Talk:Deaths in April 2014

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Carl Epting Mundy, Jr.[edit]

Can be readded - source. Unsure of the styling when it comes to military officers, so I thought I'd leave it up to the regulars here. Thanks! Connormah (talk) 22:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Thanks for the heads up! — Wyliepedia 00:36, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Irene Fernandez[edit]

This person died on March 31. B-Machine (talk) 06:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We have her listed here and sourced for March 25. Original source was wrong. Found four others giving the 31st. Thanks for heads up! — Wyliepedia 07:41, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Death of John Pinette[edit]

The "Deaths in 2014" page lists his date of death as April 5, 2014. The page for "JOHN PINETTE" lists his date of death as April 6, 2014. Which one is correct? I wonder if it has something to do with time zone differences, but I would assume that the date of someone's death given on Wikipedia would be whatever the date was in the time zone where he died. Tesseract12 (talk) 00:02, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: I see that it has been corrected by now, on the "JOHN PINETTE" page. Tesseract12 (talk) 00:09, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Usually its a work in progress and it takes care of itself. When a death occurs, there is usually an announcement followed by a window until the details come out. Most of the editors who realize the specific date was not mentioned in the announcement will put in a tag (Death announced on this date). When the details come out, the person is moved to the correct date and the tag is removed. Sometimes either the article or this page wont get updated in sync. If you find a source that goes with a death that has this tag, either update it or let us know here and one of the other editors will update it. Thanks.Sunnydoo (talk) 09:26, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mickey Rooney notable works[edit]

