Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Death/Archive 2

I'm raising this question on multiple pages as I think it is not high on many watchlists. My question is this: Do we need both coordinates and Lat/Long input lines on templates such as "{Infobox cemetery}"? Comments welcome. --S. Rich (talk) 04:54, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Would the topic of journalists killed while reporting fit under this project? There are human rights organizations that have been established to deal with this issue as well as other violations of rights journalists face. I realize that your project doesn't include "Death of...", "Assassination of ...", which are about individuals, however, the death of journalists itself, as a collective, is a phenomenon that can be studied. Crtew (talk) 06:28, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Are you kidding? That's totally within the project! There loads of articles that are "Death of..." "Murder of..." & etc. See the front page Wikipedia:WikiProject Death and look under "biography". Ironically, it's under the "this is what we're not..." but read the qualifiers beneath the heading. When it comes to articles on the deaths of individual journalists, feel free to tag it with the banner and assess them if you like! Boneyard90 (talk) 07:30, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't know how this kind of thing is usually done (if ever), but I think it'd be a good idea to redirect

Agree

Suro

08:51, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Comment: Makes sense, especially if WP: Suicide is that low on articles and members. I don't think I'd have an objection. Boneyard90 (talk) 11:02, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

One of the members is indef banned, and I'll message the other one, User:Geniac. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 11:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. Suicide is a subset of death and both are pretty quiet. --Geniac (talk) 23:59, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Agree - but also think that Wikipedia:WikiProject Psychology should be made aware of this proposal as "Suicide" is some times a result of a mental disorder that is treatable. They may what to jump in here to (more the merrier)Moxy (talk) 02:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:WikiProject_Suicide&limit=500 Some handfuls of templates still need replacing. I'll get around to them myself if they're still there tomorrow.

The task force is now here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Death/Suicide task force, the template code is right there for easy copy-pasting.

Some things still need to done, but the migration is basically complete. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 23:03, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Good job! Your efforts are certainly appreciated! Boneyard90 (talk) 07:34, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree whole-heartedly ! thank you!

Suro

07:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

K, all banners are replaced, WP Suicide banner now redirects to the WP Death banner. There's still some pages to be tagged if yalls venture into the suicide-related categories.

I think we need a to-do list...

BTW, all talk pages in this project space, including the one for the Suicide task force, redirect here. Should we start to see more action, separate talk pages may be necessary, but for now I think we're cool with one. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 12:25, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Members

I created the category Category:WikiProject Death members, if you're not in there, put yourself in there. (If you have the userbox on your page then you should be good already.) — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 12:25, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

There now seems to be 2 systems - the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Death/Participants

and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_Death_members - any particular reason for parallel universes?

Suro

12:58, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

The participants list is still the actual list, the category is for those that want to categorize themselves or have the userbox on their page. It's not mandatory to categorize yourself there. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 15:43, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

1740 Batavia massacre, within this project's scope, has been nominated for featured article status at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1740 Batavia massacre/archive1. Any feedback would be welcome. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:50, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I've written a new version of

There has been ongoing contention about whether Torsten Carleman's death from alcoholism should be discussed.

The viewpoints of editors experienced with biographies discussing causes of death would be helpful.

Sincerely,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:54, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, and thanks for visiting WP: Death! I looked over the debate at Talk:Torsten Carleman, and left my opinions at the bottom of the page. (Additional Death editors might also want to drop in a word or two!) It is indeed contentious over there. I have also removed the WP: Death banner from the talk-page. Neither Carleman's life nor his death are within the scope of WP:Death. However, if an article such as Death of Torsten Carleman is written, it would fall within the purview of WP:Death. Good luck! Boneyard90 (talk) 13:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Boneyard90,

Thank you for you helpful advice. (I was exasperated with the editor trying to present a feel-good article, and needed help.)

Death is so much more varied than conception and birth. One of the most interesting dissertations in recent Swedish philosophy was on death!

