Talk:Sushant Singh Rajput

Removed films

Sushant singh rajput- https://www.newshelp.in/sushant-singh-rajput-ki-death-kaise-hui/

@Peakat:, I've reverted this edit of yours because your assertion that the movie is filming is not supported by the reference you chose, which says fairly unambiguously that the film isn't being made. "I'm devastated that Paani didn't get made: Shekhar Kapur comforts Sushant" It's unclear to me why you added this. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:49, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb:, Thanks dear to revert that by mistake that happened, I will do my future edits with my full attention. Peakat (talk) 13:30, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Everyone requesting edits about his death please READ THIS

His death is in the article at Sushant Singh Rajput#Death. Please note we cannot add speculation about reasons without them being cited in reliable sources. Please stop requesting the same thing over and over and if you want something added please point to the source (ie the news site with the detail). We cannot add anything without it being cited. Thanks. Glen 09:58, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the requests about the death date now, hope thats ok. But, to be honestly, this looked epic. --TheImaCow (talk) 10:33, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

TheImaCow, you're a star. My watchlist was blowing up! Thanks. Glen 10:35, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

TheImaCow - What a sight. xD

Sorry if your watchlist blew up again because of what I just did; I cleared away the requests and duplicates to make this more prominent... Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 15:14, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

RandomCanadian, haha no it was blowing up from all the requests stating the same thing. Appreciate you clearing them. Glen 15:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Shobhasv (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)Is it necessary to mention the way he died by suicide? I am reading these guidelines: https://reportingonsuicide.org/recommendations/#dodonts And they say writing about how someone killed themselves is insensitive. I am wondering if this applies to Wikipedia as well. This is something we as a community should talk and discuss. Thanks.

The actual guideline is WP:NOTCENSORED, so we describe it using the language found in reliable sources even if some find it "insensitive'. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 17:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree with RandomCanadian. We do not censor. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:26, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

'Suicide by hanging' or 'asphyxiation' in infobox

The infobox lists the cause of death as 'suicide by hanging'. The current version of §Death avoids explicitly labelling his death as a suicide; I'm assuming this is due to a lack of evidence that has been made public.

Will it not be better then for the infobox to state the cause of death as 'asphyxiation' or 'strangulation' or the like, and not mention 'suicide' at this stage?

Just want to hear from the rest of the editors; I'll edit the infobox in a few hours if no one has any reservations. If the subject's death has been reported in proper sources as a suicide then there is no reason not to explicitly state it as such in §Death. —I'llbeyourbeach (talk) 13:33, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@I'llbeyourbeach: Hey there, I think it's well-established that this was a suicide by hanging. The death subsection has been changed a few times. I think someone might have deleted the death cause from this section for some reason. Here are some references: "asphyxia due to hanging", Additional Commissioner of Police said "the actor 'committed suicide at his residence in Bandra'", "in what police said appeared to be a case of suicide." Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Sorry for the late response, but alrighty—on second thought/read I wouldn't say §Death "avoids" labelling his death for what it was. I don't have any concerns anymore, thank you for the response. — Preceding unsigned comment added by I'llbeyourbeach (talk • contribs) 18:15, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: I'm curious as to your thoughts about the widespread misunderstanding caused by this article's Template:Infobox person, which provides a parameter for death_cause but no option for manner of death. Wikipedia's page Cause of death does not mention suicide, but does say The cause of death is a specific disease or injury, in contrast to the manner of death which is a small number of categories like "natural", "accident", and "homicide". Wikipedia's page Manner of death, however, does include suicide among the external causes of an unnatural death. By comparison, our sister project Wikidata offers a more robust palette. Its page for Sushant Singh Rajput specifies asphyxiation as cause of death and suicide as manner of death. If our infobox had enabled us to be equally precise, considerable confusion might have been avoided. NedFausa (talk) 19:39, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@NedFausa: I'm not sure how much confusion would actually have been avoided, since I think some of the quote-unquote "confusion" is manufactured from blinded fans who are experiencing cognitive dissonance. (Not talking about editor I'llbeyourbeach above.) Over the last few years, the Wikipedia community has been increasingly reticent to add parameters or even clarity to vague wording in manuals of style and Infobox instructions, so I'm not terribly confident anybody would have the guts to expand the infobox or provide clear instruction on the parameter usage. If it's necessary, a combined phrasing could be added, like "Asphyxia, due to suicide by hanging" or something, but I don't know if we need that. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:02, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb: Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Unless you can see a downside, I support substituting the combined phrasing Asphyxia, due to suicide by hanging. NedFausa (talk) 20:32, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@NedFausa: I won't contest it, but be prepared to defend if someone else does. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 20:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@I'llbeyourbeach: :@Cyphoidbomb: Can this be updated to "Depression" or "Asphyxia"? As we don't mention on other wiki pages if someone dies due to a suicide. for example if you check Sridevi's page, it just says cause of death due to drowning not "Suicide by drowning" Kupcake92 (talk) 18:15, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Kupcake92: I don't think depression itself is usually a cause of death. It's typically a contributor. And asphyxia, without supplementary data, is vague. Does that mean the person had a carbon monoxide leak in their house? Did someone suffocate them? According to sources, Sridevi's death was accidental, so that's not a great analogue for a suicide. And addressing your statement "we don't mention on other wiki pages if someone dies due to a suicide", yes we absolutely do. Have yerself a gander at List of suicides in the 21st century. Also Wikipedia is not censored, so it's unclear why you'd think it's appropriate to try to omit a pertinent detail about the subject's death. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:33, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Please modify to death from asphyxiation. Suicide angle is being challenged. Smrssr (talk) 18:38, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

