The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
This is going to be a weird one so please stay with me. This list as it currently stands is 299,997 bytes and has no citations because there are more entries than the per page template limit of MediaWiki. The consensus on this article's talk page has repeatedly been in favor of not splitting it due to the sort functions. We are in a bind because it is impossible to
verify the information, violating
BLP, which covers recent deaths, while leaving it in its current state.
The article does not show that this
list is notable as a stand alone list. Doing some
BEFORE I noticed that there is quite a bit of discussion of the number of deaths and trying to calculate the excess mortality over the past 2 years, but very little
attempt to exhaustively list the people who have died of COVID-19. There are some
listicles of 20 or so celebs that died but no in depth discussion of the phenomenon or anything as wide reaching as this. Maybe in a few years when the history of the pandemic is being written we can return to this subject, but right not, no.
Comment Strictly speaking, we don't need citations here, because only blue-linked individuals are included, and their articles should already include the citations for cause of death. Sometimes, footnotes are clutter; for example,
List of people by Erdős number gets by just fine without them, because any given item is supported by the contents of the linked biography page and/or a check with a standard database. I'm also not convinced that splitting by year would be such a great detriment to sortability in practice.
XOR'easter (
talk)
17:29, 29 November 2021 (UTC)reply
But what policy is actually being violated? Verification requiring one extra mouse click is not the same as information being unverifiable. And I don't think that the comparison to heart disease, stroke, or lung cancer is actually illustrative. None of those originated in 2019.
XOR'easter (
talk)
04:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I did not make the argument that other stuff exist. I was responding to the nominator mentioning these articles that they claim didn't exist and what they claimed was the reason why.
DreamFocus00:42, 30 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep Agreed with comments above that the lack of inline citations isn't a problem here as all entries are blue-linked. I disagree with the nominator's comparison to lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke. Coronavirus is a (very long) event and there will hopefully become a time when nobody is dying of it. It's very unlikely we will eradicate all deaths by stroke for example. Thus eventually there will be a finite scope for this list.
NemesisAT (
talk)
16:40, 30 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep; however, in a similar vein to what
User:Havradim said, it should probably be split. I would suggest going even further than what
User:Havradim said, however, in that it should not only be split by year, but by month. There should be a page called "List of deaths due to COVID-19", but instead of containing deaths on that page, it should have a section header for 2020, for 2021 (and later for 2022 and beyond, as will likely be the case; my best guess is it will be around 2023 or 2024 when the pandemic really starts to peter out), and under each section header, links to pages for each month (say, COVID-19 deaths in January 2020) or for a range of months (COVID-19 deaths in January-March 2020). The list provided by this page, even if or when split in the manner just described, should be kept because it provides an excellent reference of which countries had notable persons dying at what times. As sample persons, the deaths of these notable persons can provide insight into which regions were being hit at what times, and of course, since these are notable persons in themselves, provide an understanding of the wide range of people who were affected by and died from COVID-19.
AMBtheMarylander2102 (
talk)
01:47, 1 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Did you read the last sentence in that? It is generally presumed that
obviously appropriate material, such as the inclusion of
Apple in the
List of fruits, does not require an inline citation. You can click on any entry and verify the information that easily, the infobox showing when they died and the cause of death being covid.
DreamFocus05:17, 1 December 2021 (UTC)reply
You should read over
WP:BDP...major bio concern considering cause of death by COVID for those that refuse vaccinations are being denied death benefits. Serious legal stuff here... we should follow the basics on sourcing. Don't make our readers run around and hunt down sources.... that would be the opposite of enabling research and ease of access.Moxy-00:02, 3 December 2021 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
This is going to be a weird one so please stay with me. This list as it currently stands is 299,997 bytes and has no citations because there are more entries than the per page template limit of MediaWiki. The consensus on this article's talk page has repeatedly been in favor of not splitting it due to the sort functions. We are in a bind because it is impossible to
verify the information, violating
BLP, which covers recent deaths, while leaving it in its current state.
The article does not show that this
list is notable as a stand alone list. Doing some
BEFORE I noticed that there is quite a bit of discussion of the number of deaths and trying to calculate the excess mortality over the past 2 years, but very little
attempt to exhaustively list the people who have died of COVID-19. There are some
listicles of 20 or so celebs that died but no in depth discussion of the phenomenon or anything as wide reaching as this. Maybe in a few years when the history of the pandemic is being written we can return to this subject, but right not, no.
Comment Strictly speaking, we don't need citations here, because only blue-linked individuals are included, and their articles should already include the citations for cause of death. Sometimes, footnotes are clutter; for example,
List of people by Erdős number gets by just fine without them, because any given item is supported by the contents of the linked biography page and/or a check with a standard database. I'm also not convinced that splitting by year would be such a great detriment to sortability in practice.
XOR'easter (
talk)
17:29, 29 November 2021 (UTC)reply
But what policy is actually being violated? Verification requiring one extra mouse click is not the same as information being unverifiable. And I don't think that the comparison to heart disease, stroke, or lung cancer is actually illustrative. None of those originated in 2019.
XOR'easter (
talk)
04:58, 30 November 2021 (UTC)reply
I did not make the argument that other stuff exist. I was responding to the nominator mentioning these articles that they claim didn't exist and what they claimed was the reason why.
DreamFocus00:42, 30 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep Agreed with comments above that the lack of inline citations isn't a problem here as all entries are blue-linked. I disagree with the nominator's comparison to lung cancer, heart disease, and stroke. Coronavirus is a (very long) event and there will hopefully become a time when nobody is dying of it. It's very unlikely we will eradicate all deaths by stroke for example. Thus eventually there will be a finite scope for this list.
NemesisAT (
talk)
16:40, 30 November 2021 (UTC)reply
Keep; however, in a similar vein to what
User:Havradim said, it should probably be split. I would suggest going even further than what
User:Havradim said, however, in that it should not only be split by year, but by month. There should be a page called "List of deaths due to COVID-19", but instead of containing deaths on that page, it should have a section header for 2020, for 2021 (and later for 2022 and beyond, as will likely be the case; my best guess is it will be around 2023 or 2024 when the pandemic really starts to peter out), and under each section header, links to pages for each month (say, COVID-19 deaths in January 2020) or for a range of months (COVID-19 deaths in January-March 2020). The list provided by this page, even if or when split in the manner just described, should be kept because it provides an excellent reference of which countries had notable persons dying at what times. As sample persons, the deaths of these notable persons can provide insight into which regions were being hit at what times, and of course, since these are notable persons in themselves, provide an understanding of the wide range of people who were affected by and died from COVID-19.
AMBtheMarylander2102 (
talk)
01:47, 1 December 2021 (UTC)reply
Did you read the last sentence in that? It is generally presumed that
obviously appropriate material, such as the inclusion of
Apple in the
List of fruits, does not require an inline citation. You can click on any entry and verify the information that easily, the infobox showing when they died and the cause of death being covid.
DreamFocus05:17, 1 December 2021 (UTC)reply
You should read over
WP:BDP...major bio concern considering cause of death by COVID for those that refuse vaccinations are being denied death benefits. Serious legal stuff here... we should follow the basics on sourcing. Don't make our readers run around and hunt down sources.... that would be the opposite of enabling research and ease of access.Moxy-00:02, 3 December 2021 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
talk page or in a
deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.