Talk:Bullying and suicide

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 October 2020 and 10 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Omattera.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2020 and 18 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Moe466.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

This new article

In the light of the recent tom media and other prominence of the term, this article has been created, initially as a stub, as part of a series of articles on abuse. While it was, in 2001, a neologism, a fact that the article refers to, it is now in current parlance, a thing caused by the recent tragic series of LGBT bullying related suicides. It is not, however, an LGBT specific phenomenon. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:03, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

(Possible merge) I would say there is weak evidence that this can be called an established term that is worth its own encyclopaedic entry (as opposed be being mentioned in the larger article on bullying). There are poor results in Google News that match this word for example.

(Balance) For reasons of balance I think the text should mention advice to the press to avoid using the term (see upi.com and this book). Fæ (talk) 10:37, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I disagree with your thoughts on merging, but that's fine. The term itself has become notable, perhaps notorious. While there will never be much to say on the topic it seems reasonable to allow it a stand alone entry since it may be a primary entry point for the casual user.

I read the UPI article. There is no quote on this directly attributable to the named psychologist. Had there been I would have added it. As such it appears to be a lone voice. If you can find other sources then the balance you suggest should be made. However, advice to the press is not the reality of usage of a term. It has hit the blogosphere hugely. While that is not encyclopaedic it is reality.

I can;t spot the use of your header, BTW. No persons at all are named in the article, though some are named in the template at the foot. Was that the reason you put it there? Fiddle Faddle (talk) 10:46, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

For quotes, you seemed to have missed the book I linked to, see Kohut, Margaret R. (2008), The Complete Guide to Understanding, Controlling, and Stopping Bullies & Bullying: A Complete Guide for Teachers & Parents, Atlantic Publishing Company, ISBN 9781601380210. Note, the above two links were the first most relevant I picked out, more are available by simple GNews and GBooks searches as linked at the top of this talk page.

There are author names in the lead and the template list of names of suicides (some with coroner reports pending and so are not legally suicides yet) which makes {{blpo}} quite relevant here as we would expect good quality sourcing in any article that discusses this topic and mentions these articles about the recently deceased.

BTW I am aware this is a new article and so have avoided drive-by tagging. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 11:14, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

I worked out I missed a few things. Thanks for re-pointing that one out. I've expanded the reference list to include them and added a tad more meat to the article. There is a huge danger of over-referencing at this point, but I think the sheer weight of references, many of which go back past the recent spate of suicides, shows that we have an article that can and should stand on its own feet. I hope you agree. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 11:19, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Definition

So what's the definition of the made-up word? The first sentence says suicide, but later on it says homicide. As regicide is the killing of a king, matricide the killing of a mother, etc., bullycide is clearly the killing of a bully, and the incorrect definition of the word should be removed. Reywas92^Talk 01:55, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

The article should be written clearly, however it does reflect the sources in line with WP:V. The assumption of a "correct" definition based on the latin cidium would be a obviously faux etymology as bully is a 17th century English word with no latin background. As a modern neologism, there are no hard rules on how portmanteaux words have to interpreted. The argument is not a good reason to remove bullycide from {{bullying}} or to insist on changes to this article because of what you perceive to be the truth. Thanks, Fæ (talk) 07:05, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

I think this points to the need to re-add the "also" in the second definition that you removed? While you ponder I will add it back. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 08:11, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

No problem, I was (only) copyediting to remove (some) (apparently) redundant English. Fæ (talk) 08:58, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Every time I look at the article I wonder how to make it clearer. The challenge I see is that, with a short article, one which is probably at the limit of what it needs to say, one can pretty much only write in bullet points. If you can clarify it in any manner while retaining the citations, that would be much appreciated. I think i am standing too close to it to achieve much in terms of clarity. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 09:11, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Suicide by cop comparison

This seems out of place in the lead (Manual of Style), if there are going to be comparisons of this type perhaps the article needs a body and separate lead text? Fæ (talk) 16:18, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

It is not a part of this article, either. The topics are separate, and including it synthesises original research. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:52, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

There's an indirect connection; some people who commit suicide due to bullying do commit suicide by cop. For example, Trevor Varinecz: http://autism-memorial.livejournal.com/29013.html

That's not a good link for Wikipedia since it's a LJ post, but it has references to news stories. But unless suicide by cop is particularly likely in cases of bullycide, there's no reason to specifically mention it.

