This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Proposed merge with The Tyler Clementi Foundation
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- The result of this discussion was to Merge Tyler Clementi Foundation into Suicide of Tyler Clementi. I'm going ahead and performing the merge after closing this.(non-admin closure)--Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:48, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
This foundation is already mentioned on this article, and doesn't seem notable on its own especially given the existence of this page. The Foundation page seems mildly promotional(though not enough to delete it IMO) 331dot (talk) 16:34, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support. I agree, that's a very good idea. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:18, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support I agree with the rationale provided by the proposer. TheBlinkster (talk) 06:35, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support. It's the merest of stubs now, and its content doesn't even suggest notability. If events warrant, it can always be broken back out into a separate article later on. Rivertorch's Evil Twin (talk) 04:46, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support. I don't see why not. -- ChamithN (talk) 08:39, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Infobox
If, Tryptofish, the "infobox event" template can't be used for this article, why do some or many other articles about deaths of individual persons use "infobox event" instead of "infobox person"? Why not changing "infobox person" to "infobox event"? --George Ho (talk) 22:57, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
Off-topic, but the consensus at Talk:Noel Coward to omit an infobox... actually, there was "no consensus" on an infobox, so the version that lacks an infobox is used by default. Can that be used as a precedent? --George Ho (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- I'd welcome hearing from other editors about this question, but the way that I see it, the choice of template is subject to editorial judgment, page-by-page. I do, of course, understand that the page is about the event and not the person. But as I indicated in my edit summary, I think that it is important to retain a certain amount of personal information: [1]. I felt that the way the infobox was presented after your edit left out too much information. I don't care what the template is called. If the event template can provide the same information, then I don't mind using it instead. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- Let's see All pages with titles beginning with suicide of for comparison. Otherwise, let's compare. Suicide of Audrie Pott lacks an infobox for unknown reason. Suicide of Amanda Todd currently uses infobox event. If comparison is not enough, I shall say this. The "infobox person" doesn't add much substantial information; a reader can see birth dates in the lead without looking at an infobox. It discusses education profile but not adequately substantial. "Infobox event" tells readers who is or are directly and indirectly involved with the event. I added "charges" parameter and "arrests" parameter. But this is getting tricky if two of us can't agree which infobox shall be used. Call for RfC? George Ho (talk) 23:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- There are other editors who watch this page, so I'd like to just give a few days for them to comment if they want, before turning to an RfC. This issue certainly isn't an urgent one. But looking around, I quickly found these pages that use the person infobox: Suicide of Phoebe Prince, Suicide of Dawn-Marie Wesley, Suicide of Kelly Yeomans, Suicide of Jadin Bell, Suicide of Ryan Halligan, Suicide of Megan Meier, Suicide of Jamey Rodemeyer, and Suicide of Nicola Ann Raphael. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:30, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- Those pages aren't biography, yet "infobox person" is used. WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE says that infobox should be used to "summarize, not supplant, 'key' facts". I'm not confident that the usage of "infobox person" was reasonable, but you might interpret differently. George Ho (talk) 23:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- I think these are summaries of what is in the text. If an editor wanted to rename this page "Tyler Clementi" instead of "Suicide of...", I'd oppose that on the basis of it being about the event and not the person (and in fact this was a long-ago discussion that actually took place). But that pertains to notability and pagename, not the name of a template. Our readers do not even know what the names of templates are, and they don't care. What matters is what information we provide them with. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- What is a "key fact"? I always thought that key fact is anything relevant. Can a key fact be also less important? Does adding "cause" and "arrests" qualify as key facts? George Ho (talk) 00:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, I don't understand what you are asking. --Tryptofish (talk) 00:21, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- What is a "key fact"? I always thought that key fact is anything relevant. Can a key fact be also less important? Does adding "cause" and "arrests" qualify as key facts? George Ho (talk) 00:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- I think these are summaries of what is in the text. If an editor wanted to rename this page "Tyler Clementi" instead of "Suicide of...", I'd oppose that on the basis of it being about the event and not the person (and in fact this was a long-ago discussion that actually took place). But that pertains to notability and pagename, not the name of a template. Our readers do not even know what the names of templates are, and they don't care. What matters is what information we provide them with. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:56, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- Those pages aren't biography, yet "infobox person" is used. WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE says that infobox should be used to "summarize, not supplant, 'key' facts". I'm not confident that the usage of "infobox person" was reasonable, but you might interpret differently. George Ho (talk) 23:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- There are other editors who watch this page, so I'd like to just give a few days for them to comment if they want, before turning to an RfC. This issue certainly isn't an urgent one. But looking around, I quickly found these pages that use the person infobox: Suicide of Phoebe Prince, Suicide of Dawn-Marie Wesley, Suicide of Kelly Yeomans, Suicide of Jadin Bell, Suicide of Ryan Halligan, Suicide of Megan Meier, Suicide of Jamey Rodemeyer, and Suicide of Nicola Ann Raphael. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:30, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
- Let's see All pages with titles beginning with suicide of for comparison. Otherwise, let's compare. Suicide of Audrie Pott lacks an infobox for unknown reason. Suicide of Amanda Todd currently uses infobox event. If comparison is not enough, I shall say this. The "infobox person" doesn't add much substantial information; a reader can see birth dates in the lead without looking at an infobox. It discusses education profile but not adequately substantial. "Infobox event" tells readers who is or are directly and indirectly involved with the event. I added "charges" parameter and "arrests" parameter. But this is getting tricky if two of us can't agree which infobox shall be used. Call for RfC? George Ho (talk) 23:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
I'll rephrase. The "infobox person" contains just birth date, death date, education, cause of death, and occupation. My version of "infobox event" contains "location", "arrest(s)", "charges", "trial". I wish I would have fleshed it out by adding "verdict", "convictions", "sentence", and "notes" before the revert back to "infobox person", which doesn't allow further improvement as the infobox of the article. The "event" one has more well-known summarized facts than "person" does... unless you can counter what I was saying? George Ho (talk) 00:46, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- I don't understand why you'd want to add parameters such as "verdict", "convictions", and "sentence". "Arrests", "charges", and "trial" (found in the version you saved before Tryptofish reverted) are already problematic, imo, because their connection to the event is an indirect one. Those would be appropriate for an article about a homicide. In an article about a suicide, they are potentially confusing. This may be a case of "if it ain't broke . . ." Rivertorch's Evil Twin (talk) 08:25, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
- And now that I see George Ho's answer, my own response is very much the same as what Rivertorch has said. It really ain't broke. It sounds to me like the argument for changing to the event template is something like: the suicide was an event, so we must rigidly use the event template, and because we are using that template, we should look for parameters to fill in that are associated with it. In my opinion, that's the wrong approach. The right approach, I think, is to ask "what best serves the improvement of this page?". Our readers don't care what we name our templates. They care about the information that we provide. A change in infobox would have to be justified by showing that the information would be more useful to our readers. Here, it appears that it would actually be less useful. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:25, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Dispute
I invite the IP user who is edit warring today to discuss their concerns here. 331dot (talk) 12:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- Please don't. The "lol" in their edit summary and the content of their edits are clear indications that they are simply trolling, and they've already been answered in a section above this one. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:10, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Celia Homeford: Thanks for the clarification; I had posted this because to report them as an edit warrior they need to be given an opportunity to discuss the issue. 331dot (talk) 13:30, 12 December 2016 (UTC)