Talk:Deaths in September 2018

September 1

I'm wondering about the spelling of Canadian syndicalist and writer Fernand Foisy. In fact, my computer has just corrected me when I attempted to spell it the same way as your entry! 203.196.41.161 (talk) 21:40, 3 September 2018 (UTC) Editrite!

I don't get it. The spelling is of course "rite", as you like to say, both in the French Wikipedia article and in all the sources I've seen, including the one used. Your computer would be better off having its "auto-correct" feature switched to "off". Or else just ignore it. Ref ^(chew)(do) 23:00, 3 September 2018 (UTC)

Tarun Sagar and his jaundice

Hi. This "cause of death" has been inserted and removed so many times that it almost constitutes an edit war. Thus, my understanding of the medical condition is that, while non-fatal as a standalone condition, it can lead to complications. Without an exact sourceable description of the complication, the only way to include it in future would be by referring to "complications of jaundice". (Even infants and babies survive plain jaundice when they are born and growing up.) I think this needed clarification, as 3RR has already easily been exceeded here. Ref ^(chew)(do) 06:14, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Also, Sagar refused medication and fasted to death [1] so there are a whole lot of factors contributing to his death. For now, I think his COD should be omitted. WWGB (talk) 07:15, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Personally, agreed. Ref ^(chew)(do) 07:37, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Jaundice doesn't kill anyone, and no source says it killed this guy. Just that he'd had it. Probably thirsty, too, doesn't matter. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:19, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Either "suicide by starvation" or "sallekhana" is far more explicitly conveyed by WWGB's story, and should be seen as the real killer. InedibleHulk (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Alan Oakman

My source of the Warwickshire with a source pointing to the 5th as being DOD keeps getting kicked to the curb in favour of a cite that @Refsworldlee: has established as being a news gathering site, and thus unreliable. Twitter may be considered unreliable on its own, but I find it hardly fair to disregard a verified account, a fellow Warwickshire player as well, and the Warwickshire source itself. The tweet is merely embedded into the article. Even still, most of the deaths announced these days are sourced from Facebook, Twitter, etc. I just don’t see the issue in using the Warwickshire cite. Rusted AutoParts 16:37, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

If I recall (and it was this morning), I didn't revert it back to Warwickshire, but used ESPN CricInfo or somesuch, which also confirmed his age. I did initially look for a full computer URL for your "news gathering site", but it doesn't have one. On the basis of our historical reluctance to use mobile links long-term, I believed and still do that that one shouldn't be used. "News gathering" sites are usually avoided because second-hand sourcing becomes third-hand immediately (as I understand it). These are the only rationales I employed - there's never usually anything personal going on when I look for an alternative. Ref ^(chew)(do) 16:55, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

His age wasn’t what’s the issue. It’s DOD. The cite WWGB linked uses the 6th but an Allan Donald tweet he put out on the 6th embedded in the Warwickshire article has him stating “last night”. I feel it’s fair game to use Warwickshire as a source cause it’s not directly citing the tweet. Rusted AutoParts 17:06, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Fine. I don't go in for revert-revert. That's a mug's game, so as long as everyone is happy, it stays as it is until a cast-iron whistles-and-bells source comes up with all we could wish for on Oakman. Ref ^(chew)(do) 17:25, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

"Last night" does not mean "yesterday". Donald's (alleged) tweet that Oakman "passed away last night" indicates that Oakman died sometime between sunset on 5 September and sunrise on 6 September. In other words, inconclusive. If "dailyhunt" is not considered a reliable source, I am happy to leave DAOTD against the listing until an unequivocal obituary or funeral notice appears. WWGB (talk) 00:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

The literal meaning of last night is The evening or night immediately before the present. Donald tweeting at 6 in the morning of September 6 about Oakman dying “last night” has a very clear outline of when he passed away. And I suppose for semantics sake I’ll include the definition of morning: The period of time between midnight and noon, especially from sunrise to noon. As for Donald’s apparent “alledged tweet”, here it is, and once again can be found amongst other condolences included in the club website’s article about his death. Rusted AutoParts 00:27, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Per WP:TWITTER, it "may be used as sources of information about themselves" (bolded in quote). Since Donald is not reporting his own death, his tweet has no particular merit in this case. WWGB (talk) 01:07, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

