently absurd to waste the time. If someone is slightest offended upset or distraught, it takes a few seconds, it is very very easy to block the tag image by using the banner template, it covers or conceals the image, and we can all get on with our lives without going into the lengthy discussions. JarrahTree 06:41, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Clearly there is no interest in bringing the discussion here - Template talk:WikiProject Death#Images it continues there JarrahTree 22:31, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Help an article?

Hey, I'm going to post this on multiple WikiProjects so there will be some cut/paste - my apologies for that. I was recently going through the articles at Category:Proposed deletion and came across Effects of genocide on youth. The article was written by AMWilkinson, who created the article as an assignment for Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Drake University/Global Youth Studies (Fall 2015). It's currently up for PROD as WP:OR, but I do think that there's merit in covering this specific part of the topic. Now whether or not it could merit an article outside of the main topic is a good question.

A quick, offhand look at the page does show that it's written like a student paper, which is a frequent issue with student assignments but not one that can't be overcome. I need someone to help salvage the article, which will likely require some searching for sources. I tried doing some very quick and dirty searching but it wasn't exactly easy, since a lot comes up with a general search without limiting anything, even when I search an academic database like JSTOR. This will likely be a massive undertaking.

I can help out some, but it really won't be until after my school is done for the quarter, which won't be for another week at least, and this needs some urgent help. I could move it to the draftspace, but I'm afraid of it getting neglected. Anyone willing to help? Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 11:53, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

"Burial Ground"

The usage and primary topic of Burial Ground is under discussion, see talk:Burial Ground (Grave album) -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:50, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Bijeljina massacre RfC

Your input is requested at Talk:Bijeljina massacre#RfC: Should this article make reference to the Bosnian Serb politician Biljana Plavšić stepping over the body of a dead Bosniak to kiss the Serb paramilitary leader Željko Ražnatović (aka Arkan) Thanks, Peacemaker67 (crack... thump) 01:03, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Category:Cancer deaths by country

Category:Cancer deaths by country, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Big_iron (talk) 12:36, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Death in black community =

why do the power that be make white more important than black what call are women sister aunt and grand parent niece lowlife of society and prostitiute and consider this that in there eye that your so call less society standing is less than there are euen if you on the same play field the police no that these serial killer are work in the united states because there killing want they say are lowlife people main black women and men as the body get higher less to feed clothes gaue care to us yet are people are deceived sheep in wovles clothing mean the white man just want my people to learn and to get off of drug government conspiracy theories is that in fact that they ship drug into black community to ship drug in tofight nicaraguan war and they offer 10 000 to any one prove that they had drug system that was in 90s and how they we are less can you see think bigdaddymgreengmail — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:3180:2D00:5118:451B:D7FA:66A2 (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Article alerts added

FYI Article alerts have been added to this project. Ottawahitech (talk) 01:18, 1 January 2016 (UTC)please ping me

2016 Saudi Arabia mass execution

This stub could use a bit of help. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:27, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

There are a few outbreak-related WP:RM discussions going on.

Feedback would be welcome! larryv (talk) 04:00, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Animal killing, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:06, 1 February 2016 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

RFC "Does 'Died by Suicide' constitute a euphemism?

Request for comment: Does "Died by Suicide" constitute a euphemism? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Does_.22died_by_suicide.22_constitute_a_euphemism.3F --DanBCDanBC (talk) 17:00, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

FYI
 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Icons#Use of flag icons on genocide-related articles.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  21:30, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Find a Grave

Template:Find a Grave has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Suggested Move of High-Importance Article

I have recently suggested the move of high-importance article for this project, the West African Ebola virus epidemic, to a new name. If anyone wants to look at the proposed move, it is at Talk:West_African_Ebola_virus_epidemic#Requested_move_9_May_2016. Just wanted to let this project know in case they have any discussion to add. Thanks, Gluons12 (talk) 20:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC).

Discussion at Talk:Suicide bag

Figured I'd alert this project since WP:MED has already been alerted. There is a fairly large discussion regarding the sourcing and weight of content at Suicide bag. Please offer your input. Sizeofint (talk) 07:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Categories needed?

