![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 17 October 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
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 the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 12 December 2012. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
Is it of any interest for this article that this was posted on 4chan the day before? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.39.93.97 ( talk) 00:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting occured only 3 days later. It was cited on CNN that there is an escalation of copycat indedents in a feedback runnaway situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cotten134 ( talk • contribs) 21:07, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
This article cites a CNN article as the source for the statement that Roberts shouted "I am the shooter!" before opening fire. There is no information in that regard contained in the cited CNN article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.184.93 ( talk) 01:05, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
This is just horrible. That's like saying I own 2 to 6 cars, and I slept 4 to 12 hours last night. With such a perverse grasp on how many shots he fired before his weapons malfunction, the word "several" should be used. In the absence of more precision, the number of shots should be omitted. -- Digitpuppet ( talk) 10:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm adding this because someone removed the defender from the article under the argument that the defender never fired. Defense is an act that might or might not imply the expressed use of force. There is no requirement that a defender even be armed. It's the acts the person takes that places them apart into the defender category. In this case the defender states that he told his friends to get down, brandished a firearm and brought it to bear on the shooter, who then disengaged and stopped shooting people. The story is corroborated by two WP:RS sources and as such is noteworthy as a defender. Talk here to discuss and reach consensus for removal - please bring reliable sources if you disagree or if there are other reports out there. I found 2 supporting the existence of a defender - albeit one who did not discharge a firearm but who brandished one and brought it to bear. That qualifies as a defender -- Justanonymous ( talk) 00:00, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Some anonymous IP editors are adding color to Mr. Meli's actions on the page claiming that there is no proof that Mr. Meli took the actions that he did and that there were no witnesses. These premises are patently false. Two independent newsreporters reported the story and two very reputable news agencies carried the story of Mr. Meli's actions. Per Wikipedia this makes the sources Reliable Sources and satisfy the requirement of Verifiability.
I will assume good faith and that people just don't understand what journlaists (newsreporters do). It's a profession and they are required to corroborate their stories. When a reporter first arrives at the scene of a crime or a newsworthy story they start talking to people and when somebody makes a claim, the journalist will then seek to corroborate the story by asking other people present whether the story is true or not. If the reporter can corroborate the story, s/he might print it. If the reporter is not able to get a consistent story, they will very likely not print it.
Example, as newsreporter shows up on the scene of a tragic mass shooting. He asks a shaken Person A what happened, Person A replies that he told everyone to get down and drew his firearm and pointed it at the perpetrator. What does the newsreporter do next:
A) Labels Person A a hero and rushes off to print the story immediately without talking to anyone else. B) Assumes Person A is lying and goes on to get the real story by talking to the police C) Asks numerous other people at the scene to corroborate Person A's story before printing it and then her management checks her facts just to be sure by spot interviewing some of the other people present D) Starts picking up shell casings for the police
If you answered C, you are correct. And that's what happened with Mr. Meli's case. By the time a reporter publishes a story, not only has the reporter vetted the story to be true but so has the management of the reporter's company. The fact the story is coming from a reputable news agency means that it has been corroborated as fact. So please, we have two independent news reporters from very reputable news agencies reporting on the actions of Mr. Meli. Per Wikipedia standards, this meets Reliable Sources, Verifiabiliy, and Notability. His actions align with those of a defender. Please do not embelish the facts. They are facts regardless of political inclinations.- Justanonymous ( talk) 23:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
NBC and CBS both doing pieces on this man clearly means these people did their homework and this man materially did what he said he did as corroborated by the people the reporters interviewed as part of their work. It's WP:RS, can we stop making the bar inordinately high on this. It's tiresome. - Justanonymous ( talk) 02:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
You're seriously mistaken if you think reporters have such a high standard to report on a story. Even the people (his friends) with him at the time have not spoken of the indecent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.237.7 ( talk) 05:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I think whether or not it's relevant at all is a question worth having. Had the CCW-holder fired, or had he and the shooter interacted in anyway, it might be a different story. But literally nothing happened, and it had zero bearing on the events of the night; whether or not it contributed to his suicide is a matter of speculation from the CCW-holder himself. It's presence seems to suggest a paragraph flirting with the neutrality boundary in its implied intent. 71.59.147.83 ( talk) 18:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
I placed a (more or less) generic photo of an AR-15 at an appropriate location in the article. An editor objected that a generic photo wasn't good enough, and removed the photo. I've updated the photo label to reflect that it's not the exact model used. It still gives a reader the info that it's semi-automatic and not the specific model used, which wasn't revealed by media accounts. It's still informative, showing that it has a military type clip, and that it's not a flinklock. The reader can see roughly what it looks like, even if it's not the exact model. Cheers. Tapered ( talk) 04:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 17 October 2013 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
