Talk:List of school massacres by death toll

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

Why are terrorist groups included?[edit]

When most people say "school shootings" they think about a student shooting other students. The other cases have more in common with other terrorist attacks than they do with the rest of the school shootings on this list. Are you guys trying to somehow convince english speakers that school shootings happen everywhere? Well. They dont. 201.239.206.63 (talk) 03:22, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of perpetrators' names[edit]

I am opposed to the move to List of school massacres by death toll and the censoring of the perpetrators' names in this article. First of all, WP:NOTCENSORED states that "Wikipedia may contain content that some readers consider objectionable or offensive—​even exceedingly so. Attempting to ensure that articles and images will be acceptable to all readers, or will adhere to general social or religious norms, is incompatible with the purposes of an encyclopedia." Secondly this article is a sub-article of the parent article List of rampage killers that was spun off in this edit due to the "School Massacres" section becoming too long to include in its entirety in the parent article. I fail to understand how naming the perpetrators in this article is more offensive than naming the perpetrators in List of rampage killers (workplace killings) or naming them in List of rampage killers (home intruders) As it is right now, removing the perpetrators' names from only this article makes this one much less informative than any of the other List of rampage killers sub-articles. I am not opposed to linking directly to the articles about the individual shooting massacres and making the events themselves, rather than the perpetrators, the main focus of the various List of rampage killers articles but I do think the perpetrators' names should be included somewhere in the tables in the articles because it would be less informative to not include them. My main complaint is that such a large retool to the article was done completely unilateraly and without trying to come to any form of consensus from other editors. Such a large change to the article should have been proposed and discussed on the original talk page at Talk:List of rampage killers (school massacres) first. -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 18:30, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Killed[edit]

Is the killed column supposed to list the perpetrator if he or she was killed? It appears to exclude the perpetrator, but I was hoping to make sure. Ansat (talk) 00:18, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Use of Template:Expand list on this article[edit]

Note that I retitled this to a neutral title per WP:TALKNEW. John from Idegon (talk) 03:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The issue: This exact text verbatim is found in the current version of the article; "List of school massacres This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it."

The reason why it is an issue: Reading these words can be interpreted as someone asking you to expand the list in a violent manner, using the sword rather than the pen.

Action 1 taken: I simply removed this text. No longer an issue.

(cur | prev) 22:17, 12 April 2017‎ Yihman1 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (45,398 bytes) (-34)‎ . . (Removed the call to "expand the list"... It comes off as encouraging individuals to shoot schools by saying the list is incomplete, help expanding it. It will get filled in, no need to encourage shooters.) (undo)

Action 2 taken: another user added the text back again then called my opinion flawed.

(cur | prev) 22:52, 12 April 2017‎ John from Idegon (talk | contribs)‎ . . (45,432 bytes) (+34)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by Yihman1 (talk): That is simply your flawed opinion. it is a common template placed on multiple list articles. (TW)) (undo | thank)

Action 3 taken: Disclaimer added by me.

(cur | prev) 01:05, 13 April 2017‎ Yihman1 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (45,700 bytes) (+268)‎ . . (Since others complain about the removal of the template, I shall add a disclaimer instead.) (undo)

Action 4 taken: Disclaimer removed with a request to bring it here, and comments on my talk page.

(cur | prev) 01:25, 13 April 2017‎ John from Idegon (talk | contribs)‎ . . (45,432 bytes) (-268)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by Yihman1 (talk): If you feel strongly about this and you obviously do, take it to the talk page. (TW)) (undo | thank)

The argument I have heard thus far: This is silly. We do not put warnings on the numerous articles we have on guns to not kill people, we do not put warnings on the numerous lists we have of other types of massacres not to massacre. IMO, this is much more about your warped worldview than Wikipedia. If someone needs a warning not to kill people, they are very unlikely to heed it. This seems much more like trolling than editing.

My rebuttal: Calling my actions silly, calling my world view warped, and me a troll is a form of bigotry, and discrimination and this sort of thing is a violation of pillar four in the Wikipedia:Five pillars. I will put this persons blunt rudeness aside, and turn the other cheek in an effort to avoid being shallow and pedantic, and get right to the meat and potatoes of this situation.

I never placed a warning, instead I placed a disclaimer. This may sound like semantics, but these two similar words have different meanings, some use them interchangeably, but they are two entirely different things from a legal, and literal perspective:

A disclaimer is a statement by which one denies something, such as responsibility or knowledge - e.g., a disclaimer of warranties (there are no warranties for the product or service being provided).

