![]() | 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 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 8 |
As currently worded, it is implied that St. Augustine's discussion of suicide was in the middle ages, and that Justinian's work predated St. Augustine's. But the truth is the opposite: Augustine having died in 430, before the middle ages began; and Justinian having been born after the middle ages began. . I don't feel quite up to rewriting the section in a creditable way: perhaps someone else can take this on? Publius3 ( talk) 05:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I just created a new page on Familicide but it quickly became a candidate for speedy deletion due to its limited, dictionary-definition content. It is my wish that the psychology and crime scholars among you help me expand the article's content so that it will no longer be considered beneath Wikipedia standards. Thank you. J.A.McCoy 00:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I know that Japan's suicide rate is high, but why is this? It sounds morbidly interesting. The Wiggle Fish 11:55, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
as a sociology student i can't help to notice the lack of a sociological point of view in this article. bieng "suicide" by Durkheim one of the most important pieces on this topic, where he statistacally shows that the main causes of the sucide rate are social, rather than psycological or otherwise. i'm planning on working a little bit on this direction, but i want to registrate as a user and hear some opinions before donig so.
gabriel
ps. i may have several ortography mistakes, forgive me for i am not a native speaker.
Contradiction: "National suicide rates sometimes tend to be stable"; "National suicide rates, apparently universally, show an upward long-term trend."
Citations with insufficient detail: "Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1983; Lester, Patterns, 1996, p. 21"
Unclear: The sentence beginning "For example, the 1975 rates ...". Nurg 21:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
While this article affirms that "the practice is fairly common, occurring in approximately one out of three suicides...", the Suicide note article says "but statistics show that the majority of suicide victims do not leave notes; in some countries, fewer than 10% of suicides are accompanied by suicide notes". Just warning whoever looks after these articles. Simoes - http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio:Simoes —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.47.34.200 ( talk) 21:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC).
The first two statements don't contradict each other at all, even though the wording is clumsy since it was clearly written by two people coming at the numbers from different perspectives.
If 1/3 leave notes then clearly the majority (or 2/3) do NOT leave notes, right? :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.144.85.130 ( talk) 04:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I've started working on a subpage called User:Wl219/List of university student suicides in my userspace. I intend to link it eventually to List of suicides when it's more fleshed out, but comments are welcome. Wl219 01:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
--Causes of Suicide-- Substance abuse stated so blatently has no place in this list. A person may be under the influence when they kill themself, but its almost always because of a deeper underlying problem.
The article makes interesting points about the differing rates of suicide by country around the world, and states that the rate of suicide to homicide is 3:2 in the USA. I want to know more. There should be a map or a table of suicide rates by country and by age and sex if possible. I strongly believe that the suicide rate in the United States is higher than Americans realize and that this is a fact the the country does not own up to or care to look at and admit. Or, a link to a separate article on 'suicide rates' should be supplied. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.178.36.234 ( talk) 21:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC).
While this doesn't fit the classical definition, I know people who have committed suicide in this way. Bo-Lingua 03:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I think this small section deserves its own main article - I've created a redirect, but the subject certainly has such scope to qualify for its own article. While I'm here, could I request someone actively contributing here please expand the lead section a little - even one paragraph would be enough. I'm looking to summarize the topic in death but the lead section is only a definition. Richard001 01:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
It says that Islam has consistently condemned suicide. This is very dubious. There are deliberate suicide attacks, and this is drawn from Islamic rhetoric about martyrdom and accepted as OK by significant numbers of Muslims. In fact the euphemism they are found under in Islamic media is 'martyrdom operation' or variants. I'm going to tag it dubious for now, as there is a problem here. The Behnam 15:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The use of suicide attacks aren't strictly prohibited in Islam as the article says, instead of that Islam highly motivate for suicide attacks on enemy troops in case of threatening Islam or Muslims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Husam2002jo ( talk • contribs) 15:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
...is a long list and doesn't belong on an overview of the subject. The summary, as is, is more than sufficient. SonoftheMorning 10:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
For those seriously considering suicide, it is worth remembering that the best method is probably via inhalation of nitrogen, helium or other noble gas as doing so is painless, effortless and virtually guaranteed to do the job - unlike so many other methods. ie quick and effective with little or no trauma. Tripod000 ( talk) 18:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Other sources state firmly that Canada has a much lower homocide/suicide rate relating to the dramatically lower number of firearms. Here, Canada has a much higher suicide rate than the USA. How reliable are ANY of the numbers? 207.178.98.79 ( talk) 02:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
The list of "causes of suicide" is too circumstantial with the specific examples. The article should thematically discuss that section and use the current list as examples. I would suggest Emile Durkheim's classic sociological model of suicide with the primary motives of suicide being Anomic (stress, grief, unemployment), Altruistic (ie sacrifice, cults, terrorism, etc.), and Egosistic (loneliness, absurdism). Overall it would present intentional causes in a more constructed, but not limiting, manner that the current list of examples lack in. Reesebw 05:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
The entire list of "causes of suicide" strikes me as an uncited brainstorm. PsYoP78 03:27, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
The following section isn't suicide, nor is it a type of suicide, and no relation to suicide is described (just a non-relation). This has left me wondering why it was included in the article in the first place. I've placed it here for discussion, in case there are important issues I've missed. The Transhumanist 23:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Self-harm is not a suicide attempt. There is a non-causal correlation between self-harm and suicide; both are most commonly a joint effect of depression. Social issues are key as SI is most common among those living in overcrowded conditions, loss of loved one(s), in conflict with their families, with disrupted childhoods and history of drinking and violence. Borderline personality disorder is another frequent psychological factor. Individuals under these stresses become anxious and depressed and then, usually in reaction to a single particular crisis, they attempt to harm themselves. The motivation may be a desire for relief from emotional pain or a desire for attention, although the motivation will often be complex and confused. Self-injury is the paradoxical practice that relies on inflicting pain and injury to relieve or communicate another pain.
This part of the article is ridiculous, but that is POV on my part. Though I do feel this is a stretch. I wanted to remove it outright but...
Umm... no. This is a general article about suicide, not really the right place for info on specific cases, unless they're extremely notable. To be honest, the Anna Halman article has had contested notability anyway, which together with its stub status seems to be motivating the merge suggestion. I suggest if notability is contested then send it to AfD; otherwise leave it as a stub, add more info to make notability clearer, or try and find another page to merge it into (something like List_of_suicides maybe?) Eve 12:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
It is nosense, of course. No reason for merge. -- Cinik 15:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
The Suicide article does not seem to list individual people who committed suicide, so merging Anna Halman here would not make sense. If she is added to List of suicides then her article would normally be kept as well, so that's not exactly a merge. Although Anna Halman survived a contested AfD recently, the passions seem to live on. Her case received attention on the BBC, and led to a statement (and maybe a policy change) by the Polish Minister of Education. This seems to establish notability, though the sources could be better. Any further discussion on this matter should (in my opinion) take place at Talk:Anna Halman, where no one has yet said anything about a merge. EdJohnston 13:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I think that ritual suicide could be merged into this article, seeing as it's currently just a paragraph long. Yay or nay? BigglesTh9 05:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
The article strikes me as presenting (or implying) one viewpoint as "the correct view", which it later amends. It also doesn't show the topic in overview very well at present. As an overview article of the subject, I think this can be done better.
The description of suicide starts with the statement "Considered by modern medicine to be a mental health issue, suicide may also be caused by psychological factors..." Only quite a bit later does it then add (as a somewhat minor note) that in some cultures it is seen as honorable or a means of protest, and it never mentions that the view of suicide as mental issue is far from universal culturally or historically. So it's never presented as the rich subject it is, or placed really in any other than a primarily clinical context. (Even then the medical view is very limited - a note on "cry for help" or repetition as a major feature of suicide attempts is crucial to note even in the intro.)
The overall view of suicide as a disapproved act and mental health issue is the appropriate majority view, but I think the topic as a whole needs the way it's presented (ie its "contexting" of this delicate subject) to be slightly improved. I've had a go, because the current view seems rather "pushing one specific viewpoint" (albeit the predominant western one). I've tried to ensure it doesnt get biased the other way by mistake. My approach has been to look at the intro and restructure it as follows, keeping the length sensible:
FT2 ( Talk | email) 13:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
or the so-called "right to die" The "so-called" can also be rephrased to "also known as". Right now it's POV by taking a stance against right to die. Even if the majority is against this, there is an article to cover it.
Adding something on Emile Durkheim's studies about suicide would be helpful. I also have plenty of support that identity issues such as homosexuality, being adopted (to some extent), etc are one issue rather than two issues which lead to the disconnection from society. Any objections on the above should be addressed before Sunday, upon which time I'll start the revising process. I just need an editor. -- Hitsuji Kinno 21:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
The first part before the table of contents, well, just read the headline. Mattbash 00:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
As I was looking at the page, I noticed that the table titled "Suicides per 100,000 people per year" should be on the right edge of the screen. It looks like it gets caught up by the graph above it. I would move it, but I'm new to this wiki thing and I don't know how.
~Doc Honcho~ 02:20, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
There are many ways to refer to the act of intentionally terminating one's life. The one employed here is slanted, or as we put it here, "POV." It criminalizes the act. After all, one "commits" suicide the same way one "commits" a crime, and the term is also semantically connected to "homicide" and "infanticide" (please do not mention "insecticide"). The etymological implication of course is that it is a killing, and a culpable one at that.
May I suggest a more neutral term, often used in antiquity: "voluntary death"? We could have a redirect page, or perhaps a separate article specifically about the crime of "suicide." Haiduc 02:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
The external links section seems to link to quite a few websites for suicide prevention and support groups, but I don't see a single link to a site for suicide promotion or assistance. Obviously, Wikipedia isn't supposed to be a how-to manual, but if there are external links on how to avoid suicide, I think that it's only the fair and balanced thing to do to post external links on how to go through with suicide (like, say, http://www.satanservice.org/tokus/suicide/guide/). The only way you can justify not doing so is to say that it's a worthier goal to prevent suicides than to promote them, which of course is the definition of a non-NPOV. ElHalo
What did Justiian's law code really say on this yopic? The linked 'reference" is not at all authoritattive, and does not mention Justinian anyway. I ask because the Wiki article on religious attitudes to suicide very nearly contradicts this one, stating that suicide to avoid trial was a crime and sin in 533 (ie presumably under Justinian's code of that year), and this was extended generally in 590.
This figure is essentially useless, since the key doesn't offer much. <13 what? Suicides per capita? Suicides a year? It should probably be removed, or replaced with something useful.
Not having seen this article for a while, my immediate reaction to the pictures in it was that they had the potential to glorify suicide. One potential outcome of this is copycat suicides. While there is a need to be NPOV about the subject, there is also a social responsibility to not contribute to further suicides. It is significant that neither the article on murder or homicide have pictures of victims despite the ready availability of such material. This brief entry is to encourage a debate about this. -- CloudSurfer 22:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I have Been Bold and changed "commit" to "complete". I see this was discussed and changed long ago before, but somehow got changed back to "commit." It might be even better to substitute most of these instances with "kill oneself" -- it would be the most neutral -- but maybe someone else.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Friarslantern ( talk • contribs) 23:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
you still wouldn't let it affect your debate. This is speculative, false, irrelevant and fallacious. Kindly refrain from attacking me personally.
This is a charge, but not an attack by any stretch of the imagination. Speculative? Perhaps. False, irrevlevant, fallacious? I suppose its possible, though it wouldn't be conscious on my part. But in order for me consider this, then tell me where you acknowledged or demonstrated above that the citation in question had an impression on you.
If you're frustrated about your inability to put together a convincing case for making unnecessary and subjective changes to basic language, I suggess you buy a stress ball or a boxing bag instead. Speculating on my perceived motivations is uncivil and can only detract from whatever merit your arguments may have.
No, I am frustrated by the arguments that you are using: that they are generally non-responsive to mine. This is a forum to discuss changes to articles, why they should or shouldn't be changed, and we're supposed to hash controversial changes out here it before making changes; if you will not logically engage some of my most cogent points, as I have quite straightforwardly requested, then you have the effect of walking away from the debate. I believe I have put together a convincing case, and it seems to me that you will not yield me a response on some of my most important points. Nevertheless, I will try to be more gentle from here on out.
and you come back with a webpage ([7]) Wordnet is the Princeton lexical database, i.e. a comprehensive and sophisticated cross-referenced dictionary. It's also the first result when you google "define 'x'". Do some cursory research before disparaging other people's sources next time. ¶
If you would read the section I wrote, I didn't disparage your source at all -- in fact, I will now be looking to use it in the future. I simply pointed out that it didn't appear that your source supported your argument -- but rather that it supported my argument. You could disagree, & clarify how it supports your side. But otherwise, on the face of it, it goes to my position about connotation.
I have explained why I feel "commit" is not NPOV, Precisely. Why you feel. Not how you can prove that it is POV, not how you can rationally and objectively demonstrate that it is POV. A feeling is not sufficient reason to obliterate all uses of a common idiom from Wikipedia. This is clearly unacceptable practice. 138.192.140.22 23:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
The sad thing here is, my whole point is quite arguable, but you refuse to engage me on something where you actually have the advantage, instead, you fall back on a needless appeal to popularity. Granted, if enough people think that a)"commit suicide" is not loaded with any particular bias (which I'll concede, that the vast majority wouldn't say it is biased, at least when asked point blank); AND either b)"kill oneself" sticks out as awkward or too novel, or c)that the absence of use of "commit suicide" in itself feels awkward upon reading it, then my mind would be changed. But while I concede a), I don't concede b) or c), and therefore -- because "commit" has a negative connotation (which I pretty much have proven), and, I propose, "commit suicide" has a biased subtext and/or is euphemistic (my weakest point, but, ironically, one which you stop short of fully addressing) -- I am still left with the conviction that changing "commit suicide" to "kill oneself" is worth any minor awkward stylistic qualities (which qualities I can't imagine -- can you?) it might engender in order to make the article's language less judgmental, and more neutral. Friarslantern 17:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure I remember reading a Bible passage saying that the body is a temple and desecreation of the temple is a sin, so I believe there is a specific passage thats says no to suicide. Have to dig up my Bible and check on that specifically, but 1 minute of Google searching brought up 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have recieved from God? You are not your own, you were brought with a price. Therefore honor God with your body." This also seems to make obesity a sin and state that we are all slaves to the church... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.17.155.35 ( talk) 03:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
We need something in the Cultural section on how the shameful aspect of suicide (as evidenced, for example, in the continuing use of "commit" as the verb) is still prevalent in most cultures. It's also a factor that could be mentioned in the Impact of Suicide section - that the isolation survivors feel is not only due to their own grief, questioning and guilt feelings, but also to an automatic aversion that many people feel -- possibly due to the culturally shameful aspect of the act, possibly due to questions about the role that the survivors could have had in preventing or causing the suicide -- towards suicide, which manifests itself frequently as a reflexive withdrawl of contact or support towards people normally considered friends, people, who -- it's my sense -- would receive ample, more immediate support had their family member/loved one been murdered. In other words, there is a primitive taboo about it that survives in modern, industrialized culture -- about even discussing it. I'm nearly positive there's serious research out there to this effect, would need references.... (In general, this article could use more references.....). Friarslantern 16:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I kind of feel like killing myself today. Probably due to the fact that I edited Wikipedia - the methampetamine article, taking out stupid shit like "injection may be the safest way to use this drug" - when I used to do meth, and my bosses decided to riff and laugh on it one day after everything fell apart (or at least that's what I heard secondhand through the grapevine), and laughed at me when I couldn't and still can't make a living. It's not a good idea, but those are my feelings, and since Wiki helped me take away my job I figure it can take my confession. ;) What an idiot I was to be honest about my identity on Wiki... Don't ever do it, guys!!! Discuss! 76.170.206.69 12:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
I am confused. How did wiki take your job? Were you fired for editing a meth article or (more likely) for being a meth addict? You sound incredibly paranoid, which is a symptom of amphetamine abuse. Please seek help, if you're still alive.
Hi all, I was reading over the intro when I came across the line "Most Western and Asian religions—the Abrahamic religions, Buddhism, Hinduism—consider suicide a dishonorable act; in the West it was regarded as a serious crime and offense against God due to religious belief in the sanctity of life." This is problematic - as written it conflates present religious attitudes with past cultural views all while collapsing all of Western thinking on the subject into one negative assessment. Western culture may have viewed suicide as a serious crime, but no longer, you don't go to jail or get probation for attempting suicide. As for all of w. culture viewing it as an offense against God, I think that's way too general and assumes a religious viewpoint for all western people, many of whom identify as agnostic or atheistic. Also the phrase "serious crime" probably shouldn't be used in conjunction with civil institutions (like all of western culture) when the frame of reference is spiritual and not secular. I suggest changing the wording to remove the ref. to western culture or rewrite it as two or more seperate sentences. Phyesalis 19:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
There is some ambiguity in this article: in it's defining line, the article states "Suicide (Latin sui caedere, to kill oneself) is the act of intentionally terminating ones own life." However, throughout the article there is reference to "accidental" suicide. How can intentionally terminating ones own life become accidental. I'm thinking either the definition needs to change, terminology needs to change surrounding "accidental", or something needs to be added to make it clearer how intentional acts can be "accidental". PsYoP78 03:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
goodbye world —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.194.72 ( talk) 08:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
The caption for the photograph "Two Japanese Imperial Marines who committed suicide" says they "committed hari-kari by shooting themselves." This is incorrect as hara-kiri is the English word for "seppuku" meaning ritual suicide by disembowelment, not shooting. I suggest this caption be amended to simply "committed suicide by shooting themselves". -- 81.1.82.39 ( talk) 22:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
The standalone article has developed independent of the section in the parent article - though hasn't moved beyond a stub. Having two separate articles on the same topic creates a WP:CFORK. Having one article in one place allows people to work together to build the information in a progressive and organised fashion. When/if the information becomes too much to be contained within the section in the parent article then it can be broken out in summary style. A sub-topic is usually discussed within the parent topic as much as possible until it needs breaking out due to amount of information. If the amount of information is three paragraphs or less (a stub length) then it is unlikely to need breaking out. SilkTork * SilkyTalk 12:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
In the murder-suicide section, Chris Beniot's act was called "famous". I believe this word should be replaced with "infamous" or "notorious." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.254.45 ( talk) 16:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not here to start a flamewar. This is rather something I've noticed; why are the first (three I think) images on the page all of or pertaining to the USA? It seems odd that an article discussing this sort of "international act" should start with more than a couple of pictures of statistics from only one country (and the first two only regarding white males and females), why isn't the image of the suicide rate of the world or something more international used? Also, I was quickly passing through this article so this might be splitting hairs but I noticed two consecutive images with the caption "...suicide, rather then surrendering to U.S. somethings". I don't know why but there's something I don't like about that, but I'm having a hard time formulating it- maybe that it gives me the impression that the soldiers were so frightened of the US soldiers that they would rather die than fight them- this may as well be a silly point but I can't help getting that impression. I'm not trying to be anti-American (even though I'm pointing these things out :P), nor am I Japanese or German so I'd like to think I'm relatively unbiased. I just thought I should point the impressions I got from it. :) -- BiT ( talk) 02:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Mention if suicide has been observed in animals other than humans, and why, e.g., being last in the pecking order? Jidanni ( talk) 21:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, some animals do commit suicide. Well, lemmings do, though they may not know they are doing it, they may think the ocean has an opposite shore they are trying to reach. The snare ( talk) 05:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, has there ever been any case of animal suicide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.10.36 ( talk) 05:37, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
To date, no one has been able to demonstrate definitively that suicide exists in animals. Lemmings, scorpions, whales, dogs, termites and other animals do not intentionally kill themselves. And although it is true that some parasites make their host kill itself1, the use of the world suicide in animals remains metaphorical. On a different scale, scientists have observed that some cells self-destruct, particularly during embryonic development. But it is their environment that causes them to die2.
