![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
According to this link the memorial stone of Jesse Dirkhising shows his middle initial to be "W". In the newspaper clip (death notice), it shows his middle name as "William" and states his birthplace as Oxford, Ohio. CadenS ( talk) 21:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC) Here's the link
Pat Buchanan's book The Death of the West is used too many times as a citation. The book only offers a few opinions, and quotes other sources (AP, Brent Bozell, Andrew Sullivan) to lay out most of the facts and arguments. But in this article, it has been used to back up several statements that it did not make (and others that it only made as a tertiary source, by quoting others). For example, it does not claim that Dirkhising was drugged (in fact, as far as I know, none do: other sources only say he allegedly was drugged).
The entire two pages about Dirkhising can be found on Google Books: [1]
So if there are no objections, I will remove the Buchanan citations on all the statements except for the one where he is quoted. Also, the statements that say Dirkhising was drugged will need citations or will have to be removed. Did the jury (or anyone else) conclude that he was drugged, or was that just an allegation put forth by the prosecution? - kotra ( talk) 00:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
This article is currently titled around the victim but the main body of the article generally revolves the crime itself as well as the events around and resulting from it; on that basis I propose that the article be moved to something like " The murder of Jesse Dirkhising". WP:BLP1E states "If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event...Cover the event, not the person." this is already done in the (by all accounts very good) article, it is just not represented by the title (and first sentence in the lead). Guest9999 ( talk) 12:20, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Looking into the recent edit war over the word "homosexual" and other changes to the prose, I checked the citations.
The CBS News article does in fact say "In police interviews, Brown characterized the assault on Jesse as "horesplay" and claimed Jesse was a willing participant." So I think the original version is better (though we may want to paraphrase it instead of saying it word-for-word unless it's a quote, for copyvio reasons).
The Randy Newman citation, on the other hand, is slightly more suspect. The statement "There is also speculation that Dirkhising was openly gay with some stating it." is apparently supported by this quote from a fictional character: "Okay. Jesse Dirkhising was also a young gay boy. He was only thirteen, and he, too, was killed in a terrible way. But he was killed by two older gay men." and the subsequent footnote: "This is a true story. You can read more about it in many places by doing an Internet search. Note, especially, how gay writers agree with the version of the story presented in this dialogue." Besides the quote not actually saying he was openly gay (just "gay", which can be a big difference), the quote is from a fictional character. While the author claims that "gay writers" agree with the version of the story described by the character, he doesn't say which gay writers, or assert that they actually agree with that particular detail of the story (the fictional character describes the story in much greater length than I quoted above). So I think both "There is also speculation that Dirkhising was openly gay with some stating it." and "There is differing speculation over Dirkhising's sexual orientation, with some believing he may have been confused." should both be removed, since neither is adequately supported by the citation, in my opinion. At the very least, though, "openly" should be removed.
As for the "homosexual" vs. "gay" dispute, I'm leaning towards "gay", not because I think "homosexual" is necessarily used pejoratively here, but because that's the term most of the sources use, and that's the term a proposed guideline prefers. - kotra ( talk) 19:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Homosexual is almost always pejorative on biographies, gay, lesbian, bisexual or a self-descriptor is best. -- Banjeboi 11:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
A homosexual orientation refers to an erotic attraction to, and interest in forming romantic relationships with, member's of one's own sex. The term homosexuality denotes sexual interest in members of one's own anatomic sex and applies to both men and women. Homosexual men are often referred to as gay males. Homosexual women are often called lesbians. Now that we have defined homosexuality, let us note that the term is somewhat controversial. Some gay poeple object to it because they feel that it draws attention to sexual behaviour. Moreover, the term bears a social stigma. It has also been historically associated with concepts of deviance and mental illness.
— page 287, The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 20:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
By early 1894 Queensberry concluded the Wilde was most likely a homosexual...after the trials homosexuals were seen more as a threat.
— http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/wilde/wildeaccount.html, The Trials of Oscar Wilde: An Account by Douglas O. Linder
On the "adjective is acceptable, noun is pejorative" thing
Sorry to butt in, but I just want to offer my two cents on that one aspect of this. My father has cerebral palsy and has been confined to a wheelchair his entire life. I am certainly not one of those who prefer the term "differently-abled" (that's actually a bit insulting.. it's not like my father can walk differently than everyone else, haha), and I have no problem with saying "My dad is handicapped." However, I occasionally will hear a handicapped person referred to as just "a handicapped," i.e. the adjective has become the noun. It always makes me cringe when I hear that. I really, really, really don't care for it. By making the adjective the noun, you make it the central defining characteristic, taking precedence even over "person" or "man".
