Misplaced Pages

Talk:Death

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) at 12:20, 22 December 2024 (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Death/Archive 4) (bot). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

Revision as of 12:20, 22 December 2024 by Lowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs) (Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Death/Archive 4) (bot)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Skip to table of contents
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Death article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Article policies
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4Auto-archiving period: 30 days 
This  level-2 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconBiology Top‑importance
WikiProject iconDeath is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Misplaced Pages. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconDeath Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconCemeteries Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Cemeteries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cemeteries on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CemeteriesWikipedia:WikiProject CemeteriesTemplate:WikiProject CemeteriesCemeteries
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconMedicine Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSociology High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconPsychology High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconAnthropology Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthropology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anthropology on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthropologyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthropologyTemplate:WikiProject AnthropologyAnthropology
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconPhilosophy: Ethics / Religion High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Misplaced Pages.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Associated task forces:
Taskforce icon
Ethics
Taskforce icon
Philosophy of religion
WikiProject iconReligion High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconHistory Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Death. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Death at the Reference desk.
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Former good article nomineeDeath was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 23, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
February 5, 2012Good article nomineeNot listed
March 24, 2023Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

To-do list for Death: edit·history·watch·refresh· Updated 2024-12-10

Expansion


In biology

In medicine

In culture

Other

  • Expand lead section to 3 or 4 good paragraphs (in progress, contributions welcome)
  • Introduce each main subsection with a paragraph or so of prose
  • Reference fully
  • Perhaps finished, not entirely sure. Article is too animal (especially human) centered - greater discussion of other life forms needed
  • Merge as much of 'See also' into the article as possible
  • Improve picture placement, ensure all free images used are moved to or located at commons
  • Discuss whether this article should be split any further, and if so how to split it (e.g. death in nature (non-human death), death in science (biology and medicine or human/non-human death), death in medicine, death and culture (done), human death (medicine and culture, probably not given we now have a culture article)). Current size is around 60 kilobytes. You can comment at Talk:Death#Splitting off articles.
  • Please comment if electrical activity in the cortex/whole brain, once it has stopped, could be restored. If so, there need to be a time frame for electrical inactivity in which consiousness can be recovered.
  • Needs a whole section on "Awareness of Death" in both animals and children. Ernest Becker has shown that awareness of death occurs in children at between the ages of 3 and 6, and results in an "Existential crisis" which requires resolution for healthy human development. Also there is no mention of the pioneering "Death and Dying" work of Elizabeth Kubler-Ross.
  • It would be excellent to have a section (or whole article) dealing with the actuarial perspective on death, specifically, likelihoods for death by age and by cause.
  • Resubmit for GA when rest is complete
  • death of non-organics like a dead volcano, electronic circuit and star

Please add anything you feel is missing

I really feel like there needs to be a section on coping with death or different ways to find help when dealing with death. (Clbratt (talk) 22:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)). I will make it, I have all of the information, I just don't want it to get deleted right after I make it (Clbratt (talk) 23:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)).


I also agree, there should be a section added or a link to explain how grieving with different types of death are possible. Depending on how the death occurred, from sudden death to a sudden occurrence of death. (Bmhans3 (talk) 20:19, 26 March 2009 (UTC)) I have some additional information that may be possible to add to Clbratt's information, if wanted. (Bmhans3 (talk) 20:21, 26 March 2009 (UTC))

Here is some information regarding phases of grief, part of the coping stage. 1. Shock: disbelief, unreal 2. Denial: denying that your spouse is actually gone, that it is not true. 3. Bargaining with a higher power to make it all go away. 4. Guilt: difficult stage to get through, you start to blame yourself for the death. You feel as if you did something differently they would still be here. but everyone is responsible for their own actions, there is no way you made anyone do anything. This stage would be helpful to have a friend to talk too, to help you understand it is not your fault. 5. Anger: not always a phase, some find it easier to move on if they are angry at the spouse for leaving, but often it leads to feeling guilty for being angry at them, if the phase doesn't start to occur, don't worry yourself, you can skip this phase. 6. Depression: varies, it comes and goes, give it as much time as possible to heal. While dealing with depression stages try to stay clear of the child and not let them know you’re breaking down. Remember be strong for the child. 7. Resignation: finally believe the reality of the death 8. Acceptance and Hope (“moving on”): you finally understand it can never be the same, but you have to move on in life with a meaning and a purpose. (Bmhans3 (talk) 22:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC))