There seems to be a bit disagreement as to which works to list for Mickey Rooney. Starting a discussion here to avoid edit warring. Personally I know barely anything about his work, so I have no informed opinions on which works to list. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:00, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The three on there highlights the length of his career. With "Stallion" and "Babes" as Oscar nominations, and "Museum" as his highest grossing film. Rusted AutoParts 04:03, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hardy Boys seems to be cited in news sources as well as a notable work. Connormah (talk) 04:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But its more common practice to enter the films that garnered him more attention, or are the highlights of his career. He was Oscar nom'd for "Babes" and "Stallion", and "Museum" is his highest grossing. Rusted AutoParts 04:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Rusted Auto Parts doesn't seem to care about any of his well-known 'Andy Hardy' series that really made him into a household name. RAP also seems to be fixated on the number 3 for the number of cited film/tv work, despite no rules about '3' as some arbitrary limit on how many you can cite next to his obit. I wish I knew what RAPs problem was, and he reverted 4 times, which should be a violation of Wiki's rule. --Katydidit (talk) 04:12, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Theres alot of bad faith in your argument here. I'm not transfixed with the number three, its how many examples we put up so we don't wind up listing the whole person's filmography. And by that, when we enter the three, it must be ones that people can associate more with the actor and ones that won them acclaim. Rusted AutoParts 04:15, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bill is in no way a highlight of his. Rusted AutoParts 04:21, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are very short-sighted, esp. on proclaiming yourself the "expert" on Mickey's body of work, and you do have a fixation with '3' listings. '4' is no more a problem with a short title, and Bill *was* a very acclaimed tv film work of his, no matter how you spin it. You don't own Wiki, you know, and you can't be the sole person who can demand what is listed or not on the obit page. A modern high-grossing film also reflects the higher cost of a ticket compared to 1937, not necessarily the number of people who go see it. Don't forget that important point. "In 1981, Rooney won an Emmy Award for his portrayal of a mentally challenged man in Bill. The critical acclaim continued to now for the veteran performer..." http://mickeyrooney.com --Katydidit (talk) 04:31, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure Museum is either - though it may be one of the highest grossing ones, his role was relatively minor in it. Connormah (talk) 04:23, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say it is, he is one of the main villains in it, and from what I gathered, he appears in the third one, so its not a one off character. Rusted AutoParts 04:26, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, I think the "three" should be a notable film, TV and stage entry. — Wyliepedia 04:26, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We will continue to have these disputes here until the film buffs reach consensus on a guideline for the inclusion of notable roles. It should be based on the deceased's contribution to the film (eg Oscar/Emmy/Golden Globe) rather than attributes such as the film's gross take. WWGB (talk) 06:08, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I wholeheartedly agree with your analysis instead of the nonsense on the gross amount the film earned, which doesn't say anything about the performer's notability or awards/nominations in the film or not. --Katydidit (talk) 07:43, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@WWGB:: "Film's gross take". Is that before or after inflation??? — Wyliepedia 08:59, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He did win an Emmy for Bill, so it really should be listed as his notable Television work. EGOTs and nominations should be used to determine the bodys of works as those are all decided by his peers.Sunnydoo (talk) 09:29, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what WWGB is doing on the removal of the Emmy Award. We have always listed an Award and a body of work before. In February Max Schell, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Sid Ceasar all died and were EGOT winners. Each had the award and a body of work. Mitch Leigh looks like the only EGOT winner in March and also had award and body of work listed. Outside of that as Authors, we often list the book as well as whatever medal or award it is (National Book, the Akademi Award in India, etc) that they received for it. Its not an issue of space and Rooney was extremely famous (and a capital fellow I hear too boot).Sunnydoo (talk) 12:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not interested in WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, but writing Emmy Award-winning actor (This, That, Something Else) CLEARLY leads the reader to believe that the actor won multiple Emmys. It is a misrepresentation of the truth. I don't have a problem with listing award(s) [it demonstrates notability], but parenthetically we must only list the winning film(s). WWGB (talk) 11:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is one reason why I hotlinked the Emmy award to the actual ceremony showing what he won for. And there are plenty of cases where we have in the past had the award notation and films or shows inside the () that didnt win...Caesar is the latest example of that. I think that is taking it to the extreme and a reasonable person would not think such (and that is not an attack, that is a line used in the US for deciding behavior in a legal sense) and especially a person who is at all familiar with films and television. Sunnydoo (talk) 04:52, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh for the day when "Name, Age, Nationality Actor/ress, COD" suffices. The Indian actor listings here alone cause me to SMH. — Wyliepedia 12:31, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
SMH? So Much Hate? Why? Just because a population may be under represented on Wiki, does not mean that that person isnt notable. I have said it before and will say it again...by English speaking populace as a 1st language it is the US, Pakistan, Nigeria and India 1 through 4. There are more people in those 4 countries than the rest of the world together that speaks English as a first language. And you also must understand the criticism we faced as being to Western centric a few years ago. That is one reason why I spend a portion of my hobby time during the day trolling the newspapers in Africa and Malaysia/Philippines for noteworthy deaths that in all likelihood will die a 30 day death. Just because you may never heard of someone or realized their contribution, doesnt mean their death doesnt mean something to millions of other folks out there. You can be notable without being famous.Sunnydoo (talk) 04:52, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
More like SMH, I think. WWGB (talk) 04:58, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I know. Was busting his chops because he busts mine sometimes when I disambig like last night when I put in Stanley Brothers instead of The Stanley Brothers.Sunnydoo (talk) 05:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
At this point, I personally do not care the amount of films that any of the billion worldwide actors have been in. If someone in any remote part of the world has not heard of Mickey Rooney or V. K. Murthy, why should the onus be on us to list their notable work here? Individuals are listed here because they are notable. If that person with internet access in a cabin in the woods wants to know what films they have done, that is what bluelinked names are for, or their attached references. I'll bet some people have never heard of even some of the awarded movies we list. Maybe I should just retire like Rusted AutoParts, or maybe just from this page since others take my Seventh Day of the Month job. — Wyliepedia 06:20, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well I think there is a two-fold response. First off you sometimes associate movies especially older ones with one actor or another and it can be a good memory jog such as "Some Like It Hot" all had memorable performances from Jack Lemmon, Billy Wilder, Marilyn Monroe and Tony Curtis. When Lemmon died, most people either associated it with Curtis or Monroe but it was a major part of his career (he won a Cannes Best Actor- but we didnt list it we listed his other EGOT roles just using it as an example off the top of my head). Likewise it can also be a good start for someone wanting to learn more about that persons work to review on whatever internet device they choose these days to view it on. As far as the onus, it allows people to visually scan the page quickly and see which articles they might be interested in. By putting up associated links, they can find topics quickly on things that they might want to review. For example Leee Childers that died the other day had many memorable photos published over the years from Posters and Wall art to Rolling Stone magazine. Some people may want to read about him and some people may want to read up on The Factory or Andy Warhol whom he was associated with. It was an important hotbed of music and art culture during the '70s era American landscape. It isnt always just about the person who died. Sometimes people use this page to explore new venues and articles and as long as the entry can remain somewhat concise, there is no reason not to use the space. We should be here to provide at least the bare bones of information relevant to the reader. Another example was the aforementioned Shuffler and Stanley Brothers. Many people may not be familiar with George Shuffler as a solo artist or even bluegrass as a music form. But Bluegrass probably wouldnt exist in its form today without Bill Monroe and The Stanley Brothers both as 1st Generation artists. The readers can view his name, the name of the associated act (from the article he was widely regarded as the 3rd Stanley Brother), read on either or go to YouTube to hear some of their wonderful (thats not neutral- so sue me) music. The other part to this and something that you might be experiencing is that I find that I go to the Movies less these days as I get older. While I can probably write books on Hollywood from the 1940s to 1990, I have hardly seen a single movie outside of the James Bond series or from Foreign Films over the last decade.Sunnydoo (talk) 07:15, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thinking of another way to encapsulate the above argument it may simply be stated to think of the Death's Page as an Infobox for Death and we are all working for the Reaper. Just like an Infobox, we concisely place the information and relevant links quickly and easily for the reader to find. We are only a small (but mighty) part of Wiki and need to incorporate the information into the articles and main body of Wiki.Sunnydoo (talk) 08:06, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, Rusted Autoparts is edit warring. I reported him. Beerest 2 Talk page 18:16, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's unnecessary. I'm here. Rusted AutoParts 18:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John Shirley-Quirk[edit]

