This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Killing of Andrew Brown Jr. 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 |
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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Killing of Andrew Brown Jr. be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about
living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, 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. |
Page should be named "Shooting of Andrew Brown Jr." Killing presents the connotation that it was intentional and murderous and we do not have enough information to make that judgement yet. - 153.26.178.60 ( talk) 04:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
One of two AP reporters describes a protestor holding a sign styled the first way, but the splash image preceding his or her claim strongly supports the alternative emphasis. Granted, maybe the writer and photographer are conveying two completely different placards. I personally find that unlikely, and believe we need to choose between what this overall RS shows and what it tells. InedibleHulk ( talk) 03:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I've "boldly" chosen the latter format. Also made it clear that a period was not part of that black man's reaction! Revert, discuss, consent through silence? InedibleHulk ( talk) 03:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
An edit of mine was reverted with this summary:
To be clear, the article already stated that the police were conducting a raid related to a number of drugs. We commonly also state what the accused's lawyer had to say, in fact, we should include the accused's lawyer's statements to avoid bias. That is what our readers deserve as long as we use good RS for the statements. I assume that we all agree that The New York Times is acceptable and if it's not sloppy editing on their part it is not sloppy editing on mine to repeat what they had to say about the incident. All that said, perhaps it is best to wait a few days and see what develops as more information is released. But I did need to defend my reputation around this place.
Gandydancer (
talk)
00:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Lead information should include a short version of the article. I added the Brown family's comments to avoid bias--it should be obvious that we do not include only one-sided versions. Gandydancer ( talk) 12:24, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
It seems there's been more dispute over what to include in the lead. I'd like to call to attention this revision: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Killing_of_Andrew_Brown_Jr.&oldid=1023855402
Wikipedia has a responsibility to maintain a neutral point of view, and currently, the prosecution and defense in an ongoing criminal case have contradictory interpretations of the evidence. It isn't an encyclopedia's responsibility to pick one version or another to put in the lead of the article. If the user who made this edit took issue with including "rubbish from the lawyers" in the lead, as the edit summary stated, then they should've also deleted the contentious (and as yet unverifiable) claim from the DA that the officers acted reasonably. In the interest of NPOV, either the defense lawyers' interpretation of the evidence should be included in the lead, or the DA's claims should be kept to the body of the article. I'm not going to make the edit myself, since clearly there's been some back and forth and I'm not trying to start an edit war, but some definitive resolution is needed here. 2600:8806:4205:9000:DDE:9DF4:427D:5BAB ( talk) 22:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Killing of Andrew Brown Jr. 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 |
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 C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Killing of Andrew Brown Jr. be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about
living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, 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. |
Page should be named "Shooting of Andrew Brown Jr." Killing presents the connotation that it was intentional and murderous and we do not have enough information to make that judgement yet. - 153.26.178.60 ( talk) 04:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
One of two AP reporters describes a protestor holding a sign styled the first way, but the splash image preceding his or her claim strongly supports the alternative emphasis. Granted, maybe the writer and photographer are conveying two completely different placards. I personally find that unlikely, and believe we need to choose between what this overall RS shows and what it tells. InedibleHulk ( talk) 03:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I've "boldly" chosen the latter format. Also made it clear that a period was not part of that black man's reaction! Revert, discuss, consent through silence? InedibleHulk ( talk) 03:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
An edit of mine was reverted with this summary:
To be clear, the article already stated that the police were conducting a raid related to a number of drugs. We commonly also state what the accused's lawyer had to say, in fact, we should include the accused's lawyer's statements to avoid bias. That is what our readers deserve as long as we use good RS for the statements. I assume that we all agree that The New York Times is acceptable and if it's not sloppy editing on their part it is not sloppy editing on mine to repeat what they had to say about the incident. All that said, perhaps it is best to wait a few days and see what develops as more information is released. But I did need to defend my reputation around this place.
Gandydancer (
talk)
00:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
Lead information should include a short version of the article. I added the Brown family's comments to avoid bias--it should be obvious that we do not include only one-sided versions. Gandydancer ( talk) 12:24, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
It seems there's been more dispute over what to include in the lead. I'd like to call to attention this revision: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Killing_of_Andrew_Brown_Jr.&oldid=1023855402
Wikipedia has a responsibility to maintain a neutral point of view, and currently, the prosecution and defense in an ongoing criminal case have contradictory interpretations of the evidence. It isn't an encyclopedia's responsibility to pick one version or another to put in the lead of the article. If the user who made this edit took issue with including "rubbish from the lawyers" in the lead, as the edit summary stated, then they should've also deleted the contentious (and as yet unverifiable) claim from the DA that the officers acted reasonably. In the interest of NPOV, either the defense lawyers' interpretation of the evidence should be included in the lead, or the DA's claims should be kept to the body of the article. I'm not going to make the edit myself, since clearly there's been some back and forth and I'm not trying to start an edit war, but some definitive resolution is needed here. 2600:8806:4205:9000:DDE:9DF4:427D:5BAB ( talk) 22:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)