Talk:Deaths in October 2018

Peggy Sue Gerron --- author?

Nothing in the cited article nor in the linked entry says anything about her being an author.

It's all about the song.

As such, I think the notability reason needs to be changed to something more correct/accurate.

What do the rest of you think? 2600:8800:785:1300:C23F:D5FF:FEC4:D51D (talk) 01:52, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

She is merely a song namesake, should not even be here. She did write a book but it's not notable. I'm inclined to delete the listing, but will wait for others to weigh in. WWGB (talk) 02:24, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Pretty sure it'll go in thirty days anyway, whatever. Ref ^(chew)(do) 03:32, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

I would venture to call her a memoirist, as her book would never have been written had she not been involved with Jerry Allison who co-wrote the song and insisted on it being named for her. Still, she will most likely remain a redirect to her namesake, which will be removed from any deaths list page at the appointed time. — Wyliepedia @ 05:14, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Celeste Yarnall, 7 October

Yarnall appeared in one episode of Star Trek: The Original Series: "The Apple". Once that tidbit began to appear here, her entry was simply as the series. I made it episode specific. That was changed to the episode with TOS disambiguation. Then, to the misleading episode piping of the series, which I changed back to the episode-specific link. It's reminiscent of the Harlan Ellison debacle back in June.

So which shall it be: complete removal, series link, hidden disambiguation of the episode link, or full episode link showing disambiguation? Frankly, if the appearance wasn't her widespread notability and post-mortem claim to fame, I would remove it altogether. — Wyliepedia @ 08:20, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

It absolutely must not be removed completely as it is the role she is most famous for. Listing "The Apple" without some mention of "Star Trek" in the entry is no help as 99% of the people who read that will not know that is in reference to the series and will just assume it is a movie they don't recognize and move on. And why would you remove it completely and leave up "The Mechanic"? She had far more screen time in the Star Trek episode than she did in that movie. Hell, she isn't even mentioned in the Wikipedia article for that movie. How is a bit role in a movie more important than the starring role in an episode of a heavily watched and very popular classic television series? BurienBomber (talk) 08:38, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

How is piping Star Trek misleading? It’s an episode of the series Star Trek, no one is being misled. Rusted AutoParts 12:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. I thought this was best way to describe the credit. It's how every news story covering her death covered it. BurienBomber (talk) 14:37, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

By just having simply Star Trek, linked or not, a casual reader who's not a Trekkie might think she was a series regular. Hence, this edit. — Wyliepedia @ 16:47, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

I disagree. Face value, sure, but further clicking on the link shows the specifics of her involvement in the series. Most headlines about her passing when discussing her ST involvement refer to it as just Star Trek. It’s be more misleading to put it as Star Trek, but it piped to ST: Voyager or something. Clicking on a ST link that brings you to a specific ST episode I don’t believe is misleading or inappropriate. More so it directly points towards her specific ST involvement. Rusted AutoParts 16:53, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm perfectly fine with piping ST with the episode link, as long as other editors are fine with it, but, after seeing several issues over the years from pseudo-newbies who pop in here with feathers ruffled over less-bothersome issues, I like to keep things simple (showing the linkable notable episode, as is, rather than someone clicking Star Trek, thinking she appeared as a regular, then flaming us for the misdirection). I'm not even considering what sources say, because they're all different the further you get from that ST page source, which also seems wrong to use. I'm moving on from this issue, as the Harlan Ellison link above no longer contains his ST mention. — Wyliepedia @ 03:53, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

I vote for "Star Trek: The Apple" or "Star Trek (The Apple), with a pipe back to the correct article. WWGB (talk) 04:16, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Kosugi

Only one source notes he died. It does not resemble a traditional news story, and gives the date of death as December 12. Even if it turns to be the most trustworthy outlet on Earth, it isn't adequate to say someone died on October 12. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:13, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

It’s a minor translation error, where it took the 12th of October and took it admin the 12th month. Outside of that I don’t see any problems with it. Rusted AutoParts 22:16, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

@InedibleHulk: I reverted myself to finish my thought, but I see you just reverted it off anyway. Rusted AutoParts 22:18, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Of course I did. Do you think Google doesn't know the difference between the Japanese words for October and December? Another version appears here from someone in Tokyo, differing slightly in funeral details, but agreeing it happened December 12. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:22, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Yeah. Things can get lost in translation. It still states he died and it’s very clearly a translation error cause he can’t have died two months in the future. So it works until we find a better one. Rusted AutoParts 22:26, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Why don't we find a decent one first? It's not something lost in translation, the term "10月", which Google claims its team of humans is sure means October, doesn't appear anywhere in either original, only "12月". Of course it can't read the future, it's just inaccurate. We're to call someone dead on October 12 based on what you think a sketchy "life science" post meant to say? That's an extremely lax standard for a BLP. InedibleHulk (talk) 22:32, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay so it legit is a google issue. I used this source and ran it through google. Run this line (小杉武久氏（こすぎ・たけひさ＝作曲家・演奏家）１２日、食道がんのため死去、８０歳。葬儀・告別式は未定) through google, and it comes up with this: Takeshi Kosugi (RISIKI · Takehisa = composer · performer) On December 12, he died of esophageal cancer and is 80 years old. Funeral / funeral ceremony is undecided. Pretty much your result. I then ran it through this translation site and got this: 　Takehisa Kosugi, a composer and musician, died of esophageal cancer on Monday at the age of 80.The funeral and the funeral ceremony were not decided yet. So Google translator is buggy. It does however state it was Monday, which would be the 8th. Rusted AutoParts 23:31, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

