![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on October 8, 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I believe the article should either remove all parts that are unclear (with the citations needed), or clarified - or it should be deleted. As it stands now, it is total speculation, which should never be part of a wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.108.103.172 ( talk) 20:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I think this article should be merged into Tupac's death somehow. why do you get a wikipedia page for being a gang member? If he weren't a suspect in Tupac's death he'd be of no importance — Preceding unsigned comment added by, 98.238.244.254 ( talk) 08:16, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
I've cleaned up the article considerably removing links to the fan sites and instead linking to news archives or abstracts of newspaper stories. I have to say finding sources is easy, but trusting them is not. MTV, the Associated Press and others report two and three different versions of even the simplest of events or turns in the case. Sometimes it was best to read multiple sources or read stories much later in the timeline to try and understand who had their original reporting right. I must admit that I am becoming biased against the Sun reporter Cathy Scott. Her writings are all over the place and it seems she has based her career, somewhat, to covering this story - I'm suspect of a few details that she gives in a few of her articles.
Also it is hard to find sources now of information that for some people, because the whole event was so big, is common knowledge. Not that some of these items aren't true, but digging into the news accounts is difficult because of the time in which it happened, the web was just getting traction and newspapers were not putting all of their articles online. Wire reports are likely best because the events that made Mr. Anderson infamous are subject to so much speculation. The longer the article, the more speculation, if it is a book... don't even quote it here I'd suggest. JoeHenzi ( talk) 09:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
this article seems to be only editted by people biased against the man. He was never charged or even called a suspect by authorities, the article should reflect this wether 99% of Tupac's fans agree he did it or not. I just removed a blatently incorrect statement that said he was suspected, which was supported by a link saying
Las Vegas homicide detective Lt. Larry Spinosa said, "At this point, Orlando Anderson is not a suspect in the shooting of Tupac Shakur."
How could ANYONE interpret that to mean he was a supect!? It's ok to say that he is widely accused of it by media and the public, and that he did have legal issues in civil court, that is ok by wp: verify if its cited Smitty1337 ( talk) 23:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
it was. You even say he was detained... and he was detained as a suspect. In the linked interview he even says that he was an on-again-off-again suspect. I'm trying to be careful here, and to walk a fine line and keep the article objective, but two people have come by now and reversed edits that are verifiable (check tons of news stories with headlines that read "suspect arrested in connection..."). I mean I even changed the line that called him a Crip to "alleged" because we can only go on the assertion and his denial later to the media.
on a side note... it was actually pretty easy to find a source lol. Suge Knight: The Rise, Fall, and Rise of Death Row Records: The Story of Marion 'Suge' Knight, a Hard Hitting Study of One Man, One Company That Changed the Course of American Music Forever. Published book, Page 32 states he is a suspect. gonna go work that in now Smitty1337 ( talk) 02:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
true there are lots of conspiracies, but the source is published and has a decent bibliography, and wikipedia is about verifiability not truth Smitty1337 ( talk) 02:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
this would appear to be selfpublished and as such not considered a reliable source. Please consider finding better sources if you are so inclined, i will review this site further to see if i can find anything that would redeem it to meet the standards of wp: rs Smitty1337 ( talk) 00:23, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
The article says at the bottom of the first paragraph 'he is the real killer'....wtf? fix that! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
75.7.201.162 (
talk)
02:29, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Why does it say he's very handsome? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.7.222.104 ( talk) 00:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Although someone added that Cathy Scott's theory implicates Orlando Anderson, it is not clear to me that this is correct. In her 2002 book on Pac, she reviews various theories of his murder including the Suge Knight/Death row theory before finally stating "Years after the primary investigations, it's still anyone's guess. No one was ever arrested but no one was ever ruled out as a suspect, either." She then concludes oddly enough that one theory "transcends all the others, and implicates the white-record-comany power brokers themselves." implicating the bosses of the Suge Knight label. [1] The reference to her book in context doesn't make sense Scholarlyarticles ( talk) 20:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Orlando Anderson. 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) 22:02, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Wassup YRN MJ7 ( talk) 21:28, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
This assertion needs a citation: "he was a conscientious student who passed his exams and received good grades" -- seems like his mother or someone put this in here to make him look good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.36.69.90 ( talk) 19:46, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on October 8, 2007. The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I believe the article should either remove all parts that are unclear (with the citations needed), or clarified - or it should be deleted. As it stands now, it is total speculation, which should never be part of a wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.108.103.172 ( talk) 20:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
I think this article should be merged into Tupac's death somehow. why do you get a wikipedia page for being a gang member? If he weren't a suspect in Tupac's death he'd be of no importance — Preceding unsigned comment added by, 98.238.244.254 ( talk) 08:16, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
I've cleaned up the article considerably removing links to the fan sites and instead linking to news archives or abstracts of newspaper stories. I have to say finding sources is easy, but trusting them is not. MTV, the Associated Press and others report two and three different versions of even the simplest of events or turns in the case. Sometimes it was best to read multiple sources or read stories much later in the timeline to try and understand who had their original reporting right. I must admit that I am becoming biased against the Sun reporter Cathy Scott. Her writings are all over the place and it seems she has based her career, somewhat, to covering this story - I'm suspect of a few details that she gives in a few of her articles.
