![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 January 2021 and 10 May 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Mbrennan21. Peer reviewers:
Trentbohan.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 01:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article says Soon Ja Du was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, but the article on the 1992 Los Angeles riots says she was convicted of voluntary manslaughter. The vast majority of web references say voluntary manslaughter, including a court transcript, so this page is probably the one that is wrong.
It states Latasha 'threw' the orange bottle on the counter. The cctv film shows Latasha handing over the bottle, she doesn't throw the bottle. Linclinc ( talk) 22:13, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Soon Ja Du was convicted of voluntary manslaughter per official court records — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
152.132.10.72 (
talk)
15:07, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
The title is also totally wrong (bias?) It states judge sentenced Soon Ja Du to "time served". She was actually sentenced to 10 years in prison (suspended sentence), 5 years probation, a $500 fine + all costs associated with Latasha's funeral, and 400 hours community service. If anyone wants to edit / correct it there is a good source here
[1]
Kav2001c (
talk)
08:07, 6 April 2021 (UTC)kav2001c
Extended content
|
---|
You Are Wrong... Since when did she punch the owner? I've seen the video. She didn't even steal anything, as best I can remember. The owner was just acting on a stereotype. Ridethefire3211
The page is for discussing improvements to the article, not for general discussion of the article's topic. - SummerPhD v2.0 12:55, 16 June 2016 (UTC) |
This is all very sad a life was taken and another was distroyed. I was living in Los Angeles at the time this was going on and the video clearly shows the beautiful young life of Latsaha Harlins beating the crap out of the Korean store keeper. Now no one deserves to shot period but I think for one minute if it was me the person behind the counter getting the crap beat out of me by a 15 year knowing that I have been stolen from call names in my place of business. Everyday being told how you gonna kill me by adults. It's like being in a war zone And now a child comes in and starts this same vicious cycle not only with words but with a physical beating what would you do.What I Think was wrong The Korea store owner shot her from behind as she was walking away. If she was going to put a gun it should done during the fight and it would have been seen more justifiable.
When I heard the news of what happen to this 15 year on the way to school I was completely outrage and very angry
No such thing as rational or punish or not, do any is ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyhendk ( talk • contribs) 00:36, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
this article is biased and is only up here because of the supposed 'hate crime'. i think we should put this up for deletion.
Take a look and compare. These two articles are identical in scope with a few details unique to both. ie. names, ages, roles of Billy and Charles Du, Du's lawyer, video proof, Tupac. It seems like a waste of space to have the two when they don't go into the actual lives of the two individuals, and all we know about them stems from this one incident. I'm not entirely sure what the new article should be called - I'm trying to find an article which was titled after an incident with a similar background - Would this be a precedent? As voluntary manslaughter is still murder by definition, it could be called "Murder of Latasha Harlins," but I'm sure someone wants think of something that sounds "less biased." ( The Lake Effect 09:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC))
Again, I'm late to the party, but in my opinion Death of Latasha Harlins would be a far better title; the current article doesn't actually tell us anything about Harlins other than her name, age, race, and the fact she was a student. It's really about the incident rather than herself. - Ashley Pomeroy ( talk) 17:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
What absolute bullshit, seriously lads. Let's discuss, then change. Who in the world puts an item IN their backpack, and then goes to pay for it. I doubt that girl was going to pay for anything, probably going to steal it. Of course, it doesn't warrant her death but my god lads, let's get this straightened out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.178.93.113 ( talk) 13:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC).