Do we need a set of categories for "Death at (age)"? Thus all those people who died aged 84 would be in Category:Deaths at 84. We'd only need about 120 or so categories. The scope of these categories, if created, would be for people, not animals. Mjroots (talk) 17:55, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

RfC

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2016 Orlando nightclub shooting#RfC: Should the lead mention that the majority of victims were Hispanic, and should the lead mention that Pulse was hosting a Latin night?. - MrX 13:55, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Talk:SIG MCX# RFC: Is the Orlando shooting relevant? Please post on that page if you have a comment. Felsic2 (talk) 20:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Merger notice - Al-Baqi cemetery

I have tagged Demolition of al-Baqi for merger into Al-Baqi'. The discussion takes place at Talk:Al-Baqi'#Merger of Demolition. --HyperGaruda (talk) 14:33, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

RFC: Inclusion of vehicle use in crimes as part of vehicle articles

This RFC covers two automotive articles with similar disputed material.

See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#Request for Comment: Inclusion of vehicle use in crimes as part of vehicle articles. Felsic2 (talk) 00:43, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion at the Murder of JonBenét Ramsey article

Opinions are needed on the following: Talk:Murder of JonBenét Ramsey#Requested move 20 September 2016. Among the concerns noted in the move discussion is whether or not WP:Undue weight is being given to a recent documentary. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 15:44, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Cemetery Sub project

I don't know where else to put this so I am going to place it here. A few years ago I created a small article about a cemetery it was deleted. I never tried to recreate it and just let it die. However, it has gotten under my skin again. Wiki has articles for many things and we can't have articles for where hundreds, thousands of people are laid to rest. Yet we have articles for every State and Federal highway. We also have a whole project for U.S. Roads. Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads. On the Roads project the person who deleted or nominated my article for deletion has managed to get many of the Michigan roads moved to feature articles. Why is that roads rate higher than people. There are many genealogist looking for cemeteries that have been paved over and lost to time. Why can't wiki help preseve some of that history before it is lost? Why is Kentucky_Route_101 an article that is ok for wiki but a cemetery or all cemeteries. We could have several layers of a sub project, Nationa Cem. State Cem. Local Cem. Breaking down the history use of each etc. The person nominated for deletion was User:Imzadi1979 Jsgoodrich (talk) 04:47, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Let me try to answer your question. Wikipedia is not simply one encyclopedia; it is actually several scores of encyclopedia all under one URL. In other words, each group of interested people make their own decisions on what is Notable and what is not. Case in point: Secondary schools are ipso facto Notable; but middle schools are not. Professional athletes (not matter how few games they've placed) are Notable, but amateurs are not necessarily. It seems every darned road in the world, and every little island is Notable because they are geographic features, and that decision was not made by a massive vote of all Wikipedians, but only by those who take an interest in such things.
Anyway, your cemetery article probably should not have been deleted if you'd had enough citations to non-involved publications or websites to assure the most uptight Wikipedian that your place was Notable. Why not try again? What's the name of the place, and I will help you look for some sources. Sincerely, your friend, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:00, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Just to reiterate some of what BeenAround said, it sounds like you think we don't have cemetery articles in general. We do. Check out Category:Cemeteries and its subcategories for examples. Let me know if you would like to work on expanding your original article; I'll restore it to your user space where you can work on it some more to get it into shape for the main space.LadyofShalott 20:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
I also would like to get a chance to look at your deleted article and offer a "pro-cemetery" opinion. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 21:00, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Interesting to see all this - (as one of the eds around when this specific project started) - as far as I can remember when we were creating this project cemeteries were and still are an important part of this project - it sounds like lack of notability or WP:RS was the problem - I always thought we could have had a project level notability guideline for such items - but usually editors with little knowledge of the specific scope of this project might think in terms of 'universal' notability guidelines. What is interesting here is eds who have not been regulars at this noticeboard offering to help to restore. That is both encouraging and a positive response - lets hope enough current eds stay around and perhaps might get to help to create a notability standard for cemeteries ? or if not a specific policy - at least the capacity to encourage and support the project - and as for a a workgroup for cemeteries - I would hesitate on a workgroup/sub project unless there big numbers of people involved JarrahTree 22:48, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
As for the article on Mottville Township Cemetery, it did not meet WP:GNG, and searches for new sources find only passing mentions and webpages that basically confirm that it exists. Now if the local historical society or the press had published a detailed history of the facility, that would be different, but relying on FindAGrave and the township's own website isn't encouraging for notability. In other cases, where there are sources that are actually about the cemetery, and not just passing mentions of those interred there, then yes, create an article and I'll support it against deletion.