@Smrssr: Challenged by whom? If you don't bring references, how do you expect a resulting change to the article? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:43, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

The case of Sushant Singh Rajput has been registered in National Human right Commission by Advocate Gaurav Arora, under the catagory of 'Failure in taking lawful action' which is accepted by NHRC on 7th july 2020. Case No-758/13/16/2020, check status- https://hrcnet.nic.in/HRCNet/public/CaseStatus.aspx .So it is a humble request to kindly change the cause of death to 'Under Investigation' or any other appropriate word other than 'Suicide'. --2409:4062:193:1A72:8535:C764:AE2C:F8F9 (talk) 10:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC) https://hrcnet.nic.in/HRCNet/public/CaseStatus.aspx--2409:4062:193:1A72:8535:C764:AE2C:F8F9 (talk) 10:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

References

The link you provide cannot be used to make the requested change. Since HRCNet is a primary source, to cite it without verification from a reliable third-party publication would violate Wikipedia:No original research. NedFausa (talk) 15:10, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up. On July 12, 2020, Case No. 758/13/16/2020 was dismissed in limine (at the start) with the following explanation:

On perusal of the complaints listed above, it is seen that the matter raised in the complaints is pending before a State Commission or any other Commission duly constituted under any law for the time being in force, hence it is barred under section 36 (1) of the Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, which reads as follows:
"36. Matters not subject to jurisdiction of the Commission
(1) The Commission shall not inquire into any matter which is pending before a State Commission or any other Commission duly constituted under any law for the time being in force."
Therefore, the complaints are filed and the cases are closed.

NedFausa (talk) 20:24, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

@NedFausa:: Spelling out "asphyxia due to suicide by haning" as the cause of death seems quite bizarre. Asphyxia is not a cause, it's rather a mechanism of death. Would you ever write "crushing" as the cause of death if someone fell from a height, or "head trauma alt. bleeding out" if someone died in a car crash? It would seem quite morbid.

Suicide is a cause of death in List of causes of death by rate. We have a de facto consensus in naming suicide plus the manner of suicide in the infoboxes. See e.g. Robin Williams, Chris Cornell, Kurt Cobain. ––St.nerol (talk) 07:33, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@St.nerol: Wikipedia's page Cause of death explains, The cause of death is a specific disease or injury, in contrast to the manner of death which is a small number of categories like "natural", "accident", "suicide", and "homicide". (Note: I added suicide to that list today per cited source.) To quote the source verbatim, "Cause of Death is a term used to indicate the medical cause of death." (Emphasis added.) In the case of Sushant Singh Rajput, as our Infobox correctly states, asphyxia is the medical cause of death and suicide is the method that produced asphyxiation. I concede that absent a policy or guideline as to how to complete the death_cause parameter in Template:Infobox person, we must look to consensus. However, when you infer "a de facto consensus" from infoboxes of other celebrities, I assume it's because you cannot find a community-wide consensus to that effect. Given none, editors have latitude to form local consensus from article to article.