|
Extended content
|
---|
Soap Box Section Even though Wikipedia is not a soapbox, several users have used this page to express the opinion that Harlins deserved to die or that her death is somewhat less tragic because she was stealing. This idea, weak to begin with, becomes totally useless once one realizes that she WASN'T stealing, and one realizes this soon after beginning to read the article. Of course, those expressing this opinion are of the anonymous hit and run type, who can't be bothered with reading the text or the links. So I'm creating this section for them to speak their anger and ignorance, and so those wanting a real discussion don't have to be disturbed with their useless opinions. 130.156.29.112 19:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
|
This article contained several paragraphs copied (or nearly copied) from [1] (despite that page's prominent "reproduction prohibited" notice). Regrettably, the most recent revision I could find lacking the plagiarized text was from way back in December. I reverted it to be safe. Just thought I should explain myself. -- kine ( talk) 03:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC) u r an idiot she didnt leave with the merchandise she put it down and started to walk out..and thats not self-defense, Harlins was walking away the Bitch pulled some pussy shit and shot her in the head because she got her ass beat...and then she ran to Korea, she deserves to be thrown in jail and beat to death in there
Discussion here: [2] 130.156.29.230 ( talk) 20:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
I am undoing several edits made today by an IP user. This has very little to do with the facts in the edits, but more to do with no sources given. From the articles I read none of the facts asserted by this editor were ever established. I could easily be wrong. If reliable sources can be provided that would verify the edits, by all means revert me. I will be leaving a similar message on that editor's talk page. Thanks. Tide rolls 22:45, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
I've reinserted several citations that were deleted without explanation. Verifiability is an import part of Wikipedia, see WP:V 68.38.183.158 ( talk) 20:28, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know what has happened to Soon Ja Du? Did she end up going back to Korea? Does she still run a liquor store? A followup would be nice I can't find anything online but I will keep looking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.49.209 ( talk) 10:43, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Most of the narrative in the section "Summary" does not follow NPOV guidelines. The section says that it is a summary of the court case, but it is clearly not. The summary section uses language like "Du erroneously concluded" and " who falsely[4] claimed having been robbed". I think this section should just recount the facts as they appear in the case, and not make conclusions based on information that is unknowable. -- Mherlihy ( talk) 11:34, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
"Du erroneously concluded". The title of citation 5 states "Slain girl was not stealing juice, Police say". Since the victim was not stealing it is correct to characterize the perpertrators conclusion as 'erroneous'.
"to report an alleged holdup". No holdup happened. Therefore, it was alleged, not actual. This phrasing is certainly better than describing the claim as a lie, which is certainly possible although not proven.
"but her words were contradicted by the statements of the two witnesses present at the time and the security camera footage". Accurate phrasing. The videotape and the witness show that the victim came to the counter holding money and that the physical confrontation was initiated by the perpetrator.
ThatSaved ( talk) 20:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I propose this article be moved to the title Death of Latasha Harlins. Subject is notable primarily for the incident in which she died. The article focuses on the incident, the aftermath, and the legacy, with substantial space dedicated to Du's trial, and the effect on the culture. Boneyard90 ( talk) 16:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Details of the breif struggle before Harlins's death should be mentioned for completeness.
Although I have little reason to believe that someone who would shout "STOP IT NOW" has the ability or desire to engage in productive dialogue, I for one will attempt to follow wiki protocol by initiating talk page discussion. Phrases that have weasel words such as "some members" and "numerous...businesses" are not desirable in Wikipedia. The rationale, weak as it is, given for retaining this phrasing is that it is cited, but not only is this not obvious, because there are no direct links to the sources, it is of dubious relevance. The fact that sources use this language is no reason we can not try to IMPROVE on the phrasing per Wiki's manual of style. Keeping the templates that have been inserted and have been in existence for quite some time are the best method of bring attention to this issue. 24.187.214.210 ( talk) 15:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
NOTE: It's very telling that you initially reverted my comment here without edit summary. It displays very clearly that you've dug into your position in such a way that you're simply reverting me without even bothering to check what you've done. LHM ask me a question 15:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm here to offer a third opinion based on this request. I'll be brief:
As "mike" well knows, not all killings are legal. There was a criminal conviction in this case. The court documents refer to the killing as being unlawful. JamesBurnsLives ( talk) 18:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Editgram: Hello. Please discuss your proposed changes here.
Wikipedia doesn't use direct links in articles, per WP:EL.
Wikipedia articles should not be based on WP:PRIMARY sources.
We cannot attempt to interpret primary sources, as this is a form of original research. All disputable interpretations of sources must come from reliable, secondary sources. Presenting this as an "altercation" is editorializing, when the video merely shows their actions, including that Harlins was shot in the back of the head while walking away from the counter.
Since we cannot, and should not, attempt to summarize this source, we must remove this link and stick to what sources say. Grayfell ( talk) 22:12, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Grayfell: Hi Grayfell. Thanks for creating this talk page, and for posting all the threatening messages on my talk page.