Best regards,  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:54, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem. I'll continue to answer the IP editor's vitriolic replies, but that guy seems to have quite an axe to grind, or perhaps several. If other Death editors want to join in, feel free, but consider yourself warned. Out. Boneyard90 (talk) 17:16, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

I tried to take a look but I simply didn't understand what's going on in there. Was there content in the article that has been removed now? — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 17:47, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Apparently there was a quote in the footnotes, which can be seen in this edit, and describe the extent of Carleman's drinking, is upsetting to the IP editor. As it stands, there is a one line mention of his alcoholism under Torsten Carleman#Personal life. I'm not sure if the IP is against that as well. I think he wants the article to only focus on the academic accomplishments. Boneyard90 (talk) 17:56, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Is his death related to alcoholism? Do we know what he actually died of? (I'm just a tad confused here.) I do agree that the footnotes as they were were a bit long. I'll take a better look at the talk page now. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 18:04, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Wiener wrote that Carleman died of drink, and described advanced alcoholism. Feller described Carleman's antisemitism and xenophobia, specifically his advocating the shooting of Jews and foreigners, when Carleman was drinking, in a personal letter. The article no longer quotes Feller and just states that Carelman abused alcohol, according to Wiener and Feller.

Whether the IP's "Jewish chatter" and "Defamation League" referred to Wiener & Feller or to my "Wolfowitz" (which is less indicative of my religious tradition than the John Milton quotes on my user page, btw), I cannot say. The "national/ethnic" biases apparently describes "Wolfowitz"/me.

Carleman is listed in the category of alcohol-related deaths, because of Wiener; this could be removed if Wiener is not sufficiently reliable.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 00:51, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Another source states that the immediate cause of death is jaundice, which is a liver disease often associated with chronic alcohol abuse.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:55, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't think this is problematic at all. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 15:51, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Just so long as User:NotWith followed Wikipedia:Requested moves. --JeffJ (talk) 16:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

What are you saying? What is there to follow? — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 16:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

What part didn't you understand? Click on the link and read the guidelines for moving a page. --JeffJ (talk) 16:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

He did not, as far as I can see. Therefore, I have moved it back and provided my reason on the talk page. Thanks for pointing out that page. Boneyard90 (talk) 16:50, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Thought you all might be interested in taking part in the Request for Comment on this subject at Talk:2011#Request_for_Comment:_Mohamed_Bouazizi_and_the_Occupy_movement_additions Wrad (talk) 04:09, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Tom Ardolino is listed under "Deaths in 1955" when in fact this should be "born in 1955".

Galaxybabe (talk) 09:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Galaxybabe

 Done - Thanks for the heads-up. Boneyard90 (talk) 09:59, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

One of the three links listed here under the above heading is Wikipedia:Resources for suicidal individuals but are people aware that it comprises three external links one of which is to a 19th century letter suggesting that people should not feel guilty about suicide and goes to the extreme of: ‘Undoubtedly there are many cases of perfectly justifiable suicide--cases in which not to end life would be a mistake, sometimes almost a crime'?

Another is to a list of posts on a blog, one of which is about there being worse things than suicide. The third website is an encylopedic analysis of philosophical work relating to suicide.

None of this seems particularly appropriate for the suggested use. It seems the person who created them, back in July 2010, was banned not long afterwards. Eversync (talk) 10:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing attention to this. I listed it for deletion: Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Resources for suicidal individuals. — Jeraphine Gryphon ^(talk) 10:20, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for dealing with that. Eversync (talk) 13:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I refer the group to this thread on the Talk page at Major Depressive Disorder concerning the use of Vincent van Gogh's painting "At Eternity's Gate" in that article and to this comment of mine pointing out it has no place in the article and should be removed.

The essence of the complaint is that is fully documented that van Gogh's painting is not at all, nor was ever meant to be, a portrayal of depressive disorder but is rather merely a study of an old man. For that reason alone it should be removed for reasons of encyclopaedic accuracy.

As it stands it necessarily makes a judgement about the nature of depressive disorder, that it necessarily implies despair, even that it necessarily implies suicidal ideation (because of its title and van Gogh's own well known suicide). It is very much to be regretted indeed in my opinion that a Wikipedia administrator, Casliber, a practicising psychiatrist it seems but a poor historian of art, appears to be the prime mover behind perpetuating these poor judgements.

