Talk:Suicide of Kevin Whitrick: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 05:23, 13 April 2022

This article was nominated for deletion on 13 July 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article was nominated for deletion on 15 July 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

Biography Stub‑class

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article has had a peer review which is now archived.

Untitled

This page should be deleted. Kevin was never the type of man to have things such as this floating around on the net and kept himself to himself. Please remove as this disturbs me and upsets me and a lot of other fellow friends and family. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.207.62.210 (talk) 15:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

I've got a picture of him hanging himself. Should I upload it and put it on the article? Floaterfluss ^{(talk) (contribs)} 14:14, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend against it. There's no need to post such graphic content. Presumably at least one of the links cited will have this image since it's pretty widespread. 23skidoo 18:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no way we should feature the picture. Shame on you if you need it explaining to you why not. Grace Note 06:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As the copyright status of any such pictures is unclear, they would have to be fair use and I'm doubtful they would qualify as fair use Nil Einne 19:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The picture would qualify as fair use because it captures exactly why he is notable and on this project in the first place. I say upload it. Christopher Connor 16:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a face picture[1] (nothing gruesome) used in the recent BBC article [2] about no one being charged in this case. Copyright BBC, so could it be used? It is clear that gruesome photos are NOT to be posted/redistributed per the detectives and at the request of the family[3]. BodyPride 01:04, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OT but

I noticed in Brandon Vedas, we list a number of cases including this one with similar aspects. I'm pretty sure there have been cases when people have seriously said they wanted to commit suicide on the internet and people have taken them seriously enough to call the police who got there in time to save the person. While such stories don't tend to gain as much media attention, I'm pretty sure I've read about at least one which has receive attention probably enought to establish notability IMHO (this was possibly on 4chan or some other forum). We probably should have articles of these for balance Nil Einne 19:38, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A case [4] of a suicide over the internet where people did try to stop the person (but failed). There was an article once that got deleted due to notability concerns. Can't say for sure that it does meet notability but thought I'd bring it to the attention of editors Nil Einne 19:52, 9 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed in the article pertaining To Kevin Whitrick, in external links they failed to include his Memorial Page :http://kevin-neil-whitrick.gonetoosoon.co.uk/ which I feel would be a nice gesture to friends and family, as all you seem to run accross here on the net is the negative side with no thought of the surviving family.

I think the connection to Brandon Vedas should be restored and I found a link to a 1998 radio interview about cybersuicide [5], but I'm done with my edits for now. All out of creativity. Peace. BodyPride 12:12, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Semiprotection

I don't really see why this article is semiprotected. It has very little content, it's about a not very notable event, and it hasn't really been vandalized a lot. Isn't semiprotection for high quality articles that have a lot to lose from being vandalized? Small stubs like this should be open to improvement by everyone.--Mars2035 23:20, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This event is connected to 4chan. As anon has a history of vandalizing wikipedia for the lulz, it's a good precaution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.137.151 (talk) 20:12, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"married to his former wife" - logically impossible?

The article states, "At the time of his death, he was married to his former wife...".

What does this mean? If someone is your wife, you are definition married to them. If they are your former wife, you are not married to them.

Is it trying to say that he was estranged from his wife? --Jeremy94117 (talk) 03:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Kevin Whitrick. 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: 5 June 2024).

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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:19, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kevin Whitrick. 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:

Added archive https://archive.is/20070328220732/http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2007/03/25/3828482-sun.html to http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2007/03/25/3828482-sun.html

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 17:37, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kevin Whitrick. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070329174229/http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=256671 to http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=256671

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 12:35, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the list of similar incidents.

I suggest we keep the list of similar incidents since these do have some notability or virality on the Internet. Any objections? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam the speed fighter (talk • contribs) 19:10, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes why was the list of similar incidents removed? Removing the list made zero sense

Revision as of 19:11, 11 February 2022 edit SineBot (talk \| contribs) Bots 2,553,628 edits m Signing comment by Sam the speed fighter - "→Keep the list of similar incidents.: new section" ← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:23, 13 April 2022 edit undo IHeartVeronica (talk \| contribs) 65 edits m →Keep the list of similar incidents. Next edit →
Line 94:		Line 94:

	I suggest we keep the list of similar incidents since these do have some notability or virality on the Internet. Any objections? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Sam the speed fighter\|Sam the speed fighter]] ([[User talk:Sam the speed fighter#top\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Sam the speed fighter\|contribs]]) 19:10, 11 February 2022 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->		I suggest we keep the list of similar incidents since these do have some notability or virality on the Internet. Any objections? <!-- Template:Unsigned --><span class="autosigned" style="font-size:85%;">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Sam the speed fighter\|Sam the speed fighter]] ([[User talk:Sam the speed fighter#top\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Sam the speed fighter\|contribs]]) 19:10, 11 February 2022 (UTC)</span> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

			Yes why was the list of similar incidents removed? Removing the list made zero sense