I see, that's an interesting argument. And point taken.
Here is a link to an LA times article LATIMES (a secondary source) that describes the incident as "punched her in the face." Here is a book review BOOKREVIEW with an excerpt that describes the incident again as "punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down."
If you prefer secondary sources and exact, non-interpretive phrasing, I can change it to this.
Also, as to the video of the incident. Since it is a primary source, Wikipedia policy holds that "[a]ny interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation." I think you agree that the LA Times and a published book are both reliable secondary sources. Would you be okay with the following edit?
"Latasha Harlins (July 14, 1975 – March 16, 1991) was a 15-year-old African-American girl who was shot in the head by Soon Ja Du (Hangul:순자두), a 51-year-old Korean-born female convenience store owner, after punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down. Du was tried and convicted of voluntary manslaughter in Harlins' death."
Editgram ( talk) 22:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)Editgram
duringthe altercation or
afterthe altercation. This would also gloss-over the important detail of who started the altercation, which according to police etc. was, Du, not Harlins. Grayfell ( talk) 23:06, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Grayfell: Hi Grayfell.
As much as I respect your opinion, your argument doesn't make a lot of sense. Research is research. The Los Angeles Times is a reputable source. So is a published book. So is a research paper from the University of Chicago that you can see here UCHICAGO: "Soon Ja Du, her face beginning to swell and discolor from the four punches Harlins landed." My use of the word "altercation" was to use a neutral description as prescribed by Wikipedia policy, a reasonable edit that resulted from your comments. A more accurate description would be "punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down." The second description would not be an interpretation, it would be a fact corroborated by multiple sources. If you would like to omit the video, which shows Harlins punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down, then that would be fine. But you should definitely indicate such an event happened, otherwise you're creating a falsehood through omission.
It's interesting also, that you're focusing on the word "altercation" when it doesn't appear in the proposed edit, which is a straw-man argument. It's something I'd like the administrator to note. See above: ("Latasha Harlins (July 14, 1975 – March 16, 1991) was a 15-year-old African-American girl who was shot in the head by Soon Ja Du (Hangul:순자두), a 51-year-old Korean-born female convenience store owner, after punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down. Du was tried and convicted of voluntary manslaughter in Harlins' death.")
It's also interesting that you believe "punched Du in the face" is evocative, but "shot in the head" is not evocative. It's an obvious double standard, and should also be noted by the administrator.
Editgram ( talk) 23:14, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Latasha Harlins was a 15-year-old African-American girl who was fatally shot by Soon Ja Du, a 51-year-old Korean-born female convenience store owner, after Du accused Harlins of stealing a bottle of orange juice and called Harlins a "bitch", after which Harlins said she intended to pay for orange juice, after which Du grabbed Harlins sweater, after which Harlins punched Du twice in the eye, at which point Du fell down with Harlins backpack, dislodging the orange juice which fell on the floor, after which Du got up and threw her chair at Harlin, after which Harlin picked up the orange juice bottle and put it back on the counter, after which Du knocked the bottle away, after which point Harlins turned around to leave, at which point Du shot Harlins in the back of the head.
Hi AzureCitizen,
I completely agree with your two-punch edit, and thank you for being so clear and civil.
It seems like Grayfell's argument, which you may or may not support, is that the only possible and fair lead to this Wikipedia article is the current version, which excludes all details except "shot in the head," or absolutely every detail in the entire case. My counter-argument to this particular line of logic is that including one gruesome detail, and excluding any other detail is the definition of bias. To use your words, this slants the lead's summary, especially when one detail isn't balanced by another, inhibiting Wikipedia's policy of unbiased, neutral, and fair editing.
I think your source from the case is a perfect place to start looking for a proper description. The following quote pulled from the case seems to get the gist of the situation while keeping the language neutral:
Latasha Harlins was a 15-year-old African-American girl who was fatally shot by Soon Ja Du, a 51-year-old Korean-born female convenience store owner.
Pardon the interaction between me and Grayfell, his initial accusations of "white-washing" and numerous opinionated reversions seemed to indicate a political motivation which lead to my curt tone with him.
