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 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
This Daily Telegraph article contains the sentence.
In a confidential memorandum, written three weeks before Bloody Sunday, and sent to his superior officer, Lieutenant-General Sir Harry Tuzo, Ford stated that he was coming to the conclusion that the minimum force necessary to restore law and order was to shoot selected ringleaders among the “Derry Young Hooligans”.
Feel free to use it.
JRPG (
talk) 17:04, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
New evidence released, relating to the event, which challenges the neutrality of the article and places the recent Saville enquiry into some doubt. [1] If I have time I will edit the article for inclusion, anyone else in the meantime is welcome to include details, regards. Twobells ( talk) 12:18, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
References
Surprise surprise, my criticism of the political and historical bias in this article has been removed and I was "logged out" of Wikipedia. Clearly this article is being controlled by a biased moderator with a political skew or agenda.
If you cannot even debate in Talk an article, and discuss its overall historically accuracy and key facts, then Wikipedia cannot be taken seriously as an historical or academic reference source (as indeed it's not by most leading academic universities, certainly not by mine anyway, we're discouraged from referencing to it). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.26.204 ( talk) 13:45, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
This section title sounds weird to me. How about "Deaths" or "Casualties"?
Otherwise it sounds like the Walking Dead... 100.12.87.210 ( talk) 13:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Would anyone object to this being renamed? Traditionally, the word "divide" in relation to Northern Ireland would refer to the division between Catholics and Protestants. While it is true Bloody Sunday would have had some impact on that relationship it was primarily the relationship between the Catholic population and the British Army, and to a lesser extent the British establishment as a whole. Perhaps a change to "Impact on the Troubles" or "Impact on Northern Ireland" would be more appropriate? DanceHallCrasher ( talk) 18:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Bloody Sunday (1972). 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.visioncritical.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/2010.06.28_Sunday_BRI.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:43, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Bloody Sunday (1972). 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:10, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bloody Sunday (1972). 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Jackson was not second-in-command of 1 Para, as the article claims. He was the adjutant, which is not the same thing. And the sentence which comes after that false claim is not supported by the source cited. Khamba Tendal ( talk) 18:47, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
So I corrected that and, also under 'Aftermath', deleted the claim that, in addition to Wilford's OBE, 'other soldiers were also decorated with honours for their actions on the day.' The claim is sourced to a BBC article which says no such thing. The only honour it mentions is Wilford's OBE. (It's also slightly misleading to claim that Wilford was awarded the OBE by the Queen. Although she nominally awards all honours as head of state, very few of them are in her personal gift and the OBE is not one of those. Wilford's OBE will have been recommended by his army superiors and approved by an honours committee in Whitehall). Khamba Tendal ( talk) 15:08, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bloody Sunday (1972). 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:05, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
The "short description" - seen on some devices - is overly bland, bordering on misleading (it sounds like one person was shot, possibly by accident). I see the article cannot be edited, due to being linked the The Troubles. Fair enough, I guess, but then can I suggest something like:
Something like this would give a reasonable advance indication of the article content.
I think I may see a similar pattern of over-cautious, or meaninglessly-brief, summaries on other "sensitive" articles. There is a difference between sensitivity and conciseness, and lack of content, so it may be worth reviewing other such summaries.
Thanks, as always, for the fine encyclopedia. 212.34.42.186 ( talk) 09:43, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
An IP recently edited the lead (
diff) to change how it presents the details of John Johnston's death. I have reverted this, because it doesn't match the content of the body of the article, but I'm not sure that the cited sources actually support the content that's currently there. The article says his death has been attributed to the injuries he received on the day
; the source it's supported by (CAIN) says His family is convinced that he died prematurely and that his death was due to the injuries received and trauma he underwent on 'Bloody Sunday'
.
It seems to me that, if it is only his family that attributes the death to the injuries, rather than medical experts or a court ruling, we should be clearer about this in the article, with wording along the lines of 'His family believes that his injuries on the day led to his early death.'
I don't want to make a potentially controversial change like this myself without discussing it here first, but I do think we need either better sourcing to show widespread attribution of his death to his injuries, or we need to change our wording to show it was his family who made the attribution.
(Note to anyone looking for the refs - there seems to be some disagreement about the spelling of his name - the CAIN source refers to him as Johnson, rather than Johnston) GirthSummit (blether) 08:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
From Wikipedia- "One of U2's most overtly political songs, its lyrics describe the horror felt by an observer of the Troubles in Northern Ireland, mainly focusing on the 1972 Bloody Sunday incident in Derry where British troops shot and killed unarmed civil rights protesters."