It also mythologises Vincent van Gogh himself who took the greatest care to separate his difficulties in life from his work; the nature of whose illness is not settled but which is not certainly typical of a depressive disorder; who is not documented as suffering from suicidal depressive moods in the last months of his life when this painting was completed and whose suicide itself has in the past year been plausibly questioned by a respected source as rather a manslaughter.

I ask that the image be removed. If it is felt necessary, and I cannot imagine why it should be, that the article be illustrated by a fine art image, then I suggest the original image, Durer's Melancholia, be reinserted. Skirtopodes (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

FYI,

76.65.128.132 (talk) 04:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I've categorised quite a few murder related articles and have been trying to find an appropriate definition for the age limits for defining "children" and categorising people as "murders of children" etc. I noticed some others previously using anything below the age of 18 for this (at least in the context of England) and it would seem all legal definitions would support this stance, as does the Wikipedia [[child] article and the United Nations. My edits were reverted so I'm wondering do we have particular unique requirements for these categories on Wikipedia or was the editor just misguided and confusing legal and biological definitions? My guess is that we do indeed use the Wikipedia / UN definition of 18 or lower if the age of majority of the country in question says so but I'd like some input before restoring the content. Anyway perhaps it would be wise if someone were to add some text teh the categories themselves giving some guidance, and it may also be worthwhile replacing the term "children" with "minors" to avoid confusion in future. Thanks.--Shakehandsman (talk) 05:22, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Tough call. I think "minor" is a pretty neutral term. I mean, "child" might be technically correct, but it's difficult to think of a 17-year old as a "child". Like you pointed out, age of majority differs per country. In the U.S. it's 18, in Japan it's 20. So at age 19, you're an adult in the U.S., but not Japan. So, I think "child" is subjective and contextual. I think some people use "child" whenever they can for maximum dramatic effect, while terms like adolescent, youth, or teenager might be more descriptively accurate. Also, you might want to ask the reverting editor what the reason for the reversion was. Boneyard90 (talk) 07:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Also to get the reverting editor to make comment here - as the precedent is potentially wiki wide - not just death project - there might be discussions already elsewhere on this issue and the range of cultural/national differences

Suro

07:59, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Boneyeard - the UN definition deals with the issue of countries such as Japan, as do other definitions, placing a strict limit of under 18 at the most.--Shakehandsman (talk) 08:39, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Gotcha. Well, I added a descriptive paragraph to Category:English murderers of children. It's based on the American category. Maybe that will help. Boneyard90 (talk) 09:00, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I forgot to mention that the people in question are

Shaied Nazir, and Sarfraz Ali. Also, the comments by the editor removing the categories aren't especially constructive [1] and I've had previous issues with them in the past.--Shakehandsman (talk

) 13:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Well thanks for fixing the Nazir redirect, it's a shame User:Youreallycan reverted it so quickly without offering any evidence.--Shakehandsman (talk) 22:21, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

I decided to make that a "test reversion". Let's wait a couple days and see if it engenders some dialogue. If not, then go ahead and change the others with a comment directing any interested parties to the explanation on the category page. Boneyard90 (talk) 00:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

For this projects consideration - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2012_March_9#Entire_.22Category:Cancer_deaths_by_country.22_tree

We need a better image for death, probably animated.--UserWOLfan112 Talk 18:08, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

For the project banner? Did you have something specific in mind? Besides "animation", which I've never seen in a project banner.Boneyard90 (talk) 19:13, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Maybe like this image to the right? It's a diagram of the skull of Phineas Gage, who actually lived after his accident, though one wonders how.Boneyard90 (talk) 19:17, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

There's an

I assessed the article as B-class. I made a few minor changes to one section, but otherwise an excellent article.Boneyard90 (talk) 22:02, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

One editor has made sweeping deletions to the article Massacre, claiming POV and OR. A discussion was started on the Talk page. I wrote the introduction (lead), but not the other sections. Whereas the wording of the article used to be the subject of much debate, and was once nominated for deletion, it has been pretty quiet since I wrote the introduction back in September 2011. At 14,000 views per month, that means there have been about 100,000 views without complaint until this. Now another editor is talking about putting it for another deletion, apparently because the article is too much trouble. Interested editors can weigh in at Talk:Massacre. Boneyard90 (talk) 17:28, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I am proposing a merger to