One of them is clearly bending the truth or flat-out broken, but do we trust the reigning global online communications leader whose service is much-used and well-documented or the once-mighty cross-referencing and number-crunching behemoth which has apparently(?) recently transplanted its decades-dead Automatic Language Translator into some adaptation of the box that beat that man at Jeopary back in the day?

I may be more dirty hippie than Japanese analyst, but if Phoebe can discern fishiness with a simple "Boutros-Boutrous Ghali", I damn well know parentheses when I see them, and I don't see them in the IBM account. Nor a bullet/slash/dash dealy in the last sentence or anything about "１２日" (which IBM claims means "twelve days" and Google thinks is "12th"). October 12 wasn't Monday, but twelve days ago (October 1) was. Maybe that's what Watson "helpfully" deduced for us.

Dates and translations aside, what makes the source material anything like a reliable source, beyond the word "source"? What is this platform, who writes for it, is there fact-checking? Why aren't outlets known to Wikipedia reporting this in a manner befitting a news report? When in this much all-around doubt, best to leave it out, especially when dealing in spreading death rumours (corroborated by physical reality or not). InedibleHulk (talk) 00:47, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

I think Google got it wrong on this occasion. The Japanese character for December does not appear in the original headline. I tried a different machine translation and it came up with "Mr. Takehisa Kosugi (composer and performer) died of esophageal cancer on the 12th, and he was 80 years old. The funeral and funeral ceremony is undecided". WWGB (talk) 01:22, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

OK, so (per our understandings of a source which may not be reliable) we have December 12, Monday, the 12th and no October. We'll have to resort to synthesis. The most recent date that satisfies all these conditions is December 12, 2016, so we go with that or arbitrarily decide which translation to ignore. Which machine did you use? InedibleHulk (talk) 01:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

I used Yandex Translate. I also just noticed "作曲家・演奏家の小杉武久氏死去 2018.10.12" at the top of the cited page, which translates to "Composer and performer Takehisa Kosugi died 2018.10.12". WWGB (talk) 01:57, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Never heard of it, it seems legit. Bit funny how that page has a machine translation tag. Anyway, that's much clearer, thanks, but I still think the story is of dubious provenance, in any language. I have no reason to believe the guy's not dead, for what that's worth. With that, I'll leave it you you guys till Monday or so. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:03, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

One source? I've found source upon source in the Japanese language arena, including Japanese Yahoo, which all claim or confirm that he died. Refusal by fans to believe a notable death has occurred seems to be driving this particular campaign (I don't mean WP editor fans, just the usual influence of social media on public perceptions). Ref ^(chew)(do) 03:38, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

They're all recycling the same report, without any indication of confirmation from a particular person or group. I've had no contact with Yoshugi fans and couldn't understand Japanese social media if I wanted to; my "campaign" was spurred by learning he existed here two days ago, clicking through to learn more and change verb tense, then noticing a lack of death. Figuring our source might be mistaken, I translated it, found it fishy on a few levels and deleted it accordingly. Then RAP alone "influenced" me to "raise the issue" here by restoring the fish. And now I'm simply "forced to defend myself" against accusations of kowtowing to a cloud of foreign violin afficionados I've never met.

Anyway, if that's over now and nobody else sees the credibility problems, that's "good enough" by my account. At least I've heard of Asahi. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Tazmin Pugh, October 28.

As unfeeling as this might sound, the above youth swimmer has achieved no innate notability - no youth competitions partaken or medals won are mentioned, and her best opportunities for real notability were to follow in years to come, obviously. That seems to me to have been cruelly taken from her via this accident. If there is real opposition to my doubts then we wait for 30 days hence when her redlink is removed, but I honestly don't think she will ultimately qualify on notability grounds in any way. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 13:08, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

@Refsworldlee: I agree this is a borderline case, but I added the link as she is already mentioned in 2016 European Junior Swimming Championships, where it states she won a gold and silver medal. This, combined with the news story of her tragic death, seems to me that there is a case for notability. If any more information about her becomes available, I may create an article - otherwise if nobody else does she can be removed after 30 days. O Still Small Voice of Clam (formerly Optimist on the run) 20:20, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Beware the AfD then, because her notability still looks weak. Good luck though. Ref ^(chew)(do) 21:39, 31 October 2018 (UTC)