An individual human, animal or other biological organism that has recently died may have an entry in the recent deaths (RD) section if it has a biographical Wikipedia article that is:
Not currently nominated for deletion or speedy deletion.
Updated, including reliably sourced confirmation of their death.
Ofsufficient quality to be posted on the main page, as determined by a consensus of commenters.
"Recently died" means their death was announced within the last seven days.
This does not apply to species (or higher taxonomic groupings) or non-living entities.
Individuals who do not have their own article but who have significant coverage on an article about a group (e.g. one member of a musical group) are eligible for a recent deaths entry on a case-by-case basis.
Individuals who disappear are eligible for a recent deaths entry for the day they aredeclared deadin absentia, subject to the standard criteria above if there is no concurrent blurb about the disappearance.
It is often contentious whether a death that qualifies for "recent deaths" should instead merit a blurb. In general, the following criteria are used to decide this:
Life as the main story: For deaths where the person's life is the main story, where the news reporting of the death consists solely of obituaries, or where the update to the article in question is merely a statement of the time and cause of death, the "recent deaths" section is usually used.
Death as the main story: For deaths where the cause of death itself is a major story (such as the unexpected death of a prominent figure by homicide, suicide, or accident) or where the events surrounding the death merit additional explanation (such as ongoing investigations, major stories about memorial services or international reactions, etc.) a blurb may be merited to explain the death's relevance. In general, if a person's death isonly notable for what they did while alive, it belongs as an RD link. If the person's deathitself is newsworthy for either the manner of death or the newsworthy reaction to it, it may merit a blurb.
Major figures: The death of major figures may merit a blurb. These cases are rare, and are usually posted on asui generis basis through a discussion atWP:ITNC that determines there isconsensus that the death merits a blurb. Comparisons to deaths of prior persons (we posted John Doe, so we should also post Jane Smith, or conversely we didn't post Bill Jones, so we cannot post Susie Johnson) are rarely considered sufficient to post in absence of consensus. One should also be wary ofpuffery in obituaries for a recently deceased person – using terms such as "legendary", "greatest of all time", "household name", etc.
In cases where a blurb has been suggested for a recent death, but there is debate about whether to use a blurb or not, but the article is otherwise updated and of quality by editorial consensus, the name may be posted as a Recent Death while the blurb discussion continues.
The section does not detail people and deaths (e.g. occupation, age, and cause of death) due to the size and length of the Main Page. Regardless of a blurb or a "recent death" listing, the article on the person in question must still comply with the article requirements listed above, particularlyWP:BLP which still applies to those who have recently died.