I've been assessing articles Category:Unknown-importance Death articles, and there are now a fairly large number of persistent Man-eater articles, like Gustave (crocodile) and Kirov wolf attacks. Are these within the scope of our project or not? Our project page doesn't provide much guidance on this topic. Looking for some opinions and maybe a consensus here. Boneyard90 (talk) 00:49, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I'm concerned about the lack of quality information on the natural burial page. The reference materials were written primarily by a marketing association group and an individual promoting their business circle. There's a lot of good information that could be added. I'm not an experienced editor. I am, however, an instructor at Oregon State University in sustainable cemetery management and I tell my students to stay away from the wikipedia "natural burial" page. ("Green" is a color, for goodness sake! and not a methodology!) I'm willing to work on this if I can find a mentor to help. Thanks! Cynthiacabeal 03:14, 3 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cabeal (talk • contribs)

Thanks for coming to our project page. If you can improve an article, that would be great. As you probably already know, Wikipedia articles should be written in a neutral,encyclopedic style, free of point of view, with reliable sources. I'll try to help. Which article is it exactly? Is it called "natural burial"? You can start editing, and I can make corrections; or go to the article's Talk page, we can discuss and make modifications there, then copy & paste it to the main page.Boneyard90 (talk) 07:17, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

I would also like to see a category for Death Midwifery in this project. Death Midwives are people who work with the Death Journeyer and their families throughout the whole of the pan-death experience (which may include not using funeral home services). CINDEA at www.cindea.ca is the website for Canadian Integrative Network for Death Education and Alternatives (CINDEA), which supports Death Midwifery as one option for a more natural and ecological approach to dying/death/grieving. CINDEA is hoping to have a Wikipedia page in the near future. Womynstar8 (talk) 22:41, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

....ummmm, what...? Tell you what, get the article on "Death midwifery" first, with reliable sources and all that, and when there are enough related articles to fill a "category", then we can talk about that. Baby steps. Boneyard90 (talk) 00:32, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Members of this project may wish to comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of suicide crisis lines. LadyofShalott 02:46, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I just went there and it's been resolved as "keep." Guyovski (talk) 04:03, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

What does the list of "Outstanding articles" represent? Does it list especially high quality articles or articles that have been proposed but not yet sufficiently completed? (Feel free to delete this question and the response once I've read it as I realize it's a minor issue.) Guyovski (talk) 03:55, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

See this page for a potential new article topic that could perhaps be added to the project list. If people agree that it's a valid part of this project and the discussion on the other page resolves in a certain way, I could make the undertaking as my first-ever article project. Guyovski (talk) 23:48, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

A discussion about suicides in the US military is taking place here: Talk:United_States_Armed_Forces#Suicides_among_U.S._troops_averaging_one_a_day_in_2012. Project members are requested to chip in. Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 16:41, 2 July 2012 (UTC)16:46, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

I just added Unification Church funeral. I hope it meets the standards of the project. I tried to follow the example of Catholic funeral although with less detail. Steve Dufour (talk) 14:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for writing. The article does meet the standards of inclusion for the project. I did some copyediting, and I was going to assess it, but I see you've already done that. This usually isn't encouraged because it represents a conflict of interest, but you gave it the same assessment I would have, so I suppose it's a reflection of your own sincerity. To improve the article, I would suggest a photo of a service, more relevant detail in the description of the ceremonies, and a broader array of sources: most of your current sources are published by the church itself, which represent primary sources, you want to include some secondary sources, the stuff people say about the funeral, but are not directly connected to it. Good luck. Boneyard90 (talk) 14:38, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your help.Steve Dufour (talk) 22:43, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

The article Massacre has been nominated for deletion. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Massacre (2nd nomination). Interested editors should weigh in. Boneyard90 (talk) 04:30, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

People can comment in the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 August 15#Category:Female suicides. LadyofShalott 02:35, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

The article Death of Abdulredha Buhmaid has been nominated for Good article status. Interested editor can start review process by clicking here. Mohamed CJ (talk) 07:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

