Revision as of 18:25, 18 April 2013 editGeorge Ho (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users118,136 edits →Requested move: closed as withdrawn← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:16, 19 April 2013 edit undoBorn2cycle (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers31,496 edits Undid revision 551012695 by George Ho (talk) I protest very premature closing.Next edit → | ||
Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
== Requested move == | == Requested move == | ||
{{requested move/dated|multiple=yes | |||
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top --> | |||
|current1=Suicide of Kelly Yeomans|new1=Kelly Yeomans|current2=Suicide of Dawn-Marie Wesley|new2=Dawn-Marie Wesley|current3=Suicide of Nicola Ann Raphael|new3=Nicola Ann Raphael|current4=Suicide of Ryan Halligan|new4=Ryan Halligan|current5=Suicide of Megan Meier|new5=Megan Meier|current6=Suicide of Tyler Clementi|new6=Tyler Clementi|current7=Suicide of Phoebe Prince|new7=Phoebe Prince|current8=Suicide of Jamey Rodemeyer|new8=Jamey Rodemeyer|current9=Suicide of Audrie Pott|new9=Audrie Pott|current10=Suicide of Rehtaeh Parsons|new10=Rehtaeh Parsons|current11=Suicide of Amanda Todd|new11=Amanda Todd|}} | |||
:''The following discussion is an archived discussion of a ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a ]. No further edits should be made to this section. '' | |||
The result of the move request was: '''Withdrawn''' by nominator. ] (]) 18:25, 18 April 2013 (UTC) | |||
---- | |||
* ] → {{no redirect|Kelly Yeomans}} | * ] → {{no redirect|Kelly Yeomans}} | ||
Line 41: | Line 37: | ||
*'''Leave it alone'''. T13, you've been reminded elsewhere to focus on constructive editing of Article space. This is not helping. Perhaps somebody uninvolved can invoke ] if T13 doesn't self-withdraw this in good time. —] (]) 17:56, 18 April 2013 (UTC) | *'''Leave it alone'''. T13, you've been reminded elsewhere to focus on constructive editing of Article space. This is not helping. Perhaps somebody uninvolved can invoke ] if T13 doesn't self-withdraw this in good time. —] (]) 17:56, 18 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
** I've already suggested above that I'm not opposed to withdrawing the request; however, I would like to understand it better. I've taken some time to skim over a few of these articles, and most of them now have "something" named after them and some even have legislation named after them. That being the case, how are the people now not notable? ] (]) 18:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC) | ** I've already suggested above that I'm not opposed to withdrawing the request; however, I would like to understand it better. I've taken some time to skim over a few of these articles, and most of them now have "something" named after them and some even have legislation named after them. That being the case, how are the people now not notable? ] (]) 18:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC) | ||
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a ]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a ]. No further edits should be made to this section.</div><!-- Template:RM bottom --> |
Revision as of 19:16, 19 April 2013
This article was nominated for deletion on 17 March 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Untitled
Added a referance and removed no sources tag. (Neostinker 19:18, 3 September 2006 (UTC))
Requested move
It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved. A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}} . Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move |
- Suicide of Kelly Yeomans → Kelly Yeomans
- Suicide of Dawn-Marie Wesley → Dawn-Marie Wesley
- Suicide of Nicola Ann Raphael → Nicola Ann Raphael
- Suicide of Ryan Halligan → Ryan Halligan
- Suicide of Megan Meier → Megan Meier
- Suicide of Tyler Clementi → Tyler Clementi
- Suicide of Phoebe Prince → Phoebe Prince
- Suicide of Jamey Rodemeyer → Jamey Rodemeyer
- Suicide of Audrie Pott → Audrie Pott
- Suicide of Rehtaeh Parsons → Rehtaeh Parsons
- Suicide of Amanda Todd → Amanda Todd
– A discussion on my talk page got me wondering if these articles fail WP:CRIME, as the victim would not independently be notable? I'm pretty sure that if the sources are available, and the person had something dedicated in their name, then that may qualify for notability. However, unless there is a valid reason to disambiguate these articles, they should be just the persons name, as the WP:PRECISION section of WP:TITLE suggests. Technical 13 (talk) 15:27, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- Speedy oppose - This is a humongous multi-move on something so simple (or complex). I suggest that you withdraw this request and then raise this in WP:VPP. --George Ho (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- Absolutely, categorically not. Speedy close Such articles are not biographies. There have been many such discussions over time, and all discussions have been closed in favour of the title Suicide of Foo for very good reasons: the people are not of themselves notable. Their death is notable. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 16:37, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose. These are notable suicides, not notable individuals (and it's a similar situation with most "Murder of . . ." articles). The wording here sums it up well enough. Rivertorch (talk) 17:16, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- I have no problem withdrawing my proposal at this time. There are just so many forums and this seemed like to be the one that fit the best. Should I raise my issues (details here) on WP:VPP as George suggests, on WP:VPR, on WP:N, or someplace else? They all have redirect pages from "foo" to "suicide of foo", WP:PRECISION says if there is no conflict of names, and the name is available, it should be just "foo". Why would these incidents be notable but the people that the incident is about not be? Perhaps a new section needs to be added to the general notability section that protects these "suicide of ..." and "murder of ..." articles as being notable because the incident was notable. I have no problem leaving the redirects from the "suicide of ..." pages to the persons article. I'm all about discussion and consensus on this, which is why I proposed the move instead of just being WP:BOLD and moving things. Technical 13 (talk) 17:17, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- Because notability is not inherited; a person doesn't become notable (in the sense of requiring their own separate biographical article) because they were involved in a notable incident, even one so intimately connected to them as this. Events can be notable, but if the people involved in them aren't notable in their own right, there's no sense in automatically judging them to require a whole new article which will mostly be a duplicate of the event's article, since they're not notable for anything else. This is all in policy already (in things like WP:1E or WP:CRIME); I don't think any changes are necessary, really.
- I have no problem withdrawing my proposal at this time. There are just so many forums and this seemed like to be the one that fit the best. Should I raise my issues (details here) on WP:VPP as George suggests, on WP:VPR, on WP:N, or someplace else? They all have redirect pages from "foo" to "suicide of foo", WP:PRECISION says if there is no conflict of names, and the name is available, it should be just "foo". Why would these incidents be notable but the people that the incident is about not be? Perhaps a new section needs to be added to the general notability section that protects these "suicide of ..." and "murder of ..." articles as being notable because the incident was notable. I have no problem leaving the redirects from the "suicide of ..." pages to the persons article. I'm all about discussion and consensus on this, which is why I proposed the move instead of just being WP:BOLD and moving things. Technical 13 (talk) 17:17, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose, per my comment above (and others' comments, too) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:24, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- Leave it alone. T13, you've been reminded elsewhere to focus on constructive editing of Article space. This is not helping. Perhaps somebody uninvolved can invoke WP:SNOW if T13 doesn't self-withdraw this in good time. —Sladen (talk) 17:56, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- I've already suggested above that I'm not opposed to withdrawing the request; however, I would like to understand it better. I've taken some time to skim over a few of these articles, and most of them now have "something" named after them and some even have legislation named after them. That being the case, how are the people now not notable? Technical 13 (talk) 18:20, 18 April 2013 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- Start-Class Derbyshire articles
- Low-importance Derbyshire articles
- Misplaced Pages requested photographs in Derbyshire
- Derbyshire articles needing an infobox
- Derbyshire articles needing stats
- WikiProject Derbyshire articles
- Start-Class biography articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Start-Class Death articles
- Low-importance Death articles
- Start-Class Suicide articles
- Mid-importance Suicide articles
- Suicide articles
- Requested moves