Talk:1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:1997 Saint-Casimir mass suicide/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: PARAKANYAA (talk · contribs) 01:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: IntentionallyDense (talk · contribs) 17:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I will review this shortly! IntentionallyDense (talk) 17:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

Review

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Some confusing wording which I highlighted below. IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	I've verified all the online news articles (using google translate so I'm assuming any differences in wording can be attributed to that. IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC) I spot-checked some of the book sources as well and those came back clean so I think it's fair to say this passes sourcing requirements (pending nominator addressing the issue I mentioned below). IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	2c. it contains no original research.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Everything was put into writer's own words. IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
	7. Overall assessment.	Holy shit what an interesting and dark read. I really enjoyed doing this review. I'm placing it on hold until some prose issues are fixed but well done. IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC) Pleased to say that this is now a pass from me! It was a pleasure collaborating with you PARAKANYAA. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:32, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Is there no images available on the topic? I'll look as I go through the sources but I just wanted to confirm with you that you couldn't find any and that this isn't just an oversight. Could you maybe add photos of the cult leaders to the background section? IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • There's pretty much nothing. There are two probably PD images of Di Mambro but they kind of suck, and there isn't one of Jouret that is PD. I feel having one of just Di Mambro is odd. I have attempted to find PD images of this, even going as far to email the SQ (they licensed images CC non commercial :( ) but none that we can use. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:33, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

    I figured that was the case but just wanted to make sure! IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

   Not done The photos avaible suck shit. IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• The Order of the Solar Temple was a cult active in several French-speaking countries, led by Joseph Di Mambro and Luc Jouret. Founded in Switzerland in 1984, it was a Neo-Templar secret society with magical-arcane elements. You list pages 218-219 for this but most of this info is on pages 219-220. I suspect this may have just been a typo but if you could confirm that would be great. The source also does not seem to mention that it was founded in Switzerland but I may be missing something. IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:01, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

   Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  • This was either a typo or a copy paste error. I'm just going to remove what country it was founded in, because though it is true it's not in the backgrounds people give to this one (it is mentioned in Introvigne 2006) and there are so many interlocking organizations and locations it's probably not worth the trouble. Fixed. PARAKANYAA (talk)
• The three children of one of the couples had initially been included in the plans, but after the failure of the previous attempts, they convinced their parents that they wanted to live and were let go. Following three unsuccessful attempts to orchestrate the suicide, the final attempt, with help from the teenagers, was successful. are the children and teenagers the same people here? if so could you either use the term children or teenagers or maybe indicate that they are the same people for clarity purposes? IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • changed it to children in both cases PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

   Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• the group had the theological doctrine that by committing suicide, one would "transit" to the star Sirius I would define what "transit" means in this context somewhere in the lead as that isn't clear. IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • tried to do this PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

    Looks good to me! IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:31, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• The dead included two couples and one of their parents. names might be easier here as this is kind of hard to follow. IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • just did names PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

   Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:58, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• but after the failure of the previous attempts you mention the previous attempts as if we already know of them when this information has not yet been presented if that makes sense. IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • attempted to rephrase in a way that makes more sense, still not sure. do you see any issues with it? PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

    Yes that looks more clear now.IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:17, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• The children were ultimately not convicted of any crime, as while they were directly involved the Ministry of Justice deemed their responsibility lessened by their ingestion of drugs and their influence by the cult. The wording here is awkward, is there any way you could word this better? IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • attempted to rephrase. is that better? PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

    Yes that looks much better. IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

   Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:59, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• what are magical-arcane elements and could you expand on this a bit? IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • it's in the source, but i honestly have no idea what the authors mean. i replaced it with another sentence on the same page, which describes them as having a mix of beliefs, which is both a more accurate overview summary and easier to understand. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

    Sounds good. I did see it in the source but wondered if you had more insight to what they may have meant. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:16, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• as the location sat upon a large granite plate with a strong magnetic field Doesn't seem like necessary information and I think could be removed for readability. IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • this is also on jouret's page, so removed PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

   Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• Following a gun scandal involving Jouret Is there more information on this gun scandal? IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • yes, but I'm not sure how necessary it is informationally when it was mostly a trigger for the first transit and this one was a few year's distance, and only involved people not involved in this one. do you think it's necessary information? PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:24, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

    I think a one setence explanation of it would be appropriate considering it's mentioned several times. IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:25, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