1. To ensure its own survival, the nematomorph, a parasite of the cricket and locust, changes the insect's behaviour, causing it to jump into water and die. Source: Nature, 6 April 2006. 2. This phenomenon of self-destruction, also known as apoptosis or programmed cell death, is for example responsible for the formation of the fingers. Without it our hands would be shaped like mittens.
Jidanni ( talk) 12:53, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Eyewitness evidence from Jonestown's defectors/survivors suggests that many victims were coerced at gunpoint to "commit suicide" or murdered by other means if they did not comply with Jim Jones's orders. The majority of the commune's victims may have been murdered rather than willing participants of a suicide plot. The term "peer pressure" is insufficient to cover the causes of the tragedy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.226.104.225 ( talk) 22:13, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
We should have a section for that too,it's been proven that other animals commit suicde 98.14.15.12 ( talk) 19:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
{{
editsemiprotected}}
*
If You Feel Suicidal Right Now!)
This topic indicates no more external links. If that's true, please remove one of the existing ones and add this to replace it. NO external link is more important!
I actually added this link july 16, 2008, but it's not here now. I could not find it anywhere in the logs. As I said then and repeat now, I was myself suicidal and could find no link for help HERE in this entry in Wikipedia ...the most logical place for people in trouble to look and exactly where I came. Had I not stumbled upon the site I'm trying to add, i would not be here now trying to add it. It is respectful, supportive, unbiased, and honest. PLEASE!
Mokeyboy ( talk) 10:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC) Mokeyboy
First of all suicide is bad!! The practice of Sati is not sanctioned by any authoritative text in Hinduism. It started as a voluntary excessive and peer pressure gradually led to more following during the middle ages. But thankfully apart from a few stray cases, this is unheard of, and outlawed in India today. I should hope somebody changes the "Sati is" on the Suicide page to "Sati was". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.8.230.53 ( talk) 22:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
See my (Stuart Sovatsky) Words From the Soul: Time, East/West Spirituality and Psychotherapeutic Narrative. (Albany: SUNY Press, 1998)Chapter 2 "Revenge Against Impermanence, Temporal-Spiritual Psychopathology" for a discussion of the grammatics (specifically, the predominant use of the past-tense in narrating one's life-story, as often happens in the course of various forms of psychotherapy, and also the contraction "it's" [all over] that conflates traumatic events of the past into a single, tiny word, "it," coupled to the tiny present-tense of to be, "is" lost in the single "s") of the English language that underlie suicidal language that guides suicidal actions. The chapter also covers themes of existential and Buddhist impermanence of life that suicide hopes to permanently "end." It discusses temporal indeterminacy as a therapeutic basis for hope and relief from the suicidal narrative. The chapter is based on the earlier article in The Review of Existential Psychiatry and Psychology, "Clinical Contemplations on Impermanence: Temporal and Linguistic Factors in Client Hopelessness." 21-23, 1993, 153-79. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuartcsova ( talk • contribs) 00:32, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
The reference for Nero's suicide is correct (29) BUT he did not commit suicide because of the fire of Rome. I would erase the last part of that sentence; leaving Nero's death as an example of Roman views on disgrace. I'm NOT doing it as this is a semi-protected page and I'm too lazy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slaclos ( talk • contribs) 21:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
{{
editsemiprotected}}
I have no account, but someone who has might like to correct the following error:
In footnote 28 and under "further reading" the title of the book by Geo Stone is quoted as "Suicide and failed suicide". The real title is "Suicide and attempted suicide".
84.61.8.40 (
talk)
17:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Done
Marek.69
talk
22:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
The "Suicide as Esacpe" section needs to be proofread. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.192.147.206 ( talk) 21:17, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Can't edit article at present, ref for Beachy Head is: [10] 78.146.120.132 ( talk) 20:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
Please add above link as a reference where 'citation needed is, at end of 'Suicide Locations' paragraph. Reference text: Beachy Head - Suicide Spot,
BBC Inside Out.
89.240.13.162 (
talk)
18:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Seems to me like the article doesn't discuss what mental events transpire while overcoming the survival instinct as a person decides to take their life. As in, how a person rationalizes suicide to the point of trumping this instinct. Does this belong here? -- 86.197.188.189 ( talk) 20:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
"It is estimated that each suicide in the United States leaves an average of six people intimately affected by the death, either as a spouse, parent, significant other, sibling, or child of the deceased person. These people are referred to as survivors."
It is estimated that 80% of all in home suicide scenes are cleaned up by a close friend, significant other, or a family member. Those that clean up a suicide scene of a close friend, significant other, or a family member are 75% more likely to commit suicide later on in life.
I have removed the text about 'cleaning up' and the 75% statistic as the referenced did not give credible data for the citing of these statistics. Feel free to put them back in if a more sound source can be found. For your second point about the term 'survivor', this is a very common term used by the mental health service user community - the survivor movement is very well known. See for example these wikipedia pages: World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry, Psychiatric survivors movement. Jenafalt ( talk) 11:18, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Removed Globalize and Refimprove as their placement was judgmental given that there are 50 in-line references, a clear indication of both some cross-country comparisons and appropos this being the English wiki some concentration on the US. The other language wikis have developed articles and the degree of both these attributes is appropriate for the current article length. If they are justified then expand and others probably are as well. Lycurgus ( talk) 04:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Please leave only one line of white space. 68.148.149.184 ( talk) 09:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
The korean former president, Ro moo hyen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moneyjack123 ( talk • contribs) 02:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
-Recently,my book 'Suicide and Evolution: A Philosophical Analysis of the Definition of Suicide and an Examination of the Relationship Between Suicide and Evolution' was published by Muller Verlag- ISBN 978-3-639-13444-5. I suggest that the general ideas from this book should be added to the Wikipedia article on Suicide under the section Philosophical Perspectives. I would be happy to provide a summary, in order to increase the common perception of the relationship between suicide and evolution. In my book, I first provide a historical-philosophical account of suicide including Plato, Immanuel Kant, and David Hume. Then I detail the relevant theoretical shifts within evolutionary theory that provide an enhanced understanding of the phenomenon of suicide. Finally, I provide an action theoretic analysis of the definition and extension of suicide. I am new to Wikipedia and apparently cannot change the content of the article, though I assure you that I am well qualified to write on this topic. Metabenji ( talk) 19:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello, you may want to include the International Association for Suicide Prevention (IASP) (www.iasp.info) in your external links. Many thanks Iasp suicide ( talk) 18:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Under the religion, it states one of the ten commandments as being "thou shall not kill" This is incorrect for the bible states "thou shall not murder" there is a huge difference between the two-- 70.128.42.216 ( talk) 02:34, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
I am going to start work on universalising the article by taking out the data and diagrams that solely focus on suicide in the USA and adding back in more universal statements. Perhaps the references to suicide in the USA could then be moved into their own page? Jenafalt ( talk) 20:49, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm looking for opinions on whether or not there should be a short paragraph within the page which is concerned with suicide prevention. I think its missing one. What do you think? Jenafalt ( talk) 21:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Is there any information on whether suicide has been observed in animals? A very interesting topic, but there is nothing about it in the article. Suit Endeavour ( talk) 01:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Do anti-depressants cause suicide and should more information be provided on this topic in the article? Neurofish ( talk) 19:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Neurostar
It's often claimed that suicide rates in the Scandinavian countries are extremely high, but that doesn't seem to be the case according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate . Perhaps this should be mentioned? 88.88.186.149 ( talk) 17:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
May I add a link to Debt bondage which causes lots of suicide, even in children whose parents can't get out of debt, & being upset about being unable to dress like their friends, do what friends do, etc? Stars4change ( talk) 02:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Given that people who are ideating about suicide might search it on the internet and end up here is it appropriate to give a support link here? What do others think? Jenafalt ( talk) 19:11, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I found this one, Befrienders World Wide which is a world wide website for helplines. What do you think?-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 02:39, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I've now added the link to Befrienders in the external links section. Jenafalt ( talk) 12:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
In the article, under the "France" heading, someone stated--"During the Napoleonic era, suicide was seen as an acceptable way to release oneself from a dishonorable circumstance (such as bankruptcy). and i don't like the French".
The latter sentence should be removed. I'm new to editing Wiki articles and I'm not sure if this is the appropriate way to address this, so please forgive my ignorance. Adri71 ( talk) 21:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
This is the wrong article, it was this article Cultural views of suicide where that text was. It was vandalism which I have reverted. See this link. You can check the edit history and click on the recent edits to undo or revert vandalism or else fix it by manually editing the article.-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 21:41, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
An editor keeps adding back citations of the watch tower organisation for medical statistics. This is not an appropriate reference per WP:MEDRS. I am not going to revert again as I have aleady reverted this editor twice. I would recommend discussion here if the deletion of the citations are still challenged.-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 21:04, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help) "Globally, an estimated 815,000 people killed themselves in 2000, making suicide the 13th leading cause of death.1 During the last 45 years, suicide rates have increased by 60% worldwide. Suicide is now among the 3 leading causes of death of those aged 15–44 years.1,2 Suicide attempts are up to 20 times more frequent than completed suicides.1" Still not completely happy with this ref though.
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
02:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)Is this map based on a data set or just a derivative of the WHO map found here? http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/suicideprevent/en/ Either way it should probably be referenced. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 02:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Like to add interactive world map Current Worldwide Suicide Rate as a external link. What you guys think about that. Thiagarajan Varadharaju ( talk) 17:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Ordered per WP:MEDMOS needs a section on the history of suicide. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 20:31, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Good job.-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 22:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
IMO images are best if set a default. A couple are currently set at 250. All should be aware that they can set preferences for default pictures from 180 to what ever they wish. Any other thoughts? Removing Antarctica would improve the image. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Nice work on the gender specific maps, James. Would you consider that placing them with the subsection "Gender and suicide" would be as appropriate? At present, any browser wider than about 1340px will have the maps floating against the image above it, rather than the right margin. Moving them down a section avoids that problem on all browsers up to and including 1920px wide. -- RexxS ( talk) 03:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Reffering to the Jim Jones Guyana Massacre, i think it would be great to mention that people were pressured into it did not knowingly drink the poison or have a choice in the matter. The reason for this request is that my aunt died in this massacre and i would like it very much if would do her and me this honor. Respectly, Lenni Johnston. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.45.227 ( talk) 06:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Here is an interesting paper: Ajdacic-Gross V, Weiss MG, Ring M; et al. (2008).
"Methods of suicide: international suicide patterns derived from the WHO mortality database". Bull. World Health Organ. 86 (9): 726–32.
PMC
2649482.
PMID
18797649. {{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
18:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help){{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Parasuicide ("suicide attempts") was redirected here almost two years ago, but isn't included in this article. Can someone either fix this omission, or recreate a ( properly sourced) article on the subject? (I'm not watching this page.) WhatamIdoing ( talk) 07:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
There's a bit of abuse of statistics here. The article states that 40% of world's suicides are accounted for by Japan, India and China combined. This suggests that that's a high proportion whereas in reality as almost 39% of the world's population lives there, it's hardly a significant statistic.
ItsIllak ( talk) 23:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Can we also say something about the ridiculous introduction? One of the most puzzling, intensely personal experiences in the world and you aim to attribute it to a cluster of mental illnesses and warning signs that precede the act. It is entirely disingenuous and characteristic of mock-objective pseudoscience.
Acts motivated by self-harm are not considered suicidal attempts, as the text points out. But the following sentence, that the is no causal relationship between the two, is unwarranted and controversial. At least one theorist, Thomas Joiner, in "Why people die by suicide",posits that acts of self-harm can precipitate suicide attemps. The author speculates that the experience of pain during self-harm can provide to the sufferer a mental image of what is expected during self-affliction of pain, thereby alleviating some inhibition towards a suicidal attempt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.85.5.20 ( talk) 10:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
One aspect of the "escape" motivation for suicide that I have not seen addressed: Have there ever been studies to determine what percentage of suicides and suicide attempts are undertaken by individuals who believe that death will usher in some sort of better, higher, or even merely benign afterlife (e.g., heaven, reincarnation, etc.) versus those who hold no such beliefs and desire annihilation or non-existence in preference to suffering? If such studies have been done, a brief summation of the findings would be a useful addition to this article. StanislavJ ( talk) 12:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Up to... should not be used in delivering statistical information unless you deliberately seek to mislead the reader —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.108.164.214 ( talk) 22:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
That is is what the article says in the second paragraph, however I can't seem to find solid, recent statistics verifying that suicide is the tenth leading cause of death worldwide. It seems to be generally shown between the 9th and the 14th, but I don't know which is the most accurate and recent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Micropsia ( talk • contribs) 21:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
A section on Suicide Pacts would be a good addition. S-Britland ( talk) 18:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
This article only discusses humans. Is there any incidence of suicidal behavior in animals? As in, animals that consciously choose to end their lives, not animals who are prone to killing themselves by accident. -- 86.197.188.189 ( talk) 20:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
The social insects- ants and termites especially- provide remarkable instances of self sacrifice for the sake of the group. Clearly, these insects lack the intentionality that human being have and thus it is difficult to assert that they are instances of suicide. However, from an evolutionary perspective the instinctual self sacrifice of the soldier ant provides a stronger case for the adaptive nature of the act precisely because humans can have goals other than evolutionary. I take up these issues in 'Suicide and Evolution: A Philosophical Analysis of the Definition of Suicide and an Examination of the Relationship Between Suicide and Evolution' ISBN 978-3-639-13444-5. Metabenji ( talk) 19:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Clearly this phrase is the norm, but doesn't it imply that suicide is a crime? Could this be addressed in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.71.103 ( talk) 04:51, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Might not the perceived meaninglessness of life also be cited as a reason for suicide? Tisane ( talk) 09:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
There should be something about the tendency, particularly among journalists, to view suicides as an opportunity to practice one's creative writing. For example, journalists often completely ignore the sources of authoritative information on suicide, such as the CDC's fact sheets (www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/suicide/index.html), in favor of something out of their own imagination. Godofredo29 ( talk) 16:25, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Would you care to pull at least one example out of an orafice of your choosing? I'm not saying you're not right, I'm just saying I have no idea where you are going with this or what you are trying to say. What exactly are people imagining and how does this contradict the "facts"? I'm truly interested. 213.167.158.254 ( talk) 12:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
So one in 4000 people kill themselves? And 1 in 400 try? Daniel Christensen ( talk) 00:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
This article could us a section on prevention. Have created one just by taking some info from Suicide prevention Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 12:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
i dont agree with suicide and i feel that people should tell some one how they feel before killing them selfs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.206.224.210 ( talk) 10:08, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
In the "Substance Abuse Section" it is claimed that "Up to 25% of drug addicts and alcoholics commit suicide". This seems to be an outrageously high number; I have known many alcoholics and drug addicts and not a single one has committed suicide. Such a dramatic claim should be supported by a proper citation; however, there is no citation to substantiate the claim that one in four addicts will kill themselves. I tried to remove the line, but I don't think I am able to edit this page, so if anyone can edit this page please remove the line or provide a proper citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.128.166 ( talk) 21:36, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.
The following request appears on that page:
![]() | Many of the articles were selected semi-automatically from a list of indefinitely semi-protected articles. Please confirm that the protection level appears to be still warranted, and consider unprotecting instead, before applying pending changes protection to the article. |
Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.
Please update the Queue page as appropriate.
Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC).
This AfD may interest some of you.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 14:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Some animals commit suicide too; shouldn't we mention that? Tisane talk/ stalk 06:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
It would be a good epitaph
Here Lies John Doe
He went home to be with the Lord
After exploding and covering his enemies
With sticky goo
Moved from Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Suicide-Too_much_information.3F
Hi, I am concerned by the level of detail contained in the entry for 'suicide'. I am aware that there are strict guidelines journalists have to adhere to when reporting any information about suicide. I wondered why these do not apply to Wikipedia. I have lost people close to me to suicide and am worried that Wikipedia's entry reads very much like an irresponsible 'how to' guide in places. This could prove fatal to a vulnerable, distressed person trawling the internet for sources of support and help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.77.107 ( talk) 12:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I would object to that whole principle of ignorance is strength, that holds that we can prevent suicide by getting rid of information about it. True, we would perhaps reduce the number of people who commit suicide after reading our suicide-related articles, but correlation is not causation. It is quite possible that a lot of suicidal people struggle to understand their feelings, and in their search for meaning, browse through our articles after doing a Google search. Much of the suicide-related information on the Internet is biased one way or the other, or laden with emotional propaganda, and thus not ideal for people who try to approach such decisions from a logical, unbiased point of view. Wikipedia can hopefully provide a source of balanced, factual information that will be useful to researchers attempting to understand suicide epidemics, suicidal people themselves, surviving family members of suicides, etc.