To date, this talk page section has no consensus.

• I'llbeyourbeach first favored asphyxiation or strangulation instead of suicide but later withdrew his concerns
• NedFausa favors asphyxia due to suicide by hanging, suggested by Cyphoidbomb—who hedged, "I don't know if we need that."
• Kupcake92 favors depression or asphyxia instead of suicide
• Smrssr favors asphyxiation instead of suicide
• St.nerol favors suicide by hanging

I'm hopeful editors will in due course concur that specifying cause of death as asphyxia due to suicide by hanging is more informative than just suicide by hanging. Precision is bizarre only to those who prefer less encyclopedic knowledge, not more. NedFausa (talk) 16:27, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

I'd opt for 'suicide by hanging'. St.nerol's argument above is persuasive, and I also think we're trying to shoehorn too much into an infobox. The purpose of an infobox is to give a snapshot - a cause of death that (for me) goes over two lines seems excessive. Let's save the meat for the article. Darren-M talk 18:17, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Since I was pinged, I also thought the extra detail was a bit much, but felt Ned should have a chance to test the alternative, especially since our community's instructions are vague, per usual. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:35, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@NedFausa, St.nerol, and Darren-M: For all interested, I've opened a discussion at Template talk:Infobox person#Death_cause clarification, because I dislike imprecision in our guidelines, and sometimes we have to challenge the community to come up with a solution. Also, the more I thought of it, the more it seemed that the James Dean and John Lennon example articles were not saying the same thing to readers. I explained in my post there. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:53, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@NedFausa:: I do find that there is a community-wide consensus or precedent as to what cause of death means in an infobox, but it is not formalized. The Template:Infobox person links to James Dean and John Lennon as examples. Their death causes are listed as car accident and gunshot wound respectively. That would be analogous to hanging, in this case. But every celebrity I can find that committed suicide has Suicide by <method>. Are there any other variations in precedent? Otherwise, why should this article be the exception? Consider that WP:SSEFAR. Sincerely, St.nerol (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Given Cyphoidbomb's clarification and Darren-M's vote, I concede that we now have consensus for suicide by hanging. I will remove asphyxia from the infobox. Thank you all. NedFausa (talk) 19:48, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thoughts on edit?

Cyphoidbomb - Would appreciate your thoughts on the mention of the website his team launched that I added earlier? diff, where my text was removed and my old revision with said edit. Thank you! Aaryan ^{📬 • 🥰} 20:31, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Aaryan33056: I personally don't see the long-term academic relevance of including information about a website that catalogues his dreams. What quality articles have something like this, and how is it any different from advertising a subject's Twitter page in the middle of the article, which we would not do? I don't even think it would qualify under WP:ELNO, although that might be debatable. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:41, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

@Cyphoidbomb:: Information mentioned on this page is valided only from third party sources(which again can be wrong). @Aaryan33056: added the website which is the only factual and official refernce source of information about him.

Also, i have spoken with Sushant on many things which has been added as bio earlier, all those information has also been removed. His fans also know him because he was entrepreneur, and philanthropist. Someone removed that too. Please help and fix these informations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honeytech (talk • contribs) 07:01, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Honeytech: If you knew Rajput, you have a clear conflict of interest and you shouldn't be editing this article at all. People with conflicts of interest have a very difficult time approaching article subjects objectively. As I stated clearly above, we do not advertise article subjects' blogs. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform. It's not like he was a journalist who donated all of his work to a museum or library, we're literally talking about a blog of his random thoughts and content from his dream journals. Not encyclopedic, sorry. This is an encyclopedia, not a memorial to Rajput.

As for the other content, the |occupation= parameter of the infobox and the lead sentence is supposed to indicate why the subject is notable, not list every hobby the subject had. He presumably is notable because he was an actor. Yes, he made money and participated in other ventures like entrepreneurship and philanthropy, but neither of those is unique to Rajput—many wealthy people are involved in some form of entrepreneurship and philanthropy. We never would have written an article about him if he was philanthropic, but not an actor, right? And someone who launched a business in 2018 would almost certainly never have a Wikipedia article just for being an entrepreneur. The third paragraph of the lead seems to cover his entrepreneurship and philanthropic works, so it's not clear to me what you're complaining about.