Sidenote: Well, the impetus behind "Korean-born" seems to be to denote the subject was born in a foreign country. Thus Korea-born or Foreign-born seemed more accurate. But if the court record said "Korean-born," I concede it makes more sense to stick with it.
Sincerely, Editgram ( talk) 11:52, 19 February 2020 (UTC)Editgram
The specific fixes to this page that are necessary: (1) Why is the assault, fight, or altercation not mentioned in the heading section? This has already been asked by various other posters on the talk page to no avail. (2) It's not often you get a video of exactly what happened. Many other wikipedia articles link to videos, so why remove them in this case? Why not just reformat the link? (3) There are a lot of run on sentences that should be split into two sentences, grammatical and other errors. Yet these edits too are reverted. Why?
Please elaborate.
Editgram ( talk) 22:28, 18 February 2020 (UTC)Editgram
Hi All,
I'm sure the jury really recommended the maximum sentence, but none of the citations actually say this. I've also been unable to find the jury recommendation online. Can someone post a link so we can properly cite it?
Thanks, Editgram ( talk) 11:52, 19 February 2020 (UTC)Editgram
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Killing of Lizzie O'Neill which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 18:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Why does it say she is was 15 when she died? This is basic mathematics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.232.27 ( talk) 06:37, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi, So I understand this might bring my personal biases to the table, but my personal review of the video suggests that Du did not throw a stool, but that Latasha attempted to get the backpack, failed, Du pulled the backpack behind the counter then threw it at her. I don't think it was a stool. Yes, of course my review of the video is not backed by a secondary source, but I believe the current edit of this article does not back Du has thrown a stool either. Multiple previous talks have also mentioned she might have thrown the backpack instead of the stool. But of course, it is 4:50 in the morning, I was on a hankering to get to what I believe is a decent study for the tape of the killing, and I am all out of time for now. Jzburda ( talk) 09:47, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 January 2021 and 10 May 2021. Further details are available
on the course page. Student editor(s):
Mbrennan21. Peer reviewers:
Trentbohan.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 01:47, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
This article says Soon Ja Du was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, but the article on the 1992 Los Angeles riots says she was convicted of voluntary manslaughter. The vast majority of web references say voluntary manslaughter, including a court transcript, so this page is probably the one that is wrong.
It states Latasha 'threw' the orange bottle on the counter. The cctv film shows Latasha handing over the bottle, she doesn't throw the bottle. Linclinc ( talk) 22:13, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Soon Ja Du was convicted of voluntary manslaughter per official court records — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
152.132.10.72 (
talk)
15:07, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
The title is also totally wrong (bias?) It states judge sentenced Soon Ja Du to "time served". She was actually sentenced to 10 years in prison (suspended sentence), 5 years probation, a $500 fine + all costs associated with Latasha's funeral, and 400 hours community service. If anyone wants to edit / correct it there is a good source here
[1]
Kav2001c (
talk)
08:07, 6 April 2021 (UTC)kav2001c
Extended content
|
---|
You Are Wrong... Since when did she punch the owner? I've seen the video. She didn't even steal anything, as best I can remember. The owner was just acting on a stereotype. Ridethefire3211
The page is for discussing improvements to the article, not for general discussion of the article's topic. - SummerPhD v2.0 12:55, 16 June 2016 (UTC) |
This is all very sad a life was taken and another was distroyed. I was living in Los Angeles at the time this was going on and the video clearly shows the beautiful young life of Latsaha Harlins beating the crap out of the Korean store keeper. Now no one deserves to shot period but I think for one minute if it was me the person behind the counter getting the crap beat out of me by a 15 year knowing that I have been stolen from call names in my place of business. Everyday being told how you gonna kill me by adults. It's like being in a war zone And now a child comes in and starts this same vicious cycle not only with words but with a physical beating what would you do.What I Think was wrong The Korea store owner shot her from behind as she was walking away. If she was going to put a gun it should done during the fight and it would have been seen more justifiable.
When I heard the news of what happen to this 15 year on the way to school I was completely outrage and very angry
No such thing as rational or punish or not, do any is ok. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyhendk ( talk • contribs) 00:36, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
this article is biased and is only up here because of the supposed 'hate crime'. i think we should put this up for deletion.