Even the suicide methods page can serve a legitimate harm reduction purpose. E.g., if people know that laying on a railroad track is not a surefire method of painless suicide, maybe they won't do that. Likewise, it might cause someone to reconsider his plan to kill himself with a .22 caliber rifle when he finds out that can cause permanent brain damage without killing him. More information is a good thing; consider that we also have pages on cross site scripting that could be useful to newbie hackers, but the info is probably even more useful to those seeking to safeguard their sites from such hackers. Tisane talk/ stalk 19:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I have reverted these changes until they can be added again with a better range of sources. There is a great deal of debate about the psychological causes of suicide and this needs to be reflected in a discussion which gives information from a wider range of sources. These sources are all articles by the same person (and give links to a personal webpage at manchester university). Since the user who added these pages also added similar text to other pages on the same day and citing the same sources then it looks also as if this might be some sort of academic self-promotion. Jenafalt ( talk) 20:35, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry I must have been in a grumpy mood when I made that comment. I was just alerted to the fact that this person had added work from the same sources to multiple pages after not having edited Wikipedia since last year. It rang some alarm bells. I'll try to not be so suspicious in the future! To clarify - I think it would be fine to re-add this information to the page, but it needs to be much more balanced as the text and related sources that were added only relate to one small aspect of this very complex and contentious issue. Jenafalt ( talk) 12:26, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
The first sentence read "Suicide is the act of a human being intentionally causing his own death." I changed it from "his" to "his or her", because suicide can be attributed to both men and women. If anyone wishes to change it back or change it to something else, they are welcome to do so, but I do not think it should only be attributed to men. LaughinSkull ( talk) 10:24, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that the picture of Thomas Chatterton be removed, or at least displayed less prominently in the article. The article is not about suicide in the romantic movement, romantic literature, or other such subjects - it's about suicide in general. A picture of a Romantic poet is hardly appropropriate to an article about a mental health care issue of this kind. It also runs the risk of glamorizing suicide, making it look exciting, sexy, romantic or whatever. Surely it's obvious that we shouldn't be doing that?
UserVOBO (
talk)
23:54, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I think there's a bit of a problem with the wording under this heading. It says:
"It appears that about one in three teen aged suicides is by a gay or lesbian. Since homosexuals represent only about 5% of the population, gays and lesbians are greatly over-represented."
I'm not sure if it is gramatically incorrect to use "gay" as a noun, but it is certainly offensive. As well as this, the author has not specified that the statistics are from the US. Perhaps this sentance should instead read thus:
"It appears that, of the teenagers who commit suicide in the US, about one in three are known to be gay. As only approximately 5% of the population is openly gay, this statistic suggests that teenagers who are gay are far more likely to commit suicide than those who not."
However, since the pervious sentence was copied directly from a website which does not seem particularly reliabe, and is very vague about facts, I think it would be better to use the more convincing evidence from and existing Wikiedpia article entitled "Suicide among LGBT youth":
A 1989 U.S. government study found that LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender) youth are two to three times more likely to attempt suicide than other young people.[1] This finding was supported by a 2001 study that found LGBT adolescents 2.3-2.5 times more likely to commit suicide than their heterosexual peers.[2]
And I copied their references: 1 ^ Feinleib, Marcia R., Ed. Report of the Secretary's Task Force on Youth Suicide. Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration (DHHS/PHS), Rockville, MD. 1989 2 ^ Russell ST, Joyner K (August 2001). "Adolescent sexual orientation and suicide risk: evidence from a national study". Am J Public Health 91 (8): 1276–81. PMID 11499118. PMC 1446760. http://www.ajph.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=11499118.
I would suggest also linking this page, but since the Suicide article is not specific to America as this LGBT article seems (for some reason) to be only about the US, this does not seem like such a good idea. Certainly I think that this section should include statistics about other countries, which I will spend some time finding later.
Emould ( talk) 02:56, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
==Representations of suicide in popular culture==
Film
- In The Godfather Part II (1974), Corleone Family consiglieri, Tom Hagen, and caporegime, Frank Pentangeli, make a deal. The Family will take care of Frank's dependents if Frank - who entered the Witness Protection Program and intended to testify about the Corleone Family's criminal activities in court, but ultimately did not - will pay penance for the intended disloyalty by slitting his wrists, Roman style, while taking a bath.
- The war drama, The Deer Hunter (1978), deals with such controversial issues as suicide, post-traumatic stress disorder, infidelity and mental illness.
- Heathers (1989) deals with the themes of individual and mass suicide by teenagers.
- The 1993 novel, The Virgin Suicides, and the 1999 film based on the book center on the suicides of five sisters in Grosse Pointe, Michigan during the 1970s. The Lisbon girls' suicides fascinate their community as their neighbors struggle to find an explanation for the acts.
Television
- HBO's series, The Sopranos, frequently addresses the theme of suicide.
- Three characters successfully kill themselves: mobster Eugene Pontecorvo (in " Members Only") and Tony Soprano's emotionally unstable comare, Gloria Trillo (as we learn in " Everybody Hurts"), both hang themselves when they feel trapped by their lives, and corrupt, heavily indebted policeman, Vin Makazian, jumps off a bridge (in " Nobody Knows Anything") after he has been arrested and must turn in his gun and badge.
- At least two successful suicides by characters' acquaintances are cited: Tony's sister, Janice Soprano, tells Tony (in " Everybody Hurts") that her neighbor in Seattle killed himself by "sucking down the end of a deer rifle", and Dr. Jennifer Melfi tells Tony that one of her patients committed suicide while Melfi was on the lam (in " Guy Walks Into a Psychiatrist's Office...".
- Several other characters contemplate, threaten, or bungle suicide attempts: Tony Soprano's ex-comare, Irina, threatens to kills herself (in " The Knight in White Satin Armor"), Artie Bucco - perhaps Tony's best friend - attempts suicide by mixing pills and liquor (in " Everybody Hurts"), A.J. Soprano unsuccessfully attempts suicide by drowning (in " The Second Coming") - which is fortunate, since he ultimately wants to live - and Tony's sister, Janice Soprano, confides to Bobby Baccalieri (in " Pie-O-My") that she came close to shooting herself when her husband left her, but was saved by thoughts of her son, Harpo.
- Tony Soprano dreams about self-immolation (in " Funhouse"), but denies his suicidal ideations in " The Legend of Tennessee Moltisanti", when he asks whether or not Christopher has ever contemplated suicide and Chris responds: "Suicide is for the weak".
- The British soap opera series, Brookside, regularly wrote characters out by means of suicide, such as Petra Taylor, Theresa Nolan, Liam Riley, Graeme Curtis, Clive Crosbie and Simon Howe - who committed suicide - and Gladys Charlton - who died after an assisted suicide.
This will need refs else it appears to be little more than original research. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 13:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
{{ edit semi-protected}} "Counter-arguments include the following: that the sixth commandment is more accurately translated as "thou shalt not murder", not necessarily applying to the self; that taking one's own life no more violates God's Law than does curing a disease; and that a number of suicides by followers of God are recorded in the Bible with no dire condemnation.[98]" should be omitted because in Catholic doctrine there is no arguing whether or not suicide is a sin, it is a sin beacause murdering also includes yourself. i also think that methods of suicide should be ommitted so that people wont get ideas of how to commit suicide.
22butter22 ( talk) 03:48, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Whether one believes suicide is a great evil from which a person must be rescued from, or whether one views the choice between life or death as a basic human right - it's impossible to deny that this is a matter of (polarising) debate. The article currently bears six external links, *all* six fervently in support of the former stance. Can we balance this out a little?
It's as if the 'external links' on the Homosexuality page were to point to, say, some speech from the Pope, Ann Coulter's website, and the Westboro Baptist Church... it just makes an otherwise very good article look unnecessarily 'opinionated'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.74.250 ( talk) 02:19, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
An interesting study [15] Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if maybe it would be a good idea to add a hatnote suggesting the user where he could find help should the individual want to commit suicide. I know there are some links at the bottom but maybe something more visible might help better? when you make a google search for suicide there is a link to the National Suicide Prevention Line in the US. Thanks -- Camilo Sanchez ( talk) 23:59, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Over two days have passed since user 'Camilo Sanchez' added an utterly un-encyclopedic (not to mention bigoted) link at the top of this page. Could someone whose account is privileged enough kindly revert back to the last good edit, by user 'GraemeS'? Tiresias79 ( talk) 18:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
{{ edit semi-protected}} Please include Samaritans of Singapore (SOS) in the External Links section as this can be a relevant site (www.sos.org.sg) for users who may want to find out more about suicide prevention and resources. SOS is a non-profit organization which aims to provide 24-hour confidential emotional support to people in crisis, thinking of suicide or affected by suicide in Singapore. SOS is also an affliation of Befrienders Worldwide, which is listed as an external link. Thank you for your consideration.
203.125.207.182 ( talk) 11:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}} "Since homosexuals represent only about 5% of the population, gays and lesbians are greatly over-represented." Given the disputed numbers of the people who are homosexual/bisexual, either self-identified or in practice, the percentage of people who are homosexual in the article should be footnoted / commented that the 5% figure is disputed. Reference the percentage of people who engage in homosexual acts in the Kinsey Report and other more recent studies.
Nearly 10% of Self-Proclaimed 'Straight' Men Only Have Sex With Men By Daniel J. DeNoon WebMD Health NewsReviewed by Louise Chang, MD
Sept. 18, 2006 --
Nearly one in 10 men who say they're straight have sex only with other men, a New York City survey finds.
And 70% of those straight-identified men having sex with men are married.
In fact, 10% of all married men in this survey report same-sex behavior during the past year.
See URL below for the remainder of the article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_scale http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/research/ak-hhscale.html http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=single-angry-straight-male http://www.webmd.com/sex/news/20060918/many-straight-men-have-gay-sex 76.189.127.64 ( talk) 01:15, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)===Sexual Orientation===Data concerning young homosexuals is somewhat unreliable. It appears that about one in three teen aged suicides is by a gay or lesbian. Since homosexuals represent only about 5% of the population, gays and lesbians are greatly over-represented. [1]
Several population-based studies have reported an elevated risk of death by suicide [2] suicide attempts [3] and suicide ideation among traumatic brain injury survivors [4] It has been suggested that this is related to hormone deficiencies caused by pituitary damage, a frequent concomitant of head injury [5] [6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joannalane48 ( talk • contribs) 23:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Please change (under heading Suicide Risk Factors - Biological") the following
BiologicalGenetics has an effect on suicide risk[57] accounting for 30–50% of the variance.[58] Much of this relationship acts through the heritability of mental illness.[58] There is also evidence to suggest that if a parent has committed suicide, it is a strong predictor of suicide attempts among the offspring.[59]
to
BiologicalGenetics has an effect on suicide risk[57] accounting for 30–50% of the variance.[58] Much of this relationship acts through the heritability of mental illness.[58] There is also evidence to suggest that if a parent has committed suicide, it is a strong predictor of suicide attempts among the offspring.[59]
Several population-based studies have reported an elevated risk of death by suicide, [1] suicide attempts, [2] and suicide ideation among traumatic brain injury survivors [3]. It has been suggested that this is related to hormone deficiencies caused by pituitary damage, a frequent consequence of head injury [4], [5].
[edit] = References =1.^ Teasdale TW, Engberg AW, “Suicide after traumatic brain injury: a population study.” J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry (2001; 71: 436-440) 2.^ Silver JM, Kramer R, Greenwald S, Weissman M, “The Association between head injuries and psychiatric disorders: findings from the New Haven NIMH Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study,” Brain Inj (2001: 15: 935-945) 3.^ Simpson G, Tate R. “Suicidality after traumatic brain injury: demographic, injury and clinical correlates.” Psychological Medicine (2002; 32: 687-98) 4.^ Popovic V, Aimaretti G, Casanueva FF, Ghigo E. “Hypopituitarism following traumatic brain injury.” Growth Hormone and IGF Research (2005; 15: 3: 177-184) 5.^ Schneider HJ, Kreitschmann-Andermahr I, Ghigo E, Stalla GK, Agha A. “Hypothalamopituitary dysfunction following traumatic brain injury and aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. A systematic review.” JAMA (2007; 26:1429-38)
Joannalane48 ( talk) 22:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
You may consider adding this external link to a 2003 monograph on suicide available online at Towards a Suicide Free Society: Identify Suicide Prevention as Public Health Policy Philosophypsychiatry ( talk) 04:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}} Joannalane48 ( talk) 11:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
This phrase raises some questions: "Up to 25% of drug addicts and alcoholics commit suicide ...[30]" ( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1932152). While it is cited, and not a dead link, it is only a link to an abstract and not the entire article.
In the article's 2nd paragraph, it says "Over one million people commit suicide every year ... [3]". http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1932152
However, the WHO also says that there are over 140 million alcoholics worldwide ( http://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/2001/english/20010219_youngpeoplealcohol.en.html). If the original citation in the suicide entry is correct (25% of alcoholics and drug addicts commit suicide), the number of suicides would 35 million counting ONLY alcoholics. I wonder if the original citation (to the abstract) meant to say that 25% of suicide victims are attributable to alcohol/drug abuse? It appears the numbers don't add up and that something is amiss here.
Thanks for your time!
Ongaku72 ( talk) 22:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Guys, I realize that Wikipedia is meant to be a "Neutral" and empirical source of knowledge that has a strict set of rules and guidelines. That being said; it's a reasonable assumption to make that people considering committing suicide would looking at the topic on the internet. Wikipedia is one of the internet's largest websites; links to it are vast and everyone knows about it. Could a banner be placed at the top of this article linking to help for people considering suicide? I just Googled "suicide" and the first thing that is shown in the Google result is the same kind of banner that I'm talking about (I'm not basing this discussion point on that, Google seem to have independently thought up the idea; a friend recently took his own life prompting me to make this post. See: http://www.google.com.au/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=Suicide). If wikipedia can run a massive banner above every page thanking the New South Wales Library of Australia for donating works, I think it could manage a small banner label offering help for those contempating suicide. If it takes the breaking of one Wikipedia rule, and ends up saving one lift, it will have all been worth it. Skythe ( talk) 17:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help):Other suicide prevention strategies that have been considered are crisis centres and hotlines, method control, and media education. Public awareness campaigns can increase knowledge, self-identification of depression, and help seeking.133 There is minimal research on these strategies. Even though crisis centres and hotlines are used by suicidal youth, information about their impact on suicidal behaviour is lacking.
If you google suicide it just has a little "need help?" thing and a phone number for a local samaritans service at the top. Would that be so unthinkably against the rules?
Wikiditm (
talk)
18:07, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't have an opinion on this specific matter either way, but whenever someone proposes an additional banner or warning with the intention of being helpful or informative to other Wikipedia users, it's immediately shot down because Wikipedia already has a disclaimer. I'd just like to point out that disclaimers aren't (and aren't meant to be) helpful or informative to users (who rarely read them, if ever) but only to relinquish any assumed responsibility. A hotline banner is not a disclaimer. Wikipedia is not obligated to take measures to prevent suicide, but that does not preclude it from doing so. The issue here is whether Wikipedia should take a stance on the issue of suicide itself, i.e., against suicide. While this would go against Wikipedia's policy of neutrality, one could argue that Wikipedia does occasionally go against that policy on some issues, e.g., the pro-Wikipedia stance illustrated by banners asking for donations. OzW ( talk) 20:06, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
If anything, there should be a section on how attitudes about suicidal people need to change. Suicidal people are treated like they have the plague. Their symptoms are treated (not by doctors...) by people as selfish. Their symptoms are treated like it isn't worthy of being spoken about. Too often people either brush off a suicidal person by not wanting to talk to them (I am thinking of friends and family) or they give them the 'get over it' or 'get over yourself' sort of conversation. None of those attitudes are helpful at all when someone is truely depressed and hopeless. Mylittlezach ( talk) 21:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
The suicide legislation section in this article has limited information and the link it provides to the 'main' article has even LESS information. Suicide used to be illegal in the USA. I was looking on here to see if it still is. Where is all the legislation information? There is nothing except a blip about Brazil and Germany. I looked years ago and there was more information. Please have someone redo that main article on Suicide Legislation with some real information. Mylittlezach ( talk) 21:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I wish I had access to WestLaw or some other legal online resources, but, alas, I do not. I did wade through about 20 pages on the internet. I did find one site that appears to be reliable. I do not think I have the literary chops to write for Wikipedia. Here is the link: http://www.freelawanswer.com/law/1507-1.html
I hope the link highlights... Mylittlezach ( talk) 22:30, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Should hunger striking be included in this article as a form of suicide? If so, the current version implies that hunger striking, and indeed suicide as a protest, are purely Irish phenomenons, and that is not true. If hunger striking ending in death is to be accepted as a form of suicide, we must also accept that Mohandas Gandhi attempted suicide. The article Hunger Strike contains more global examples. Quasihuman ( talk) 20:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
This is basically a cotract. Needs merging. -- Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 00:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Youth Suicide warrants it's own page. The issues that lead to and the impact of Youth suicide are not exactly the same as in the case of adult suicide (not suggesting in any way that one is more or less acceptable/worse/has more impact etc than the other). For example, young people can be more influenced by the suicide of a celebrity or idol, and youth specific services are already rare and young peoples experience is mostly that they get channeled into a generalist service developed more with adults in mind. I believe it would be an error to follow that same pattern here. I think the article could be further improved by adding youth specific data and material about successful interventions from around the world.