... is listed as dying aged 83 but I believe from his date of birth that he was actually 82. Can anyone edit 'Death' pages please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.96.92.124 (talk) 16:13, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done by another editor already. Thanks for pointing it out! EvergreenFir (talk) 18:08, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blanco passed away- Needs article[edit]

If there is a big LOTR fan out there, the Spanish horse known as Blanco has passed away at 25. He portrayed Shadowfax in the final 2 parts of the LOTR trilogy. He needs an article before he can be added to the list.[2]Sunnydoo (talk) 05:44, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not interested in starting it, but thought someone else might be.Sunnydoo (talk) 23:36, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Sunnydoo just wants to list the death here. — Wyliepedia 02:48, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ya, I am not big on animal actors, but I know others are and I ran across it. You guys have had 3 almosts this week Wylie (Denton, Dixon and Harvey)...what is going on in K-Town? I almost added each of the 3, but there is no listing for the Pig Burger on Wiki and I didnt think Denton was quite there as a PA announcer.Sunnydoo (talk) 04:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not particularly a fan of horses or LOTR, but I know that's a notable role. If I didn't already have a monkey languishing in my sandbox, I'd welcome the horse. I've procrastinated twice as long on him as I did on the bear, so the horse likely wouldn't be ready till 2015. I wholeheartedly support someone else doing it. InedibleHulk (talk) 04:18, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ya I have been lazy of late also. RFD asked me to write an article, I forgot and its sitting in my box. Need to get that one myself.Sunnydoo (talk) 04:33, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jim Flaherty[edit]

Please make a note that Jim Flaherty was not merely an MP, but he was also Canada's long-serving Minister of Finance, who only resigned that post less than a month ago, though it was really more of a retirement than a resignation. That would make him one of Canada's most senior cabinet ministers. (NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:10, 10 April 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Further note: according to Canadian tradition, Jim Flaherty is likely to receive a state funeral. While no decision has been announced, as it is entirely at the discretion of the Prime Minister, tradition would imply he should receive one. (NorthernFalcon (talk) 19:28, 10 April 2014 (UTC))[reply]