Take a look and compare. These two articles are identical in scope with a few details unique to both. ie. names, ages, roles of Billy and Charles Du, Du's lawyer, video proof, Tupac. It seems like a waste of space to have the two when they don't go into the actual lives of the two individuals, and all we know about them stems from this one incident. I'm not entirely sure what the new article should be called - I'm trying to find an article which was titled after an incident with a similar background - Would this be a precedent? As voluntary manslaughter is still murder by definition, it could be called "Murder of Latasha Harlins," but I'm sure someone wants think of something that sounds "less biased." ( The Lake Effect 09:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC))
Again, I'm late to the party, but in my opinion Death of Latasha Harlins would be a far better title; the current article doesn't actually tell us anything about Harlins other than her name, age, race, and the fact she was a student. It's really about the incident rather than herself. - Ashley Pomeroy ( talk) 17:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
What absolute bullshit, seriously lads. Let's discuss, then change. Who in the world puts an item IN their backpack, and then goes to pay for it. I doubt that girl was going to pay for anything, probably going to steal it. Of course, it doesn't warrant her death but my god lads, let's get this straightened out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.178.93.113 ( talk) 13:31, 12 May 2007 (UTC).
|
Extended content
|
---|
Soap Box Section Even though Wikipedia is not a soapbox, several users have used this page to express the opinion that Harlins deserved to die or that her death is somewhat less tragic because she was stealing. This idea, weak to begin with, becomes totally useless once one realizes that she WASN'T stealing, and one realizes this soon after beginning to read the article. Of course, those expressing this opinion are of the anonymous hit and run type, who can't be bothered with reading the text or the links. So I'm creating this section for them to speak their anger and ignorance, and so those wanting a real discussion don't have to be disturbed with their useless opinions. 130.156.29.112 19:21, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
|
This article contained several paragraphs copied (or nearly copied) from [1] (despite that page's prominent "reproduction prohibited" notice). Regrettably, the most recent revision I could find lacking the plagiarized text was from way back in December. I reverted it to be safe. Just thought I should explain myself. -- kine ( talk) 03:52, 14 February 2008 (UTC) u r an idiot she didnt leave with the merchandise she put it down and started to walk out..and thats not self-defense, Harlins was walking away the Bitch pulled some pussy shit and shot her in the head because she got her ass beat...and then she ran to Korea, she deserves to be thrown in jail and beat to death in there
Discussion here: [2] 130.156.29.230 ( talk) 20:21, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
I am undoing several edits made today by an IP user. This has very little to do with the facts in the edits, but more to do with no sources given. From the articles I read none of the facts asserted by this editor were ever established. I could easily be wrong. If reliable sources can be provided that would verify the edits, by all means revert me. I will be leaving a similar message on that editor's talk page. Thanks. Tide rolls 22:45, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
I've reinserted several citations that were deleted without explanation. Verifiability is an import part of Wikipedia, see WP:V 68.38.183.158 ( talk) 20:28, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone know what has happened to Soon Ja Du? Did she end up going back to Korea? Does she still run a liquor store? A followup would be nice I can't find anything online but I will keep looking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.22.49.209 ( talk) 10:43, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
Most of the narrative in the section "Summary" does not follow NPOV guidelines. The section says that it is a summary of the court case, but it is clearly not. The summary section uses language like "Du erroneously concluded" and " who falsely[4] claimed having been robbed". I think this section should just recount the facts as they appear in the case, and not make conclusions based on information that is unknowable. -- Mherlihy ( talk) 11:34, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
"Du erroneously concluded". The title of citation 5 states "Slain girl was not stealing juice, Police say". Since the victim was not stealing it is correct to characterize the perpertrators conclusion as 'erroneous'.
"to report an alleged holdup". No holdup happened. Therefore, it was alleged, not actual. This phrasing is certainly better than describing the claim as a lie, which is certainly possible although not proven.
"but her words were contradicted by the statements of the two witnesses present at the time and the security camera footage". Accurate phrasing. The videotape and the witness show that the victim came to the counter holding money and that the physical confrontation was initiated by the perpetrator.