In terms of neutrality I see no conflict with the notion that a section about services supporting young people seeking help, it could describe the modality of different services and external websites relevant to the content could be listed at the bottom of the page. Need Peace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Need Peace ( talk • contribs) 19:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
The intro of the article lists suicide as 13th leading cause of death, the epidemiology section lists it as 10th, and the actual linked epidemiology article lists it as 12th. A little clarification on these numbers seems necessary. 96.53.84.50 ( talk) 09:00, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
This was the review removed PMID:17824349. The ref with which it was replaced does not work. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 10:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
With the rise of people finding how to commit suicide, using forums and websites to establish suicide pacts, watch suicides "live" (no pun intended), goad people into doing it (fake pacts) and finding others to enter a downward spiral with - the effect of internet on suicide promotion and prevention is notable, imho - not unlike the pro-anorexia crowd on the internet. For or against? Any good sources? Pär Larsson ( talk) 15:38, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Suicide |
---|
These templates are not recommended to be placed in the lead but at the end of the article. Wondering if we should change it format and move it there? Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 23:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure how the fact that psychiatric disorders are associated with self harm relates to prevention of self harm? Thus I have moved this content to the causes section that discusses the relationship between psychiatric disorders and self harm where it is better placed. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 02:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
The article's main image, The Death of Chatterton was removed. Since this is a fairly major change and was not discussed, and especially because it wasn't replaced, I've restored it for the time being. I'm not particularly opposed to having another image if another one would be better, but I'm not convinced by the stated reason for removal, that it romanticizes suicide. I'm not sure that it does so and I'm not sure that if it did it would violate NPOV: you could argue that the main image for the article on lions romanticizes lions, but would that be the same as arguing that it was POV? Does anyone have a better image to suggest, or any other thoughts on the image? GideonF ( talk) 10:10, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Here are some more "people in the world who argee with you that the image romanticizes suicide" in case no one else has "taken as read":
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, what is placed on it should be based on fact. I am not the only one to question the placement of the image on the page. I've stated the facts with references and citing Wikipedia policy why it should not be used, so unless you or someone else can do otherwise there is no plausible reason for the image to be there except for temper tantrums and bulllying. 7mike5000 ( talk) 15:37, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
This is an encyclopedia not a "patient handout". The image we have now is appropriate for the purpose for which it is being used. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:30, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
I agree 100% with every word posted by Mike, above, including his view of GideonF's uncivil baiting. I won't repeat Mike's excellent and, I believe, compelling argument, which is reason enough to remove the image from this article. However, as a depiction of death by arsenic, the painting is grossly misleading, so it should be removed on that basis alone. Suicides by arsenic do not drift into a tranquil eternal sleep but generally die covered in their own vomit and shit, slumped over a toilet after seizure or acute kidney failure. It should be removed because it may mislead some distressed person into choosing arsenic over a more humane mode of suicide. I oppose replacing it with any other image that romanticises suicide for the reasons eloquently laid out by Mike. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 09:30, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 03:24, 27 September 2011 (UTC)Initially, the patient experiences a metallic taste in the mouth and a garlicky odor on the breath. Burning and dryness of the mouth and throat, dysphagia, colicky abdominal pain, projectile vomiting and profuse, watery diarrhea or "rice-water stools" are also early manifestations and occur within hours of exposure. Shock develops rapidly as a result of dehydration and generalized vasodilation. [25]
Mike you could try a RfC to see if their is support for its replacement or removal. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 05:17, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Is Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton an appropriate illustration for the article Suicide?
Yes happy with math and science. The wording you propose is excellent. Add yes / no / discussion heading and post. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
I happen to be all for the use of images, I have been accused of using images for "decorative purposes", which admittedly on occasion I have used copyrighted images using a questionable fair-use rationale. However my indiscretions did not have the potential to negatively affect people. As stated by User:Bodnotbod, I myself tried to find a suitable alternative and I can't think of anything appropriate which does not come off as pandering to a certain point of view or look superfluos. No medical articles contain superfluos or gratuitous images, this is the type of article to emulate: Medscape: Depression and Suicide [28]. The images are limited to graphs and charts complimenting and visually elucidating the subject matter, there is no decorative use of images. The image sets the tone for the rest of the page which in my opinion does not even come close to a reputable source on the subject of suicide. As far as the wording, I believe in order to avoid the same protracted debate in the future over potential images, it should be worded::
Is Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton or any similar such image appropriate illustrations for the article Suicide?
7mike5000 ( talk) 20:23, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
This formulation rules out a yes/no response. Commenters would need to be offered four options:Should the article Suicide contain an image depicting suicide, or an image that could reasonably be seen as sanitizing, glorifying or romanticizing suicide.
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 23:50, 14 September 2011 (UTC)Is Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton an appropriate illustration for the article Suicide?
How about simply "should we use image A, image B or no image to illustrate suicide" Followed by support A B no image and discussion headings? Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:02, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
and make a section for yes/no answers to each of these three questions? -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 07:01, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Should Suicide contain any image depicting or symbolizing suicide? Is any image that romanticizes suicide appropriate for the article? Does Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton romanticize suicide?
Oh, come on. That question is ridiculously loaded and POV. The whole problem here, as I see it, is someone with an anti-suicide agenda POV pushing
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 10:17, 15 September 2011 (UTC)If an image says nothing about the article subject, and only performs a decorative function, must it be removed, per this policy, or may it remain if a majority of editors like it there. That is, does the policy prescribe removal in this situation, and if so, does local consensus trump that prescription?
Gideon, James, Mike, Bodnotbod? -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 12:33, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Should Suicide contain an image depicting or symbolizing suicide? Is an image that romanticizes suicide appropriate for the article? Does Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton romanticize suicide?
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 15:05, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Is it appropriate for the article Suicide to contain an image depicting suicide? Is Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chattertonappropriate for this article?
Yes Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 23:29, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
What areas of interest should we invite?
I'd also like to notify WikiProject Medicine, WikiProject Psychology, and WikiProject Philosophy. We could try WikiProject Religion. My experience of that topic is a strong WP:BATTLE ethos (but maybe I just picked the wrong articles). -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 15:55, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
I removed the following: -
A disproportionate amount of suicides in the world occur in Asia, which is estimated to account for up to 60% of all suicides. According to the WHO, China, India and Japan may account for 40% of all world suicides. [rf 1]
- ^ "WHO Statement: World Suicide Prevention Day 2008" (PDF). World Health Organization. 2008. Retrieved 2008-10-26.
According to the article World population somewhat over 60% of the worlds population lives in Asia. Moreover the populations of India, Japan and China add up to 38.13 %.
The source actually says nothing about proportion, and uses the weasel words "up to" so in fact all we can theoretically conclude is that "A disproportionate amount of suicides in the world occur outside Asia" - but even this would be reading to much into the somewhat vague figure "up to 60%" as 60% could well be rounded and really mean, say, "up to 60.4%".
Rich
Farmbrough,
22:15, 20 October 2011 (UTC).
There are currently three main photos porposed for the lead. Which one should we use? Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
(Added Rich Farmbrough, 21:58, 20 October 2011 (UTC).)
I am all in favour of illustrations to any acceptable WP article or topic whatsoever, from sexual techniques to murder, taking in suicide on the way. However, I cannot see what any of the proposed pictures have to do with the price of parsnips. Except that some of them are better pictures than Chatty, they add no value and they suffer the same objections of irrelevance. If we present a picture in an article, its presence should leave readers better informed than its absence would do. Which of those pictures would do so in the proper context? They might do for an article on art in communication, but what do they tell anyone in an article on suicide? JonRichfield ( talk) 09:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
The whole discussion is off the point. The first thing required is to write the article in a proper logical structure. Having achieved that, decide which points in the article would profit from pictures, and if so, of which nature and for what purpose. Then consider whether any picture adds the appropriate value. Saying: "Oh dear, some people didn't like that pic; let's propose a few rival candidates" is waaaayyyy off track. Don't ask the authors' opinions, ask the article. Ask the logic. JonRichfield ( talk) 09:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Suicide ( Latin suicidium, from sui caedere, "to kill oneself") is the act of an organism intentionally causing its own death. Suicide is often committed out of despair, or attributed to some underlying mental disorder which includes depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, alcoholism and drug abuse. [7] Pressures or misfortunes such as financial difficulties or troubles with interpersonal relationships may play a significant role. [8] Over one million people die by suicide every year...
I came in from RFC. I really wonder what value a picture of a dead or dying person would have in the context of this article. Perhaps I am not a very visual person. Greglocock ( talk) 00:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
I am a new editor on this article and my impression right away is that I appreciate the factual information provided in the article. The pictures do not seem like they add to this and might be better placed in an art history article? Coaster92 ( talk) 21:55, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
How do I vote and/or add "no illustration" as an option? 216.175.109.139 ( talk) 04:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
There would probably have to be another "Rfc". It's asinine to have any image but Socrates is a vast improvement over the crap that was up there. You could see all the B.S. necessary to remove the previous image "The Death of Chatterton". 7mike5000 ( talk) 21:32, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Some new antriretrovirals used in first line treatment of HIV/AIDS have suicide thoughts and actual suicides as common side effects. These include Isentress® (saltegravir) http://www.isentress.com/raltegravir/isentress/consumer/patient_product_information/index.jsp; ATRIPLA that contains three HIV medicines in one pill: SUSTIVA® (efavirenz), EMTRIVA® (emtricitabine) and VIREAD® (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. The mechanism of action for this tragic side effect is unknown and the suicidal thoughs, the acts and the depression and insomnia contribute to a state of desperation described in some patients. http://www.atripla.com/atripla-side-effects.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpenarosas ( talk • contribs) 19:12, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
"Around 100 studies have been conducted to examine the ‘ Werther effect’ – the phenomenon whereby there is an increased rate of completed or attempted suicide following the depiction of an individual’s suicide in the media. These ‘media influence studies’ provide strong evidence for the existence of the Werther effect in the news media, and equivocal evidence for its existence in the entertainment media." [30] Thus it appears that announcing suicides as current events increase rates but art work does not. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 11:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I think it is more "if people identify with the person who committee suicide" and the suicide is presented in a positive / romantic way than that could increase the risk of suicide. I view Chatterton as safe a few people would identify with an 1800s poet. Art, movies and plays are entertainment and I have provided a study which found that the evidence regarding these is equivocal. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
The media guidelines of the American Association of Suicidology and the American Suicide Prevention Foundation recommend using no pictures when discussing suicide, in order to reduce both the risk of romanticizing suicide and the risk of promoting contagion suicides.3 I oppose any depiction of suicide in this article because such images add nothing to the readers' understanding and may do actual harm.
I'll make a comment that because it is a free image, there is less of a requirement for having the image help increase the reader's understand than there is for non-free media. It's clearly not flat out decorative or out of place, and it's not non-free where we would be more critical of such inclusion. I've no other comment and whether the image is actually appropriate otherwise, but it's certainly not against IUP. -- MASEM ( t) 14:00, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Citing WP:NOTCENSORED in an image debate should have a sort of Godwin's Law effect. If your only/best argument for keeping an image is to make a stand against censorship, then your argument isn't building an encyclopaedia and could fall into disrupting Wikipedia to make a point territory. That policy section seems to be regarded as some as an excuse to reject all pleas to common sense, reasoned argument or tact. Yes we don't remove images just because some people find it objectionable but we also don't keep them just because some people find them objectionable and so must be protected at all costs. Colin° Talk 08:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm a big fan of taking advice from professionals who have to deal with these issues as their day job. We can all have our own opinion on the effect of this picture or that picture, or on whether suicidal people might be reading this article. Our opinions might be useful, harmful or of uncertain value -- we have little way of knowing. For example, the suggestion of using a shocking picture to deter people. Often, well meaning measures can have a paradoxical effect and what may deter one person may encourage two others. Note: taking advice is different from being legally pressured into doing something -- as happened with the Rorschach images. Whether or not the professional guidance is based on mere expert opinion or is the result of statistical analysis or even some randomised controlled trial, it is worth more than the opinions of Wikipedians IMO. We should not reject it lightly and certainly not just to make a point. Colin° Talk 08:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Found some evidence "Around 100 studies have been conducted to examine the ‘ Werther effect’ – the phenomenon whereby there is an increased rate of completed or attempted suicide following the depiction of an individual’s suicide in the media. These ‘media influence studies’ provide strong evidence for the existence of the Werther effect in the news media, and equivocal evidence for its existence in the entertainment media." [40] Thus it appears that announcing suicides as current events increase rates but I would consider this image entertainment. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 11:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
The professionals have their own POV and bias (c.f. the Rorschach debacle), whereas Wikipedia doesn't/musn't (insofar as its ethos is merely to be neutral and informative). And since we're talking about an editorial decision as opposed to an issue of informational accuracy, WP:RS isn't applicable. -- Cybercobra (talk) 04:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
This particular picture, as Anthonyhcole notes, is not a realistic depicture of suicide. It is romantic art. It is therefore not encyclopaedic for an article on suicide. It would suit an article discussing suicide in literature and art (something, that from a brief scan, this article doesn't cover).
Suicide is not a concept that requires illustration in order to be understood, nor does a picture help in any significant way towards understanding it. Possibly one could argue that seeing a picture of someone after they have hanged themselves aids ones understanding of hanging but most people would consider such a shocking picture voyeuristic rather than educational. Our article on toilet doesn't have someone sitting on one wiping their bum. And it would only deal with one method, so using such a picture for the lead would place undue weight on that. Colin° Talk 08:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I think appropriately chosen images add to articles. Showing an image of a pregnant women is better than leaving the lead blank as is showing a reasonable image of suicide. I think both add to the educational value of the article. A historical image of suicide put it into historical perspective. That this is not a new phenomena. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 13:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
This continues the discussion above between myself and Anthony, which was taking up space in the voting section. I don't think the key question is about what the image may or may not do (it may do anything. It may contain a coded message to Al-Qaeda sleeper cells), I think it's about whether Wikipedia cares. Most of the opposition to this image comes from people who, like yourself, have a moral objection to suicide. I'm not here to debate the morality of suicide, it's simply my position that a diversity of opinion exists on the subject and that Wikipedia shouldn't favour one view over the other, per the "Non-negotiable" NPOV policy. Imagine, for a moment, that you do not have any opinion either way on the question of whether being alive is better than being dead. If you did not, would you be making the same arguments you're making now? GideonF ( talk) 13:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Consensus is against the use of the "Death of Chatterton" and I agree that this it is not an accurate image of the subject matter is not the most appropriate picture for this article. There does seem to be support for a image however. "The Suicide" does not appear to romantize the subject and is a more accurate depiction while still not being gory. Thus I hope it addresses many of the concerns raised. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 11:47, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
(undent) Regardless, it does (1) clearly depict suicide witout forcing the concept through captions, (2) provide a sense of the history of the subject. It also directly contradicts the lead, which I'm fixing either way, since "West" is such a vague concept and suicide was fairly acceptable in the Classical era. For the record, I am specifically opposed to a photo of a dead body, which is just voyeuristic and distracting: suicide isn't about bodies, it's about death. The metaphysical is far more important than the physical on this topic: people don't ask "what did they do with the body?" but "why did he kill himself?" SDY ( talk) 15:37, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Looking at the image of Ophelia I am sure there will be the same concerns as Chatterton. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 09:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
And WP:IUP says imagesImages must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly and directly related to the article's topic. Images are primarily meant to inform readers by providing visual information.
(My bolding.) This policy is moderated by this recently added to WP:IMAGEshould be relevant and increase readers' understanding of the subject matter.
This policy does not say "Any picture is better than no picture." Since Edouard Manet, The Suicide is related to the topic but not the article, and does not add to the readers' understanding in any meaningful way, I have deleted it. If someone can defend its inclusion on policy grounds, please do so. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 11:39, 29 September 2011 (UTC)Because the Wikipedia project is in a position to offer multimedia learning to its audience (which includes visual learners), images are an important part of any article's presentation. Effort should therefore be made to improve quality and choice of images or captions (in accordance with the details of this page), rather than deleting them - especially on pages which lack visuals.
(undent) I don't think the Manet is a terrible image to use for the article, but we could do better. I'm a little concerned that "educational value" might be construed to mean "blood and guts and gore" which really aren't all that educational. Dead people are messy, not exactly a useful or necessarily on-topic lesson (i.e. the article isn't about anatomy or corpses). What can we provide visually that's actually educational? I've proposed either something from history (e.g. Socrates) or something from literature (e.g. R&J), which both have specific educational value. SDY ( talk) 14:42, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
" But this had better not turn into a bunch of dudes who've never shown any interest in suicide before, slapping some shit together after a frenetic afternoon of googling, just so you can make some point. "
— Anthonyhcole
Yes and this image informs, it is only your opinion that it does not. Consensus is that we should have an image. We have agreed not to use one that romanticizes the subject matter. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 17:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
"I see nothing remotely inappropriate in what I said."
It does inform the reader of a number of things as mentioned (guns are a common medthod of suicide, the most common in the USA if I remember correct) there is a long history to suicide. This image does comply with policy. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:44, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
I have stated a couple of things. You could try to get consensus. Current consensus is that we should have an image. This one here does illustrate suicide. Therefore it does give information. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 20:43, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
The previous image is better as it shows suicide not someone who is sad such as the current image. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 14:00, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
(undent) Dragging this conversation back from the brink... As long as the image doesn't actually appear twice in the same article I don't think re-using it is a problem. There might actually be some logic to having the lead article have the same image as the template. Given that only someone looking very closely at the images would even see that the goblet is from the same painting, I don't think this is a big deal. SDY ( talk) 16:07, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
![]() | 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 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 8 |
As currently worded, it is implied that St. Augustine's discussion of suicide was in the middle ages, and that Justinian's work predated St. Augustine's. But the truth is the opposite: Augustine having died in 430, before the middle ages began; and Justinian having been born after the middle ages began. . I don't feel quite up to rewriting the section in a creditable way: perhaps someone else can take this on? Publius3 ( talk) 05:56, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
I just created a new page on Familicide but it quickly became a candidate for speedy deletion due to its limited, dictionary-definition content. It is my wish that the psychology and crime scholars among you help me expand the article's content so that it will no longer be considered beneath Wikipedia standards. Thank you. J.A.McCoy 00:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I know that Japan's suicide rate is high, but why is this? It sounds morbidly interesting. The Wiggle Fish 11:55, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
as a sociology student i can't help to notice the lack of a sociological point of view in this article. bieng "suicide" by Durkheim one of the most important pieces on this topic, where he statistacally shows that the main causes of the sucide rate are social, rather than psycological or otherwise. i'm planning on working a little bit on this direction, but i want to registrate as a user and hear some opinions before donig so.
gabriel
ps. i may have several ortography mistakes, forgive me for i am not a native speaker.