A warning is a statement that points out a danger - e.g., a warning not to use your hair dryer in the bathtub.

Either way, warning or disclaimer it makes no difference. Warnings or disclaimers are used on other pages of Wikipedia, and I will site 3 of them at random, and trust me I could list hundreds of examples... Inversion_therapy It has health risks listed for using inversion therapy. Cocaine has a cornucopia of adverse effects listed here. The Rape article has a small prevention section, and separate article to go along with. So as you can see, 3 entirely different categories, and 3 entirely different warnings, or disclaimers.

The person however is correct that there are not any disclaimers not to kill people on gun articles. This is because guns do not kill people, people kill people.

The only actual legitimate argument I have heard thus far: "If someone needs a warning not to kill people, they are very unlikely to heed it." And I am going to agree with this statement. Lets say 99 out of 100 would ignore the warning. If the warning just stopped the 1, then wouldn't it be worth it?

On past the arguments, and my case for some sort of disclaimer or the removal of the words as written:

Alright try to step outside of your own rational mind for a moment. Realize that there are many people who exist in this world, not all of whom are rational. Try to step into the mind of this irrational individual who has mental health problems. Also realize that not all people are as privileged as you, and I and some have some very serious problems in life. Join the world of the chaos of my imagination with me. I'm going to setup a possible scenario let me know if it sounds "possible" or totally "impossible"... Lets call this person John Doe. John was raised by a single mother, and had an abusive step father in later childhood. John was always a bright kid, but he was often bullied in school for his lack of social skills, sub par wardrobe, and inability to maintain proper hygiene because only cold water comes out of pipes in his home. John's step father was a real bad man when he had a bit of the drink. He would do things like put a lit cigar out on his mothers arm in front of John because dinner wasn't cooked right. These terrible moments in childhood do something terrible inside of Johns head. They give him PTSD, and some real rage issues. John keeps going to school, and eventually reaches high school. One of his bullies flings a lit cigarette into the back of his hoodie after school one day. John prays to god, and asks for a "sign" on what he should do... He comes to this very wikipedia article with thoughts of violence, having been desensitized to it, and thinks "What should I do god? show me a sign!" He sees those magical words, and grins evilly... "This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it." He says them over and over in his head... it has become his mantra... he looks over many of the shootings using them as a sort of template... The following day he brings a gun to the school... He shoots that bully that flung the cigarette at him... Then another... and another... and another... many of whom were not even his bullies... and so it went for John before he became his own final victim. In this scenario, or a similar scenario there are a lot of the things we can not change. We can't stop the bullies at his school. We can't give the boy warm water for a bath. We can't stop his mother from taking a violent man into the home... However we can stop being Straw that broke the camel's back. Maybe he found a different mantra if my version were up "find help find help find help" not "expand the list expand the list expand the list"... Yihman1 (talk) 02:46, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a template that is in use on multiple list articles. It is in use here properly per the template documentation.BURDEN would be on you to make an arguement based in policy, guidelines and sources for why it should not be here. Reading WP:TLDR would be beneficial prior to replying. John from Idegon (talk) 03:42, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I will reply to the argument you made. In the article's you mentioned, the adverse effects of cocaine and inversion therapy are extremely well sourced. They are medical articles and our policy for sourcing on medical articles are very strict. You have no sources for your addition to the article or for your TLDR soliloquy here. That makes it WP:OR and totally irrelevant here. We are not a medium for social change, we are not a platform for either your viewpoint or mine. In an encyclopedia, we do not write about a subject, we write about what is written about a subject. I do know for certain of at least 4 incidents in metropolitan Chicago way back when I was a student that would qualify to be on this list. I cannot add them because it will require a physical library search to find the sources and I no longer live anywhere near a library that archives Chicago area newspapers. So yes the list needs to be expanded. John from Idegon (talk) 04:04, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Finally, I changed the section header for this discussion to a completely neutral title. "Double entendre" is a matter of your opinion (and IMO, your singularly held opinion). Titles are supposed to be neutral. The current one describes the problem without terms that color the discussion to follow. (An aside: read WP:MOSHEADER. Your capitalization was incorrect.) Also, I will be posting neutral notification of this discussion to the projects that follow this article. John from Idegon (talk) 04:24, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This comes from this 9gag post. Triplecaña (talk) 08:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Missing titles[edit]

Hi, y'alls. This article has a dozen citations that are missing titles. Anybody care to tackle it? Having fun! Cheers! {{u|Checkingfax}} {Talk} 22:00, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with List of rampage killers (school massacres)[edit]

