![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I’ve re-added the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame twice to Connie Hawkins’ entry, and just re-added the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame to Tom Petty’s. They had been removed by User:Fronticla with a note that “pov hall of fame mentions in lede, most of those listed are probably in a HoF of some level, even if local, just say who they are.” I think that is a reasonable point if someone is removing a Regional or otherwise minor HOF, but these cases are significant HOF indications - the top level in the subjects’ genre so to me it seems they should stay. Any obituary of a basketball player inducted into the Naismith HOF is going to say so in the subject’s obituary, usually in the first sentence or paragraph. But I figured I’d ask what the consensus is on this, if any. Maybe this has been discussed and as should leave it alone, but I didn’t recall any conversation about it, so I thought I’d ask. Rikster2 ( talk) 16:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
simp, almost every notable NBA player is in a HoF, even state/local/college ones". They obviously don't know what Naismith recognition is.— Wylie pedia 20:38, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Personally I think that the Hall of Fame for Great Americans is the "original" Hall of Fame,and all its members are already dead...any other HoF should be identified as such rather than only piped to the specific HoF a decedent belonged to. 12.144.5.2 ( talk) 04:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
There are occasional edit wars between these two terms. Does anyone have an opinion when each of these terms should be used? WWGB ( talk) 08:11, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Oh goody, DI20XX has become " Words with Friends". — Wylie pedia 09:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Could some of my fellow gnomes keep an eye on Deaths in October 2015? Someone keeps adding a non-notable child. I have already reverted three times, and don't want to breach 3RR. Thanks, WWGB ( talk) 02:40, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
A couple of Wikipolicies seem in direct opposition to the effective good of this page. In the one-sentence entries, we should be able to declare what someone is best known for, and sometimes that is for being somebody's relative, despite "Notability is not Inherited" (which of course is not applicable to royalty), and also there's the recent (making me bring this up) matter of John B. Anderson, who may qualify because he was in Congress, but came to the notice of the great majority of those who ever heard of him because of his now-deleted-from-here presidential candidacy. Omission of the real reason why a reader may care to know about a person misleads. 12.144.5.2 ( talk) 05:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
" Folk hero" or "national hero", according to wiki, is a type of hero – real, fictional or mythological – with the sole salient characteristic being the imprinting of his or her name, personality and deeds in the popular consciousness of a people. This presence in the popular consciousness is evidenced by its historical frequency in folk songs, folk tales and other folklore; and its modern trope status in literature, art and films. Although some folk heroes are historical public figures, many are not. The lives of folk heroes are generally fictional, their characteristics and deeds often exaggerated to mythic proportions. The folk hero often begins life as a normal person, but is transformed into someone extraordinary by significant life events, often in response to social injustice, and sometimes in response to natural disasters.
Now looking at the highlighted portion I thought that fit pretty well given the facts that he was (A) only famous for this event, (B) his act is taught in Iranian schools from the article itself which ticks the literature requirement off, (C) exaggerated to mythic proportions as Wylie so kindly pointed out, and (D) the response to a natural disaster.
Thats 4 for 4 just out of the opening paragraph from the Wiki Page. I care not one way or the other, but there is a method to that madness of why it was chosen. You guys can fit it however you want, but please argue the facts as editors should instead of telling us how you feel as a reason why you are against something. And yes I used serial commas up above, and no I am not going to apologize for that either. Have a wonderful day! Sunnydoo ( talk) 22:15, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
I've added Alan Sinfield, who died on December 2, but I am looking for an RS. In the mean time, I added this tweet. Zigzig20s ( talk) 09:08, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
NYT: John Anderson, Who Ran Against Reagan and Carter in 1980, Is Dead at 95 WSJ: John Anderson, Who Ran For President as an Independent in 1980, Dies at 95.
That should be put back on the Deaths page. Sovper ( talk) 07:18, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
This is on the John Anderson disambiguation page: John B. Anderson (1922–2017), United States Representative from Illinois and 1980 presidential candidate.
