Talk:2023 Nashville school shooting: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Justanother2 (talk | contribs) Talk |
Undid revision 1267378932 by 2603:8001:E600:5A40:D4FB:A9D5:1A5F:A92A (talk) Disruptive |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header|}} |
|||
{{talkpage||archive_units=days|archive_age=7}} |
|||
{{Skip to talk}} |
|||
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|gg|long}} |
|||
{{Not a forum}} |
|||
{{contentious topics/page restriction talk notice|gg|consensus-required=yes|protection=semi}} |
|||
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|gc|brief}} |
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|gc|brief}} |
||
{{Recruiting}} |
|||
{{American English}} |
{{American English}} |
||
{{Old moves |
|||
{{WikiProject banner shell|blpo=yes|collapsed=yes|1= |
|||
| list = |
|||
{{WP Christianity|class=C}} |
|||
* RM, 2023 Covenant School shooting → Covenant School shooting, '''No consensus''', 28 March 2023, [[Special:Permalink/1148605671#Requested_move_28_March_2023|Requested move 28 March 2023]] |
|||
{{WikiProject Crime |class=C|importance=Low}} |
|||
* RM, 2023 Covenant School shooting → Nashville school shooting, '''Moved to 2023 Nashville school shooting''', 7 April 2023, [[Special:Permalink/1149909218#Requested move 7 April 2023|Requested move 7 April 2023]] |
|||
{{WikiProject Current events}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Death |class=C|importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Firearms |class=C|importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WP Gender studies|class=C}} |
|||
{{WPLE|class=C}} |
|||
{{WikiProject LGBT studies |class=C}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Politics|American=y|gun-politics=y|class=Start |importance=Low}} |
|||
{{serial killer}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Tennessee |class=Start |importance=Low}} |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
{{Annual readership}} |
|||
{{pageviews}} |
|||
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}} |
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}} |
||
{{WikiProject banner shell|blp=other|class=C|collapsed=yes| |
|||
{{WikiProject Christianity|importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=Low|serialkiller=yes|serialkiller-imp=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Death|importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Firearms|importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Gender studies|importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Law Enforcement|importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=Low|American=yes|American-importance=Low|gun-politics=yes|gun-politics-importance=Low}} |
|||
{{WikiProject Tennessee|importance=Low}} |
|||
}} |
|||
{{Top 25 Report|Mar 26 2023}} |
|||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
||
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
||
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
||
|counter = |
|counter = 7 |
||
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
||
|algo = old(7d) |
|algo = old(7d) |
||
|archive = Talk:2023 |
|archive = Talk:2023 Nashville school shooting/Archive %(counter)d |
||
}} |
}} |
||
== RfC on inclusion of Nashville school shooter's manifesto release == |
|||
== Deadname == |
|||
Can we use the correct name for the perp? [[Special:Contributions/72.89.27.178|72.89.27.178]] ([[User talk:72.89.27.178|talk]]) 03:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:See several of the recent discussions above — we're trying to find a reliable source that notes the correct name. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|talk]]) 03:17, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Disagree that it is the "correct" name, the perp's social media profile was shown to employ the name Audrey Hale alongside "(He/Him)".— '''[[User talk:Crumpled Fire|<span style="font-family: Lucida Fax; color: #2695A9">Crumpled Fire</span>]]'''<small> • ''[[Special:Contributions/Crumpled Fire|contribs]]'' •</small> 03:29, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Indeed, but (while it's not yet evidence in the "reliable source" sense) I can't imagine why the shooter would write "Aiden" on the gun if it wasn't the name he was going by. Agree that there's not yet justification to include it, though. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|talk]]) 03:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Yes, but even if "Aiden" is later confirmed as the first name Hale was using, there's the challenging question of whether [[MOS:GENDERID]] precludes us from including the birthname. The letter of the MOS states (my bold): "If a '''''living''''' transgender or non-binary person '''''was not notable under a former name''''' (a deadname), it should not be included in any page". Hale is not living, and, due to the widespread reporting of the name "Audrey Hale", '''is''' technically notable under that name, just like how we use "Ellen Page" on the [[Elliot Page]] article because Page was notable under the former name.— '''[[User talk:Crumpled Fire|<span style="font-family: Lucida Fax; color: #2695A9">Crumpled Fire</span>]]'''<small> • ''[[Special:Contributions/Crumpled Fire|contribs]]'' •</small> 03:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Hm, that raises the question of whether a deadname's notability due to mis- or incomplete reporting is considered notability for the purposes of GENDERID. Can notability be conferred for that purpose by the initial statements of police, even if later proven false? Curious if a situation like that has ever come up before. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|talk]]) 03:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::[[MOS:GENDERID]] is part of [[MOS:BLP]], which includes the recently deceased. --[[User:Pokelova|Pokelova]] ([[User talk:Pokelova|talk]]) 04:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::@[[User:Crumpled Fire|Crumpled Fire]] fwiw, [[WP:BLP]] applies to the recently dead so I think GENDERID would too. [[User:EvergreenFir|'''<span style="color:#8b00ff;">Eve</span><span style="color:#6528c2;">rgr</span><span style="color:#3f5184;">een</span><span style="color:#197947;">Fir</span>''']] [[User talk:EvergreenFir|(talk)]] 05:25, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::In evaluating administrative action on this article and talk page, I ended up with not enforcing the BLP policy as it generally does not apply to people confirmed dead by reliable sources, and applying it to dead people in this case would be an editorial rather than administrative decision (see the wording of [[WP:BDP]]). [[User:ToBeFree|~ ToBeFree]] ([[User talk:ToBeFree|talk]]) 05:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::BDP states: "'''The only exception would be for people who have recently died''', in which case the policy can extend '''based on editorial consensus''' for an indeterminate period beyond the date of death—six months, one year, two years at the outside. '''Such extensions would only apply to contentious or questionable material about the subject that has implications for their living relatives and friends''', such as in the case of a possible suicide or particularly gruesome crime." (bolding mine) |
|||
:::::::Given that this appears to be up to editorial consensus, what are people's thoughts as to whether the subject's name should be considered contentious material with implications for his living relatives and friends? [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|talk]]) 06:16, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::This reasoning in [[Talk:Gloria Hemingway#Requested_move_4_February_2022|this move discussion]] from last year might be pertinent, in which consensus was to change the subject's name away from her deadname, despite her being deceased and the majority of sources only using her deadname. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|talk]]) 06:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::<p>Yeah that move is a useful comparison. This is a complicated case and I don't think stuff like Page is particularly useful as a comparison. While shooters are sometimes notable from their shootings, it seems too early to conclude that here, they may not be notable point blank therefore it's impossible for them to me notable under a previous name. </p><p>Also if the are notable and for that matter in so much as we need to cover them in this article, the reason we have to cover them arose from them being a shooter i.e. from just before they died. I'm fairly sure Hale didn't yell a completely new name at the police or victims of the shooting, so whatever name they had was from ''before'' whatever it is that requires coverage or which makes them notable. (In other words, they were already using whatever name it is, possibly Aiden, at the time of the shooting.) </p><p>The fact that in a late breaking news situation sources may have originally used a name (and pronouns) which may not have been their latest preferred name doesn't mean they were ever notable under this name IMO. </p><p>However given how widespread the name was in early sources and I expect it is likely to be in a fair amount of continuing coverage and maybe even from the police, while we might be able to respect DEADNAME in terms of which name we choose to make the main name we use, I'm not sure we can actually exclude the name completely like we are supposed to when the subject wasn't notable under that name. </p><p>Their death also means it's likely we'll only have social media posts, perhaps some stuff from their 'manifesto', and whatever they told family and friends; to guide us. (Although most of this isn't particularly unique, I can think of at least two recent cases were it arises.) </p><p>[[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 07:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)</p> |
|||
::::::::::This I think is a case of [[WP:RS]] and [[MOS:GENDERID]] being in conflict. In this case, I would suggest [[WP:RS]] takes precedence. I think the best idea is to wait until this resolves itself as more sources start using the correct name. [[User:Theheezy|Theheezy]] ([[User talk:Theheezy|talk]]) 17:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/03/28/us/nashville-school-shooting-tennessee [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 14:57, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::Do we not consider this to be a reliable source? [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 14:58, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::Whenever RS and GENDERID are in conflict, which happens sadly but not unsurprisingly often with regards to trans and non-binary people, it is ''always'' best practice to follow the subject's most recently expressed name and identity, even when this conflicts with the most commonly used name or terminology used in reliable sources. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 00:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::I agree. I understand why RS is important and that it isn't good to set a precedent to have something outweigh that, but I don't think that's what we would be doing. NYT reported that he publicly asked to be called Aiden, a name that we know he chose for himself as part of his transition. we have already agreed to mention his transition in the article and use he/him pronouns- there's no evidence he would be going by his birth name after choosing a new name aside from the fact that people we know were not accepting of his transition refer to him by his birthname (in conjunction with she/her pronouns, which we know he also didn't use), that he included his birth name along with his preferred name in a message to someone who he hadn't spoken to since changing his name (very common during a name change), and that RS are using his birth name because that's what the police, who are not a RS, used to refer to him prior to the reporting about his transition. trans people's identities have always been and will always be contentious and subject to erasure, and a RS like NYT using someone's birth name when referring to police reports but explicitly saying he used a different name along with all of the other evidence of his transition is certainly enough for us to use his new name with a mention that his birth name is still being used to refer to him because all of the information being reported on is based on police reports using his old name. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 03:34, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::The story goes that a former teacher said she saw a [[Facebook post]] sometime after 2017 wherein Audrey ''asked'' to be called Aiden. Not all posts are public and we don't know who was asked or why. We do know we often ask for things we don't get, or get called things we didn't ask to be. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 07:51, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::He asked to be called Aiden and be referred to with he/him pronouns, he changed all of his social media to the name Aiden, and it's been reported that he was trans. what exactly don't we know? [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 15:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::https://www.newschannel5.com/news/she-checked-her-instagram-she-didnt-expect-a-message-from-the-covenant-school-shooter is this not the most recent expression of Audrey? She signed it with her birth name, with her trans-identified name in parenthesis. [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 13:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::And what did her best friend in the whole wide world (and ''maybe'' beyond) immediately reply? "Audrey!" Audrey didn't seem to mind being "deadnamed" a bit, so it likely wasn't as big a deal at the time, in the end. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 14:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::his best friend? as we've already addressed, this person was a middleschool basketball teammate who he did not speak to often. https://abcnews.go.com/US/friend-contacted-authorities-after-speaking-nashville-shooter-audrey/story?id=98182991 You can also see in the newschannel5 story that he messaged this person through an account under the name Aiden, which is an additional reason he would include his birthname at the bottom despite going by Aiden. |
|||
:::::::::::::If I knew someone had enough information to stop me from committing a crime I was immenantly about to commit, especially one that ends in my death, I would not continue the conversation to tell them about the importance of respecting a trans person's identity. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 15:27, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::She didn't say she was going to commit a crime, she said she was planning on dying. And her friend ''did'' know and care enough to try and save her from herself, to no avail. Now that friend's left knowing Audrey trusted her more than anyone, even her parents, and she's fine with using "she/her" pronouns in public. Us strangers with no reason at all to respect "the shooter" (by any pronoun or name) should find it even easier to accept the mainstream view. For trans folk ''in general'', sure, fight for the rights till they're equal. But don't lose sight of ''this'' tree in the wider sex and gender woods. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 15:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::::HE was on HIS way to commit a crime and knew that his friend had enough information to inform the police he was planning to kill himself, which could have prevented him from committing the crime. He made it clear that he used the name Aiden and he/him pronouns, whether or not people respect that is irrelevant. We do not get to change the rules for respecting trans identities because we don't like the person in question, this issue effects the whole trans community not just this one person. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 15:48, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::::I have it on good authority (newswires, police, recently professed best friend) that Audrey was a woman. And a woman who acted too fast for that friend to get through to police. Disrespecting a highly atypical mass murderer who was evidently fine with being called Audrey during her last half hour is no disrespect to anybody else, including trans or autistic men, women and children. And it's no disrespect to her, because she wanted to kill and die and got her wishes seven times over. That's already more placation than ''this'' extreme outlier should have gotten in life, in my opinion. Not in yours. I understand. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 16:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::::::You do not get to decide what is disrespectful to the trans community, and your opinion is not relevant because it goes against WP:DEADNAME and WP:RS. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 16:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::::::We're lucky then that Wikipedia doesn't publish what is respectful, only what is verifiable from reliable sources. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 16:18, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::::::I get to decide ''what I think'' is the proper respect I show to all mortal beings. We're distant cousins and ''some of us'' are friends, we've spent our lives together, generally. In this case, specifically, fuck Audrey Hale ''and'' the three guns she rode in with. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 16:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::::::::So in addition to refusing to acknowledge reliably sourced information, proposing we go agains WP:DEADNAME, and generally not having a NPOV while sharing your opinion all over this talk page, you also have a previously undisclosed COI? Again, what respect you think people do or don't deserve has absolutely no bearing on wikipedia. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 16:49, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::::::::If acknowledging we all have common ancestors, breathe the same air and bleed the same blood counts as disclosing a conflict of interest, sure. I guess I'll stay away from mortal being articles, lest my bias make me partial. And yes, I've repeatedly acknowledged reliably sourced information, it says she was a woman who ''may have'' wanted to be addressed as a man and her name in the real world, offline, was exactly what every RS says it was. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 17:27, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I've [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_LGBT_studies&diff=1146984551&oldid=1146758709 alerted WikiProject LGBT Studies] to the multiple discussions on this talk page regarding the suspect's name and gender identity. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 04:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::As I understand it, the shooter's full name was Audrey Elizabeth Hale ([https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/28/us/covenant-school-shooting-nashville-tennessee-tuesday CNN], [https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/28/us/audrey-hale-nashville-school-shooting/index.html CNN]). The fact that she used other names, like Aiden ([https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/28/us/audrey-hale-nashville-school-shooting/index.html CNN]) I think is another piece of information about the profile of the shooter that could be included as a fact in the article. |
|||
::Whether the nickname or legal name is the one used repeatedly throughout the wiki article when referring to her, I guess that is something that could be determined on how most reliable sources go about it. Generally, I don't believe that a person's nicknames and preferred way of being called should have much weight in how an encyclopedic article talks about them, even more so for shooters. There are many historical figures that had preferred names other than their legal name. For example John F. Kennedy went by Jack with his friends and family. The Wikipedia article on him makes a brief mention of it but mostly sticks with his formal/legal name. [[User:Al83tito|Al83tito]] ([[User talk:Al83tito|talk]]) 18:31, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::He was transitioning to using the name Aiden, it was not a nickname and if he had not died would most likely have been his legal name at some point. Your opinion on chosen names has no bearing on Wikipedia's conventions, and Wikipedia conventions (and respect for the trans community) don't change based on what the person was notable for. JFK going by Jack in some circles is not the same as a trans person changing their name. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 18:36, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
* Given how much RS have reported "Audrey", if we fail to do so, we may confuse readers, and this is a disservice to readers. Also, since the subject is dead, there is no harm to the subject in using the old name. '''[[User:Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">starship</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">.paint</span>]] ([[User talk:Starship.paint|exalt]])''' 06:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*:Setting aside the topic of harm — I wouldn't advocate for excluding the deadname entirely, as it has indeed been reported enough to where its inclusion is inevitable, but I do think there's a strong argument for changing the primary name used in the article to Aiden. |
|||
*:"Aiden Elizabeth Hale, who also went by the name Audrey" instead of the other way around as it is now. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|talk]]) 06:55, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*::How do you know it's "Aiden Elizabeth Hale" and not "Aiden Hale"? '''[[User:Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">starship</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">.paint</span>]] ([[User talk:Starship.paint|exalt]])''' 07:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Fair point; I was assuming Elizabeth was the middle name and that it wouldn't change, but it would be safer to just say "Aiden Hale, who also..." [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|talk]]) 07:28, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*::::Is there anything out there suggesting it wasn't going to just be "Aiden" (like Shakira or Virgil or Poppy)? [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 07:47, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::(Well, I've been hearing a lot about this "Occam" guy lately...) [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|talk]]) 08:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*::::::You can't be ''too'' rational if you want to empathize with someone who shoots strangers in a school ''or'' church to death, it's been said. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 08:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*:this argument is disingenuous. if readers can't understand "Aiden, formerly known as Audrey" that's not wikipedia's problem. there's more than enough precedent to use the name Aiden in this article. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 15:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:From the reliable sources that have already been cited in this article, here's a non-exhaustive (rather, chosen to avoid overlap) list of references to the shooter actively using and stating a preference for the name "Aiden". |
|||
:''Sources that quote people the shooter had known or the shooter himself:'' |
|||
:[https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/31/us/covenant-school-shooting-nashville-tennessee-friday/index.html CNN], sourced to former instructor: "Over the last year, Hale posted on Facebook about the death of a girl with whom Hale apparently played basketball and a request to be referred to by the name Aiden and male pronouns, according to Maria Colomy, a teacher who taught Hale for two semesters in 2017." |
|||
:[https://apnews.com/article/nashville-covenant-school-shooting-updates-3dfb2fcbb22ff8638074fd90c7b266fd AP], ditto: "Hale had “been very publicly grieving” on Facebook, Colomy said. “It was during that grief (Hale) said, ’In this person’s honor, I am going to be the person who I want to be, and I want to be called Aiden.’”" |
|||
:[https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/30/us/covenant-school-shooting-nashville-tennessee-thursday/index.html CNN], sourced to former classmate #1: "In a social media post last year, Hale wanted to go by the name Aiden, Cody said." |
|||
:[https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/details-nashville-shooters-gender-identity-sow-confusion-disinformatio-rcna77424 NBC News], sourced to former classmate #2: "She added that Hale began using a different name on social media “in the last year or two maybe.”" |
|||
:[https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nashville-school-shooter-messaged-ex-teammate-shortly-massacre-rcna76964 NBC News], sourced to screenshots provided by former teammate: "In the first message sent to Patton, Hale signed it as "Audrey (Aiden)."" |
|||
:''Sources that reference the shooter's social media accounts and such:'' |
|||
:[https://fox17.com/news/local/nashville-school-shooter-emblazoned-weapons-with-possible-personal-references-tennessee-green-hills-mass-shooting-the-covenant-school WZTV Nashville]: "One of the weapons, an assault rifle as described by police, has the word "Aiden" written on the stock of the rifle. The name is also part of a social media profile used by Hale. On the profile, which has been since removed, Hale listed social links which included links to "creative.aiden" and "Aiden Creates" under Hale's 'About' section." |
|||
:[https://apnews.com/article/tennessee-school-shooting-protest-e1421ec12e8eb28851de7627d9e4e9af AP]: "Social media accounts and other sources indicate that the shooter identified as a man and might have recently begun using the first name Aiden." |
|||
:[https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2023/03/28/nashville-shooter-audrey-hale-instagram-dms-covenant-school/70055736007/ The Tennessean]: "Hale, who at this point used male pronouns and the name "Aiden" on his Instagram profile, told Patton that a post he had made on March 13 was really a suicide note." |
|||
:[https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/details-nashville-shooters-gender-identity-sow-confusion-disinformatio-rcna77424 NBC News]: "Hale’s website, which has since been taken down, linked to an Instagram account where Hale used the name Aiden." |
|||
:If all of this isn't enough to change the primary name to Aiden (while still keeping a "who also went by Audrey" in the article) per GENDERID, RS, precedent, and established best practices — I'd like to hear the rationale for why not. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|talk]]) 08:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Because the reliable sources that note it was what the killer seems to have wanted call him Audrey. Some call Audrey "her". But I've yet to see a source only or primarily call Audrey Aiden. Audrey will ''always'' be this dead person's common name, it's mathematically assured. This "Aiden" request is worth a mention. But more than who we think we are, we are the way we're remembered by others, and this is not any different for a cis or peaceful person. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 08:56, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::In the very last message Audrey sent to her friend, she signed it with her birth name in addition to her trans-identified name.<ref>https://www.newschannel5.com/news/she-checked-her-instagram-she-didnt-expect-a-message-from-the-covenant-school-shooter</ref> This has been widely covered by RS. We can't ask her if that's what she preferred and it simply illustrates how conflicted this young woman was. RS uses her birth name prolifically and we can explain the context quite well given the amount of coverage this event has. The policies re: [[WP:DEADNAME]] don't apply here because she's dead. [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 13:20, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::We don't have to ask what name he preffered, he told everyone who followed him on social media and they have reported it to reliable sources. implying that his transness was related to the issues that led him to commit this crime is unbelievably transphobic. |