I suggest that whoever is mainating this article add a reference to U2's Sunday, Bloody Sunday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyle kursk ( talk • contribs) 22:28, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
U2 artistic, really? They're about as artistic as Black Sabbath.... oops, they're in the 'Artistic Reaction' section as well... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.31.209.12 ( talk) 02:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive330#Bloody Sunday (1972). FDW777 ( talk) 09:54, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
After yesterdays edits, the article is not consistent about general (then captain) Mike Jackson as the sources conflict. Formerly he was mentioned as "second in command" based on this source: https://www.bbc.com/news/10287463. However, the book Soldier mentions him as adjutant while at the same time suggesting on page 60 and 84 that Jackson was, as adjutant, acting as second in command. More clarification is needed. The Banner talk 07:28, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Apparently, "This article is part of the Serial Killer Task Force, a work group of WikiProject Crime. It is an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide on serial killers, mass murders, spree killers and related topics on Wikipedia." The so-called "task force" appears to have arbitrarily decided that any killing of two or more people can warrant inclusion in their "task force" (why single killings aren't worthy of a "task force" dedicated to them is unclear). I am strongly of the opinion that the "Serial Killer" "task force" should stick to dealing with serial killers, and that inclusion of Troubles-related articles, including this one and, e.g., Omagh bombing, is problematic, to say the least. I therefore propose removal, unless consensus decides otherwise. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:16, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
This statement is clearly contradicted by the preceding section. In addition the BBC reference cited as a source has been corrected to reflect the Saville enquiry conclusion that John Johnson's subsequent death, from a brain tumour, was "not the result of any of the wounds he sustained on Bloody Sunday." JF42 ( talk) 13:13, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
It appears that Village Magazine has reported Soldier F’s real name. Whether or not this changes the direction of the archived BLP discussion, I feel like it is worth mentioning. 50.24.63.63 ( talk) 05:24, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When deciding whether to include a name, its publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories. Consider whether the inclusion of names of living private individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value.A single reference doesn't satisfy that, far from it. The detail you asked me to restore that doesn't actually mention the name has previously been removed, by someone else, as unnecessary detail. FDW777 ( talk) 16:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi - in wishing to be transparent as possible, I have recently oversighted two revisions from this talk page per OSPOL#2. This is in reference to VRTS ticket # 2021100910000219. Many thanks ~ TNT (she/her • talk) 17:58, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized expert" - so far, I count one news outlet. I would strongly recommend omitting the name until multiple reliable sources are reporting it, and at that point open a request for comment ~ TNT (she/her • talk) 18:45, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
His name was published in Hansard, which reports on the British Parliament. If Hansard is not a reliable source, I don't know what is. This was published after the charges against him were abandoned. Whilst the charges were still pending, I could understand not naming him. Now that they've been dropped, I see no reason for Wikipedia to keep the anonymity. It seems a violation of the Wikipedia is not censored policy. Epa101 ( talk) 22:45, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Content will be removed if it is judged to violate Wikipedia's policies (especially those on biographies of living personsso it's not a way round WP:BLPNAME. FDW777 ( talk) 04:31, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Is Hansard a primary source? I'm so sure on that. It's not a personal opinion. It's a third party taking down what others say. It seems akin to a newspaper to me, albeit a particularly accurate one. I also don't see how it violates BLP now that charges have been dropped. If we take other cases of media black-outs on a name (e.g. Ryan Giggs and his super-injunction over his affair), has BLP been applied in the same way there? Epa101 ( talk) 07:56, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
I'm not so sure on that*. Sorry, when you're on a phone, it's hard to correct your mistakes like that. Epa101 ( talk) 07:58, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus is that there's no primary topic. There does seem to be quite a bit of support for rewriting the disambiguation page along the lines of Dirk's proposal; feel free to give that a try. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 21:03, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
– The 1972 massacre appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for 'Bloody Sunday' by quite a margin:
Primefac, you removed my addition of the Breakingnews.ie report on the new committal trial of Soldier F. Can you restore it, please? It's sourced and relevant to the article. If you want to leave out Soldier F's name, fine, rather than me adding it earlier in the coverage of Soldier F, I'll open a separate RfC on the censorship of his name. Thanks in advance. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Block evasion by User:HarveyCarter. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
One of the victims was revealed to be an IRA member: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/may/19/bloodysunday.northernireland Jgins ( talk) 17:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
|
Block evasion by User:HarveyCarter. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
The lede should mention that Gerard Donaghy was a member of the junior IRA. Jgins ( talk) 20:28, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
He was a member of the Fianna Éireann. Not that he was shot because of this, or his actions on the day. Despite conclusions latterly, Eamonn McCann's book Bloody Sunday in Derry: What Really Happened states he was examined by two doctors, an officer of the British Army on duty, and several civilians (one of them a reporter), and none of them saw any nail bombs in his tight-fitting jeans.-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 08:35, 19 December 2022 (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 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 |
This Daily Telegraph article contains the sentence.