Also it is hard to find sources now of information that for some people, because the whole event was so big, is common knowledge. Not that some of these items aren't true, but digging into the news accounts is difficult because of the time in which it happened, the web was just getting traction and newspapers were not putting all of their articles online. Wire reports are likely best because the events that made Mr. Anderson infamous are subject to so much speculation. The longer the article, the more speculation, if it is a book... don't even quote it here I'd suggest. JoeHenzi ( talk) 09:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
this article seems to be only editted by people biased against the man. He was never charged or even called a suspect by authorities, the article should reflect this wether 99% of Tupac's fans agree he did it or not. I just removed a blatently incorrect statement that said he was suspected, which was supported by a link saying
Las Vegas homicide detective Lt. Larry Spinosa said, "At this point, Orlando Anderson is not a suspect in the shooting of Tupac Shakur."
How could ANYONE interpret that to mean he was a supect!? It's ok to say that he is widely accused of it by media and the public, and that he did have legal issues in civil court, that is ok by wp: verify if its cited Smitty1337 ( talk) 23:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
it was. You even say he was detained... and he was detained as a suspect. In the linked interview he even says that he was an on-again-off-again suspect. I'm trying to be careful here, and to walk a fine line and keep the article objective, but two people have come by now and reversed edits that are verifiable (check tons of news stories with headlines that read "suspect arrested in connection..."). I mean I even changed the line that called him a Crip to "alleged" because we can only go on the assertion and his denial later to the media.
on a side note... it was actually pretty easy to find a source lol. Suge Knight: The Rise, Fall, and Rise of Death Row Records: The Story of Marion 'Suge' Knight, a Hard Hitting Study of One Man, One Company That Changed the Course of American Music Forever. Published book, Page 32 states he is a suspect. gonna go work that in now Smitty1337 ( talk) 02:11, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
true there are lots of conspiracies, but the source is published and has a decent bibliography, and wikipedia is about verifiability not truth Smitty1337 ( talk) 02:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
this would appear to be selfpublished and as such not considered a reliable source. Please consider finding better sources if you are so inclined, i will review this site further to see if i can find anything that would redeem it to meet the standards of wp: rs Smitty1337 ( talk) 00:23, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
The article says at the bottom of the first paragraph 'he is the real killer'....wtf? fix that! —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
75.7.201.162 (
talk)
02:29, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Why does it say he's very handsome? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.7.222.104 ( talk) 00:53, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
Although someone added that Cathy Scott's theory implicates Orlando Anderson, it is not clear to me that this is correct. In her 2002 book on Pac, she reviews various theories of his murder including the Suge Knight/Death row theory before finally stating "Years after the primary investigations, it's still anyone's guess. No one was ever arrested but no one was ever ruled out as a suspect, either." She then concludes oddly enough that one theory "transcends all the others, and implicates the white-record-comany power brokers themselves." implicating the bosses of the Suge Knight label. [1] The reference to her book in context doesn't make sense Scholarlyarticles ( talk) 20:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
References
{{
cite book}}
: Check |isbn=
value: invalid character (
help)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Orlando Anderson. 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) 22:02, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
Wassup YRN MJ7 ( talk) 21:28, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
This assertion needs a citation: "he was a conscientious student who passed his exams and received good grades" -- seems like his mother or someone put this in here to make him look good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.36.69.90 ( talk) 19:46, 29 September 2023 (UTC)