You are certainly not going to see me siding with the PC police in general, but on this one issue, I gotta agree. Using an adjective as a noun to describe a person is not preferred. -- Jaysweet ( talk) 15:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
According to this link the memorial stone of Jesse Dirkhising shows his middle initial to be "W". In the newspaper clip (death notice), it shows his middle name as "William" and states his birthplace as Oxford, Ohio. CadenS ( talk) 21:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC) Here's the link
Pat Buchanan's book The Death of the West is used too many times as a citation. The book only offers a few opinions, and quotes other sources (AP, Brent Bozell, Andrew Sullivan) to lay out most of the facts and arguments. But in this article, it has been used to back up several statements that it did not make (and others that it only made as a tertiary source, by quoting others). For example, it does not claim that Dirkhising was drugged (in fact, as far as I know, none do: other sources only say he allegedly was drugged).
The entire two pages about Dirkhising can be found on Google Books: [1]
So if there are no objections, I will remove the Buchanan citations on all the statements except for the one where he is quoted. Also, the statements that say Dirkhising was drugged will need citations or will have to be removed. Did the jury (or anyone else) conclude that he was drugged, or was that just an allegation put forth by the prosecution? - kotra ( talk) 00:45, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
This article is currently titled around the victim but the main body of the article generally revolves the crime itself as well as the events around and resulting from it; on that basis I propose that the article be moved to something like " The murder of Jesse Dirkhising". WP:BLP1E states "If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event...Cover the event, not the person." this is already done in the (by all accounts very good) article, it is just not represented by the title (and first sentence in the lead). Guest9999 ( talk) 12:20, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
Looking into the recent edit war over the word "homosexual" and other changes to the prose, I checked the citations.
The CBS News article does in fact say "In police interviews, Brown characterized the assault on Jesse as "horesplay" and claimed Jesse was a willing participant." So I think the original version is better (though we may want to paraphrase it instead of saying it word-for-word unless it's a quote, for copyvio reasons).
The Randy Newman citation, on the other hand, is slightly more suspect. The statement "There is also speculation that Dirkhising was openly gay with some stating it." is apparently supported by this quote from a fictional character: "Okay. Jesse Dirkhising was also a young gay boy. He was only thirteen, and he, too, was killed in a terrible way. But he was killed by two older gay men." and the subsequent footnote: "This is a true story. You can read more about it in many places by doing an Internet search. Note, especially, how gay writers agree with the version of the story presented in this dialogue." Besides the quote not actually saying he was openly gay (just "gay", which can be a big difference), the quote is from a fictional character. While the author claims that "gay writers" agree with the version of the story described by the character, he doesn't say which gay writers, or assert that they actually agree with that particular detail of the story (the fictional character describes the story in much greater length than I quoted above). So I think both "There is also speculation that Dirkhising was openly gay with some stating it." and "There is differing speculation over Dirkhising's sexual orientation, with some believing he may have been confused." should both be removed, since neither is adequately supported by the citation, in my opinion. At the very least, though, "openly" should be removed.
As for the "homosexual" vs. "gay" dispute, I'm leaning towards "gay", not because I think "homosexual" is necessarily used pejoratively here, but because that's the term most of the sources use, and that's the term a proposed guideline prefers. - kotra ( talk) 19:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
Homosexual is almost always pejorative on biographies, gay, lesbian, bisexual or a self-descriptor is best. -- Banjeboi 11:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
A homosexual orientation refers to an erotic attraction to, and interest in forming romantic relationships with, member's of one's own sex. The term homosexuality denotes sexual interest in members of one's own anatomic sex and applies to both men and women. Homosexual men are often referred to as gay males. Homosexual women are often called lesbians. Now that we have defined homosexuality, let us note that the term is somewhat controversial. Some gay poeple object to it because they feel that it draws attention to sexual behaviour. Moreover, the term bears a social stigma. It has also been historically associated with concepts of deviance and mental illness.
— page 287, The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 20:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
By early 1894 Queensberry concluded the Wilde was most likely a homosexual...after the trials homosexuals were seen more as a threat.
— http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/wilde/wildeaccount.html, The Trials of Oscar Wilde: An Account by Douglas O. Linder
On the "adjective is acceptable, noun is pejorative" thing
Sorry to butt in, but I just want to offer my two cents on that one aspect of this. My father has cerebral palsy and has been confined to a wheelchair his entire life. I am certainly not one of those who prefer the term "differently-abled" (that's actually a bit insulting.. it's not like my father can walk differently than everyone else, haha), and I have no problem with saying "My dad is handicapped." However, I occasionally will hear a handicapped person referred to as just "a handicapped," i.e. the adjective has become the noun. It always makes me cringe when I hear that. I really, really, really don't care for it. By making the adjective the noun, you make it the central defining characteristic, taking precedence even over "person" or "man".
You are certainly not going to see me siding with the PC police in general, but on this one issue, I gotta agree. Using an adjective as a noun to describe a person is not preferred. -- Jaysweet ( talk) 15:59, 15 October 2008 (UTC)