Talk:List of self-harmers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

What's the point of a list like this? Isn't it their own business? --Ekaiyu 02:57, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

*shrugs* It could make people who self-injure, themselves, feel better. That happened for me, in any case. Also anyone reading up on the addiction might be interested. --OGoncho 06:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Most of these are celebrities who have come out about their self-harm, so I don't think there's a privacy issue. One notable exception is Renae Lawrence, whose 'fame' is due to being arrested for drug trafficking, and the self-harm appears to relate to an incident whilst in prison - I can agree that perhaps she should be removed from the list, it doesn't seem fair to speculate about whether she is a self-harmer given the circumstances.
As for the usefulness of this, I guess it's comparable to other such lists (eg, List of famous gay, lesbian or bisexual people; it lets people know that even well known "successful" people have self-harmed; and whether or not a particular famous person self-harms or not is a question that people sometimes have - it would be useful to try and compile a list, as long as it can be backed up with references. Mdwh 20:28, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
So, any objection to me removing Renae Lawrence? There's no source that she identifies as a self-harmer, and her inclusion is based on a single incident (not to mention that it only says "might"). Mdwh 15:38, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] As a religious ritual

Is this circumstance considered self-harm? I am referring the inclusion of Pio of Pietrelcina ("Pater Pio"), a stigmatic and practicioner of ritual self-flagellation as a means of suffering for Christ (or something to that effect--I'm sorry if I am offending anyone's religious beliefs; this is not my intent). Unless he was known to self-harm as a result of a psychological condition, does he (and others like him) have a place on this list? --buck 20:33, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking that myself. But we can't use as a result of a psychological condition, because many self-harmers do not necessarily have a psychological condition (and self-harm isn't itself considered a mental illness in the DSM, so we can't refer to that for a definition).
Generally I'd say that if it isn't done to alter or cope with emotions, then it isn't what would be considered self-harm, but then many self-harmers do so out of self-punishment too. I don't really know enough about self-flagellation to comment how it fits in with either of those.
One way round this, and something I'd be in favour of, is to restrict it to those who have come out as self-identified self-harmers, cutters and so on, rather than trying to put people on the list based on us trying to decide if "X behaviour" counts as self-harm. So this would also discount people such as Renae Lawrence (who is listed based on the report of a single incident) and Vincent van Gogh. I don't know if that sounds reasonable? Otherwise, I don't see how we can include some people based on reports of their behaviour, whilst discounting others, when it's not clear what their motivations are in any of the cases. Mdwh 22:54, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Works for me, though I think we can make exceptions regarding people for whom their self-harm is obviously related to something psychological (depression, suicidal tendencies, an emotional connection to the act of self-mutilation, etc), even if they aren't self-identified. That is, people of antiquity who certainly don't have the opportunity to confirm or deny it, such as Caligula or Sylvia Plath. Then again, if there is little or no substance to such claims, then they certainly should be left off the list. Now this may or may not apply to van Gogh's case, as he did seem to publicly acknowledge his tendency to self-harm (in conversation as well as what is evident in his self-portraits). One thing to consider could be a revision to the list that designates it as strictly pathological self-harmers. Or maybe that would just lead to unnecessary complications? :) --buck 00:07, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

On a related note, I've removed Glen Benton. The only reference on the article is to a scar on his forehead. Aside from this being a one-off act, the link from that article [1] suggests it was done for religious reasons. Since the other religious ones were removed, I've removed this one also. Mdwh 23:15, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Performers?

People like Sid Vicious, GG Allin, and Marilyn Manson use/used self-mutilation as a shock technique during their live performances. In this regard, is this considered self-harm (in reference to the medical/mental condition), and should they be included on this list? --buck 17:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Personally I'd say this alone shouldn't be considered self-harm for the purposes of this list. Though note that I have seen various references claiming that Marilyn Manson at least has self-harmed, not in the context of live performances (eg, [2] ). Mdwh 18:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] References

I've tried to add references as best as I can find them. There is the danger with lists like these in that people get added, with no way of knowing whether they should really be on there or not. Ideally I think there should be at least some reference given for each person, or a mention in their own Wikipedia article. I'm suspicious that some people mentioned here (Chopper Read, Vincent van Gogh) are people who have done one-off acts of mutilation, but not what would normally be considered repetitive self-harm. Mdwh 19:17, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

The following are those who have no mention of self-harm on their own Wikipedia entries, and I can't find any references for with a quick search:

Does anyone have any references for these? Should they be removed?