ThatSaved ( talk) 20:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I propose this article be moved to the title Death of Latasha Harlins. Subject is notable primarily for the incident in which she died. The article focuses on the incident, the aftermath, and the legacy, with substantial space dedicated to Du's trial, and the effect on the culture. Boneyard90 ( talk) 16:53, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
Details of the breif struggle before Harlins's death should be mentioned for completeness.
Although I have little reason to believe that someone who would shout "STOP IT NOW" has the ability or desire to engage in productive dialogue, I for one will attempt to follow wiki protocol by initiating talk page discussion. Phrases that have weasel words such as "some members" and "numerous...businesses" are not desirable in Wikipedia. The rationale, weak as it is, given for retaining this phrasing is that it is cited, but not only is this not obvious, because there are no direct links to the sources, it is of dubious relevance. The fact that sources use this language is no reason we can not try to IMPROVE on the phrasing per Wiki's manual of style. Keeping the templates that have been inserted and have been in existence for quite some time are the best method of bring attention to this issue. 24.187.214.210 ( talk) 15:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
NOTE: It's very telling that you initially reverted my comment here without edit summary. It displays very clearly that you've dug into your position in such a way that you're simply reverting me without even bothering to check what you've done. LHM ask me a question 15:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
I'm here to offer a third opinion based on this request. I'll be brief:
As "mike" well knows, not all killings are legal. There was a criminal conviction in this case. The court documents refer to the killing as being unlawful. JamesBurnsLives ( talk) 18:11, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
@ Editgram: Hello. Please discuss your proposed changes here.
Wikipedia doesn't use direct links in articles, per WP:EL.
Wikipedia articles should not be based on WP:PRIMARY sources.
We cannot attempt to interpret primary sources, as this is a form of original research. All disputable interpretations of sources must come from reliable, secondary sources. Presenting this as an "altercation" is editorializing, when the video merely shows their actions, including that Harlins was shot in the back of the head while walking away from the counter.
Since we cannot, and should not, attempt to summarize this source, we must remove this link and stick to what sources say. Grayfell ( talk) 22:12, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Grayfell: Hi Grayfell. Thanks for creating this talk page, and for posting all the threatening messages on my talk page.
I see, that's an interesting argument. And point taken.
Here is a link to an LA times article LATIMES (a secondary source) that describes the incident as "punched her in the face." Here is a book review BOOKREVIEW with an excerpt that describes the incident again as "punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down."
If you prefer secondary sources and exact, non-interpretive phrasing, I can change it to this.
Also, as to the video of the incident. Since it is a primary source, Wikipedia policy holds that "[a]ny interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation." I think you agree that the LA Times and a published book are both reliable secondary sources. Would you be okay with the following edit?
"Latasha Harlins (July 14, 1975 – March 16, 1991) was a 15-year-old African-American girl who was shot in the head by Soon Ja Du (Hangul:순자두), a 51-year-old Korean-born female convenience store owner, after punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down. Du was tried and convicted of voluntary manslaughter in Harlins' death."
Editgram ( talk) 22:43, 18 February 2020 (UTC)Editgram
duringthe altercation or
afterthe altercation. This would also gloss-over the important detail of who started the altercation, which according to police etc. was, Du, not Harlins. Grayfell ( talk) 23:06, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
@ Grayfell: Hi Grayfell.
As much as I respect your opinion, your argument doesn't make a lot of sense. Research is research. The Los Angeles Times is a reputable source. So is a published book. So is a research paper from the University of Chicago that you can see here UCHICAGO: "Soon Ja Du, her face beginning to swell and discolor from the four punches Harlins landed." My use of the word "altercation" was to use a neutral description as prescribed by Wikipedia policy, a reasonable edit that resulted from your comments. A more accurate description would be "punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down." The second description would not be an interpretation, it would be a fact corroborated by multiple sources. If you would like to omit the video, which shows Harlins punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down, then that would be fine. But you should definitely indicate such an event happened, otherwise you're creating a falsehood through omission.