Lastly, we use reliable secondary sources (like news articles, magazines, books) for most of our content, not primary sources like the subject's blog. You should familiarise yourself with Wikipdia referencing guidelines before arguing about the sources. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:38, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Honeytech, per Cyphoidbomb 100% agree. Read WP:COI carefully. Glen 15:59, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

References

@Cyphoidbomb: Thanks. Got the point. Really appriciate the explanations Sir. Feel free to reach out for any help or validations of information which is benefical for people watching this page(*only if falls under right policy like WP:AD or WP:V orWP:DTTC or WP:FRINGE or WP:NPOV or WP:ASSERT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honeytech (talk • contribs) 07:18, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I think the website his team has launched should be added in this wiki page. 'Cause any information related to Sushant with official sources should be added in this wiki article. Nirzak (talk) 16:52, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

'Cause any information related to Sushant with official sources should be added in this wiki article. Um, no, per WP:V "Verifiability does not guarantee inclusion". Editors have to consider the academic value of including details about his dream journal, and it seems that this would be of super-low value, unless the journal itself was noteworthy for some reason. Every celebrity has a social media outlet. I'm sure many celebrities have personal journals. We don't typically care enough about those details to include them in most other articles, so why would we care here? Because he killed himself? Pointless. Promotional. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:02, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Editnotice for talk page

Should we add an edit notice to this talk page saying something like this:?

It may help cut back on the number of edit requests here. Danski454 (talk) 19:17, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

I've added a stop hand. I'm happy to remove it if other people want to. Danski454 (talk) 19:31, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Added second sentence and emphasis. Danski454 (talk) 20:08, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

@Danski454: A good suggestion, but I don't believe edit notices are seen by editors using the mobile version of the site, and most of the people creating the disruption are using mobile editing. I've semi-protected the talk page, because at this point it's a bit disruptive to have random people stop by to demand changes to the article based on unfounded suppositions and conspiracy theories. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:55, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Automagic Archiving

Given how popular this talkpage is at present, I have taken the liberty of setting up auto-archiving of threads after 14 days. Please do not hesitate to (1) alter the settings for the bot or (2) remove auto-archiving entirely, should anyone disagree. Thanks, --Jack Frost (talk) 14:40, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Conspiracy theory

Editors should beware a social media conspiracy theory, emanating from India, that seeks to implicate Wikipedia in covering up foul play by attributing Sushant Singh Rajput's death to suicide. The claim is that Wikipedia was updated to that effect before SSR was found dead! On June 16, 2020, the online portal Oneindia related that, according to Mumbai police, SSR spoke to his sister around 9 a.m. on the morning of his death, and an hour later had a glass of juice. Meaning he was still alive at 10 a.m., India Standard Time. Conspiracy theorists have pounced on Wikipedia's first edits attributing SSR's death to suicide, posted at 08:59 14 June 2020 by IP 139.5.242.88 (Delhi) and 09:08 14 June 2020 by IP 117.210.206.190 (Chandīgarh). How, they demand, could Wikipedia have announced his suicide an hour before he died? This stems, of course, from a common misunderstanding of Wikipedia's edit history, which uses UTC. Due to IST's offset of UTC +5:30 hours, our first edit suggesting SSR killed himself came three hours after a locksmith was summoned to open his door, and at exactly the same time as Times Now, a 24-hour English news channel in India, reported SST's suicide on worldwide social media. NedFausa (talk) 01:49, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, your notes about the death timeline and subsequent reporting are appreciated. The conspiracy theory push is largely why the article, and the talk page, have been protected. Not only were the announcements of his death attributed to reliable sources, but the causes of death were as well, and subsequent talk page requests to change the cause of death were all unsourced and reeking of unfounded conspiracy nonsense, as is demonstrable by looking at the above notes or going through the edit history. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:33, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Cyphoidbomb, Actually, some users have been attacking me on my talk page, thinking that I was the one who made the edits yet I just reverted them since they were unsourced, check here Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 09:17, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