Its OK to have both as both are important and notable functions.Sunnydoo (talk) 23:34, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Ultimate Warrior[edit]

We go by COMMONAME, right? The Ultimate Warrior's entry was recently altered to just Warrior, and that's incorrect, despite being his legal name. Rusted AutoParts 21:53, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Even in reporting his death, a preponderance of reliable sources are calling him "the Ultimate Warrior" and his article remains at this title as well. The good faith edit which changed this should be reverted back; in my opinion.—John Cline (talk) 22:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The sources are still quite mixed on this one (including WWE.com within itself). Some capitalize "The", some drop it, Nancy Grace thinks his first name is Ultimate. As for the legal name, even many that acknowledge the 1993 change call him Hellwig now, maybe trying to sound "respectful". But yes, the article name is exactly what it should be, and his kids are truly Warriors. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jürgen Frick (April 7), et al.[edit]

"Banker", according to the Wiktionary, could mean "a stone bench used in cutting", "a dealer in a gambling house", "a vessel employed in the cod fishery", or "a ditch drainer", which is why, in my original edit of his entry, I listed him as a bank executive, since he was none of the above and a CEO. — Wyliepedia 07:23, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Had this issue before as well. I started using the term "financier" which applies in this case because he was involved with wealth investments and capital funds. So I have updated it on the front for you. I wonder why the Wikitionary doesnt have the definition for "going glass." I guess no one called BANK!Sunnydoo (talk) 08:30, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tanji Dewberry Has Passed[edit]

On Sunday, April 13, 2014, Children's author Tanji Dewberry, along with her son, were killed in a house fire. More details on her and her work: http://www.clutchmagonline.com/2014/04/childrens-author-son-dies-nj-house-fire/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lephenomjdiva (talk • contribs) 04:11, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tanji Dewberry does not have an article, notability is unclear. WWGB (talk) 06:13, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not notable. Wrote one book about her son's ADHD and worked at a Wall Street brokerage firm. If added here, any future created article would fail. — Wyliepedia 06:22, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Searches bring up only multiple links to her one book "Oh Fiddlesticks!", and multiple links to reports of their death in the fire. There is no notability gained by perishing, by whatever means, and there cannot be notability for authoring one non-fiction title. As sad as the whole thing no doubt is. 86.112.67.18 (talk) 21:50, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Little Joe Cook[edit]

Hi. Just like to point out that, though your list says "(death announced on this date)" for the 18th, his article claims an actual death date of April 15, 2014. If this matters, or affects how you list his passing here. Thanks. 86.112.67.18 (talk) 21:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And if you check the source given there, it uses the same one we use, which gives no date except the one of the source (the one we listed as "announced"). Thanks. — Wyliepedia 21:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Changed that to plain April. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:16, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And now it's rvv. — Wyliepedia 02:34, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Death date confirmed as 15th [3]. WWGB (talk) 03:34, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nice one. I like that fact that we get there in the end. 86.112.67.18 (talk) 03:43, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Frits Thors[edit]

Frits Thors was 103, not 104, as is clearly stated in the article on him. Could someone please correct this? 62.238.249.71 (talk) 17:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The age given in his entry is correct; he died before his 105th birthday, making him 104 years old at the time of death. Perhaps you misread the article? Randor1980 (talk•contributions) 19:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: Barbara Mauritz[edit]

Barbara Mauritz of Lamb has died. The only source that I have been able to find is for the Examiner which is a blacklisted Wiki site. A 1-page exemption for inclusion of the source has been filed here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki_talk:Spam-whitelist#Proposed_removals_from_whitelist_.28sites_to_reblock.29 . Until then the link will not be clickable. In order to access it, remove the extra "." in the menu bar. This occurs from time to time. I am expecting the SF Chronicle to be rolling up on the story soon as well, however they arent there yet. So we are in a holding pattern until one or the other gets done.Sunnydoo (talk) 06:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Romilda Bollati di Saint Pierre, April 24[edit]