So if that appears like that it should also be on the Deaths page as it originally was. Just about anyone who has heard of him knew of his 1980 candidacy (plenty more than knew of the legal case). Sovper ( talk) 08:14, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
I note that someone has made "Macon Brock" a redirect to Dollar Tree but not written an article. The Dollar Tree article doesn't say much about him. Does this suffice to prevent his deletion for not having an article? (Dollar Tree's website still has a bio for him and will likely issue a memorial press release -- they recorded his retirement as chairman in September). LE ( talk) 22:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
In recent days someone or other has apparently decided to remove the explanation to readers (and potential editors) of how this article is organized. I am at a total loss as to how this benefits anyone. 12.144.5.2 ( talk) 16:30, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
So Toni Mascolo's main claim of fame, i.e., having been co-founder of Toni&Guy , has been removed twice, once because the company is "non notable" (which it isn't) and once because the exemplar contained an interlanguage link (which isn't a reason for removing it completely). Imo, we shouldn't attach more importance to being a small part of a big whole (e.g. playing a minor role in a well-known movie, or placing 56th or something at the Olympic Games) than to being a big part of something which isn't quite as well-known, yet still notable. I think mentioning Toni&Guy, whether formatted as a red link, an interlanguage link, or no link at all, is decisive for readers to immediately realize who he was. If we assume that he himself might have been notable (and a "Guardian" obit is quite a hint at that), I'd consider it consequent to assume the company he was involved in is notable as well and therefore to at least mention it here. Axolotl Nr.733 ( talk) 13:05, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
"48 countries" and yet only one wikilink? That is precisely the reason not to add the business here. Same reason Mascolo is still red. My personal criteria for scrutinised bio creation is cross-enwiki-coverage. To be frank, the time and effort made here to include the business in the entry could've been put into trying to get either article created. — Wylie pedia 23:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
According to what I've found searching for him, he is a far right extremist threatening real journalists at their homes. His death is only mentioned by far right nationalist propaganda sites with a so and so relationship with truth and reality. No real media outlet has yet to mention his death. I doubt very much he is more notable than the average comments section troll. Nukualofa ( talk) 23:37, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
It doesn't matter what your personal opinions about him or the sites reporting about his death are. He is notable and several newssite are reporting about his death: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] except for those which have already been linked. Even before his death he was mentioned in MSM: [6], [7], [8], [9]. He is indeed notable and we shall wait 30 days before we removes him if he don't gets an article. DrKilleMoff ( talk) 09:23, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Is Aktuelltifokus also "far right propaganda" according to you? That has a left profile. [10] And once again, it doesn't matter what your personal preferences about the sites are. They don't become unreliable when it comes to reporting Rabani's death or because they have a more right profile then the major newspapers. Rabani has been mentioned several times on several sites before his death. He became a very notable person within the last year. DrKilleMoff ( talk) 12:48, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
The cause of death for Mr Carney is cited as traffic collision, while the wikiepedia entry for Mr Carney states that he died following a fall in his home. It seems a correction is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.154.68.1 ( talk) 16:40, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
It was announced on December 18th that he "passed away at the end of November". He needs to stay in the November 2017 rather than December 2017 deaths article! LE ( talk) 00:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
But we can't do that for Beesley since his death wasn't reported until in December. We don't have an Unknown date-section. DrKilleMoff ( talk) 15:29, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
A similar case is Michael Mortimore. His death was added to the article in September, but only recently has an obituary been published, which still doesn't state the death date: [11]. I'm sure there will be an additional obit in an academic journal, but until then, is there any possibility to list his death anywhere here? Axolotl Nr.733 ( talk) 11:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Before Nukualofa and I engage in full edit-war, lets discuss; Stan Pilecki was born in Germany (in a refugee camp) to Polish parents. The family then emigrated to Australia when Stan was 3. If he kept his Polish citizenship and obtained an Australian one it makes him a German-born Polish-Australian. If he didn't keep his Polish citizenship he is a German-born Australian. If this even needs to be distinguished here, I'm fine with calling him just "Australian". But he is not Polish-born, he was not born in Poland. -- Marbe166 ( talk) 22:42, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Although I've always been brought up that geography is key when describing which nationality someone is born into, the fluidity of inter-national movement in the modern world means I grudgingly accept Nukualofa's premise. Ref (chew) (do) 06:50, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Ah, Lyudmila, we hardly knew ye. — Wylie pedia 19:18, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
As usual, the seven-day "overlap" period at the end of each month does not apply at the end of December.
The reason is that Recent Deaths on the front page of Wikipedia is pointed to Deaths in 2018 from January 1. This means that deaths from that date need to be reported on Deaths in 2018, rather than staying on Deaths in 2017 for the first seven days (which does not make sense in a new year anyway). WWGB ( talk) 02:37, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
InedibleHulk - it's the old chestnut of using or not using "cite web" inline sourcing. As you know, we don't use the full cite format in the current Deaths pages, in order to keep coding slimmer. Bots and other editors have been all over unattended archived versions of past years and re-added "cite web", chucking in a generalized opinion tag that they do not understand the simpler version. To be fair, they have also identified many dead links and added links to content only available now through the Wayback Machine internet archive. It's a mess, but sortable with work, and the tag can be removed if a return to simpler source citing is achieved (or earlier, as it's not a Nazi state after all). (To be honest though, I don't often personally revisit earlier years; I'm only interested in keeping the current Deaths page correct.) Ref (chew) (do) 06:44, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
(Sidebar: Illuminati confirmed, hilarious! — Wylie pedia 17:47, 30 December 2017 (UTC))
Hurrah! I see that there is a separate sub-category for deaths in December 2017 before December 2017 has finished. Many thanks to the kind Wikipedian who sorted that out. Vorbee ( talk) 15:40, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
I’ve re-added the Naismith Memorial Basketball Hall of Fame twice to Connie Hawkins’ entry, and just re-added the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame to Tom Petty’s. They had been removed by User:Fronticla with a note that “pov hall of fame mentions in lede, most of those listed are probably in a HoF of some level, even if local, just say who they are.” I think that is a reasonable point if someone is removing a Regional or otherwise minor HOF, but these cases are significant HOF indications - the top level in the subjects’ genre so to me it seems they should stay. Any obituary of a basketball player inducted into the Naismith HOF is going to say so in the subject’s obituary, usually in the first sentence or paragraph. But I figured I’d ask what the consensus is on this, if any. Maybe this has been discussed and as should leave it alone, but I didn’t recall any conversation about it, so I thought I’d ask. Rikster2 ( talk) 16:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
simp, almost every notable NBA player is in a HoF, even state/local/college ones". They obviously don't know what Naismith recognition is.— Wylie pedia 20:38, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Personally I think that the Hall of Fame for Great Americans is the "original" Hall of Fame,and all its members are already dead...any other HoF should be identified as such rather than only piped to the specific HoF a decedent belonged to. 12.144.5.2 ( talk) 04:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
There are occasional edit wars between these two terms. Does anyone have an opinion when each of these terms should be used? WWGB ( talk) 08:11, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Oh goody, DI20XX has become " Words with Friends". — Wylie pedia 09:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Could some of my fellow gnomes keep an eye on Deaths in October 2015? Someone keeps adding a non-notable child. I have already reverted three times, and don't want to breach 3RR. Thanks, WWGB ( talk) 02:40, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
A couple of Wikipolicies seem in direct opposition to the effective good of this page. In the one-sentence entries, we should be able to declare what someone is best known for, and sometimes that is for being somebody's relative, despite "Notability is not Inherited" (which of course is not applicable to royalty), and also there's the recent (making me bring this up) matter of John B. Anderson, who may qualify because he was in Congress, but came to the notice of the great majority of those who ever heard of him because of his now-deleted-from-here presidential candidacy. Omission of the real reason why a reader may care to know about a person misleads. 12.144.5.2 ( talk) 05:04, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
" Folk hero" or "national hero", according to wiki, is a type of hero – real, fictional or mythological – with the sole salient characteristic being the imprinting of his or her name, personality and deeds in the popular consciousness of a people. This presence in the popular consciousness is evidenced by its historical frequency in folk songs, folk tales and other folklore; and its modern trope status in literature, art and films. Although some folk heroes are historical public figures, many are not. The lives of folk heroes are generally fictional, their characteristics and deeds often exaggerated to mythic proportions. The folk hero often begins life as a normal person, but is transformed into someone extraordinary by significant life events, often in response to social injustice, and sometimes in response to natural disasters.