In a confidential memorandum, written three weeks before Bloody Sunday, and sent to his superior officer, Lieutenant-General Sir Harry Tuzo, Ford stated that he was coming to the conclusion that the minimum force necessary to restore law and order was to shoot selected ringleaders among the “Derry Young Hooligans”.
Feel free to use it.
JRPG (
talk) 17:04, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
New evidence released, relating to the event, which challenges the neutrality of the article and places the recent Saville enquiry into some doubt. [1] If I have time I will edit the article for inclusion, anyone else in the meantime is welcome to include details, regards. Twobells ( talk) 12:18, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
References
Surprise surprise, my criticism of the political and historical bias in this article has been removed and I was "logged out" of Wikipedia. Clearly this article is being controlled by a biased moderator with a political skew or agenda.
If you cannot even debate in Talk an article, and discuss its overall historically accuracy and key facts, then Wikipedia cannot be taken seriously as an historical or academic reference source (as indeed it's not by most leading academic universities, certainly not by mine anyway, we're discouraged from referencing to it). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.241.26.204 ( talk) 13:45, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
This section title sounds weird to me. How about "Deaths" or "Casualties"?
Otherwise it sounds like the Walking Dead... 100.12.87.210 ( talk) 13:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Would anyone object to this being renamed? Traditionally, the word "divide" in relation to Northern Ireland would refer to the division between Catholics and Protestants. While it is true Bloody Sunday would have had some impact on that relationship it was primarily the relationship between the Catholic population and the British Army, and to a lesser extent the British establishment as a whole. Perhaps a change to "Impact on the Troubles" or "Impact on Northern Ireland" would be more appropriate? DanceHallCrasher ( talk) 18:34, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Bloody Sunday (1972). 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:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.visioncritical.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/2010.06.28_Sunday_BRI.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:43, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 11 external links on Bloody Sunday (1972). 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:10, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bloody Sunday (1972). 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:02, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Jackson was not second-in-command of 1 Para, as the article claims. He was the adjutant, which is not the same thing. And the sentence which comes after that false claim is not supported by the source cited. Khamba Tendal ( talk) 18:47, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
So I corrected that and, also under 'Aftermath', deleted the claim that, in addition to Wilford's OBE, 'other soldiers were also decorated with honours for their actions on the day.' The claim is sourced to a BBC article which says no such thing. The only honour it mentions is Wilford's OBE. (It's also slightly misleading to claim that Wilford was awarded the OBE by the Queen. Although she nominally awards all honours as head of state, very few of them are in her personal gift and the OBE is not one of those. Wilford's OBE will have been recommended by his army superiors and approved by an honours committee in Whitehall). Khamba Tendal ( talk) 15:08, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bloody Sunday (1972). 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:05, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
The "short description" - seen on some devices - is overly bland, bordering on misleading (it sounds like one person was shot, possibly by accident). I see the article cannot be edited, due to being linked the The Troubles. Fair enough, I guess, but then can I suggest something like:
Something like this would give a reasonable advance indication of the article content.
I think I may see a similar pattern of over-cautious, or meaninglessly-brief, summaries on other "sensitive" articles. There is a difference between sensitivity and conciseness, and lack of content, so it may be worth reviewing other such summaries.
Thanks, as always, for the fine encyclopedia. 212.34.42.186 ( talk) 09:43, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
An IP recently edited the lead (
diff) to change how it presents the details of John Johnston's death. I have reverted this, because it doesn't match the content of the body of the article, but I'm not sure that the cited sources actually support the content that's currently there. The article says his death has been attributed to the injuries he received on the day
; the source it's supported by (CAIN) says His family is convinced that he died prematurely and that his death was due to the injuries received and trauma he underwent on 'Bloody Sunday'
.
It seems to me that, if it is only his family that attributes the death to the injuries, rather than medical experts or a court ruling, we should be clearer about this in the article, with wording along the lines of 'His family believes that his injuries on the day led to his early death.'
I don't want to make a potentially controversial change like this myself without discussing it here first, but I do think we need either better sourcing to show widespread attribution of his death to his injuries, or we need to change our wording to show it was his family who made the attribution.
(Note to anyone looking for the refs - there seems to be some disagreement about the spelling of his name - the CAIN source refers to him as Johnson, rather than Johnston) GirthSummit (blether) 08:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
From Wikipedia- "One of U2's most overtly political songs, its lyrics describe the horror felt by an observer of the Troubles in Northern Ireland, mainly focusing on the 1972 Bloody Sunday incident in Derry where British troops shot and killed unarmed civil rights protesters."