I know we prefer English sources, and my Italian is a bit rusty, but this source says she died on "lunedì", which is Monday (April 21). — Wyliepedia 07:46, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aye. If you use Chrome, they have put the translate button in the right bar now so it is literally 1 click on a non-native language screen. Alternately you can go to www.google.com/translate and copy and paste anything you might want to see. Regardless, I have moved it to Monday and removed the tag. Thanks.Sunnydoo (talk) 06:58, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I use GT, as I spend most of my Wiki-time on my iPhone, unless it's a major addition, which helped with "lunedì" (and that Italian lady I met years ago in the service, but that's another story). Grazie signore, for the move, as it's difficult at times to do with this screen. — Wyliepedia 07:53, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Roy Matsumoto, 21 April[edit]

Entry states "Medal of Honor winner". He actually received the Congressional Gold Medal according to Wiki entry and cited source. Incidentally, is winner an appropriate term to use for such an award? I suggest recipient would be a better term. 212.159.21.157 (talk) 08:55, 25 April 2014 (UTC)ukstar1[reply]

 Done. WWGB (talk) 10:47, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As for the part two suggestion, it would also tie into the List of Medal of Honor recipients. It just depends on who adds it and the cycle of the moon at the time. We have this issue with "Nobel Prize winner" when most are called "laureates". — Wyliepedia 10:50, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the term "awarded" myself, but usually it falls on whichever editor is editing. For whatever that is wrong with me associates "recipient" more with gift giving and hence that slight implication to something that is most seriously earned and not gifted. But thats just me.Sunnydoo (talk) 07:05, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As long as we don't use "garnered". Ugh. — Wyliepedia 07:56, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Or "emblazonee". InedibleHulk (talk) 08:12, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request Addition to "Deaths in 2014" article[edit]

Someone please add this under 29 April 2014:

Tyler, 13, American mix-breed dog, reality TV star ("Swamp People"), natural causes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ijnfleetadmiral (talk • contribs) 15:21, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Animals must have their own Wikipedia page to be considered notable enough to add to this list. EvergreenFir (talk) 19:17, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As with The Bachelorette bachelor who died recently, the "reality star" dog would still not be notable enough to have an article, nor mention here. Sorry. — Wyliepedia 05:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Olympic Champion x2 not able to be listed[edit]

Absolutely ridiculous that an Olympic athlete and a champion no less does not qualify regardless of how many legs he has. This horse won 2 Gold Medals...1 individual with Matt Ryan and 1 team medal for Australia which he pulled the points in for. It is called Equestrian for a reason. A human cant win the competition by him or herself. It takes 2 to win something this prestigious. Rules are still ridiculous in cases like this when common sense is not applying. I understand like the above example where the Dog didnt have an article. But this is an OLYMPIC Champion. Hello Australia, fix your problem. Not aimed at WWGB, but the Continent as a whole. This horse won 2 Gold Medals for you. Take the time and give him an article.(End of rant, steps off soap box)Sunnydoo (talk) 04:41, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Sunnydoo: be bold. — Wyliepedia 04:56, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was- WWGB took it out already.

(cur | prev) 03:59, 30 April 2014‎ WWGB (talk | contribs)‎ . . (159,558 bytes) (-286)‎ . . (→‎28: no article, no animal) (undo | thank)

Sunnydoo (talk) 05:00, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: The article, I meant. — Wyliepedia 05:14, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ [1]

Missing one[edit]

You are missing one he may not be famous but if you are british you would be proud. Britains oldest solder Harvey Mcreen,Died April 26 2014 aged 102. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.244.7 (talk) 12:00, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source? — Wyliepedia 01:20, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 15 external links on Deaths in April 2014. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 17:37, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 external links on Deaths in April 2014. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 11:33, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Deaths in April 2014. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 22:26, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Deaths in April 2014. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Deaths in April 2014. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 15:50, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Deaths_in_April_2014&oldid=1204917685"