This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Essex lorry deaths 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 |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) 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 was nominated for deletion on 23 October 2019. The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
![]() | A news item involving Essex lorry deaths was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 23 October 2019. | ![]() |
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 B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | It is requested that a photograph of the lorry in the crime scene be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Essex may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
"Human trafficking is the trade of humans for the purpose of forced labour, sexual slavery, or commercial sexual exploitation for the trafficker or others." which is part of organized crime, while migrants fall under People smuggling. The latter is also a crime but done with the victim's consent. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 16:26, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Neutrality Issue - The article implies the deceased individuals are victims of human trafficking - there is no reported factual evidence to support this. The news reporting and historical trends show it's almost certainly migrant smuggling. There is a significant difference between the two; being that the "victims" may also be seen as willful perpetrators as they have given consent. Aeonx ( talk) 08:35, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
He's been id'd & is aged 25, according to CCTV. However, he'd only picked up the truck/container minutes before the bodies were found, so he's probably not involved in what happened... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.3.59 ( talk) 17:19, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
He's innocent until proven guilty. - SchroCat ( talk) 23:24, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
For relatively unknown people, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured. A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction.There is no need for him to be included unless and until there is a conviction. This is a policy, not a guideline. – SchroCat ( talk) 13:08, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
This policy applies to any living person mentioned in a BLP, whether or not that person is the subject of the article, and to material about living persons in other articles and on other pages, including talk pages.-- DeFacto ( talk). 13:57, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
For relatively unknown people, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured. A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction." given in WP:BLPCRIME, what would be your rationale for ignoring that? -- DeFacto ( talk). 21:45, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
The above term, linking to two other articles, is currently in the first sentence of the Incident section. [R]efrigerated lorry links to Refrigerator truck and container links to Intermodal container. This term is problematic in a couple of ways. One, judging from Refrigerator truck, such a truck/lorry has its own type of trailer and does not normally transport an intermodal container. Two, if it's an intermodal container, it's not strictly a lorry container. I suggest that the term be replaced with refrigerated container if that is in fact what the dead were found in. (Or were they found in a trailer pulled by refrigerated trucks/lorries that had been driven onto the ship in Belgium and off of the ship in Purfleet by a different cab than the one that it was found attached to?) — 184.207.39.217 ( talk) 09:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
(I realise that the answers to some or all of the following questions may not yet be clear). The article says that "The lorry arrived in Essex in two parts. The trailer arrived in Purfleet, a town near Grays with a port on the River Thames, from the port of Zeebrugge in Belgium at around 00:30 on 23 October.[7] Police believe that the lorry cab came from Northern Ireland[8] and entered the Welsh port of Holyhead on Saturday 19 October[9][7] after passing through the Republic of Ireland.[10] Initial reports were that the cab and trailer arrived at Holyhead together."
1. So is the article saying that the lorry cab/tractor unit and the trailer did not come together until they both arrived in Purfleet from different directions - the lorry cab/tractor unit through Great Britain from Holyhead, and the trailer across the English Channel from Zeebrugge?
2. Is it normal practice for trailers of this type to travel from Zeebrugge to Purfleet with cabs or without cabs?
3. Is it known whether or not the cab visited the continent of Europe at any time after it last arrived from the island of Ireland at Holyhead?
4. Is it known whether or not the "Initial reports ... that the cab and trailer arrived at Holyhead together." were correct?
5. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50159748 gives details of the trailer's movements (including on the European continent) and says that "Essex Police said the tractor unit (the front part of the lorry) had entered the UK via Holyhead - an Irish Sea port in Wales - on Sunday 20 October, having travelled over from Dublin. Police believe the tractor unit collected the trailer in Purfleet on the River Thames and left the port shortly after 01:05 on Thursday." So is it known which cab was pulling the trailer during its movements as listed, and whether or not that was the same cab as the one which collected it at Purfleet?
If the answers to any or all of these questions are known, I suggest that it would be helpful if the article provided them. Thoughts/comments? Alekksandr ( talk) 22:09, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
The owner of the trailer has been published - https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2019/1024/1085287-migrant-deaths/ Tentstick ( talk) 10:44, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Although not confirmed, yes, but should we name victims (for now and future revelations). See Father of Vietnamese woman believed dead in Essex truck: Smugglers said this was a 'safe route' CNN article, Pham Thi Tra My is named as the 19-year-old Vietnamese woman. comrade waddie96 ★ ( talk) 06:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
1. The victim or person wrongly convicted, consistent with Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Subjects notable only for one event, had a large role within a well-documented historic event. The historic significance is indicated by persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role."? Martinevans123 ( talk) 21:13, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Under what scenario could this not be a crime? Jim Michael ( talk) 17:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
In English law, where murder and manslaughter are concerned, the English court has jurisdiction over offences committed abroad, if committed by a British citizen (see section 9 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 and section 3 of the British Nationality Act 1948)" Both the drivers are reported to be British (in this context = UK) citizens. Davidships ( talk) 15:18, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
The Telegraph is running a story that the Grays lorry may have been part of a three-vehicle convoy of which two reached destination. But it seems to be a synthesis/speculation based on other vague reports, so I have not added it, pending wider sourcing. At present there is an unexplained pair of maps in the article, but they are not captured in the archived version. Davidships ( talk) 18:33, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
I’m an IP so I can’t edit. Can someone fix please? Thanks. -- 100.6.163.186 ( talk) 20:08, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2019 Grays incident has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change "On 23 October 2019, the bodies of 39 people were found in a refrigerated articulated lorry in Grays, Essex, United Kingdom" to "...Grays, Essex at the outskirts of London". Judging by the map, it's an outer suburb of London 93.136.156.137 ( talk) 00:06, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
According to The NYT], we don't know whether the refrigerator was on or off, whether they froze, whether they suffocated, or whether something else killed them. Do we really have no sources that say whether the refrigerator was on? -- Guy Macon ( talk) 04:11, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Several sources, such as Huffington Post, are reporting that the victims left ‘bloody handprints’ and that they were ‘half naked’ and ‘foaming at the mouth’. Is any of this worth putting in the article, or is it irrelevant human interest stuff? Sir Magnus Fluffbrains ( talk) 16:15, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
The Sun https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10215863/essex-lorry-deaths-news-found-naked-bloody-handprints/
Daily Mirror https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/dead-migrants-left-bloody-handprints-20726568
Daily Mail (unreliable source) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7615547/Police-bloody-handprints-freezing-coffin-39-migrants-died.html
Birmingham Mail https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/essex-lorry-deaths-horror-conditions-17150885
Belfast Live https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/essex-deaths-conditions-39-victims-17150343
The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/dreams-of-new-life-end-with-bloody-handprints-in-a-lorry-bzws6dpct
Daily Star https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/essex-lorry-migrants-left-bloody-20727239
A redlinked category Wikipedia requested images of miscellaneous has been lurking at the bottom of the page for some days. Can someone fix it please? Davidships ( talk) 23:58, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
[Moved here, where discussion about the content of this article belongs, from my talkpage. It refers to this edit of mine. -- DeFacto ( talk). 07:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
The dailymail is actually more reliable than other news sources when it comes to certain events (particular to the UK). Undoing an update because I sourced the dailymail isn't justified. I'm an experienced editor, I know about the blanket suppression of it, and I choose to use it as a source anyways. You should have a read... Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. When it comes to providing better encyclopedic content, WP:IAR. Aeonx ( talk) 23:35, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
The dailymail is actually more reliable than other news sources: No, no, no, no, no NO!!! The Daily Fail is one of the biggest culprits for stretching facts, fabricating quotes, reminagining scenarios as fact and outright straight, bare-faced, open lying. It belongs with the Sun, Mirror, People, Express, Star and Record as sources that should not ever be used as a source for anything! - SchroCat ( talk) 07:44, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