At the talkpage Euthanasia there is a discussion going about avoiding prosecution in case of child euthanasia. A tandem is trying to change the wording "in the Netherlands, physicians can avoid prosecution by following well described and strict conditions when non-voluntary euthanasia is performed on infants." into "in the Netherlands, non-voluntary euthanasia can be performed on infants under well-described and strict conditions". The latter version is, in my opinion, less accurate because it is a fact that by following the guidelines, a physician is just avoiding prosecution. No way that it is legal. The tandem ignores a long standing consensus and arguments brought in my me and by my long time adversary (!). Unfortunately, by now they are getting under my skin and I am getting annoyed. So more input necessary to avoid me exploding... The Banner _talk 09:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Autopsy images of Ngatikaura Ngati#Inclusion of autopsy image. -- Trevj (talk) 08:47, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

See my comment there. --Ysangkok (talk) 19:35, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

It has been proposed here to delete the category that links people to their place of burial. Note that the proposer is recommending the removal of the whole tree of categories, not just the the top level categories listed. Ephebi (talk) 15:38, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I commented, but I hope I didn't go overboard. I am quite appalled at such a sweeping proposal. Boneyard90 (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Normally, when the cause of death for a person is known, I add the relevant "year deaths" (e.g. Category:2012 deaths) and "cause deaths in place" (e.g. Category:Cancer deaths in England) categories to their bio article.

However, when their cause of death is not known, it seems the only appropriate location category is "Death in place", but those categories rarely have any individual bio articles in them. Recently, I added Category:Death in England, to Dinah Sheridan – one such case – and was reverted. Do we need catch all "Deaths in place" categories (note the plural Deaths) for these, or is the "Death in place" category meant for this purpose (and the reversion incorrect)? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 11:00, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

There are guidelines here. 20:10, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

• The categorisation of disease-related deaths Category:Disease-related deaths by country and its subcategories has been flagged for review or deletion here.

I would like to invite some comments on the title of this article. In my opinion it should be "Death of Amanda Todd" until such time as the coroner's court rules on the cause of death (for example it might yet prove to be misadventure).

Moreover the article is essentially reporting on a current event. However it is presently in breach, rather significantly on several counts, of media guidelines on the responsible reporting of suicides published by the Canadian Pyschiatric Association and designed to prevent copycat suicides, notably on the issue of headlining the word "suicide". Since some 50% of teenagers today, judging from a UK survey, have been the victims of cyberbullying or internet harrassment, implicated in Amanda's case and the basis of literally hundeds of tribute website in her memory, that risk must be deemed substantial.

At present there are 12 Wikipedia articles entitled "Suicide of [a named individual]". Of these 9 (75%) concern teenage victims of cyberbullying or internet harrassment.

I opened a discussion at The Village Pump. JaniB (talk) 20:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm surprised that the Lisa Stieinberg child abuse death isn't included in the category "Child Abuse Resulting in Death."

Lisa was adopted illegally by Joel Steinberg and Hedda Nussbaum, herself a victim of long-term domestic violence. Lisa was abused over a long period before she finally died, and her case received considerable media coverage.

Please include her case in this category. 208.54.32.132 (talk) 18:57, 21 December 2012 (UTC)KI

Following Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2012 December 3#Category:Deaths by location, it seems that country sub-categories of Category:Death by country need a new "Deaths" sub-category e.g. Category:Deaths in Canada. The direct contents of Category:Death in Canada should mainly be society-related issues such as e.g. Euthanasia in Canada and Category:Capital punishment in Canada, along with burials and cemeteries; all the sub-cats of deaths by cause would go down into a new sub-cat Category:Deaths in Canada. Does this sound appropriate? – Fayenatic London 22:35, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Have reworked Impalement considerably together with User BoneYard90, and woul like a reassessment on the quality scale? Arildnordby (talk) 23:46, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I would like to have a thorough discussion of the article's quality status. Arildnordby (talk) 13:49, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Whoa, hey! You're jumping the gun a bit there! YOU can not assess the article, there's a review process. See Wikipedia:Good articles. You can then nominate it, and an independent reviewer will go over the article, and with some corrections, decide if it is acceptable for Good article status. Boneyard90 (talk) 15:13, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

An article that you have been involved in editing, John Allen Muhammad , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Huh? - this is a project page...

