This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deaths in 2011 redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article was nominated for deletion on 16 June 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2011. |
Has the guideline of waiting 30 days to remove the redlink entries changed? I noticed that the December 2010 names are being deleted much faster and wonder if this a new policy or an over eager editor making their own rules? BurienBomber ( talk) 03:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
While on the subject of red links, I remember that some one last calendar year (i.e. 2010) suggested that there should be a policy of no article, no entry here. I remember that I very strongly opposed this plea. I pointed out at the time that Rose Gray was originally down here as a red link - and yet, some one who was notable enough to have her death mentioned on the Radio Four news. I began an article on this co-founder of the River Cafe - and there were soon many conscientious Wikipedians who were improving the article. I just wish to conclude by saying again that I would oppose any policy of no article means no entry, and I for one am happy to see red links here. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 22:13, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I think that part of the problem may be that the initial part of this article says that this is a list of "notable" people who have died in 2011. It is only a matter of time before some one looks at this page and says that people with red links are not notable - overlooking that this is not always the case (may I cite Rose Gray again to make my point. I agree with what WWGB (and yes, I do know that stands for Wrong Way Go Back!) about consensus, and I share what you take to be aversions to both the red links must remain forever argument, and the red links get removed argument. You are right WWGB - that is just what one finds when working on a wiki. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 19:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Some editors are getting over-keen. The red-links for 6 April were removed on 4 May. Arjayay ( talk) 15:35, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Following on from my previous post I would like to suggest that the simple term 'criminal' be removed from all posts. Almost everyone who logs on to Wiki is in some sense or another a 'criminal'. Who hasn't taken money out their mother's purse to buy sweets, downloaded P2P videos or albums, driven the car when we knew we had had a little bit too much to drink or broken the speed limit. Whether we like it or not they are all crimes so we're all basically criminals. Just like calling someone a 'sportsperson' (I played for my school football team when I was 11 so I am technically a 'sportsperson') the word 'criminal is totally meaningless. Charles Zwolsman is described as a 'Dutch criminal'. He was a Drugbaron and will probably be remembered for being such, though he is also described as a 'racing driver', so why reduce him to the simple rank of criminal? Hitler was a criminal, Stalin was a criminal, I am a criminal because I got a speeding fine a few weeks ago!Williamgeorgefraser 11:47, 24 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamgeorgefraser ( talk • contribs)
On the note of criminals, Johnnie Baton was not the first to be executed in the U.S by Pentobarbital alone, and I would like to refer whoever posted it to "John David Duty" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.2.173.126 ( talk) 19:47, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
For all these words, add "notable" before them. If the person is a "notable criminal", label them a criminal. If you stealing money from your mother's purse made you notable among more than just your family, you're a criminal...if it was 10p for some sweets, all you will get is a slap, if it's £5000 that she just happened to have for some reason, you're possibly going to the police station and will become a notable criminal in the papers. Just as if you were a sportsman as a child you won't be notable until people take note of you abilities and you get known outside of your own circle for the aforementioned. Until you're a notable sportsman, you're not a sportsman as defined here. Brettalan said it long before me, I just noticed, but will keep on posting as I think I might have gone into a bit more detail :-P Also, Jack the Ripper was no criminal, he was a suspected criminal and there is no definite proof that such a person even existed. 87.194.86.204 ( talk) 18:07, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
First of all, not all people who read this would be criminals - some of the "crimes" you mention would technically be civil offences, not criminal offences. However, I think that perhaps what you would like to see is that a a more specific term (or set of terms) could be used, such as murderers, rapists, burglar, thieves, insurance swindlers and other people who are known for notorious reasons. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 23:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Of the 36 deaths in 2011 since 20 January, is it really possible that only 2 women of note died? one the wife of an Israeli politician and the other a German porn star...oh and also one horse of note died!...all three were among the 21 deaths noted on 20 January. Might Wikipedia make an effort to strike a gender balance in its reporting? T'would be refreshing as we move along in the 21st century Sunestep ( talk) 19:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps you could list notable women and we could 'take them out' to even the list up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.41.223 ( talk) 19:52, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
The discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 January 28#Template:Recent death may of interest to editors frequenting this page. -- Mattinbgn ( talk) 03:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
What happened to the recent deaths tag? Did it get deleted? ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 20:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I see that we often have redlinked Greek deaths that are inevitably deleted after one month [1]. Seems a waste of effort to add them. WWGB ( talk) 11:18, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Since Facebook operates with personal acconts, announcement of death on Facebook can hardly be considered reliable information, since an individual almost certainly does not announce their own death on their personal Facebook account. Hence, the account must be compromised and considered unreliable. An example of this can be found at the article on Scott Columbus, which is currently also linked to from this article. Talk/ ♥фĩłдωəß♥\ Work 08:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
No, the person does not announce his or her own death. Confirmed FB friends may post it on the person's Wall. Tenorlove ( talk) 11:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Tenorlove
I've noticed a couple of these on this page in the past few days: Josephine Hart is given by our source ( [2]) as being 69, and her article - which uses the same source - agrees. But other sources, such as [3] and [4] give her as 67. Similarly, Donald Hewlett is listed on our page as 88, in agreement with his article. But the source we're using ( [5]) conflicts with our own stated age, and makes him 90. Do we have any defined policy for this sort of thing? EJBH ( talk) 01:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm starting to see several athletes for organizations like the NHL or NFL get team listings. But i think we should keep the team names full, like Baltimore Ravens rather then Ravens. It would be confusing to readers for they might not know what team they mean. Rusted AutoParts ( talk) 0:43 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I have noticed that one editor, RowdyCat, is constantly removing any song credit included in listings for musical artists. Recent examples include Clarence Clemons, Andrew Gold and Mel McDaniel. Only after edit warring do the song credits seem to eventually be retained. This only seems to be happening with musicians and not credits for actors, writers, etc. Am I missing something? Are there different rules for including credits for musicians?
On a related note the same editor has a habit of trying to force in minor acting roles over more established or award nominated roles for certain actors such as what is currently happening with Peter Falk. It would seem that the most universally recognized role should be listed and then ones that an Oscar/Emmy/Tony nomination should have more weight than any minor billed roles. In any case, if some kind of guide could be established, it would sure help with the edit warring that is going on. BurienBomber ( talk) 13:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
New York Times lets you read 20 articles per month. And if you want to read more, you have to pay. So, are we supposed to keep using it, or we should avoid it? Hours ago, I changed it on someone's death, but I see there are more.-- Andres arg ( talk) 19:20, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure this has been answered for previous years but just to clarify here are we going by local time of the location of death or a standardised timezone such as GMT to establish the date of passing? I ask this because if the former is the case then surely by law of averages there will be cases where people who physically died before somebody else are listed the day after them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.70.175 ( talk) 22:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Is there a standard here for the term for what Americans and Canadians refer to as soccer? I was using the term "football player" as that seem to be what the established editors were using, but now the term "footballer" is being used frequently. (Personally, I don't find it confusing to use the term "football player" for both sports since the gridiron sport is always preceded by "American" or "Canadian".) Can we decide on one or the other for the sake of consistency? BurienBomber ( talk) 21:42, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
( talk) 04:19, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I would not worry about this. I would have most people who speak English as a fist language, whether American English or English as it used in the United Kingdom, could understand both the terms "footballer" and "football player". ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 22:55, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I suspect that the "suspected cause of death" phenomenon is biased. Amy Winehouse's cause of death isn't being allowed to be displayed until at least October, and yet Hideki Irabu's cause of death hasn't been confirmed yet but speculation has been left in! Is bias against celebrities at work here? -- Ryanasaurus007 ( talk) 14:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