|||
:::WP:DEADNAME does not say we can use whatever name we want in the event the subject is deceased. it does say "Refer to any person whose gender might be questioned with gendered words (e.g. pronouns, man/woman/person, waiter/waitress/server) that reflect the person's most recent expressed gender self-identification as reported in the most recent reliable sources, even if it does not match what is most common in sources. This holds for any phase of the person's life, unless they have indicated a preference otherwise." which we should be extending to his name. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 15:42, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Ditto. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 15:31, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I updated the article to use the name Aiden Hale in light of all of that reliable sourcing as well as WP:DEADNAME and was told to bring it to the talk page, even though this was the last relevant thing that was stated and is clearly in line with wikipedia's manual of style. Hale did not also use the name Audrey except where he was speaking to someone who was not aware of his name change. We have no reliable sources stating that he was still using the name Audrey. The fact that some people have not used the correct name for him is not relevant. In addition to all of the sources you listed here we also have https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/03/28/us/nashville-school-shooting-tennessee. I will be updating the article again to be in line with WP:DEADNAME and WP:RS [[User:Tekrmn|Tekrmn]] ([[User talk:Tekrmn|talk]]) 15:34, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2023_Covenant_School_shooting&diff=prev&oldid=1148220272 This] is bullshit. "Aiden Hale" is something ''you'' synthesized. Police haven't changed their tune. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 21:39, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::feel free to provide a reliable source saying he didn't go by that name. [[User:Tekrmn|Tekrmn]] ([[User talk:Tekrmn|talk]]) 21:56, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::That's not how this works. You're supposed to source the claim. As it stands, both inline citations only mention the real full name (one in the headline itself). [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 22:10, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I did source my claim, which is why you would need to source to revert the article. If you're referring to the citations you marked, I did not include those citations and I don't believe they were intended to show that he went by Aiden. [[User:Tekrmn|Tekrmn]] ([[User talk:Tekrmn|talk]]) 22:16, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::You claimed Aiden Hale was identified as the shooter. Your source opens: {{tq|The suspected shooter who killed six people, including three children, at a Christian elementary school in Nashville, Tennessee, has been identified as ''Audrey Elizabeth'' Hale.}} That's textbook incompetence, and [[WP:CIR|competence is required]]. If you're not willing to learn, go away. If you are, welcome to Wikipedia! [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 22:33, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Again, that was not my source. |
|||
::::::::The sentence after "Aiden Hale was identified as the shooter." is "Police initially identified him as a woman '''using his birth name''', but authorities later reported he was a transgender man." |
|||
::::::::Additionally, the person who the police identified as the shooter was Aiden Hale. I made it clear that he was identified under a different name. The way these two sentences were written is in keeping with WP:DEADNAME. [[User:Tekrmn|Tekrmn]] ([[User talk:Tekrmn|talk]]) 22:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::I said it was your claim. By making your claim next to a contradictory source, you've helped make Wikipedia a less trustworthy place. Accidents happen; will you ''now'' either change the source to match your claim or change your claim to match the source? [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 22:49, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::[https://www.kwtx.com/2023/03/28/what-we-know-about-alleged-nashville-school-shooter/ KWTX] quite clearly state "Aiden Hale" in their March 28th article. This is pretty clearly not a case of synthesis based on that article alone. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:44, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::That's a caption, not a source, and doesn't say that's how the shooter "was identified", unlike the multitude of sources which correctly do. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 22:49, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Hulk you made the claim that ''name'' Aiden Hale was [[WP:SYNTH|synthesis]] when you said {{tq|"Aiden Hale" is something you synthesized.}} Regardless of whatever else that article states, the fact that the KWTX article uses Aiden Hale means that name cannot be synthesis, at least as far as we define the term on wiki. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:53, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Fine, I was wrong. It was something someone saw in a caption. It's still at odds with the way the police, reporters and real life acquaintances identified and continue to identify her, per reliable sources. I get not wanting to make a living transgender person feel bad, in general. But in ''this'' specific case, the dead mass murderer feels nothing and you're all taking this to a rather nutty extreme. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 23:14, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::The protections that are founded upon the [[WP:BLP|BLP policy]] are not just there to protect our article subjects, they're also there to protect the family, friends, and loved ones of our article subjects. Yes Hale is dead, but people who knew him are not. By disrespecting him, no matter how heinous the crime he may have committed, we are also disrespecting the people that Hale cared about and who cared about him. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:18, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::See, that's what I mean by a nutty extreme. Calling a murderer widely and posthumously identified as Audrey Elizabeth Hale "Audrey" is somehow a danger to her family, friends and loved ones, who don't seem to have known she thought she was a man, up to 30 minutes before she went postal. ''And'' the loved ones of ''other'' article subjects, somehow. Right. As I said on my Talk, I'll let you think about it for eight more days. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 23:32, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::Your opinion doesn't matter. There are reliable sources stating that he went by Aiden, and the way his name is used in this article is the way it should be according to the wikipedia manual of style. If you can't provide a reliable source that says he wanted to go by his birth name then you have nothing of any relevance to contribue to this article or talk page. Your edits are vandalism at this point. [[User:Tekrmn|Tekrmn]] ([[User talk:Tekrmn|talk]]) 23:41, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::[https://www.newschannel5.com/news/she-checked-her-instagram-she-didnt-expect-a-message-from-the-covenant-school-shooter She signs "Audrey", first and foremost (Aiden parenthetically, as if optional). Her loved one chooses to reply "Audrey!" Audrey is unoffended and still thinks she's beautiful.] [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 23:50, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::We've had this conversation twice already, but he used his birth name in that message because he was using an account under the name Aiden, which the person he was messaging didn't know him by. Your claim that he was unoffended is based on literally nothing and wouldn't be relevant even if it were verifiable. Additionally, this does not in any way indicate that he wanted to go by his birth name, let alone explicitly show that to be the case. This is not a reliable source for your claim and you know it. [[User:Tekrmn|Tekrmn]] ([[User talk:Tekrmn|talk]]) 00:00, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::I know what I know. I didn't know you use two usernames here. Now I do and am sorry your two identities made me repeat myself. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 00:08, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::I don't use two usernames, I changed my username. Either way this is a discussion we have had three times (twice under this username) now despite the fact that you are making baseless claims. I'm not going to respond to you again unless you vandalize this article again or come up with a reliable source to verify your claims. [[User:Tekrmn|Tekrmn]] ([[User talk:Tekrmn|talk]]) 00:13, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::::The only user I've talked about this to went by "Derekeaaron1". [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 00:26, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::A quick search on social media does reveal some people, some who say they knew Hale, expressing various degrees of frustration, anger, and sadness towards the misgendering and misnaming of Hale, both by the Nashville police and in the wider media. This is one of the areas where we can and should do better, regardless of the crimes that Hale may have committed. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:45, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Hulk brings up an interesting point above. We know this person named themselves as “Aiden”, but did they ever name themselves as “Aiden Hale”? We shouldn’t assume. '''[[User:Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">starship</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">.paint</span>]] ([[User talk:Starship.paint|exalt]])''' 14:42, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:If he was changing his last name he would have made that clear in his social media posts or name. [[User:Derekeaaron1|Derekeaaron1]] ([[User talk:Derekeaaron1|talk]]) 15:43, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Did he actually state that he was still using his last name with Aiden? '''[[User:Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">starship</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">.paint</span>]] ([[User talk:Starship.paint|exalt]])''' 03:16, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::not to my knowledge, but why would we assume he changed his last name with no evidence??? especially given that we still aren't using his new first name despite there being tons of reliable sources reporting that Aiden was indeed his preferred name. [[User:Tekrmn|Tekrmn]] ([[User talk:Tekrmn|talk]]) 05:20, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::I'm not saying assume he changed his last name, I'm saying don't assume that he didn't change his last name. '''[[User:Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">starship</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">.paint</span>]] ([[User talk:Starship.paint|exalt]])''' 03:10, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::[[Mononym]]! [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 03:31, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
* I have reverted an undiscussed edit by [[User:Justanother2]] that had changed Aiden to Audrey. Justanother2, please do not make edits like that without achieving consensus or at least discussing, especially if a discussion is already ongoing. Everyone else, please feel free to change back to Audrey if consensus emerges so. [[User:Soni|Soni]] ([[User talk:Soni|talk]]) 02:42, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
You run exactly nothing on here, Soni. You're wrong, continue to be, and do not address me.[[User:Justanother2|Justanother2]] ([[User talk:Justanother2|talk]]) 02:50, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== weapon type should be removed == |
|||
Listing the specific weapons should be removed. They do not need to be named/ made known. "Gun violence" is enough to describe the shooting. No need to give details that may create interest in these weapons. [[Special:Contributions/2406:E003:18DE:1C01:86B7:16AC:532C:6E7A|2406:E003:18DE:1C01:86B7:16AC:532C:6E7A]] ([[User talk:2406:E003:18DE:1C01:86B7:16AC:532C:6E7A|talk]]) 06:50, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Wikipedia is [[WP:NOTCENSORED]]. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|talk]]) 06:58, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I see your NOTCENSORED, and raise you a [[WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE]]. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 07:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Touché. I had the infoboxes for Columbine, Sandy Hook, Uvalde, etc in mind; but definitely worth removing for now if unsourced. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:7472:BF3A:464B:A1FE|talk]]) 07:24, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I've removed them as they were unsourced, they also are not mentioned in such detail in the article body, and infobox values typically need to exist in the body as well. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 07:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Once reliable sources discuss the details of the weapons extensively, those details should be added back to the article. Hint: None was a [[lever action]] [[30-06]] [[Winchester rifle|Winchester hunting rifle]] like the one I owned as a teenager over 50 years ago. [[User:Cullen328|Cullen328]] ([[User talk:Cullen328|talk]]) 07:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{u|JBW95}} continues to add them without adding sources, I've removed them again. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 16:17, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::There's a source that gives the types of all three: KelTec SUB2000 (as CNN says), a Grunt .300 Blackout, and a S&W M&P9 Shield EZ. Shall it be included?<ref>{{cite news |last1=Rahman |first1=Khaleda |title=What we know about the guns used in Nashville school shooting |url=https://www.newsweek.com/what-we-know-guns-nashville-school-shooting-1790784 |access-date=29 March 2023 |work=Newsweek |date=28 March 2023 |language=en}}</ref> [[User:Etnguyen03|Etnguyen03]] ([[User talk:Etnguyen03|talk]]) 02:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Newsweek is generally [[WP:NEWSWEEK|not considered a reliable source]]. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:E07E:FFB:80F2:8234|2600:1700:87D3:3460:E07E:FFB:80F2:8234]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:E07E:FFB:80F2:8234|talk]]) 02:25, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::@[[User:Etnguyen03|Etnguyen03]]: Could you link the CNN article? Per [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#CNN|WP:CNN]] it's a reliable source [[User:A09|A09]] ([[User talk:A09|talk]]) 13:12, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::There are a few sources I found while I'm at it: CNN (Kel-Tec)<ref>{{cite news |last1=Levenson |first1=Eric |last2=Alonso |first2=Melissa |last3=Salahieh |first3=Nouran |title=Covenant School shooter was under care for emotional disorder and hid guns at home, police say |url=https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/28/us/covenant-school-shooting-nashville-tennessee-tuesday/index.html |access-date=29 March 2023 |work=CNN |date=28 March 2023 |language=en |quote=Three weapons – an AR-15, a Kel-Tec SUB 2000, and a handgun – were found at the school}}</ref>, Euronews (Grunt)<ref>{{cite news |last1=Khatsenkova |first1=Sophia |title=Nashville: Has the same gun type been used by mass shooters in the US? |url=https://www.euronews.com/2023/03/29/have-all-recent-mass-shootings-in-the-us-been-carried-out-using-the-same-type-of-gun |access-date=29 March 2023 |work=euronews |date=29 March 2023 |language=en}}</ref>, and Guardian (S&W)<ref>{{cite news |last1=Pilkington |first1=Ed |title=Nashville shooting: what it reveals about Americans’ love of military-style guns |url=https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/28/nashville-shooting-assault-guns-marketing-profits |access-date=29 March 2023 |work=The Guardian |date=29 March 2023}}</ref>. [[User:Etnguyen03|Etnguyen03]] ([[User talk:Etnguyen03|talk]]) 13:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Dude you took issue with the name of the gun, but forget the external video is showing the perperator armed and walking in the school💀. [[User:Illchy|Illchy]] ([[User talk:Illchy|talk]]) 20:22, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::(In fairness, while I disagree with the person's stance, I will note that the external video was not added to the article at the time they had posted that comment.) [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:742D:25AD:5EFB:98BA|talk]]) 20:25, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
=== Firearms === |
|||
Again the media and the reporters go for sensationalism instead of fact. There is no such thing as an assault rifle, assault style pistol or assault weapon. Those phrases are used to make an ordinary tool seem scary. |
|||
I mean firstly they don't need to list the weapons at all, just say firearms were involved and be done. Its like when columbine happened they listed the guns used and soon after, Several of the guns they used went from 50 to 100 dollar firearma no one really bought to costing 400 dollars with some manufacturers even making clones briefly in the early to mid 2000s. So don't mention what types to prevent copycats and sickos. |
|||
Secondly they shouldn't mention the types because it is irrelevant. The ownership of guns didn't cause this person to shoot up a school, it was something else whether it be mental illness, twisted sense of morality, even a twisted sense of religion but its never the guns fault. [[User:Loneviking|Loneviking]] ([[User talk:Loneviking|talk]]) 13:18, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Well a nuclear bomb or double trailer truck doesn't make someone into a terrorist but I doubt you will convince people you should just say explosive or vehicle if a terrorist uses one to kill people. Actually why say firearm at all? Just say weapon. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 13:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:This isn't a soapbox to express your opinions on gun control. Wikipedia follows the sources, and the sources are highlighting the guns used. [[User:Couruu|Couruu]] ([[User talk:Couruu|talk]]) 16:09, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Assault rifle and assault weapon are clearly understood terms and/or have legally-defined meanings. I am less certain of "assault style pistol". It appears News Week addressed this issue previously and concluded: |
|||
::''"While the term assault pistol has been cited by the government and may have been used in the past to name certain models of semi-automatic pistol-type weapons (including at least one model that bears remarkable similarity to the firearm used in Monterey Park), it's not a well known or understood descriptor."'' Source: https://www.newsweek.com/fact-check-assault-pistol-real-type-gun-1776538 |
|||
::I would think "semi-automatic pistol" or "handgun" would be the more appropriate descriptor, and these terms seems to be the ones employed by many news reports. However, I would defer to more experienced editors. I don't think the current terminology is technically incorrect, but the uncommon usage of a term may lead to more confusion for readers than a more commonly used term. [[User:ProbitasVeritas|ProbitasVeritas]] ([[User talk:ProbitasVeritas|talk]]) 21:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::I would contest that the terms [[Assault Weapon|assault weapon]], "assault rifle", and "assault-style gun" are all legally vague terms specific to the United States. Within the United States they are not even consistently defined across jurisdictions; this may also be a conflict with [[MOS:COMMONALITY]]. |
|||
:::Putting that aside, the reason why the term "assault-style pistol" is important to the article is that the [[Kel-Tec SUB-2000|gun in question]] has been explicitly included in other "assault weapon" bans<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons-ban-summary|title=Assault Weapons Ban summary - United States Senator for California|accessdate=5 September 2020}} </ref>. The efficacy of such laws are not in question here, but the fact is that these weapons were purchased legally, and Tennessee has no such laws on the books. [[User:EatTrainCode|EatTrainCode]] ([[User talk:EatTrainCode|talk]]) 23:11, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Because the term "assault style" has no consistent definition (and to note, has no definition at all in Tennessee) and is inherently politically charged, I don't believe it has any business being used in that context on Wikipedia. It could be used when explaining ban proposals or whatever, but not in simply describing the weapon. I've just left it as "two rifles". [[User:Ironmatic1|Ironmatic1]] ([[User talk:Ironmatic1|talk]]) 07:03, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
{{reflist-section}} |
|||
== Requested move 28 March 2023 == |
|||
{{requested move/dated|Covenant School shooting}} |
|||
[[:2023 Covenant School shooting]] → {{no redirect|Covenant School shooting}} – I think that WP:NOYEAR and WP:NCE has a much stronger case here than in other recent shootings. Since the title is much more precise in its location (naming a specific school), and given that history has usually not seen a major notable shooting happen in the same precise location as opposed to maybe a city (for example, there are numerous [[Pittsburgh shooting|shootings in Pittsburgh]] but [[Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting|only one at Sandy Hook Elementary]]). The precision of the location in the title is too specific to justify more, and I believe WP:CRYSTALBALL could potentially be implied (albeit weakly) if we keep a year in here, potentially suggesting that there are more shootings, notable or unnotable. <b><span style="color:#0080FB">Invading</span><span style="color:#0668E1">Invader</span></b> ([[User:InvadingInvader|userpage]], [[User talk:InvadingInvader|talk]]) 20:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:<s>'''Support''' per the proposal. The proposed title is reasonable, makes sense per [[WP:NOYEAR]], and there's precedent in relation to other article titles of similar events.<span id="Nythar:1680036963770:TalkFTTCLN2023_Covenant_School_shooting" class="FTTCmt"> — [[User:Nythar|<span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#36454f;">'''Nythar'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Nythar|💬]]'''-'''[[Special:Contributions/Nythar|🍀]]) 20:56, 28 March 2023 (UTC)</span></s> <small>Striking vote. [[User:Nythar|<span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#36454f;">'''Nythar'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Nythar|💬]]'''-'''[[Special:Contributions/Nythar|🍀]]) 05:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC)</small> |
|||
:<s>'''Support''' as the standard, concise title format for this type of article. It includes a specific location, so there's no need for the year.</s> Move to [[Nashville school shooting]] because the national & international media is using Nashville far more often in its article titles than Covenant, so it's the best title. Due to being highly-publicised & the only notable school shooting in Nashville, it fulfils [[WP:NOYEAR]]. [[User:Jim Michael 2|Jim Michael 2]] ([[User talk:Jim Michael 2|talk]]) 21:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::The "standard, concise title format" is prescribed at [[WP:NCE]]. It would be utterly amazing if you accepted that. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 21:09, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Please tone down the comments...they're starting to seem uncivil. <b><span style="color:#0080FB">Invading</span><span style="color:#0668E1">Invader</span></b> ([[User:InvadingInvader|userpage]], [[User talk:InvadingInvader|talk]]) 01:09, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::What a time to be alive, equating requesting consensus be respected to being incivil. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 05:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Comments like "What a time to be alive" and "It would be utterly amazing if you accepted that." seem to ride the line of incivility. Could you please tone down your wording? Maybe just say "please respect consensus" instead of what you said earlier. <b><span style="color:#0080FB">Invading</span><span style="color:#0668E1">Invader</span></b> ([[User:InvadingInvader|userpage]], [[User talk:InvadingInvader|talk]]) 18:53, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Jim as with all of the past move discussions we've both been involved in on this, the standard community consensus naming convention is spelled out at [[WP:NCE]]. That means that until this event has a common name, which it won't for at least a year, the ''When, where, what'' standard naming format should be used. In this case, this means that the article should be named ''2023 Covenant School shooting'' or ideally ''2023 Nashville Covenant School shooting''. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 01:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Strong oppose''' per [[WP:NCE]], the title format for events is '''When''', '''Where''' and '''What happened'''. [[WP:NOYEAR]] suggests the year can be omitted for titles where the event is so recognizable that the year is irrelevant, but that also requires {{tqq|historic perspective}}, and for something that happened less than 24 hours ago it's far too soon to be claiming this is the [[WP:COMMONNAME]]. If anything, I'd support moving the page to '''2023 Nashville shooting''' which is what the vast majority of our sources refer to this event as. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 21:08, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I never understood the {{tq|historic perspective}} argument given that the same argument can be tossed back in the courts of the argument's proponents. Yes, we have a day of precedent, but that means that there's no argument to support inserting the year either, especially considering that in practically every "year or no year" dispute, the subject event is the only kind. People also frequently mention [[WP:NCE]], but there's a reason why at the top of the wider page, it states that [{{tq|this wider guideline}}] {{tq|is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with [[Wikipedia:What "Ignore all rules" means#Use common sense|common sense]], and [[Wikipedia:Ignore all rules|occasional exceptions]] may apply}}. I also strongly oppose moving this article to 2023 Nashville Shooting, which violates [[WP:DESCRIPTOR]] by being needlessly vague and broad. - [[User:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #00b7ff;">Knightsoftheswords</span><span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;">281</span>]]<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #007bff; color: #ffffff;"> i.e </span>[[User:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;">Crusader</span><span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #00b7ff;">1096</span>]] '''('''[[User talk:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;"> Talk </span>]][[Special:Contributions/Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #007bff; color: #ffffff;"> Contribs </span>]][[User:Knightoftheswords281/Global Presence|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;"> Wikis </span>]]''')''' 21:32, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::The {{tq|historic perspective}} argument is one that requires a significant amount of time to have passed from the event to be accurately assessed. One day is nowhere near enough time, and as such Locke Cole is correct that the primary convention on ''When, where, what'' of [[WP:NCE]] should apply. Additionally all of the examples listed at NOYEAR largely follow the [[WP:COMMONNAME|common name]] for those events from the sources that discuss them. |
|||
:::The boilerplate {{tq|is a generally accepted standard}} text is something that is on all Wikipedia guidelines, and comes from the {{t|Wikipedia subcat guideline}} template. It's not specific to that guideline and no extra meaning should be read into it by its presence. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 01:52, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:{{icon|ga}} '''Support''' - this is a specific location, at that point, there really is no point to disambiguate further. - [[User:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #00b7ff;">Knightsoftheswords</span><span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;">281</span>]]<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #007bff; color: #ffffff;"> i.e </span>[[User:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;">Crusader</span><span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #00b7ff;">1096</span>]] '''('''[[User talk:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;"> Talk </span>]][[Special:Contributions/Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #007bff; color: #ffffff;"> Contribs </span>]][[User:Knightoftheswords281/Global Presence|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;"> Wikis </span>]]''')''' 21:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::{{tqq|this is a specific location}} Does [[WP:NCE]] say it applies to non-specific locations only? Regardless, there are ''many'' schools with the name "Covenant" in their name, so omitting the year makes it ambiguous, especially as it's very likely this will not be the only "Covenant" school to have a mass shooting at some point. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 04:27, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Oppose both titles''' - Both are too vague, as a simple google of "covenant school" will show that this is not even the only covenant school out there, as results show there are also ones in Virginia and Texas. Also complying with [[WP:NCE]], I think we should have the title as "[[2023 Nashville Covenant School shooting]]" or "[[Nashville Covenant School shooting]]". ''- [[User:L'Mainerque|L'Mainerque]] - <small>([[User talk:L'Mainerque|Disturb my slumber]]) -</small>'' 21:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Good point, but a point has to be raised in that this is the only Covenant school that has been subject to a shooting. I am {{icon|ga2}} '''neutral '''on the latter [[Nashville Covenant School shooting]] suggestion of yours. - [[User:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #00b7ff;">Knightsoftheswords</span><span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;">281</span>]]<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #007bff; color: #ffffff;"> i.e </span>[[User:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;">Crusader</span><span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #00b7ff;">1096</span>]] '''('''[[User talk:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;"> Talk </span>]][[Special:Contributions/Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #007bff; color: #ffffff;"> Contribs </span>]][[User:Knightoftheswords281/Global Presence|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;"> Wikis </span>]]''')''' 21:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Fair point of yours also, and I understand where you're coming from. I'll keep your comment in mind in this RM and future ones. ''- [[User:L'Mainerque|L'Mainerque]] - <small>([[User talk:L'Mainerque|Disturb my slumber]]) -</small>'' 21:47, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Not sure about this when it’s not a standalone title, but generally the title formatting for "[[Covenant School]]"s is Covenant School (State), which if following this format within this title would be: [[Covenant School (Nashville) shooting]] [[User:BhamBoi|BhamBoi]] ([[User talk:BhamBoi|talk]]) 17:28, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Comment''' – If the consensus of this debate ends up being to exclude the year from the title, I recommend changing the [[2015 Umpqua Community College shooting]], [[2018 Santa Fe High School shooting]], & [[2021 Oxford High School shooting]] articles back to their original titles, without the year included. [[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] ([[User talk:Silent-Rains|talk]]) 21:52, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Yes, the year should be removed from those titles as well. [[User:Jim Michael 2|Jim Michael 2]] ([[User talk:Jim Michael 2|talk]]) 22:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I agree and concur with Jim and Silent on all of these. <b><span style="color:#0080FB">Invading</span><span style="color:#0668E1">Invader</span></b> ([[User:InvadingInvader|userpage]], [[User talk:InvadingInvader|talk]]) 01:08, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Aye. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 06:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::No. The year should only be removed from those article titles if there is a [[WP:COMMONNAME|common name]] in reliable sources for those events, and that removing the natural disambiguation of the year would not cause article ambiguity. A quick Google search for each of those shootings did not turn up a common name that lacked a year, as every source I skimmed, except those local to Santa Fe, specified a year in their ongoing coverage. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 02:03, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support'''. The year in the title is unnecessary disambiguation. [[User:Rreagan007|Rreagan007]] ([[User talk:Rreagan007|talk]]) 22:29, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support''' per NCE's "Some articles do not need a year for disambiguation when, in historic perspective, the event is easily described without it." First thing that came to my mind with the included year was, "there was more than one shooting? [[User:Morbidthoughts|Morbidthoughts]] ([[User talk:Morbidthoughts|talk]]) 23:03, 28 March 2023 (UTC) I also support adding Nashville to the title because that's more useful than the year. People will more likely search for Nashville school shooting than use covenant as a search term. [[User:Morbidthoughts|Morbidthoughts]] ([[User talk:Morbidthoughts|talk]]) 23:05, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''' [[WP:NCE]] is absolutely clear here that in the absence of a common name from reliable sources, the article title should follow the '''When, Where, What''' pattern. A shooting that happened a day ago is far too early to have a common name from sources, and the lack of a ''When'' would make ''Covenant School shooting'' non-descriptive. That being said, ''2023 Covenant School shooting'' is also a pretty bad title for the ''Where'' part of NCE, as there are [[Covenant School|multiple Covenant Schools]] in the US and elsewhere. A more descriptive title would be something like ''2023 Nashville Covenant School shooting'', [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''' per NCE. The inclusion of the year adds a time context to the event. [[User:WWGB|WWGB]] ([[User talk:WWGB|talk]]) 01:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support''' Distinctive enough, three words long and more consistent with how reliable sources and the people who know them actually write and talk. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 04:54, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''' per NCE and precedent of this format being used for school shootings as outlined below. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:E07E:FFB:80F2:8234|2600:1700:87D3:3460:E07E:FFB:80F2:8234]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:E07E:FFB:80F2:8234|talk]]) 05:46, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''' as per emerged convention (see "Precedent" below). [[User:Dan100|Dan100]] ([[User talk:Dan100|Talk]]) 09:02, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Comment''' I do want to mention that this discussion [[Special:Diff/1140779332#Requested move 14 February 2023|mirroring past discussions]]. For whatever reason, there appears to be a conflict between articles in the sub-categories of {{Category|School shootings in the United States}} and the recent sub-categories of {{Category|Mass shootings in the United States by year}}, specifically 2021 to 2023. Sub-category {{category|Elementary school shootings in the United States}} has fifteen article with twelve not using the year. Sub-category {{Category|2023 mass shootings in the United States}} has all articles with a year, with one exception. I do think that there needs to be [[WP:CONSISTENT|some consistency]] with these types of articles, but I believe that would require an RfC. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 09:35, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''' I believe the year should always be in the title. Helps people sort through which was which. The precedent section below makes a good case. [[User:Dream Focus | '''<span style="color:blue">D</span><span style="color:green">r</span><span style="color:red">e</span><span style="color:orange">a</span><span style="color:purple">m</span> <span style="color:blue">Focus</span>''']] 12:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''' per NCE and the mountain of precedent below. We should remain [[WP:CONSISTENT|consistent]]. [[User:Iamreallygoodatcheckers|<b style="color: #E2062C ;"> ''Iamreallygoodatcheckers''</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:Iamreallygoodatcheckers|<b style="color: #000000;"> talk</b>]]</sup> 15:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Oppose''' per [[WP:NCE]] [[User:Esb5415|Esb5415]] ([[User talk:Esb5415|talk]]) 13:31, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Oppose''' per [[WP:NCE]] and precedent cited below. [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 14:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Support renaming''' to a name without the year, with a redirect. The precence of the year in a name would suggest a previous shooting in that same location. -<span style="text-shadow:7px 5px 7px #409fff;">[[User:Mardus|Mardus]] <small>/[[User talk:Mardus|talk]]</small></span> 23:46, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Giving a title a specific name will help more to learn about which shooting it exactly is. There were probably many more Covenant Shootings and people might get confused by which exact shooting it would be. Besides, the title is perfect the way it is. The 2023 does nothing to the title except give it more info on which exact shooting it is, like I just talked about. [[User:GhostOfWiki4|GhostOfWiki4]] ([[User talk:GhostOfWiki4|talk]]) 15:20, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
=== "Precedent" === |
|||
Above, <s>both {{u|Nythar}} and </s> (<small>struck since Nythar struck their !vote</small>) {{u|Jim Michael 2}} claim there is precedent for naming school shootings ''without the year''. Let's test that theory. I went through the list of school shootings in {{tl|School shootings in the United States}} that have articles, and (surprise, surprise) the vast majority of them in fact ''do include the year'' in the title. The outliers are typically the ones you'd expect, [[Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting]], [[Stoneman Douglas High School shooting]], etc. But here's the rest: |
|||
*[[2023 Michigan State University shooting]] |
|||
*[[2022 University of Virginia shooting]] |
|||
*[[2022 Central Visual and Performing Arts High School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2022 East High School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2022 Oakland school shooting]] |
|||
*[[2021 Oxford High School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2019 STEM School Highlands Ranch shooting]] |
|||
*[[2019 University of North Carolina at Charlotte shooting]] |
|||
*[[2018 Noblesville West Middle School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2018 Santa Fe High School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2018 Marshall County High School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2017 Aztec High School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2017 North Park Elementary School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2016 Townville Elementary School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2016 UCLA shooting]] |
|||
*[[2015 Northern Arizona University shooting]] |
|||
*[[2015 Umpqua Community College shooting]] |
|||
*[[2013 Sparks Middle School shooting]] |
|||
*[[2013 Santa Monica shootings]] |
|||
*[[2008 University of Central Arkansas shooting]] |
|||
I stopped there. I could go on though, but I think the point is made: most articles on "school shootings" utilize the naming convention put forward by the community in [[WP:NCE]]. For an event that just happened yesterday, there's little reason to deviate from that. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 05:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I see your point. But, well, [[Stoneman Douglas High School shooting]] isn't even the common name. That would be "Parkland high school shooting", the most common name found in reliable sources. But I suppose that's beside the point.<span id="Nythar:1680068112914:TalkFTTCLN2023_Covenant_School_shooting" class="FTTCmt"> — [[User:Nythar|<span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#36454f;">'''Nythar'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Nythar|💬]]'''-'''[[Special:Contributions/Nythar|🍀]]) 05:35, 29 March 2023 (UTC)</span> |
|||
::{{tqq|That would be "Parkland high school shooting"}} And I'd ''support'' that move, because we're dealing with the {{tq|historic perspective}} that [[WP:NCE]] (and [[WP:NOYEAR]] specifically) calls out as prerequisites to deviating from the when/where/what naming convention. Let's go discuss moving that page, if we're gonna move anything... —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 05:51, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Alright then. Striking my support !vote above. [[User:Nythar|<span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#36454f;">'''Nythar'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Nythar|💬]]'''-'''[[Special:Contributions/Nythar|🍀]]) 05:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:When the location is in the title (rather than merely the settlement/area) it's not even the majority of titles that include the year, let alone the vast majority. Those without the year are far from being outliers; they greatly outnumber those with the year. [[User:Jim Michael 2|Jim Michael 2]] ([[User talk:Jim Michael 2|talk]]) 09:02, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::If you think that a ''Where, what'' naming convention pattern is sufficient disambiguation for the majority of these sort of events, then I would suggest that you seek a consensus to change the text of [[WP:NCE]], which currently clearly states that the majority of articles should use the ''When, where, what'' pattern. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:14, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Yes, there could be a case for [[WP:TITLECON|TITLECON]] here. [[User:BhamBoi|BhamBoi]] ([[User talk:BhamBoi|talk]]) 17:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:<s>I think the claim that {{tpq|most articles on "school shootings" utilize the naming convention put forward by the community in WP:NCE}} appears to be incorrect. Looking at the primary sub-categories of {{Category|School shootings in the United States}}, you have the {{Category|University and college shootings in the United States|University and college sub-category}} where 20 of the 32 do not use the year, the {{Category|High school shootings in the United States|High School sub-category}} with 36 out of 46 that do not use the year, the {{Category:Middle school shootings in the United States|Middle School sub-category}} with 11 out of 15 that do not use the year, and the {{Category|Elementary school shootings in the United States|sub-category this article belongs to}} with 12 out of 15 that do not use the year. That makes a total of 79 out of 98 that do not use the year and 21 that do.</s> --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 09:52, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::For your University and college sub-category, it appears there's a combination of counting redirects (which are irrelevant), and miscategorization (as there are articles not about school shootings categorized in that list). This is why I went with the navbox, because as a rule they don't include redirects (makes the navbox less functional) and it's easy to pick out articles not directly about school shootings. It's the same thing for the High School sub-category you linked to. All of those italic titles listed are ''redirects''. Redirect naming is much more lax than article naming. Working from the navbox list, 70% of article titles included the year, while < 30% did not. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 15:52, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::When only those whose specific location is included (such as [[Thurston High School shooting]]) rather than only the settlement (such as [[2022 Oakland school shooting]]), the clear majority don't include the year. Although this shooting is very recent, it's very widely publicised, so it clearly fits the no year criteria. As far more media sources are using Nashville in their headlines than are using Covenant, there's a good case for including Nashville in the heading. Nashville shooting is a dab page, so [[Nashville school shooting]] would be a better title. [[2023 Nashville shooting]] & [[Nashville Covenant School shooting]] are also better than the current title. [[User:Jim Michael 2|Jim Michael 2]] ([[User talk:Jim Michael 2|talk]]) 07:47, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Sorry for the delayed response. (I apparently didn't remember to subscribe to discussions.) I did understand that redirects are in italics, but Category:University and college shootings in the United States had very few redirects so I didn't account for them separately. However, I did check again and see that {{Category|Middle school shootings in the United States|some sub-categories}} had a more significant number of redirects. I am a bit confused about the what is miscategorized, but I will concede the point. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 09:21, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Many of those titles originally excluded the years but they were changed without discussion. For example, "2018 Santa Fe High School shooting" was originally just "Santa Fe High School shooting," but user Love of Corey changed it a month ago. [[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] ([[User talk:Silent-Rains|talk]]) 19:21, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::So on principle I take issue with your claim that {{tqq|they were changed without discussion}}. The discussion occurred at [[WT:NCE]] and [[WT:AT]]. When we have a consensus at a guideline level, we don't need to have discussions repeatedly to enforce that consensus (see [[WP:LOCALCON]]). That being said, I didn't know about the recent moves on some of these articles, but the trend in recent RM discussions has been to follow what [[WP:NCE]] prescribes, so I understand ''why'' it was done. In general mass shooting articles (not just school mass shootings) follow [[WP:NCE]], but for whatever reason, school shooting articles did seem to deviate the most without any good reason (and certainly no discussion at WT:NCE and/or WT:AT to carve out an exception for school shootings). —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 18:19, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Biden ice cream criticism == |
|||
It's been added and removed a couple of times now. A consensus for inclusion needs to be established on this, so starting this discussion. Per [[WP:ONUS]], could editors in favour of including it please state your reasoning for inclusion. Thanks. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 03:22, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't see in any sort of world where that addition would be DUE and not just a random POV [[WP:COATRACK]] violation. [[User:Silver seren|<span style="color: silver;">Silver</span>]][[User talk:Silver seren|<span style="color: blue;">seren</span>]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Silver seren|C]]</sup> 03:24, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::These rationales against a "blue side" are expected. I do strive to overcome public misconception of bias regarding Wiki. with everything I do on here, but with politics.. WP:WEIGHT, selectively, continuously skews one way.--[[User:Kieronoldham|Kieronoldham]] ([[User talk:Kieronoldham|talk]]) 03:50, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Especially "his supporters claimed that his jokes were taken out of context" — numerous reliable sources that neither support nor oppose Biden have stated that it was taken out of context, because it objectively was. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1700:87D3:3460:E07E:FFB:80F2:8234|2600:1700:87D3:3460:E07E:FFB:80F2:8234]] ([[User talk:2600:1700:87D3:3460:E07E:FFB:80F2:8234|talk]]) 03:28, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't think that is needed. Some sources don't mention it as I didn't hear or read about it on National Desk news or ABC news. CNN has no mention of that. This is my first-time hearing about that part. A source here does. https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-bidens-gaffe-about-ice-cream-and-nashville/a-65159845 [[User:Cwater1|Cwater1]] ([[User talk:Cwater1|talk]]) 03:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::[[Wikipedia:Obscure does not mean not notable]] [[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] ([[User talk:Silent-Rains|talk]]) 03:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Keep in article''' - I am in favor of keeping this controversy within the article. Every time a major mass shooting in the United States happens, the president usually reacts in the same way, & that same reaction is added to the articles on the shootings every time. Here are some examples since Biden has been president: |
|||
* [[2021 Oxford High School shooting]]: "President Joe Biden and U.S. Representative Elissa Slotkin, whose district includes Oxford High School, expressed their condolences over the shooting." |
|||
* [[2022 Sacramento shooting]]: "President Joe Biden called on the United States Congress to work on new gun control measures." |
|||
* [[2022 Buffalo shooting]]: "President Joe Biden offered his prayers for the victims and their families." |
|||
* [[Robb Elementary School shooting]]: "Biden highlighted that other countries have "mental health problems", "domestic disputes", and "people who are lost, but these kinds of mass shootings never happen with the kind of frequency they happen in America. Why? Why are we willing to live with this carnage?" Biden said that he was "sick and tired" of mass shootings, declaring "we have to act", and calling for "common sense" gun laws." |
|||
* [[Highland Park parade shooting]]: "President Joe Biden stated that he was shocked by the "senseless" gun violence and has offered the "full support of the Federal government" to the affected communities. He also called for gun control measures." |
|||
* [[2022 Raleigh shooting]]: " U.S. President Joe Biden said he and his wife Jill were grieving with the victims' families." |
|||
* [[2022 Central Visual and Performing Arts High School shooting]]: "President Joe Biden posted on Twitter, writing "Jill and I are thinking of everyone impacted by the senseless shooting in St. Louis – especially those killed and injured, their families, and the first responders. As we mourn with Central Visual and Performing Arts, we must take action – starting by banning assault weapons." |
|||
* [[2022 University of Virginia shooting]]: "US President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden issued a joint statement about the shooting, which offered their condolences to the families of the victims, thanked first responders for their swift response, and condemned gun violence." |
|||
* [[2022 Chesapeake shooting]]: "President Joe Biden shared his condolences and called for gun reform in the U.S." |
|||
* [[2023 Monterey Park shooting]]: "He later offered condolences and ordered flags at the White House to be flown at half-staff." |
|||
* [[2023 Michigan State University shooting]]: " Joe Biden expressed condolences, and called for gun control." |
|||
As you can see, all of Joe Biden's reactions to shootings consist of him feeling sorry for the victims & advocating for gun control. This differs from the norm, so I believe it is notable & should be included. Many media outlets, such as Snopes, USA Today, Politico, & others have mentioned this. [[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] ([[User talk:Silent-Rains|talk]]) 03:39, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:That's some nice [[wp:original research|original research]]. Let us know when a reliable source says the same thing. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 03:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Do you have a reliable source to say that my reply is original research? [[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] ([[User talk:Silent-Rains|talk]]) 03:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::The lack of reliable sources in your reply implies that it's [[WP:OR|original research]]. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 03:51, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Your reply sounds like original research to me unless you have a reliable source to support that claim. [[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] ([[User talk:Silent-Rains|talk]]) 03:54, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::We're not trying to put in a Wikipedia article that Silent-Rains is guilty of original research, so we don't need an RS. We can use our brains and Wikipedia's definition of original research. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 03:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::You must have copied the statement from the articles. If you add the sources, then it is legit. These are tips, see [[Wikipedia:No original research]] for more. [[User:Cwater1|Cwater1]] ([[User talk:Cwater1|talk]]) 03:57, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::@[[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]]: Please see [[WP:BURDEN]]. [[User:A09|A09]] ([[User talk:A09|talk]]) 13:35, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Sources for statements: Oxford,<ref name="shock2">{{cite web |last=Chowdhury |first=Maureen |date=November 30, 2021 |title=Biden on school shooting: "My heart goes out to the families that are enduring the unimaginable grief" |url=https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/oakland-county-michigan-high-school-shooting-11-30-21/h_678a3f5f5f7c186e964feb94fdac28bc |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211201171200/https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/oakland-county-michigan-high-school-shooting-11-30-21/h_678a3f5f5f7c186e964feb94fdac28bc |archive-date=December 1, 2021 |access-date=November 30, 2021 |website=[[CNN]]}}</ref> Sacramento,<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Cullinane |first1=Susannah |date=April 4, 2022 |title=Sacramento police hunt for multiple suspects after mass shooting leaves six dead |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2022/04/04/us/sacramento-california-shooting-monday/index.html |access-date=2022-04-04 |website=[[CNN]]}}</ref> Buffalo,<ref name=":4">{{cite web |last=Ryan |first=Patrick |date=May 14, 2022 |title='Pure evil': 10 dead, 13 shot in Buffalo supermarket mass shooting |url=https://www.wivb.com/news/local-news/poloncarz-police-on-scene-of-active-multiple-shooting/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220514220208/https://www.wivb.com/news/local-news/poloncarz-police-on-scene-of-active-multiple-shooting/ |archive-date=May 14, 2022 |access-date=May 15, 2022 |website=WIVB-TV}}</ref> Uvalde (there's something wacky with that source), Highland Park,<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |title=At least 7 killed in shooting at Fourth of July parade in Highland Park, Illinois; person of interest in custody |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/highland-park-shooting-fourth-of-july-illinois/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220705124243/https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/highland-park-shooting-fourth-of-july-illinois/ |archive-date=July 5, 2022 |access-date=2022-07-06 |website=www.cbsnews.com}}</ref> Raleigh,<ref name=":12">{{Cite web |last1=Shaffer |first1=Josh |date=2022-10-14 |title=NC officials, President Biden react to 'tremendous tragedy' 5 deaths in Raleigh shooting |url=https://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/article267288182.html |access-date=2022-10-14 |website=News Observer}}</ref> Missouri high school,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Biden |first=Joe |authorlink=Joe Biden |title=@POTUS: "Jill and I are thinking of everyone impacted by the senseless shooting in St. Louis – especially those killed and injured, their families, and the first responders. As we mourn with Central Visual and Performing Arts, we must take action – starting by banning assault weapons." |url=https://twitter.com/potus/status/1584978565233348613 |access-date=2022-10-25 |website=Twitter |language=en}}</ref> Virginia,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Locklear |first=Robert |date=November 14, 2022 |title='Get weapons of war off America's streets:' Bidens release statement after UVA shooting |url=https://wset.com/news/local/get-weapons-of-war-off-americas-streets-joe-jill-biden-releases-statement-after-uva-shooting-violent-crime-gun-law |access-date=November 14, 2022 |website=WSET |language=en}}</ref> Chesapeake,<ref>{{Cite web |last=House |first=The White |date=2022-11-23 |title=Statement from President Biden on the Shooting in Chesapeake, VA |url=https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/11/23/statement-from-president-biden-on-the-shooting-in-chesapeake-va/ |access-date=2022-11-23 |website=The White House |language=en-US}}</ref> Monterey Park,<ref>{{cite news |last1=Forrest |first1=Jack |last2=Pellish |first2=Aaron |date=January 22, 2023 |title=Biden offers condolences to victims of California mass shooting, acknowledges the impact on AAPI community |publisher=CNN |url=https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/22/politics/biden-statement-monterey-park-shooting/index.html |url-status=live |accessdate=January 22, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230123083225/https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/22/politics/biden-statement-monterey-park-shooting/index.html |archive-date=January 23, 2023}}</ref> & Michigan.<ref>{{Cite web |last=News 10 |first=WILX |title=President Joe Biden releases statement on the shooting at MSU |url=https://www.wilx.com/2023/02/14/president-joe-biden-releases-statement-shooting-msu/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230214210842/https://www.wilx.com/2023/02/14/president-joe-biden-releases-statement-shooting-msu/ |archive-date=February 14, 2023 |access-date=February 14, 2023 |website=wilx.com |language=en}}</ref> [[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] ([[User talk:Silent-Rains|talk]]) 04:08, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:<s>@[[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] Make sure you source statements.</s> [[User:Cwater1|Cwater1]] ([[User talk:Cwater1|talk]]) 15:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::{{reply|Cwater1}} I think that you might not get a response from your ping, so out of curiosity what source is missing? The reply above yours is the sources that Silent-Rains provided for the quotes above and I provided sources for Snopes, USA Today, and Politico in my ping to FormalDude below. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 18:52, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::<s>I see the sources you provided now. I was reminding someone else that they should cite the statements.</s> [[User:Cwater1|Cwater1]] ([[User talk:Cwater1|talk]]) 21:24, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Sorry, I didn't see his response. I just noticed he did add sources. Sorry about that. [[User:Cwater1|Cwater1]] ([[User talk:Cwater1|talk]]) 21:26, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Ah, gotcha. No problem at all. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 23:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
{{sources-talk}} |
|||
::{{Re|Silent-Rains}} None of those suggest that Biden's reaction to this event differs from the norm, as you originally claimed. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 04:10, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Do you have a reliable source to say that none of those sources suggest that Biden's reaction to this event differs from the norm, as I originally claimed? [[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] ([[User talk:Silent-Rains|talk]]) 04:14, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Again, I don't need one, because I'm not trying to put that into a Wikipedia article. Sources are open to interpretation, but you will have a hard time convincing anyone that a source verifies something it explicitly doesn't say, as anyone can read the sources for themselves and see that. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 04:18, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::What reliable source says you don't need a source unless you want to put it into a Wikipedia article? What reliable source backs up anything you say? |
|||
:::::If you need to violate a policy (being unable to provide a reliable source) to explain the policy & how it applies, you are likely using the policy incorrectly. [[User:Silent-Rains|Silent-Rains]] ([[User talk:Silent-Rains|talk]]) 04:25, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::If you don't want to edit anymore you could just voluntarily stop editing rather than being silly in an effort to get banned. [[User:Nil Einne|Nil Einne]] ([[User talk:Nil Einne|talk]]) 06:58, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::To me, this seems to be a misunderstanding that didn't get cleared up and spiraled out of control a bit. Hopefully the sources below that FormalDude was asking for get this back on track. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 09:20, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{Ping|FormalDude}} Honestly, your comment was a bit confusing to me, so it makes sense why the sources you got were not the ones you wanted. Here is sources for [https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-ice-cream-nashville-shooting-remarks/ Snopes], [https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/03/28/nashville-shooting-christie-slams-biden-joke/11554133002/ USA Today], and [https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/27/biden-assault-weapons-ban-nashville-shooting-00089050 Politico]. Not 100% sure if these were the exact articles that [[User:Silent-Rains]] was mentioning, but I am somewhat confident. Hopefully this somehow helps someone. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 09:20, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{Re|Super Goku V}} I'm not sure what's confusing, but I'll try to make it simpler. Silent-Rains is saying Joe Biden's ice cream comment needs to be included because it "{{tq|differs from the norm}}" and they provided previous quotes from Joe Biden responding to mass shootings as 'proof'. The sources they provided, in addition to the sources you provided, do not verify that. We know Joe Biden said it, but that's besides the point because nobody is arguing that he didn't say it. The argument is that it is not [[wp:relevant|relevant]] to this article. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 09:39, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::What was confusing to me was what sources you were asking for. (I actually went and pulled up [https://www.cbsnews.com/live-updates/biden-texas-school-shooting-address/ the sources] for [https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/05/24/remarks-by-president-biden-on-the-school-shooting-in-uvalde-texas/ the Uvalde comments] thinking that you wanted them for some reason rather than looking at the linked articles for them.) And I think that was what derailed this whole discussion as Silent-Rains took it that you wanted the sources for the statements that were mentioned rather that the sources for what was said on Monday. (As for the last three sentences, gotcha. I don't see the point in including it, but at least we seem to be back on track.) --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 09:59, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Exclude'''. The "ice cream-gate" is no more than a conservative beatup to attempt to smear Biden. He was speaking at a business forum, where he made a light-hearted comment to the audience. He addressed the shooting with appropriate commentary and demeanour. It has been demonstrated that his ice cream comments were taken out of context.[https://www.dw.com/en/fact-check-bidens-gaffe-about-ice-cream-and-nashville/a-65159845] [[User:WWGB|WWGB]] ([[User talk:WWGB|talk]]) 04:31, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*:A similar statement made by a right leaning politician, and used by the left to smear that politician, would be featured on that person's Wikipedia article without question. [[User:Derpytoucan|Derpytoucan]] ([[User talk:Derpytoucan|talk]]) 22:10, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*::I removed a leftist smearjob from Andy Ogles' on-topic reaction the other day. It was questioned. But it's still gone, for now (and didn't even ''appear'' in his own article). [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 22:38, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:While I do have my suspicions of bias (in that I think that there would be significantly more support for including it if say DeSantis or Trump did the same), I don't this this should be included per [[WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS]]. - [[User:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #00b7ff;">Knightsoftheswords</span><span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;">281</span>]]<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #007bff; color: #ffffff;"> i.e </span>[[User:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;">Crusader</span><span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #00b7ff;">1096</span>]] '''('''[[User talk:Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;"> Talk </span>]][[Special:Contributions/Knightoftheswords281|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #007bff; color: #ffffff;"> Contribs </span>]][[User:Knightoftheswords281/Global Presence|<span style="font-weight: bold; background-color: #000000; color: #ffffff;"> Wikis </span>]]''')''' 04:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Exclude'''. The ice cream comment and reactions to it have absolutely nothing to do with the subject of this article. The political affiliation of Biden is (or should be) irrelevant to whether or not to include this pointless trivia. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 05:01, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*INCLUDE - Biden's icecream jokes and blaming Republicans for the shooting made international news so it does reach the newsworthy threshold for Wikipedia. Now whether it'll be permitted to get past gatekeepers here, that's another story. [[Special:Contributions/2001:44B8:2104:4600:590D:6BC0:543D:DF08|2001:44B8:2104:4600:590D:6BC0:543D:DF08]] ([[User talk:2001:44B8:2104:4600:590D:6BC0:543D:DF08|talk]]) 07:49, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*:I suggest you relax a little with the accusatory tone. Nobody else over here is really sympathetic to what you're saying. (I mean that not as a critique of your views but instead just to inform you) No point getting agitated because viewers will just think you're flailing around. [[User:Becausewhynothuh?|Becausewhynothuh?]] ([[User talk:Becausewhynothuh?|talk]]) 08:30, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Include''' If there are RS and sufficient coverage there should be no debate regardless how editors feel the media is spinning this story. This is an encyclopedia right, or are we editorializing now? [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 10:10, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*: We don't include random trivia not related to the subject of the article. That is exactly what [[WP:COATRACK]] is about. [[User:Silver seren|<span style="color: silver;">Silver</span>]][[User talk:Silver seren|<span style="color: blue;">seren</span>]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Silver seren|C]]</sup> 12:54, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*::It's not trivia or [[WP:COATRACK]], Biden was panned widely in RS in relation to the subject of the article. To not include could be considered white washing. [[WP:REDACTION]] applies here. [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 13:40, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Leaning exclude''' - I disagree that this would be COATRACK; the president's "poor" joke before speaking about this shooting would be relevant enough for a mention here if sufficient sourcing covered the comments. However, I don't believe it to be established enough in mainstream coverage to warrant a mention, per [[WP:DUE]]. All I've really found is [https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-ice-cream-nashville-shooting-remarks/ Snopes], [https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/03/28/nashville-shooting-christie-slams-biden-joke/11554133002/ USA Today], [https://local21news.com/news/nation-world/biden-slammed-for-joking-about-ice-cream-in-first-appearance-following-nashville-shooting-white-house- CBS 21]. Not enough really. [[User:Iamreallygoodatcheckers|<b style="color: #E2062C ;"> ''Iamreallygoodatcheckers''</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:Iamreallygoodatcheckers|<b style="color: #000000;"> talk</b>]]</sup> 15:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''' Political gaffs might be due in an article about the politician but they don't pass the 10 year test for an encyclopedia article about the event. [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 17:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Include''' See my comments below.[[User:Derpytoucan|Derpytoucan]] ([[User talk:Derpytoucan|talk]]) 22:05, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Exclude''' This is the place for criticism or praise of the Covenant School shooting, not Joe Biden. He has his own article for that. Besides, the last version removed didn't even say who "criticized" him, and the sketchy source only claimed he "was mocked". [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 22:30, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Exclude'''. Ice cream comment wasn't about the shooting, and he had been just introduced to speak at the Small Business Administration's Women's Business Summit. '''[[User:Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">starship</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">.paint</span>]] ([[User talk:Starship.paint|exalt]])''' 06:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Exclude''' While I agree that if someone like Trump had said this it would've been most likely included without any debate, the comment itself does absolutely nothing to improve the article or inform the reader about the reactions to the shooting. Saying "I came down because I heard there was chocolate chip ice cream" isn't a reaction and isn't relevant to the subject matter. [[User:Rabawar|Rabawar]] ([[User talk:Rabawar|talk]]) 15:03, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Exclude''' While there was some news coverage about it, it's mostly irrelevant. It was at a business forum that was planned way before the shooting. The criticism was mainly used by conservatives against Joe Biden and lacked proper context. --[[User:Atomicdragon136|<span style="color: green">𝕒𝕥𝕠𝕞𝕚𝕔𝕕𝕣𝕒𝕘𝕠𝕟𝟙𝟛𝟞</span>]] [[User talk:Atomicdragon136|🗨️]] [[Special:Contributions/Atomicdragon136|🖊️]] 01:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*Maybe not include it in article. I don't think the criticism is needed. This could be [[bias]], not 100% sure.[[User:Cwater1|Cwater1]] ([[User talk:Cwater1|talk]]) 04:27, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
==Other coatrack concerns== |
|||
*[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2023_Covenant_School_shooting&diff=prev&oldid=1147144870 This portion] removed by {{U|Kieronoldham}} is clearly much more balanced than the deep-dive on Biden's reaction. It mentions both liberal and conservative takes. I'm personally not sure if we should include it or not, but it certainly shouldn't be removed based on Kieronoldham's reasoning. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 03:32, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
**They self-reverted, but we should still consider whether this is relevant or not. The last sentence in particular seems to hold little weight. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 03:34, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
***Don't waste time. Work aside from political aspects and adherences to conform to sterile impartiality. Public perception of Wikipedia can be improved without selectivity re: political affiliations.--[[User:Kieronoldham|Kieronoldham]] ([[User talk:Kieronoldham|talk]]) 04:07, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
****I have no idea what this means. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 04:14, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*****Not trying to speak for Kieronoldham, so correct me if I'm wrong, but I think they mean that the political aspects ie "hot takes" shouldn't be prioritized or given more weight than the more objective and factual components. Otherwise we may see editors and ip coming out of the woodwork to POVpush and distract from getting consensus on less subjective details, IMO. Not a bad idea, but it could be easier said than done for admins. Is there any kind of protocol for these types of articles yet? This happens so frequently there really should be, otherwise it must be exhausting. [[User:Darknipples|DN]] ([[User talk:Darknipples|talk]]) 04:28, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
**:As any fyi as I am unsure if this has been settled or not but wanted to mention that the entire part has been removed again by @[[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] along with comments by Rep Tim Burchett and the comments by the Highland Park parade shooting survivor. The comment left was that it was "Beyond their jurisdictions" If this was discussed and settled in the Tucker Carlson section below, I might have missed it. [[User:Leaky.Solar|Leaky.Solar]] ([[User talk:Leaky.Solar|talk]]) 14:43, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
**::That works for me. Mentioning every politician's reaction would definitely get us into COATRACK territory. Limiting the reactions to only those who are related to or involved with the event (e.g. those who have jurisdiction over the area where it occurred) seems like a good way to prevent that. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 22:22, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Pronouns... == |
|||
IMO, the beginning of the article, as currently written, is rather confusing...In the first paragraph, it identifies the shooter as "Audrey Elizabeth Hale" - a very female sounding name - but then shortly, thereafter, we read that "Hale sent a message...that '''he''' planned to die today." (emphasis mine) |
|||
Up to this point though, there was no discussion of the fact that Hale was a female to male trans-person (this doesn't come until a ways later in the article), so I think that's rather confusing....Yes, there is a note "b" by the pronoun, but IMO there should be more clarity from the plain text of the article, without someone having to click on a note. |
|||
It seems to me that there are two possible solutions to this issue (to maintain clarity while avoiding misgendering): |
|||
1)Discuss the shooter's gender identity earlier in the article. |
|||
2)Avoid using pronouns for him at all, until the fact that he was F->M trans is mentioned. So, in that sentence for example, it would read that "Hale sent a message...that Hale planned to die today." |
|||
Personally, I prefer the first option, but either could work. -[[Special:Contributions/2003:CA:8708:3F11:AE24:B40F:B794:1F57|2003:CA:8708:3F11:AE24:B40F:B794:1F57]] ([[User talk:2003:CA:8708:3F11:AE24:B40F:B794:1F57|talk]]) 17:03, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:We should just use an explanatory note about the pronoun usage at the first pronoun just like we do in the [[Bella Ramsey]] article. [[User:Rreagan007|Rreagan007]] ([[User talk:Rreagan007|talk]]) 17:11, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I don't really see how that's a comparable situation...."Bella" and "Isabella May" (the names listed at the beginning of that article) are both female, and then the article proceeds to use female pronouns for her. So not a lot of confusion is likely in that case. The note in that article is more than sufficient. But this article is quite different, as it identifies the shooter with a female name, and them proceeds to use male pronouns, thus causing confusion. Like I said, I think the plain text of the article should be much clearer, without readers having to click on a note. Of course if the primary name Hale is identified as is switched to "Aiden," as some have suggested, this would no long be an issue. But so long as Hale is indentified primarily as "Audrey" then it remains confusing. -[[Special:Contributions/2003:CA:8708:3F11:AE24:B40F:B794:1F57|2003:CA:8708:3F11:AE24:B40F:B794:1F57]] ([[User talk:2003:CA:8708:3F11:AE24:B40F:B794:1F57|talk]]) 17:20, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Looks like someone added an explanatory note to explain the he/him pronouns. I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2023_Covenant_School_shooting&curid=73394532&diff=1147247763&oldid=1147246369&diffmode=source just tweaked it] to change "male" to "he/him" to describe said pronouns. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 18:40, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:The way I had it referred to Hale as "I". The fuller quote [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2023_Covenant_School_shooting&diff=prev&oldid=1147158911 was] "basically a suicide note. I'm planning to die today." I still think that's the clearest way, and something like "Hale, who used he/him pronouns,..." would work better than an interrupting note people have to click. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 18:46, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::There are other uses of he/him pronouns in that section though, before Hale's trans identity is mentioned later in the article. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 18:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::As best I can tell, the very first word is "Hale". This ''could'' easily be {{tq|Hale, who used he/him pronouns, sent a message}}... I won't do it while we're still discussing this, though. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 19:03, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::The full name "Audrey Elizabeth Hale" is currently in the lead, hence the desire to avoid confusion. (Though I suppose the explanatory note could be moved up to the lead, that might make things more confusing rather than less.) [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 20:09, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::We could add his gender identification there, beside the police's, and save the pronoun preference for the beginning of the Shooting section. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 20:11, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I've "gone ahead" with the first bit. I'll defer to anyone on whether trans adults prefer to be called men/women or males/females. I'll also accept pure reversion, but won't be as happy about it. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 20:20, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I would have "purely reverted" but did not as I knew you edited in good faith. I'm still not entirely comfortable with calling attention to his trans status in the lead in this way; I think an explanatory note might be better. But I'm open to other input. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 20:21, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::If you want to avoid confusion, being upfront is the way to go. More than nine times out of ten, someone identified as "Audrey Elizabeth" ''is'' a woman and calling her "him" ''does'' jar the unaware. Your parenthetical change is fine, but I feel like it still ''slightly'' appears as though it's "trying to hide" or "distance itself" from the main identification line. I'll suggest "and trans man" after "former student", but that's my final offer. Take it or leave it. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 20:27, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::If the subject were, say, a [[Michael Learned|cis woman named Michael]], I'd agree with you about being upfront to avoid confusion. But given the state of "dialogue" around trans people in the U.S., the wording in this article should be considered extra-carefully. I'm hoping for more input. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 20:41, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::You brought up "the desire to avoid confusion", ''I'' was trying to agree with ''you''. I don't know what "dialogue" you're talking about now, I'm a Canadian. I think we write for a global audience, so don't have to tiptoe around anything the way a mainstream corporate paper might, but if there's something potentially ''harmful'' you're trying not to say, yes, be as careful as you need to be. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 20:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thinking it over, I think "preferred" beats "used". From the message I saw, he didn't refer to himself in the third person. Pending evidence to the contrary, I also doubt he used the words to mean other women. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 19:29, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::I prefer to say "went by [x/y/z] pronouns" but most editors don't agree with me on that. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 20:06, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I like it. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 20:11, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:It is terribly perplexing how we find ourselves in this situation, harming an encyclopedia to satisfy the dreadful delusions of a mass murderer. What progress we have made! [[User:Sir Jack Hopkins|Sir Jack Hopkins]] ([[User talk:Sir Jack Hopkins|talk]]) 12:13, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
It looks like the issue '''had been''' fixed, but then someone went and removed the information again, so we're once again back at square one. I haven't gone yet and looked through the edit history, but I did see that someone above commented about "the state of dialogue." I would note though that Wikipedia is not censored. Our job is simply to present accurate and relevant information in a clear manner, not to omit things because it doesn't fit with a desired narrative. -[[Special:Contributions/2003:CA:8708:3FB4:1366:9663:457D:FCF6|2003:CA:8708:3FB4:1366:9663:457D:FCF6]] ([[User talk:2003:CA:8708:3FB4:1366:9663:457D:FCF6|talk]]) 21:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:{{Ping|StarryNightSky11}} You two ''might'' want to settle this. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 21:18, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::The source says the shooter was later identified as transgender man. [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/28/nashville-school-shooter-identity-transgender]https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/28/nashville-school-shooter-identity-transgender [[User:Cwater1|Cwater1]] ([[User talk:Cwater1|talk]]) 16:01, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{u|InedibleHulk}} I've updated the lead section, to prevent confusion for readers. -- [[User:StarryNightSky11|<span style="color:green">StarryNightSky11</span>]] [[User talk:StarryNightSky11|<span style="color:green">☎</span>]] 18:41, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Seems to violate NPoV by calling her a man. If she's undergone gender reassignment and had her gender ''legally'' changed fair enough, as far as I'm aware she just identified as a man why is everyone falling over themselves not to misgender her, especially considering what she did? [[User:Faronnorth|Faronnorth]] ([[User talk:Faronnorth|talk]]) 12:27, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Multiple reliable sources have stated that whilst born a woman, she identified as male as used he/him pronouns, regardless of whether she legally changed her gender to male or had surgery, the article simply reflects what the sources are saying, as you put it above ''why is everyone falling over themselves not to misgender her, especially considering what she did'', because articles are written from a [[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]], not based on editors thoughts or opinions as that wouldn't be neutral, regardless of what she has done, articles are written from a neutral perspective with no bias regardless of who or what the subject of the article is about. -- [[User:StarryNightSky11|<span style="color:green">StarryNightSky11</span>]] [[User talk:StarryNightSky11|<span style="color:green">☎</span>]] 13:54, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
==Baptist News Global article== |
|||
Here’s an article that delves into the relationship between the school (and its affiliated denomination) with LGBT issues. [https://baptistnews.com/article/how-the-church-of-the-nashville-shooting-winds-through-history-gender-wars-church-discipline-and-the-sbc-sexual-abuse-study/] |
|||
I’m not sure whether it’d be considered a reliable source or not (BNG is a Christian publication, albeit one that tends to be ''far'' more progressive on social issues than the aforementioned organizations are; it has more of a mainline Protestant perspective). But I think it’d represent a unique perspective, mostly because secular news organizations tend to shy away from writing too directly about explicitly religious/theological issues, while this site shows no such reluctance. |
|||
The article also points out that there was sexual abuse of students taking place at the school at the time the shooter attended. It’s a topic that has to be handled with ''extreme'' delicacy (so that readers don’t get the impression that the article is [[blaming the victim]] or empathizing/sympathizing with the shooter in any way), but I think the article I linked to did a good job of this. |
|||
In fact, according to the article, it seems that what happened at Covenant in the 2000s ended up being the catalyst for the [[Southern Baptist Convention]]′s recent, widely-publicized reckoning with sexual abuse in its own institutions. [[User:LonelyBoy2012|LonelyBoy2012]] ([[User talk:LonelyBoy2012|talk]]) 22:20, 29 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2023_Covenant_School_shooting&diff=prev&oldid=1147308029&diffmode=source removed the content] about sexual abuse for now. Unless we can say how it is related to the shooting, it probably doesn't belong here. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 02:52, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I've never edited a wikipedia article (although I read a lot of them), and so I'm not sure all the details for determining what constitutes a Reliable Source per Wikipedia protocols. (I'm a Wikipedia layman, so to speak). My understanding is that the context of the source is to be considered when assessing its reliabiity, and that while the presence of bias doesn't necessarily preclude a source's inclusion it is to be considered when assessing its reliability. I'm sure that's harder to do in matters of religious news, which generally don't receive a lot of attention from non-biased sources. Most who write on those issues have a dog in the fight so to speak. As a Christian pastor (neither Southern Baptist nor Cooperative Baptist nor Presbyterian), who reads a lot of religious news and church history, including quite a bit of Baptist News Global, I do think it's relevant to the discussion that the linked-to article in question comes from a source that is far from unbiased on the matter, and seems to be using the issue to prosecute broader fights within Baptist denominational politics that goes back decades. The linked-to article is also labelled "Analysis" on the top of the page, (Baptist News Global separates its articles between "News" "Analysis" and "Opinion"). |
|||
::The article source, Baptist News Global, was formed by the merger of two Baptist news agencies, one of which, the Associated Baptist Press, was founded after the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship (a more theologically liberal Baptist Fellowship split from the Southern Baptist Convention in 1990 in part over whether women should be ordained.) For those not familiar with Baptist history/controversy, those within the Southern Baptist Convention holding more theologically conservative positions on a variety of religious and political issues managed to organize themselves and gain control of Southern Baptist denominational structures and institutions in the 1980s and 1990s and began purging those they deemed overly theologically liberal from denominational positions within the SBC, leading some of those more theologically liberal (in terms of the SBC) churches at the time to split and form the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship, in part with the express goal of ordaining women which the theological conservatives who gained control of the organization opposed. There's still a lot of bad blood because of how that went down in Baptist circles, both within the SBC itself, but especially between the CBF churches that felt pushed out of the SBC over these matters. Baptist News Global which was formed in the aftermath of that split, and which is an official partner of the CBF (the churches that left), frequently focuses much of their opinion/news analysis on criticizing the SBC. Often this is over serious and legitimate issues of power abuse the SBC including the sex abuse crisis, but it's also on other related theological issues which were related to the original split, especially issues of gender and LGBTQ topics. |
|||
::Some of that history I think explains why an issue involving a shooting and past sexual abuse issues involving a non-SBC Presbyterian church is throughout the article being tied to other issues of contention between the CBF and the SBC, including LGBTQ issues (the article references the Nashville Declaration and highlights shared theological positions on those disputed issues between the SBC and the Presbyterian Church of America (the Covenant Church and School's theologically conservative Presbyterian denomination). |
|||
::Again, that's not to say the article may not contain accurate information, and I've read the linked articles/blog posts in the article regarding past issues in the Covenant Church, around the sexual abuse issues. When the manifesto is released that may prove to be the issue, but until there is a tighter connection demonstrated, I think inclusion of this source and the speculation in the source is probably jumping the gun from a source with a pretty strong axe to grind. [[Special:Contributions/69.77.212.43|69.77.212.43]] ([[User talk:69.77.212.43|talk]]) 14:10, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::TL;DR: You could include such allegations in article about the school, but as far as media reports go, no connection between the two exist. [[User:A09|A09]] ([[User talk:A09|talk]]) 15:58, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Do unproven allegations from blogsites and failed lawsuits meet the threshold of credibility for Wikipedia? [[Special:Contributions/2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9|2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9]] ([[User talk:2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9|talk]]) 04:19, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::If reported in [[WP:RS|reliable sources]], than yes (talking about failed lawsuits). For blogs, see [[WP:SPS]]. [[User:A09|A09]] ([[User talk:A09|talk]]) 08:37, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Background of child abuse in Covenant Church == |
|||
{{edit extended-protected|2023 Covenant School shooting|answered=yes}} |
|||
It appears that the church associated with the school [https://www.courthousenews.com/church-accused-of-covering-for-molester/ has dealt with a child abuse scandal] at the right time for Hale's attendance of the school. Could this be relevant to mention in the background section, or do we have to wait for current media coverage to mention this? [[Special:Contributions/83.141.209.216|83.141.209.216]] ([[User talk:83.141.209.216|talk]]) 09:00, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:We would need to at least have reliable sources make such a connection between these two events, especially since these are two separate events that might not actually be connected. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 09:23, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Wait''' until media reports it and makes connection. Making connections ourselves might count as [[WP:OR]]. [[User:A09|A09]] ([[User talk:A09|talk]]) 15:55, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't know why but I've only assume for my possible motive: |
|||
:Emotional disorder according to the media. |
|||
:retaliation against members of the covenant school for unknown reason. [[User:Dyaz04102003|Dyaz04102003]] ([[User talk:Dyaz04102003|talk]]) 09:30, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::@[[User:Dyaz04102003|Dyaz04102003]]: Just clearing that making bold assumptions/connections on two subjects is considered [[WP:OR]] [[User:A09|A09]] ([[User talk:A09|talk]]) 21:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 30 March 2023 (4) == |
|||
{{edit extended-protected|2023 Covenant School shooting|answered=yes}} |
|||
Here are the important updates"[https://northeasternpost.com/news/crime/nashville-school-shooter-sent-me-messages-before-the-attack/ Nashville School Shooter sent me messages before the attack]" [[User:Santoshsendha|Santoshsendha]] ([[User talk:Santoshsendha|talk]]) 17:22, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:EEp --> This appears to be an unreliable sources ([[WP:IRS]]) because it has no stated editorial oversight and the article is attributed to the NEP Team instead of a named author. [[User:EvergreenFir|'''<span style="color:#8b00ff;">Eve</span><span style="color:#6528c2;">rgr</span><span style="color:#3f5184;">een</span><span style="color:#197947;">Fir</span>''']] [[User talk:EvergreenFir|(talk)]] 17:35, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:The pertinent facts are already in the article, more or less, just without names or much insight. She's the "old friend" at the beginning of the Shooting section, and the cited sources have more detail on the messages themselves. Is there something in particular you think is missing and educational? [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 21:01, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I believe that North Eastern Post is either committing plagiarism or is just badly summarizing other news organizations. |
|||
::{| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" |
|||
|+ class="nowrap" | Long comparison table made with the help of [[H:COLS]] |
|||
|- |
|||
! scope="col" | BBC |
|||
! scope="col" | North Eastern Post |
|||
|- |
|||
| (Friend) is thought to be one of the last people the Nashville school shooter messaged before the attack. || (Friend) is believed to be one of the last persons messaged by the Nashville school gunman before the assault. |
|||
|- |
|||
| On Monday morning, Ms (Friend) received a message on Instagram from her former classmate, who sounded depressed and desperate. || Ms. (Friend) got an Instagram post from a former student on Monday morning, who sounded despondent and frantic. |
|||
|- |
|||
| "She said that I would see her on the news later on… and something tragic was about to happen," Ms (Friend) told BBC News. || “She said I’d see her on the news later… and that something tragic was about to happen,” Ms. (Friend) told BBC News. |
|||
|- |
|||
| She immediately called the local sheriff's office. || She dialed the local sheriff’s office right away. |
|||
|- |
|||
| "I don't know what she was battling... but I knew it was a mental thing, you know?" Ms (Friend) said. || “I don’t know what she was going through… but I knew it was a mental thing,” Ms. (Friend) explained. |
|||
|- |
|||
| "Just something in my spirit, when she reached out, I just jumped into the mode of trying to call around make sure that I'm doing everything that I could." || “It was just something in my spirit, and when she reached out, I just went into the mode of trying to call around and make sure I was doing everything I could.” |
|||
|- |
|||
| But within minutes, (Hale) attacked the Covenant School, killing three nine-year-old pupils and three staff members. || However, (Hale) attacked the Covenant School within minutes, killing three nine-year-old students and three staff members. |
|||
|- |
|||
! colspan="2" | Brackets in the next row are directly from both of the original articles. |
|||
|- |
|||
| "I later found out that this was not a game, this was not a joke, it was [Hale] who did this," she said. "It's just been very, very heavy." || “I later discovered that this was not a game or a joke; it was [Hale] who did this,” she explained. “It’s just been extremely heavy.” |
|||
|- |
|||
| Ms (Friend) said that police came to her home that afternoon to review the messages from Hale. || Ms. (Friend) stated that officers arrived at her house that afternoon to examine Hale’s communications. |
|||
|- |
|||
! colspan="2" | There are eight more lines in both articles, but I think the point has been made. |
|||
|} |
|||
::Multiple times, we have quotes that have been modified. Even the third line has the quote modified in the NEP article, despite going on to mention that this was what she had told the BBC. If we do need to include information, we should use the original BBC version rather than the copied version modified by the NEP. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 03:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Definitely seems inspired by the BBC article, but changing a few words is exactly what ''prevents'' plagiarism. Just paraphrasing, like Wikipedia does. If, for any reason, we must quote (the woman you call Ms. Friend) and it includes (the pronoun you call Hale), we shouldn't alter ''her'' exact words, as relayed by whatever source. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 20:37, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Honestly, I don't know what [[User:Santoshsendha|Santoshsendha]] wants added here, so for now we don't need to do anything unless they respond or someone else finds something that can be added. In any case, if the paraphrasing is not a problem, we still should not use NEP for quotes as they have modified the quotes that the friend said to the BBC. Also, I didn't modify any pronouns; I just excluded Hale's first name since there was plenty of discussion elsewhere regarding names. (I apparently forgot to link to the BBC article which would have made this clearer, so [https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65106763 here it is.]) That aside, I don't currently think that we should name Hale's friend without a good reason. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 21:56, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Shouldn’t the article make it clear this isn’t the main Presbyterian church? == |
|||
It’s the second largest denomination and anti LGBT+ which is an important part of the context. [[User:Doug Weller|<span style="color:#070">Doug Weller</span>]] [[User talk:Doug Weller|talk]] 18:06, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree. The Baptist News Global article I linked to above goes into some detail about this, and the school/denomination’s policies toward sexuality in general. [[User:LonelyBoy2012|LonelyBoy2012]] ([[User talk:LonelyBoy2012|talk]]) 18:38, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I've unpiped it in the lead, if that's what you meant by making it clear. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 21:28, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:''(Deleted message)'' |
|||
::Just have it link to that church. No evidence has been presented that the motive was the Church's stance on same-sex relations, so it would be OR to include. Using "anti-LGBT+" would appear to be a loaded term here. As far as I can tell that label is not used for the Catholic or Orthodox Churches, Islam, or other religions who hold positions that are the same as the one here. If there is some evidence that their stance and actions is closer to say the Westboro Baptist Church, it might be warranted.[[User:3Kingdoms|3Kingdoms]] ([[User talk:3Kingdoms|talk]]) 02:03, 3 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:The article makes it clear that it's a PCA church. But the denomination's, church's, or school's positions are only relevant if they are part of the motive. [[User:StAnselm|<b>St</b>]][[Special:Contributions/StAnselm|Anselm]] ([[User talk:StAnselm|talk]]) 04:55, 3 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Where is the previous discussion? == |
|||
The talk page is missing earlier discussion topics. Where are they? [[Special:Contributions/62.212.144.248|62.212.144.248]] ([[User talk:62.212.144.248|talk]]) 22:14, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:They've likely been archived at [[Talk:2023 Covenant School shooting/Archive 1]]. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 22:16, 30 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::And also [[Talk:2023 Covenant School shooting/Archive 2]]. Nothing was lost, I just archived older and/or closed discussions. [[User:A09|A09]] ([[User talk:A09|talk]]) 08:39, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Arizona press secretary tweet == |
|||
Yesterday I saw that the controversial tweet of the now former press secretary of Arizona was included in the article; as of the posting of this thread it's not. I think that this controversy ''should be included'' in the article in some capacity. It's been reported in several RS, connected to this shooting, and resulted in her resignation. [https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/30/politics/katie-hobbs-press-secretary-nashville/index.html CNN], [https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/03/29/arizona-katie-hobbs-tweet-meme/ WaPo], [https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/3924613-arizona-governors-press-secretary-resigns-after-tweet-suggesting-violence/ The Hill], [https://www.axios.com/local/phoenix/2023/03/29/arizona-hobbs-press-resigns-tweet-gun-shooting Axios], [https://apnews.com/article/hobbs-staffer-resigns-controversial-tweet-nashville-shooting-870914ee01bbec18bc8a6bb7fe307594 AP], and [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/arizona-governor-press-secretary-resigns-after-transphobe-meme-tweet/ CBS]. [[User:Iamreallygoodatcheckers|<b style="color: #E2062C ;"> ''Iamreallygoodatcheckers''</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:Iamreallygoodatcheckers|<b style="color: #000000;"> talk</b>]]</sup> 15:23, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Meh. She's not a notable person and worked for a very different state, from a rather different city. Most of the attention is from association with a notable governor, who really has no business being stuck with the mess. If you want to keep her name out of it, though, and just focus on the actual idiot, I guess that's cool. Cooler, anyway; still could open the floodgates to all sorts of peripheral quasicelebrity yahoos who catch heat for tweeting ''something'' yahooish about this. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 17:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*I'm more inclined to include the allegedly anti-trans responses, as well as the calls for it to be investigated as a hate crime. [[User:StAnselm|<b>St</b>]][[Special:Contributions/StAnselm|Anselm]] ([[User talk:StAnselm|talk]]) 17:40, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*:We don't have to cover just one subject. We do have potential sources for the anti-trans responses that can be used ([https://www.latimes.com/politics/newsletter/2023-03-29/nashville-shooting-trans-rights-biden-essential-politics 1], [https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2023/03/30/nashville-shooting-transgender-shooter/ 2], [https://abcnews.go.com/US/anti-transgender-sentiment-nashville-shooting/story?id=98177377 3]) and potential sources for the investigation part. ([https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/sen-hawley-calls-nashville-shooting-investigated-hate-crime-rcna77013 1], [https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/29/josh-hawley-nashville-shooting-hate-crime 2], [https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article273686005.html 3]) --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 19:16, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*::Agreed with SGV, we can cover both. '''[[User:Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">starship</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">.paint</span>]] ([[User talk:Starship.paint|exalt]])''' 03:04, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
*:{{reply|StAnselm}} [[#Add Congressional Republican's demand for Hate Crime investigation to Reactions?|A separate discussion was created regarding covering the investigation part.]] --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 06:50, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I am in support of a sentence briefly covering this. If we don't want to include her name, then that is fine with me. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 18:54, 31 March 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I am OK with including the press secretary's response, including the press secretary's name, but I agree that the governor's name does not need to be included. '''[[User:Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">starship</span>]][[Special:Contributions/Starship.paint|<span style="color:#512888">.paint</span>]] ([[User talk:Starship.paint|exalt]])''' 03:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Yeah, the ''governor's'', that's who I meant by "her". Name the one shamed. That's the name of the game. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 18:22, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Ah, gotcha. That is still fine with me. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 21:39, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Yes, an important member of the Governor's staff had to resign and was covered by multiple sources. Also agree it should be one sentence for brevity. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:3Kingdoms|3Kingdoms]] ([[User talk:3Kingdoms#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/3Kingdoms|contribs]]) </small> |
|||
:::::That part I understood. Just misunderstood and thought we were going to keep out the name of the resigned press secretary for some reason. (I don't have a strong opinion either way on including or excluding either name.) --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 00:42, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Inaccurate\Misleading Addition to Perpetrator Section == |
|||
I see someone added "'''People who knew Hale said he''' had been having a difficult time dealing with the death of a classmate in the summer of 2022. Hale had known the individual since they were in middle school; '''they were basketball teammates'''". |
|||
This is problematic and misleading. Hale never played men's basketball and there is no dead male classmate. The reality is that one of her women's basketball teammates died (was killed?) back in August or so, and she struggled greatly with it. |
|||
The current language '''misgenders''' the historical reality. Since I don't want to start an edit war I'm posting this here in the hope consensus will recommend change. [[Special:Contributions/2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9|2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9]] ([[User talk:2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9|talk]]) 04:32, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I see no misgendering. The sentence doesn't say the teammate is a he and never states that Hale was in men's basketball. What exactly is wrong with those sentences? [[User:Silver seren|<span style="color: silver;">Silver</span>]][[User talk:Silver seren|<span style="color: blue;">seren</span>]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Silver seren|C]]</sup> 04:46, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I've bolded the original sentence to make it more apparent. Hale is referred to as male then it pivots to 'his' teammate. This is misgendering. Basketball is divided by gender so if Hale is male then 'he' played male basketball and 'his' teammate is also male. This is false. Thus the paragraph ought to say "People who knew Hale said '''she''' ..." I'd also recommend tweaking the language to "... they were in middle school and were basketball teammates". The current syntax is a little awkward. [[Special:Contributions/2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9|2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9]] ([[User talk:2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9|talk]]) 05:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::It looks like {{u|WWGB}} already fixed the issue by changing the sentence to "Hale had known her since they were in middle school". [[User:Silver seren|<span style="color: silver;">Silver</span>]][[User talk:Silver seren|<span style="color: blue;">seren</span>]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Silver seren|C]]</sup> 05:31, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Reaction Addition == |
|||
Tennessee has just passed a law so that it is now legal for private schools to contract with local law enforcement so they can hire school resource officers. |
|||
It wasn't actually what I was looking for but is likely worth adding to the section. |
|||
