Should the subject's cause of death be included in the infobox? 00:58, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

• No. In this case this factoid is not particularly significant. Per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, infoboxes should be limited to key facts, and unnecessary content excluded; "The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose". Most articles using ((infobox professional wrestler)) do not appear to use this parameter. Details can be provided and discussed in the article body. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:58, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Yes Every wrestler that has died their article has the cause of death, To say that this parameter is not used on most articles is false and most likely it hasn't been used because they are still alive. I can link probably 20 off the top of my head that have used the parameter. The template for the infobox has it already in it. Nikki has chosen this 1 article out of the 1000's of wrestling articles to want a cause of death removed. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 06:19, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Yes - To say most don't is a flat out lie. The cause of death could have been linked to the persons career, or steroid use. Also, tag the pro wrestling project when you do something like this. 166.182.242.177 (talk) 06:27, 2 December 2018 (UTC) (Crash Underride via mobile)[reply]

• Yes it should. And the only way your statement "most articles don't use this" is if you count all the living wrestler's articles - which is about as cherry-picking an argument as you can get. MPJ-DK (talk) 11:42, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• First of all, WarMachineWildThing, please review WP:CANVASS; your notification of this RfC was incredibly non-neutral and inappropriate. Second, do any of you have any evidence that my statement is false? A search for insource:"infobox professional wrestler" -insource:"living people" returns 719 results; insource:"infobox professional wrestler" -insource:"living people" insource:"death cause" returns 240 results, and that would include any cases where the parameter was present but left blank. I would appreciate if all of you withdrew your baseless accusations and limit your arguments to fact- and policy/guideline-based points. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:38, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Nikkimaria Your RFC for this was one sided, you did not link the Wrestling project you only linked Biographies. So Call it canvass all you like, you have changed your reasons to have the death section removed from the infobox for this 1 article several times. First it was policy and not notable, then it wasn't sourced, then it was sourced but not correctly, Nothing I said wasn't fact as its right on your Talk page. Every wrestler death is notable, It could have been drugs, it could have been in the ring, it could have been an accident, Hawks is notable because it was a Heart Attack and not a drug overdose. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 19:06, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• (a) The RfC question as posed above is neutral, and even if it were not, canvassing would not be the appropriate response. Your approach here risks invalidating the RfC. (b) He's not notable for dying of a heart attack, he's notable for what he did while living. Many of the allegations you've made, such as "Every wrestler that has died their article has the cause of death" or "Every wrestler death is notable", do not have a basis in fact or in policy. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:24, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I feel the RFC was started as one sided and clearly so did another user. Again you have singled out 1 article because YOU don't think it is notable. Nothing I said wasn't fact as its right on your Talk page per our last discussion about this. So I dont feel like I did any WP:CANVASS of the Project like you said as the post was based on facts, the Wrestling Project was informed of what exactly was going on, Which you DID NOT do and should have done. I did NOT tell anyone to comment yes or no, I did NOT tell anyone to take a side, I Informed them and I stated the facts of this whole thing, Fact you singled out 1 page, Fact you removed the cause of Death without a good reason, so nothing in that post to the project wasn't true. Hawks death is notable because It could have been drugs, it could have been in the ring, it could have been an accident, Hawks is notable because it was a Heart Attack in his sleep and not a drug overdose. If he was born in 1902 then it would be clear what his cause was and you might have a valid argument, but based on your statements that a middle aged man having a Heart Attack who was in pretty damn good shape physically in his sleep isn't notable is non sense, By your reasoning any middle aged man that just up and dies in his sleep isn't notable. I have also removed anything that was aggressive or crass from the post in the Project as well and it still only states facts. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 19:39, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Your post very clearly took a side on the matter, and also made an allegation about lying which you have yet to substantiate; if you don't understand why your post was canvassing then I can only suggest you read the explanation at WP:CANVASS. It appears you also need to read WP:N, as notability has a particular meaning on Wikipedia that does not align with the way you are using the term. The death of "any middle aged man that just up and dies in his sleep" will almost always not be notable, because middle aged men die of heart attacks routinely regardless of their apparent health; the notability of the "middle aged man" himself will depend on who he was and what he accomplished in his lifetime. So too here: we don't know who Hawk is because he died of a heart attack, because that detail is actually not what is significant about him as a person. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:51, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• You stated Most articles using infobox professional wrestler do not appear to use this parameter, That is not true. Only ones who are still alive or died of old age do not use it. So by your wording it isnt true. I can link SEVERAL wrestling articles that are of middle aged men who had heart attacks and they all have it in their info box. One of them was only in his 30's. Your RFC was one sided from the beginning because YOU did not link the Wrestling Project, that was on you to do. I DID NOT tell anyone how comment. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 20:09, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I showed above how I arrived at my conclusion regarding use of the parameter; do you have any evidence for yours other than anecdote? "Other stuff exists" is not a particularly strong argument. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:16, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• An Anecdote? You showed your conclusion DID NOT include the facts some died of old age which then the cause isn't used. Your basis on this FROM the beginning was his age, its right on your talk page and here, you continue to say the same thing over and over, "A middle aged man having a heart attack isn't notable" It isn't about his age, its the fact he was in good shape, had drug issues in the past and had a heart attack in his sleep after he went to take a nap per the sources. He didn't die from an overdose or suicide which is what happens to alot of them. He died from a heart attack in his sleep. You act like all middle aged men having a heart attack is normal, it isn't normal. You started an RFC without notifying the project, which is one sided. It's now up to others to comment on how we go from here. You say I'm wrong and I say your wrong. Its not up to you how we proceed and Its not up to me how we proceed. I told you when you brought up RFC on your talk page to do it then and you waited almost 2 days to do it then started an RFC without notifying the project, that is one sided. The fact that it is only used in certain wrestling infoboxes is irrelevant as these should be addressed on a case-by-case basis. I stated facts based on your comments, period. I will not sit here and continue to take over this conversation with you with the same arguments over and over. Chris "WarMachineWildThing" ^{Talk to me} 20:33, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The question is not "Is this used in enough wrestling infoboxes to be included?", the question is "Is it notable enough to be included?". Per Template:Infobox person, the cause of death should only be included when the cause of death has significance for the subject's notability, e.g. James Dean, John Lennon. It should not be filled in for unremarkable deaths such as those from old age or routine illness. The fact that it is only used in certain wrestling infoboxes is irrelevant as these should be addressed on a case-by-case basis. JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:09, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• keep - I'm amazed that this wasn't mentioned at WP:PW. Creating an RFC without ever discussing this with the WikiProject seems quite disruptive. The argument that because it's not used on a vast majority of PW articles is a little bit forced for a few reasons. Firstly, a lot of PW articles are based on WP:BLP, so wouldn't have a CoD. Second, even those that have died, as pointed out above - aren't considered to be notable causes of death. For the same reason as Infobox person - someone dying by say a heart attack at 90 isn't really notable enough for an infobox. If they died of a drug overdose; would be notable enough for inclusion. Finally, not all PW personalities have consistent causes of death; with news sites often getting mixed up, or wrong altogether. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:20, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• It "isn't really notable enough for an infobox" in this case - heart disease is literally the most common cause of death for men of his age. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• For consistency, if it were removed from wrestling bio infoboxes, it would also need to be taken from all other Biographies. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 11:20, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• It is used in other biographies when significant but not when routine, per the documentation of ((infobox person)). Nikkimaria (talk) 12:40, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes If cause of death is known from a reliable source, any editor should be allowed to add it to the infobox, with a citation to the reliable source if there is any question regarding the cause of death. Whether cause of death is reported in other biographies, and how many or in what categories, is irrelevant. If cause of death is known, it deserves a space in the article in the event that some readers may be interested in that fact. If an editor feels it is important enough to include, other editors should respect that. Be collaborative folks! The more information and sources we give to people researching a topic, the better.--Saranoon (talk) 17:04, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes Not all heart attacks are notable but this subject had been active in the months prior to his sudden death, including appearing at the two most prominent professional wrestling promotions in the US, and wrestled up to two weeks before his passing. His death was shocking and notable and it's beneficial to readers to include the cause.LM2000 (talk) 12:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Yes I didn't know about the policy. As it says "has significance for the subject's notability". Road Warrior was 46 years old, a heart attack is not common (I mean, if he is Terry Funk, it's normal, Funk has 74) and he was a pro wrestler, a profession where he has to be (in theory) healthy (you know, gym and doing sport). I think the heart attack is notable for the article. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes. This field appears in Template:Infobox person and the professional wrestling biography template should not deviate from the general template without good reason. McPhail (talk) 19:49, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• No many fields appear in the infobox templates becaus they are ocassionally useful, not because they should be routinely used. Infoboxes fail of their purpose unless they are compact; they're meant for a compact overview of the basics. Cause of death is usually not that significant to a bio, tho it can be ifthe person died in a way related to their profession. DGG ( talk ) 05:06, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• No Per MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, "keep in mind the purpose of an infobox: to summarize (and not supplant) key facts that appear in the article... The less information it contains, the more effectively it serves that purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance." Dying young from a heart attack is somewhat unusual, but it is not a "key fact" related to his notability. (Summoned by bot) HouseOfChange (talk) 04:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]