This article was nominated for deletion on 25 March 2011. 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article seems particularly POV; a quick read should illustrate that. For example, "In spite of the fact that the State Prosecutor of Dessau has made formal accusations of negligent homicide and bodily harm with fatal consequences, new excuses are nevertheless found to close the case—to the point of absurdity."
Seems to me that there are lots of weasel words and phrases designed to provoke sympathy in the reader, and while it may be warranted, Wikipedia is not the appropriate platform. -- Chris (talk) 03:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
most of the stuff, except the first paragraph is intendend to force the readers in a certain way of thinking -- why is an article so biased allowed to stay fully if disputed? it would be far more appropriate if it was shortened to contain nothing but the facts, ie the first paragraph. atm the authors of this article are able to propagate their suspicions without any way to correct those! btw: the article does not even contain the informations of the german article on the topic (which doublessly is ab bit biased) but contains far more informations instead of pure allegations.
Oury Jalloh is notable only for his death. This situation is similar to that of WP:BLP1E, except that he is dead. If we leave the article at the current title, we can never do the supposed topic justice since we simply don't have any useful reliable sources about any details of his life other than its end. As in all other similar situations, such as the featured article Death of Ian Tomlinson, the article should be renamed to make the scope implicit. This is also necessary so that we can describe the court cases, an important aspect, in detail.
I do not expect any opposition, and in fact I moved the article. However, an editor has moved it back, apparently (the editor has not replied to my request for clarification yet) based on some idea that articles may never be renamed while subject to an AfD, even when the AfD is clearly baseless and the move appears to be uncontroversial. Once the AfD is over, I intend to move the article again. If anyone opposes this, please say so now and I will start the more formal WP:RM process. Hans Adler 14:40, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move per proposal. Orlady ( talk) 04:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Oury Jalloh → Death of Oury Jalloh — This article is not about Oury Jalloh as a person. It is about the extremely suspicious circumstances of his death, and about the consequences. Reliable sources tried to research his life, as it is somewhat relevant to the case, but did not find much. There simply isn't enough material for a reasonable biography article. The situation is analogous to WP:BLP1E. This move to a title analogous to that of the featured article Death of Ian Tomlinson seemed like a no-brainer to me. An editor reverted, claiming that a move during AfD was automatically improper, but has so far not given any reason against the move. Hans Adler 11:03, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
The section about a supposed "parallel" to the
Yangjie Li case was recently deleted by another editor as
OR.
So I threw out this unneeded source but only gave "really executed the removal decribed in my last (non-)edit " as an edit summary, when there is no 'last edit' to see. (Please don't ask.) Mentioned here for completeness' sake. --
ΟΥΤΙΣ (
talk) 02:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
I have just thrown out Bartsch, 2008 (taz) as a source, because his report about the first verdict from December 8, 2008 is quite misleading. His title is "Acquittal and fine for policemen", when in fact the fine part was in the prosecutors's speech only, not in the final verdict. Bartsch only mentions the demand, not the final verdict for Andreas S., which was acquittal, here. That's sloppy journalism, in my opinion. (Personally, I'm a bit disappointed. I've always been a bit of a taz fan.) The other sources already cited only have "acquittal" and no mention of a fine, this had me a bit confused. -- ΟΥΤΙΣ ( talk) 00:04, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm working to translate and fill the chronological gaps (2012 - 2020) in this section. Please help me with my current draft for this. I'm no native speaker, so a bit of proof-reading would be a big help already. Thanks. -- ΟΥΤΙΣ ( talk) 19:39, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm still a bit unsure about this.
From what I have read so far, it appear there have been (at least) the following:
Please help me sort this out and find missing dates, sources and results. -- ΟΥΤΙΣ ( talk) 08:35, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Zunächst muss ich mich vielmals entschuldigen, mein Englisch ist leider derart lausig, dass ich gar nicht erst einen Versuch wagen möchte. Zudem muss sich derjenige, der sich meines Einwurfs annimmt, ohnehin intensiv mit deutscher Juristensprache auseinandersetzen, denn ohne ein Verständnis meines Aufsatzes Die Zeitenwende im Klageerzwingungsverfahren und meiner aktuellen Kommentierungen auf beck-blog ist eine Bearbeitung des Artikels Oury Jalloh überhaupt nicht möglich.