I seem to vaguely recall reading something about (federal?) Republicans proposing that school resource officers be made available to all schools, public and private, but Democrats blocked it. I can't recall where I saw that and can't see it in my browser history. Am I misremembering, or has someone seen a similar story elsewhere? [[Special:Contributions/2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9|2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9]] ([[User talk:2001:44B8:2104:4600:DC27:1E52:33CC:A9C9|talk]]) 05:06, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Are any reliable sources connecting the bill and this incident? Was the bill proposed afterwards or has it been going through the state Congress for a while? [[User:Silver seren|<span style="color: silver;">Silver</span>]][[User talk:Silver seren|<span style="color: blue;">seren</span>]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Silver seren|C]]</sup> 05:32, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::{{s|The bill's two proposers connected the two [https://www.blackburn.senate.gov/2023/3/blackburn-hagerty-introduce-safe-school-act two days ago.] [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 16:49, 1 April 2023 (UTC)}} Federal business here. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 03:28, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::So we'll presumably be seeing reliable source coverage of the bill sometime soon, if the news hasn't reported on it already. Since we shouldn't be using a primary source like that for inclusion of the information. [[User:Silver seren|<span style="color: silver;">Silver</span>]][[User talk:Silver seren|<span style="color: blue;">seren</span>]]<sup>[[Special:Contributions/Silver seren|C]]</sup> 16:54, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::It's in the news, too, had to add an extra word to find the press release. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 17:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::The new law's in the news, I mean, I know nothing of the story the OP seems to vaguely recall. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 19:46, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:I think it might fit better in Aftermath than Reactions. It's still words. But they're in effect, like an action. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 16:53, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::'''Support''' with rewording. [[User:A09|A09]] ([[User talk:A09|talk]]) 20:07, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::It's way too late and beyond our power to reword the bill, and there's no related edit (real or proposed) to finesse. It'll have to be worded at all first. I nominate you. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 20:18, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::@[[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]]: Sorry, I don't think I'm qualified enough to write articles or parts of articles that I don't have much knowledge of. Again, sorry, but you can file in edit request with "change X to Y" format :) Sincerely, [[User:A09|A09]] ([[User talk:A09|talk]]) 15:00, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I've made a request to add this, this is the first time I've ever made a protected edit-request so sorry about screwing up the format. You can find it below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:2023_Covenant_School_shooting#SAFE_Act [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 15:17, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Yeah, I think having a sentence or two would be fine. If you want a second source for it, I came across [https://apnews.com/article/tennessee-officers-private-schools-shootings-ce5fd0b194e4a291c05b75344e0726bd the AP's article that mentions the bill and the shooting.] --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 01:41, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thanks for the assist, one fine sentence. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 03:03, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::Here are two sentences. I'd go ahead and add these myself but I'm still 100 edits away from extended-confirmed. {{tq|In response, Governor Bill Lee has signed a law allowing private schools to contract with local law enforcement to hire school resource officers. The law, which goes into effect immediately, does not require private schools to hire such officers but clears the path for them to do so.}} [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 15:20, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Missing information == |
|||
According to The Independent: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/nashville-school-shooting-manifesto-audrey-hale-b2310865.html |
|||
''Hale had been able to legally purchase seven firearms – despite receiving mental health treatment at the time. In a press conference, Chief Drake said that Hale was under care “for an emotional disorder” and that her family “felt that she should not own weapons”. The police chief said that Hale’s parents were aware the suspect had purchased one firearm, but believed it had since been sold. In reality, the 28-year-old had legally purchased seven firearms and hid them around the family home. Three of those firearms – two assault rifles and a handgun – were used in Monday’s shooting. Even if Hale’s parents had been aware of the stash of weapons and contacted law enforcement, there is no red flag law in Tennessee that could have been used to take away the firearms.'' |
|||
''Hale had “looked at” carrying out attacks on two other schools, both of which were public. But he said that Hale appears to gave decided that “the security was too great to do what she wanted to do” and so “she chose a private Christian school, for, probably the reason is that the security is a whole lot less”. Nashville Police Chief John Drake said on Tuesday that investigators “strongly believe” Hale was planning to carry out other attacks including at a local mall and targeting family members. “We strongly believe there was going to be some other targets, including maybe family members, and one of the malls here in Nashville,” the police chief said. “And that just did not happen.” He said that some maps “pertaining to maybe some thinking about some other incidents” had been discovered during a search of the shooter’s family home, along with other weapons. The Covenant School was believed to have been singled out for an attack because it had a lower level of security – with no school resource officer – than other locations.'' |
|||
Sadly this article seems to be locked (?) and I can't edit it. I think the above information should be worked into the article. [[User:Nordostsüdwest|Nordostsüdwest]] ([[User talk:Nordostsüdwest|talk]]) 21:51, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:The article is just [[WP:BLUELOCK]]ED as there was some vandalism earlier this week. In any case, can you mention specifically what parts are missing from the article? I can see that some of this is covered in the article, [[2023 Covenant School shooting#Perpetrator|such as the line about the seven firearms]]. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 22:28, 1 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Just to follow up on this, you can now edit the article again, [[User:Nordostsüdwest|Nordostsüdwest]]. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 00:37, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Edit extended-protected Request (5) == |
|||
{{Edit extended-protected|2023 Covenant School shooting|answered=yes}} |
|||
<!--Don't remove anything above this line.--> |
|||
* '''What I think should be changed (addition to Reactions)''': |
|||
=== SAFE Act === |
|||
The Securing Aid for Every (SAFE) School Act is a proposed legislation in the United States Senate, introduced by Senators Marsha Blackburn and Bill Hagerty. If passed, the Act would make available a $900 million grant program for public and private schools to train and hire veterans and former law enforcement officers as school security officers. |
|||
* '''Why it should be changed''': This has been suggested on the talk page and has received significant coverage. |
|||
* '''References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button)''':{{cite web |url=https://newschannel9.com/news/local/us-senators-blackburn-and-hagerty-introduce-safe-act-900m-for-school-safety |title=U.S. Senators Blackburn and Hagerty introduce SAFE act, $900M for school safety | WTVC |format= |work= |accessdate=2023-04-02}} |
|||
[[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 15:13, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
<!--Don't remove anything below this line--> |
|||
{{reftalk}} |
|||
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done for now:'''<!-- Template:EEp --> This reads too much like a [[WP:SOAP| political advertisement]]. I would advise rewriting, ideally making the suggested addition shorter to focus on the facts of the matter, not the intentions and values of the lawmakers. [[User:Actualcpscm|Actualcpscm]] ([[User talk:Actualcpscm|talk]]) 17:12, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Fair enough, I dropped the last sentence. Any other suggestions? [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 17:39, 2 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yeah, look at the last line of Aftermath. It already passed. I don't think it makes sense to single (double?) out its proposers, since Tennessee as a whole is now on board, but ''some'' detail is probably missing and warranted. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 22:21, 3 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::I believe there might be two different "things" here. One is a local law that has passed, the other is a bill that might have been introduced to the house. In any case, I'll do some research and add it myself at some point if someone else doesn't since I've reached ext-confirmed. [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 22:24, 3 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Yeah, you're right, I read (past tense) poorly. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 03:25, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Listed as a Hate Crime == |
|||
Shouldn’t this be labeled as a Hate Crime? [[User:KeysNC|KeysNC]] ([[User talk:KeysNC|talk]]) 17:28, 3 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:Until such time a large swathe of [[WP:RS]] report on this, no, not really. The FBI still hasn't released the manifesto, and we don't know when they will. [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 17:34, 3 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:No it shouldn't. It can only be so if the motive is released and RS begin referring to this as a hate crime. [[User:Iamreallygoodatcheckers|<b style="color: #E2062C ;"> ''Iamreallygoodatcheckers''</b>]]<sup>[[User talk:Iamreallygoodatcheckers|<b style="color: #000000;"> talk</b>]]</sup> 22:48, 3 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Should the calls for it to be investigated as a hate crime by congressional republicans be put into the article? [[User:Foward123456|Foward123456]] ([[User talk:Foward123456|talk]]) 01:05, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::No. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 01:23, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I just created a new section discussing the possibility of adding congressional republican calls for the shooting to be investigated as a hate crime. Mainstream and reputable sources have published articles on this. Thoughts? [[User:Foward123456|Foward123456]] ([[User talk:Foward123456|talk]]) 01:45, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Add Congressional Republican's demand for Hate Crime investigation to Reactions? == |
|||
Some congressional republicans have called for a hate crime investigation into the shooting. Multiple main stream media sources (NBC, Axios, the hill, Yahoo news, Fox News) have released articles about this so it seems like this should be put into the article. [[User:Foward123456|Foward123456]] ([[User talk:Foward123456|talk]]) 01:11, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:No. We are not the news. [[User:Drmies|Drmies]] ([[User talk:Drmies|talk]]) 01:23, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::I'm sorry that doesn't make any sense. Members of congress requesting a specific type of investigation, requests that are widely covered by mainstream sources is something exactly in line with wiki standards. What did you mean by "we are not the news." [[User:Foward123456|Foward123456]] ([[User talk:Foward123456|talk]]) 01:42, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::They are most likely referring to [[WP:RECENT]]. A small number of GOP representatives asking to designate or investigate the shooting as a hate crime is interesting as a current event, but its long-term impact is unclear. It may become more relevant long-term when the shooter's motives are made public, if there are more representatives pushing that designation. [[User:EatTrainCode|EatTrainCode]] ([[User talk:EatTrainCode|talk]]) 02:06, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::::I agree with you to some extent although, adding this is some what aided by police statements that the shooting may have been ideologically motivated. Certainly something to watch for, especially if a large number of members of congress sign on to some sort of letter to the justice department, which can often happen in these cases. I will say information related to the discussion of this shooting as a hate crime seems to be relevant to the article. This will also likely be resolved when details of the manifesto are released. I would still argue that hate crime speculation should be added to this article as it has been widely propagated by political figures on the right, and also factors into discussion about an anti-lgbtq backlash. [[User:Foward123456|Foward123456]] ([[User talk:Foward123456|talk]]) 02:18, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Now THAT is hilarious. [[Special:Contributions/109.93.177.159|109.93.177.159]] ([[User talk:109.93.177.159|talk]]) 01:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Hoax calls == |
|||
Until recently, there was a line in the Reactions section which read "''A two-day string of hoax calls was made about active school shooters in six states.''" It had an issue that the source used did not mention all six states, so I moved the source and was planning to fix the issue when I could. [[Special:Diff/1147940436|Unfortunately, I botched my edit a bit]] and the sentence was removed in the next edit. I think that the sentence could be restored, but I am unsure of all of the states that were impacted. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2023/03/31/nashville-shooting-hoax-online/ The Washington Post source in the article mentions Pennsylvania and New Jersey] and I found a source for [https://www.nbcboston.com/news/local/multiple-mass-schools-received-swatting-hoax-threats-tuesday-state-police-say/3007871/ Massachusetts] and [https://kslnewsradio.com/1996557/finding-the-caller-behind-utahs-13-school-hoaxes/ Utah]. (And apparently [https://www.abc4.com/news/national/wyoming-high-schools-struck-by-active-shooter-hoaxes-after-similar-cases-reported-in-utah/ Wyoming, but that was this week.]) Does anyone know the other missing states? --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 07:18, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 02:01, 9 October 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1728439277}} |
|||
:Hoaxes occur after many major crimes and events. I don't think they are particularly significant or notable. Mentioning every state where a hoax happened is even less useful. [[User:WWGB|WWGB]] ([[User talk:WWGB|talk]]) 07:29, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
{{archive top|Given the RFC question is not clear and the IP editor who created it is blocked, I'm going to close this discussion. The RFC would need to have a clearer question for the result to be useful and since this is not possible closing it seems reasonable. This will allow a discussion on the broader topic. [[User:Nemov|Nemov]] ([[User talk:Nemov|talk]]) 16:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC) {{nac}}|closed}} |
|||
::Sorry for being unclear, but I wasn't saying to mention every state in the text. I was just trying to figure out what the other two states were, assuming that there was six in total. If there wasn't six, then the sentence would need to say, "A two-day string of hoax calls was made about active school shooters in <s>six</s> ''four'' states." In any case, if you think that it is not notable, then it can be dropped. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 17:21, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2023_Covenant_School_shooting&diff=prev&oldid=1147767011 These are the six I saw.] [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 18:17, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Should the Nashville school shooter's manifesto release be included in the article? |
|||
== Edit Request(?): Error in Perpetrator section == |
|||
[[Special:Contributions/2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F|2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F]] ([[User talk:2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F|talk]]) 01:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Include''' - The Tennessee Star, a local news outlet, has published the 90-page manifesto written by Hale. The journal, which the outlet claims to have legally obtained from a source familiar with the investigation, contains Hale's writings from January to March 2023 and includes details about their mental health, gender identity, and plans for the attack. |
|||
The section includes the sentence "It is said to not be rare for trans and non-gender conforming people to selectively reveal their sexual orientation; a 2023 survey revealed over 10% never share this aspect of their lives." — this is incorrect/confused, the source states that 10% of trans/GNC people have not shared the fact that they are trans — gender identity/trans status is separate from sexual orientation. It should instead read that "…trans and non-gender conforming people to selectively reveal their gender identity…", or, preferably — staying accurate to the source — "…selectively reveal that they are trans…". |
|||
:This has been covered by the following non-deprecated/blocked national sources: |
|||
:New York Sun |
|||
:Fox News |
|||
:Townhall |
|||
:The Washington Times |
|||
:Tampa Free Press |
|||
:And also by the following local stations: |
|||
:WSMV |
|||
:WKRN |
|||
:[[Special:Contributions/2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F|2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F]] ([[User talk:2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F|talk]]) 01:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Comment.''' It is difficult to [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] in the IP initiating the RfC when they misgender they shooter. —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 01:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Corrected it now. Not sure which one you would prefer. Please dont [[Wikipedia:Bite]] and remember to not do drive by comments. Based on your editing history, you are here solely by disagreeing with me elsewhere and posting on my TP. You have also been asked to stop posting on my TP. This might be important to note for others given your previous comment. It seems you are not willing to contribute here to this RfC and seem to harbor ill will against me. Please be a better Wikipedian. |
|||
*:[[Special:Contributions/2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F|2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F]] ([[User talk:2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F|talk]]) 01:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Include''': It makes sense to include it, given that the article currently covers a small leak of four pages from Steven Crowter and that this leak is 90 pages (apparently the entire document). [[User:Daddyelectrolux|Daddyelectrolux]] ([[User talk:Daddyelectrolux|talk]]) 03:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
In fact, that entire sentence is, quite frankly, distorted out of recognition. “It is said”? (By whom?) “not be rare”? (Orwell is spinning in his grave) “non-gender conforming”? (The normative phrase is "gender-nonconforming" as WikiPedia itself attests) |
|||
*:Absolutely agree. Any criticism on the source that fails to account for the previous Crowder leaks being here already would be ill formed. |
|||
*:[[Special:Contributions/2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE]] ([[User talk:2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|talk]]) 14:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''<s>Include with attribution</s>'''. There are concerns with The Tennessee Star noted above, but the repetition of the claims in other sources warrants at least a mention.{{pb}}(Also, Fox News has been generally unreliable on politics, broadly construed, for a while now.) [[User:Aaron Liu|<span style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span>]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu#top|talk]]) 03:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Comment''' - All of the sources simply refer to the same source, ''The Tennessee Star'', which is not a reliable source. Indeed, according to Snopes (which is RS), it was set up by "PAC-Connected Activists".[https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/03/04/activists-setup-local-news-sites/] That is, there are no reliable sources for this. [[User:Objective3000|O3000, Ret.]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 10:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Even admins have agreed to its inclusion here. Your point above has been addressed multiple times by multiple people and you ignore these. Moreover, you continue to reply negatively to me on other article TP's which implies sour grapes and ill will instead of trying to help Wikipedia and/or achieve consensus via the proper means. |
|||
*:You do not seem to be acting in good faith, sadly. |
|||
*:[[Special:Contributions/2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE]] ([[User talk:2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|talk]]) 11:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::Admins are not supposed to be treated as admins outside of administrative disputes. Please don't assume that others are acting in bad faith within a day; it seems clear that Obj just doesn't want facts to be made up. [[User:Aaron Liu|<span style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span>]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu#top|talk]]) 13:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::I will take your suggestion and give it great value. This is given you have been previously very helpful. It just seems that on two different topics @[[User:Objective3000|Objective3000]] very quickly posts negatively against whatever opinion I might be holding, one after the other. Its happened at least once already. He has also complained on your TP about me. I wonder if [[Wikipedia:Tendentious editing]] could apply here? If it doesn't, then apologies. |
|||
*:::[[Special:Contributions/2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE]] ([[User talk:2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|talk]]) 14:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::Please stop the nasty posts. Three this morning alone. You have claimed I'm guilty of a dozen infractions, all totally false. This must stop. [[User:Objective3000|O3000, Ret.]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 14:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* <del>Include with attribution and limitation.</del> Since the clearly-reliable sources are indicating that ''The Tennessee Star'' is the source of the information, it is relevant to include that so readers know where the information came from and can make assessments of its veracity accordingly. Further, we should limit our coverage to what has been reported by the clearly-reliable sources downstream of the ''TS'', since we can expect their editorial staffs to have done more vetting that is inline with [[WP:RS]]. —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 12:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:I fully agree. [[User:Aaron Liu|<span style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span>]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu#top|talk]]) 13:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Problem is that the readers don't know what ''The Tennessee Star'' is and therefore won't know {{tq|where the information came from and can make assessments of its veracity accordingly}}. According to Snopes, it is not a local paper. It is only one of several papers masquerading as a local paper but carrying paid political stories and often duplicate text that ends up with mistakes like naming the incorrect governor because the story has been copied from one of their local papers to another paper in another state. The Snopes story is a quite interesting read.[https://www.snopes.com/news/2019/03/04/activists-setup-local-news-sites/] [[User:Objective3000|O3000, Ret.]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 13:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::[[Wikipedia:WHATABOUTX]] on the source. If you feel so strongly about the original source, please start a RfC on RS and rally the community to deprecate it. In the mean time, any previous mistake the source has made doesn't carry to their current, relevant reporting. If we followed your lead we should neved use the New York Times sincw they really messed up by 'confirming' weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, no? |
|||
*::The facts are, a source you don't like published the subjects entire manifesto. It contains a lot of information over the shooters mental stability and thought process. Many RS are covering it, though they are not your personally preferred sources. Recall that the RS Perennial states it is non-exhaustive itself. |
|||
*::On the above, plenty of experienced editors are agreeing that WP should definitely cover this. Some prefer an attribution. |
|||
*::Please let us know what other formal points you disagree as per WP rules. |
|||
*::[[Special:Contributions/2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE]] ([[User talk:2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|talk]]) 14:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::This has zero to do with WHATABOUTX. You keep linking to irrelevant guidelines. I have already given my opinion. I am allowed to do so. The source has been discussed at RSN. It is a bad source. RfC's are not performed for the vast majority of bad sources because they are obvious. And please stop using phrases like {{tq|a source you don't like}} as this is improper. [[User:Objective3000|O3000, Ret.]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 14:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::It looks like 2601:19E is mostly linking to [[Wikipedia:Essays]] (not guidelines). [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 18:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Include''' with relevant information that RS cover. If RS are reporting on its content, even in detailed summary form, they have put their journalistic integrity on the line and Wikipedia should reasonably assume that the content and the reactions to it is reliable. There can be further discussion as to what is [[WP:DUE]], but after reviewing the content myself (and to be clear, my views are not what decides whether details are or aren't included) I believe it's important that Wikipedia cover what RS's are saying because this individual was quite clearly mentally unwell. If we can help readers understand the importance of mental health and keeping firearms away from unstable individuals then I think we're being good stewards for humanity. To be clear, I'm not here to [[WP:WGW]], but just report what [[WP:RS]] and trusted professionals are saying (of course, when reported by a reliable source). [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 13:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:I fully agree with the above. I'd like to highlight [[Wikipedia:Compromise]]. There seems to be consensus here to include, possibly with attribution. |
|||
*:I can't do that given the protection level this article carries. Perhaps a more experienced editor can do som. |
|||
