Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of selfie-related injuries and deaths


 * 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 was keep. –  Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:29, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

List of selfie-related injuries and deaths

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Trivia list, compiled through original research. Seems to fail Notability. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:26, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 11:44, 18 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Plenty of related discussion out there, see, , , , , , or any similar google search of your choice. "Proper" news media don't usually publish lists of things; however, see e.g.  and  or any similar search of Google News to see that this was widely covered as a government concern. Samsara 16:10, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete A load of non-notable people, pretty much the definitions of WP:LISTCRUFT and WP:NOTNEWS.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 17:52, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Notability of individual people is not relevant here - see any of the similar entries in Category:Lists of people by cause of death or Category:Death-related lists, e.g. List of fatal snake bites in the United States, List of fatal shark attacks in Australia, List of fatal, unprovoked shark attacks in the United States or List of people who died climbing Mount Everest. Samsara 18:49, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Nominate it and see what happens. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:16, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ignoring my main point, which is that notability of individual people is not relevant. You could make a lot of lists of notable people that would not be considered apt for acceptance of Wikipedia. So please stick with the criteria, and avoid ignoring the main points made in the discussion. There are reliable sources that show this lemma to be a topic of broad interest, from pop culture all the way to politics. Samsara 16:35, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I remember when a list like this would fly on WP (10+ years ago), but not now. shoy (reactions) 18:04, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Age is not a criterion in deleting articles. Samsara 18:49, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete original research, first few sources listed by Samsara are tabloids and human interest stories in random websites which doesn't meet WP:RS and the last two sources listed is more appropriate on a section of safety in the selfie article. Pokerkiller (talk) 19:18, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * What is your requirement? The nomination is based on Notability, which states One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. I believe the section you are referring to in the selfie article demonstrates that this criterion is met. Selfie related deaths have been the subject of news coverage citing government action and awareness of the problem, and those news articles (RS!) give partial lists of the incidents as required by the guideline. Samsara 19:52, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Samsara, are there any reliable sources that have compiled such lists? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:18, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * http://www.ibtimes.com/deadly-selfie-couple-dies-after-taking-selfie-while-vacationing-portugal-latest-selfie-1655322 Samsara 03:22, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't see the source as particularly reliable, but I guess this will be closed as no consensus... oh well, the community seems to have spoken. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:24, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. It looks as though some people need to read WP:RS again Questionable sources are those with a poor reputation for checking the facts, or with no editorial oversight.. Searching this brings up a huge article in the Christian Science Monitor (has nothing to do with Christian or Science before the uninformed lose their shit), covering most of the incidents listed. Coverage on a government website of one incident . NBC news one incident . Among others. Not to mention general coverage of the topic in the CS Monitor , the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs . And so on and so on.--Savonneux (talk) 04:07, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note to admin Every single line in the list and the introduction is sourced.--Savonneux (talk) 23:50, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Also still waiting on a response from Piotr, whom I left a message for - or anyone else for that matter. Samsara 15:47, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep: feels like trivia but it's well referenced and reliable sources are covering it, those are the criteria that matter. Vrac (talk) 18:08, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - Why is this even an article ? .. I mean seriously ?, I've seen some daft articles in my time but I think this beats them all!, Unencyclopedic and quite frankly a moronic list of morons unable to take an image of themselves without fucking it all up!. This is is the kind of crap that belongs off of the internet. – Davey 2010 Talk 01:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - List is well sourced, other such lists appear in reliable sources and most delete votes seem to be emotional, ranty, and of the "I think this is a stupid topic" variety. However, this is an encyclopedia, and if things are sourced, it doesn't matter what one's personal opinion of the topic is, opinion isn't how we determine inclusion. pschemp | talk 04:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.    The article notes: "Seconds or minutes after these people took these shots they were dead - including a vet who accidentally shot himself and a bride-to-be taking an in-car shot involved in crash"  Here are the selfie-related injuries and deaths listed in the article:<ol><li>"a 21-year-old woman in Moscow accidentally shot herself in the head in May while taking a selfie while holding a pistol. She suffered head injuries but survived"</li><li>"In January, two young men blew themselves up in the Urals while taking a selfie holding a hand grenade with the pin pulled out. The cell phone with the selfie survived as a record."</li><li>"In May, a teenager in the Ryazan region died while attempting to take a selfie as he climbed on a railway bridge and accidentally came into contact with live wires."</li></ol></li> <li> Here are the selfie-related injuries and deaths listed in the article:<ol><li>"Last April, inspired by a trend of Russian youths climbing tall structures to take selfies at the top, a Saint Petersburg teenager died when she fell on railroad tracks.</li><li>"Another young woman fell to her death taking a selfie on a bridge this past weekend,"</li><li>"and a Moscow woman accidentally shot herself in the head while posing with a gun in May."</li><li>"Earlier this year, a civilian plane crashed in Colorado, killing the pilot and his passenger, when the pilot lost control of the plane while taking selfies."</li><li>"Another man was electrocuted to death in Spain when he attempted to climb atop a parked train to take a photo with friends."</li><li>"In 2014, a viral video of a man getting kicked in the head by the conductor of a moving train while shooting a video of himself attracted over 37 million views on YouTube. He was unhurt, but three college students from India attempting a similar stunt weren't so lucky."</li></ol>The article notes: "The list of accidents under thrill-seeking circumstances goes on and on – and that's not even counting the accidents caused by people snapping photos of themselves while driving."</li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow the subject to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 04:40, 25 August 2015 (UTC)</li></ul>
 * The subject also passes Notability, which says, "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." Cunard (talk) 04:40, 25 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep, sources indicate notability. Everyking (talk) 07:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep: See little difference between this and List of unusual deaths. Well-sourced and relevant to current culture. <b style="color:#4B0082;">Julia</b>\<sup style="color:#008080;">talk  23:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep – Per the sources presented above, the topic passes WP:LISTN, having "been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources." North America1000 01:59, 26 August 2015 (UTC)


 * 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.