BTW: Would it help to list specific cases, or is that too much for this page? 65.185.155.121 (talk) 16:03, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

The unilateral merge and redirect to bullying

If a consensus is reached then this merge and redirect can be made. There is, however, sufficient separation between bulling and bullycide to maintain separate articles. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 07:57, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

• I can certainly appreciate that this page, in its current form, needs to be developed further, but I also would tend to oppose merge because I think that it has plenty of potential to be a well-developed page on its own. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:17, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose merge. Bullycide and bullying are functionally distinct. Bullycide, although an important sociological phenomina, is a possible indirect byproduct of bullying. See bullycide's position in Template:Bullying - it is down in the related topics section. --Penbat (talk) 18:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose Merge for reasons already stated in header to this section. This comment is simply to clarify my (op)position Fiddle Faddle (talk) 21:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

What ISN'T a bullying related suicide, then???

Outside of ending or avoiding pain and suffering coming from within (physical like health/disease/disability, or emotional from unrequited love to pangs of conscience), isn't just about any other suicide a case of this??? Even the for-honour cases boil down to a refusal to live on in the ignominy of defeat (Samurai code and similar), failure (Captain goes down with his ship, etc.), or public shaming (scandals, rumors) --- in other words, making it a preemptive action to avoid the experience of peer group rejection and ostracism aka preventing pain & suffering inflicted from without... meanwhile, the rest are pushed to such actions by experiencing said continued pain & suffering inflicted from without. Which, well, sounds like a key element of bullying. That's really what all intentional suicide comes down to - avoiding some form of misery, which most often comes with external causes. Aka abuse and/or ostracism aka bullying. Because (truly) unintentional suicide, whether due to undocumented, insufficiently emphasized, or hazards of something/anything is really something else entirely, be it "death by misadventure" as per British euphemism or loss of life at the fault of another party entirely... while death by intentionally taking on a series of (known) disproportionate and unnecessary risks is self-harming or deadly risk-seeking behaviour that amounts to indecisively suicidal behaviour and/or "leaving it up to luck/fate/God/whatever", especially in cultures and societies that emphasize a more direct suicide as the epitome of taboo (as cultures rooted in Abrahamic faiths tend to do, while looking down far less on recklessness or thoughtlessness). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.127.70.219 (talk) 20:44, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Suicides unrelated to bullying are not bullying related suicides. Talk pages are not a place for people to opine over such things. They are for discussion of the articles. This is not a forum. Please confine your remarks to those improving the article. Fiddle Faddle 21:49, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Dreadful title

I hate portmanteaux! --MacRùsgail (talk) 17:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

@MacRusgail: agreed. Since we write article about subjects, not words (that would be a dictionary), I boldly moved the article to a better title. VQuakr (talk) 03:43, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@VQuakr: Thank you, this is a much more appropriate (and respectful?) title for this article.--MacRùsgail (talk) 13:32, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

I have reverted this move. The article is not about a word but a phenomenon. If you genuinely feel that this move is required please discuss it and reach a true consensus. Fiddle Faddle 18:47, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Not every move requires a discussion, but very well. VQuakr (talk) 01:08, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 4 November 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. The consensus is that the proposed title is unambiguous and more recognisable. Jenks24 (talk) 00:55, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

---

Bullycide → Bullying and suicide – page was uncontroversially moved in November 2014; move was reverted in July 2015 for reasons I find unclear. I think the proposed move target is better in compliance with our policy on article titles, especially WP:PRECISION. The -cide terminology is inherently ambiguous as to whether the subject of the article is suicide by bullied persons or homicide of a bully. "Bullycide" is also a neologism to which WP:COMMONNAME applies, though the alternative proposed "X and Y" format naming is rather too apples and oranges to readily, quantitatively, compare. VQuakr (talk) 01:11, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