That is total crap, social media has been used by many sources to confirm news, and we have used said sources before. Christopher Lawford’s entry uses a source tying the news back to his cousin’s Twitter. So should we remove Lawford because he himself isn’t confirming his own death? It’s from someone not Lawford, held to this logic it’s unusable. Thomas Rickman is using a source that ties back to Nicholas Meyer’s Facebook. Meyer isn’t confirming his own death, thus unusable. The Warwickshire source itself is good to use to cite the fact he has died, the tweet being included within the source is fair to use as they are using it to spread information. I guess if you aren’t budging on Oakman, at least be consistent with this social media enforcement you’re using against the Warwickshire source. Rusted AutoParts 01:13, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Will Jordan’s source point to Facebook as well. Unusable, right? Rusted AutoParts 01:22, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Any additional comment? I’d like to know if my stance here is illthoughout or not. Rusted AutoParts 16:57, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

I completely agree with Rusted AutoParts. Many sources base themselves on social media announcements if they are verified. I understand we can not use directly social media, there should be some article that adfirms "Hey, that's true!", but once there is an available reputable source it does not matter how it took the news, if they are verified. --Folengo (talk) 17:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

But that's the point. Warwickshire CCC has not "verified" anything, it just reprinted Donald's tweet without comment or validation. Anyway, I still do not accept that "last night" is synonymous with a particular date. WWGB (talk) 01:19, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

And that may be your personal choice but the definition that even Wikitionary prominently uses is “The evening or night immediately before the present”. Rusted AutoParts 01:24, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

BTW @WWGB:, you haven’t yet addressed my above response to thensudden employment of WP:TWITTER. Rusted AutoParts 01:30, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

What can I say? I have always accepted, and still do, that anything published on social media about someone other than the author in not reliable, in accordance with Wikipedia policy. Sometimes things "get through", as you have pointed out. To my mind, that's just WP:OSE. If I come across social media used as a reliable source about a second party, I will replace it. I have already done that with Lawford's death listing. (I'm yet to work on Meyer and Jordan.) As for "last night" being defined as "the evening or night immediately before the present", I still don't find that changes anything, as the night before the present ends at sunrise. WWGB (talk) 01:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

But the date always changes at midnight. Ref ^(chew)(do) 06:27, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

At this point the amount of sources stating September 6 outweigh the one tweet of last night, but I still stand that for all intents and purposes that last night has a clear meaning of being the previous evening. Rusted AutoParts 16:41, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Chelsi Smith - a singer?

One track co-written and recorded, solely for the soundtrack to the film "The Sweetest Thing" (starring Cameron Diaz), and called "Dom Da Da". And that's it as far as all my searching goes. Hardly constitutes a "singer" in notable terms, to my mind. Ref ^(chew)(do) 11:44, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it does (see #10). However, it's debatable as to The Sweetest Thing's contribution to film history. — Wyliepedia @ 20:29, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Hmm, that #10 is very vague about one-event notability when it relates to claims in this instance of her being an actual singer, recommending a "mention in the main article" only. A front-and-centre full description of "singer" still seems tenuous when you re-read that criteria. Ref ^(chew)(do) 21:54, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

I suppose I would benefit by making the point that her article also claims that she was an actress and television host, yet those aren't trotted out alongside the descriptor singer. Seems odd. Ref ^(chew)(do) 21:56, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

It doesn't appear enough to earn her an article, minus the pageant stuff. If we're applying article creation theory to blurb inclusion practice, we should treat her existing article as the "main article" and mention her blip of a singing career there. Whether we should work by the wrong standard at all remains questionable, but I'm with Ref so long as we do. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:06, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I get the feeling that editors are loathe to remove the "singer" part because what's left would be an historically bare resumé painting her as just a good looker. To put it bluntly. Ref ^(chew)(do) 21:15, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