The summary does not relate to the topic at hand -- "Humans increased the number of extinctions in recent times, one cause being, for example, the destruction of ecosystems as a consequence of the spread of industrial technology." Not only is human causes of extinction events completely unrelated, but it doesn't sound completely neutral. This should be removed. --Andreas


Death before birth

makes no sense to put abortion here since a foetus is never alive. Something which isn't alive cannot die. 148.252.146.55 (talk) 05:59, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

This is probably acceptable; most would argue that the fetus is, biologically, alive, but in the sense of death as it’s usually put an abortion might not qualify as the “death” of a conscious being. More discussion necessary. OverzealousAutocorrect (talk) 18:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
probably need to elaborate on different arguments on the definition of (alive and) death in the article in order to decide this?
while i do agree that a foetus is (culturally seens as) never alive, the answer to the question seems more to be on the philosophical instead of practical/empirical side of things. irisChronomia (talk) 14:56, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

calcium baby

dead baby in womb being attacked by cells Ballseater (talk) 17:29, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

@Ballseater be more specific please, UnsungHistory (Questions?) (Did I mess up?) 00:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Aging as leading cause of death.

In the Introduction, cardiovascular disease is listed as a leading cause of death, with the source claiming that it is responsible for a third of all deaths. However the National library of Medicine cites aging as causing 23.3 million annual deaths, 41.6 percent. I have fixed it, I simply wanted to let everyone know, as I understand this may be a controversial issue. Panderbear01 (talk) 16:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC) Panderbear01 (talk) 16:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Panderbear01, thank you for an excellent reference. That sentence begins with "The top ten causes" and then mentions "aging" followed by other causes of death, so at first glance it appears to be saying that "aging" is the #1 cause out of 10 causes. However, when I re-read that sentence more carefully, I see that it's making a statement about the relationship between the "top ten causes" and "aging", and *then* it literally lists all 10 causes, starting with "ischemic heart disease" as the #1 cause and then 9 other causes.
So while I think this article *should* have a few more words about aging, our sources seem to be saying heart disease is #1 (not #2) and so that's what we should report as #1 (not #2). --DavidCary (talk) 19:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, however the sentence notes that aging is the underlying cause of aging, the listed conditions being the most common subset, it says "The top ten causes of disease accounted for a total of 16.1 million global deaths related to population aging (69.2%); these included..." implying that aging was the cause of the conditions, as well as stating that aging accounts for 69.2% of all deaths. Panderbear01 (talk) 20:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10750162/#:~:text=The%20top%20ten%20causes%20of,ADOD%2C%201.0%20million)%3B%20lower

Short description

...was previously "Irreversible cessation of an organism's biological functions". I personally find this description to be more mild and neutral, (albeit quite terse,) and prefer this version of it. Maybe we can put this sentence somewhere down in the main article or put the current description into the Simple English Misplaced Pages? irisChronomia (talk) 14:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 December 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

There is a grammatical error in the World Health Organization statistics in 2012, where a writer wrote "persons" instead of people. Madrilla21 (talk) 12:58, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: Persons is also grammatically correct. If there is any other rationale to change it to 'people,' you're welcome to open another request The AP (talk) 16:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Poorly written article

There are a lot of issues with this article, especially when you get to the psychology and the culture and Society pieces. The paragraph structure and grammar is off . It seems like the purpose of the paragraphs is not clear. It seems like the writer is trying to make an argument rather than provide information. And I strongly question the thinly veiled arguments that are being made. It reads like it was written by someone who overestimates their argument, composition, and just general writing skills. It needs to be revised by somebody with a little bit more technical skill in writing, and someone who has a little bit more understanding of those topics and knows how to represent that in an informative writing style. 24.237.159.221 (talk) 13:14, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Categories: