Wikipedia:articles For Deletion List Of Mentally Ill Modern Era World Leaders

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. postdlf ( talk) 14:01, 6 July 2017 (UTC) reply

List of mentally ill modern era world leaders

(Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Mostly just speculation, I doubt any of the people listed received a formal diagnosis (and many lived before formal psychiatric diagnoses even existed). Basically any important world leader will be labelled mentally ill by his opponents. Fordiana ( talk) 09:04, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 09:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 09:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 09:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Delete, biased title and likely irrelevant intersection of topics (mental illness & world leadership) for many potential entries. I don't recall Churchill being bipolar is a talking point these days; I'm not saying he wasn't, but this is the first I've heard of it, so I personally can't imagine it came into play very much in his career. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 09:42, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply
Comment There is actually quite a bit of coverage of the topic of the relationship of leadership and mental illness with regard to world leaders [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] although it still seems a risky subject with WP:POV, WP:OR, and WP:BLP issues and I'm not sure we want to be labelling specific individuals without very good authority.

Winston Churchill's mental health has been very widely covered (as well as the previously cited sources see e.g. [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] and Winston Churchill#Mental and physical health), which isn't directly relevant except the previous comment seems to be arguing "I've not heard of this so it can't be notable". Although the extensive debate over Churchill's mental health provides a good illustration of why this is better covered in articles on individual people, rather than in a list like this. -- Colapeninsula ( talk) 11:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

( edit conflict) "Not playing very much into his career" isn't the same thing as "it's not notable". My point was that it's probably not something so emphasized about him that it's something he's particularly known for. People know him first as the charismatic leader of the UK in WWII sooner than they know he was bipolar. I've read quite a bit about him and based on what I do know I wouldn't assume he was bipolar. Besides, it's not relevant to the implied point of the list which includes such qualities as narcissism and megalomania among the worst dictators of all time, so the list is clearly seeking to use mental disorders as some kind of explanation for these people and how they behaved. It implies that at all times there is a connection between their use of their power and their diagnoses, which is probably a very WP:OR point more often than not. To me, it's more like, "He was a strong leader and happened to be bipolar," not, "He was bipolar which explains quite a lot that you might have heard about him." I imagine that's how it is for most people. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 11:41, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete Assigning mental disorder diagnosis to long dead people is just straight up speculation even if its reported by a reputable source. ★Trekker ( talk) 13:56, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete as largely unfounded speculation. XOR'easter ( talk) 16:47, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply
- Addendum – We already have an article on retrospective diagnosis, which points out how fallible the whole practice is. XOR'easter ( talk) 17:51, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete Speculative pseudo-history, same as the one regarding monarchs. Saying 'in most cases this is problematic' is in no way sufficient to disclaim the article. ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador ^ᐁT₳LKᐃ 17:03, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

I purposefully did not nominate the monarchs list as I feel that the "mad monarch" is an actual trope that is often written about. Fordiana ( talk) 05:28, 30 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:34, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply

Delete per nom. This is irresponsible, sloppy work. Chris Troutman ( talk) 21:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete -- I do not believe there is likely to be a proper diagnosis in any of these cases. These are all retrospective views of historians. Note, I am taking a different view of "mad" monarchs. Peterkingiron ( talk) 21:52, 29 June 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete as per nom. Midnightblueowl ( talk) 15:08, 30 June 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete. Inclusion here is largely speculative, not based on medical records confirming a diagnosis; there's no WP:DEFINING relationship between being a political leader and having a mental illness (as I've said elsewhere, "List of X who are also Q" is not a thing we do if X and Q are unconnected traits); and checking the edit history, I see constant editwarring from people trying to add Donald Trump to the list — exactly the kind of extreme WP:BLP violation we must avoid at all costs, forcing permanent page protection and making it not worth the hassle. Kill with fire and WP:SALT. Bearcat ( talk) 23:05, 30 June 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete. Seeing the title made me laugh, so there's one moment's pleasure out of this. Otherwise this is subjective OR with potential serious BLP issues as Bearcat points out. A poor idea from the beginning. -- Lockley ( talk) 07:37, 1 July 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete There's a long, long list of reasons why this list article is a terrible idea. Launch this article into the sun ASAP. Exemplo347 ( talk) 21:02, 1 July 2017 (UTC) reply
Delete Highly speculative, retrospective diagnosis which is always problematic. -- HighFlyingFish ( talk) 21:52, 1 July 2017 (UTC) reply
It's a balmy summer where I live, but I think it's WP:SNOWing outside... Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 09:26, 3 July 2017 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.