In addition, Drew Barrymore is uncertain - http://self-injury.net/doyousi/famous/ says Drew Barrymore has been removed from this page because only one brief sentence in a single article claimed that she self-injures. Further searches for more evidence of this have been inconclusive. Mdwh 20:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Criteria for including

I suggest that people should be only listed on this page if either their self harm is mentioned in their Wikipedia article (similar to List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people), or a source is cited. Otherwise we have no idea for what reason people are being added to the list. Opinions? Mdwh 16:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree wholeheartedly. Anville 14:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Removal

Further to my above comments, I have removed the following due to lack of evidence of them being self-harmers: Drew Barrymore, Casey Chaos, Ian Curtis, Martin Grech, T.E. Lawrence, Chopper Read, Trent Reznor, Henry Rollins, Kenji Siratori, Vincent van Gogh, Peter Wentz. There are possibly more that should go too. Feel free to add any of these back, but I think we need information to explain why. Mdwh 01:08, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Chopper Read cut off his own ears (which I'm sure his article makes mention of, and is referenced in his many books). -- Longhair 02:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
Though self-harm tends to refer to repetitive acts rather than one-off acts of major self-mutilation (same reason I removed Vincent van Gogh) - also, his website [3] says that he had someone do it to him, and that it was in order to get a transfer. I'll leave it for now if someone wants to add him back - but these are three reasons which make this different from what is covered in the topic self-harm, should these sorts of things be included? Mdwh 02:51, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Kenji Siratori has recently been added to numerous articles by anonymous editors, see User talk:Todfox#Kenji Siratori for more on this. I suspect self-promotion, but adding yourself to this list is certainly a unique form of it. Kit 23:27, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

It probably can't be counted as a real source, but Trent Reznor's lyrics to "Hurt" are strongly suggestive of self-harm [4]. I was actually surprised, when I found this list, that he wasn't on it. -- Loudsox 11:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vincent van Gogh

I've added Vincent van Gogh back on the list. The slicing off of his ear was not simply an isolated incident of self-mutilation. There are accounts of him threatening to harm himself with a razor, burning himself with open flames [5], and as you may recall, he eventually committed suicide. How do others feel about having van Gogh on the list? --buck 01:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Personally I feel that paper borders on NOR, stating that it "believes" he did this to maintain the attention of his brother, etc. Personally I'm against the idea of including him on the list, and even it says that cutting off his ear was psychoses, not self-harm Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 19:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
Then perhaps it is necessary to provide an explanation of such limitations in the title of this list. That is, a "disclaimer" of sorts that says this list should exclude people who self-harm as a result of psychosis (though I don't see why psychosis-related self-harm should be excluded from this list in the first place). However, if enough restrictions are placed on this list, then it will continue to be a simple showcase of rock stars and Hollywood actors. Surely this affliction is not confined to the subjects of tabloids...? --buck 22:11, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
I think it's clear, and reasonable, that this is a list of self-harmers as defined at Wikipedia's own article self-harm. I don't object to stating this explicitly in the introduction of this article though.
Regarding Vincent van Gogh - if he's been added as a repetitive self-harmer, then the evidence for that seems rather limited. If he's only been added due to a one-off mutilation, then I believe that that isn't relevant to the context of this list.
More generally, I think it's hard to properly judge whether historical characters were or weren't self-harmers. As I said above, perhaps it better stick with those who have admitted to repetitive self-harm, rather than trying to judge whether a particular act is self-harm. The former is something we can objectively do - the latter borders on original research (at least, if the decision of whether acts count as self harm is being made my editors, and not notable external sources). Mdwh 03:09, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Very well. Though I would like to point out that the self-harm article is rather vague (and sometimes self-contradictory) in its definition of the term. Also, some of the sources for this list are mtv.com and the Daily Star, a British tabloid. My reasoning for including van Gogh was based on an article in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology and included a link to the appropriate reference--but this is not a notable source, and violates the NOR policy? I'm done. --buck 23:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
The thing about sources like the Daily Star is that it isn't a case of "The Daily Star think that so-and-so is/was a self-harmer, so we'll include them on the list", rather that the people themselves have come out as being a self-harmer, which I think can be accepted, assuming that the newspaper isn't outright lying.
I don't object to including Van Gogh if there are references to him self-harming repetitively (I see the link says "put his hand in the flame of the lamp and said, 'Let me see her for as long as I can keep my hand in the flame'" - are there any more sources, or is it based on this one observation?) though if this isn't something known for certain, we should say so with some explanation for his inclusion - otherwise people may assume it only refers to the single act of mutilation. Mdwh 00:58, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] kurt cobain

i've never read anywhere that was a self harmer, he actually was too coward to cut himself. unless you're talking about the drug abuse but if it's so i think there are lots of people missing here. and what about jeff weise?

I agree, I've removed him. Mdwh 23:11, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kyo Niimura

Kyo of Dir en grey does various forms of self-harm, should he be added or is he not well known enough?

 yes. i can't see why not

[edit] Category for Wikipedians who self-harm?