As a side note, there's an attempt to draw a false comparison between the importance of one topic and another in the original statements above. There are limits to the notability of roads, so it's not "every darned road in the world", rather only certain ones, and articles that fall outside the bounds of notability established years ago at VfD and AfD are regularly deleted now. In short, meet the threshold for inclusion with a topic, and it won't be deleted, but fail and it will, no matter the subject area. Imzadi 1979 → 02:07, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

"Veneration"

The topic of Veneration is under discussion, see talk:Veneration -- 65.94.171.217 (talk) 05:49, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

Diversify/globalise RDs on the main page

Hello. I have been trying to suggest more RDs from the developing world, but it is a bit of an uphill battle. Should we create a taskforce? I think it would really help if a small group of editors watched out for prominent individuals from developing nations and created/expanded their articles before submitting them to RDs on "In the news".Zigzig20s (talk) 03:46, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

It would be very useful to use the term RD (Recent Deaths) - this is the death project - I suspect you would have much more luck in the Biography project than here, there a very few editors who are actually here working and watching here over time on this project, as for a taskforce, again Biography seems a much opportune location to seek interest in your project idea JarrahTree 03:54, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll do that.Zigzig20s (talk) 04:05, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Greetings WikiProject Death/Archive 3 Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 17:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Lead image discussion at Talk:Murders of Alison Parker and Adam Ward

Several of us are discussing whether one of the screenshots is appropriate and helpful. I invite you to comment there. --George Ho (talk) 05:12, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Definition of WP:NPOV at the Death of JonBenét Ramsey article and its relation to article titles and article content

Will editors here weigh in on a dispute about the definition of WP:NPOV and its relation to article titles and article content? It's now an RfC; see Talk:Death of JonBenét Ramsey#RfC: Is use of murder in the text, or use of murder categories, within the article against the WP:NPOV policy?. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 02:16, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Eric Garner facebook.jpg

This image is nominated for deletion. I invite you to comment at FFD. --George Ho (talk) 01:13, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

RfC notice

Here is a link to an RfC that relates to this WikiProject: Talk:Banjica concentration camp#RfC about the use of Cohen's Serbia's Secret War Your input would be appreciated. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:16, 8 January 2017 (UTC)

Beth David Cemetery

I have begun a draft for this cemetery, which can be found here. If anyone has anything to add, especially in way of sources, it would be greatly appreciated. Rusted AutoParts 02:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Category talk:Road incident deaths by country

Would appreciate input from the community. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Project watchers

Interesting - Vampire is on show in May 22... - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today%27s_featured_article/May_22,_2017 This project was labelled semi active today... Glass half full and glass half empty at the same time JarrahTree 23:57, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Venom

Is Venom within your scope?--— Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs) 22:43, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Death/Archive 3/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Death.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

  • The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
  • The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
  • The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Death, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

How to describe the Emmett Till case in the lead sentence of the Emmett Till article

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Talk:Emmett Till#RfC: Should we include the "accused of showing an interest in a white woman" aspect in the lead or specifically the lead sentence?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 17:04, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Elysium Space

So I have a draft up at Draft:Elysium Space for this space burial company. -- 65.94.169.56 (talk) 03:31, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Findagrave citation (2017)

Is Findagrave a reliable source to reference a person's death? SWP13 (talk) 00:04, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

No. The matter has been discussed so often and with such consistent conclusions that FindAGrave has been added to WP:PEREN as a site to avoid using as a source. 32.218.40.184 (talk) 00:13, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 June 23

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 June 23. Marchjuly (talk) 03:27, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Salman Ramadan Abedi, suicide attacker in the Manchester Arena bombing.jpg

The usage of the image File:Salman Ramadan Abedi, suicide attacker in the Manchester Arena bombing.jpg is discussed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 June 13, where I invite you to comment. --George Ho (talk) 11:54, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposal for a Cemetery Task Force

I think this project might benefit by separating Cemetery articles and lists - and having them in a dedicated task force - rather than just the Death tag and area - any thoughts ?? JarrahTree 03:12, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Talk:2017#Prodigy

Discussion about retaining the entry of Prodigy's death is occurring at Talk:2017#Prodigy, where I invite you to discuss. --George Ho (talk) 11:55, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

RfC tag is inserted at Talk:2017#.5BReady.5D Prodigy. --George Ho (talk) 05:08, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

