Comments:Assisted-suicide doctor Jack Kevorkian dies at age 83
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.
Contents
| Thread title | Replies | Last modified |
|---|---|---|
| "...was controversial..." | 3 | 21:54, 6 June 2011 |
| Comments from feedback form - "I'm curious to see how this af..." | 4 | 21:21, 6 June 2011 |
| Comments from feedback form - "Hei :)" | 0 | 09:22, 6 June 2011 |
"The concept of a doctor assiting suicide was controversial within the US at the time and he was known as "Dr Death"."
I believe it still is highly controversial. Maybe the word 'particularly' in front of 'controversial' would better describe the atmosphere in the U.S. of the time. Also, 'assisting' is missing an 's' in the article.
You're right! It is still highly controversial. Only three states out of fifty allow physician assisted suicides, and those three states have many restrictions, provisions, requirements and safeguards before it is allowed. For example, in Oregon the medication must be self-administered in the presence of a physician.
As an outsider, I'm not at all surprised it is controversial. The problem is keeping within what the sources say; they don't really talk about the present situation. The information would need sourced and the deadline for additions to the article is almost here.
As for the typo, I'll go deal with that.
It is too bad the article was not more complete in explaining the context of Kevorkian's actions. It was a complex situation that is not conveyed in the article.
I certainly would've welcomed a more in-depth article too.
That's where prepped obits should be useful. Due to license differences, they'd need written independent of relevant Wikipedia articles (they can import from us, we can't do the reverse).
An interesting idea... news organizations prepare obits all the time, so I don't see why we shouldn't. Though we should be a bit careful about writing them, since our content is open to the public. It's such a bummer that we can't copy from Wikipedia, though.
Seems like I remember a prepared Wikinews obit a while ago that turned out, after the person actually died, to be an unsourced copyvio of Wikipedia, and sorting that out took long enough that we ended up with no obit for the person at all — we might have done better (and couldn't have done worse) without a prepared obit. --Pi zero (talk) 21:21, 6 June 2011 (UTC)