This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
The article seemed to skirt the fact that Gunn was an abortion provider. It seems obvious to me that it should be included, as it was the reason Griffin targeted him. It's not as if his death was a random act of violence simply targeted at any representative of the medical profession. It happened because he was an abortion provider. It seems disingenuous to leave this out of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.1.104.176 ( talk) 18:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
The fellow was Christian but does that make this an act of "Christian terrorism"? - Schrandit ( talk) 20:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
(indent reset)Much, much more to come... Groupthink ( talk) 14:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
http://www.progressive.org/karlin1094.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/31/recent-cases-of-abortionr_n_209528.html 00:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clipomatic ( talk • contribs)
One editor claims that sources support categorizing the murder of David Gunn (doctor) as an act of Christian terrorism. Two editors strongly disagree. The adding editor claims that the sources support that the act "was motivated by fundamentalist dogma and was intended to intimidate and scare health care providers," and is therefore Christian terrorism. The two opposing editors state that the sources do not say that, and that no source has been given that uses the word "terrorism." — Sxeptomaniac (via posting script) 16:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
It just occurred to me that this also falls into the realm of BLP Policy. Michael F. Griffin is still living. As a result, it would be a violation of BLP policy to accuse him of terrorism without a good source. Sχeptomaniac χαιρετε 20:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/abortviolence/stories/gunn.htm
http://www.rickross.com/reference/a-abortion/a-abortion2.html
http://www.villagevoice.com/1998-11-10/news/the-terrorist-campaign-against-abortion/
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=933
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Watch+on+the+right:+no+place+to+hide-a013255821
http://www.sonomacountyfreepress.com/body/raceabrt.html 01:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clipomatic ( talk • contribs)
Uninvolved view: This characterization of the act in question, and its motivation, is only permissable if it comes directly from the source in question, and is explicitly attributed as such. If it does not, then it's POV. Nightscream ( talk) 23:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I hope the "Encyclopedia of Terrorism" ref I just added will put these (frankly) silly objections to rest. Also note that BLP does not apply to categorizing an act as terrorism, only to calling someone a terrorist. Groupthink ( talk) 22:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Re this edit:
If the Army of God's connection to Gunn is notable, reliable sources will have noted it. A link to their website does not establish this and does not allow for a neutral interpretation of their statement. - SummerPhD ( talk) 01:50, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Dr. Gunn was assassinated in 1993, so that means the string of "four doctors murdered" began in 1993, not 1998, since Dr. Gunn was the first; article text being changed accordingly. BLZebubba ( talk) 10:00, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
This phrasing implies that the string has ended. How do we know this? Might there not be another in this string committed tomorrow, making a total of five until the next? 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:6D1C:EC7C:EB0A:18C0 ( talk) 00:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on David Gunn (doctor). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:52, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
The article seemed to skirt the fact that Gunn was an abortion provider. It seems obvious to me that it should be included, as it was the reason Griffin targeted him. It's not as if his death was a random act of violence simply targeted at any representative of the medical profession. It happened because he was an abortion provider. It seems disingenuous to leave this out of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.1.104.176 ( talk) 18:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
The fellow was Christian but does that make this an act of "Christian terrorism"? - Schrandit ( talk) 20:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
(indent reset)Much, much more to come... Groupthink ( talk) 14:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
http://www.progressive.org/karlin1094.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/31/recent-cases-of-abortionr_n_209528.html 00:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clipomatic ( talk • contribs)
One editor claims that sources support categorizing the murder of David Gunn (doctor) as an act of Christian terrorism. Two editors strongly disagree. The adding editor claims that the sources support that the act "was motivated by fundamentalist dogma and was intended to intimidate and scare health care providers," and is therefore Christian terrorism. The two opposing editors state that the sources do not say that, and that no source has been given that uses the word "terrorism." — Sxeptomaniac (via posting script) 16:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
It just occurred to me that this also falls into the realm of BLP Policy. Michael F. Griffin is still living. As a result, it would be a violation of BLP policy to accuse him of terrorism without a good source. Sχeptomaniac χαιρετε 20:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/abortviolence/stories/gunn.htm
http://www.rickross.com/reference/a-abortion/a-abortion2.html
http://www.villagevoice.com/1998-11-10/news/the-terrorist-campaign-against-abortion/
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history.do?action=Article&id=933
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Watch+on+the+right:+no+place+to+hide-a013255821
http://www.sonomacountyfreepress.com/body/raceabrt.html 01:26, 11 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clipomatic ( talk • contribs)
Uninvolved view: This characterization of the act in question, and its motivation, is only permissable if it comes directly from the source in question, and is explicitly attributed as such. If it does not, then it's POV. Nightscream ( talk) 23:54, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I hope the "Encyclopedia of Terrorism" ref I just added will put these (frankly) silly objections to rest. Also note that BLP does not apply to categorizing an act as terrorism, only to calling someone a terrorist. Groupthink ( talk) 22:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Re this edit:
If the Army of God's connection to Gunn is notable, reliable sources will have noted it. A link to their website does not establish this and does not allow for a neutral interpretation of their statement. - SummerPhD ( talk) 01:50, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
Dr. Gunn was assassinated in 1993, so that means the string of "four doctors murdered" began in 1993, not 1998, since Dr. Gunn was the first; article text being changed accordingly. BLZebubba ( talk) 10:00, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
This phrasing implies that the string has ended. How do we know this? Might there not be another in this string committed tomorrow, making a total of five until the next? 2604:2000:F64D:FC00:6D1C:EC7C:EB0A:18C0 ( talk) 00:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on David Gunn (doctor). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:52, 13 January 2018 (UTC)