  • fair enough, added brief summary PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:08, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

   Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:15, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• A lapsed Catholic from Switzerland, Klaus had met Luc Jouret in Switzerland circa 1984 when he visited him (as he was a doctor) due to an earache. This sentence doesn't really make it clear who the doctor is. Also do we know if Luc Jouret was a real doctor? IntentionallyDense (talk) 19:47, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Specified the doctor was Jouret. Okay, so, Jouret did have an actual non-woo medical degree and was for several years a normal doctor, but he later became a homeopath. Sometimes he did both at once. I don't know under the circumstances he saw Klaus, but he was a real doctor. Homeopathy was more accepted then that it is now so it's possible it was mixed. Source implies normal doctor visit. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

    Interesting. Thanks for clarifying that! IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:26, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

   Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:27, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• The same day, the pair mailed (from a post office in Sainte-Anne-de-la-Pérade) the Canadian newspapers La Presse and Le Journal de Montréal a "testament" letter; it was stamped on the 21st. could be reworded to The same day, the pair mailed the Canadian newspapers La Presse and Le Journal de Montréal a "testament" letter, from a post office in Sainte-Anne-de-la-Pérade; it was stamped on the 21st. or something similar. The current wording just kinda jumps around a bit. IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • changed it to your suggestion PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

   Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

• They had created a setup involving propane tanks, gas canisters, and stoves, designed to explode the house; three five-gallon canisters of gasoline were attached to three propane tanks and a timer. This wording doesn't make it clear who "they" are (almost sounds like "they" could be the children). IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:09, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
  • tried to make clearer by specifying the adults. This is only tangentially related, but now that I'm thinking about this I recall that I once read a source calling Didier Queze the "mastermind" of this one and saying that he had set up the machinery, but now I cannot find it. I will attempt to find it in a bit PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:39, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

    Thank you! IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

After checking, I have no idea where I read this. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:18, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

•  Done IntentionallyDense (talk) 20:57, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

I think that's all of what you pointed out. Anything else you see an issue in? PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 00:28, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that on the same day that the members of Heaven's Gate died in a mass suicide, five members of an unrelated group did the same thing?

• Source: Coleman, Loren L. (2004). "Cultic Copycats". The Copycat Effect: How the Media and Popular Culture Trigger the Mayhem in Tomorrow's Headlines. Simon & Schuster. ISBN 978-1-4165-0554-9, p. 84. "On March 22, 1997, just as the Heaven’s Gate thirty-nine were dying by suicide, a documentary film about the Order of the Solar Temple cult aired on French television, and, in what was probably not a coincidence, five members of the Order of the Solar Temple killed themselves that day in a “Christic Fire.”

• Reviewed:

Improved to Good Article status by PARAKANYAA (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:05, 2 October 2024 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ:

Overall: IntentionallyDense (talk) 01:45, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

No murder?

'This was the only OTS transit that ... was purely voluntary and did not involve murder'

Can't check the reference, but I believe that killing a person who asks you to kill them still counts as murder, so the killing of Druau would have to be murder, wouldn't it? As for 'purely voluntary' - well, 'pure' seems a strong word, since the cultists did try to kill their children twice involuntarily. 62.73.72.3 (talk) 01:53, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

If you kill someone who asks them to kill you it is probably more along the lines of assisted suicide, which when prosecuted is usually manslaughter not murder. Well, it might be tried as such in some jurisdictions. Depends on the circumstances, the country, and many factors but that is what the source says. A murder is not simply killing someone, but a specific legal thing, differentiated from other counts. Since there was no one alive to try, I suppose if they had abandoned the plot after Druau died it may have turned out differently but unlike the others none of the deaths here were declared to be murder by the authorities, which is not the case for the 1994 and 1995 transits.

