| Revision as of 03:34, 23 October 2015 editScottDavis (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators40,430 edits →Does this qualify for an article? What should it be called?: named and moved← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 17:01, 28 December 2024 edit undoLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,294,330 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Archive 6) (bot | ||
| (844 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{central|Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Organized crime task force|Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Serial Killer task force|Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Terrorism task force}} | |||
| {{Talk header}} | |||
| {{Talk header|sc=WT:CRIME}} | |||
| {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | |||
| {{WikiProject banner shell| | |||
| {{WP Crime}} | |||
| {{ |
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography}} | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | {{User:MiszaBot/config | ||
| |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | |archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} | ||
| |maxarchivesize = 200K | |maxarchivesize = 200K | ||
| |counter = |
|counter = 6 | ||
| |minthreadsleft = 4 | |minthreadsleft = 4 | ||
| |algo = old(31d) | |algo = old(31d) | ||
| |archive = Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Archive %(counter)d | |archive = Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Archive %(counter)d | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| {{archive box|auto=yes|bot=MiszaBot I|age=31|units=days|search=yes |
{{archive box|auto=yes|bot=MiszaBot I|age=31|units=days|search=yes| | ||
| Organized crime project discussion pages (now redirects here): | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| Serial killer task force discussion (now redirects here): | |||
| == Is this death in Houston notable? == | |||
| * ] | |||
| Terrorism task force discussions (now redirects here): | |||
| Hi! I collected sources about a 2006 killing of an MS-13 gang member in Houston by a 16-year old girl: ] - It received a lot of media coverage through the '']'' series "The Butterfly and the Knife," and '']'' did an article about the girl years after the incident. I found a '']'' "The murder trial of fascinated Houston " | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| This falls under the WikiProject since the girl (16 at the time, criminal responsibility age in Texas is 17) who killed him pleaded guilty to aggravated assault as part of a plea deal. | |||
| * ] | |||
| * ] | |||
| }} | |||
| Do you think that there are enough sources to write about this case, or should I look for additional ones? | |||
| ] (]) 15:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| == RfC: Does "murder" presume "murderer" #2 == | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ''']]''' 11:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{rfc|pol|rfcid=873B396}} | |||
| This was discussed before , and that discussion was closed with no consensus due to the differing opinions with clear points to back their arguments. However, it's become a bit of an issue again and I'd like to bring it up a second time so a clear consensus can (hopefully) be reached and we can put this controversy to a rest. I'll repeat the question posed by {{U|InedibleHulk}}, because I can't phrase it any better: "Does calling a killing 'murder' on Misplaced Pages, in the body, infobox or categories, presume the suspect(s) in a resulting and ongoing/upcoming murder trial is/are 'murderer(s)', contrary to the presumption of innocence bit of ]?" ] (]) 06:39, 8 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| *'''Yes''' Rather than repeat everything from last time, I'll just say I still believe it. ] ] 06:44, ], ] (UTC) | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ''']]''' 13:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| *'''Comment''' If you want a real RfC on this, you ]. As is, only people coming by this page will see it. ] ] 06:47, ], ] (UTC) | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] (]) 19:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Oh, my bad. ] (]) 07:04, 8 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :::All's well that ends well, so things that fix themselves early ''should'' be OK, too. You can delete this part now, if you'd like. ] ] 07:33, ], ] (UTC) | |||
| == Requested move at ] == | |||
| *'''Comment''' Did I do something wrong? Because no one else seems to be participating... ] (]) 20:38, 8 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ] There is a requested move discussion at ] that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. ] 02:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Misplaced Pages's a busy place. Maybe people aren't aware of the RfC, or maybe they don't care (or just don't care to comment again, so soon after the last). Sort of like how buying a pinball machine doesn't mean you'll profit or break even, even when pinball was cool. You might have skimped a bit on ], but technically, it looks fine. ] ] 09:17, ], ] (UTC) | |||
| :::Oh... ] (]) 16:22, 9 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ==New category, ]== | |||
| *'''NO''' When police or investigative bodies report that a killing was indeed a murder, even if they are not certain whom the perpetrator might be, Misplaced Pages is right to label it as such with the use of valid references confirming it. Murder is a legal term that suggests other(s) were involved in a killing, whereas a tree falling on someone is a killing without a murder. Differentiating between happenstance and intent by at least one other is fair game, even when we are not certain who that might be. If an article mentions a suspect, it behooves editors to use the words "alleged" or 'suspect' without assigning guilt. ] (]) 11:35, 9 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| Editors may have an interest in further populating this category, which at this point only has 11 entries. Thanks. ] (]) 14:28, 17 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::This is where the last one failed, too. ''']''' is the term for people killing people. ''']''' requires that killing to be ], ] and ]. Only a court can decide the latter, which is why pre-trial investigative reports don't use the word and newspapers use it with "alleged". | |||
| :This category sounds like it may conflict with ], but it comes at it from the other side. The difference should be the new category is populated by the crimes themselves, not the films. ] (]) 02:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::This question is '''only''' about how this affects "the suspect(s) in a resulting and ongoing/upcoming murder trial". It's not about unknown people. ] ] 12:24, ], ] (UTC) | |||
