Talk:Deaths in June 2017

Cause of death of Jeffrey Tate

This list says that Jeffrey Tate died of a heart attack, but the BBC website says that he died of spina bifida. Can anybody clarify which is to be believed?Vorbee (talk) 20:23, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

The BBC merely states that he was born with spina bifida and gives no COD nor circumstances. Here's the Deutsche Welle report. — Wyliepedia 20:32, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Consensus for/against the hatnote highlighting "List of terrorist incidents in June 2017", but also relating to any others added in the future

Hi. I think we really need to discuss this fresh addition to our preamble, added by a user today. Not just because it seems a very "populist-led" innovation (it appears to be generated based mainly on what has happened in that sphere recently. What would be added to the top next week - "List of vehicle related deaths by accident", should that article get written? And how many notes of a similar ilk would you continue to allow there - ad infinitum even?). If it hadn't been for the sad incidents which have occurred in well-known places very recently (I shall not elaborate, as we all know where they happened), I doubt this note would have been included at the head of the article we edit. My main worry is a fudging of the basic simplicity of this page, and an over-elaboration. I would be inclined to cast Against at the moment, were it to go to that kind of vote, but other points of view would help me further. Ref ^(chew)(do) 18:39, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

I have removed it as it is not really relevant to this article which is about the deaths of individuals that meet the criteria. MilborneOne (talk) 19:22, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your continued support of this article. That's what I thought. Ref ^(chew)(do) 19:50, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, despite the rise in such attacks in 2017, any such link causes breeding ground for other seemingly rampant COD list links and their varying degrees of notability (i.e. deaths by falling in 2017). — Wyliepedia 00:31, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

There seemed to be a rise in falling motorcycle racers last week, but 75% of them are redlinks. I don't see any terrorism or terror attack victims here. Not even a shooting, stabbing or traffic collision this month (unless planes are traffic). I'll vote Against all coatracks. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:51, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Glenne Headly age

Seems to be in dispute, so I'll post here. It appears that her age being initially reported as 63 was a mistake, and she was indeed 62. Most sources that initially reported 63 have since updated to 62. Notably Variety's article has a correction at the bottom now saying Note: An earlier version of this story incorrectly listed Headly’s age as 63. Variety apologizes for the error. Nohomersryan (talk) 20:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Ian Brady removal

Was there a consensus reached regarding Mr. Brady? I did not believe there was one reached. I see he was deleted today from the May page. As stated before there have been other exceptions in the past made for people who did not have their own article. Are they going to be deleted?

I believe not including Brady, who was infamous and well known for over 50 years and whose life and death received significant coverage, hurts the integrity of this site. Here we have an obvious notable person now excluded from this record due to a technicality. People using this site to research deaths for this period will never see his name and will never know that he was excluded. Wikipedia is no longer the authority of record for notable deaths for the year. This is a sad day. BurienBomber (talk) 13:42, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Is this intended to be an argument for returning Brady to the list? If so. (opinion) logic usually works better than emotion. Carptrash (talk) 15:26, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Apologies, I had forgotten there was a discussion surrounding his inclusion so I've put him back in. Rusted AutoParts 16:48, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

However ... can I just point out that I can see no consensus reached at all in the discussion at Talk:Deaths in May 2017#Ian Brady? Just a vague feeling of things being left hanging in the air with no firm decision. That discussion therefore needs to be revisited by those who feel strongly enough about it (I don't), or else I'd say indeed remove Brady, in accordance with past consensus on the matter, and "da rools" as they stood then. Ref ^(chew)(do) 20:06, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

One month has expired and so has Brady's listing. I have removed it. If Brady is notable (and "infamous") then why does he still not have an article 50 years after his conviction? I do not support one-off decisions like "this person is important despite no article so we should keep him listed". This decision in 2009 determined the fate of a Brady article. WWGB (talk) 00:02, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

I am uncomfortable with this. I think he should be listed. But, I can't figure a way "around the rules". Which means that maybe the rules need to be examined. Didn't we determine that somebody like Lorene Yarnell cannot be listed because there is an article called "Shields and Yarnell", but not an article called "Lorene Yarnell"? It seems silly. Sometimes, the individual (for example, Ian Brady) is simply synonymous with the article (e.g., the Moors murders). And it is simply a random naming fluke or convention that the individual's exact name is not listed in the article title. That should not supersede the fact that a notable person died. Which is the point of these "Deaths" pages. I think there were other examples, perhaps with The Everly Brothers or such? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 14:13, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Was Warmbier a criminal or not?

When I first saw him, he was imprisoned in North Korea for 17 months. This looked unusual for a criminal, until I learned he was convicted of theft and the sentence severity might have been a political move. So "college student, convicted thief and political figure".

This becomes "convicted college student by the North Korean regime." "Regime" is a bit loaded, so someone removed it, but changed "convicted" to "imprisoned", suggesting he wasn't found guilty of something we don't say he was accused of. That something was theft, so I add "for theft" and someone slaps an "alleged" in the middle, while advising against mentioning the crime he was convicted of at all.