Have just added Ziyarat and Tombstone tourist to the scope of the project - visiting graves is part of a whole range of tourist itineraries worldwide - the graves of famous people, ancestors, and significant people in cultural contexts, makes grave visiting an important process within the understanding some cultures. It can be on special days (my user name for instance in Java), and at certain times in the calendar. If anyone can think of related terms - either to add as a redirect at Tombstone tourist (anyone for a change of name to a less culturally laden term as the article title? - if no response will delay going for a move - but I suggest cemetery tourist is a more neutral term more cross-culturally appropriate...

There seems to be some inconsistency in the articles on capital punishment. Some are named "List of individuals executed in XYZ State", while others are named "List of people executed in XYZ State". (See the

I think you are in the right place. Please answer us through the text msg center on our sites or back here.<not sure when I'll be back.> Question 3. I'd like to learn more about how to edit pages on wiki, as well as my own submissions. I wouldn't mind being mentored(the help screens and resources don't seem to help me[function,learning])As part of this project I could do some research and submit on the sandbox perhaps some help with editing and I'll be a regular contributor. Please post some links and helps that can get our questions answered. I've submitted reasonable data before and been rejected due to incorrect format discrepancies. Kingofallclergy (talk) 17:14, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi everyone, we'd be grateful for your thoughts at

Hello all. I am hoping to spend the next few weeks improving the article

CoeA (talk) 02:13, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Information about rates of suicide among transgendered individuals should be included. LadyofShalott 21:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Fort Hood shooting#Request for Comment. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

There is an amicable discussion going on on the article’s talk page

I believe that the category is getting too large to be useful, and I would like to see it subcategorized. Unless there are objections, I am thinking about doing it by nationality of the executed. Thoughts? Objections? --Nlu (talk) 05:38, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. The existing 5 subcats are by who executed the person, not the person's nationality. My first thought is that that way around makes sense because I think it's more important/informative to know where somebody was executed rather than were they were from. For example, to group together people who were executed by Singapore, mainly for drug trafficking. I'm welcome to be convinced otherwise, of course. --Geniac (talk) 00:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Or both? In other words, by nationality and by nation of execution? --Nlu (talk) 15:47, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, sure, makes sense to me. --Geniac (talk) 21:52, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Members of this project may wish to comment at Talk:Suicide#Revisit "Commit" language as Not Neutral. LadyofShalott 22:46, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2013_April_14#Category:Women_and_death. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 03:49, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

The current logo of the Death Portal box is a cartoon skull. It looks really out of place on articles discussing such sombre topics as, say, the

I'm ok with the cartoon skull. It's cartoon-y, but it's not over-the-top in any direction. I don't think a grave is appropriate, because images of graves are connected with religion (a tombstone of or with a cross), or are now connected to a particular culture (the Egyptian pyramids). A religion-neutral, culture-neutral grave would look like a nondescript mound of dirt, or maybe a pile of rocks. There doesn't seem to be a neutral, universal symbol of death beside the skull. Boneyard90 (talk) 22:20, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

We've had a few discussions about this and I still agree that a skull is the best universal depiction of death we've come up with. I wouldn't object to a less cartoony skull. --Geniac (talk) 00:47, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

I could go with a less cartoon version of a skull...

sats

01:21, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

A headstone works for Judaeo-Christian-Muslim cultures, right? What other symbols are used (e.g. Buddhist, Hindu, animist, etc.)? How about a montage of them? —[AlanM1(talk)]— 01:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

No not right, it doesnt - it is not a universally accepted image across the variant ways of portaying death in the world of those cultures. As for the others there is no easily accepted symbol or image... No montage, please... one image is sufficient.

sats

01:50, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

File:Tench Tilghman Grave Site.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 00:44, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 May 20 where many of these images are up for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 03:03, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

image:Andy Warhol's imagine of Jackie Kennedy mourning at John F. Kennedy's funereal.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:59, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

I have heard of this category in the past, but it recently came to my attention with the Allan Simonsen (racing driver) article, which is currently on the Main Page. I have never fully understood the need for this category, and I have had a look through the previous CFDs for it which ended in no clear cut consensus. My question now, however, is what exactly is the criteria for this category? Relating specifically to Allan Simonsen, he had an accident in an auto race and died within the hour. The accident was clearly caught on television footage and private video. But, Simonsen did not die in the impact. He died in the infield care center long after he had been taken from the car, and thus was no longer on film. The accident may have been the cause of death (although there is currently no statement on the cause of death therefore this is only a presumption), there was no "filmed death". Death is a clearly defined biological function, and simply being injured is not technically "dying".