*:[[Special:Contributions/2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE]] ([[User talk:2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE|talk]]) 14:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::RFCs typically run for seven days. Please be patient, and please refrain from commenting on every !vote. [[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] ([[User talk:Funcrunch|talk]]) 15:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Agree with @[[User:Funcrunch|Funcrunch]] here, please refrain from replying to every vote and wait until RfC has concluded. I will not introduce contentious material to a BLP unless there is affirmative consensus. [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 16:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::It will take more than 7 days. I only just added the relevant RfC topics, pol and bio. [[User:Objective3000|O3000, Ret.]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 17:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Comment''' - What source would be used? None of these sources are considered good. Maybe I'm missing something, but I can't find any mention in the NYPost or Fox listed above. I Googled trying to find a source. They are all poor sources. The only half decent source related to this said the "Judge rejects requests to release Nashville school shooter’s writings". The copyright is held by the victims. So what is the provenance? Only ''The Tennessee Star'' says it has a copy. But to get it, you must give them your name and email, which I will not do. The Star article on this is clearly trying to push a political point.[https://tennesseestar.com/covenant-school-shooting/michael-patrick-leahy-publishing-of-the-covenant-school-killers-journal-offers-glimpse-into-how-the-mental-health-system-is-destroying-children/khousler/2024/09/03/]. How do we know if this document is real? Before any addition to an encyclopedia, we should have a very good source. Is there any source at [[WP:RSP]] that discusses this? As per [[WP:REDFLAG]], "Exceptional claims require exceptional sourcing." [[User:Objective3000|O3000, Ret.]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 16:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:It would help if the IP had provided links to the sources, so that other users could [[WP:V|verify]] what they say more readily, rather than having to crawl through Google trying to find it. —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 16:49, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Omit''', in absence of verification. One of the local news sources mentioned has no coverage. The other's lede on the story is "A Tennessee newspaper published all 90 pages of ''a what it says is the journal'' seized during a search of the Covenant School shooter’s home and vehicle on the day she murdered six people in Nashville."<sup>[sic, emphasis added]</sup>[https://www.wsmv.com/2024/09/03/covenant-school-shooters-presumed-writings-published-by-tennessee-star/] And as O3000 mentioned with WP:REDFLAG, WSMV is disclaimering their presentation of the information, so we need sources that are more plentiful and more solid. —'''[[User:C.Fred|C.Fred]]''' ([[User_talk:C.Fred|talk]]) 16:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Omit''' per Obj's pretty convincing argument. I saw the disclaimer, but the thing about the copyright and the quotation of REDFLAG got me thinking. [[User:Aaron Liu|<span style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span>]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu#top|talk]]) 18:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Agree with the rest, but re:the copyright thing, I don't think it really matters. Unless I'm missing something, whether the copyright is held by the victims or the shooter, it shouldn't effect anything here, right? [[Special:Contributions/71.249.96.216|71.249.96.216]] ([[User talk:71.249.96.216|talk]]) 18:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::Well, assuming you don't mind being blocked for violating [[Wikipedia:LINKVIO|one of our legal policies]], then you're right: the mere consideration of contributory copyright infringement wouldn't affect anything here. Of course, the admin who blocked you for creating the copyright problem would also be obligated to [[WP:REVDEL]] the copyright problems, so if the goal is to Tell The World The Truth™ (or at least to help people indulge their curiosity and/or stoke their outrage), then that would be pretty ineffective way to go about it. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 18:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Um, I'm a little confused? Are you confusing me with the other person? I never posted anything on Wikipedia so I don't think I'm blocked? I'm writing a post right now that will disagree with the rather silly person that I just now see was blocked. I think I now understand. Random IP anon causes a ruckus, gets blocked, then a new random IP anon starts replying in the very same thread, so I understand why you probably think I'm that person. I will post a reply disagreeing with him in a few minutes, so rest assured, I'm not that person. |
|||
*:::Addressing the copyright thing, wouldn't it be fair use? Is it also a copyright problem on other articles with manifestos? Or are you saying that we shouldn't post anything until we are sure it is fair use or not a copyright problem? I think I agree with that last question. [[Special:Contributions/71.249.96.216|71.249.96.216]] ([[User talk:71.249.96.216|talk]]) 18:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::Linking to a pirated copy of a whole document would not be [[fair use]]. It would be [[Contributory copyright infringement]], which is a blockable offense on Wikipedia. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 19:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::As a simple example, fair use looks like writing something like this: |
|||
*:::::"In these lines, 'The moon, like a flower/In heaven's high bower/With silent delight/Sits and smiles on the night", the poet emphasizes the siblant S sound, which reminds the reader of a quiet shushing sound." |
|||
*:::::Fair use does not look like this: |
|||
*:::::"Click here to get a copy of the whole thing from a political outfit that has no legal right to be letting people read it." [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 19:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::::Thank you for the explanation. What was confusing me was the judge ruling that copyright transferred to the victims. But, the way I was thinking, that didn't really matter since whether the victim or the perpetrator held the copyright, it shouldn't change the fair use analysis. But, your example about fair use using only a small part of the original work, and no more, reminded me about fair use factor 3: "The Amount or Substantiality of the Portion Used". I will now try to figure out how to strike out my post saying there isn't a copyright problem. [[Special:Contributions/71.249.96.216|71.249.96.216]] ([[User talk:71.249.96.216|talk]]) 19:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::::You can do that with {{tag|s}} codes if you want, but it's not really necessary. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 19:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::::::(s is for things that are no longer true or relevant and del just generically indicates a change between edits along with ins.) [[User:Aaron Liu|<span style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span>]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu#top|talk]]) 20:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::This is not slightly close to fair use. A judge ruled the copyright transferred to the victims. It is their choice to make this public. If they don't, the victims are being victimized again. According to the Tennessee paper, the same judge may hold them in contempt of court for publishing it. [[User:Objective3000|O3000, Ret.]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 19:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Omit''', but solely for the lack of good sources. The real decider for me is that almost all the sources put a disclaimer before presenting the info. The ones that don't are clearly extremely partisan (NY Post and the like). Fox 17, a local Fox affiliate is the only source I found that that doesn't use a disclaimer. However, another article, this time authored by the "FOX Nashville Staff" rather than a single reporter as in the first article does use a disclaimer. |
|||
I understand that wikiPedia must be careful not to copy sentences verbatim but this is taking it quite a bit too far I think! |
|||
:<s>As I wrote above, I don't think there is a copyright problem since it seems that it is fair use to me, but I'm not sure. </s> It is a copyright problem to link the whole thing. I'm removing the links now since both Fox 17 articles link to the Tennessee Star which has the whole thing. In response to "Exceptional claims require exceptional sourcing", I'm not sure I agree that this is an exceptional claim. I think the first leak would've been an exceptional claim, but this just seems like a continuation of the leaks, which seems expected given it was already leaked once before. I'm unsure if there is a more rigorous standard for what "exceptional" means. [[Special:Contributions/71.249.96.216|71.249.96.216]] ([[User talk:71.249.96.216|talk]]) 19:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::It is an exceptional claim that this document is real and unmodified. Modification is all to common these days. [[User:Objective3000|O3000, Ret.]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 19:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Include''' - given the fact that it has been covered by national outlets and the current article covers the small couple page leak. [[User:Grahaml35|Grahaml35]] ([[User talk:Grahaml35|talk]]) 02:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:What national outlet? [[User:Aaron Liu|<span style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span>]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu#top|talk]]) 11:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Omit''' – I just don't see the point behind saying that someone obtained a copy of something written by the perpetrator. In [[WP:10YEARS]], this is not going to seem relevant. Just saying "This outfit has a copy" feels like free advertising. I would have a different view if we had, say, a scholarly source analyzing the contents, so we could say something substantive. I'm doubtful about including the current quotations, which may have been cherry-picked for their political value instead of being representative. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 03:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Omit''' — I was summoned here by Yapperbot and I have read the preceding discussion. I find {{u|WhatamIdoing}}'s arguments about the contributory copyright infringement issue convincing. If it comes out the Tennessee star published the manifesto with permission from a victim's parent that would merit revisiting this question. |
|||
Thank you, that is all. [[Special:Contributions/99.146.242.37|99.146.242.37]] ([[User talk:99.146.242.37|talk]]) 07:35, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:[[User:Groceryheist|Groceryheist]] ([[User talk:Groceryheist|talk]]) 05:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Include'''—but to be clear, I mean include that the Star published the "manifesto"; I do not think the text should be reproduced in this article, as that would be excessive. This release has received secondary coverage, and I thank that in [[WP:TENYEARS|ten years]], this will indeed be an important aspect of the shooting's story—the efforts to keep these writings unpublished by parents have become a major aspect of this sad story, and since secondary sources have covered this alleged acquisition and release, our article should cite those reports. <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>[[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 05:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Extraordinary claims require extraordinary sourcing. This is an extraordinary claim (because, for example, if these were in there, why didn't Crowder leak these parts? Did this known advocacy organization masquerading as a local outlet make the pages up?), and IMO local sources (+ the conspiracy-pushing [[Fox News]] & [[The Washington Times]]) do not satisfy extraordinary sourcing. [[User:Aaron Liu|<span style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span>]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu#top|talk]]) 20:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::I don’t see what’s so extraordinary about a document leak that secondary coverage from acceptable sources doesn’t cut it. It’s not terribly unusual. <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>[[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 21:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::What sources? [[User:Objective3000|O3000, Ret.]] ([[User talk:Objective3000|talk]]) 10:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Only local and dubious sources have covered this, every article includes a disclaimer that the original source is dubious, the event has not made e.g. AP, the contents contradict previous coverage that the attack was not motivated by identity (directly meeting REDFLAG: {{tq|Claims contradicted by the prevailing view within the relevant community or that would significantly alter mainstream assumptions—especially in ... politics}}), and the additional uncertainty that Crowder had to not have seen it. [[User:Aaron Liu|<span style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span>]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu#top|talk]]) 12:42, 6 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Omit''' per O3000 and WhatamIdoing, feels like there are likely some [[WP:NPOV]] issues in presenting the cherry picked portions as well. —[[User:Locke Cole|Locke Cole]] • [[User talk:Locke Cole|t]] • [[Special:Contributions/Locke Cole|c]] 18:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*<s>'''Include''' Agree with Zanahary that this has received enough coverage to justify some mention in the article. I'm not moved by arguments that the motivations of the perpetrator won't be important in 10 years. That argument falls into [[WP:CRYSTAL|crystal ball]] territory. A manifesto existing isn't a trivial part of the case and the coverage of it is enough for it to be mentioned in the article. [[User:Nemov|Nemov]] ([[User talk:Nemov|talk]]) 19:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)</s> |
|||
*:@[[User:Nemov|Nemov]], I agree with you that the motivations would be interesting, but I believe the proposal here is to add a sentence that says something like "A website posted a copy of some things the perp wrote on August 32, 2024", which is not "the motivations of the perpetrator". If we could add something like "The perpetrator appears to have been motivated by A, B, and C", then that would be great, but that does not appear to be what's on offer. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 20:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::I would profoundly disagree with including the Star's highlights due to the dubiousness. [[User:Aaron Liu|<span style="color:#0645ad">Aaron Liu</span>]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu#top|talk]]) 21:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::I hope that we will some day have a decent source (maybe something from a psychology journal?) that would let us add that kind of information. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 22:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::@[[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]], I agree this RFC wording is problematic and I'd support a '''procedural close''' or a reword of the RFC question. For now I'm withdrawing my support for include until there's a clearer idea what that means. [[User:Nemov|Nemov]] ([[User talk:Nemov|talk]]) 22:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::It is truly a meaningless question, and nobody is even entertaining its closest interpretation. <span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧁</span>[[User:Zanahary|Zanahary]]<span style="position: relative; top: -0.5em;">꧂</span> 04:15, 6 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Omit.''' The news outlet does not state clearly where it obtained the manifesto from. It can be mentioned that there is an alleged manifesto and who published it, but unless it is an official source working on the case such as the police, or family members I do not believe it is reliable enough. [[User:Luna Cielus|Luna Cielus]] ([[User talk:Luna Cielus|talk]]) 21:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I updated the sentence to address these concerns. ––[[User:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0">Formal</span><span style="color:black">Dude</span>]] [[User talk:FormalDude|<span style="color:#004ac0;font-size:90%;">(talk)</span>]] 10:52, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Comment''' It seems like this RfC is destined to either fail or be relisted with a major revision. I would be opposed to referring it as a "manifesto", I don't think RS are referring to it as that (and if they are, ugh). It appears to be Hales' journal, and a disturbing one at that. [[User:Kcmastrpc|Kcmastrpc]] ([[User talk:Kcmastrpc|talk]]) 12:48, 6 September 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't think this sentence, about impersonalized statistics, is relevant in a section about ''this'' person. [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 19:28, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
{{archive bottom}} |
|||
::To me, the sentence is trying to address potential confusion from the line, {{tpq|i=yes|Six other associates do not recall talk about gender identity.}} I do get the point that the line is still a problem. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 20:18, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:In the meantime, I've changed "revealed" to "suggests", "over 10%" to "12%" and the bit about this ''not'' being rare to nothing (because any 12% occurrence is pretty uncommon). [[User:InedibleHulk|InedibleHulk]] ([[User talk:InedibleHulk|talk]]) 19:53, 4 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
== Whatever happened to [[MOS:GENDERID]]? == |
|||
== This article is ridiculous == |
|||
[[User:Some1|Some1]], if anything, it should be removed from the perpetrator section. Have one or the other, not both. '''''[[User:LilianaUwU|<span style="font-family:default;color:#246BCE;">Liliana</span><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;color:#FF1493;">UwU</span>]]''''' <sup>([[User talk:LilianaUwU|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/LilianaUwU|contributions]])</sup> 23:45, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
12% of non conforming have I’d their gender!?! Why is it even on here? [[Special:Contributions/47.200.110.84|47.200.110.84]] ([[User talk:47.200.110.84|talk]]) 00:45, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:The RfC consensus ([[Talk:2023_Nashville_school_shooting/Archive_6#Request_for_Comment:_How_should_the_perpetrator_be_named_in_the_article?]]) says {{tq|there's a rough consensus to say "Audrey Elizabeth Hale" once in the lede, and in one or two other carefully-selected places.}} [[User:Some1|Some1]] ([[User talk:Some1|talk]]) 23:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:You don't still take Wikipedia seriously, do you? I like to come here when they make articles about ongoing or recent events and just read the Talk pages for laughs. American politics and the Ukraine War are currently my favorite topics for pure gold. I then make memes about it with friends, I find it refreshing. Wikipedia ain't good for much else these days. [[Special:Contributions/109.93.177.159|109.93.177.159]] ([[User talk:109.93.177.159|talk]]) 01:04, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
::Which goes against GENDERID. RFC don't mean anything when they go against a policy. '''''[[User:LilianaUwU|<span style="font-family:default;color:#246BCE;">Liliana</span><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;color:#FF1493;">UwU</span>]]''''' <sup>([[User talk:LilianaUwU|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/LilianaUwU|contributions]])</sup> 00:42, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::It’s insane. They’re a joke. Why would that factoid be in an article about the shooter. Oh. Don’t forget a definition of recession! [[Special:Contributions/47.200.110.84|47.200.110.84]] ([[User talk:47.200.110.84|talk]]) 02:15, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
:::[[MOS:GENDERID]] is a guideline ("It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though occasional exceptions may apply.") {{ping|User:S Marshall}} took this (MOS:GENDERID) into account when he made the close. [[User:Some1|Some1]] ([[User talk:Some1|talk]]) 00:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*I did indeed. That close is more than a year old and it's reasonable to revisit old decisions from time to time to see if the consensus has changed; but I'm resolute that I closed that discussion correctly.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 00:54, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*: LilianaUWU herself !voted to say Audrey Elizabeth Hale in the lead, by the way.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 00:57, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::Yes, ''in the lead'', and only because the RSes blindly followed what the cops said in their press releases. Note how I never said anything about putting it anywhere else. '''''[[User:LilianaUwU|<span style="font-family:default;color:#246BCE;">Liliana</span><span style="font-family:Comic Sans MS;color:#FF1493;">UwU</span>]]''''' <sup>([[User talk:LilianaUwU|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/LilianaUwU|contributions]])</sup> 01:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Might be a good idea anyways given [[Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/Archive 182#RFC: MOS:GENDERID and the deadnames of deceased trans and nonbinary persons|RFC: MOS:GENDERID and the deadnames of deceased trans and nonbinary persons]]. Guideline still as noted above by Some1, but that RfC did try to resolve some of the discussions that we had here. --[[User:Super Goku V|Super Goku V]] ([[User talk:Super Goku V|talk]]) 04:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::I don't see the point of another RfC considering the name is only mentioned twice and for {{tq|encyclopedic interest or when necessary to avoid confusion}}; most of the reliable sources that came out after the shooting used Hale's birth name, not the preferred name. [[User:Some1|Some1]] ([[User talk:Some1|talk]]) 12:54, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Well, I mean, the point is that the policy has since been clarified; I don't think there's really much to support the idea that the second mention is of encyclopedic interest or necessary to avoid confusion. And the entire point of MOS:GENDERID is that we reflect what the sources say about ''their self-identification'', not how third parties describe them. As it says, we must {{tq|"reflect the person's most recent expressed gender self-identification as reported in the most recent reliable sources, '''even if it does not match what is most common in sources.'''"}} I don't think anyone has really given a particularly good reason for why we would deviate from that here. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 17:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Since three editors (you, LilianaUwU and I'm assuming Super Goku V) seemingly support removing the second mention of the birth name, feel free to remove it--preferably from the lead (not the Perpetrator section). No RfC needed (unless people are trying to remove every mention of the birth name from this article). [[User:Some1|Some1]] ([[User talk:Some1|talk]]) 23:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== More Hale info == |
||
Several resources say that Hale died three days after her 28th birthday. [[Special:Contributions/2600:1702:5225:C010:69EE:BDDD:749E:475C|2600:1702:5225:C010:69EE:BDDD:749E:475C]] ([[User talk:2600:1702:5225:C010:69EE:BDDD:749E:475C|talk]]) 00:38, 4 January 2025 (UTC) |
|||
Could extended protection be applied? [[User:Justanother2|Justanother2]] ([[User talk:Justanother2|talk]]) 02:35, 5 April 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Latest revision as of 21:42, 4 January 2025
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2023 Nashville school shooting article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 7 days  |
 | This page is not a forum for general discussion about 2023 Nashville school shooting. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about 2023 Nashville school shooting at the Reference desk. |
 | Warning: active arbitration remedies The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:
Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
 | The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
 | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article has previously been nominated to be moved. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination.
Discussions:
|
Gender identity of perpetrator Q: Which pronouns should be used when referring to the perpetrator?
A: Multiple (1, 2, 3) talk page sections have discussed this topic — it currently appears that a majority of reliable sources (e.g. Independent, The Guardian, WaPo, NPR) now lean towards using he/him pronouns for the perpetrator. As a majority of reliable sources use these pronouns, and these pronouns seem to reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification(WP:GENDERID), we too should use he/him pronouns when referring to the perpetrator. Q: Which name should be used when referring to the perpetrator?
A: Multiple talk page sections have discussed this topic. Consensus is to use both names, while limiting the number of uses of the former name, following this RfC. Other questions Q: Why are the weapons used not fully named?
A: Multiple (1, 2, 3) talk page sections have discussed this. At this time, there does not appear to be a reliable source for two of the three weapons used. In order for the names of the other two weapons to be included, we would need a source that is considered to be generally reliable. Q: The New York Post has posted an article with details about the shooting. Why haven't they been included?
A: Multiple (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) talk page sections have attempted to suggest edits due to information from the New York Post. The New York Post has been deemed a generally unreliable source by the community. (See WP:NYPOST for more details.) This means that the New York Post is not considered to be a reliable source for information. |
| While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
RfC on inclusion of Nashville school shooter's manifesto release
[edit]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.
Should the Nashville school shooter's manifesto release be included in the article? 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F (talk) 01:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Include - The Tennessee Star, a local news outlet, has published the 90-page manifesto written by Hale. The journal, which the outlet claims to have legally obtained from a source familiar with the investigation, contains Hale's writings from January to March 2023 and includes details about their mental health, gender identity, and plans for the attack.
- This has been covered by the following non-deprecated/blocked national sources:
- New York Sun
- Fox News
- Townhall
- The Washington Times
- Tampa Free Press
- And also by the following local stations:
- WSMV
- WKRN
- 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F (talk) 01:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. It is difficult to assume good faith in the IP initiating the RfC when they misgender they shooter. —C.Fred (talk) 01:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Corrected it now. Not sure which one you would prefer. Please dont Wikipedia:Bite and remember to not do drive by comments. Based on your editing history, you are here solely by disagreeing with me elsewhere and posting on my TP. You have also been asked to stop posting on my TP. This might be important to note for others given your previous comment. It seems you are not willing to contribute here to this RfC and seem to harbor ill will against me. Please be a better Wikipedian.