What do you think about it? Zbihniew 16:51, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. Might that be seen as promotion of a dangerous activity? --OGoncho 21:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
I don't think it's promotion of a dangerous activity any more then someone saying they use a Mac is promoting Macs. Creating a group could actually help help. I'm all for it. S.Skinner 18:59, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
I'm a little late on this, but I'm for it too. As a self-harmer myself who spends lots of time on Wikipedia, it is hard when things get bad and you don't know anyone on Wikipedia to talk to about it. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 05:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't see why not if people want to add themselves to such a category. There are a few similar categories in Category:Wikipedians_by_mental_condition. I don't see it as promoting anything. Mdwh 02:10, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Alex Rees

I just removed this entry in the list after it was added by 86.143.16.202 on 17:07, 14 July 2006. There is no wikipedia article for Alex Rees or Alexander Rees. After searching on AlltheWeb, Google and Yahoo, I couldn't come up with much info on an Alex Rees of note so I removed him. I would recommend that this entry be restored to the list if and when evidence can be found. S.Skinner 17:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is this encyclopedic?

Is this encyclopedic in any way? Are these people notable for engaging in self injury? Does Wikipedia really need a list of famous people conforming to any particular abnormal psychology?

If anyone has a compelling case for why this entry should remain, please elaborate on it. I am concerned that this list borders on violating WP:LIVING in a lot of cases and I am strongly considering listing it for deletion. —ptk✰fgs 02:17, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Firstly these are people notable for other reasons, who also self-harm (i.e., it should be a list of famous people who self-harm, not anyone who is famous because they self-harm).
I think it's just as encyclopedic as any of the many other "Lists of people who do x" on here (e.g., List of bisexual people - again, you could ask whether it's notable that they're bisexual or whatever).
I you think it violates privacy, I am in favour of restricting the list to cases where the person has come out as a self-harmer themselves (and indeed, that would be a good thing anyway, to avoid possible original research - we shouldn't be labelling someone as a self-harmer when no one else has).
Since there are still people on the list who have talked about their self-harming in reliable sources, I would be against deleting it altogether. Mdwh 10:47, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I know they are notable for other reasons; that's why there are articles on them. I'm asking why anyone in this list should be considered notable as a self-harmer to such a degree that we need this article to list them. It should not be a list of famous people who incidentally have engaged in self-injury. It should be a list of people notable for engaging in self injury — just as not every Briton who has picked up a paintbrush is listed at List_of_British_painters.
List of bisexual people strikes me as equally unencyclopedic and just as poorly referenced as this list, and I wouldn't object if it were proposed for deletion either.
I am not sure what you are getting at in the last paragraph. If those people have discussed it in reliable sources, and if it is a notable aspect of their biographies, it should be included in the articles on them. I still don't see that it makes them notable for self injury to the extent that a separate list is needed.
Looking at Wikipedia:Lists, the most plausible justification I can find for this list is for use as a "see also" — but unless any of these biographies contain significant information about self injury (and they don't seem to) that's not really helping.
Additionally I am concerned that the criteria for inclusion in this list are excessively vague.
Please take some time to review Wikipedia:Lists, Wikipedia:Lists_in_Wikipedia, and Wikipedia:Listcruft. I am still having trouble seeing the justification for this list. —ptk✰fgs 14:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Firstly, I think this is more similar to List of bisexual people rather than List_of_British_painters, in that people in the former list are not famous because of their bisexuality. And if you think these are unencyclopedic, a quick look over Category:Lists_of_people reveals many articles where famous people are categorised in some way, even though they aren't famous for that categorisation. Similarly, saying we should mention it in their articles rather than here - that goes for many if not all articles in Category:Lists_of_people. Perhaps it's better to take the issue up there?
Secondly, when someone's self-injury has been documented in something like a national newspaper, this surely more than meets the requirements for notability - so in that sense, yes, their self-injury is notable.
You say "just as poorly referenced" - if you point out entries which are poorly referenced, then I'd probably not disagree. But that's no reason in my opinion to delete the entire article, when some are referenced by notable sources.
As for "excessively vague" - I know that some people have tried to bend the definition of self-harmer to include any one off act of self-mutilation (see talk above), and I am against that. But articles like Garbage's Shirley Manson Admits To "Cutting" seem pretty clear, surely? Mdwh 21:00, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fictional people

Should we include fictional self-harmers in here too? There's a growing number of characters from movies and television shows that qualifies for this list. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 05:37, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I've no objection to a list, it would be a good thing. But it should certainly be kept separate, and I'd favour a seperate article altogether. Mdwh 02:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Alrighty, I started on one here. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 23:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/i/s/Talk%7EList_of_self-harmers_8991.html"