Talk:Avicii

Handling of suicide terminology

Please consider amending the term "committed suicide" to "died by suicide" in this article and others. Suicide is not a crime and should not be described as something which one "commits". 2A00:23C6:3A93:7300:A43:2CD7:570:6C32 (talk) 00:04, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

This has been going on for ages, numerous sources do refer to his death as such, and the word "committed" doesn't automatically mean committing a crime. TylerBurden (talk) 16:46, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 March 2023

It only shows his mother under parents/relatives. His father needs to be added in and his information placed in the article as his mother has been.

His father is Klas Bergling, he was born December 7, 1945 (age 77 years), in Hedvig Eleonora Parish, Stockholm, Sweden.

Klas Bergling, born in 1945, is a Swedish entrepreneur married to the actress Anki Lidén. The couple share four children together; Linda, David, Anton and Tim. After Klas sold his company in 2001 he worked for a few years importing furniture from Egypt.

With his wife, Aviciis mother he founded the Tim Bergling Foundation, to help those affliwith mental illness, and help remove the stigma around it. GayRehabProject84 (talk) 09:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, people such as parents are generally only added to the infobox if their notability is established through having their own article, while Avicii's mother has one, his father doesn't on the English Wikipedia. TylerBurden (talk) 15:46, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that information 102.65.246.87 (talk) 10:24, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Consensus on "committed suicide"

Several editors have referred to "consensus" to deny edit requests to change the wording ("committed suicide") in the lead. I'm confused—where is this consensus? If the "consensus" is meant to refer to MOS:SUICIDE, that guidance does not preclude changing "committed suicide" and explicitly offers more appropriate alternatives. Pinging TylerBurden, as you're the main person to be reverting/denying these requests. Thanks. Wracking ^talk! 19:32, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

The sources cited in the article use the term "committed suicide", and it was previously discussed on the talk page if you look at the archive, which reached no consensus to change it. In addition, the manual of style guideline you cite explicitly says that it is not banned to write "committed suicide". If neither is incorrect, there is no point in changing back and forth between different "appropriate alternatives". TylerBurden (talk) 19:41, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you link me to the consensus-building discussion you're referring to?

That MOS:SUICIDE does not ban the current wording is irrelevant to the conversation; as I said, it does not preclude changing to more appropriate wording.

As for "changing back and forth", in the last year, six out of nine times, you have been the person to change the wording or deny request. The other times, the request denier was ScottishFinnishRadish or Asartea. Eight users have tried to change the wording, and three have denied them. I don't see consensus in favor of the current wording. Wracking ^talk! 20:13, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

It is relevant, since you have cited the guideline as a reason to change it, when in reality it makes it clear that while other alternatives are also acceptable, it may be used. So why should it be changed when that has been both the longstanding term, and the one used in the references the article cites? You can simply search "committed" in the archive and the discussion should show up, I don't know how to link specific threads. Consensus also isn't a number's game, especially not when it has been consistently mostly new IP's requesting the change, meaning it could be one person using proxies, etc. Unless a good policy backed reason can be provided for the change, I don't see any reason to change it. TylerBurden (talk) 20:45, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

I never claimed that MOS:SUICIDE bans the current wording; that's why I said your mention of that is irrelevant.

The current wording has been longstanding largely because you have reverted attempts to change it. It is mostly IPs requesting the change because they are not able to edit the article due to its protected status. Registered users have made the change; you reverted them. The hidden message in the article citing "current consensus" has likely dissuaded other editors from changing the wording.

There are several discussions of the issue in the archive. I asked you to link to the consensus-building one because I did not find one when I searched; the word "committed" is used in several discussions. If you can't link to the discussions, can you tell me what the name of the header(s) is/are? Wracking ^talk! 22:41, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

The wording has been used since before I even started editing the article, and so has the tag been present, the reason I have been helping to maintain it is because there is no point in making subjective style changes on Wikipedia, if something is subjective, just keep it however it was first added unless there is some really good reason to change it, which you have not provided. The article was actually protected because IP's and new accounts (likely the same person or group, based on the exact same arguments used over and over) kept changing it without establishing consensus to do so. If you are going to continue this discussion, please provide a concrete reason as to why it should be changed, since that appears to be what you are advocating for, linking to MOS:SUICIDE is not good enough because of what is said above. TylerBurden (talk) 10:45, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

The reason is, per MOS:SUICIDE, "many external style guides discourage it as being potentially stigmatising and offensive to some people". I went to change the wording, but I saw the hidden message discouraging it. I went to the talk page to see when the consensus was reached, and I did not find the consensus-building discussion I expected to find. While you see no good reason to change the wording, I see no good reason to keep it the same. Thus, my initial post. For clarity, as you did not provide any header(s), is there no discussion on which the claims of consensus are based? Wracking ^talk! 14:59, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

So you find it offensive and that is why you want to change it? Well to be blunt, a lot of people are offended by all kinds of things in this day and age, that doesn't mean language should bend over for them just because of their feelings. I would say for most people, the term "committed suicide" simply means that a person took their life. But for whatever reason, some people take offense, I suppose assuming committed means doing something bad, which I feel is certainly an exception in this context of suicide. It is tragic, not criminal. Did Avicii express disdain for the term during his life? Has his family members or the like expressed it? If so, simply out of human decency that could be one of the few reasons to change something subjective, but not just because some Wikipedia editors feelings. If we are going to go around and base our editing on our personal preferences, the bickering will be non-stop and nothing would get done.