What do editors think about using the relevant template from Category:Language icon templates when a reference is in a language other than English? At present we use (Greek) rather than {{gr icon}}, which produces (in Greek). An editor recently introduced this style, but I reverted it in the absence of any discussion/consensus. I am against the idea as any editor can add, for example, (Japanese) without any knowledge of Wikipedia markup. Using the template seems like a complication without any real benefit. Opinions? WWGB ( talk) 07:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Why are American death penalties so often listed and not those of the other 23+ countries that actively use capital punishment? -- Aaron Walden 14:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Unless they were awarded a Nobel Prize, please don't incclude "Oscar winning" or awrd winning anything in their submissions. Thanks. Rusted AutoParts ( talk) 16:32 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I've asked if a bot could be setup to add redlinks to an archive so the useful info is retained. Please add comments/questions at the Bot Request page. Thanks. Lugnuts ( talk) 09:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Just wondering. In the recent deaths of november 6th 2011, a horse is mentioned; Hickstead. Are ANIMALS, no matter how famous, to be listed among deceased PEOPLE? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to create a list of "Animal Deaths" to indicate a certain difference between people and animal? Vliegert ( talk) 10:54, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Is it really worth putting this as a cause of death? It doesn't tell us anything much beyond that we don't know the actual cause of death. Its use in obituaries is just filler and it's doing the same thing here... if we know the full CoD then put it in, and if we don't, then don't bother. EJBH ( talk) 15:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
90.206.49.94 ( talk) 12:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Exactly, so correct it. 90.206.49.94 ( talk) 14:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Every other month in 2011 is unprotected and so is January 2012. The only month protected is December 2011, which I find utterly ridiculous. When are you going to remove the protection?
From a user point of view, having a page of links to other articles is frustrating. The entire list should be included on this page for convenience and easy reading. However this is entirely my own conjecture! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.96.59 ( talk) 05:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deaths in 2011 redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article was nominated for deletion on 16 June 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single year to make it into the Top 50 Report annual list. This happened in 2011. |
Has the guideline of waiting 30 days to remove the redlink entries changed? I noticed that the December 2010 names are being deleted much faster and wonder if this a new policy or an over eager editor making their own rules? BurienBomber ( talk) 03:23, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
While on the subject of red links, I remember that some one last calendar year (i.e. 2010) suggested that there should be a policy of no article, no entry here. I remember that I very strongly opposed this plea. I pointed out at the time that Rose Gray was originally down here as a red link - and yet, some one who was notable enough to have her death mentioned on the Radio Four news. I began an article on this co-founder of the River Cafe - and there were soon many conscientious Wikipedians who were improving the article. I just wish to conclude by saying again that I would oppose any policy of no article means no entry, and I for one am happy to see red links here. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 22:13, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I think that part of the problem may be that the initial part of this article says that this is a list of "notable" people who have died in 2011. It is only a matter of time before some one looks at this page and says that people with red links are not notable - overlooking that this is not always the case (may I cite Rose Gray again to make my point. I agree with what WWGB (and yes, I do know that stands for Wrong Way Go Back!) about consensus, and I share what you take to be aversions to both the red links must remain forever argument, and the red links get removed argument. You are right WWGB - that is just what one finds when working on a wiki. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 19:43, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Some editors are getting over-keen. The red-links for 6 April were removed on 4 May. Arjayay ( talk) 15:35, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Following on from my previous post I would like to suggest that the simple term 'criminal' be removed from all posts. Almost everyone who logs on to Wiki is in some sense or another a 'criminal'. Who hasn't taken money out their mother's purse to buy sweets, downloaded P2P videos or albums, driven the car when we knew we had had a little bit too much to drink or broken the speed limit. Whether we like it or not they are all crimes so we're all basically criminals. Just like calling someone a 'sportsperson' (I played for my school football team when I was 11 so I am technically a 'sportsperson') the word 'criminal is totally meaningless. Charles Zwolsman is described as a 'Dutch criminal'. He was a Drugbaron and will probably be remembered for being such, though he is also described as a 'racing driver', so why reduce him to the simple rank of criminal? Hitler was a criminal, Stalin was a criminal, I am a criminal because I got a speeding fine a few weeks ago!Williamgeorgefraser 11:47, 24 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Williamgeorgefraser ( talk • contribs)