So what's the consensus? Is Warmbier too good to be called a thief, or is North Korea too evil to trust? Would it make sense to refer to Simon Nelson as an "American man imprisoned by the State of Illinois for 38 years for alleged mass murder" if he can't remember doing what the judge said he did? If we're holding different nation's courts to different standards, are there any we trust like we trust North Korea? Iran? Syria? Wales? InedibleHulk (talk) 09:16, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Well, he self-admitted taking the item from an officially restricted area on Korean soil - that much seems not to be under duress. There are certain aspects, including the manner of his death, which are less clear and could be a collusion on the part of certain North Korean authorities, but that remains to be seen. When I saw the edit stating merely "for theft", I was personally pretty satisfied that the description came down pretty much in the middle as far as either "side" went. The inclusion of "alleged" is not necessary when you have a confession by the perpetrator, who appears to have been souvenir-hunting. So, whichever other description finally gets used, I would say "dump the alleged". Ref ^(chew)(do) 11:20, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that he "admitted" to that crime, did he? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:24, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

"Evidence at his trial included his confession, CCTV footage, fingerprint evidence, and witness testimony." That's included in his own Wikipedia article. Whether duress was used may still be arguable, but an admission of guilt was presented to the trial. Overall though, trying to establish a firm consensus on how good or evil one side or the other is or is not will be a hard one to achieve, given that any decision may inevitably be viewed by certain others as biased. Ref ^(chew)(do) 05:46, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that, by "Western standards", he admitted to any crimes. Sure, he verbally and physically made some statements to that effect in the courts over there. But, I think it's rather obvious, that it was all a "scam" and a "kangaroo court". He likely admitted to whatever they told him to admit to. Under whatever promises were extended to him. I am rather sure that duress was a factor. Also, the video is of some unrecognizable figure. Maybe Warmbier, maybe not. Likely not. Anyway, what's all this got to do with the "Deaths in 2017" page? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 14:07, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

He died in 2017, so we should describe him. Under "traditional standards", it's by role. Most people who become famous for their crimes are called "convicted x". This time, the circumstances of his death and sentence are so mired in brouhaha, it seems to be rubbing off on the non-controversial part.

If he attended college, was convicted of theft and imprisoned by North Korea, as nobody disputes, there should be nothing weird about "college student, convicted thief and North Korean prisoner". Instead he's only defined as the non-defining (but wholesome-sounding) one, then it's over to passive voice to insinuate North Korea convicted and imprisoned a college student, rather than a thief and prisoner. It's fine to rephrase a freedom fighter/political prisoner's terrorism conviction if he dies after his merry band destroys the state, but North Korea currently calls the shots within North Korea. Wikipedia doesn't have to like it, but it should appear to objectively accept it. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:20, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Huh? His current entry states: Otto Warmbier, 22, American college student, convicted of theft and imprisoned by North Korea. So, is there an issue or problem with that wording? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:47, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

It insinuates North Korea convicted and imprisoned a college student, rather than a thief and prisoner. Makes it more about the country than the guy, and makes the country look like a bag of dicks. But if that's not a problem, it's just a little wordier than those entries convicted by preferred courts. If that's also OK, everything's peachy. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:20, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

The entry seems fines to me. He is known as the "college student who was convicted of theft and imprisoned by North Korea". He was never known as a "thief". Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:49, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Aye, English sources do predominantly paint him that way. The Korean Wikipedia's necrology hasn't called him anything (the only dead Americans at all this month are Adam West and Glenn Hadley, whom we call Glenne Headly). In light of that, I'll concede it may be better to remember him as he was known over here, and not for what he did over there. InedibleHulk (talk) 18:18, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

I agree it's fine NOW. When this thread was started, it certainly wasn't (go through the edit history and match up the first comments in the thread - it needed to be debated, it was debated, and I personally don't see the need to come back here and debate it more). Ref ^(chew)(do) 16:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Marike Bok

Hi. As of my timestamp below, the one and only source on the internet (to my knowledge) which provided the information back-up for the death of Marike Bok has turned into a "404 page". As is obvious according to the criteria for inclusion here, we can't allow it unless we have a source of SOME kind, so I've removed the entry for now but still hope that a reference becomes available soon. It's annoying. Ref ^(chew)(do) 20:43, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

If that's the case, then Carlo Turcato (June 2) should be removed as well. — Wyliepedia 01:07, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Do it then. Of course it's the case. Even if all we have is Twitter we can go ahead. But not any kind of hearsay, as you well know. Ref ^(chew)(do) 03:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

 Done. — Wyliepedia 07:22, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

(Still nothing conclusive for either at this time.) Ref ^(chew)(do) 14:22, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Why is the same not done for their respective pages? Why leave the death date there with "citation needed" instead of removing it since it is hearsay? BurienBomber (talk) 16:23, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Re: Turcato, his page history shows that I removed it, and it was readded with an archive URL, which I don't believe should happen with BLPs. — Wyliepedia 00:55, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

(Personally speaking.) I only work to the stringent rules which apply to this page - it seems that (especially in Wikis of other languages) "anything goes" is the order of the day where references are concerned. You could certainly focus on all the dodgy claims of death in biographical articles and remove such uncited info, but that's a long job and so I'll stick to making sure this page is kept properly. Ref ^(chew)(do) 06:15, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Deaths in June 2017. 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/20170617193101/http://www.berkshireeagle.com/stories/state-rep-gailanne-cariddi-dies-at-age-63%2C510833 to http://www.berkshireeagle.com/stories/state-rep-gailanne-cariddi-dies-at-age-63%2C510833
• Added {{dead link}} tag to https://www.themorningbulletin.com.au/classifieds/ad/2725110/

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) 13:04, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Reference for Parker Lee McDonald

The text in the link for Parker Lee McDonald used to read "Former Fla. Surpreme Court Justice McDonald Dies at 93". Note the extra "r" in "Supreme". I checked the link, and in fact, the linked article has the incorrect spelling "Surpreme" in its title, though the rest of the article seemed OK at a quick glance. Despite the actual text of the linked source, I chose to correct the text as it appears on this Wikipedia page. If this was not the way to handle this, someone let me know. Jkgree (talk) 18:44, 5 March 2019 (UTC)