It did not involve murder, but it did involve attempted murder. And then they stopped. Those are not the same thing, so I think it is fair to say. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:01, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Assisted suicide is defined in the article on the subject as 'the process by which a person, with the help of others, takes medications to end their own life' or otherwise as 'when another person materially helps an individual person die by suicide, such as providing tools or equipment'. This is contrasted with voluntary euthanasia, in which the doctor takes a more active role. So killing someone who asks them to kill you would be closer to voluntary euthanasia, not to assisted suicide, but such a description would still be absurd in this case, because euthanasia is 'the practice of intentionally ending life to eliminate pain and suffering' and does not include 'the practice of intentionally ending life to send a person to Sirius'. The description as 'manslaughter' doesn't seem to fit, since manslaughter is normally either involuntary or the result of the offender 'act[ing] "in the moment" under circumstances that could cause a reasonable person to become emotionally or mentally disturbed'. The OST believers were not 'acting in the moment' and their beliefs can hardly be described as those of reasonable persons. (Assisted suicide is apparently treated - illogically - as manslaughter in some US states, but the acts were committed in Canada.) All in all, deliberately killing someone is normally, by default, considered murder with the exception of certain very special cases, and I don't think that the fact the victim asked to be killed is enough to make it one of these cases. However, if the source does say explicitly that no murder was involved, the claim will have to stay, however wrong it may be in my opinion. I would just request a quotation to verify that the source does indeed say that.

Concerning the description 'purely voluntary' - if one means by 'transit' only the deaths that did occur, then it was voluntary, since these deaths were voluntary; but I think it makes more sense to use the term to refer to the entire proceeding intended to bring about a 'transition', and suggesting that said proceeding consistently respected consent is clearly incorrect. I see no reason to refer only to successful killings as 'true transit', since the successful killings produced an actual journey to Sirius precisely as much as the unsuccessful ones did. Again, if the source says it, there is nothing to do about it, but I would request a quote from the source that explicitly says that.--62.73.72.3 (talk) 07:13, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Our article on "assisted suicide" does not actually reflect the dictionary definition of suicide. It appears mostly to reflect medical assisted suicide, which is its own thing. Merriam Webster defines it thus: "the act of suicide carried out by someone with assistance from another person". Not strictly a medical professional. Oxford reference says: "The act of helping someone to commit suicide by giving them the means (e.g. drugs) to do so." So under not-Wikipedia's definition it is assisted suicide yes; though perhaps your comment about "voluntary euthanasia" is more accurate. There was no murder investigation and unlike the others it was not ruled as a murder after the fact. I can go look at the coroner reports if you want. Even if it is murder, no sources call it that, so we cannot call it that. Also, things kind of get weird when you're talking about mass suicide specifically.

Here is the quotation from page 242 of The Mystical Geography of Quebec:

"The 1997 transit, unlike the previous transits in 1994 and 1995, was a pure voluntary and ideologically driven group suicide". I guess I could remove "did not involve murder" but that's referred to before. PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

I rephrased this slightly. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:01, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

'So under not-Wikipedia's definition it is assisted suicide yes' - not really. Oxford reference says assisted suicide is 'the act of helping someone to commit suicide by giving them the means (e.g. drugs) to do so'. But they didn't just 'give Druau the means' to kill herself, they literally, physically killed her with their own hands. Merriam Webster's 'definition' is more of a syntactic operation than a definition - pretty much 'assisted suicide is suicide that someone assists': this does not address the question whether killing someone on their request is a suicide at all. The fact that there was no murder investigation does not necessarily mean that no murder took place, especially when the perpetrators were dead and could not be punished anyway. The general characterisation of the event as 'a pure voluntary and ideologically driven group suicide' stresses, again, the fact that it was voluntary, which is clear, but the idea that this characterisation excludes murder hinged on the idea that murder cannot be voluntary, which is, again debatable. Perhaps we may not call it murder in the absence of sources calling it that - although IMO it is too obvious to count as OR, but OK, I suppose the very fact of our discussion proves otherwise - but explicitly claiming that it did not involve murder seems excessive. --62.73.72.3 (talk) 10:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, so it no longer says that, I changed it some time ago. It just says it was the only purely voluntary one, which is probably the clearest way given the sourcing (explicitly saying no murder was a somewhat tortured, if accurate, reading of the text). That they killed her is undisputed, but killing is not murder, and Wikipedia has very specific guidelines on deeming something a killing/murder/death, see WP:DEATHS. Also I have never seen a source that calls this murder, and in the absence of a conviction, murder is a judgement call on whether one consider a killing to have the requisite attributes. We can't make the judgement, since that is WP:OR, and seemingly no one else has. Personally, the idea of calling a voluntary killing murder is ludicrous - murder is not just killing somebody, it is a specific thing and requires both a lack of justifiable reason and malice. Having someone else kill you is still suicide, because you still made the choice and action to die, you're just using someone else as a tool to do it. But that gets into broader arguments than the Sirius weirdos. PARAKANYAA (talk) 10:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)