As the RfC generally allow, the print version of the Daily Mail can provide facts relating to British politics (but even then they have a heavy Conservative lean) and what seem to be trivial events, and then has generally expected coverage of sports etc. that any other paper also provides; its opinion pieces are all from non-experts with strong views, so don't touch them. The Daily Mail Online is a piece of crud and should never be used. The consensus to deprecate clearly notes that anything the Daily Mail publishes that is arguably reliable and factual will have definitely been published by another paper, so there is no need to cite the DM when better sources (that don't run the risk of the article being liberal with the truth) exist. WP:DAILYMAIL is a thing. Kingsif ( talk) 16:42, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
I distinctly remember hearing the claim, on a BBC TV News item, that the Vietnamese had been flown to China where they were given false Chinese identity papers. And then flown to Europe. This would obviously explain the initial confusion over their nationality. Does anyone have a good source for that? I can't remember the day I saw that News bulletin, but it was certainly a few days ago. Martinevans123 ( talk) 13:36, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Diane Abbott has this: "Abbott has been Shadow Home Secretary since 2016." This article has this: " Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, said greater international co-operation was needed." This seems a bit odd? The article here also has: " António Guterres, the United Nations Secretary-General. Martinevans123 ( talk) 19:53, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
1. Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, said greater international co-operation was needed to prevent similar events happening again, adding "You cannot stop international people
This has a clear misquoting error, noted above and confirmed by the TV interview itself
here at about 38:56. However, although a RS, I do not think that this video works as a reference as (a) it is only available for another four weeks and (b) I think that it is only legally available within the UK - and I cannot see how it could be archived. Unfortunately all the reliable media I can find reporting the whole sentence as a quotation have the same error. Some media, for example
the Independent miss out the erroneous phrase, but the consequence of that is that the following "them", referring to the gangs, has no object and looks all wrong.
tracking trafficking gangs, if people trafficking is what this is, you can't stop them without working internationally. ... Yes, we can try and make our east coast ports more secure, but you have to have more international co-operation."
What is the best solution? Davidships ( talk) 00:47, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
If we're not careful the explanation needed, to explain which parts of the lorries were where, might make the map less useful than might have been hoped for. I guess colour coding might work, if we could all agree which parts were where? Martinevans123 ( talk) 17:01, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
Does no one have a CC image to put on the article, the map doesn't serve much use. Berrely ( talk) 16:02, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Regarding this restore by Eric Kvaalen, does this source say that the refrigeration was turned off? Also another question, which may be pertinent to this topic: If the lorry had been transporting cookies, as was falsely claimed, would the refrigeration have been required to be turned on? Martinevans123 ( talk) 10:23, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Martin, you have admitted that the lorry was not refrigerated, in your first edit comment on the subject. You objected that I said something that was not in the source. Now I have rephrased it so that it doesn't say that the lorry was not refrigerated. So what's the problem now? I think it's bad that the rules about "original research" and "synthesis" are interpreted to mean that we editors have to act totally stupid -- not allowed to make even the slightest logical extension from what a source actually says! But now, as I said, I have reworded it so that it doesn't even say that the lorry was obviously not refrigerated. Eric Kvaalen ( talk) 14:43, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Any reason we're speaking so formally of the dead in an article titled after their deaths? Plain English works best, I thought yesterday, but at least one of us thinks not. Discuss? InedibleHulk (talk) 21:19, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
"The deceased" doesn't strike me as a weird or unusual word, and the level of formality is appropriate for an encyclopedia. MaxBrowne2 ( talk) 01:33, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mo Robinson. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 21:36, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
He has admitted plotting to assist illegal immigration this morning. I don't know how this works with the article and naming him though. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 11:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
For relatively unknown people, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured. A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law.
unless a conviction has been secured". If he is convicted of something, then come back and discuss whether it is then appropriate. -- DeFacto ( talk). 20:28, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
The police initially said the bodies were believed to be Chinese, but on 7 November 2019, following extensive investigations, they named all the deceased and confirmed they were Vietnamese.
or, following the concerns raised in
WP:EDITORIALIZE, avoid the use of the word 'but', so something like: The police initially said the bodies were believed to be Chinese, and on 7 November 2019, following extensive investigations, they named all the deceased and confirmed they were Vietnamese.
--
DeFacto (
talk).
