This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Death of Brian Sicknick 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,
2Auto-archiving period: 21 days
![]() |
![]() | Death of Brian Sicknick has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: March 19, 2021. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. 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. |
![]() |
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 |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Death of Brian Sicknick appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 7 March 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Wow. The article has been reduced, once again, to a story about the 'crime of spraying', the 'confusion about the cause (manner?) of death', the 'memorials', and some 'bio'. A lot of, uh, authorized, trivial facts. Some day, Wiki-editors will have reliable secondary sources about the whole Sicknick episode, and it will be clear what has endured and how to contextualize and summarize the important facts and details. For the time being, this article is based mostly on primary sources of mixed reliability, and editors differ about what's important.
I prefer to overload this article, to some degree, with direct quotations and with explicit statements about 'Who said what and when', even if there is some redundancy. I also think there is important political context that deserves to be added, as long as the content is relevant and specific quotes are used: it isn't OR to 'find' relevant sources, and it isn't SYNTH if there are no non-trivial generalizations or conclusions.
Our colleague-editor
Neutrality seems determined to minimize, if not ignore, what I think is essential content. So we have a dispute, about the article as a whole, not just about some specific components or wordings. The removal of political material has also erased the explanations about why Sicknick received special honors, the only thing (as mentioned above by
Terjen) of enduring historical significance. The article is now entirely trivial.
>> So, maybe questions need to be decided: How much prominence is to be given to (A) the belief that Sicknick was killed? (B) its role in impeachment? (C) the "fire extinguisher" error? (D) the spray assault (still alleged, not yet tried in court)?
>> I think A,B,C are high; D is low.
Horsense (
talk)
18:55, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
First, what does this statement have to do with Sicknick's death? If it's supposed to explain why some people thought Sicknick was struck with a fire extinguisher, then it needs to say that. Otherwise it's just extraneous information dropped into the article: "Other police officers were targeted by the pro-Trump mob with hurled fire extinguishers on January 6, in incidents unrelated to Sicknick.[52]" Next, the following statement is written as hearsay. The Wall Street Journal "reportedly" said? Does the reference include the statement or not? "In April, after the medical examiner's autopsy findings were reported, the official cited by the Wall Street Journal reportedly said that the erroneous information had been privately spread by Capitol Police officers.[29]" I also dislike this statement as it tries to place the blame for the misinformation on the Capitol Police, when it's fairly clearly politicians and main stream media who pushed the misinformation. It's unethical to place blame on the Capitol Police. 73.120.83.182 ( talk) 15:04, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
The lead implies that pepper spray caused Sicknick's strokes,
The medical examiner found no connection of the pepper spray with Sicknick's strokes. Pepper spray should be removed by changing the above to,
Bob K31416 ( talk) 19:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
I suggest adding a definition of natural death as a quote in an existing cite in the second sentence of the lead, but not in the main text of the lead,
Natural: Used when a disease alone causes death. If death is hastened by an injury, the manner of death is not considered natural.
Bob K31416 ( talk) 19:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
The categories section says "!-- categories for Brian Sicknick - see Brian Sicknick --" but there is no such Wikipedia article. 76.190.213.189 ( talk) 04:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Death of Brian Sicknick 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,
2Auto-archiving period: 21 days
![]() |
![]() | Death of Brian Sicknick has been listed as one of the
Social sciences and society good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: March 19, 2021. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. 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. |
![]() |
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 |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | A fact from Death of Brian Sicknick appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 7 March 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
|
||
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Wow. The article has been reduced, once again, to a story about the 'crime of spraying', the 'confusion about the cause (manner?) of death', the 'memorials', and some 'bio'. A lot of, uh, authorized, trivial facts. Some day, Wiki-editors will have reliable secondary sources about the whole Sicknick episode, and it will be clear what has endured and how to contextualize and summarize the important facts and details. For the time being, this article is based mostly on primary sources of mixed reliability, and editors differ about what's important.
I prefer to overload this article, to some degree, with direct quotations and with explicit statements about 'Who said what and when', even if there is some redundancy. I also think there is important political context that deserves to be added, as long as the content is relevant and specific quotes are used: it isn't OR to 'find' relevant sources, and it isn't SYNTH if there are no non-trivial generalizations or conclusions.
Our colleague-editor
Neutrality seems determined to minimize, if not ignore, what I think is essential content. So we have a dispute, about the article as a whole, not just about some specific components or wordings. The removal of political material has also erased the explanations about why Sicknick received special honors, the only thing (as mentioned above by
Terjen) of enduring historical significance. The article is now entirely trivial.
>> So, maybe questions need to be decided: How much prominence is to be given to (A) the belief that Sicknick was killed? (B) its role in impeachment? (C) the "fire extinguisher" error? (D) the spray assault (still alleged, not yet tried in court)?
>> I think A,B,C are high; D is low.
Horsense (
talk)
18:55, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
First, what does this statement have to do with Sicknick's death? If it's supposed to explain why some people thought Sicknick was struck with a fire extinguisher, then it needs to say that. Otherwise it's just extraneous information dropped into the article: "Other police officers were targeted by the pro-Trump mob with hurled fire extinguishers on January 6, in incidents unrelated to Sicknick.[52]" Next, the following statement is written as hearsay. The Wall Street Journal "reportedly" said? Does the reference include the statement or not? "In April, after the medical examiner's autopsy findings were reported, the official cited by the Wall Street Journal reportedly said that the erroneous information had been privately spread by Capitol Police officers.[29]" I also dislike this statement as it tries to place the blame for the misinformation on the Capitol Police, when it's fairly clearly politicians and main stream media who pushed the misinformation. It's unethical to place blame on the Capitol Police. 73.120.83.182 ( talk) 15:04, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
The lead implies that pepper spray caused Sicknick's strokes,
The medical examiner found no connection of the pepper spray with Sicknick's strokes. Pepper spray should be removed by changing the above to,
Bob K31416 ( talk) 19:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
I suggest adding a definition of natural death as a quote in an existing cite in the second sentence of the lead, but not in the main text of the lead,
Natural: Used when a disease alone causes death. If death is hastened by an injury, the manner of death is not considered natural.
Bob K31416 ( talk) 19:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
The categories section says "!-- categories for Brian Sicknick - see Brian Sicknick --" but there is no such Wikipedia article. 76.190.213.189 ( talk) 04:47, 7 January 2023 (UTC)