Pinging: @Timtrent and MacRusgail:

• Support move as nom. VQuakr (talk) 01:11, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support move. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 01:53, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose precisely for the reason that "bullying and suicide" are apples and oranges as you have stated so clearly. Bullying is by no means the sole precursor to suicide, and suicide is not the inevitable result of bulling. You state that it is a neologism. In 2001 it was. Many years have passed since then and the term is in common parlance. It is, indeed, the common name of suicide the is a direct result of bullying. The inherent ambiguity is addressed in the article itself, or was in an earlier version. That clarification of the ambiguity needs to return if it has been removed. Bullycide the term became a noted phenomenon. The word crossed the lips of the US president. I feel strongly that more than a redirect is required. It is the term that is important.

When you state that it was uncontroversially moved you are in error. It was simply not noticed until you had done the deed. When I noticed it I moved it back. The irony is that you took a long time to notice that before starting this conversation. You are simply expressing WP:IDONTLIKEIT with the current and correct title. Fiddle Faddle 11:16, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

@Timtrent: nothing about the proposed title would imply that all suicides are attributable to bullying. The "X and Y" format naming is commonly used on Wikipedia for articles about the relationship between to concepts; see WP:CONSISTENCY. Your unsupported assertion is inadequate to demonstrate that this term is "in common parlance". It is not adequate to merely address ambiguity in the article text; WP:TITLE is about title selection not prose content. Why do you feel that "more than a redirect is required"? It unambiguously is not "the term that is important": we do not write articles about terms, but about subjects. "Uncontroversial" does not mean that no person could ever oppose a move; feel free to follow up with me on my talk page if you would like to discuss that tangent further. The deletion essay WP:IDONTLIKEIT is totally non sequitur in a move discussion. VQuakr (talk) 20:41, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

• Support. "Bullycide" is invented and ambiguous. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 14:26, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support as unambiguous per WP:RECOGNIZABLE, in the absence of any more widely used term. Although the term "bullycide" has seen some adoption, thousands of news articles about bullying leading to suicide do not use it. Google News gives 17,400 results for "of bullying" "suicide" -"bullycide", and just 511 for "bullycide". --McGeddon (talk) 14:38, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support "Bullying and suicide" is an acceptable title for describing the concept of the overlap of bullying and suicide. "Bullycide" may mean that, or it may mean something else. That is not a clear term, and because it is a WP:NEOLOGISM, it is not the preferred term for the base concept unless it can be proven to be more popular than other names for the concept. Many articles cited here do not seem to be using the "bullycide" term, so I am not convinced that "bullycide" is the most common way to describe this. "Bullycide" does seem to be a notable concept, and could have its own Wikipedia article if it really merits a fork, but at this time, I do not see the difference between bullycide and "bullying and suicide". Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
• Strong Support - Obviously an invented word, Bullying and suicide is the correct term. –Davey2010^Talk 00:09, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support for the same reasons as McGeddon. "Bullying and suicide" is a clearer title. "Bullycide" is uncommon, and my initial assumption upon seeing "Bullycide" was that it might refer to killing a bully in self-defence or revenge. -sche (talk) 05:09, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

I made a similar assumption upon seeing the title. The proposed title seems clearly more recognizable. --BDD (talk) 22:06, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

• Support - "Bullycide" is ambiguous drivel 90.213.223.50 (talk) 10:08, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
• Oppose. The word was coined as such. It has become part of popular culture.Zigzig20s (talk) 20:33, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
• Support per nominator's ambiguity argument, indeed when I came across this article I thought it was a neologism for violence against bullies. There's a serious, well-documented and recently well-publicized connection between bullying and suicide, and the proposed title is a suitable place to have an article about it. We do have guidance against "X and Y" names (WP:XY, though that's for redirects) but that's to discourage nonsensical articles about things which have no connection. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:10, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bullying and suicide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101114141911/http://www.gaytimes.co.uk/Magazine/InThisIssue-articleid-7574-sectionid-742.html to http://www.gaytimes.co.uk/Magazine/InThisIssue-articleid-7574-sectionid-742.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:40, 27 July 2017 (UTC)