22:45, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
More subtly, editorializing can produce implications that are not supported by the sources. Words used to link two statements such as but, despite, however, and although may imply a relationship where none exists, possibly unduly calling the validity of the first statement into question while giving undue weight to the credibility of the second.. The cautionary advice is understood, but in this case the implication is supported by the sources. Both parts are are directly related as the sequential views of the police, who themselves called into question their initial belief that they were Chinese when further investigations showed definitively that they were not (and that is hardly undue weight). "But" is the correct conjunction of contrast ("and" is for non-contrasting cases). Davidships ( talk) 00:37, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
I cannot understand the problem with "accused=3" (corrected from 2, per the article). Three template fields are a logical sequence and all are stages in the formal process of investigation/justice system: Arrests > Accused > Convicted. The "accused" field appears to relate to those accused of specific crimes and brought before the courts, and only three have been reported, all cited in the article, so it is hardly meaningless. Davidships ( talk) 00:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
This article is not "obviously within scope" of WP:TRUCKS, which covers "articles on trucks, truckparts and truck manufacturers", with goals "to co-ordinate articles on light, medium and heavy trucks. It aims to improve the coverage of manufacturers and models, and to make articles on trucks uniform and informative." This is clearly focused on articles about trucks as transport hardware. It is not for general editors to tell a WP what they must be interested in; they have been asked, but no WP participant has answered, but I note that that WP has been tagged for over six years as only semi-active. Davidships ( talk) 23:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
In the section "Court appearances", it begins with "On 25 November, Robinson pleaded guilty in the Central Criminal Court to conspiring with others to assist illegal immigration and acquiring criminal property". In my opinion, the sentence could begin with a brief explanation of who Robinson is; I read through the article but could see no mention in any of the sections previous of who he is, which I believe might be confusing for the reader. Okama-San ( talk) 02:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Given that there were long custodial sentences for manslaughter, should the article title not be Essex lorry killings, or similar? Martinevans123 ( talk) 10:36, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Any news on the investigation? 2601:1C0:8100:A380:8CC7:E4BC:28E2:748A ( talk) 12:00, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
The Investigation section, as of 3 October 2022 ( special:permalink/1113209127#Investigation), says
Is the case still being investigated? If it's closed, a past tense should be used here. -- CiaPan ( talk) 06:01, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
—
Hello? Anybody there...? --
CiaPan (
talk)
07:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Essex lorry deaths 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 |
![]() | This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) 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 was nominated for deletion on 23 October 2019. The result of the discussion was speedy keep. |
![]() | A news item involving Essex lorry deaths was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the In the news section on 23 October 2019. | ![]() |
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 B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
![]() | It is requested that a photograph of the lorry in the crime scene be
included in this article to
improve its quality.
Wikipedians in Essex may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
"Human trafficking is the trade of humans for the purpose of forced labour, sexual slavery, or commercial sexual exploitation for the trafficker or others." which is part of organized crime, while migrants fall under People smuggling. The latter is also a crime but done with the victim's consent. - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 16:26, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
Neutrality Issue - The article implies the deceased individuals are victims of human trafficking - there is no reported factual evidence to support this. The news reporting and historical trends show it's almost certainly migrant smuggling. There is a significant difference between the two; being that the "victims" may also be seen as willful perpetrators as they have given consent. Aeonx ( talk) 08:35, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
He's been id'd & is aged 25, according to CCTV. However, he'd only picked up the truck/container minutes before the bodies were found, so he's probably not involved in what happened... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.111.3.59 ( talk) 17:19, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
He's innocent until proven guilty. - SchroCat ( talk) 23:24, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
For relatively unknown people, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured. A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction.There is no need for him to be included unless and until there is a conviction. This is a policy, not a guideline. – SchroCat ( talk) 13:08, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
This policy applies to any living person mentioned in a BLP, whether or not that person is the subject of the article, and to material about living persons in other articles and on other pages, including talk pages.-- DeFacto ( talk). 13:57, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
For relatively unknown people, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured. A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction." given in WP:BLPCRIME, what would be your rationale for ignoring that? -- DeFacto ( talk). 21:45, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
The above term, linking to two other articles, is currently in the first sentence of the Incident section. [R]efrigerated lorry links to Refrigerator truck and container links to Intermodal container. This term is problematic in a couple of ways. One, judging from Refrigerator truck, such a truck/lorry has its own type of trailer and does not normally transport an intermodal container. Two, if it's an intermodal container, it's not strictly a lorry container. I suggest that the term be replaced with refrigerated container if that is in fact what the dead were found in. (Or were they found in a trailer pulled by refrigerated trucks/lorries that had been driven onto the ship in Belgium and off of the ship in Purfleet by a different cab than the one that it was found attached to?) — 184.207.39.217 ( talk) 09:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
(I realise that the answers to some or all of the following questions may not yet be clear). The article says that "The lorry arrived in Essex in two parts. The trailer arrived in Purfleet, a town near Grays with a port on the River Thames, from the port of Zeebrugge in Belgium at around 00:30 on 23 October.[7] Police believe that the lorry cab came from Northern Ireland[8] and entered the Welsh port of Holyhead on Saturday 19 October[9][7] after passing through the Republic of Ireland.[10] Initial reports were that the cab and trailer arrived at Holyhead together."
