Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Causing death

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 delete. Courcelles 12:38, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Causing death

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is nothing much to say about this topic that isn't already covered at death and murder; what's left is little more than a dictionary definition. Powers ^T 12:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I don't see any prospect for expanding this beyond a dictionary definition. older ≠ wiser 12:58, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into homicide, which lacks the Mens rea of either murder or Manslaughter. Killing is a dab page. Redirects are cheap. Bearian (talk) 13:16, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I knew there must be an article that didn't have the implications of murder. Thanks. Powers ^T 21:13, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This appears to be an editorial on finding a more positive way to refer to homicide, and there's no reason for anyone to hang out the merge tags on the big toe of this one. "Causing death is ending the life of an individual. Killing generally has an equivalent definition, but is often used synonymously with murder and may be disregarded in a neutral point of view due to negative associations." Technically, one is causing death when spraying a can of Lysol, but that's not said in advertisements due to negative associations. Essentially, it's been done already, though the information in the homicide article hasn't yet been "done to death". Add musings there. Mandsford 13:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 15:22, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 15:22, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I intended to fill this article with ethical aspects of killing, which aren't appropriately covered by existing articles (which rather deal with the legal aspects). However, I do not currently have the time to expand it to the point of justification of existence, and I can recreate it again at the time I do. Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:26, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- If that's the article you want to write, you should title it accordingly. Or start by expanding the existing articles to cover missing aspects. Powers ^T 21:14, 12 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for the advice. Indeed, killing should perhaps have been the article title. Naming it ethical aspects of killing would imply that you could find a main article about killing in general, but there is apparently no such article, as, again, existing ones have a predetermined legal scope. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:34, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - The article is homicide. If its scope is too limited for your tastes, you should work to improve the article, not start a separate article with a different POV. That's called a POV fork. Powers ^T 14:00, 13 November 2010 (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.