On the note of criminals, Johnnie Baton was not the first to be executed in the U.S by Pentobarbital alone, and I would like to refer whoever posted it to "John David Duty" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.2.173.126 ( talk) 19:47, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
For all these words, add "notable" before them. If the person is a "notable criminal", label them a criminal. If you stealing money from your mother's purse made you notable among more than just your family, you're a criminal...if it was 10p for some sweets, all you will get is a slap, if it's £5000 that she just happened to have for some reason, you're possibly going to the police station and will become a notable criminal in the papers. Just as if you were a sportsman as a child you won't be notable until people take note of you abilities and you get known outside of your own circle for the aforementioned. Until you're a notable sportsman, you're not a sportsman as defined here. Brettalan said it long before me, I just noticed, but will keep on posting as I think I might have gone into a bit more detail :-P Also, Jack the Ripper was no criminal, he was a suspected criminal and there is no definite proof that such a person even existed. 87.194.86.204 ( talk) 18:07, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
First of all, not all people who read this would be criminals - some of the "crimes" you mention would technically be civil offences, not criminal offences. However, I think that perhaps what you would like to see is that a a more specific term (or set of terms) could be used, such as murderers, rapists, burglar, thieves, insurance swindlers and other people who are known for notorious reasons. ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 23:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Of the 36 deaths in 2011 since 20 January, is it really possible that only 2 women of note died? one the wife of an Israeli politician and the other a German porn star...oh and also one horse of note died!...all three were among the 21 deaths noted on 20 January. Might Wikipedia make an effort to strike a gender balance in its reporting? T'would be refreshing as we move along in the 21st century Sunestep ( talk) 19:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps you could list notable women and we could 'take them out' to even the list up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.5.41.223 ( talk) 19:52, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
The discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 January 28#Template:Recent death may of interest to editors frequenting this page. -- Mattinbgn ( talk) 03:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
What happened to the recent deaths tag? Did it get deleted? ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 20:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
I see that we often have redlinked Greek deaths that are inevitably deleted after one month [1]. Seems a waste of effort to add them. WWGB ( talk) 11:18, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
Since Facebook operates with personal acconts, announcement of death on Facebook can hardly be considered reliable information, since an individual almost certainly does not announce their own death on their personal Facebook account. Hence, the account must be compromised and considered unreliable. An example of this can be found at the article on Scott Columbus, which is currently also linked to from this article. Talk/ ♥фĩłдωəß♥\ Work 08:58, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
No, the person does not announce his or her own death. Confirmed FB friends may post it on the person's Wall. Tenorlove ( talk) 11:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)Tenorlove
I've noticed a couple of these on this page in the past few days: Josephine Hart is given by our source ( [2]) as being 69, and her article - which uses the same source - agrees. But other sources, such as [3] and [4] give her as 67. Similarly, Donald Hewlett is listed on our page as 88, in agreement with his article. But the source we're using ( [5]) conflicts with our own stated age, and makes him 90. Do we have any defined policy for this sort of thing? EJBH ( talk) 01:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm starting to see several athletes for organizations like the NHL or NFL get team listings. But i think we should keep the team names full, like Baltimore Ravens rather then Ravens. It would be confusing to readers for they might not know what team they mean. Rusted AutoParts ( talk) 0:43 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I have noticed that one editor, RowdyCat, is constantly removing any song credit included in listings for musical artists. Recent examples include Clarence Clemons, Andrew Gold and Mel McDaniel. Only after edit warring do the song credits seem to eventually be retained. This only seems to be happening with musicians and not credits for actors, writers, etc. Am I missing something? Are there different rules for including credits for musicians?