1. So is the article saying that the lorry cab/tractor unit and the trailer did not come together until they both arrived in Purfleet from different directions - the lorry cab/tractor unit through Great Britain from Holyhead, and the trailer across the English Channel from Zeebrugge?
2. Is it normal practice for trailers of this type to travel from Zeebrugge to Purfleet with cabs or without cabs?
3. Is it known whether or not the cab visited the continent of Europe at any time after it last arrived from the island of Ireland at Holyhead?
4. Is it known whether or not the "Initial reports ... that the cab and trailer arrived at Holyhead together." were correct?
5. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50159748 gives details of the trailer's movements (including on the European continent) and says that "Essex Police said the tractor unit (the front part of the lorry) had entered the UK via Holyhead - an Irish Sea port in Wales - on Sunday 20 October, having travelled over from Dublin. Police believe the tractor unit collected the trailer in Purfleet on the River Thames and left the port shortly after 01:05 on Thursday." So is it known which cab was pulling the trailer during its movements as listed, and whether or not that was the same cab as the one which collected it at Purfleet?
If the answers to any or all of these questions are known, I suggest that it would be helpful if the article provided them. Thoughts/comments? Alekksandr ( talk) 22:09, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
The owner of the trailer has been published - https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2019/1024/1085287-migrant-deaths/ Tentstick ( talk) 10:44, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Although not confirmed, yes, but should we name victims (for now and future revelations). See Father of Vietnamese woman believed dead in Essex truck: Smugglers said this was a 'safe route' CNN article, Pham Thi Tra My is named as the 19-year-old Vietnamese woman. comrade waddie96 ★ ( talk) 06:27, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
1. The victim or person wrongly convicted, consistent with Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Subjects notable only for one event, had a large role within a well-documented historic event. The historic significance is indicated by persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role."? Martinevans123 ( talk) 21:13, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Under what scenario could this not be a crime? Jim Michael ( talk) 17:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
In English law, where murder and manslaughter are concerned, the English court has jurisdiction over offences committed abroad, if committed by a British citizen (see section 9 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 and section 3 of the British Nationality Act 1948)" Both the drivers are reported to be British (in this context = UK) citizens. Davidships ( talk) 15:18, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
The Telegraph is running a story that the Grays lorry may have been part of a three-vehicle convoy of which two reached destination. But it seems to be a synthesis/speculation based on other vague reports, so I have not added it, pending wider sourcing. At present there is an unexplained pair of maps in the article, but they are not captured in the archived version. Davidships ( talk) 18:33, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
I’m an IP so I can’t edit. Can someone fix please? Thanks. -- 100.6.163.186 ( talk) 20:08, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
2019 Grays incident has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change "On 23 October 2019, the bodies of 39 people were found in a refrigerated articulated lorry in Grays, Essex, United Kingdom" to "...Grays, Essex at the outskirts of London". Judging by the map, it's an outer suburb of London 93.136.156.137 ( talk) 00:06, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
According to The NYT], we don't know whether the refrigerator was on or off, whether they froze, whether they suffocated, or whether something else killed them. Do we really have no sources that say whether the refrigerator was on? -- Guy Macon ( talk) 04:11, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Several sources, such as Huffington Post, are reporting that the victims left ‘bloody handprints’ and that they were ‘half naked’ and ‘foaming at the mouth’. Is any of this worth putting in the article, or is it irrelevant human interest stuff? Sir Magnus Fluffbrains ( talk) 16:15, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
The Sun https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10215863/essex-lorry-deaths-news-found-naked-bloody-handprints/
Daily Mirror https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/dead-migrants-left-bloody-handprints-20726568
