Jump to content

Talk:Elliot Rodger

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Draft talk:Elliot Rodger)

Peer review

[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I am wanting to bring it to GA. I want to make sure everything is good before nominating. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 04:17, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2025

[edit]

change location of ashes unknown to location of ashes undisclosed ManU9827 (talk) 09:32, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ManU9827, do you have a source which supports that change? TarnishedPathtalk 11:52, 1 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The infobox lists it as unknown currently but this is misleading as they not some lost artifact, the family knows where they are. I found this source that says he was cremated but nothing more.[1] ManU9827 (talk) 07:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Done TarnishedPathtalk 07:01, 19 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

A comment about the lead

[edit]

I will say that the lead seems to focus overwhelmingly on the last days of Elliot's life. Mind you that the purpose of the lead is to summarize a page. I think, perhaps, I would structure the lead as follows:

  • A sentence defining Elliot Rodger (MOS:BIOFIRSTSENTENCE), followed by three paragraphs of roughly equal size:
    • A paragraph describing his life up to the attacks, maybe mention his lineage?
    • A paragraph describing the attacks proper
    • A paragraph describing his societal/macrohistorical significance. This would include the phrase "Go ER", status in incel/manosphere communities, inspiring future shooters, popular culture. Maybe also NotAllMen/YesAllWomen. (Though the legacy section is also one paragraph, which seems to indicate underdevelopment)

This structure would highlight a more diverse amount of aspects about ER. Things about Elliot's ideology and manifesto should probably be somewhere here too, not sure what paragraph would serve best. Koopinator (talk) 18:43, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think @Shootforthestars would be interested in that feedback, since they've nominated the article for GA status - OpalYosutebitotalk』 『articles I want to eat19:10, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Shoot for the Stars, I agree with @Koopinator here. Though instead of referring to MOS:BIOFIRSTSENTENCE for the first para, I would refer to MOS:FIRSTBIO as the former deals with the first sentence. TarnishedPathtalk 09:24, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Koopinator and TarnishedPath, I have updated the lead with the suggestions above. Feel free to change if you feel like it can be improved. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 00:29, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for correcting the ping, Tarnished! - OpalYosutebitotalk』 『articles I want to eat00:31, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your update @Shoot for the Stars. I've made some slight changes separating the first sentence which establishes his notability from the paragraph which deals with his early life and then I've added a bit to the paragraph which establishes his notability.
@Koopinator and @OpalYosutebito, how does it look now? Any feedback or suggestions? TarnishedPathtalk 06:00, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it looks great. Koopinator (talk) 06:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks pretty good to me - OpalYosutebitotalk』 『articles I want to eat02:51, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

misinformation in userbox

[edit]

on the details in the userbox it shows that he died 10 years ago, it has been 11 years now, i cant edit it as i am not extended confirmed just thought I would let people who can edit it know because this article is being nominated to be a good article and having invalid information would not be very sigma Bastubunny (talk) 03:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bastubunny I can't see what you mean. It gives the date of death, not the years since death. TarnishedPathtalk 03:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
in the Details section of the userbox under the 'date' subheading it shows the date of his killing as 10 years ago Bastubunny (talk) 03:16, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's automated as consequence of the date of death. Later this month it will read 11 years. I wouldn't worry about it. TarnishedPathtalk 05:17, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind minor inaccuracy in age, but this isn't really a case where the "age" has any reason to be displayed. The date of the event is important info, but the time that's passed since is trivial. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]