I suggest that whoever is mainating this article add a reference to U2's Sunday, Bloody Sunday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyle kursk ( talk • contribs) 22:28, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
U2 artistic, really? They're about as artistic as Black Sabbath.... oops, they're in the 'Artistic Reaction' section as well... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.31.209.12 ( talk) 02:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive330#Bloody Sunday (1972). FDW777 ( talk) 09:54, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
After yesterdays edits, the article is not consistent about general (then captain) Mike Jackson as the sources conflict. Formerly he was mentioned as "second in command" based on this source: https://www.bbc.com/news/10287463. However, the book Soldier mentions him as adjutant while at the same time suggesting on page 60 and 84 that Jackson was, as adjutant, acting as second in command. More clarification is needed. The Banner talk 07:28, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
Apparently, "This article is part of the Serial Killer Task Force, a work group of WikiProject Crime. It is an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide on serial killers, mass murders, spree killers and related topics on Wikipedia." The so-called "task force" appears to have arbitrarily decided that any killing of two or more people can warrant inclusion in their "task force" (why single killings aren't worthy of a "task force" dedicated to them is unclear). I am strongly of the opinion that the "Serial Killer" "task force" should stick to dealing with serial killers, and that inclusion of Troubles-related articles, including this one and, e.g., Omagh bombing, is problematic, to say the least. I therefore propose removal, unless consensus decides otherwise. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 21:16, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
This statement is clearly contradicted by the preceding section. In addition the BBC reference cited as a source has been corrected to reflect the Saville enquiry conclusion that John Johnson's subsequent death, from a brain tumour, was "not the result of any of the wounds he sustained on Bloody Sunday." JF42 ( talk) 13:13, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
It appears that Village Magazine has reported Soldier F’s real name. Whether or not this changes the direction of the archived BLP discussion, I feel like it is worth mentioning. 50.24.63.63 ( talk) 05:24, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When deciding whether to include a name, its publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories. Consider whether the inclusion of names of living private individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value.A single reference doesn't satisfy that, far from it. The detail you asked me to restore that doesn't actually mention the name has previously been removed, by someone else, as unnecessary detail. FDW777 ( talk) 16:03, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi - in wishing to be transparent as possible, I have recently oversighted two revisions from this talk page per OSPOL#2. This is in reference to VRTS ticket # 2021100910000219. Many thanks ~ TNT (she/her • talk) 17:58, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized expert" - so far, I count one news outlet. I would strongly recommend omitting the name until multiple reliable sources are reporting it, and at that point open a request for comment ~ TNT (she/her • talk) 18:45, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
His name was published in Hansard, which reports on the British Parliament. If Hansard is not a reliable source, I don't know what is. This was published after the charges against him were abandoned. Whilst the charges were still pending, I could understand not naming him. Now that they've been dropped, I see no reason for Wikipedia to keep the anonymity. It seems a violation of the Wikipedia is not censored policy. Epa101 ( talk) 22:45, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
Content will be removed if it is judged to violate Wikipedia's policies (especially those on biographies of living personsso it's not a way round WP:BLPNAME. FDW777 ( talk) 04:31, 22 March 2022 (UTC)
Is Hansard a primary source? I'm so sure on that. It's not a personal opinion. It's a third party taking down what others say. It seems akin to a newspaper to me, albeit a particularly accurate one. I also don't see how it violates BLP now that charges have been dropped. If we take other cases of media black-outs on a name (e.g. Ryan Giggs and his super-injunction over his affair), has BLP been applied in the same way there? Epa101 ( talk) 07:56, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
I'm not so sure on that*. Sorry, when you're on a phone, it's hard to correct your mistakes like that. Epa101 ( talk) 07:58, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus is that there's no primary topic. There does seem to be quite a bit of support for rewriting the disambiguation page along the lines of Dirk's proposal; feel free to give that a try. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 21:03, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
– The 1972 massacre appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for 'Bloody Sunday' by quite a margin:
Primefac, you removed my addition of the Breakingnews.ie report on the new committal trial of Soldier F. Can you restore it, please? It's sourced and relevant to the article. If you want to leave out Soldier F's name, fine, rather than me adding it earlier in the coverage of Soldier F, I'll open a separate RfC on the censorship of his name. Thanks in advance. Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 16:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Block evasion by User:HarveyCarter. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
One of the victims was revealed to be an IRA member: https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2002/may/19/bloodysunday.northernireland Jgins ( talk) 17:18, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
|
Block evasion by User:HarveyCarter. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
The lede should mention that Gerard Donaghy was a member of the junior IRA. Jgins ( talk) 20:28, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
He was a member of the Fianna Éireann. Not that he was shot because of this, or his actions on the day. Despite conclusions latterly, Eamonn McCann's book Bloody Sunday in Derry: What Really Happened states he was examined by two doctors, an officer of the British Army on duty, and several civilians (one of them a reporter), and none of them saw any nail bombs in his tight-fitting jeans.-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 08:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
|