Closing this discussion as per a request at Wikipedia:Requests for closure. The consensus is clear that a merge of the two articles is appropriate. Fish+Karate 12:08, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

same subject Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:09, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, these are redundant. The other list should redirect here. It will need to be decided if perpetrator names are listed. The type of attack, include rampage killing, should be stated in a new column. Fences&Windows 12:05, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Each event is the key field. All related data, regardless of whether it's contained in one Wikipedia article or another, should be associated with the key field, not "spun off" into more articles. Wikipedia supports word wrapping within columns. If you wish to create a list of only criminals who have committed crimes at schools, you're duplicating a lot of information. It's enough to list the criminal's name in the column, then link it to the Wikipedia page with the killer's detailed information.Clepsydrae (talk) 16:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with merge as both are basically identical except the first column. Adding the perpetrator names would as a column would be sufficient. --Xeror (talk) 19:27, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong support–There is no separate notability for the list of killers. No one has committed multiple massacres so this is a subset of the other list (which includes multiple perpetrator shootings).--Carwil (talk) 15:17, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment
A. Whether or not there is a merge, some clean up is necessary for the two articles. I have already started by fixing sort order for the numerical columns (Dead, Injured) by adding (sort-data-order="numeric"). The date columns are a little more complex, with design and sort order problems. Sorting by full date does not work correctly at the moment, though sorting by month&day only (in a separate column) or year only (in a separate column) does. A single sorted order by full date, month&day, and year would add value. However, I can not think of a way to add this capability other than to add an otherwise redundant column for the full date
B. The criteria for inclusion should be made more specific. I just disallowed a pending edit that added an aerial bombing during World War II (basis for reversion: an aerial bombing during the World War II era could not be accurate enough to particularly target a school). In addition, imagine the tragic length of this list if WW II incidents were allowed. And the complete swamping of the list value. — Neonorange (talk) 19:11, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support and rename result as the two lists almost completely overlap. Suggest new title as 'rampage' implies that an incident in which specific individuals were targeted would not seem to fall under that rubric. Suggest a separate list for the United States since multiple incidences per year seem likely—at-a-glance presentation of these would be encyclopedic value added. — Neonorange (talk) 19:11, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Agree with Merge Databases are best kept properly linked to the key field that's unique to the event. Here in Wikipedia, that's usually the same name used in the associated Wikipedia article for that event. The rest of the information in these summary tables should be limited to the most important information. List of school massacres by death toll does that properly. List of school shootings in the United States is improper as the information is broken out by period, thereby preventing easy use and analysis via other means such as a spreadsheet. List of rampage killers (school massacres) is nothing more than the List of school massacres by death toll article with some columns in different places. The conflagration of articles highlights Wikipedia's inability to treat databases as anything more than flat files. Therefore, I strongly recommend all such lists be moved to Wikidata Project and allow Wikipedia to remain an encyclopedia rather than attempt to use it as an ersatz database.Clepsydrae (talk) 16:28, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge. These are basically duplications of the same information. Natureium (talk) 17:01, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
  checkY Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 04:50, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding of single external link to NCTSN[edit]

Hello all! In light of my previous edit being reverted, and after discussion, I have gone ahead to add a single external link that goes to the resources page of the National Center Trauma Support Network (NCTSN). Many thanks to all for the consensus building, as per discussion here! Ongmianli (talk) 01:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]


No total casualty column?[edit]

It would be nice. 71.184.121.115 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:50, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the Stoneman entry include explosives?[edit]

Nothing in the wikipedia article supports that as being included weapons.72.84.244.79 (talk) 16:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. I've removed it. Shearonink (talk) 17:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

More attacks?[edit]

What about the Eastern University massacre ,Thammasat University massacre, Chencholai bombing or the Bahr El-Baqar primary school bombing ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carmanhaho (talk • contribs) 12:18, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Carmanhaho (talk) 23:43, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Add Monash_University_shooting (Australia) killed 2, injured 5, perpetrator found to be insane. [1]

66.85.230.192 (talk) 19:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_University_shooting

Beslan[edit]

The Beslan school siege is currently at the top of this list, claiming the perpetrators were "Killed by special forces". But in this case, the majority of the deaths weren't deliberate killings, but by crossfire between the hostage takers and Russian forces (including Russian tanks shooting at the building). Our article cites sources claiming that 80% of the deaths were caused by the Russian military firing back. I think this needs to be clearer - it's not a massacre in the same sense as most of the others on the list. Smurrayinchester 09:55, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Recent Bath School disaster edits & everts[edit]