Another example: Swede Savage, suffered an accident during the Indy 500 which was caught on film. Conscious and alive when he came out of the wreck, taken to the hospital, died 33 days later, most likely due to medical complications. How exactly does this fit the criteria of "filmed death"?

To take this further, and this one may be a little in left field, but the Death of Dale Earnhardt. The accident that caused his death was filmed from outside his car, but there is no footage inside the car showing Earnhardt die. This category seems to be filled more with "filmed accidents that eventually led to death" than it does actual deaths.

I personally feel this category may need to be nominated for CFD again, but I figured I would bring this up here first. The³5₉ (Talk) 23:15, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

image:The Temple of Madam Xian.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is a temple honoring an dead person) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, Please note that Main Page in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 00:07, 12 August 2013 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

I just started it. The group names (Phenomena, Models, Processes, Theories and concepts) are a bit bizarre, but I didn't know how else to arrange it. Please feel free to bend it into the right shape.

I've posted this at a few other projects, so if there's anything to discuss, I'd suggest Template talk:Extinction.

Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:33, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

See Talk:Kidnapping of Hannah Anderson where we are having a discussion on the issue -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 13:42, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

File:Rupintojas.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 70.24.244.158 (talk) 07:54, 9 September 2013 (UTC)

Hello! Is the above submission of interest to this Wikproject? —Anne Delong (talk) 06:40, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

The subject is of interest to this project, though of very minimal interest. Subject does not appear to be notable enough for a Wikipedia article, and the text appears to be overtly promotional. Boneyard90 (talk) 06:53, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

image:AFGonesseMemorial.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.181.39 (talk) 03:53, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

We have these categories:

• Category:Deaths in custody
  • Category:People who died in police custody‎
  • Category:People who died in prison custody
    • Category:People who died in prison custody by country
      • Category:Prisoners who died in Australian detention
      • (... other countries detention)

Note the change from prison to detention. This is a problem, unless we clearly define what is meant by "detention". Presumably the intent is not to include police custody (eg, arrested held overnight, not charged or convicted) because we list police and prison as separate categories further up the hierarchy: But (in Australia at least), "detention" is commonly used to include police lockups. Currently Category:Prisoners who died in Western Australian detention, includes Death of John Pat and Mr Ward, both of whom died in police custody, but the category hierarchy has them under Category:People who died in prison custody not Category:People who died in police custody. Actually Death of John Pat is listed under both, because I was recategorizing the article more specifically when I noticed this problem.

There's clearly a problem with the categories, but the solution is not obvious to me. The word "detention" may have different meanings in different countries, which may complicate matters. At the very least we need to define (and possibly state on the category pages) exactly what we mean by:

• police custody
• prison custody
• detention

Remember also that there may detention other than "police" or "prison" (eg Australian immigration detention facilities). Mitch Ames (talk) 02:01, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

• Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World

I've created the new article about the book

Further suggestions for research and additional secondary sources would be appreciated, at the article's talk page, at Talk:Targeted Killings: Law and Morality in an Asymmetrical World.

Thank you, — Cirt (talk) 04:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

A graveyard is a cemetery  ?? It would be very interesting to see if the few watchers left here would have any thoughts on this matter - I very strongly disagree as there are many cross cultural issues where this is not the case, but would appreciate the words from others - this is added here from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cemetery

which in my opinion, if the whole talk page is read carefully, the move should be reverted.

• Category:Targeted killing

I've gone ahead and created Category:Targeted killing, a category to encompass articles related to the topic of Targeted killing.

Suggestions for additional articles to add into the category would be appreciated, feel free to add them yourself or suggest them at Category talk:Targeted killing.

