Talk:Pro-death

Recreation
At this moment there are 35 uses of "pro-death" on WP: pro-capital punishment 24, favoring the abortion-rights movement 5, Pro-Death Ravers 3, causing apoptosis 2, anti-long-term unemployment 1. Google roughly concurs, although the first is artificially high because it often is shorthand for "pro-death penalty". There is also discussion, which countenanced a minority favoring dabbing, that suggested "people who support the death penalty, eugenics selection, baby sex determination, jihad, .... Voluntary euthanasia"; and a lighter discussion.

Accordingly, since there are many WP and RS references to various stances of favoring death or killing (many nonpejorative), as a WP:WPDAB member I am requesting that the salting admin unprotect the page, to be created noncontentiously with the content below. JJB 20:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Article baseline
"Pro-death" or "pro-death-penalty" means being in favor of capital punishment.

"Pro-death" or "Pro-Death" can also refer to:
 * Favoring a specific expression of death in culture, such as war, suicide, or euthanasia
 * Pro-Death Ravers, the second album by Danish band Psychopomps
 * In biochemistry, causing apoptosis or cell death
 * PRO-DEATH, a metallic rock band
 * As a pejorative term:
 * Favoring the abortion-rights movement
 * Favoring jihad, spiritual war in Islam
 * Carnivorous (considered from within the ethics of vegetarianism)
 * Opposing long-term unemployment (in the 99ers debate)

JJB 20:31, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Followup
The salting admin was unavailable and the RFP admin recommended a wider audience. Accordingly here are some RS from WP and the first 200 Google Scholar links, though this is unusual for a dab page: I think it a rather straightforward question as to whether a term that "refers to more than one topic covered by Wikipedia articles" is appropriate for a dab page. However, due to prior misstarts with this page, I have no problem submitting the question to wider review. Though I was referred to AN, the DRV procedures suggest that is only for "the most exceptional cases" where "rapid corrective action" may be needed. Accordingly, I am instead opening a DRV because a short stub was deleted for lack of the content above and I wish to create a useful dab on the same subject; and the significant new information above has come to light and reversing the salting information in the deleted article would be useful. After discussion, the page you are now reading would be moved from userspace to Talk:Pro-death (where it was previously inappropriate under CSD:G7). JJB 21:08, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * capital punishment
 * A Pro-Death, Self-Fulfilling Constitutional Construct: The Supreme Court’s Evolving Standard of Decency for the Death Penalty
 * Perhaps even more curious is the political overlap between those who are pro-life when discussing abortion and pro-death when discussing capital punishment; some of this overlap, however, may be explained by attitudes toward punishment in general.
 * death in culture
 * Personality and a pro-death attitude
 * In my view, decisions about whether or not to commit suicide are the product of the balance between pro-life and pro-death forces operating at any given time. A person is likely to move toward life when pro-life forces intensify or pro-death forces diminish.
 * apoptosis
 * BCL2L13:
 * LRDD:
 * Most results at Google Scholar
 * abortion-rights movement
 * The Pro-Death Lobby, JSTOR article in The Women's Review of Books

Tags
Bkonrad has twice tagged this article and my expansion of the "anti-life" dab as well, but without any specifics. Both articles are based on reliable sources and in-wiki usage. If there is no discussion of the tags I will revert them again. JJB 02:10, 15 May 2012 (UTC)


 * And you have twice removed it without any attempt to repair the obvious violations of WP:DAB and WP:MOSDAB. I have some time now to attempt the cleanup myself. older ≠ wiser 23:17, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Analysis
Bkonrad has now removed all but two entries and left an ungrammatical lead, with the only substantive discussion being "remove entried not supported by the linked articles and unambiguous entries and partial title matches". This is contrary to unanimous consensus at the DRV that restored the article knowing this content. While some individual analysis is above, I have invited WP:WPDAB to comment on whether individual entries in this diff should be in or out, as well as what the primary topic should be. Further, leaving only two entries is a tactical error, because it is a temptation to let other editors change the article to a plain redirect for the pejorative, which is clearly contrary to local and wider consensus. Accordingly this page should be more inclusionist because of the greater need to dab the pejorative from other uses. Feel free to comment separately by bullet. Naturally it's not necessary for the article to use the "pro-" version if it's clearly about "death" and sources do use "pro-death" as an adjective for the article's topic. JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Primary topic:
 * Capital punishment per above including Google analysis. Though there is static there is still a clear plurality of sources on this target. Also this topic, like abortion-rights, should be an adjective rather than a noun ("persons"). JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Death in culture:
 * Strong keep, clearly established by sources above. JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Pro-Death Ravers:
 * Weak keep, it appears from Google that Pro-Death may be a short form of this title used enough for listing. JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Apoptosis:
 * Strong keep from sources. JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * PRO-DEATH:
 * Keep, I created the redirect because of a prior AFD; this is standard for topics not notable enough for their own article but mentioned in other articles. JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The word pejorative as a subheading:
 * Keep with or without link. I thought it fitting to add a link to this line for clarification even though it's a subhead not a dab line, but what do you think? JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Jihad:
 * Neutral: (opposing) This came up less in searches than others but (favoring) seemed to need inclusion for global balance. JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Ethics of vegetarianism:
 * Keep, clearly supported by sources, I'm not sure if the sources have been linked though. JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)


 * 99ers:
 * Keep, clear in-article use. JJB 00:54, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Nonpejorative
Since a second user had a second dispute unrelated to Bkonrad's above, I reverted first to Bkonrad's version, then after the second user agreed with me on Bkonrad's lack of grammar I reverted to my version. So as not to be considered long-term edit warring, I wanted to clarify this. The primary question of this user is whether "pro-death" has any nonpejorative uses, and per my edit summary and the above there are five. I think this is pretty simple but the question of which lines should be retained is still open. "My" version is that approved unanimously at DRV, but there has been no local consensus yet. That question can be handled in the section above. JJB 22:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I think this is basically fine with me, though dropping the operative word at the end of a term (e.g. "punishment") and pretending that it's the same thing is downright silly. No one who is a proponent of the death penalty calls themselves "pro-death". But, well, whatever. R. fiend (talk) 01:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)