- 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F (talk) 01:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Include: It makes sense to include it, given that the article currently covers a small leak of four pages from Steven Crowter and that this leak is 90 pages (apparently the entire document). Daddyelectrolux (talk) 03:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Absolutely agree. Any criticism on the source that fails to account for the previous Crowder leaks being here already would be ill formed.
- 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE (talk) 14:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Include with attribution. There are concerns with The Tennessee Star noted above, but the repetition of the claims in other sources warrants at least a mention.(Also, Fox News has been generally unreliable on politics, broadly construed, for a while now.) Aaron Liu (talk) 03:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)- Comment - All of the sources simply refer to the same source, The Tennessee Star, which is not a reliable source. Indeed, according to Snopes (which is RS), it was set up by "PAC-Connected Activists".[1] That is, there are no reliable sources for this. O3000, Ret. (talk) 10:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Even admins have agreed to its inclusion here. Your point above has been addressed multiple times by multiple people and you ignore these. Moreover, you continue to reply negatively to me on other article TP's which implies sour grapes and ill will instead of trying to help Wikipedia and/or achieve consensus via the proper means.
- You do not seem to be acting in good faith, sadly.
- 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE (talk) 11:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Admins are not supposed to be treated as admins outside of administrative disputes. Please don't assume that others are acting in bad faith within a day; it seems clear that Obj just doesn't want facts to be made up. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- I will take your suggestion and give it great value. This is given you have been previously very helpful. It just seems that on two different topics @Objective3000 very quickly posts negatively against whatever opinion I might be holding, one after the other. Its happened at least once already. He has also complained on your TP about me. I wonder if Wikipedia:Tendentious editing could apply here? If it doesn't, then apologies.
- 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE (talk) 14:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Please stop the nasty posts. Three this morning alone. You have claimed I'm guilty of a dozen infractions, all totally false. This must stop. O3000, Ret. (talk) 14:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Admins are not supposed to be treated as admins outside of administrative disputes. Please don't assume that others are acting in bad faith within a day; it seems clear that Obj just doesn't want facts to be made up. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Include with attribution and limitation.Since the clearly-reliable sources are indicating that The Tennessee Star is the source of the information, it is relevant to include that so readers know where the information came from and can make assessments of its veracity accordingly. Further, we should limit our coverage to what has been reported by the clearly-reliable sources downstream of the TS, since we can expect their editorial staffs to have done more vetting that is inline with WP:RS. —C.Fred (talk) 12:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)- I fully agree. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Problem is that the readers don't know what The Tennessee Star is and therefore won't know
where the information came from and can make assessments of its veracity accordingly
. According to Snopes, it is not a local paper. It is only one of several papers masquerading as a local paper but carrying paid political stories and often duplicate text that ends up with mistakes like naming the incorrect governor because the story has been copied from one of their local papers to another paper in another state. The Snopes story is a quite interesting read.[2] O3000, Ret. (talk) 13:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)- Wikipedia:WHATABOUTX on the source. If you feel so strongly about the original source, please start a RfC on RS and rally the community to deprecate it. In the mean time, any previous mistake the source has made doesn't carry to their current, relevant reporting. If we followed your lead we should neved use the New York Times sincw they really messed up by 'confirming' weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, no?
- The facts are, a source you don't like published the subjects entire manifesto. It contains a lot of information over the shooters mental stability and thought process. Many RS are covering it, though they are not your personally preferred sources. Recall that the RS Perennial states it is non-exhaustive itself.
- On the above, plenty of experienced editors are agreeing that WP should definitely cover this. Some prefer an attribution.
- Please let us know what other formal points you disagree as per WP rules.
- 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE (talk) 14:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- This has zero to do with WHATABOUTX. You keep linking to irrelevant guidelines. I have already given my opinion. I am allowed to do so. The source has been discussed at RSN. It is a bad source. RfC's are not performed for the vast majority of bad sources because they are obvious. And please stop using phrases like
a source you don't like
as this is improper. O3000, Ret. (talk) 14:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)- It looks like 2601:19E is mostly linking to Wikipedia:Essays (not guidelines). WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- This has zero to do with WHATABOUTX. You keep linking to irrelevant guidelines. I have already given my opinion. I am allowed to do so. The source has been discussed at RSN. It is a bad source. RfC's are not performed for the vast majority of bad sources because they are obvious. And please stop using phrases like
- Include with relevant information that RS cover. If RS are reporting on its content, even in detailed summary form, they have put their journalistic integrity on the line and Wikipedia should reasonably assume that the content and the reactions to it is reliable. There can be further discussion as to what is WP:DUE, but after reviewing the content myself (and to be clear, my views are not what decides whether details are or aren't included) I believe it's important that Wikipedia cover what RS's are saying because this individual was quite clearly mentally unwell. If we can help readers understand the importance of mental health and keeping firearms away from unstable individuals then I think we're being good stewards for humanity. To be clear, I'm not here to WP:WGW, but just report what WP:RS and trusted professionals are saying (of course, when reported by a reliable source). Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- I fully agree with the above. I'd like to highlight Wikipedia:Compromise. There seems to be consensus here to include, possibly with attribution.
- I can't do that given the protection level this article carries. Perhaps a more experienced editor can do som.
- 2601:19E:427E:5BB0:34CA:87CE:F550:B1EE (talk) 14:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- RFCs typically run for seven days. Please be patient, and please refrain from commenting on every !vote. Funcrunch (talk) 15:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with @Funcrunch here, please refrain from replying to every vote and wait until RfC has concluded. I will not introduce contentious material to a BLP unless there is affirmative consensus. Kcmastrpc (talk) 16:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- It will take more than 7 days. I only just added the relevant RfC topics, pol and bio. O3000, Ret. (talk) 17:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- RFCs typically run for seven days. Please be patient, and please refrain from commenting on every !vote. Funcrunch (talk) 15:09, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - What source would be used? None of these sources are considered good. Maybe I'm missing something, but I can't find any mention in the NYPost or Fox listed above. I Googled trying to find a source. They are all poor sources. The only half decent source related to this said the "Judge rejects requests to release Nashville school shooter’s writings". The copyright is held by the victims. So what is the provenance? Only The Tennessee Star says it has a copy. But to get it, you must give them your name and email, which I will not do. The Star article on this is clearly trying to push a political point.[3]. How do we know if this document is real? Before any addition to an encyclopedia, we should have a very good source. Is there any source at WP:RSP that discusses this? As per WP:REDFLAG, "Exceptional claims require exceptional sourcing." O3000, Ret. (talk) 16:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- It would help if the IP had provided links to the sources, so that other users could verify what they say more readily, rather than having to crawl through Google trying to find it. —C.Fred (talk) 16:49, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Omit, in absence of verification. One of the local news sources mentioned has no coverage. The other's lede on the story is "A Tennessee newspaper published all 90 pages of a what it says is the journal seized during a search of the Covenant School shooter’s home and vehicle on the day she murdered six people in Nashville."[sic, emphasis added][4] And as O3000 mentioned with WP:REDFLAG, WSMV is disclaimering their presentation of the information, so we need sources that are more plentiful and more solid. —C.Fred (talk) 16:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Omit per Obj's pretty convincing argument. I saw the disclaimer, but the thing about the copyright and the quotation of REDFLAG got me thinking. Aaron Liu (talk) 18:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with the rest, but re:the copyright thing, I don't think it really matters. Unless I'm missing something, whether the copyright is held by the victims or the shooter, it shouldn't effect anything here, right? 71.249.96.216 (talk) 18:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Well, assuming you don't mind being blocked for violating one of our legal policies, then you're right: the mere consideration of contributory copyright infringement wouldn't affect anything here. Of course, the admin who blocked you for creating the copyright problem would also be obligated to WP:REVDEL the copyright problems, so if the goal is to Tell The World The Truth™ (or at least to help people indulge their curiosity and/or stoke their outrage), then that would be pretty ineffective way to go about it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Um, I'm a little confused? Are you confusing me with the other person? I never posted anything on Wikipedia so I don't think I'm blocked? I'm writing a post right now that will disagree with the rather silly person that I just now see was blocked. I think I now understand. Random IP anon causes a ruckus, gets blocked, then a new random IP anon starts replying in the very same thread, so I understand why you probably think I'm that person. I will post a reply disagreeing with him in a few minutes, so rest assured, I'm not that person.
- Addressing the copyright thing, wouldn't it be fair use? Is it also a copyright problem on other articles with manifestos? Or are you saying that we shouldn't post anything until we are sure it is fair use or not a copyright problem? I think I agree with that last question. 71.249.96.216 (talk) 18:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Linking to a pirated copy of a whole document would not be fair use. It would be Contributory copyright infringement, which is a blockable offense on Wikipedia. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- As a simple example, fair use looks like writing something like this:
- "In these lines, 'The moon, like a flower/In heaven's high bower/With silent delight/Sits and smiles on the night", the poet emphasizes the siblant S sound, which reminds the reader of a quiet shushing sound."
- Fair use does not look like this:
- "Click here to get a copy of the whole thing from a political outfit that has no legal right to be letting people read it." WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:10, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the explanation. What was confusing me was the judge ruling that copyright transferred to the victims. But, the way I was thinking, that didn't really matter since whether the victim or the perpetrator held the copyright, it shouldn't change the fair use analysis. But, your example about fair use using only a small part of the original work, and no more, reminded me about fair use factor 3: "The Amount or Substantiality of the Portion Used". I will now try to figure out how to strike out my post saying there isn't a copyright problem. 71.249.96.216 (talk) 19:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- You can do that with
<s>...</s>codes if you want, but it's not really necessary. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)- (s is for things that are no longer true or relevant and del just generically indicates a change between edits along with ins.) Aaron Liu (talk) 20:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- You can do that with
- Thank you for the explanation. What was confusing me was the judge ruling that copyright transferred to the victims. But, the way I was thinking, that didn't really matter since whether the victim or the perpetrator held the copyright, it shouldn't change the fair use analysis. But, your example about fair use using only a small part of the original work, and no more, reminded me about fair use factor 3: "The Amount or Substantiality of the Portion Used". I will now try to figure out how to strike out my post saying there isn't a copyright problem. 71.249.96.216 (talk) 19:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- This is not slightly close to fair use. A judge ruled the copyright transferred to the victims. It is their choice to make this public. If they don't, the victims are being victimized again. According to the Tennessee paper, the same judge may hold them in contempt of court for publishing it. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Linking to a pirated copy of a whole document would not be fair use. It would be Contributory copyright infringement, which is a blockable offense on Wikipedia. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Well, assuming you don't mind being blocked for violating one of our legal policies, then you're right: the mere consideration of contributory copyright infringement wouldn't affect anything here. Of course, the admin who blocked you for creating the copyright problem would also be obligated to WP:REVDEL the copyright problems, so if the goal is to Tell The World The Truth™ (or at least to help people indulge their curiosity and/or stoke their outrage), then that would be pretty ineffective way to go about it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:47, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with the rest, but re:the copyright thing, I don't think it really matters. Unless I'm missing something, whether the copyright is held by the victims or the shooter, it shouldn't effect anything here, right? 71.249.96.216 (talk) 18:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Omit, but solely for the lack of good sources. The real decider for me is that almost all the sources put a disclaimer before presenting the info. The ones that don't are clearly extremely partisan (NY Post and the like). Fox 17, a local Fox affiliate is the only source I found that that doesn't use a disclaimer. However, another article, this time authored by the "FOX Nashville Staff" rather than a single reporter as in the first article does use a disclaimer.
As I wrote above, I don't think there is a copyright problem since it seems that it is fair use to me, but I'm not sure.It is a copyright problem to link the whole thing. I'm removing the links now since both Fox 17 articles link to the Tennessee Star which has the whole thing. In response to "Exceptional claims require exceptional sourcing", I'm not sure I agree that this is an exceptional claim. I think the first leak would've been an exceptional claim, but this just seems like a continuation of the leaks, which seems expected given it was already leaked once before. I'm unsure if there is a more rigorous standard for what "exceptional" means. 71.249.96.216 (talk) 19:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)- It is an exceptional claim that this document is real and unmodified. Modification is all to common these days. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Include - given the fact that it has been covered by national outlets and the current article covers the small couple page leak. Grahaml35 (talk) 02:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- What national outlet? Aaron Liu (talk) 11:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Omit – I just don't see the point behind saying that someone obtained a copy of something written by the perpetrator. In WP:10YEARS, this is not going to seem relevant. Just saying "This outfit has a copy" feels like free advertising. I would have a different view if we had, say, a scholarly source analyzing the contents, so we could say something substantive. I'm doubtful about including the current quotations, which may have been cherry-picked for their political value instead of being representative. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Omit — I was summoned here by Yapperbot and I have read the preceding discussion. I find WhatamIdoing's arguments about the contributory copyright infringement issue convincing. If it comes out the Tennessee star published the manifesto with permission from a victim's parent that would merit revisiting this question.
- Include—but to be clear, I mean include that the Star published the "manifesto"; I do not think the text should be reproduced in this article, as that would be excessive. This release has received secondary coverage, and I thank that in ten years, this will indeed be an important aspect of the shooting's story—the efforts to keep these writings unpublished by parents have become a major aspect of this sad story, and since secondary sources have covered this alleged acquisition and release, our article should cite those reports. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 05:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Extraordinary claims require extraordinary sourcing. This is an extraordinary claim (because, for example, if these were in there, why didn't Crowder leak these parts? Did this known advocacy organization masquerading as a local outlet make the pages up?), and IMO local sources (+ the conspiracy-pushing Fox News & The Washington Times) do not satisfy extraordinary sourcing. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don’t see what’s so extraordinary about a document leak that secondary coverage from acceptable sources doesn’t cut it. It’s not terribly unusual. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 21:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- What sources? O3000, Ret. (talk) 10:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Only local and dubious sources have covered this, every article includes a disclaimer that the original source is dubious, the event has not made e.g. AP, the contents contradict previous coverage that the attack was not motivated by identity (directly meeting REDFLAG:
Claims contradicted by the prevailing view within the relevant community or that would significantly alter mainstream assumptions—especially in ... politics
), and the additional uncertainty that Crowder had to not have seen it. Aaron Liu (talk) 12:42, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- I don’t see what’s so extraordinary about a document leak that secondary coverage from acceptable sources doesn’t cut it. It’s not terribly unusual. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 21:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Extraordinary claims require extraordinary sourcing. This is an extraordinary claim (because, for example, if these were in there, why didn't Crowder leak these parts? Did this known advocacy organization masquerading as a local outlet make the pages up?), and IMO local sources (+ the conspiracy-pushing Fox News & The Washington Times) do not satisfy extraordinary sourcing. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Omit per O3000 and WhatamIdoing, feels like there are likely some WP:NPOV issues in presenting the cherry picked portions as well. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Include Agree with Zanahary that this has received enough coverage to justify some mention in the article. I'm not moved by arguments that the motivations of the perpetrator won't be important in 10 years. That argument falls into crystal ball territory. A manifesto existing isn't a trivial part of the case and the coverage of it is enough for it to be mentioned in the article. Nemov (talk) 19:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)- @Nemov, I agree with you that the motivations would be interesting, but I believe the proposal here is to add a sentence that says something like "A website posted a copy of some things the perp wrote on August 32, 2024", which is not "the motivations of the perpetrator". If we could add something like "The perpetrator appears to have been motivated by A, B, and C", then that would be great, but that does not appear to be what's on offer. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I would profoundly disagree with including the Star's highlights due to the dubiousness. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I hope that we will some day have a decent source (maybe something from a psychology journal?) that would let us add that kind of information. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @WhatamIdoing, I agree this RFC wording is problematic and I'd support a procedural close or a reword of the RFC question. For now I'm withdrawing my support for include until there's a clearer idea what that means. Nemov (talk) 22:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- It is truly a meaningless question, and nobody is even entertaining its closest interpretation. ꧁Zanahary꧂ 04:15, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- I would profoundly disagree with including the Star's highlights due to the dubiousness. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:00, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Nemov, I agree with you that the motivations would be interesting, but I believe the proposal here is to add a sentence that says something like "A website posted a copy of some things the perp wrote on August 32, 2024", which is not "the motivations of the perpetrator". If we could add something like "The perpetrator appears to have been motivated by A, B, and C", then that would be great, but that does not appear to be what's on offer. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Omit. The news outlet does not state clearly where it obtained the manifesto from. It can be mentioned that there is an alleged manifesto and who published it, but unless it is an official source working on the case such as the police, or family members I do not believe it is reliable enough. Luna Cielus (talk) 21:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It seems like this RfC is destined to either fail or be relisted with a major revision. I would be opposed to referring it as a "manifesto", I don't think RS are referring to it as that (and if they are, ugh). It appears to be Hales' journal, and a disturbing one at that. Kcmastrpc (talk) 12:48, 6 September 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.
Whatever happened to MOS:GENDERID?
[edit]Some1, if anything, it should be removed from the perpetrator section. Have one or the other, not both. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 23:45, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- The RfC consensus (Talk:2023_Nashville_school_shooting/Archive_6#Request_for_Comment:_How_should_the_perpetrator_be_named_in_the_article?) says
there's a rough consensus to say "Audrey Elizabeth Hale" once in the lede, and in one or two other carefully-selected places.
Some1 (talk) 23:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC)- Which goes against GENDERID. RFC don't mean anything when they go against a policy. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 00:42, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- MOS:GENDERID is a guideline ("It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though occasional exceptions may apply.") @S Marshall: took this (MOS:GENDERID) into account when he made the close. Some1 (talk) 00:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Which goes against GENDERID. RFC don't mean anything when they go against a policy. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 00:42, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- I did indeed. That close is more than a year old and it's reasonable to revisit old decisions from time to time to see if the consensus has changed; but I'm resolute that I closed that discussion correctly.—S Marshall T/C 00:54, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- LilianaUWU herself !voted to say Audrey Elizabeth Hale in the lead, by the way.—S Marshall T/C 00:57, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, in the lead, and only because the RSes blindly followed what the cops said in their press releases. Note how I never said anything about putting it anywhere else. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 01:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Might be a good idea anyways given RFC: MOS:GENDERID and the deadnames of deceased trans and nonbinary persons. Guideline still as noted above by Some1, but that RfC did try to resolve some of the discussions that we had here. --Super Goku V (talk) 04:20, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see the point of another RfC considering the name is only mentioned twice and for
encyclopedic interest or when necessary to avoid confusion
; most of the reliable sources that came out after the shooting used Hale's birth name, not the preferred name. Some1 (talk) 12:54, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see the point of another RfC considering the name is only mentioned twice and for
- LilianaUWU herself !voted to say Audrey Elizabeth Hale in the lead, by the way.—S Marshall T/C 00:57, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I mean, the point is that the policy has since been clarified; I don't think there's really much to support the idea that the second mention is of encyclopedic interest or necessary to avoid confusion. And the entire point of MOS:GENDERID is that we reflect what the sources say about their self-identification, not how third parties describe them. As it says, we must
"reflect the person's most recent expressed gender self-identification as reported in the most recent reliable sources, even if it does not match what is most common in sources."
I don't think anyone has really given a particularly good reason for why we would deviate from that here. --Aquillion (talk) 17:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)- Since three editors (you, LilianaUwU and I'm assuming Super Goku V) seemingly support removing the second mention of the birth name, feel free to remove it--preferably from the lead (not the Perpetrator section). No RfC needed (unless people are trying to remove every mention of the birth name from this article). Some1 (talk) 23:27, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I mean, the point is that the policy has since been clarified; I don't think there's really much to support the idea that the second mention is of encyclopedic interest or necessary to avoid confusion. And the entire point of MOS:GENDERID is that we reflect what the sources say about their self-identification, not how third parties describe them. As it says, we must
More Hale info
[edit]Several resources say that Hale died three days after her 28th birthday. 2600:1702:5225:C010:69EE:BDDD:749E:475C (talk) 00:38, 4 January 2025 (UTC)
Categories:
- Wikipedia articles that use American English
- C-Class Christianity articles
- Low-importance Christianity articles
- WikiProject Christianity articles
- C-Class Crime-related articles
- Low-importance Crime-related articles
- C-Class Serial killer-related articles
- Low-importance Serial killer-related articles
- Serial Killer task force
- WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography articles
- C-Class Death articles
- Low-importance Death articles
- C-Class Firearms articles
- Low-importance Firearms articles
- WikiProject Firearms articles
- C-Class Gender studies articles
- Low-importance Gender studies articles
- WikiProject Gender studies articles
- C-Class Law enforcement articles
- Low-importance Law enforcement articles
- WikiProject Law Enforcement articles
- C-Class LGBTQ+ studies articles
- WikiProject LGBTQ+ studies articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- C-Class American politics articles
- Low-importance American politics articles
- American politics task force articles
- C-Class gun politics articles
- Low-importance gun politics articles
- Gun politics task force articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class Tennessee articles
- Low-importance Tennessee articles
- Pages in the Wikipedia Top 25 Report