Daily Mail (unreliable source) https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7615547/Police-bloody-handprints-freezing-coffin-39-migrants-died.html
Birmingham Mail https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/uk-news/essex-lorry-deaths-horror-conditions-17150885
Belfast Live https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/belfast-news/essex-deaths-conditions-39-victims-17150343
The Times https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/dreams-of-new-life-end-with-bloody-handprints-in-a-lorry-bzws6dpct
Daily Star https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/essex-lorry-migrants-left-bloody-20727239
A redlinked category Wikipedia requested images of miscellaneous has been lurking at the bottom of the page for some days. Can someone fix it please? Davidships ( talk) 23:58, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
[Moved here, where discussion about the content of this article belongs, from my talkpage. It refers to this edit of mine. -- DeFacto ( talk). 07:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
The dailymail is actually more reliable than other news sources when it comes to certain events (particular to the UK). Undoing an update because I sourced the dailymail isn't justified. I'm an experienced editor, I know about the blanket suppression of it, and I choose to use it as a source anyways. You should have a read... Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. When it comes to providing better encyclopedic content, WP:IAR. Aeonx ( talk) 23:35, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
The dailymail is actually more reliable than other news sources: No, no, no, no, no NO!!! The Daily Fail is one of the biggest culprits for stretching facts, fabricating quotes, reminagining scenarios as fact and outright straight, bare-faced, open lying. It belongs with the Sun, Mirror, People, Express, Star and Record as sources that should not ever be used as a source for anything! - SchroCat ( talk) 07:44, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
As the RfC generally allow, the print version of the Daily Mail can provide facts relating to British politics (but even then they have a heavy Conservative lean) and what seem to be trivial events, and then has generally expected coverage of sports etc. that any other paper also provides; its opinion pieces are all from non-experts with strong views, so don't touch them. The Daily Mail Online is a piece of crud and should never be used. The consensus to deprecate clearly notes that anything the Daily Mail publishes that is arguably reliable and factual will have definitely been published by another paper, so there is no need to cite the DM when better sources (that don't run the risk of the article being liberal with the truth) exist. WP:DAILYMAIL is a thing. Kingsif ( talk) 16:42, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
I distinctly remember hearing the claim, on a BBC TV News item, that the Vietnamese had been flown to China where they were given false Chinese identity papers. And then flown to Europe. This would obviously explain the initial confusion over their nationality. Does anyone have a good source for that? I can't remember the day I saw that News bulletin, but it was certainly a few days ago. Martinevans123 ( talk) 13:36, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
Diane Abbott has this: "Abbott has been Shadow Home Secretary since 2016." This article has this: " Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, said greater international co-operation was needed." This seems a bit odd? The article here also has: " António Guterres, the United Nations Secretary-General. Martinevans123 ( talk) 19:53, 28 October 2019 (UTC)
1. Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, said greater international co-operation was needed to prevent similar events happening again, adding "You cannot stop international people
This has a clear misquoting error, noted above and confirmed by the TV interview itself
here at about 38:56. However, although a RS, I do not think that this video works as a reference as (a) it is only available for another four weeks and (b) I think that it is only legally available within the UK - and I cannot see how it could be archived. Unfortunately all the reliable media I can find reporting the whole sentence as a quotation have the same error. Some media, for example
the Independent miss out the erroneous phrase, but the consequence of that is that the following "them", referring to the gangs, has no object and looks all wrong.
tracking trafficking gangs, if people trafficking is what this is, you can't stop them without working internationally. ... Yes, we can try and make our east coast ports more secure, but you have to have more international co-operation."