Contradiction: "National suicide rates sometimes tend to be stable"; "National suicide rates, apparently universally, show an upward long-term trend."
Citations with insufficient detail: "Australian Bureau of Statistics, 1983; Lester, Patterns, 1996, p. 21"
Unclear: The sentence beginning "For example, the 1975 rates ...". Nurg 21:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
While this article affirms that "the practice is fairly common, occurring in approximately one out of three suicides...", the Suicide note article says "but statistics show that the majority of suicide victims do not leave notes; in some countries, fewer than 10% of suicides are accompanied by suicide notes". Just warning whoever looks after these articles. Simoes - http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usu%C3%A1rio:Simoes —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.47.34.200 ( talk) 21:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC).
The first two statements don't contradict each other at all, even though the wording is clumsy since it was clearly written by two people coming at the numbers from different perspectives.
If 1/3 leave notes then clearly the majority (or 2/3) do NOT leave notes, right? :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.144.85.130 ( talk) 04:45, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
I've started working on a subpage called User:Wl219/List of university student suicides in my userspace. I intend to link it eventually to List of suicides when it's more fleshed out, but comments are welcome. Wl219 01:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
--Causes of Suicide-- Substance abuse stated so blatently has no place in this list. A person may be under the influence when they kill themself, but its almost always because of a deeper underlying problem.
The article makes interesting points about the differing rates of suicide by country around the world, and states that the rate of suicide to homicide is 3:2 in the USA. I want to know more. There should be a map or a table of suicide rates by country and by age and sex if possible. I strongly believe that the suicide rate in the United States is higher than Americans realize and that this is a fact the the country does not own up to or care to look at and admit. Or, a link to a separate article on 'suicide rates' should be supplied. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 4.178.36.234 ( talk) 21:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC).
While this doesn't fit the classical definition, I know people who have committed suicide in this way. Bo-Lingua 03:24, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I think this small section deserves its own main article - I've created a redirect, but the subject certainly has such scope to qualify for its own article. While I'm here, could I request someone actively contributing here please expand the lead section a little - even one paragraph would be enough. I'm looking to summarize the topic in death but the lead section is only a definition. Richard001 01:37, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
It says that Islam has consistently condemned suicide. This is very dubious. There are deliberate suicide attacks, and this is drawn from Islamic rhetoric about martyrdom and accepted as OK by significant numbers of Muslims. In fact the euphemism they are found under in Islamic media is 'martyrdom operation' or variants. I'm going to tag it dubious for now, as there is a problem here. The Behnam 15:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The use of suicide attacks aren't strictly prohibited in Islam as the article says, instead of that Islam highly motivate for suicide attacks on enemy troops in case of threatening Islam or Muslims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Husam2002jo ( talk • contribs) 15:04, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
...is a long list and doesn't belong on an overview of the subject. The summary, as is, is more than sufficient. SonoftheMorning 10:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
For those seriously considering suicide, it is worth remembering that the best method is probably via inhalation of nitrogen, helium or other noble gas as doing so is painless, effortless and virtually guaranteed to do the job - unlike so many other methods. ie quick and effective with little or no trauma. Tripod000 ( talk) 18:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Other sources state firmly that Canada has a much lower homocide/suicide rate relating to the dramatically lower number of firearms. Here, Canada has a much higher suicide rate than the USA. How reliable are ANY of the numbers? 207.178.98.79 ( talk) 02:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
The list of "causes of suicide" is too circumstantial with the specific examples. The article should thematically discuss that section and use the current list as examples. I would suggest Emile Durkheim's classic sociological model of suicide with the primary motives of suicide being Anomic (stress, grief, unemployment), Altruistic (ie sacrifice, cults, terrorism, etc.), and Egosistic (loneliness, absurdism). Overall it would present intentional causes in a more constructed, but not limiting, manner that the current list of examples lack in. Reesebw 05:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
The entire list of "causes of suicide" strikes me as an uncited brainstorm. PsYoP78 03:27, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
The following section isn't suicide, nor is it a type of suicide, and no relation to suicide is described (just a non-relation). This has left me wondering why it was included in the article in the first place. I've placed it here for discussion, in case there are important issues I've missed. The Transhumanist 23:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Self-harm is not a suicide attempt. There is a non-causal correlation between self-harm and suicide; both are most commonly a joint effect of depression. Social issues are key as SI is most common among those living in overcrowded conditions, loss of loved one(s), in conflict with their families, with disrupted childhoods and history of drinking and violence. Borderline personality disorder is another frequent psychological factor. Individuals under these stresses become anxious and depressed and then, usually in reaction to a single particular crisis, they attempt to harm themselves. The motivation may be a desire for relief from emotional pain or a desire for attention, although the motivation will often be complex and confused. Self-injury is the paradoxical practice that relies on inflicting pain and injury to relieve or communicate another pain.
This part of the article is ridiculous, but that is POV on my part. Though I do feel this is a stretch. I wanted to remove it outright but...
Umm... no. This is a general article about suicide, not really the right place for info on specific cases, unless they're extremely notable. To be honest, the Anna Halman article has had contested notability anyway, which together with its stub status seems to be motivating the merge suggestion. I suggest if notability is contested then send it to AfD; otherwise leave it as a stub, add more info to make notability clearer, or try and find another page to merge it into (something like List_of_suicides maybe?) Eve 12:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
It is nosense, of course. No reason for merge. -- Cinik 15:25, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
The Suicide article does not seem to list individual people who committed suicide, so merging Anna Halman here would not make sense. If she is added to List of suicides then her article would normally be kept as well, so that's not exactly a merge. Although Anna Halman survived a contested AfD recently, the passions seem to live on. Her case received attention on the BBC, and led to a statement (and maybe a policy change) by the Polish Minister of Education. This seems to establish notability, though the sources could be better. Any further discussion on this matter should (in my opinion) take place at Talk:Anna Halman, where no one has yet said anything about a merge. EdJohnston 13:52, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
I think that ritual suicide could be merged into this article, seeing as it's currently just a paragraph long. Yay or nay? BigglesTh9 05:26, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
The article strikes me as presenting (or implying) one viewpoint as "the correct view", which it later amends. It also doesn't show the topic in overview very well at present. As an overview article of the subject, I think this can be done better.
The description of suicide starts with the statement "Considered by modern medicine to be a mental health issue, suicide may also be caused by psychological factors..." Only quite a bit later does it then add (as a somewhat minor note) that in some cultures it is seen as honorable or a means of protest, and it never mentions that the view of suicide as mental issue is far from universal culturally or historically. So it's never presented as the rich subject it is, or placed really in any other than a primarily clinical context. (Even then the medical view is very limited - a note on "cry for help" or repetition as a major feature of suicide attempts is crucial to note even in the intro.)
The overall view of suicide as a disapproved act and mental health issue is the appropriate majority view, but I think the topic as a whole needs the way it's presented (ie its "contexting" of this delicate subject) to be slightly improved. I've had a go, because the current view seems rather "pushing one specific viewpoint" (albeit the predominant western one). I've tried to ensure it doesnt get biased the other way by mistake. My approach has been to look at the intro and restructure it as follows, keeping the length sensible:
FT2 ( Talk | email) 13:58, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
or the so-called "right to die" The "so-called" can also be rephrased to "also known as". Right now it's POV by taking a stance against right to die. Even if the majority is against this, there is an article to cover it.
Adding something on Emile Durkheim's studies about suicide would be helpful. I also have plenty of support that identity issues such as homosexuality, being adopted (to some extent), etc are one issue rather than two issues which lead to the disconnection from society. Any objections on the above should be addressed before Sunday, upon which time I'll start the revising process. I just need an editor. -- Hitsuji Kinno 21:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
The first part before the table of contents, well, just read the headline. Mattbash 00:00, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
As I was looking at the page, I noticed that the table titled "Suicides per 100,000 people per year" should be on the right edge of the screen. It looks like it gets caught up by the graph above it. I would move it, but I'm new to this wiki thing and I don't know how.
~Doc Honcho~ 02:20, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
There are many ways to refer to the act of intentionally terminating one's life. The one employed here is slanted, or as we put it here, "POV." It criminalizes the act. After all, one "commits" suicide the same way one "commits" a crime, and the term is also semantically connected to "homicide" and "infanticide" (please do not mention "insecticide"). The etymological implication of course is that it is a killing, and a culpable one at that.
May I suggest a more neutral term, often used in antiquity: "voluntary death"? We could have a redirect page, or perhaps a separate article specifically about the crime of "suicide." Haiduc 02:08, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
The external links section seems to link to quite a few websites for suicide prevention and support groups, but I don't see a single link to a site for suicide promotion or assistance. Obviously, Wikipedia isn't supposed to be a how-to manual, but if there are external links on how to avoid suicide, I think that it's only the fair and balanced thing to do to post external links on how to go through with suicide (like, say, http://www.satanservice.org/tokus/suicide/guide/). The only way you can justify not doing so is to say that it's a worthier goal to prevent suicides than to promote them, which of course is the definition of a non-NPOV. ElHalo
What did Justiian's law code really say on this yopic? The linked 'reference" is not at all authoritattive, and does not mention Justinian anyway. I ask because the Wiki article on religious attitudes to suicide very nearly contradicts this one, stating that suicide to avoid trial was a crime and sin in 533 (ie presumably under Justinian's code of that year), and this was extended generally in 590.
This figure is essentially useless, since the key doesn't offer much. <13 what? Suicides per capita? Suicides a year? It should probably be removed, or replaced with something useful.
Not having seen this article for a while, my immediate reaction to the pictures in it was that they had the potential to glorify suicide. One potential outcome of this is copycat suicides. While there is a need to be NPOV about the subject, there is also a social responsibility to not contribute to further suicides. It is significant that neither the article on murder or homicide have pictures of victims despite the ready availability of such material. This brief entry is to encourage a debate about this. -- CloudSurfer 22:29, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I have Been Bold and changed "commit" to "complete". I see this was discussed and changed long ago before, but somehow got changed back to "commit." It might be even better to substitute most of these instances with "kill oneself" -- it would be the most neutral -- but maybe someone else.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Friarslantern ( talk • contribs) 23:51, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
you still wouldn't let it affect your debate. This is speculative, false, irrelevant and fallacious. Kindly refrain from attacking me personally.
This is a charge, but not an attack by any stretch of the imagination. Speculative? Perhaps. False, irrevlevant, fallacious? I suppose its possible, though it wouldn't be conscious on my part. But in order for me consider this, then tell me where you acknowledged or demonstrated above that the citation in question had an impression on you.
If you're frustrated about your inability to put together a convincing case for making unnecessary and subjective changes to basic language, I suggess you buy a stress ball or a boxing bag instead. Speculating on my perceived motivations is uncivil and can only detract from whatever merit your arguments may have.
No, I am frustrated by the arguments that you are using: that they are generally non-responsive to mine. This is a forum to discuss changes to articles, why they should or shouldn't be changed, and we're supposed to hash controversial changes out here it before making changes; if you will not logically engage some of my most cogent points, as I have quite straightforwardly requested, then you have the effect of walking away from the debate. I believe I have put together a convincing case, and it seems to me that you will not yield me a response on some of my most important points. Nevertheless, I will try to be more gentle from here on out.
and you come back with a webpage ([7]) Wordnet is the Princeton lexical database, i.e. a comprehensive and sophisticated cross-referenced dictionary. It's also the first result when you google "define 'x'". Do some cursory research before disparaging other people's sources next time. ¶
If you would read the section I wrote, I didn't disparage your source at all -- in fact, I will now be looking to use it in the future. I simply pointed out that it didn't appear that your source supported your argument -- but rather that it supported my argument. You could disagree, & clarify how it supports your side. But otherwise, on the face of it, it goes to my position about connotation.
I have explained why I feel "commit" is not NPOV, Precisely. Why you feel. Not how you can prove that it is POV, not how you can rationally and objectively demonstrate that it is POV. A feeling is not sufficient reason to obliterate all uses of a common idiom from Wikipedia. This is clearly unacceptable practice. 138.192.140.22 23:37, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
The sad thing here is, my whole point is quite arguable, but you refuse to engage me on something where you actually have the advantage, instead, you fall back on a needless appeal to popularity. Granted, if enough people think that a)"commit suicide" is not loaded with any particular bias (which I'll concede, that the vast majority wouldn't say it is biased, at least when asked point blank); AND either b)"kill oneself" sticks out as awkward or too novel, or c)that the absence of use of "commit suicide" in itself feels awkward upon reading it, then my mind would be changed. But while I concede a), I don't concede b) or c), and therefore -- because "commit" has a negative connotation (which I pretty much have proven), and, I propose, "commit suicide" has a biased subtext and/or is euphemistic (my weakest point, but, ironically, one which you stop short of fully addressing) -- I am still left with the conviction that changing "commit suicide" to "kill oneself" is worth any minor awkward stylistic qualities (which qualities I can't imagine -- can you?) it might engender in order to make the article's language less judgmental, and more neutral. Friarslantern 17:18, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure I remember reading a Bible passage saying that the body is a temple and desecreation of the temple is a sin, so I believe there is a specific passage thats says no to suicide. Have to dig up my Bible and check on that specifically, but 1 minute of Google searching brought up 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 "Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have recieved from God? You are not your own, you were brought with a price. Therefore honor God with your body." This also seems to make obesity a sin and state that we are all slaves to the church... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.17.155.35 ( talk) 03:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
We need something in the Cultural section on how the shameful aspect of suicide (as evidenced, for example, in the continuing use of "commit" as the verb) is still prevalent in most cultures. It's also a factor that could be mentioned in the Impact of Suicide section - that the isolation survivors feel is not only due to their own grief, questioning and guilt feelings, but also to an automatic aversion that many people feel -- possibly due to the culturally shameful aspect of the act, possibly due to questions about the role that the survivors could have had in preventing or causing the suicide -- towards suicide, which manifests itself frequently as a reflexive withdrawl of contact or support towards people normally considered friends, people, who -- it's my sense -- would receive ample, more immediate support had their family member/loved one been murdered. In other words, there is a primitive taboo about it that survives in modern, industrialized culture -- about even discussing it. I'm nearly positive there's serious research out there to this effect, would need references.... (In general, this article could use more references.....). Friarslantern 16:02, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
I kind of feel like killing myself today. Probably due to the fact that I edited Wikipedia - the methampetamine article, taking out stupid shit like "injection may be the safest way to use this drug" - when I used to do meth, and my bosses decided to riff and laugh on it one day after everything fell apart (or at least that's what I heard secondhand through the grapevine), and laughed at me when I couldn't and still can't make a living. It's not a good idea, but those are my feelings, and since Wiki helped me take away my job I figure it can take my confession. ;) What an idiot I was to be honest about my identity on Wiki... Don't ever do it, guys!!! Discuss! 76.170.206.69 12:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
I am confused. How did wiki take your job? Were you fired for editing a meth article or (more likely) for being a meth addict? You sound incredibly paranoid, which is a symptom of amphetamine abuse. Please seek help, if you're still alive.
Hi all, I was reading over the intro when I came across the line "Most Western and Asian religions—the Abrahamic religions, Buddhism, Hinduism—consider suicide a dishonorable act; in the West it was regarded as a serious crime and offense against God due to religious belief in the sanctity of life." This is problematic - as written it conflates present religious attitudes with past cultural views all while collapsing all of Western thinking on the subject into one negative assessment. Western culture may have viewed suicide as a serious crime, but no longer, you don't go to jail or get probation for attempting suicide. As for all of w. culture viewing it as an offense against God, I think that's way too general and assumes a religious viewpoint for all western people, many of whom identify as agnostic or atheistic. Also the phrase "serious crime" probably shouldn't be used in conjunction with civil institutions (like all of western culture) when the frame of reference is spiritual and not secular. I suggest changing the wording to remove the ref. to western culture or rewrite it as two or more seperate sentences. Phyesalis 19:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
There is some ambiguity in this article: in it's defining line, the article states "Suicide (Latin sui caedere, to kill oneself) is the act of intentionally terminating ones own life." However, throughout the article there is reference to "accidental" suicide. How can intentionally terminating ones own life become accidental. I'm thinking either the definition needs to change, terminology needs to change surrounding "accidental", or something needs to be added to make it clearer how intentional acts can be "accidental". PsYoP78 03:31, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
goodbye world —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.194.72 ( talk) 08:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
The caption for the photograph "Two Japanese Imperial Marines who committed suicide" says they "committed hari-kari by shooting themselves." This is incorrect as hara-kiri is the English word for "seppuku" meaning ritual suicide by disembowelment, not shooting. I suggest this caption be amended to simply "committed suicide by shooting themselves". -- 81.1.82.39 ( talk) 22:48, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
The standalone article has developed independent of the section in the parent article - though hasn't moved beyond a stub. Having two separate articles on the same topic creates a WP:CFORK. Having one article in one place allows people to work together to build the information in a progressive and organised fashion. When/if the information becomes too much to be contained within the section in the parent article then it can be broken out in summary style. A sub-topic is usually discussed within the parent topic as much as possible until it needs breaking out due to amount of information. If the amount of information is three paragraphs or less (a stub length) then it is unlikely to need breaking out. SilkTork * SilkyTalk 12:42, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
In the murder-suicide section, Chris Beniot's act was called "famous". I believe this word should be replaced with "infamous" or "notorious." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.60.254.45 ( talk) 16:55, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not here to start a flamewar. This is rather something I've noticed; why are the first (three I think) images on the page all of or pertaining to the USA? It seems odd that an article discussing this sort of "international act" should start with more than a couple of pictures of statistics from only one country (and the first two only regarding white males and females), why isn't the image of the suicide rate of the world or something more international used? Also, I was quickly passing through this article so this might be splitting hairs but I noticed two consecutive images with the caption "...suicide, rather then surrendering to U.S. somethings". I don't know why but there's something I don't like about that, but I'm having a hard time formulating it- maybe that it gives me the impression that the soldiers were so frightened of the US soldiers that they would rather die than fight them- this may as well be a silly point but I can't help getting that impression. I'm not trying to be anti-American (even though I'm pointing these things out :P), nor am I Japanese or German so I'd like to think I'm relatively unbiased. I just thought I should point the impressions I got from it. :) -- BiT ( talk) 02:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Mention if suicide has been observed in animals other than humans, and why, e.g., being last in the pecking order? Jidanni ( talk) 21:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Yes, some animals do commit suicide. Well, lemmings do, though they may not know they are doing it, they may think the ocean has an opposite shore they are trying to reach. The snare ( talk) 05:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, has there ever been any case of animal suicide? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.14.10.36 ( talk) 05:37, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
To date, no one has been able to demonstrate definitively that suicide exists in animals. Lemmings, scorpions, whales, dogs, termites and other animals do not intentionally kill themselves. And although it is true that some parasites make their host kill itself1, the use of the world suicide in animals remains metaphorical. On a different scale, scientists have observed that some cells self-destruct, particularly during embryonic development. But it is their environment that causes them to die2.