@Synoman Barris: Let me know if it continues. I'm not a fan of willful ignorance or SPAs/anons harassing people. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:42, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

I see that even the Indian right-wing news portal OpIndia has debunked this conspiracy theory. "The claim that the fan made about someone being aware of Sushant's death before he committed suicide," OpIndia concludes, "is false." Ironically, OpIndia is on Wikipedia's spam blacklist, having been deemed generally unreliable due to a poor reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. In this instance, however, OpIndia got it right (no pun intended). NedFausa (talk) 16:01, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

NedFausa, even OpIndia, my god. Very silly one here though, it takes two seconds to read (UTC) and know that's the time Wikipedia uses. Thanks for leaving a summary here. Ed6767 talk! 16:23, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Timetable for clarity

UTC = Coordinated Universal Time
IST   = India Standard Time

14 June 2020

UTC	IST	Event
03:30	09:00 a.m.	spoke to sister
04:30	10:00 a.m.	had glass of juice
06:00	11:30 a.m.	locksmith summoned
08:59	02:29 p.m.	Times Now tweet
08:59	02:29 p.m.	change by IP 139.5.242.88
09:08	02:38 p.m.	change by IP 117.210.206.190

NedFausa (talk) 18:33, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTCENSORED

As a Westerner, I've been struggling to understand the fierce resistance of so many Indians to Wikipedia, citing reliable sources, describing Sushant Singh Rajput's untimely death as suicide. This backlash has manifested in numerous reverted edits to the article space and rejected edit requests posted at this talk page, all demanding that we sanitize Rajput's bio by purging any mention of suicide. The onslaught was severe enough to require protection of both pages.

If I may be allowed latitude in skirting WP:NOTSOAPBOX in order to help editors improve this bio through greater insight into the issue, I'd point to Wikipedia's informative Suicide in India, which suggests that our critics are turning a blind eye in this case. In 2016, suicide was the most common cause of death in India among the age group 15–39 years. (Sushant Singh Rajput killed himself at age 34.) In 2012, hanging was the method of 26% of suicides in India. (Sushant Singh Rajput hanged himself.) Also in 2012, Mumbai ranked fourth in suicides among India's largest cities, only slightly behind Delhi. (Sushant Singh Rajput killed himself at his home in Bandra, a suburb of Mumbai.)

Finally, Wikipedia notes that until commencement in July 2018 of the Mental Healthcare Act, 2017, suicide was illegal in India. In his 2009 essay "Death Systems and Suicide Around the World", Canadian psychologist Antoon Leenaars attributed India's longstanding suicide taboo to religion. (According to the 2011 census, 79.8% of India's population practices Hinduism.)

The Hindu believes in determinism, the law of karma. A belief in free will makes little sense; it also makes death, including suicide, difficult to accept. … Suicide is strongly forbidden; it is against Hindu belief. … In Hinduism, an even stronger force [than the legal code] in India, there are acts that are permanent pollutions/impurities; suicide is one. These cannot be overcome, even after death. Indeed, no reading of the Gita or other text may save the suicide. The soul may suffer permanently.

Our relevant policy advises: Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive—even exceedingly so. Attempting to ensure that articles and images will be acceptable to all readers, or will adhere to general social or religious norms, is incompatible with the purposes of an encyclopedia. (Emphasis added.) That sums up why we are justified in using the word suicide when supported by WP:RS. Hopefully, by a deeper appreciation of why Indians find that word offensive, editors will exercise patience in responding to attempts and exhortations to censor this bio. NedFausa (talk) 18:18, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I think in this case, we're probably talking about a small group of Rajput fanatics who are thinking emotionally, rather than rationally. Some articles have portrayed Rajput as a victim of an insular, cliquish community that doesn't support new talent--specifically people like him. This portrayal, probably increases the emotional response that fanatics would have about their idol Rajput. When facts are in conflict with our emotions, the brain goes wonky, and we start believing odd bollox. Interesting Wired article on the psychology of conspiracy theories here. There might also be educational limitations here. A lot of people may have mobile phones, and some amount of literacy, but may not be educated in things like researching and critical thinking, which you often find at university level. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Kindly revise your knowledge. It is not confirmed as suicide. The matter is still inclusive. Wikipedia domhiw concludes it prematurely. Yours truly 16:20, 19 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swami1980 (talk • contribs)