What is the best solution? Davidships ( talk) 00:47, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
If we're not careful the explanation needed, to explain which parts of the lorries were where, might make the map less useful than might have been hoped for. I guess colour coding might work, if we could all agree which parts were where? Martinevans123 ( talk) 17:01, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
Does no one have a CC image to put on the article, the map doesn't serve much use. Berrely ( talk) 16:02, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Regarding this restore by Eric Kvaalen, does this source say that the refrigeration was turned off? Also another question, which may be pertinent to this topic: If the lorry had been transporting cookies, as was falsely claimed, would the refrigeration have been required to be turned on? Martinevans123 ( talk) 10:23, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
Martin, you have admitted that the lorry was not refrigerated, in your first edit comment on the subject. You objected that I said something that was not in the source. Now I have rephrased it so that it doesn't say that the lorry was not refrigerated. So what's the problem now? I think it's bad that the rules about "original research" and "synthesis" are interpreted to mean that we editors have to act totally stupid -- not allowed to make even the slightest logical extension from what a source actually says! But now, as I said, I have reworded it so that it doesn't even say that the lorry was obviously not refrigerated. Eric Kvaalen ( talk) 14:43, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
Any reason we're speaking so formally of the dead in an article titled after their deaths? Plain English works best, I thought yesterday, but at least one of us thinks not. Discuss? InedibleHulk (talk) 21:19, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
"The deceased" doesn't strike me as a weird or unusual word, and the level of formality is appropriate for an encyclopedia. MaxBrowne2 ( talk) 01:33, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Mo Robinson. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed, Rosguill talk 21:36, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
He has admitted plotting to assist illegal immigration this morning. I don't know how this works with the article and naming him though. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 11:12, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
For relatively unknown people, editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured. A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law.
unless a conviction has been secured". If he is convicted of something, then come back and discuss whether it is then appropriate. -- DeFacto ( talk). 20:28, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
The police initially said the bodies were believed to be Chinese, but on 7 November 2019, following extensive investigations, they named all the deceased and confirmed they were Vietnamese.
or, following the concerns raised in
WP:EDITORIALIZE, avoid the use of the word 'but', so something like: The police initially said the bodies were believed to be Chinese, and on 7 November 2019, following extensive investigations, they named all the deceased and confirmed they were Vietnamese.
--
DeFacto (
talk).
22:45, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
More subtly, editorializing can produce implications that are not supported by the sources. Words used to link two statements such as but, despite, however, and although may imply a relationship where none exists, possibly unduly calling the validity of the first statement into question while giving undue weight to the credibility of the second.. The cautionary advice is understood, but in this case the implication is supported by the sources. Both parts are are directly related as the sequential views of the police, who themselves called into question their initial belief that they were Chinese when further investigations showed definitively that they were not (and that is hardly undue weight). "But" is the correct conjunction of contrast ("and" is for non-contrasting cases). Davidships ( talk) 00:37, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
I cannot understand the problem with "accused=3" (corrected from 2, per the article). Three template fields are a logical sequence and all are stages in the formal process of investigation/justice system: Arrests > Accused > Convicted. The "accused" field appears to relate to those accused of specific crimes and brought before the courts, and only three have been reported, all cited in the article, so it is hardly meaningless. Davidships ( talk) 00:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
This article is not "obviously within scope" of WP:TRUCKS, which covers "articles on trucks, truckparts and truck manufacturers", with goals "to co-ordinate articles on light, medium and heavy trucks. It aims to improve the coverage of manufacturers and models, and to make articles on trucks uniform and informative." This is clearly focused on articles about trucks as transport hardware. It is not for general editors to tell a WP what they must be interested in; they have been asked, but no WP participant has answered, but I note that that WP has been tagged for over six years as only semi-active. Davidships ( talk) 23:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
In the section "Court appearances", it begins with "On 25 November, Robinson pleaded guilty in the Central Criminal Court to conspiring with others to assist illegal immigration and acquiring criminal property". In my opinion, the sentence could begin with a brief explanation of who Robinson is; I read through the article but could see no mention in any of the sections previous of who he is, which I believe might be confusing for the reader. Okama-San ( talk) 02:54, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
Given that there were long custodial sentences for manslaughter, should the article title not be Essex lorry killings, or similar? Martinevans123 ( talk) 10:36, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
Any news on the investigation? 2601:1C0:8100:A380:8CC7:E4BC:28E2:748A ( talk) 12:00, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
The Investigation section, as of 3 October 2022 ( special:permalink/1113209127#Investigation), says
Is the case still being investigated? If it's closed, a past tense should be used here. -- CiaPan ( talk) 06:01, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
—
Hello? Anybody there...? --
CiaPan (
talk)
07:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)