I think our current singular descriptive notability here is all that matters. I doubt anyone will see her listing and say "Didn't she have a song on that Cameron Diaz movie soundtrack?" or "Didn't she host that Beyonce special on HBO?", because she wasn't known for those. — Wyliepedia @ 14:54, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

And it's not like recognition as the most beautiful woman in the universe and United States combined is that unimpressive. InedibleHulk (talk) 20:06, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Daniel Küblböck

German pop singer Daniel Küblböck has surely died on September the 9th drowning in the Atlantic Ocean. Body will probably never be found. I know the policy on disappeared people, we should wait for his corpse to be found. Anyway it's impossible he's still alive, so I wanted to bring this to your attention. Policy is clear indeed (see Karl-Erivan Haub).--Folengo (talk) 18:39, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

As per Cast Away, Lord of the Flies, Robinson Crusoe, Hatchet, Lost, Gilligan's Island and Life of Pi, the prospect of becoming deserted or adrift somewhere is still a possibility but we typically or at least should wait until a death is at least declared ala Natalee Holloway. Rusted AutoParts 18:56, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Needed Obits

The following people have died in the current year, but reports have only been on Twitter, Facebook, blogs or Wiki. Anyway these people are really dead, as reports were all from reatives, disciples or Institutions. I think all the usual contributors to the page should help with finding suitable obits. Obviosuly it's not our fault if obits don't show up, but I ask everyone to be alert. I guarantee I am personally working on all these cases, but my abilities could be limited (I do my best anyway). Let's begin:

• Elizabeth Chambers, British actress, born in 1933, famous for TV Series Tenko. She died in June. Funeral was reportedly held on June the 12th.
• Helli Louise, Danish actress, born in 1949, famous for her appearances in The Benny Hill Show. Died on 21 July 2018 according to Robin Askwith on twitter.
• Carl Duering, German-born British actor, known for his role in A Clockwork Orange, died on September 1 according to edit on his page. The style of edits is that of relatives not familiar with Wiki rules. I personally believe those reports.
• Sheila White (actress), British actress, born in 1950, reportedly died on September 6, according to her agent. Shockingly, no obits came out.
• Frank Lee Sprague, American musician, born in 1958, of Sprague Brothers fame, reported dead on Facebook on September 1. Wiki edits seem to confirm this.
• Bettina Shaw-Lawrence, British painter residing in Italy, born in 1921, died on September 12 according to edits on her page. The guy who added DoD is the usual contributor to the page and created it. I think he's in touch enough, would write him something.
• Diana Baumrind, American Jewish psychologist, born in 1927, died on September the 13th according to edits on Wiki. Also reported on Facebook she died in a traffic collision.
• Ursula Acosta, German-born Puerto Rican psychologist, born in 1933. Edits to her wiki page claim she died on 10 September 2018 in Puerto Rico.
• Ranganayaki Rajagopalan, Indian musician, born 1932, edits to her wiki page claim she died on September 20 2018.

I hope all obits are found! --Folengo (talk) 09:08, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Can't help so far, but I'm still so glad we at Deaths insist on correct sourcing and not social media hearsay, unlike some of those editing other bio articles. Ref ^(chew)(do) 19:07, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

I know little about Sheila White or her public relations, but don't see anything suggesting Mark Shenton has ever been anyone's agent. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:45, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

I think Shenton is passing along info that her agent told him. Rusted AutoParts|

Correct, her agent told him.--Folengo (talk) 09:29, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

OK, I see that now in the replies. Any idea who her agent was? Might help get to the bottom of this. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:09, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

As previously mentioned many times in many places here at Wikipedia, sources like "Twitter, Facebook, blogs or Wiki" are not usually considered reliable. A lot of fake news appears in those places.

However, if the passing of those people can be confirmed & verified elsewhere, then I have no problem having them appear on the Deaths page.

