The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus to delete. However, an effort should really be made to add citations... in lists like this, it helps to weed out vandalism and other inaccurate entries. W.marsh 22:25, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of suicides[edit]

List of suicides (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This is a list of notable people who allegedly died intentionally by their own hand. However, this list fails to cite reliable sources by which to verify that the named people died intentionally by their own hand. Moreover, there is no requirement that the suicides themselves be important/significant. Notability is not inherited and this list attempts to import the notability of the people on the list into their act of suicide. Both the people and their suicide separately needs to meet the general notability guidelines. Not one of the entries in this list even has a Wikipedia article such as 'Suicide of XXXX". The only such Wikipedia article I could find was the Suicide of Miss Melancholy, which is about a musical group, not a notable suicide. In addition, the entries in this list are covered adaquately through Category:Suicides and the 38 subcategories listed there.. -- Jreferee t/c 17:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. I don't believe there is a general requirement for lists to be referenced. Suicides should be (and usually are) referenced in the corresponding bio articles. The list is only moderately useful, though. GregorB 18:16, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOT#INFO. Granted, there have been a few (in)famous suicides (George Reeves, Hitler, etc.), but other than that, I don't see a need to take all these people and group them together indiscriminately. Keep, if verifiable. J-ſtan^Talk_Contribs 18:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. A list of unsourced redundant info that is better severed somewhere else.Ridernyc 19:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as indiscriminate info. There are plenty of people who commit suicides in this world, hence the inclusion criterion is far too wide for the list.--Alasdair 19:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, but major re-work needed The subject list is notable, since the suicide of a notable person inherently receives press coverage. This is a list of Wikipedia articles who share an attribute which is studied and covered by many secondary sources. In my view, it meets the the first two purposes of lists in Wikipedia, which are that the list serves as a valuable information source, and that it aids in navigation of a certain topic, in this case, suicides. The argument that the reason an article is included in a list should be notable in and of itself is not enough to delete a list. If you wish, take a look at List of HIV-positive people for an example, which includes notable persons who share a common, widely-studied attribute, HIV. Most sources provided are not published works on their specific HIV infection, per se, only evidence that the person shares the common attribute for inclusion in the list. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 19:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That said, there are certain problems with the list, which should be corrected during this discussion: (1) Move the lead section where it belongs, on top. (2) Create sub-lists of fictional characters and attempted suicides in fiction. Whether these lists meet the notability guidelines by themselves is another AfD debate. (3) Remove outright Possible suicides section. It NEEDS to be sourced otherwise it doesn't belong in any article, let alone this list. Entries under this section who "officially" committed suicide but are disputed (with sources) should be incorporated into the main list with the additional comment. (4) All entries must include a description of the method of suicide, otherwise they should be removed. I know this is not the responsibility of the closing admin, but I hope users reading this discussion will take the time to improve the list and avoid future AfDs. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 19:27, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This is yet another list of loosely associated trivia and fails our WP:FIVE pillars immensely. Burntsauce 22:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The five pillars? How exactly? I'm curious to know. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 02:24, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep loosely associated can be and has been been asserted about almost anything-- we need a proper formulation that would among other things make it clear according to common sense that , for example, having the similar essential characteristic of dying in a particular way that is generally considered as noteworthy is not a loose association. List of suicides in March would be a loose association. List of suicides is not. As usual, all lists need maintenance. DGG (talk) 05:37, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The sources can be found on the individual's article. Lugnuts 08:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep How is a list of suicides a 'loose association'? How is it 'trivial'? Obviously all the entries should be sourced over time and only 'notable' suicides should be included but 'I don't like it' or 'I don't think it's useful' are hardly an adequate arguments for deletion. Like many articles here it's unduly weighted to the present but it will only improve as it evolves. Nick mallory 10:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above but edit out major portions. The list of real suicides is voluminous enough without adding fictional suicides, suicide attempts, etc. I recognize that an article called "List of fictional suicides" will probably have trouble suriviving, but its dragging this article down rather than anchoring it. Mandsford 12:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep because it's convenient and useful. Horia 20:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete better served as a category. --Sc straker 01:27, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete use a category. This is bad idea just like List of chefs was a bad idea. MarsRover 03:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, because it passed a discussion from just a few months ago and because organized lists of facts are exactly what reference guides do best. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I can see this being useful for research into celebrity suicides or something. One of Wikipedia's attractions is cataloging this kind of obscure information. Leaving sourcing to the articles about individuals is generally fine, but if this ends keep, I'm going to source all the attempted suicides. Having that kind of unsourced info about living people worries me.--chaser - t 19:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.