On a related note the same editor has a habit of trying to force in minor acting roles over more established or award nominated roles for certain actors such as what is currently happening with Peter Falk. It would seem that the most universally recognized role should be listed and then ones that an Oscar/Emmy/Tony nomination should have more weight than any minor billed roles. In any case, if some kind of guide could be established, it would sure help with the edit warring that is going on. BurienBomber ( talk) 13:34, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
New York Times lets you read 20 articles per month. And if you want to read more, you have to pay. So, are we supposed to keep using it, or we should avoid it? Hours ago, I changed it on someone's death, but I see there are more.-- Andres arg ( talk) 19:20, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm sure this has been answered for previous years but just to clarify here are we going by local time of the location of death or a standardised timezone such as GMT to establish the date of passing? I ask this because if the former is the case then surely by law of averages there will be cases where people who physically died before somebody else are listed the day after them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.201.70.175 ( talk) 22:48, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
Is there a standard here for the term for what Americans and Canadians refer to as soccer? I was using the term "football player" as that seem to be what the established editors were using, but now the term "footballer" is being used frequently. (Personally, I don't find it confusing to use the term "football player" for both sports since the gridiron sport is always preceded by "American" or "Canadian".) Can we decide on one or the other for the sake of consistency? BurienBomber ( talk) 21:42, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
( talk) 04:19, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
I would not worry about this. I would have most people who speak English as a fist language, whether American English or English as it used in the United Kingdom, could understand both the terms "footballer" and "football player". ACEOREVIVED ( talk) 22:55, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
I suspect that the "suspected cause of death" phenomenon is biased. Amy Winehouse's cause of death isn't being allowed to be displayed until at least October, and yet Hideki Irabu's cause of death hasn't been confirmed yet but speculation has been left in! Is bias against celebrities at work here? -- Ryanasaurus007 ( talk) 14:52, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
What do editors think about using the relevant template from Category:Language icon templates when a reference is in a language other than English? At present we use (Greek) rather than {{gr icon}}, which produces (in Greek). An editor recently introduced this style, but I reverted it in the absence of any discussion/consensus. I am against the idea as any editor can add, for example, (Japanese) without any knowledge of Wikipedia markup. Using the template seems like a complication without any real benefit. Opinions? WWGB ( talk) 07:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Why are American death penalties so often listed and not those of the other 23+ countries that actively use capital punishment? -- Aaron Walden 14:21, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Unless they were awarded a Nobel Prize, please don't incclude "Oscar winning" or awrd winning anything in their submissions. Thanks. Rusted AutoParts ( talk) 16:32 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I've asked if a bot could be setup to add redlinks to an archive so the useful info is retained. Please add comments/questions at the Bot Request page. Thanks. Lugnuts ( talk) 09:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
Just wondering. In the recent deaths of november 6th 2011, a horse is mentioned; Hickstead. Are ANIMALS, no matter how famous, to be listed among deceased PEOPLE? Wouldn't it be more appropriate to create a list of "Animal Deaths" to indicate a certain difference between people and animal? Vliegert ( talk) 10:54, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Is it really worth putting this as a cause of death? It doesn't tell us anything much beyond that we don't know the actual cause of death. Its use in obituaries is just filler and it's doing the same thing here... if we know the full CoD then put it in, and if we don't, then don't bother. EJBH ( talk) 15:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
90.206.49.94 ( talk) 12:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Exactly, so correct it. 90.206.49.94 ( talk) 14:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Every other month in 2011 is unprotected and so is January 2012. The only month protected is December 2011, which I find utterly ridiculous. When are you going to remove the protection?
From a user point of view, having a page of links to other articles is frustrating. The entire list should be included on this page for convenience and easy reading. However this is entirely my own conjecture! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.96.59 ( talk) 05:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)