RfC discussion on May/June events at Talk:2017

There is an RfC discussion on which event that occurred in May/June 2017 to include or exclude (Talk:2017#RfC: Events in May and June 2017). Join in discussion. --George Ho (talk) 06:33, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

File:James Thomas Hodgkinson.png

The image was undeleted, was relisted, and is discussed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 July 7#File:James Thomas Hodgkinson.png, where comments are welcome there. --George Ho (talk) 00:10, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

"Died by suicide" instead of "committed suicide"

I know it's fairly pedantic, but I think there should be a shift in language when talking about suicide. At the very least, many of the categories could be updated to use better words. http://www.suicide.org/stop-saying-committed-suicide.html ~ Amalas rawr =^_^= 19:14, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

File:Wade michael page police handout.png relisted for discussion

The image File:Wade michael page police handout.png is relisted into Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 August 27#File:Wade michael page police handout.png. You are invited to comment. --George Ho (talk) 05:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

List of heads of state and government who committed suicide

List of heads of state and government who committed suicide, which currently redirects to List of suicides, has been nominated at RfD for deletion or unmerging. You are invited to contribute to the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 September 25#List of heads of state and government who committed suicide. Thryduulf (talk) 18:55, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

RfC regarding victim lists in tragedy articles

I invite anyone interested to participate in an RfC about WP:NOTMEMORIAL and whether or not we should list individual victims in tragedy articles. The discussion can be found here. Thank you. SkyWarrior 04:55, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Death

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 14:53, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

List of fatal cougar attacks in North America

A discussion has been started regarding the factual accuracy of some of the information in this article. Your input is requested here. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Please come and help...

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:2017 Washington train derailment#Requested move 21 December 2017, regarding a page related to this WikiProject. Your opinion and rationale are needed so a decision can be made. Thank you and Happy New Year to All!  Paine Ellsworth  put'r there  12:08, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

RfC notice: Coverage of mass shootings in firearms articles

An RfC relevant to this project has been opened at:

Interested editors are invited to participate. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:22, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

Victims by Name

Its been normal practice in aircraft accident articles not to list victims unless they are notable (normally indicated by having or have the potential for a wikipedia article). Sometimes we have some resistance to this despite using WP:NOTMEMORIAL (although it appears to be focused on stand-alone articles). Can anybody point to the actual guidance on listing victims. I also note that a lot of American shooting incidents always list victims but they are frowned upon else where. Thanks MilborneOne (talk) 11:58, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

AfD comments for Operation Brand please

Right after being made, the article Operation Brand (which has come under this project) got a deletion nomination. The AfD discussion is 2-3 so far --not enough feedback for a real quorum. Please, editors, take a peek at the AfD and maybe weigh in. Best wishes, Cramyourspam (talk) 19:16, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

List of entertainers who died during a performance

Opinions are sought as to the scope of the List of entertainers who died during a performance, in particular do we include those who died later (e.g. in hospital) after an event (fall, heart attack etc) during the performance? Discussion at Talk:List of entertainers who died during a performance#... or thereafter. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:43, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Question for the death experts

I've encountered this a few times and cannot find the MOS (if any) concerning this, or other guidelines. Do we have a standard for writing about suicides? The old term committing/committed suicide is considered outdated. So, if we state in an article that Subject X killed themselves, how do we word it? Should we change "On July 5 Subject X committed suicide..." when encountered, and if so, to what? I've seen "died by suicide" but for me that clunky. However, if that's the standard now, that's fine. I just want to know what's preferred and/or if Wikipedia has a firm guideline about this. Ping me here if any editors know the answer. Thanks. freshacconci (✉) 14:15, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

MOS for the death project was not established when the project first started. If only they had - some projects are meticulous in terminology with editors abiding by guidelines that projects evolve policies re terminology... However here in this project space eds come and go or crawl out of their coffins very irregularly. There was a sub project / work force on suicide at one stage.

Probably the best would be to formulate a proposal here, and who knows, the creaking coffin hinges might see some project eds return. Some have gone.

  • Died by suicide seems to be from a non native speaker.

— JarrahTree 14:24, 9 April 2018 (UTC) — continues after insertion below

Not a guideline, but there is an essay WP:SUICIDES that might have something useful in it.Mitch Ames (talk) 11:27, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Proposal

For a MOS to be created regarding terminology regarding death and suicide.

Terms/phrases

Please add either a list or column format here to add possible unusable items and preferred alternatives.

JarrahTree 14:24, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Death/Archive_3&oldid=1142661443"