Now looking at the highlighted portion I thought that fit pretty well given the facts that he was (A) only famous for this event, (B) his act is taught in Iranian schools from the article itself which ticks the literature requirement off, (C) exaggerated to mythic proportions as Wylie so kindly pointed out, and (D) the response to a natural disaster.
Thats 4 for 4 just out of the opening paragraph from the Wiki Page. I care not one way or the other, but there is a method to that madness of why it was chosen. You guys can fit it however you want, but please argue the facts as editors should instead of telling us how you feel as a reason why you are against something. And yes I used serial commas up above, and no I am not going to apologize for that either. Have a wonderful day! Sunnydoo ( talk) 22:15, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
I've added Alan Sinfield, who died on December 2, but I am looking for an RS. In the mean time, I added this tweet. Zigzig20s ( talk) 09:08, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
NYT: John Anderson, Who Ran Against Reagan and Carter in 1980, Is Dead at 95 WSJ: John Anderson, Who Ran For President as an Independent in 1980, Dies at 95.
That should be put back on the Deaths page. Sovper ( talk) 07:18, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
This is on the John Anderson disambiguation page: John B. Anderson (1922–2017), United States Representative from Illinois and 1980 presidential candidate.
So if that appears like that it should also be on the Deaths page as it originally was. Just about anyone who has heard of him knew of his 1980 candidacy (plenty more than knew of the legal case). Sovper ( talk) 08:14, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
I note that someone has made "Macon Brock" a redirect to Dollar Tree but not written an article. The Dollar Tree article doesn't say much about him. Does this suffice to prevent his deletion for not having an article? (Dollar Tree's website still has a bio for him and will likely issue a memorial press release -- they recorded his retirement as chairman in September). LE ( talk) 22:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
In recent days someone or other has apparently decided to remove the explanation to readers (and potential editors) of how this article is organized. I am at a total loss as to how this benefits anyone. 12.144.5.2 ( talk) 16:30, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
So Toni Mascolo's main claim of fame, i.e., having been co-founder of Toni&Guy , has been removed twice, once because the company is "non notable" (which it isn't) and once because the exemplar contained an interlanguage link (which isn't a reason for removing it completely). Imo, we shouldn't attach more importance to being a small part of a big whole (e.g. playing a minor role in a well-known movie, or placing 56th or something at the Olympic Games) than to being a big part of something which isn't quite as well-known, yet still notable. I think mentioning Toni&Guy, whether formatted as a red link, an interlanguage link, or no link at all, is decisive for readers to immediately realize who he was. If we assume that he himself might have been notable (and a "Guardian" obit is quite a hint at that), I'd consider it consequent to assume the company he was involved in is notable as well and therefore to at least mention it here. Axolotl Nr.733 ( talk) 13:05, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
"48 countries" and yet only one wikilink? That is precisely the reason not to add the business here. Same reason Mascolo is still red. My personal criteria for scrutinised bio creation is cross-enwiki-coverage. To be frank, the time and effort made here to include the business in the entry could've been put into trying to get either article created. — Wylie pedia 23:43, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
According to what I've found searching for him, he is a far right extremist threatening real journalists at their homes. His death is only mentioned by far right nationalist propaganda sites with a so and so relationship with truth and reality. No real media outlet has yet to mention his death. I doubt very much he is more notable than the average comments section troll. Nukualofa ( talk) 23:37, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