Correction : The matter is still inconclusive. Let not our respected Wikipedia end up with an egg on its face. Yours truly 16:22, 19 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swami1980 (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia doesn't pursue Truth with a capital T. We write about what is reported. Otherwise, we'd have to wait until the police finish their investigation to even call Rajput dead, right? I mean how do we know for sure that he's dead until the police finish their investigation? "It is not confirmed as suicide." You're wrong. If the media says that the police called it a suicide, like NDTV did, then that's a confirmation, and it is sufficient for our purposes. If, at a later point, different information comes out and "suicide" is no longer relevant, then we will adjust accordingly, likely with context about how it was first reported, compared to what the final determination was. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:28, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Height

On July 16, 2020, Hindustan Times, one of India's largest newspapers, reported the emergence in the wake of Rajput's suicide of "a massive online campaign fuelled by conspiracy theories." One manifestation is the hashtag #SSRCaseIsNotSuicide on Twitter, where dozens of tweets have assailed Wikipedia. Specifically, these conspiracy theorists focus on Rajput's height, which they correctly point out "was edited on Wikipedia on the day of his death." To the conspiracists, this matters because Wikipedia "changed his height as soon as we caught on the fact that its impossible for sushant to have hung from the fan." It's impossible, they say, because Rajput's height was 183 cm (6ft 0in), and the "distance between his bed and the motor of fan is 5ft 11 inches." It somehow eludes these math wizards that after affixing his rope, Rajput could simply have stepped off the bed, allowing enough distance from his dangling feet to the floor in which the rope could go taut and strangle him. No, as they see it, Wikipedia reduced his height by two inches to fool readers into believing that this, and only this, would enable his suicide by hanging.

In any case, as this talk page's resident debunker, I thought it might be informative to trace what we did and when we did it.

• At the time Sushant Singh Rajput's suicide was announced on worldwide social media, and for the preceding 34 days (when an administrator removed 183 cm for being unsourced), Wikipedia's BLP did not show the actor's height.
• It was added half an hour afterward as 1.78 m (5 ft 10 in) [conversions are automatic]
• but survived only 91 minutes.
• Nine hours later the same height was restored
• but after two hours was again removed, this time by an administrator in accordance with Template:Infobox person, which directs that a height parameter should be included only if the person was notable for their height.

There is no reason to suspect that users Shiwansh27 (account created 19 March 2020) or Thedravidan (account created 25 March 2019), neither of whom had previously edited this article, inserted the erroneous height knowingly or for any purpose other than to improve Wikipedia. As usual, the Indian conspiracy theorists have let their love for Sushant Singh Rajput run amok, and are smearing Wikipedia in the process. NedFausa (talk) 23:39, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Del alleged movie content

In this edit I deleted the content about the proposed fan-funded film "Suicide or Murder". As far as I can tell, this is an entirely hypothetical project. The producer and director who are alleged to be attached are not notable, the proposed "star" of the hypothetical film is a non-notable TikTok personality, there is no studio attached, there's no money secured, so keeping all of that in perspective, it is an entirely vapourous project. There is zero certainty that it will ever see the light of day, and we are under no obligation to promote hypothetical projects. And per normal community practise, we typically don't draw attention to proposed projects until filming has begun. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:52, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Yesterday, in heralding Suicide or Murder: A Star Was Lost, the Hindustan Times reported: Now, within a month of his death, two films have been announced which are inspired by the life of the late actor. (Emphasis added.) My Google search for the second such project came up empty. But hope springs eternal. NedFausa (talk) 19:08, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, it's all hype. I think credibility is important here, and unless a credible studio has a project "on floors" as they say (in production), it would likely not be worthy of inclusion. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:11, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Social consequences

Should we attempt to trace the societal impact of Sushant Singh Rajput's death? On July 23, 2020, with the edit summary How is this relevant?, Jéské Couriano reverted my inclusion of the following content:

That same day, upset about the actor's death, a 13-year-old girl reportedly committed suicide using the same method as Rajput. Police said she was found hanging from the ceiling of her home in Durg, a city in the Indian state of Chhattisgarh.

