Talk:List of shootings in California

numbers wrong?

are the perpetrators included in these figures or not? covina was supposedly 9+gunman = 10, like the article says, but monterey park reports 10+gunman, for a total of 11. the article, however, lists them BOTH at 10.

one or the other needs to be tweaked. not sure WHICH, however, as it depends on whether the list intends to include gunmen or not. 2601:19C:527F:A660:D94A:ECD9:C37E:3734 (talk) 08:34, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

i see someone updated monterey park, but it still doesn't fix the underlying mistake w/rt covina. does the list INCLUDE (dead) perpetrators, or not?? 2601:19C:527F:A660:FD5B:D95F:5A7A:BD41 (talk) 01:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

i went ahead and changed san ysidro and monterey park totals to match their indiv articles, since we are apparently INCLUDING THE (dead) PERPETRATORS in the totals here?

feel free to revert if that is not correct, but if so, other entries need to be changed to SUBTRACT 1. as it stood, the list was an inconsistent mish-mash with some including and some not including the perpetrator. 2601:19C:527F:A660:343B:4680:EDA7:7B11 (talk) 08:08, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The list says it's a list of shooting homicides, so it may not always match "number dead" in an infobox at an articles because number dead at the article may include a perpetrator or perpetrators who died by suicide or were killed by a cop or someone else. Valereee (talk) 14:26, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

yes, but it is not INTERNALLY consistent -- some include those latter perps; some don't.

i tweaked only 2; i'm sure there's at least 5 or 6 left which are wrong. 2601:19C:527F:A660:2977:276F:9512:AB4E (talk) 21:02, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by internally consistent, but FWIW we aren't actually all that concerned with consistency between articles, if that's what you mean. Valereee (talk) 00:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

"between" is the exact OPPOSITE of "internally".

pls read my first post. dead gunman is included in some entries, not in others. so 2 lines both reading "7", say, will have 1 of them incorrect -- it's either 6 & 7 or 7 & 8.

OR, going the other way, 2 shootings with exact same totals -- 5 plus gunman suicide, say -- will have diff entries here. 4&5 or 5&6, again, "depending". needs to be consistent.

for starters, we need to decide are dead gunmen SUPPOSED to be included? is there some policy on this? 2601:19C:527F:A660:2977:276F:9512:AB4E (talk) 02:16, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

There's no policy that I know of, but a dead gunman is not part of the same homicide, so I'd say in the gunmen shouldn't be included in total homicides in this list. But it's quite likely some of these entries were made by people who didn't read the instructions at the top of the list and simply transferred over from the main article the number of total dead. Valereee (talk) 16:56, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

what "instructions"? it just says "number killed". there's a whole section on the monterey article as to whether that is to include the gunman or not.

is every article to decide that willy-nilly on their own? 2601:19C:527F:A660:5026:C459:698B:972A (talk) 18:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

At the very top, the description of the list says "This is a list of homicides committed by firearms in the state of California which have a Wikipedia article for the killing, the killer, or a related subject." So this list should include the homicides committed by the perpetrators and would exclude suicides of the perpetrators. I'd argue it should also exclude any homicide by cop/bystander of the perpetrator as that wasn't a part of the crime event. But others might disagree.

Within an article the editors of that article are given a lot of leeway for anything not stated in policy. As far as I know we have no policy for how to count the dead in a mass murder/suicide/takedown incident. I've seen a lot of infoboxes that count it dead "11 (10+shooter)" whether the shooter suicided or was killed by police/bystander. But some might just say 11. Some might count victims dead = 10. It would be up to other editors at that article to come in and say, "Hey, let's count the shooter as dead also for a total of 11" or whatever. It may sound a little willy-nilly, but it usually ends up being similar to other articles about similar events because the same editors end up there. Valereee (talk) 19:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Which reminds me: one of the reasons for creating an account is so that other editors can see your edit history and recognize you as a well-intentioned editor. Since your IP is dynamic, no one can see your edit history beyond a day or so. We can't get to know you, and that puts you at a disadvantage. There are many, many other advantages to creating an account. Valereee (talk) 19:29, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

not my immediate concern if various articles are counting things differently, but it is a problem once COMPILED HERE into an inconsistent mish-mash.

both covina and the 101 shooting were reading "9", for example, before i tweaked one. indiv articles reveal that 9 here meant "9 plus perpetrator" in the case of covina but "9 incl perpetrator" for the 101. THAT cannot stand. 2601:19C:527F:A660:5026:C459:698B:972A (talk) 03:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

WP:SOFIXIT Valereee (talk) 04:11, 30 January 2023 (UTC)