Any disagreements about what weaponry - explosives, guns, whatever - regarding the Bath School disaster deaths should probably be discussed on that article's talkpage first. The parent article's talkpage is the appropriate place to hash out what designations belong in the weapons column here since the List is dependent on all the parent articles. There is already a discussion at Talk:Bath School disaster in the Weapons Listed in the Infobox section. Shearonink (talk) 04:49, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria question[edit]

For inclusion on this list, there needs to be 2 deaths. Was there ever a discussion about this? That wouldn't even qualify as a mass shooting if those were the only casualties. Isn't calling 2 deaths a "massacre" perhaps a little much? Niteshift36 (talk) 19:55, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps we should go with the more formal rule of 4 casualties? Natureium (talk) 14:18, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since massacre is about deaths, I don't think casualties should be a factor, only deaths. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:19, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of rampage killers gives the following criteria, in case you're looking for an idea:

  • Rampage killings with 6 or more dead
  • Rampage killings with at least 4 people killed and least ten victims overall (dead plus injured)
  • Rampage killings with at least 2 people killed and least 12 victims overall (dead plus injured)
  • An incidence of rampage killing shall not be included in this list if it does not include at least two people killed.
  • In all cases the perpetrator is not counted among those killed or injured.

Natureium (talk) 17:00, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's clearly a mass tragedy even if only a few die. We could even go to zero deaths if there were a lot of injuries. I don't know what's a good minimum, frankly. Maybe 5 deaths and 10 total (even if no deaths)? To what extent were these criteria discussed?

The criteria for Rampage have drifted away from "single individual": Columbine, Suzano, Jonesboro, and Wilno each had TWO perps.

There are other inconsistencies as well. For example, the Austin tragedy tallies a death that occurred 35 years later. Some of these events did not have long-term tracking of victims, so it's possible that an injured person died only 5 years later, or maybe they all died of old age 75 years later? Martindo (talk) 06:57, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New Vote to Remove the List of Perpetrators[edit]

As we see an increase in school shootings around the world, particularly in the United States, we should consider removing content that may be fueling the violence. The idolization of past perpetrators is one contributing factor to these atrocities. Although free speech and freedom of information is invaluable for democratic and equitable societies, it must still be conveyed judiciously for the public good. Continuing to allow an avenue for perpetrators to inspire violence is not in the best interest of the public and their names should be removed. I hope Wikipedia and users of the platform will agree. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amberdwebb (talk • contribs) 17:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should censor newspapers and TV, too? See the comment above from 2015 explaining good reasons for retaining names.Martindo (talk) 06:46, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with OP and comment above from 2015. I think it would be best to replace the name of the perpetrator with the name of the incident and a link to the article. It does give it a rogues' gallery hall-of-fame appearance to have the perpetrator, especially in the first column. It puts focus on the person who committed the act, not the act itself, which gives undue weight to the perpetrator over the event. The perpetrators are small people. The events are newsworthy. We talk about Sandy Hook, not the Adam Lanza Affair. We should at least give the second table the same formatting as the first. The amount of effort should not be a consideration in determining whether it is the right thing to do. Dcs002 (talk) 03:57, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Change of Country[edit]

At #21, we have the Enoch Brown Massacre which happened in 1764 as "United States" before that country existed. Yet also at #21 we have the Cologne school massacre in 1964 as "West Germany". Shouldn't for consistency sake one of those be changed to either be in the current country (Germany, US) or the country it was a part of at the time (West Germany, British Empire)? There seems to be some consistency problems in the national attribution; further down there is the Kachin massacre, which is listed as "Burma", even though the country is now Myanmar. Yet others list Hong Kong, with its current flag, when the massacres happened under British rule. Others alternatively list Russia, Soviet Union and Azerbaijan. Thoughts? RSDanneskjöld (talk) 09:13, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. This could be done simply by adding an explanatory sentence above the abbreviation list. Or squeeze parentheses into the space for each ambiguous country in the appropriate column.Martindo (talk) 06:47, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong victims numbers[edit]

I realized that there are several murderers in the list that the victims out of school are counted, cases like Suzano, Red Lake and Dendermonde They are high on the list because they killed people outside of the school, so my question is ¿Why we are counting victims outside the School? Kelsykelsykarter2 (talk) 23:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rampage killers[edit]

Tatarnikov, Vladimir used only explosives and that is why he is on the list Other incidents. Unknown4321unknown (talk) 10:57, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_school_massacres_by_death_toll&oldid=1186345613"