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 the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 12 December 2012. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
Is it of any interest for this article that this was posted on 4chan the day before? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.39.93.97 ( talk) 00:05, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting occured only 3 days later. It was cited on CNN that there is an escalation of copycat indedents in a feedback runnaway situation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cotten134 ( talk • contribs) 21:07, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
This article cites a CNN article as the source for the statement that Roberts shouted "I am the shooter!" before opening fire. There is no information in that regard contained in the cited CNN article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.184.93 ( talk) 01:05, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
This is just horrible. That's like saying I own 2 to 6 cars, and I slept 4 to 12 hours last night. With such a perverse grasp on how many shots he fired before his weapons malfunction, the word "several" should be used. In the absence of more precision, the number of shots should be omitted. -- Digitpuppet ( talk) 10:28, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
I'm adding this because someone removed the defender from the article under the argument that the defender never fired. Defense is an act that might or might not imply the expressed use of force. There is no requirement that a defender even be armed. It's the acts the person takes that places them apart into the defender category. In this case the defender states that he told his friends to get down, brandished a firearm and brought it to bear on the shooter, who then disengaged and stopped shooting people. The story is corroborated by two WP:RS sources and as such is noteworthy as a defender. Talk here to discuss and reach consensus for removal - please bring reliable sources if you disagree or if there are other reports out there. I found 2 supporting the existence of a defender - albeit one who did not discharge a firearm but who brandished one and brought it to bear. That qualifies as a defender -- Justanonymous ( talk) 00:00, 25 December 2012 (UTC)
Some anonymous IP editors are adding color to Mr. Meli's actions on the page claiming that there is no proof that Mr. Meli took the actions that he did and that there were no witnesses. These premises are patently false. Two independent newsreporters reported the story and two very reputable news agencies carried the story of Mr. Meli's actions. Per Wikipedia this makes the sources Reliable Sources and satisfy the requirement of Verifiability.
I will assume good faith and that people just don't understand what journlaists (newsreporters do). It's a profession and they are required to corroborate their stories. When a reporter first arrives at the scene of a crime or a newsworthy story they start talking to people and when somebody makes a claim, the journalist will then seek to corroborate the story by asking other people present whether the story is true or not. If the reporter can corroborate the story, s/he might print it. If the reporter is not able to get a consistent story, they will very likely not print it.
Example, as newsreporter shows up on the scene of a tragic mass shooting. He asks a shaken Person A what happened, Person A replies that he told everyone to get down and drew his firearm and pointed it at the perpetrator. What does the newsreporter do next:
A) Labels Person A a hero and rushes off to print the story immediately without talking to anyone else. B) Assumes Person A is lying and goes on to get the real story by talking to the police C) Asks numerous other people at the scene to corroborate Person A's story before printing it and then her management checks her facts just to be sure by spot interviewing some of the other people present D) Starts picking up shell casings for the police
If you answered C, you are correct. And that's what happened with Mr. Meli's case. By the time a reporter publishes a story, not only has the reporter vetted the story to be true but so has the management of the reporter's company. The fact the story is coming from a reputable news agency means that it has been corroborated as fact. So please, we have two independent news reporters from very reputable news agencies reporting on the actions of Mr. Meli. Per Wikipedia standards, this meets Reliable Sources, Verifiabiliy, and Notability. His actions align with those of a defender. Please do not embelish the facts. They are facts regardless of political inclinations.- Justanonymous ( talk) 23:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
NBC and CBS both doing pieces on this man clearly means these people did their homework and this man materially did what he said he did as corroborated by the people the reporters interviewed as part of their work. It's WP:RS, can we stop making the bar inordinately high on this. It's tiresome. - Justanonymous ( talk) 02:07, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
You're seriously mistaken if you think reporters have such a high standard to report on a story. Even the people (his friends) with him at the time have not spoken of the indecent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.59.237.7 ( talk) 05:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
I think whether or not it's relevant at all is a question worth having. Had the CCW-holder fired, or had he and the shooter interacted in anyway, it might be a different story. But literally nothing happened, and it had zero bearing on the events of the night; whether or not it contributed to his suicide is a matter of speculation from the CCW-holder himself. It's presence seems to suggest a paragraph flirting with the neutrality boundary in its implied intent. 71.59.147.83 ( talk) 18:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
I placed a (more or less) generic photo of an AR-15 at an appropriate location in the article. An editor objected that a generic photo wasn't good enough, and removed the photo. I've updated the photo label to reflect that it's not the exact model used. It still gives a reader the info that it's semi-automatic and not the specific model used, which wasn't revealed by media accounts. It's still informative, showing that it has a military type clip, and that it's not a flinklock. The reader can see roughly what it looks like, even if it's not the exact model. Cheers. Tapered ( talk) 04:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)