References

I propose that social effects—whether positive or negative—are indeed relevant. For example, if Rajput's death were, per reliable sources, to spur increased awareness of depression and suicide in India, resulting in reduced taboos against seeking treatment or crisis intervention, that would be a significant development. Likewise (but of course regrettably), a copycat suicide in which a note is found indicating the victim took her life because she was distraught about SSR's death, is also germane. I acknowledge the dangers of sensationalism, but if handled responsibly, such content could improve our article about an actor whose death has transcended show business and affected the broader fabric of Indian life. NedFausa (talk) 21:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

There are two main concerns I have: listing people who hanged themselves suggests causality between their death and Rajput's, where there may only be correlation. It would have to be very clear that the person was doing it inspired by Rajput, which at least superficially seems to be the case in the link you provided. People also could have been inspired by Rajput's death and taken poison instead of hanging themselves and maybe we'd never know that, because maybe the means (i.e. hanging) is what inspires the conclusion that they were copying Rajput. We need to avoid any sort of speculative content, as you know. We'd also have to consider the long-term academic value of this information. If unstable people imitate a celebrity, is it worthy of note in perpetuity? I'm not 100% sure of that, but am willing to consider it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 21:54, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't believe this is relevant, because this is one person (thus far), and there's no real gain to be had unless there's a rash of them and it becomes clear it was due to his own suicide (claims which would require strong sourcing per BLP). For all we know, the only reason the deaths are connected is because they were suicide by hanging and the other suicidee was a fan. We don't have enough details to prove causation or correlation; implying so verges on synthesis and puts too much weight on the death. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 23:49, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano: I appreciate your opinion, because part of what was going on my head when I wrote above, "which at least superficially seems to be the case", was a consideration that parents, looking for rhyme or reason for why their kid killed herself, might be desperate to satisfy pain by focussing on correlative data, like that she was a fan of Rajput's. I don't know that any parents across the world are ever really as astute about their teenage kid's likes/dislikes/obsessions/hatreds as they might think, and might be seeking something to blame. The decades-old stories about American rock bands being blamed for suicides stick in my mind. Regards, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 00:37, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

The blame for that is mainly due to moral panic, especially over backmasking (which the moral guardians claimed was being used to hide subliminal messages). That's not what's going on here. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Hasteur Hasteur Ha-- oh....} 18:08, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Aftermath

On July 25, 2020, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and USA Today published an Associated Press story relating how Sushant Singh Rajput's death has fueled discord over nepotism in Bollywood. "A rancorous debate around what pushed him to take his life," reads the report, "has a bevy of angry actors and filmmakers facing off on social media. … National Film Award-winning actress Kangana Ranaut, in widely shared social media posts, has accused the powerful Bollywood studio owners, influential filmmakers and movie critics of pushing Rajput over the edge by their alleged lack of support for the actor." Under Personal life and death, we currently have no Aftermath subsection dealing with the societal consequences, including industry ramifications, flowing from Rajput's suicide. Such developments, however, are increasingly being reported by reliable sources. Is it time to make a place for them? NedFausa (talk) 16:11, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

NedFausa, agreed, it's slowly turning into India's #MeToo (in the sense that other celebrities like Simi Garewal, Kadar Khan and A.R. Rahman are coming out publicly about the ostracism they've faced in the industry). SerChevalerie (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Notification

There is a separate article here about his death. Best Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 12:19, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Cause of death

Change cause of death from "suicide due to hanging" to "asphyxia due to hanging" because the angle of suicide or murder is still under investigation 2401:4900:490A:9208:7E78:7EFF:FE5C:73A9 (talk) 16:04, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 16:21, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring over death in infobox

Jack Shukla, please STOP your edit warring and disruptive editing. You have already violated WP:3RR despite being informed about it, so please self-revert and discuss the issue here before reinstating your problematic edits. SerChevalerie (talk) 20:15, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

SerChevalerie, You are creating problems for me I have already mentioned it as a mystery with an authenticated source because it has still not been resolved yet and you are just acting like kiddish by reverting my edits, please be mature of making such edits without giving me the proper answer.