Talk:Deaths in January 2012

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Policy not followed[edit]

Apparently the policy of keeping the previous month visible for the first seven days of a new month was not followed in the most recent edit. And some people will still die during 2011 in the coming hours. (It is now 6:32 PM on December 31st where I am.) Michael Hardy (talk) 00:31, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a copy of the December 2011 deaths list to this page. By policy, these should remain until seven days have ellapsed. It appears that this policy has been followed except in January, out of inconveniences resulting from starting a new page for a new year. But it's still policy and the reasons for it remain the same. Michael Hardy (talk) 01:13, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot maintain two different versions of the same article, Deaths in December 2011. It is completely unworkable. Deaths in December 2011 can never exist as part of Deaths in 2012. Besides, it was never policy, just consensus that works well for month to month rollovers, but not for year to year rollovers. WWGB (talk) 01:20, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the intention here - it would be convenient to have a quick link to recent deaths in 2011 (the main page link is "Recent deaths" after all). I also agree that we can't have two articles with the same content - that is impossible very difficult to synchronise. So, as a compromise, I've added a quick link (For recent deaths in 2011, see Deaths in 2011) near the top of the page that can be deleted in a week or so. Wikipeterproject (talk) 03:14, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
"It is completely unworkable." Wrong. The link from the frontpage is recent deaths, so the last 7 days should be here. By the time the usual suspects here have argued amongst themselves, it will be the 8th of January. Lugnuts (talk) 09:37, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think "completely unworkable" means that it will be very difficult indeed to mirror the information accurately on the two pages, because the information needs to be entered twice. My understanding is that at the end of a month (other than Deember) the information for the entire previous month is to over to the new page for that month for seven days. That means that the information only appears once (not on two pages). In this case, it doesn't make sense to have 2012 information in an article that relates to 2011, so the new page, which includes January, needs to be started immediately. I think the quick links the top of the 2012 page helps a lot to navigate from the main page "Recent deaths" to recent deaths in 2011, while staying ensuring 2011 information is in the 2011 article and 2012 in the 2012 one, without having to try to mirror anything. Wikipeterproject (talk) 11:23, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maintaining a mirror article is unworkable because it creates content forking which is against Wikipedia guidelines. WWGB (talk) 11:36, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Recall the policy: The previous month is to be visible on the recent deaths page until seven days of the new month have passed.

Now the problem is: How shall we implement the policy? Michael Hardy (talk) 06:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What you proposed on 1 March 2009 was "A month should be deleted from the "Deaths in [CURRENT YEAR]" page ONE WEEK after the month ends". [1] But Deaths in December 2011 can never be deleted from Deaths in 2012 as it does not belong there in the first place. There is no article called Recent deaths (a redirection), just deaths in a particular calendar year. WWGB (talk) 06:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This shows why out-of-context verbatim quoting is fallacious. Read the whole posting rather than that one sentence. Your argument, if viewed in context, rather than in the out-of-context way in which you present it, is an argument against having a page called "deaths in [CURRENT YEAR]". Michael Hardy (talk) 18:08, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I merely pointed out the "policy" as you wrote it in March 2009 [2], compared to the different version written above. WWGB (talk) 23:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In other words, you pointed out why context matters and out-of-context quoting is fallacious. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:50, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Natalee Holloway[edit]

If we're going to list her here at the date she was legally declared dead, shouldn't we list her with the age she would've been on that date? At the moment she's listed on a "Deaths in 2012" page, as an 18 year old, yet she was born in 1986. Doesn't look right, in my opinion. EJBH (talk) 03:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. She died (circa) May 30, 2005, at the age of 18. Legal restrictions (i.e., a waiting-period of seven years) dictated that she be "legally recognized as dead" on January 12, 2012. Thus, regardless of the legal waiting-period, she nonetheless died at the age of 18 in the year 2005. To claim that she died in 2012 -- or that she died at the age of 25 -- is a fiction and does not make sense. In other words, it is more important to record when she factually died (albeit, presumably) ... not when she is "eligible" (through the legal requirements) to be "considered dead". (See Death in absentia.) The legal requirement is, essentially, a fiction. It does not change the fact of when she actually died ... nor does it change the actual or factual date of her death or her age-at-death. Furthermore, I think that the entry listed here on the "Deaths in 2012" page for January 12 contains parenthetical information (i.e., "declared legally dead on this date"), which clarifies any ambiguity or confusion. Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:11, 28 January 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Thanks, just seen this reply. For me, the problem is that, for a reader unfamiliar to the case (like me until I read her page), the current entry still isn't sufficiently clear what the age relates to. I read the "missing since 2005" and the parenthetical explanation, and my assumption until I opened her article was that she had gone missing as an eleven-year-old. I take the point that she almost certainly didn't actually die on the 2012 date, but surely we're then trying to have it both ways? If we're presuming she died in 2005, she should be listed as a death in 2005, probably on the date she was reported missing (I'm guessing that's the date from which the 7-year span is measured); on the other hand, if we want to list her as a death in 2012, we should surely write her entry on the basis of her dying in that year. EJBH (talk)

88th year = 87 in some cultures....??[edit]