The only 'obstacle' is - - - would any of them pass the "notable" test? 2600:8800:785:1300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 18:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

They already have articles. They are deemed to be notable by virtue of their existing allowed Wikipedia article, unless there is an AfD notice on the article page or discussion of the same ilk going on about any of them (in which case they would be watched very closely and regardless of this a bot would usually remove them after article deletion). We only get judgmental over very basic redlinks as and when they enter the Deaths pages. Ref ^(chew)(do) 12:20, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Maartin Allcock

In his entry, it states "multi-instrumentalist" as one of his notable 'aspects.'

To me, that does not pass muster as "notable" since most musicians can play several instruments - - - like the Mandrell Sisters who can each play five or more instruments.

Or is it a British/English thing that it is unusual for one of their own to be able to play multiple instruments?

To me, his notability is all who he played with and produced.

Or am I missing something? 2600:8800:785:1300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 18:36, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

If a musician uses multiple instruments in their notable work, and they're too many to list smoothly, it's a fair descriptor. But if they're primarily known for one, and just dabble in others, best to note the big one. I'm not that familiar with Allcock, but it seems from his article that guitar and keyboards are his mainstays, though his bass work for Beth Nielsen Chapman is also singled out. Perhaps she should replace Robert Plant in his list, to give a wider picture. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:27, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Though I see he played almost everything on Plant's "Colours of a Shade", a tune I assume some people might remember. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:33, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

I see absolutely nothing wrong with the description as it stands, and I think you'll find the true notability attached to Allcock and musicians of his ilk is in how proficiently he plays those several instruments, rather than perhaps just "plunking along" in an average fashion, which many other musicians seem to me to be doing half the time. Ref ^(chew)(do) 00:12, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Richard M. Pollack

The above person has been added to the Deaths page with what I would call an "anecdotal" source for confirmation - as the source comes from an unlinked personal mailing list circulation to a third party, it is eminently unverifiable outside of the one person who so far announces its inclusion in that mailing list (mind you, it's allegedly a mailing list, so there are bound to be many others who COULD verify the death, but the rest of us seem to have to take a leap of faith in granting its inclusion, and good faith at that). Please discuss urgently, as any mistake in the posting of the death of this already articled person could compromise our editorial integrity. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 19:27, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Should be immediately removed. Wait for proper source. Nukualofa (talk) 19:38, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Agreed, it's an unreliable source. I have removed the listing. WWGB (talk) 02:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

In fairness, I have also left a notification on the subject article's talk page to the same effect. Ref ^(chew)(do) 05:35, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Subsequently I linked the message. It is not a "personal mailing list", it is the official mailing list for the research community associated with the Symposium on Computational Geometry, and the message is signed by the members of the steering committee of the symposium. In addition your use of "unlinked" throws up a big red flag for me. There is nowhere in Wikipedia's policies or guidelines that sources are required to have links, for good reason — because this is an encyclopedia of everything, not just of online stuff. And your "allegedly" is purely an expression of bad faith in my editing and, as such, a personal attack. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:58, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

Calm down, no-one is attacking you. A claim that a notable person is dead is always handled with caution, and follows WP:Verifiability: "people using the encyclopedia can check that the information comes from a reliable source". That was not the case until you posted the link. The death listing has now been restored. The earlier comments here were fair and reasonable: a message shared on a closed collegial bulletin board is not sufficient to confirm the death of a notable person. WWGB (talk) 07:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

I note that the subject is now listed here with a verifiable link to the source, which is now obviously available to editors of the subject's own article if required. By the way, the use of the word "alleged" merely illustrates how unverifiable information is often treated with some scepticism when we editors-in-the-dark do not subscribe to that information. And I don't do personal attacks, I edit in good faith. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 11:37, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

It should never be the case that the inclusion or failure to include a URL on a source makes a difference for whether that source is considered reliable. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:03, 20 September 2018 (UTC)

It's more about the reliability of Wikipedia and our accountability. This page is consistently among the most-viewed pages across Wikipedia and could held accountable for its entries (hence, our scrutiny). One person's "this is a reliable source" is another's "prove it". — Wyliepedia @ 21:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)