1. To ensure its own survival, the nematomorph, a parasite of the cricket and locust, changes the insect's behaviour, causing it to jump into water and die. Source: Nature, 6 April 2006. 2. This phenomenon of self-destruction, also known as apoptosis or programmed cell death, is for example responsible for the formation of the fingers. Without it our hands would be shaped like mittens.
Jidanni ( talk) 12:53, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
Eyewitness evidence from Jonestown's defectors/survivors suggests that many victims were coerced at gunpoint to "commit suicide" or murdered by other means if they did not comply with Jim Jones's orders. The majority of the commune's victims may have been murdered rather than willing participants of a suicide plot. The term "peer pressure" is insufficient to cover the causes of the tragedy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.226.104.225 ( talk) 22:13, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
We should have a section for that too,it's been proven that other animals commit suicde 98.14.15.12 ( talk) 19:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
{{
editsemiprotected}}
*
If You Feel Suicidal Right Now!)
This topic indicates no more external links. If that's true, please remove one of the existing ones and add this to replace it. NO external link is more important!
I actually added this link july 16, 2008, but it's not here now. I could not find it anywhere in the logs. As I said then and repeat now, I was myself suicidal and could find no link for help HERE in this entry in Wikipedia ...the most logical place for people in trouble to look and exactly where I came. Had I not stumbled upon the site I'm trying to add, i would not be here now trying to add it. It is respectful, supportive, unbiased, and honest. PLEASE!
Mokeyboy ( talk) 10:56, 9 March 2009 (UTC) Mokeyboy
First of all suicide is bad!! The practice of Sati is not sanctioned by any authoritative text in Hinduism. It started as a voluntary excessive and peer pressure gradually led to more following during the middle ages. But thankfully apart from a few stray cases, this is unheard of, and outlawed in India today. I should hope somebody changes the "Sati is" on the Suicide page to "Sati was". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.8.230.53 ( talk) 22:04, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
See my (Stuart Sovatsky) Words From the Soul: Time, East/West Spirituality and Psychotherapeutic Narrative. (Albany: SUNY Press, 1998)Chapter 2 "Revenge Against Impermanence, Temporal-Spiritual Psychopathology" for a discussion of the grammatics (specifically, the predominant use of the past-tense in narrating one's life-story, as often happens in the course of various forms of psychotherapy, and also the contraction "it's" [all over] that conflates traumatic events of the past into a single, tiny word, "it," coupled to the tiny present-tense of to be, "is" lost in the single "s") of the English language that underlie suicidal language that guides suicidal actions. The chapter also covers themes of existential and Buddhist impermanence of life that suicide hopes to permanently "end." It discusses temporal indeterminacy as a therapeutic basis for hope and relief from the suicidal narrative. The chapter is based on the earlier article in The Review of Existential Psychiatry and Psychology, "Clinical Contemplations on Impermanence: Temporal and Linguistic Factors in Client Hopelessness." 21-23, 1993, 153-79. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuartcsova ( talk • contribs) 00:32, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
The reference for Nero's suicide is correct (29) BUT he did not commit suicide because of the fire of Rome. I would erase the last part of that sentence; leaving Nero's death as an example of Roman views on disgrace. I'm NOT doing it as this is a semi-protected page and I'm too lazy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slaclos ( talk • contribs) 21:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
{{
editsemiprotected}}
I have no account, but someone who has might like to correct the following error:
In footnote 28 and under "further reading" the title of the book by Geo Stone is quoted as "Suicide and failed suicide". The real title is "Suicide and attempted suicide".
84.61.8.40 (
talk)
17:52, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
Done
Marek.69
talk
22:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
The "Suicide as Esacpe" section needs to be proofread. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.192.147.206 ( talk) 21:17, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Can't edit article at present, ref for Beachy Head is: [10] 78.146.120.132 ( talk) 20:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
{{editsemiprotected}}
Please add above link as a reference where 'citation needed is, at end of 'Suicide Locations' paragraph. Reference text: Beachy Head - Suicide Spot,
BBC Inside Out.
89.240.13.162 (
talk)
18:09, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Seems to me like the article doesn't discuss what mental events transpire while overcoming the survival instinct as a person decides to take their life. As in, how a person rationalizes suicide to the point of trumping this instinct. Does this belong here? -- 86.197.188.189 ( talk) 20:28, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
"It is estimated that each suicide in the United States leaves an average of six people intimately affected by the death, either as a spouse, parent, significant other, sibling, or child of the deceased person. These people are referred to as survivors."
It is estimated that 80% of all in home suicide scenes are cleaned up by a close friend, significant other, or a family member. Those that clean up a suicide scene of a close friend, significant other, or a family member are 75% more likely to commit suicide later on in life.
I have removed the text about 'cleaning up' and the 75% statistic as the referenced did not give credible data for the citing of these statistics. Feel free to put them back in if a more sound source can be found. For your second point about the term 'survivor', this is a very common term used by the mental health service user community - the survivor movement is very well known. See for example these wikipedia pages: World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry, Psychiatric survivors movement. Jenafalt ( talk) 11:18, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Removed Globalize and Refimprove as their placement was judgmental given that there are 50 in-line references, a clear indication of both some cross-country comparisons and appropos this being the English wiki some concentration on the US. The other language wikis have developed articles and the degree of both these attributes is appropriate for the current article length. If they are justified then expand and others probably are as well. Lycurgus ( talk) 04:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Please leave only one line of white space. 68.148.149.184 ( talk) 09:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
The korean former president, Ro moo hyen —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moneyjack123 ( talk • contribs) 02:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
-Recently,my book 'Suicide and Evolution: A Philosophical Analysis of the Definition of Suicide and an Examination of the Relationship Between Suicide and Evolution' was published by Muller Verlag- ISBN 978-3-639-13444-5. I suggest that the general ideas from this book should be added to the Wikipedia article on Suicide under the section Philosophical Perspectives. I would be happy to provide a summary, in order to increase the common perception of the relationship between suicide and evolution. In my book, I first provide a historical-philosophical account of suicide including Plato, Immanuel Kant, and David Hume. Then I detail the relevant theoretical shifts within evolutionary theory that provide an enhanced understanding of the phenomenon of suicide. Finally, I provide an action theoretic analysis of the definition and extension of suicide. I am new to Wikipedia and apparently cannot change the content of the article, though I assure you that I am well qualified to write on this topic. Metabenji ( talk) 19:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello, you may want to include the International Association for Suicide Prevention (IASP) (www.iasp.info) in your external links. Many thanks Iasp suicide ( talk) 18:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Under the religion, it states one of the ten commandments as being "thou shall not kill" This is incorrect for the bible states "thou shall not murder" there is a huge difference between the two-- 70.128.42.216 ( talk) 02:34, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
I am going to start work on universalising the article by taking out the data and diagrams that solely focus on suicide in the USA and adding back in more universal statements. Perhaps the references to suicide in the USA could then be moved into their own page? Jenafalt ( talk) 20:49, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm looking for opinions on whether or not there should be a short paragraph within the page which is concerned with suicide prevention. I think its missing one. What do you think? Jenafalt ( talk) 21:22, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Is there any information on whether suicide has been observed in animals? A very interesting topic, but there is nothing about it in the article. Suit Endeavour ( talk) 01:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
Do anti-depressants cause suicide and should more information be provided on this topic in the article? Neurofish ( talk) 19:38, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Neurostar
It's often claimed that suicide rates in the Scandinavian countries are extremely high, but that doesn't seem to be the case according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate . Perhaps this should be mentioned? 88.88.186.149 ( talk) 17:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
May I add a link to Debt bondage which causes lots of suicide, even in children whose parents can't get out of debt, & being upset about being unable to dress like their friends, do what friends do, etc? Stars4change ( talk) 02:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Given that people who are ideating about suicide might search it on the internet and end up here is it appropriate to give a support link here? What do others think? Jenafalt ( talk) 19:11, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I found this one, Befrienders World Wide which is a world wide website for helplines. What do you think?-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 02:39, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I've now added the link to Befrienders in the external links section. Jenafalt ( talk) 12:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
In the article, under the "France" heading, someone stated--"During the Napoleonic era, suicide was seen as an acceptable way to release oneself from a dishonorable circumstance (such as bankruptcy). and i don't like the French".
The latter sentence should be removed. I'm new to editing Wiki articles and I'm not sure if this is the appropriate way to address this, so please forgive my ignorance. Adri71 ( talk) 21:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
This is the wrong article, it was this article Cultural views of suicide where that text was. It was vandalism which I have reverted. See this link. You can check the edit history and click on the recent edits to undo or revert vandalism or else fix it by manually editing the article.-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 21:41, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
An editor keeps adding back citations of the watch tower organisation for medical statistics. This is not an appropriate reference per WP:MEDRS. I am not going to revert again as I have aleady reverted this editor twice. I would recommend discussion here if the deletion of the citations are still challenged.-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 21:04, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help) "Globally, an estimated 815,000 people killed themselves in 2000, making suicide the 13th leading cause of death.1 During the last 45 years, suicide rates have increased by 60% worldwide. Suicide is now among the 3 leading causes of death of those aged 15–44 years.1,2 Suicide attempts are up to 20 times more frequent than completed suicides.1" Still not completely happy with this ref though.
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
02:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)Is this map based on a data set or just a derivative of the WHO map found here? http://www.who.int/mental_health/prevention/suicide/suicideprevent/en/ Either way it should probably be referenced. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 02:56, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Like to add interactive world map Current Worldwide Suicide Rate as a external link. What you guys think about that. Thiagarajan Varadharaju ( talk) 17:56, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Ordered per WP:MEDMOS needs a section on the history of suicide. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 20:31, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Good job.-- Literaturegeek | T@1k? 22:08, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
IMO images are best if set a default. A couple are currently set at 250. All should be aware that they can set preferences for default pictures from 180 to what ever they wish. Any other thoughts? Removing Antarctica would improve the image. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:22, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Nice work on the gender specific maps, James. Would you consider that placing them with the subsection "Gender and suicide" would be as appropriate? At present, any browser wider than about 1340px will have the maps floating against the image above it, rather than the right margin. Moving them down a section avoids that problem on all browsers up to and including 1920px wide. -- RexxS ( talk) 03:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Reffering to the Jim Jones Guyana Massacre, i think it would be great to mention that people were pressured into it did not knowingly drink the poison or have a choice in the matter. The reason for this request is that my aunt died in this massacre and i would like it very much if would do her and me this honor. Respectly, Lenni Johnston. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.100.45.227 ( talk) 06:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Here is an interesting paper: Ajdacic-Gross V, Weiss MG, Ring M; et al. (2008).
"Methods of suicide: international suicide patterns derived from the WHO mortality database". Bull. World Health Organ. 86 (9): 726–32.
PMC
2649482.
PMID
18797649. {{
cite journal}}
: Explicit use of et al. in: |author=
(
help); Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link)
Doc James (
talk ·
contribs ·
email)
18:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help){{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:47, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Parasuicide ("suicide attempts") was redirected here almost two years ago, but isn't included in this article. Can someone either fix this omission, or recreate a ( properly sourced) article on the subject? (I'm not watching this page.) WhatamIdoing ( talk) 07:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
There's a bit of abuse of statistics here. The article states that 40% of world's suicides are accounted for by Japan, India and China combined. This suggests that that's a high proportion whereas in reality as almost 39% of the world's population lives there, it's hardly a significant statistic.
ItsIllak ( talk) 23:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Can we also say something about the ridiculous introduction? One of the most puzzling, intensely personal experiences in the world and you aim to attribute it to a cluster of mental illnesses and warning signs that precede the act. It is entirely disingenuous and characteristic of mock-objective pseudoscience.
Acts motivated by self-harm are not considered suicidal attempts, as the text points out. But the following sentence, that the is no causal relationship between the two, is unwarranted and controversial. At least one theorist, Thomas Joiner, in "Why people die by suicide",posits that acts of self-harm can precipitate suicide attemps. The author speculates that the experience of pain during self-harm can provide to the sufferer a mental image of what is expected during self-affliction of pain, thereby alleviating some inhibition towards a suicidal attempt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.85.5.20 ( talk) 10:25, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
One aspect of the "escape" motivation for suicide that I have not seen addressed: Have there ever been studies to determine what percentage of suicides and suicide attempts are undertaken by individuals who believe that death will usher in some sort of better, higher, or even merely benign afterlife (e.g., heaven, reincarnation, etc.) versus those who hold no such beliefs and desire annihilation or non-existence in preference to suffering? If such studies have been done, a brief summation of the findings would be a useful addition to this article. StanislavJ ( talk) 12:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Up to... should not be used in delivering statistical information unless you deliberately seek to mislead the reader —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.108.164.214 ( talk) 22:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
That is is what the article says in the second paragraph, however I can't seem to find solid, recent statistics verifying that suicide is the tenth leading cause of death worldwide. It seems to be generally shown between the 9th and the 14th, but I don't know which is the most accurate and recent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Micropsia ( talk • contribs) 21:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
A section on Suicide Pacts would be a good addition. S-Britland ( talk) 18:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
This article only discusses humans. Is there any incidence of suicidal behavior in animals? As in, animals that consciously choose to end their lives, not animals who are prone to killing themselves by accident. -- 86.197.188.189 ( talk) 20:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
The social insects- ants and termites especially- provide remarkable instances of self sacrifice for the sake of the group. Clearly, these insects lack the intentionality that human being have and thus it is difficult to assert that they are instances of suicide. However, from an evolutionary perspective the instinctual self sacrifice of the soldier ant provides a stronger case for the adaptive nature of the act precisely because humans can have goals other than evolutionary. I take up these issues in 'Suicide and Evolution: A Philosophical Analysis of the Definition of Suicide and an Examination of the Relationship Between Suicide and Evolution' ISBN 978-3-639-13444-5. Metabenji ( talk) 19:39, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Clearly this phrase is the norm, but doesn't it imply that suicide is a crime? Could this be addressed in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.71.103 ( talk) 04:51, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Might not the perceived meaninglessness of life also be cited as a reason for suicide? Tisane ( talk) 09:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
There should be something about the tendency, particularly among journalists, to view suicides as an opportunity to practice one's creative writing. For example, journalists often completely ignore the sources of authoritative information on suicide, such as the CDC's fact sheets (www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/suicide/index.html), in favor of something out of their own imagination. Godofredo29 ( talk) 16:25, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Would you care to pull at least one example out of an orafice of your choosing? I'm not saying you're not right, I'm just saying I have no idea where you are going with this or what you are trying to say. What exactly are people imagining and how does this contradict the "facts"? I'm truly interested. 213.167.158.254 ( talk) 12:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
So one in 4000 people kill themselves? And 1 in 400 try? Daniel Christensen ( talk) 00:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
This article could us a section on prevention. Have created one just by taking some info from Suicide prevention Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 12:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
i dont agree with suicide and i feel that people should tell some one how they feel before killing them selfs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.206.224.210 ( talk) 10:08, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
In the "Substance Abuse Section" it is claimed that "Up to 25% of drug addicts and alcoholics commit suicide". This seems to be an outrageously high number; I have known many alcoholics and drug addicts and not a single one has committed suicide. Such a dramatic claim should be supported by a proper citation; however, there is no citation to substantiate the claim that one in four addicts will kill themselves. I tried to remove the line, but I don't think I am able to edit this page, so if anyone can edit this page please remove the line or provide a proper citation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.128.166 ( talk) 21:36, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.
The following request appears on that page:
![]() | Many of the articles were selected semi-automatically from a list of indefinitely semi-protected articles. Please confirm that the protection level appears to be still warranted, and consider unprotecting instead, before applying pending changes protection to the article. |
Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.
Please update the Queue page as appropriate.
Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially
Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC).
This AfD may interest some of you.-- Epeefleche ( talk) 14:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
Some animals commit suicide too; shouldn't we mention that? Tisane talk/ stalk 06:33, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
It would be a good epitaph
Here Lies John Doe
He went home to be with the Lord
After exploding and covering his enemies
With sticky goo
Moved from Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Suicide-Too_much_information.3F
Hi, I am concerned by the level of detail contained in the entry for 'suicide'. I am aware that there are strict guidelines journalists have to adhere to when reporting any information about suicide. I wondered why these do not apply to Wikipedia. I have lost people close to me to suicide and am worried that Wikipedia's entry reads very much like an irresponsible 'how to' guide in places. This could prove fatal to a vulnerable, distressed person trawling the internet for sources of support and help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.77.107 ( talk) 12:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I would object to that whole principle of ignorance is strength, that holds that we can prevent suicide by getting rid of information about it. True, we would perhaps reduce the number of people who commit suicide after reading our suicide-related articles, but correlation is not causation. It is quite possible that a lot of suicidal people struggle to understand their feelings, and in their search for meaning, browse through our articles after doing a Google search. Much of the suicide-related information on the Internet is biased one way or the other, or laden with emotional propaganda, and thus not ideal for people who try to approach such decisions from a logical, unbiased point of view. Wikipedia can hopefully provide a source of balanced, factual information that will be useful to researchers attempting to understand suicide epidemics, suicidal people themselves, surviving family members of suicides, etc.