I have already told you how to find the single discussion I can find on this talk page, if we are using the same version of Wikipedia, simply enter "committed" and the thread "Method of suicide" should show up that contains the single brief discussion I find solely focused on the different terms. Otherwise you could click on the archive, there is only a single one, and find the header there. I'd love to do the work for you but like I said, I don't know how to link specific threads. TylerBurden (talk) 03:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

I am going to request a third opinion. Wracking ^talk! 03:24, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

To add to this as I realize it may have come off a bit cold—I think this conversation has come to a bit of a standstill, which is why I am requesting a third opinion.

I did not say I found the wording offensive; I said I found the consensus inadequate. I appreciate you providing the discussion title. The conversation you reference involves only three editors each making a single comment, and it occurred before MOS:SUICIDE was developed. I don't believe this discussion is grounds for resisting calls for change by multiple editors over several years. Thanks ~ Wracking ^talk! 03:47, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

No problem, it would be good to have more people involved in the discussion so a stronger consensus can be built in either direction. TylerBurden (talk) 03:51, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Well, the WP:3O request was thrown out as another editor commented in this section. I followed up about it and they said I could repost it, but I don't feel like pushing it. An WP:RfC might be appropriate but it seems like its best to try another solution before then, so I've tried to cobble together a request at WP:DRN. Wracking ^talk! 02:45, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Was I not supposed to comment? I did leave a comment there. I am sorry, I did comment before reading the WP:SUICIDE policy that clearly states we dont use committed. I support the change to conform to policy. I dont personally agree with the statement "many external style guides discourage it as being potentially stigmatising and offensive to some people", however if that is policy then we should follow it. I dont particularly feel strong enough to oppose policy or propose any sort of change to policy. As for an article, it should follow policy. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:59, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

@Wracking Yea, usually RfC's are meant to be one of the later steps, but it's probably the best tool for establishing a strong consensus. In the meantime, I have reverted the premature edit by Jtbobwaysf to implement a change to the wording used that they took upon themselves to make, as well as leave me an edit warring template and imply I'm editing tendentiously. I think I have made my case clear above, subjective things shouldn't be changed but left in its original state, unless there is very good reason for it. In fact if it was reverse I would be arguing for whatever of the other phrases were originally in use, so it has little to do with the wording itself, but more against subjective changes. I don't think this is a bad faith approach, and I think the remark is very strange. Anyway, appreciate you trying to involve others, just wasn't expecting to log in and discover I'm being attacked over this. TylerBurden (talk) 09:03, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

• Whats wrong with the current wording? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 02:12, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Jtbobwaysf, The current wording has been disputed by several editors (see my comments above). Please see MOS:SUICIDE and let me know if you have further questions! Wracking ^talk! 02:22, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Im sorry, I commented without reading the policy and stuck my foot in my mouth. I see the policy and agree with your position to change the text. I have changed the article text to "died by" to comply with policy WP:SUICIDE. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:26, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Noting that what you are citing has nothing to do with "complying with policy", it's a guideline on dealing with threats of physical harm. What you're looking for is MOS:SUICIDE, which explicitly states the prhase is not banned. I do not know how you read that and reached the conclusion that it is against policy, I am edit warring and am editing in a WP:TENDENTIOUS manner as you implied here. It seems like bizarre escalation when the only thing going on here was a civil discussion in good faith. TylerBurden (talk) 08:56, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Your edits are now looking like WP:TE. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 10:09, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

If you could refrain from the personal attacks here and instead focus on the matter at hand, that would be good. Your accusations have been brought up on your own talk page. Perhaps you should read everything again since you have clearly completely misinterpreted just about everything, including policies you are citing. TylerBurden (talk) 12:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Reading the discussion above, I don't see any evidence of current consensus. As far as I can the previous wording seems to have been settled on over four yeats ago after a discussion by three editors that preceded MOS:SUICIDE. In my opinion it's now time to re-evaluate that decision by normal editing processes. I've changed the wording to "died by suicide", one of the MOS's preferred options. If you feel that's too euphemistic, the extremely blunt but also-MOS-preferred "killed himself" would also be another option. But "committed suicide" is now an outdated term referring to a criminal act, and the MOS is right in deprecating its use. — The Anome (talk) 07:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Well while I don't think a particularly strong formal consensus exists to change it either, I am not going to edit war over such a minor thing if several editors feel strongly about it. You and Wracking are correct that MOS:SUICIDE lists external style guides as reasons as to why other versions may be preferable, but the same link states the term is not banned, which is what the editor that summoned you has continued to incorrectly claim while linking to WP:SUICIDE, which does not mention the phrase at all. TylerBurden (talk) 11:33, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi - I think the editor repeatedly linking to WP:SUICIDE is meaning to refer to MOS:SUICIDE.

I think the problematic word here is "committing", which carries with it the implication of criminal wrongdoing; suicide is no longer a crime, and the verb no longer applies as a consequence. If we want to be literal, but be considerate of people's sensibilities, "died by suicide" works fine; if you want to be blunt, "killed himself" also works. I prefer the first. — The Anome (talk) 16:04, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, yes, I am referring to MOS:SUICIDE. Apologies for the mistake. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 20:39, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 14 February 2024

I want to add, that Avicii's remix of Beautiful Heartbeat by Zack Brown Band, will be released February 16th this yeart Kallenberg1 (talk) 22:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Isi96 (talk) 23:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 March 2024

Add the link for "Levels" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levels_(Avicii_song) 79.117.98.114 (talk) 16:52, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

 Already done It's already linked in lede. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

The information regarding the location of the funeral and the burial are incorrectly reversed in your article. His funeral was held at the Hedwig Eleanora Church (the video is on YouTube) and his burial was in the cemetery. Please confirm and correct the article. 2603:8080:6B01:9344:8421:BD57:C906:582C (talk) 02:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)