Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Notable survivors
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the nomination was delete. Mailer Diablo 17:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 1: According to the talk page, this is copyright text for which only conditional permission has been given for use. 2: sources are not given for most of it - it'd be better to clear the article and start afresh with sourced examples. I don't think that this is in principle a bad subject for Wikipedia, though categories might well be better, and the name of the page is certainly bizarre (though this may be a cultural idiom). Pseudomonas 13:46, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This does nothing that a category couldn't do better. (Whether or not this should be a category is another story). --IslaySolomon 14:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. If a category is created to replace it (which I personally don't think is necessary), it'll need to have a more descriptive title; I don't want to get into the politics of the issue and suggest it includes words like "rape" or "victim", but something more than mere "survivor" is necessary. "Abuse survivors", perhaps? Tevildo 14:41, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- If it were my decision, I'd have a number of subcategories, since lumping disparate groups together is probably not helpful. In general I think that the term "surviving" is most usefully used of something that would normally be fatal - which some of these may well be, but others may not. I suspect this may be a US idiom, though, as I say. Pseudomonas 14:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete the entire list is POV; there were notable "survivors" of any manner of things Molly Brown of Titanic fame comes to mind, but the inclusion of Lorena Bobbit and not John Wayne Bobbitt just shows the POV nature of this list. I fancy that everyone was the "survivor" of something and this list, which could just as well be renamed "notable humans" should not be a "survivor" of this AfD. Carlossuarez46 19:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- For related discussions, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people who became famous for surviving a deadly event and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of already famous people who have survived a deadly event. Uncle G 19:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I was reluctant to say this earlier, but I'm glad to see that I'm not alone in considering the modern euphemism of "survivor" for "victim" to be taking entirely the wrong direction. IMO, to be notable for _surviving_ something, that "something" should be an event which generally results fatally... Tevildo 21:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Interestingly in Uncle G's two references, the former was kept and the latter not. Carlossuarez46 22:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I was reluctant to say this earlier, but I'm glad to see that I'm not alone in considering the modern euphemism of "survivor" for "victim" to be taking entirely the wrong direction. IMO, to be notable for _surviving_ something, that "something" should be an event which generally results fatally... Tevildo 21:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for bizarre vagueness. I am all for using the term "rape survivor" rather than "rape victim," personally, but that doesn't mean that "survivor" now only means survivors of rape or domestic abuse...and why are we covering sexual abuse, non-sexual child abuse, and emotional abuse all on the same list? Penelope D 02:41, 11 July 2006 (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.