Ich denke, dass es sich bei dem Fall Oury Jalloh um einen der größten Justizskandale der bundesdeutschen Nachkriegsgeschichte handelt: Zwei deutsche Polizisten bringen einen Schwarzen um, und der Fall wird noch nicht einmal gerichtlich untersucht, es wird noch nicht einmal der Versuch unternommen, den beiden beschuldigten Polizisten den Mordvorwurf nachzuweisen. An dieser Stelle kommt mein Aufsatz Die Zeitenwende im Klageerzwingungsverfahren ins Spiel: Ich will erreichen, dass die Hinterbliebenen eines Mordopfers eine faire Chance erhalten, das Vertuschen und Verschleiern, das staatliche Behörden betreiben, zu durchbrechen. Denn in Deutschland besteht für die Hinterbliebenen von Mordopfern durchaus die Möglichkeit, bei Gericht einen Antrag zu stellen, dass das Gericht die Strafverfolgungsbehörde, die Staatsanwaltschaft, dazu anhält, Mordanklage zu erheben. Dieses Verfahren steht aber praktisch nur auf dem Papier, in der forensischen Realität haben die Hinterbliebenen von Mordopfern nicht wirklich eine Aussicht, mit ihrem Klagebegehren Erfolg zu haben.
Aktuell ist das Verfahren beim Bundesverfassungsgericht unter dem Aktenzeichen 2 BvR 378/20 anhängig. Gelingt es, das BVerfG davon zu überzeugen, dass die Hinterbliebenen von Mordopfern eine realistische Chance erhalten müssen, eine strafrechtliche Anklage zu erzwingen, ist auch im Fall Oury Jalloh der Weg zur Aufklärung der Mordvorwürfe gegen die beiden beschuldigten Polizisten geebnet.-- Helmut Hoppenstedt ( talk) 08:31, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Über ein neues Gutachten, das zum wiederholten Male unter Beweis stellt, dass den beiden beschuldigten Polizeibeamten der Mord an Oury Jalloh nachweisbar ist, berichtet die taz in einem aktuellen Artikel.-- Helmut Hoppenstedt ( talk) 08:18, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 25 March 2011. 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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article seems particularly POV; a quick read should illustrate that. For example, "In spite of the fact that the State Prosecutor of Dessau has made formal accusations of negligent homicide and bodily harm with fatal consequences, new excuses are nevertheless found to close the case—to the point of absurdity."
Seems to me that there are lots of weasel words and phrases designed to provoke sympathy in the reader, and while it may be warranted, Wikipedia is not the appropriate platform. -- Chris (talk) 03:49, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
most of the stuff, except the first paragraph is intendend to force the readers in a certain way of thinking -- why is an article so biased allowed to stay fully if disputed? it would be far more appropriate if it was shortened to contain nothing but the facts, ie the first paragraph. atm the authors of this article are able to propagate their suspicions without any way to correct those! btw: the article does not even contain the informations of the german article on the topic (which doublessly is ab bit biased) but contains far more informations instead of pure allegations.
Oury Jalloh is notable only for his death. This situation is similar to that of WP:BLP1E, except that he is dead. If we leave the article at the current title, we can never do the supposed topic justice since we simply don't have any useful reliable sources about any details of his life other than its end. As in all other similar situations, such as the featured article Death of Ian Tomlinson, the article should be renamed to make the scope implicit. This is also necessary so that we can describe the court cases, an important aspect, in detail.
I do not expect any opposition, and in fact I moved the article. However, an editor has moved it back, apparently (the editor has not replied to my request for clarification yet) based on some idea that articles may never be renamed while subject to an AfD, even when the AfD is clearly baseless and the move appears to be uncontroversial. Once the AfD is over, I intend to move the article again. If anyone opposes this, please say so now and I will start the more formal WP:RM process. Hans Adler 14:40, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Move per proposal. Orlady ( talk) 04:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Oury Jalloh → Death of Oury Jalloh — This article is not about Oury Jalloh as a person. It is about the extremely suspicious circumstances of his death, and about the consequences. Reliable sources tried to research his life, as it is somewhat relevant to the case, but did not find much. There simply isn't enough material for a reasonable biography article. The situation is analogous to WP:BLP1E. This move to a title analogous to that of the featured article Death of Ian Tomlinson seemed like a no-brainer to me. An editor reverted, claiming that a move during AfD was automatically improper, but has so far not given any reason against the move. Hans Adler 11:03, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
The section about a supposed "parallel" to the
Yangjie Li case was recently deleted by another editor as
OR.