Even the suicide methods page can serve a legitimate harm reduction purpose. E.g., if people know that laying on a railroad track is not a surefire method of painless suicide, maybe they won't do that. Likewise, it might cause someone to reconsider his plan to kill himself with a .22 caliber rifle when he finds out that can cause permanent brain damage without killing him. More information is a good thing; consider that we also have pages on cross site scripting that could be useful to newbie hackers, but the info is probably even more useful to those seeking to safeguard their sites from such hackers. Tisane talk/ stalk 19:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
I have reverted these changes until they can be added again with a better range of sources. There is a great deal of debate about the psychological causes of suicide and this needs to be reflected in a discussion which gives information from a wider range of sources. These sources are all articles by the same person (and give links to a personal webpage at manchester university). Since the user who added these pages also added similar text to other pages on the same day and citing the same sources then it looks also as if this might be some sort of academic self-promotion. Jenafalt ( talk) 20:35, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Sorry I must have been in a grumpy mood when I made that comment. I was just alerted to the fact that this person had added work from the same sources to multiple pages after not having edited Wikipedia since last year. It rang some alarm bells. I'll try to not be so suspicious in the future! To clarify - I think it would be fine to re-add this information to the page, but it needs to be much more balanced as the text and related sources that were added only relate to one small aspect of this very complex and contentious issue. Jenafalt ( talk) 12:26, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
The first sentence read "Suicide is the act of a human being intentionally causing his own death." I changed it from "his" to "his or her", because suicide can be attributed to both men and women. If anyone wishes to change it back or change it to something else, they are welcome to do so, but I do not think it should only be attributed to men. LaughinSkull ( talk) 10:24, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to suggest that the picture of Thomas Chatterton be removed, or at least displayed less prominently in the article. The article is not about suicide in the romantic movement, romantic literature, or other such subjects - it's about suicide in general. A picture of a Romantic poet is hardly appropropriate to an article about a mental health care issue of this kind. It also runs the risk of glamorizing suicide, making it look exciting, sexy, romantic or whatever. Surely it's obvious that we shouldn't be doing that?
UserVOBO (
talk)
23:54, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I think there's a bit of a problem with the wording under this heading. It says:
"It appears that about one in three teen aged suicides is by a gay or lesbian. Since homosexuals represent only about 5% of the population, gays and lesbians are greatly over-represented."
I'm not sure if it is gramatically incorrect to use "gay" as a noun, but it is certainly offensive. As well as this, the author has not specified that the statistics are from the US. Perhaps this sentance should instead read thus:
"It appears that, of the teenagers who commit suicide in the US, about one in three are known to be gay. As only approximately 5% of the population is openly gay, this statistic suggests that teenagers who are gay are far more likely to commit suicide than those who not."
However, since the pervious sentence was copied directly from a website which does not seem particularly reliabe, and is very vague about facts, I think it would be better to use the more convincing evidence from and existing Wikiedpia article entitled "Suicide among LGBT youth":
A 1989 U.S. government study found that LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender) youth are two to three times more likely to attempt suicide than other young people.[1] This finding was supported by a 2001 study that found LGBT adolescents 2.3-2.5 times more likely to commit suicide than their heterosexual peers.[2]
And I copied their references: 1 ^ Feinleib, Marcia R., Ed. Report of the Secretary's Task Force on Youth Suicide. Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration (DHHS/PHS), Rockville, MD. 1989 2 ^ Russell ST, Joyner K (August 2001). "Adolescent sexual orientation and suicide risk: evidence from a national study". Am J Public Health 91 (8): 1276–81. PMID 11499118. PMC 1446760. http://www.ajph.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=11499118.
I would suggest also linking this page, but since the Suicide article is not specific to America as this LGBT article seems (for some reason) to be only about the US, this does not seem like such a good idea. Certainly I think that this section should include statistics about other countries, which I will spend some time finding later.
Emould ( talk) 02:56, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
==Representations of suicide in popular culture==
Film
- In The Godfather Part II (1974), Corleone Family consiglieri, Tom Hagen, and caporegime, Frank Pentangeli, make a deal. The Family will take care of Frank's dependents if Frank - who entered the Witness Protection Program and intended to testify about the Corleone Family's criminal activities in court, but ultimately did not - will pay penance for the intended disloyalty by slitting his wrists, Roman style, while taking a bath.
- The war drama, The Deer Hunter (1978), deals with such controversial issues as suicide, post-traumatic stress disorder, infidelity and mental illness.
- Heathers (1989) deals with the themes of individual and mass suicide by teenagers.
- The 1993 novel, The Virgin Suicides, and the 1999 film based on the book center on the suicides of five sisters in Grosse Pointe, Michigan during the 1970s. The Lisbon girls' suicides fascinate their community as their neighbors struggle to find an explanation for the acts.
Television
- HBO's series, The Sopranos, frequently addresses the theme of suicide.
- Three characters successfully kill themselves: mobster Eugene Pontecorvo (in " Members Only") and Tony Soprano's emotionally unstable comare, Gloria Trillo (as we learn in " Everybody Hurts"), both hang themselves when they feel trapped by their lives, and corrupt, heavily indebted policeman, Vin Makazian, jumps off a bridge (in " Nobody Knows Anything") after he has been arrested and must turn in his gun and badge.
- At least two successful suicides by characters' acquaintances are cited: Tony's sister, Janice Soprano, tells Tony (in " Everybody Hurts") that her neighbor in Seattle killed himself by "sucking down the end of a deer rifle", and Dr. Jennifer Melfi tells Tony that one of her patients committed suicide while Melfi was on the lam (in " Guy Walks Into a Psychiatrist's Office...".
- Several other characters contemplate, threaten, or bungle suicide attempts: Tony Soprano's ex-comare, Irina, threatens to kills herself (in " The Knight in White Satin Armor"), Artie Bucco - perhaps Tony's best friend - attempts suicide by mixing pills and liquor (in " Everybody Hurts"), A.J. Soprano unsuccessfully attempts suicide by drowning (in " The Second Coming") - which is fortunate, since he ultimately wants to live - and Tony's sister, Janice Soprano, confides to Bobby Baccalieri (in " Pie-O-My") that she came close to shooting herself when her husband left her, but was saved by thoughts of her son, Harpo.
- Tony Soprano dreams about self-immolation (in " Funhouse"), but denies his suicidal ideations in " The Legend of Tennessee Moltisanti", when he asks whether or not Christopher has ever contemplated suicide and Chris responds: "Suicide is for the weak".
- The British soap opera series, Brookside, regularly wrote characters out by means of suicide, such as Petra Taylor, Theresa Nolan, Liam Riley, Graeme Curtis, Clive Crosbie and Simon Howe - who committed suicide - and Gladys Charlton - who died after an assisted suicide.
This will need refs else it appears to be little more than original research. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 13:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
{{ edit semi-protected}} "Counter-arguments include the following: that the sixth commandment is more accurately translated as "thou shalt not murder", not necessarily applying to the self; that taking one's own life no more violates God's Law than does curing a disease; and that a number of suicides by followers of God are recorded in the Bible with no dire condemnation.[98]" should be omitted because in Catholic doctrine there is no arguing whether or not suicide is a sin, it is a sin beacause murdering also includes yourself. i also think that methods of suicide should be ommitted so that people wont get ideas of how to commit suicide.
22butter22 ( talk) 03:48, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Whether one believes suicide is a great evil from which a person must be rescued from, or whether one views the choice between life or death as a basic human right - it's impossible to deny that this is a matter of (polarising) debate. The article currently bears six external links, *all* six fervently in support of the former stance. Can we balance this out a little?
It's as if the 'external links' on the Homosexuality page were to point to, say, some speech from the Pope, Ann Coulter's website, and the Westboro Baptist Church... it just makes an otherwise very good article look unnecessarily 'opinionated'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.211.74.250 ( talk) 02:19, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
An interesting study [15] Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:43, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I was wondering if maybe it would be a good idea to add a hatnote suggesting the user where he could find help should the individual want to commit suicide. I know there are some links at the bottom but maybe something more visible might help better? when you make a google search for suicide there is a link to the National Suicide Prevention Line in the US. Thanks -- Camilo Sanchez ( talk) 23:59, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
Over two days have passed since user 'Camilo Sanchez' added an utterly un-encyclopedic (not to mention bigoted) link at the top of this page. Could someone whose account is privileged enough kindly revert back to the last good edit, by user 'GraemeS'? Tiresias79 ( talk) 18:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
{{ edit semi-protected}} Please include Samaritans of Singapore (SOS) in the External Links section as this can be a relevant site (www.sos.org.sg) for users who may want to find out more about suicide prevention and resources. SOS is a non-profit organization which aims to provide 24-hour confidential emotional support to people in crisis, thinking of suicide or affected by suicide in Singapore. SOS is also an affliation of Befrienders Worldwide, which is listed as an external link. Thank you for your consideration.
203.125.207.182 ( talk) 11:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}} "Since homosexuals represent only about 5% of the population, gays and lesbians are greatly over-represented." Given the disputed numbers of the people who are homosexual/bisexual, either self-identified or in practice, the percentage of people who are homosexual in the article should be footnoted / commented that the 5% figure is disputed. Reference the percentage of people who engage in homosexual acts in the Kinsey Report and other more recent studies.
Nearly 10% of Self-Proclaimed 'Straight' Men Only Have Sex With Men By Daniel J. DeNoon WebMD Health NewsReviewed by Louise Chang, MD
Sept. 18, 2006 --
Nearly one in 10 men who say they're straight have sex only with other men, a New York City survey finds.
And 70% of those straight-identified men having sex with men are married.
In fact, 10% of all married men in this survey report same-sex behavior during the past year.
See URL below for the remainder of the article.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinsey_scale http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/research/ak-hhscale.html http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=single-angry-straight-male http://www.webmd.com/sex/news/20060918/many-straight-men-have-gay-sex 76.189.127.64 ( talk) 01:15, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)===Sexual Orientation===Data concerning young homosexuals is somewhat unreliable. It appears that about one in three teen aged suicides is by a gay or lesbian. Since homosexuals represent only about 5% of the population, gays and lesbians are greatly over-represented. [1]
Several population-based studies have reported an elevated risk of death by suicide [2] suicide attempts [3] and suicide ideation among traumatic brain injury survivors [4] It has been suggested that this is related to hormone deficiencies caused by pituitary damage, a frequent concomitant of head injury [5] [6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joannalane48 ( talk • contribs) 23:14, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Please change (under heading Suicide Risk Factors - Biological") the following
BiologicalGenetics has an effect on suicide risk[57] accounting for 30–50% of the variance.[58] Much of this relationship acts through the heritability of mental illness.[58] There is also evidence to suggest that if a parent has committed suicide, it is a strong predictor of suicide attempts among the offspring.[59]
to
BiologicalGenetics has an effect on suicide risk[57] accounting for 30–50% of the variance.[58] Much of this relationship acts through the heritability of mental illness.[58] There is also evidence to suggest that if a parent has committed suicide, it is a strong predictor of suicide attempts among the offspring.[59]
Several population-based studies have reported an elevated risk of death by suicide, [1] suicide attempts, [2] and suicide ideation among traumatic brain injury survivors [3]. It has been suggested that this is related to hormone deficiencies caused by pituitary damage, a frequent consequence of head injury [4], [5].
[edit] = References =1.^ Teasdale TW, Engberg AW, “Suicide after traumatic brain injury: a population study.” J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry (2001; 71: 436-440) 2.^ Silver JM, Kramer R, Greenwald S, Weissman M, “The Association between head injuries and psychiatric disorders: findings from the New Haven NIMH Epidemiologic Catchment Area Study,” Brain Inj (2001: 15: 935-945) 3.^ Simpson G, Tate R. “Suicidality after traumatic brain injury: demographic, injury and clinical correlates.” Psychological Medicine (2002; 32: 687-98) 4.^ Popovic V, Aimaretti G, Casanueva FF, Ghigo E. “Hypopituitarism following traumatic brain injury.” Growth Hormone and IGF Research (2005; 15: 3: 177-184) 5.^ Schneider HJ, Kreitschmann-Andermahr I, Ghigo E, Stalla GK, Agha A. “Hypothalamopituitary dysfunction following traumatic brain injury and aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. A systematic review.” JAMA (2007; 26:1429-38)
Joannalane48 ( talk) 22:43, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
You may consider adding this external link to a 2003 monograph on suicide available online at Towards a Suicide Free Society: Identify Suicide Prevention as Public Health Policy Philosophypsychiatry ( talk) 04:18, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
{{edit semi-protected}} Joannalane48 ( talk) 11:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
This phrase raises some questions: "Up to 25% of drug addicts and alcoholics commit suicide ...[30]" ( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1932152). While it is cited, and not a dead link, it is only a link to an abstract and not the entire article.
In the article's 2nd paragraph, it says "Over one million people commit suicide every year ... [3]". http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1932152
However, the WHO also says that there are over 140 million alcoholics worldwide ( http://www.who.int/director-general/speeches/2001/english/20010219_youngpeoplealcohol.en.html). If the original citation in the suicide entry is correct (25% of alcoholics and drug addicts commit suicide), the number of suicides would 35 million counting ONLY alcoholics. I wonder if the original citation (to the abstract) meant to say that 25% of suicide victims are attributable to alcohol/drug abuse? It appears the numbers don't add up and that something is amiss here.
Thanks for your time!
Ongaku72 ( talk) 22:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Guys, I realize that Wikipedia is meant to be a "Neutral" and empirical source of knowledge that has a strict set of rules and guidelines. That being said; it's a reasonable assumption to make that people considering committing suicide would looking at the topic on the internet. Wikipedia is one of the internet's largest websites; links to it are vast and everyone knows about it. Could a banner be placed at the top of this article linking to help for people considering suicide? I just Googled "suicide" and the first thing that is shown in the Google result is the same kind of banner that I'm talking about (I'm not basing this discussion point on that, Google seem to have independently thought up the idea; a friend recently took his own life prompting me to make this post. See: http://www.google.com.au/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=Suicide). If wikipedia can run a massive banner above every page thanking the New South Wales Library of Australia for donating works, I think it could manage a small banner label offering help for those contempating suicide. If it takes the breaking of one Wikipedia rule, and ends up saving one lift, it will have all been worth it. Skythe ( talk) 17:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help):Other suicide prevention strategies that have been considered are crisis centres and hotlines, method control, and media education. Public awareness campaigns can increase knowledge, self-identification of depression, and help seeking.133 There is minimal research on these strategies. Even though crisis centres and hotlines are used by suicidal youth, information about their impact on suicidal behaviour is lacking.
If you google suicide it just has a little "need help?" thing and a phone number for a local samaritans service at the top. Would that be so unthinkably against the rules?
Wikiditm (
talk)
18:07, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
I don't have an opinion on this specific matter either way, but whenever someone proposes an additional banner or warning with the intention of being helpful or informative to other Wikipedia users, it's immediately shot down because Wikipedia already has a disclaimer. I'd just like to point out that disclaimers aren't (and aren't meant to be) helpful or informative to users (who rarely read them, if ever) but only to relinquish any assumed responsibility. A hotline banner is not a disclaimer. Wikipedia is not obligated to take measures to prevent suicide, but that does not preclude it from doing so. The issue here is whether Wikipedia should take a stance on the issue of suicide itself, i.e., against suicide. While this would go against Wikipedia's policy of neutrality, one could argue that Wikipedia does occasionally go against that policy on some issues, e.g., the pro-Wikipedia stance illustrated by banners asking for donations. OzW ( talk) 20:06, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
If anything, there should be a section on how attitudes about suicidal people need to change. Suicidal people are treated like they have the plague. Their symptoms are treated (not by doctors...) by people as selfish. Their symptoms are treated like it isn't worthy of being spoken about. Too often people either brush off a suicidal person by not wanting to talk to them (I am thinking of friends and family) or they give them the 'get over it' or 'get over yourself' sort of conversation. None of those attitudes are helpful at all when someone is truely depressed and hopeless. Mylittlezach ( talk) 21:31, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
The suicide legislation section in this article has limited information and the link it provides to the 'main' article has even LESS information. Suicide used to be illegal in the USA. I was looking on here to see if it still is. Where is all the legislation information? There is nothing except a blip about Brazil and Germany. I looked years ago and there was more information. Please have someone redo that main article on Suicide Legislation with some real information. Mylittlezach ( talk) 21:39, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
I wish I had access to WestLaw or some other legal online resources, but, alas, I do not. I did wade through about 20 pages on the internet. I did find one site that appears to be reliable. I do not think I have the literary chops to write for Wikipedia. Here is the link: http://www.freelawanswer.com/law/1507-1.html
I hope the link highlights... Mylittlezach ( talk) 22:30, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
Should hunger striking be included in this article as a form of suicide? If so, the current version implies that hunger striking, and indeed suicide as a protest, are purely Irish phenomenons, and that is not true. If hunger striking ending in death is to be accepted as a form of suicide, we must also accept that Mohandas Gandhi attempted suicide. The article Hunger Strike contains more global examples. Quasihuman ( talk) 20:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
This is basically a cotract. Needs merging. -- Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 00:11, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Youth Suicide warrants it's own page. The issues that lead to and the impact of Youth suicide are not exactly the same as in the case of adult suicide (not suggesting in any way that one is more or less acceptable/worse/has more impact etc than the other). For example, young people can be more influenced by the suicide of a celebrity or idol, and youth specific services are already rare and young peoples experience is mostly that they get channeled into a generalist service developed more with adults in mind. I believe it would be an error to follow that same pattern here. I think the article could be further improved by adding youth specific data and material about successful interventions from around the world.