It's interesting also, that you're focusing on the word "altercation" when it doesn't appear in the proposed edit, which is a straw-man argument. It's something I'd like the administrator to note. See above: ("Latasha Harlins (July 14, 1975 – March 16, 1991) was a 15-year-old African-American girl who was shot in the head by Soon Ja Du (Hangul:순자두), a 51-year-old Korean-born female convenience store owner, after punching Du in the face four times and knocking her down. Du was tried and convicted of voluntary manslaughter in Harlins' death.")
It's also interesting that you believe "punched Du in the face" is evocative, but "shot in the head" is not evocative. It's an obvious double standard, and should also be noted by the administrator.
Editgram ( talk) 23:14, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Latasha Harlins was a 15-year-old African-American girl who was fatally shot by Soon Ja Du, a 51-year-old Korean-born female convenience store owner, after Du accused Harlins of stealing a bottle of orange juice and called Harlins a "bitch", after which Harlins said she intended to pay for orange juice, after which Du grabbed Harlins sweater, after which Harlins punched Du twice in the eye, at which point Du fell down with Harlins backpack, dislodging the orange juice which fell on the floor, after which Du got up and threw her chair at Harlin, after which Harlin picked up the orange juice bottle and put it back on the counter, after which Du knocked the bottle away, after which point Harlins turned around to leave, at which point Du shot Harlins in the back of the head.
Hi AzureCitizen,
I completely agree with your two-punch edit, and thank you for being so clear and civil.
It seems like Grayfell's argument, which you may or may not support, is that the only possible and fair lead to this Wikipedia article is the current version, which excludes all details except "shot in the head," or absolutely every detail in the entire case. My counter-argument to this particular line of logic is that including one gruesome detail, and excluding any other detail is the definition of bias. To use your words, this slants the lead's summary, especially when one detail isn't balanced by another, inhibiting Wikipedia's policy of unbiased, neutral, and fair editing.
I think your source from the case is a perfect place to start looking for a proper description. The following quote pulled from the case seems to get the gist of the situation while keeping the language neutral:
Latasha Harlins was a 15-year-old African-American girl who was fatally shot by Soon Ja Du, a 51-year-old Korean-born female convenience store owner.
Pardon the interaction between me and Grayfell, his initial accusations of "white-washing" and numerous opinionated reversions seemed to indicate a political motivation which lead to my curt tone with him.
Sidenote: Well, the impetus behind "Korean-born" seems to be to denote the subject was born in a foreign country. Thus Korea-born or Foreign-born seemed more accurate. But if the court record said "Korean-born," I concede it makes more sense to stick with it.
Sincerely, Editgram ( talk) 11:52, 19 February 2020 (UTC)Editgram
The specific fixes to this page that are necessary: (1) Why is the assault, fight, or altercation not mentioned in the heading section? This has already been asked by various other posters on the talk page to no avail. (2) It's not often you get a video of exactly what happened. Many other wikipedia articles link to videos, so why remove them in this case? Why not just reformat the link? (3) There are a lot of run on sentences that should be split into two sentences, grammatical and other errors. Yet these edits too are reverted. Why?
Please elaborate.
Editgram ( talk) 22:28, 18 February 2020 (UTC)Editgram
Hi All,
I'm sure the jury really recommended the maximum sentence, but none of the citations actually say this. I've also been unable to find the jury recommendation online. Can someone post a link so we can properly cite it?
Thanks, Editgram ( talk) 11:52, 19 February 2020 (UTC)Editgram
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Killing of Lizzie O'Neill which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — RMCD bot 18:20, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
Why does it say she is was 15 when she died? This is basic mathematics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.232.27 ( talk) 06:37, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi, So I understand this might bring my personal biases to the table, but my personal review of the video suggests that Du did not throw a stool, but that Latasha attempted to get the backpack, failed, Du pulled the backpack behind the counter then threw it at her. I don't think it was a stool. Yes, of course my review of the video is not backed by a secondary source, but I believe the current edit of this article does not back Du has thrown a stool either. Multiple previous talks have also mentioned she might have thrown the backpack instead of the stool. But of course, it is 4:50 in the morning, I was on a hankering to get to what I believe is a decent study for the tape of the killing, and I am all out of time for now. Jzburda ( talk) 09:47, 9 August 2023 (UTC)