Is it the case that in some cultures, the newspapers would report that someone who had died in their 88th year, really was 88 even though in most western cultures today they would be said to be 87? I was thinking of the recent death of Rauf Denktaş announced in the press from Turkish cultures as being 88 even though we now have him down as 87. 80.249.48.109 (talk) 19:17, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think, technically, if someone dies before their next birthday, then they are within that particular year of their life. In Mr. Denktaş' case, he died two weeks before his 88th birthday, making him 87 and in his 87th year. If most editors, who add the ages to this article, would do the math rather than take the numbers from sources, they would be more correct. Yes, I understand some who have died don't have articles and the sources are all we have for the age. Hope this helps! — WylieCoyote (talk) 03:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree. If someone dies at 11 months, they are in their first year (0). The rest compiles numerically parallel. Dru of Id (talk) 12:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That is puzzling though, the phrasing. On television, they would say he was 87, yet he was in his 88th year. I'm not losing sleep over it, until my 88th, when others can talk about me all they like. (Six in one hand, half a dozen in the other.) — WylieCoyote (talk) 20:30, 19 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Senator (tree)[edit]

Whilst of course mostly for human deaths, animal deaths also appear here. But trees? This has to be a new one...

Is it appropriate to have a link to a page about a tree?--Q-Jux Q-Jux Q-Jux (talk) 12:39, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A year or two ago, I asked whether notable trees should appear on the deaths list, but was greeted with sarcasm and ridicule for posing the question (which was never answered). Such is the level of public discourse these days. Derrick Chapman 13:09, 20 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Derrickchapman (talk • contribs)

Recent deaths reports "a list of notable deaths". No restriction to humans or animals there ..... WWGB (talk) 13:53, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, i think listing animals and trees is fine, but the categories for death by year indicate its for people. This page is fine as categorized, but IF we are including animals and plants, shouldnt they also be categorized at their articles? and if so, shouldnt the description of the category group be expanded to include them?Mercurywoodrose (talk) 22:10, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whenever an animal which has it's own Wikipedia page dies, it gets included on this page, so surely this tree, which is also noteworthy enough to have it's own Wikipedia page, should also be included. It's no more ridiculous to include the The Senator than it was to include Paul the Octopus, or any other number of animals that have been included on these pages, and yet they go unquestioned. At the end of the day it was a notable living being, and it has died. Either all non-humans should be included or none of them, because there's no reason why animals should be included but plants shouldn't. Burbridge92 (talk) 23:59, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

On Sarig[edit]

On Sarig died on January 19th. The article should be moved to his real name, Shraga Gafni.Tushyk (talk) 10:00, 21 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Paterno[edit]

Note: Please defer to Talk:Joe Paterno for ongoing discussion of reports.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 02:47, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

is there any RELIABLE source that confirms his death? all the reports i see is that he is in serious condition — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.18.77.37 (talk) 02:16, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At least one major sports source had reported his death -- then took it back. As it stands right now (Sat Jan 21, 9:25 pm EST) according to online sources such as Yahoo!, CBS Sportsline, USA Today, ESPN, CNN-Sports Illustrated and SportsNetwork.com, he is apparently still alive, but in very serious condition.

I would monitor the front pages of all six above-named sources until every one has a definitive report!

Fgf2007 (talk) 02:26, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

CBS reported it, but both brothers have said he is still alive now via twitter. Apparently an email was given to all the players and to the student university newspaper that reported his death. Sunnydoo (talk) 02:29, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/22/us/paterno-false-report/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 Now the premature report of his death has become news itself.Sunnydoo (talk) 13:14, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whom would know better about the fine art of premature obituaries than CNN! Every major source I have seen in the last 10-12 hours has reported him to have passed from severe complications. When reported by some of the more questionable news organizations, I stumble, but when Penn State itself and the Lions website both report his death, they'd probably know better than anyone outside of the family. 166.249.198.86 (talk) 06:46, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Colin Tarrant entry[edit]

I removed the cause of death because it has not been confirmed (the source states "suspected suicide" based on a report in British tabloid The People), but I notice it has been restored. I do not think this should be stated in the article until a reliable source reports that it has been confirmed. January (talk) 11:42, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nancy Nevinson[edit]

I haved added british actress Nancy Nevinson to January 25, 2012. The word actress is not mentioned in the available part of the obituary (it's been archived)[3], but it mentions that she died at 93 at Glebelands. It is known that Nevinson was a resident of Glebelands. [4] I seriously doubt that there could have been two 93 year old Nacy Nevinsons in such a small place as Glebelands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.153.59.45 (talk) 10:04, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the consensus here is that deaths more than one month ago are not retained unless the deceased has a Wikipedia article. That's an agreed way to ensure that only notable deaths are reported here. If you feel strongly that Nevinson deserves a mention, then I encourage you to write a stub article about her. Regards, WWGB (talk) 10:46, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 8 external links on Deaths in January 2012. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:06, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Deaths in January 2012. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:07, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Deaths in January 2012. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:28, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Deaths in January 2012. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 13:49, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 33 external links on Deaths in January 2012. 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:

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) 07:57, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 24 external links on Deaths in January 2012. 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:

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) 11:55, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Deaths in January 2012. 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:

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) 06:29, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Deaths in January 2012. 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:

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) 02:03, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Deaths_in_January_2012&oldid=1207794625"