Cheers,

— Cirt (talk) 01:57, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

I am currently undertaking a huge overhaul of the

The List of people who were beheaded currently includes not only victims of execution or other homicide by decapitation, but also people who were decapitated in air or motor vehicle accidents (such as Charles Bassett and Jochen Rindt) or posthumously (such as Joseph Haydn). My understanding is that the word "behead" normally refers specifically to executions or the like, and not to accidental decapitations or to the taking as a trophy of the head of someone who is already dead from other causes. Thus, I believe a list of the "beheaded" should include only victims of executions or other intentional homicides in which decapitation was the intended method of death or the actual cause of death. I have brought up this issue on the article's talk page (see here), and I would like to see a discussion on the issue. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 01:34, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

I second this completely and suggest creating a listing of "people who were decapitated" separate from the beheading list. I would do so myself but I am in the midst of a huge overhaul of the mummification and mummification-related articles and have my hands quite full. -- Saint Soren (talk) 11:00, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Deceased Wikipedians#Category:Deceased Wikipedians. -- Trevj (talk) 12:28, 21 November 2013 (UTC) -- Trevj (talk) 12:28, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

This article needs cleanup and expansion and adequate explanation on the topic. --George Ho (talk) 08:50, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I've become interested in the assassination market article and made a couple of edits recently as a result of an in-depth Forbes article on the topic.

Interest in editing the article seems to have picked up recently, leaving it quite messy. Anyone want to help out?

A bottle helium and a plastic bag seems to be a advertised method in some books and this "advertisement leads to increases cases of suicides by this method. The featured article helium needs a little bit of help to get to the standard for references. I put some references for the increased number of cases on the talk page. I want to have some help from this project to improve the Hazards section of the article. Thanks.--Stone (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

See the article Suicide bag. - Boneyard90 (talk) 04:56, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Input is appreciated here:

Can you put my article Murder of Diane Maxwell under this category? It seems someone forgot to place it under the scope of a WikiProject. DudeWithAFeud (talk) 01:33, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Done. I put that article under WikiProject Death as well as WikiProject Crime. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

If this WikiProject is active, I'd like to draw your attention to Funeral, a lengthy article with many problems that is rated as High-importance. 72.244.206.27 (talk) 20:05, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, this WikiProject is active. In your view, what many problems does Funeral have? I see many unsourced sections. --Geniac (talk) 04:19, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

A major problem with that article is it is too big, and should be forked off on to smaller sub articles, and not try to be an answer for everything related to the term in its broadest term. Many customs related to death are included - but are not really specific to the actual thing that is a 'funeral'. Also for someone to go and tag sections about lack of sources like that is plain mis-using the tag.

satusuro

05:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the

) 05:02, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

RfC: Pogrom list inclusion criteria

An RfC has been opened at

talk

) 11:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been featured

Hello, Please note that scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 01:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

Suggested rename: Category:Deaths by heroin overdose to Heroin-related deaths

Many of the deaths listed as heroin overdoses are not actually heroin overdoses, they are examples of Combined drug intoxication. I see 2 options.

• Remove names from list which are not heroin overdoses.
• Rename Category:Deaths by heroin overdose to Category:Heroin-related deaths, which would be similar to the already existing Category:Cocaine-related deaths.

The first choice leaves a much smaller list.

The second choice would allow Philip Seymour Hoffman and River Phoenix to be placed back in this category, as well as the cocaine-related death category. I suspect all of the other current names would stay. Nereocystis (talk) 21:02, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

Would appreciate more eyes on the discussions regarding NPOV and citations on the Brain death talk page. Funcrunch (talk) 17:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

The Beating heart cadaver page could use some additional editor input as well. Funcrunch (talk) 03:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

An RFC has been created regarding conduct of user 24.0.133.234 who has been editing pages under the scope of this WikiProject. Input requested. Funcrunch (talk) 05:18, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Just noticed that Category:Golders Green Crematorium has just been added to Tommy Handley, seems unusual and not really a defining thing to add as a category to an individual. Is there a guideline or something that covers this ? MilborneOne (talk) 14:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Please note that scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by Theo's Little Bot at 01:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team