So I threw out this unneeded source but only gave "really executed the removal decribed in my last (non-)edit " as an edit summary, when there is no 'last edit' to see. (Please don't ask.) Mentioned here for completeness' sake. --
ΟΥΤΙΣ (
talk) 02:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
I have just thrown out Bartsch, 2008 (taz) as a source, because his report about the first verdict from December 8, 2008 is quite misleading. His title is "Acquittal and fine for policemen", when in fact the fine part was in the prosecutors's speech only, not in the final verdict. Bartsch only mentions the demand, not the final verdict for Andreas S., which was acquittal, here. That's sloppy journalism, in my opinion. (Personally, I'm a bit disappointed. I've always been a bit of a taz fan.) The other sources already cited only have "acquittal" and no mention of a fine, this had me a bit confused. -- ΟΥΤΙΣ ( talk) 00:04, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm working to translate and fill the chronological gaps (2012 - 2020) in this section. Please help me with my current draft for this. I'm no native speaker, so a bit of proof-reading would be a big help already. Thanks. -- ΟΥΤΙΣ ( talk) 19:39, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
I'm still a bit unsure about this.
From what I have read so far, it appear there have been (at least) the following:
Please help me sort this out and find missing dates, sources and results. -- ΟΥΤΙΣ ( talk) 08:35, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Zunächst muss ich mich vielmals entschuldigen, mein Englisch ist leider derart lausig, dass ich gar nicht erst einen Versuch wagen möchte. Zudem muss sich derjenige, der sich meines Einwurfs annimmt, ohnehin intensiv mit deutscher Juristensprache auseinandersetzen, denn ohne ein Verständnis meines Aufsatzes Die Zeitenwende im Klageerzwingungsverfahren und meiner aktuellen Kommentierungen auf beck-blog ist eine Bearbeitung des Artikels Oury Jalloh überhaupt nicht möglich.
Ich denke, dass es sich bei dem Fall Oury Jalloh um einen der größten Justizskandale der bundesdeutschen Nachkriegsgeschichte handelt: Zwei deutsche Polizisten bringen einen Schwarzen um, und der Fall wird noch nicht einmal gerichtlich untersucht, es wird noch nicht einmal der Versuch unternommen, den beiden beschuldigten Polizisten den Mordvorwurf nachzuweisen. An dieser Stelle kommt mein Aufsatz Die Zeitenwende im Klageerzwingungsverfahren ins Spiel: Ich will erreichen, dass die Hinterbliebenen eines Mordopfers eine faire Chance erhalten, das Vertuschen und Verschleiern, das staatliche Behörden betreiben, zu durchbrechen. Denn in Deutschland besteht für die Hinterbliebenen von Mordopfern durchaus die Möglichkeit, bei Gericht einen Antrag zu stellen, dass das Gericht die Strafverfolgungsbehörde, die Staatsanwaltschaft, dazu anhält, Mordanklage zu erheben. Dieses Verfahren steht aber praktisch nur auf dem Papier, in der forensischen Realität haben die Hinterbliebenen von Mordopfern nicht wirklich eine Aussicht, mit ihrem Klagebegehren Erfolg zu haben.
Aktuell ist das Verfahren beim Bundesverfassungsgericht unter dem Aktenzeichen 2 BvR 378/20 anhängig. Gelingt es, das BVerfG davon zu überzeugen, dass die Hinterbliebenen von Mordopfern eine realistische Chance erhalten müssen, eine strafrechtliche Anklage zu erzwingen, ist auch im Fall Oury Jalloh der Weg zur Aufklärung der Mordvorwürfe gegen die beiden beschuldigten Polizisten geebnet.-- Helmut Hoppenstedt ( talk) 08:31, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Über ein neues Gutachten, das zum wiederholten Male unter Beweis stellt, dass den beiden beschuldigten Polizeibeamten der Mord an Oury Jalloh nachweisbar ist, berichtet die taz in einem aktuellen Artikel.-- Helmut Hoppenstedt ( talk) 08:18, 4 November 2021 (UTC)