In terms of neutrality I see no conflict with the notion that a section about services supporting young people seeking help, it could describe the modality of different services and external websites relevant to the content could be listed at the bottom of the page. Need Peace. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Need Peace ( talk • contribs) 19:07, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
The intro of the article lists suicide as 13th leading cause of death, the epidemiology section lists it as 10th, and the actual linked epidemiology article lists it as 12th. A little clarification on these numbers seems necessary. 96.53.84.50 ( talk) 09:00, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
This was the review removed PMID:17824349. The ref with which it was replaced does not work. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 10:24, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
With the rise of people finding how to commit suicide, using forums and websites to establish suicide pacts, watch suicides "live" (no pun intended), goad people into doing it (fake pacts) and finding others to enter a downward spiral with - the effect of internet on suicide promotion and prevention is notable, imho - not unlike the pro-anorexia crowd on the internet. For or against? Any good sources? Pär Larsson ( talk) 15:38, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Suicide |
---|
These templates are not recommended to be placed in the lead but at the end of the article. Wondering if we should change it format and move it there? Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 23:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
I am not sure how the fact that psychiatric disorders are associated with self harm relates to prevention of self harm? Thus I have moved this content to the causes section that discusses the relationship between psychiatric disorders and self harm where it is better placed. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 02:13, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
The article's main image, The Death of Chatterton was removed. Since this is a fairly major change and was not discussed, and especially because it wasn't replaced, I've restored it for the time being. I'm not particularly opposed to having another image if another one would be better, but I'm not convinced by the stated reason for removal, that it romanticizes suicide. I'm not sure that it does so and I'm not sure that if it did it would violate NPOV: you could argue that the main image for the article on lions romanticizes lions, but would that be the same as arguing that it was POV? Does anyone have a better image to suggest, or any other thoughts on the image? GideonF ( talk) 10:10, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Here are some more "people in the world who argee with you that the image romanticizes suicide" in case no one else has "taken as read":
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, what is placed on it should be based on fact. I am not the only one to question the placement of the image on the page. I've stated the facts with references and citing Wikipedia policy why it should not be used, so unless you or someone else can do otherwise there is no plausible reason for the image to be there except for temper tantrums and bulllying. 7mike5000 ( talk) 15:37, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
This is an encyclopedia not a "patient handout". The image we have now is appropriate for the purpose for which it is being used. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:30, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
I agree 100% with every word posted by Mike, above, including his view of GideonF's uncivil baiting. I won't repeat Mike's excellent and, I believe, compelling argument, which is reason enough to remove the image from this article. However, as a depiction of death by arsenic, the painting is grossly misleading, so it should be removed on that basis alone. Suicides by arsenic do not drift into a tranquil eternal sleep but generally die covered in their own vomit and shit, slumped over a toilet after seizure or acute kidney failure. It should be removed because it may mislead some distressed person into choosing arsenic over a more humane mode of suicide. I oppose replacing it with any other image that romanticises suicide for the reasons eloquently laid out by Mike. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 09:30, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 03:24, 27 September 2011 (UTC)Initially, the patient experiences a metallic taste in the mouth and a garlicky odor on the breath. Burning and dryness of the mouth and throat, dysphagia, colicky abdominal pain, projectile vomiting and profuse, watery diarrhea or "rice-water stools" are also early manifestations and occur within hours of exposure. Shock develops rapidly as a result of dehydration and generalized vasodilation. [25]
Mike you could try a RfC to see if their is support for its replacement or removal. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 05:17, 13 September 2011 (UTC)Is Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton an appropriate illustration for the article Suicide?
Yes happy with math and science. The wording you propose is excellent. Add yes / no / discussion heading and post. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:24, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
I happen to be all for the use of images, I have been accused of using images for "decorative purposes", which admittedly on occasion I have used copyrighted images using a questionable fair-use rationale. However my indiscretions did not have the potential to negatively affect people. As stated by User:Bodnotbod, I myself tried to find a suitable alternative and I can't think of anything appropriate which does not come off as pandering to a certain point of view or look superfluos. No medical articles contain superfluos or gratuitous images, this is the type of article to emulate: Medscape: Depression and Suicide [28]. The images are limited to graphs and charts complimenting and visually elucidating the subject matter, there is no decorative use of images. The image sets the tone for the rest of the page which in my opinion does not even come close to a reputable source on the subject of suicide. As far as the wording, I believe in order to avoid the same protracted debate in the future over potential images, it should be worded::
Is Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton or any similar such image appropriate illustrations for the article Suicide?
7mike5000 ( talk) 20:23, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
This formulation rules out a yes/no response. Commenters would need to be offered four options:Should the article Suicide contain an image depicting suicide, or an image that could reasonably be seen as sanitizing, glorifying or romanticizing suicide.
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 23:50, 14 September 2011 (UTC)Is Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton an appropriate illustration for the article Suicide?
How about simply "should we use image A, image B or no image to illustrate suicide" Followed by support A B no image and discussion headings? Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:02, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
and make a section for yes/no answers to each of these three questions? -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 07:01, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Should Suicide contain any image depicting or symbolizing suicide? Is any image that romanticizes suicide appropriate for the article? Does Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton romanticize suicide?
Oh, come on. That question is ridiculously loaded and POV. The whole problem here, as I see it, is someone with an anti-suicide agenda POV pushing
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 10:17, 15 September 2011 (UTC)If an image says nothing about the article subject, and only performs a decorative function, must it be removed, per this policy, or may it remain if a majority of editors like it there. That is, does the policy prescribe removal in this situation, and if so, does local consensus trump that prescription?
Gideon, James, Mike, Bodnotbod? -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 12:33, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Should Suicide contain an image depicting or symbolizing suicide? Is an image that romanticizes suicide appropriate for the article? Does Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chatterton romanticize suicide?
-- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 15:05, 15 September 2011 (UTC)Is it appropriate for the article Suicide to contain an image depicting suicide? Is Henry Wallis's painting The death of Chattertonappropriate for this article?
Yes Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 23:29, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
What areas of interest should we invite?
I'd also like to notify WikiProject Medicine, WikiProject Psychology, and WikiProject Philosophy. We could try WikiProject Religion. My experience of that topic is a strong WP:BATTLE ethos (but maybe I just picked the wrong articles). -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 15:55, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
I removed the following: -
A disproportionate amount of suicides in the world occur in Asia, which is estimated to account for up to 60% of all suicides. According to the WHO, China, India and Japan may account for 40% of all world suicides. [rf 1]
- ^ "WHO Statement: World Suicide Prevention Day 2008" (PDF). World Health Organization. 2008. Retrieved 2008-10-26.
According to the article World population somewhat over 60% of the worlds population lives in Asia. Moreover the populations of India, Japan and China add up to 38.13 %.
The source actually says nothing about proportion, and uses the weasel words "up to" so in fact all we can theoretically conclude is that "A disproportionate amount of suicides in the world occur outside Asia" - but even this would be reading to much into the somewhat vague figure "up to 60%" as 60% could well be rounded and really mean, say, "up to 60.4%".
Rich
Farmbrough,
22:15, 20 October 2011 (UTC).
There are currently three main photos porposed for the lead. Which one should we use? Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 05:09, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
(Added Rich Farmbrough, 21:58, 20 October 2011 (UTC).)
I am all in favour of illustrations to any acceptable WP article or topic whatsoever, from sexual techniques to murder, taking in suicide on the way. However, I cannot see what any of the proposed pictures have to do with the price of parsnips. Except that some of them are better pictures than Chatty, they add no value and they suffer the same objections of irrelevance. If we present a picture in an article, its presence should leave readers better informed than its absence would do. Which of those pictures would do so in the proper context? They might do for an article on art in communication, but what do they tell anyone in an article on suicide? JonRichfield ( talk) 09:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
The whole discussion is off the point. The first thing required is to write the article in a proper logical structure. Having achieved that, decide which points in the article would profit from pictures, and if so, of which nature and for what purpose. Then consider whether any picture adds the appropriate value. Saying: "Oh dear, some people didn't like that pic; let's propose a few rival candidates" is waaaayyyy off track. Don't ask the authors' opinions, ask the article. Ask the logic. JonRichfield ( talk) 09:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Suicide ( Latin suicidium, from sui caedere, "to kill oneself") is the act of an organism intentionally causing its own death. Suicide is often committed out of despair, or attributed to some underlying mental disorder which includes depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, alcoholism and drug abuse. [7] Pressures or misfortunes such as financial difficulties or troubles with interpersonal relationships may play a significant role. [8] Over one million people die by suicide every year...
I came in from RFC. I really wonder what value a picture of a dead or dying person would have in the context of this article. Perhaps I am not a very visual person. Greglocock ( talk) 00:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
I am a new editor on this article and my impression right away is that I appreciate the factual information provided in the article. The pictures do not seem like they add to this and might be better placed in an art history article? Coaster92 ( talk) 21:55, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
How do I vote and/or add "no illustration" as an option? 216.175.109.139 ( talk) 04:48, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
There would probably have to be another "Rfc". It's asinine to have any image but Socrates is a vast improvement over the crap that was up there. You could see all the B.S. necessary to remove the previous image "The Death of Chatterton". 7mike5000 ( talk) 21:32, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Some new antriretrovirals used in first line treatment of HIV/AIDS have suicide thoughts and actual suicides as common side effects. These include Isentress® (saltegravir) http://www.isentress.com/raltegravir/isentress/consumer/patient_product_information/index.jsp; ATRIPLA that contains three HIV medicines in one pill: SUSTIVA® (efavirenz), EMTRIVA® (emtricitabine) and VIREAD® (tenofovir disoproxil fumarate. The mechanism of action for this tragic side effect is unknown and the suicidal thoughs, the acts and the depression and insomnia contribute to a state of desperation described in some patients. http://www.atripla.com/atripla-side-effects.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpenarosas ( talk • contribs) 19:12, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
"Around 100 studies have been conducted to examine the ‘ Werther effect’ – the phenomenon whereby there is an increased rate of completed or attempted suicide following the depiction of an individual’s suicide in the media. These ‘media influence studies’ provide strong evidence for the existence of the Werther effect in the news media, and equivocal evidence for its existence in the entertainment media." [30] Thus it appears that announcing suicides as current events increase rates but art work does not. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 11:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I think it is more "if people identify with the person who committee suicide" and the suicide is presented in a positive / romantic way than that could increase the risk of suicide. I view Chatterton as safe a few people would identify with an 1800s poet. Art, movies and plays are entertainment and I have provided a study which found that the evidence regarding these is equivocal. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 22:01, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
The media guidelines of the American Association of Suicidology and the American Suicide Prevention Foundation recommend using no pictures when discussing suicide, in order to reduce both the risk of romanticizing suicide and the risk of promoting contagion suicides.3 I oppose any depiction of suicide in this article because such images add nothing to the readers' understanding and may do actual harm.
I'll make a comment that because it is a free image, there is less of a requirement for having the image help increase the reader's understand than there is for non-free media. It's clearly not flat out decorative or out of place, and it's not non-free where we would be more critical of such inclusion. I've no other comment and whether the image is actually appropriate otherwise, but it's certainly not against IUP. -- MASEM ( t) 14:00, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Citing WP:NOTCENSORED in an image debate should have a sort of Godwin's Law effect. If your only/best argument for keeping an image is to make a stand against censorship, then your argument isn't building an encyclopaedia and could fall into disrupting Wikipedia to make a point territory. That policy section seems to be regarded as some as an excuse to reject all pleas to common sense, reasoned argument or tact. Yes we don't remove images just because some people find it objectionable but we also don't keep them just because some people find them objectionable and so must be protected at all costs. Colin° Talk 08:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm a big fan of taking advice from professionals who have to deal with these issues as their day job. We can all have our own opinion on the effect of this picture or that picture, or on whether suicidal people might be reading this article. Our opinions might be useful, harmful or of uncertain value -- we have little way of knowing. For example, the suggestion of using a shocking picture to deter people. Often, well meaning measures can have a paradoxical effect and what may deter one person may encourage two others. Note: taking advice is different from being legally pressured into doing something -- as happened with the Rorschach images. Whether or not the professional guidance is based on mere expert opinion or is the result of statistical analysis or even some randomised controlled trial, it is worth more than the opinions of Wikipedians IMO. We should not reject it lightly and certainly not just to make a point. Colin° Talk 08:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Found some evidence "Around 100 studies have been conducted to examine the ‘ Werther effect’ – the phenomenon whereby there is an increased rate of completed or attempted suicide following the depiction of an individual’s suicide in the media. These ‘media influence studies’ provide strong evidence for the existence of the Werther effect in the news media, and equivocal evidence for its existence in the entertainment media." [40] Thus it appears that announcing suicides as current events increase rates but I would consider this image entertainment. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 11:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
The professionals have their own POV and bias (c.f. the Rorschach debacle), whereas Wikipedia doesn't/musn't (insofar as its ethos is merely to be neutral and informative). And since we're talking about an editorial decision as opposed to an issue of informational accuracy, WP:RS isn't applicable. -- Cybercobra (talk) 04:57, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
This particular picture, as Anthonyhcole notes, is not a realistic depicture of suicide. It is romantic art. It is therefore not encyclopaedic for an article on suicide. It would suit an article discussing suicide in literature and art (something, that from a brief scan, this article doesn't cover).
Suicide is not a concept that requires illustration in order to be understood, nor does a picture help in any significant way towards understanding it. Possibly one could argue that seeing a picture of someone after they have hanged themselves aids ones understanding of hanging but most people would consider such a shocking picture voyeuristic rather than educational. Our article on toilet doesn't have someone sitting on one wiping their bum. And it would only deal with one method, so using such a picture for the lead would place undue weight on that. Colin° Talk 08:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one. I think appropriately chosen images add to articles. Showing an image of a pregnant women is better than leaving the lead blank as is showing a reasonable image of suicide. I think both add to the educational value of the article. A historical image of suicide put it into historical perspective. That this is not a new phenomena. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 13:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
This continues the discussion above between myself and Anthony, which was taking up space in the voting section. I don't think the key question is about what the image may or may not do (it may do anything. It may contain a coded message to Al-Qaeda sleeper cells), I think it's about whether Wikipedia cares. Most of the opposition to this image comes from people who, like yourself, have a moral objection to suicide. I'm not here to debate the morality of suicide, it's simply my position that a diversity of opinion exists on the subject and that Wikipedia shouldn't favour one view over the other, per the "Non-negotiable" NPOV policy. Imagine, for a moment, that you do not have any opinion either way on the question of whether being alive is better than being dead. If you did not, would you be making the same arguments you're making now? GideonF ( talk) 13:55, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Consensus is against the use of the "Death of Chatterton" and I agree that this it is not an accurate image of the subject matter is not the most appropriate picture for this article. There does seem to be support for a image however. "The Suicide" does not appear to romantize the subject and is a more accurate depiction while still not being gory. Thus I hope it addresses many of the concerns raised. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 11:47, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
(undent) Regardless, it does (1) clearly depict suicide witout forcing the concept through captions, (2) provide a sense of the history of the subject. It also directly contradicts the lead, which I'm fixing either way, since "West" is such a vague concept and suicide was fairly acceptable in the Classical era. For the record, I am specifically opposed to a photo of a dead body, which is just voyeuristic and distracting: suicide isn't about bodies, it's about death. The metaphysical is far more important than the physical on this topic: people don't ask "what did they do with the body?" but "why did he kill himself?" SDY ( talk) 15:37, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
Looking at the image of Ophelia I am sure there will be the same concerns as Chatterton. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 09:29, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
And WP:IUP says imagesImages must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly and directly related to the article's topic. Images are primarily meant to inform readers by providing visual information.
(My bolding.) This policy is moderated by this recently added to WP:IMAGEshould be relevant and increase readers' understanding of the subject matter.
This policy does not say "Any picture is better than no picture." Since Edouard Manet, The Suicide is related to the topic but not the article, and does not add to the readers' understanding in any meaningful way, I have deleted it. If someone can defend its inclusion on policy grounds, please do so. -- Anthonyhcole ( talk) 11:39, 29 September 2011 (UTC)Because the Wikipedia project is in a position to offer multimedia learning to its audience (which includes visual learners), images are an important part of any article's presentation. Effort should therefore be made to improve quality and choice of images or captions (in accordance with the details of this page), rather than deleting them - especially on pages which lack visuals.
(undent) I don't think the Manet is a terrible image to use for the article, but we could do better. I'm a little concerned that "educational value" might be construed to mean "blood and guts and gore" which really aren't all that educational. Dead people are messy, not exactly a useful or necessarily on-topic lesson (i.e. the article isn't about anatomy or corpses). What can we provide visually that's actually educational? I've proposed either something from history (e.g. Socrates) or something from literature (e.g. R&J), which both have specific educational value. SDY ( talk) 14:42, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
" But this had better not turn into a bunch of dudes who've never shown any interest in suicide before, slapping some shit together after a frenetic afternoon of googling, just so you can make some point. "
— Anthonyhcole
Yes and this image informs, it is only your opinion that it does not. Consensus is that we should have an image. We have agreed not to use one that romanticizes the subject matter. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 17:47, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
"I see nothing remotely inappropriate in what I said."
It does inform the reader of a number of things as mentioned (guns are a common medthod of suicide, the most common in the USA if I remember correct) there is a long history to suicide. This image does comply with policy. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:44, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
I have stated a couple of things. You could try to get consensus. Current consensus is that we should have an image. This one here does illustrate suicide. Therefore it does give information. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 20:43, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
The previous image is better as it shows suicide not someone who is sad such as the current image. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 14:00, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
(undent) Dragging this conversation back from the brink... As long as the image doesn't actually appear twice in the same article I don't think re-using it is a problem. There might actually be some logic to having the lead article have the same image as the template. Given that only someone looking very closely at the images would even see that the goblet is from the same painting, I don't think this is a big deal. SDY ( talk) 16:07, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)