It doesn't matter what your personal opinions about him or the sites reporting about his death are. He is notable and several newssite are reporting about his death: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] except for those which have already been linked. Even before his death he was mentioned in MSM: [6], [7], [8], [9]. He is indeed notable and we shall wait 30 days before we removes him if he don't gets an article. DrKilleMoff ( talk) 09:23, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
Is Aktuelltifokus also "far right propaganda" according to you? That has a left profile. [10] And once again, it doesn't matter what your personal preferences about the sites are. They don't become unreliable when it comes to reporting Rabani's death or because they have a more right profile then the major newspapers. Rabani has been mentioned several times on several sites before his death. He became a very notable person within the last year. DrKilleMoff ( talk) 12:48, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
The cause of death for Mr Carney is cited as traffic collision, while the wikiepedia entry for Mr Carney states that he died following a fall in his home. It seems a correction is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.154.68.1 ( talk) 16:40, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
It was announced on December 18th that he "passed away at the end of November". He needs to stay in the November 2017 rather than December 2017 deaths article! LE ( talk) 00:02, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
But we can't do that for Beesley since his death wasn't reported until in December. We don't have an Unknown date-section. DrKilleMoff ( talk) 15:29, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
A similar case is Michael Mortimore. His death was added to the article in September, but only recently has an obituary been published, which still doesn't state the death date: [11]. I'm sure there will be an additional obit in an academic journal, but until then, is there any possibility to list his death anywhere here? Axolotl Nr.733 ( talk) 11:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)
Before Nukualofa and I engage in full edit-war, lets discuss; Stan Pilecki was born in Germany (in a refugee camp) to Polish parents. The family then emigrated to Australia when Stan was 3. If he kept his Polish citizenship and obtained an Australian one it makes him a German-born Polish-Australian. If he didn't keep his Polish citizenship he is a German-born Australian. If this even needs to be distinguished here, I'm fine with calling him just "Australian". But he is not Polish-born, he was not born in Poland. -- Marbe166 ( talk) 22:42, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Although I've always been brought up that geography is key when describing which nationality someone is born into, the fluidity of inter-national movement in the modern world means I grudgingly accept Nukualofa's premise. Ref (chew) (do) 06:50, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Ah, Lyudmila, we hardly knew ye. — Wylie pedia 19:18, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
As usual, the seven-day "overlap" period at the end of each month does not apply at the end of December.
The reason is that Recent Deaths on the front page of Wikipedia is pointed to Deaths in 2018 from January 1. This means that deaths from that date need to be reported on Deaths in 2018, rather than staying on Deaths in 2017 for the first seven days (which does not make sense in a new year anyway). WWGB ( talk) 02:37, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
InedibleHulk - it's the old chestnut of using or not using "cite web" inline sourcing. As you know, we don't use the full cite format in the current Deaths pages, in order to keep coding slimmer. Bots and other editors have been all over unattended archived versions of past years and re-added "cite web", chucking in a generalized opinion tag that they do not understand the simpler version. To be fair, they have also identified many dead links and added links to content only available now through the Wayback Machine internet archive. It's a mess, but sortable with work, and the tag can be removed if a return to simpler source citing is achieved (or earlier, as it's not a Nazi state after all). (To be honest though, I don't often personally revisit earlier years; I'm only interested in keeping the current Deaths page correct.) Ref (chew) (do) 06:44, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
(Sidebar: Illuminati confirmed, hilarious! — Wylie pedia 17:47, 30 December 2017 (UTC))
Hurrah! I see that there is a separate sub-category for deaths in December 2017 before December 2017 has finished. Many thanks to the kind Wikipedian who sorted that out. Vorbee ( talk) 15:40, 29 December 2017 (UTC)