| ::@] I think this is a useful category - however, could the distinction you mention be clarified in the description? ] (]) 02:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::And also, your edits confuse me, because you just added it to several pages in the reverse to how you described it. ] (]) 02:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::Yes, I realized I was adding films into the category incorrectly, and either reverted or, interestingly, many of the incorrect films I added were not yet in the correct category and have added those. Of course a descriptor should have been written, thanks for reminding me of the obvious I missed. ] (]) 02:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::{{u|PARAKANYAA}}, have written a brief descriptor. I've included crimes adapted into theatrical documentaries, should those be here or a separate 'Crimes which are subjects of documentaries'? Thanks for following up on this discussion. ] (]) 02:57, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::I think as is fine for now, but documentary films category could be OK too. ] (]) 03:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::Thanks, will leave it as is before making another productive mistake. ] (]) 03:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :@] Do you have any thoughts about making similar categories for TV shows? I think that would be useful, though I don't know how that category scheme works. ] (]) 09:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::Interesting idea {{u|PARAKANYAA}}, and while 'Crimes adapted into television shows' and 'Crime drama television shows based on actual events' would duplicate many of the entries in the films category (JFK assassination, Lindbergh kidnapping, etc.) some would be new. Did you have specific shows in mind? Thanks. ] (]) 11:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::@] My first thought was the ] case which had ] made about it (though it’s a loose adaptation so it might not count…) and also some Netflix series I watched ages ago. Surely more, but the Solar Temple case is my pet project onwiki so that’s what sprung to mind. I’ll tell you if I think of more. ] (]) 00:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Thanks {{u|PARAKANYAA}}. The film category has picked up a good number of entries, thanks to everyone here. If you have enough for a television category please go ahead and do that. Many of the promising but "probably-not" television examples may include too much drama and purposely-fictionized events. ] (]) 01:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::@] Yeah if I find like… 5 or so that have straightforward adaptions I might make it. But not now. | |||
| :::::Relatedly, how direct of an adaptation do you think should go in the category? No inspired by just direct? I want to keep this in mind when I tag things. ] (]) 01:44, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::I'd say spot-on direct. Inspired by would include such fictional renditions as '']'' and many ''Law and Order'' episodes, clearly tangential to the topic. Things like the ] adhered to the facts enough that it would fit the crime (the Atlanta Olympic bombing). ] (]) 09:56, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::::::Makes sense. Thanks, I will keep that in mind while tagging. ] (]) 21:13, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Possible rename of ] == | |||
| *'''No''' The articles in question are more focused on the ''events'' rather than the ''suspects'' from my perspective. There's only one section dedicated to the suspect (excluding any info at the end of an "Event" section that details the suspect's arrest), and even then, it doesn't outright presume he/she is guilty (which I think is the problem, if I'm reading this correctly). If anything, I think the real issue is keeping the amount of info related to the suspect at a bare minimum to prevent any unintentional implications. I.e., no infobox, limit/monitor the amount/wording of info, probably no photo. ] (]) 01:31, 11 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| I have opened up a pre-requested move discussion of the title of this article, since it is not accurately reflective of the coverage on this topic. Please contribute your thoughts ], thank you :) ] (]) 03:37, 19 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Essentially No''' BLP issues should not dictate how an event is described, but considering BLP issues can guide us in how an event should be described. In most articles a description of an event will be made in Misplaced Pages's voice and that description should present a neutral POV based on information from reliable sources. If RS's say event is "type A" and the description is not seriously and/or broadly contested in RS's, then it should be OK to say it in Misplaced Pages's voice. If it is contested, we find some neutral way to describe it that is not likely to be contested and BLP issues can be used to find neutral wording. For instance, in the case where someone was shot and it is contested that it was murder, we usually describe the event as a shooting. In the case where someone calls it a murder, but it is too contested to say so in Misplaced Pages's voice, we only mention murder making it clear who is saying it and only if the POV is notable enough to mention. ] (]) 20:54, 11 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| == Categorizing criminals whose existence is disputed == | |||
| *'''No, but be cautious.''' There are plenty of crimes that are pretty obviously murder, even if there is no suspect. The naming of a suspect does not, practically speaking, make such a crime no longer a murder nor does it imply guilt of the accused. There is not a strong enough BLP concern here to warrant a blanket ban on calling crimes murders until someone is convicted; it needs to be a case by case analysis that balances ] with ]. And for crap's sake, {{U|Versus001}} (and anyone else) quit interpreting case-by-case discussions as applicable to every other article in the encyclopedia. ] (]) 22:54, 13 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::<small>Speaking of case analysis and caution, it may interest you to know that Versus001 has been convicted of impersonating the DisuseKid, who is your Igor-like sidekick. And also ], because this cloak and dagger horseshit wasn't convoluted enough. ] ] 20:52, ], ] (UTC) </small> | |||
| :::{{reply|InedibleHulk}} yup, the indef should preclude the article-space disruption I was complaining about above. ] (]) 02:02, 16 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| I have noticed there are several alleged criminals who are in the category ] is disputed and it's subcategories. This seems to me to be less than ideal. I do not think we should place people whose even existence is disputed directly in the crime categories. I think we should maybe make a parallel tree, probably much less developed, for criminals whose existence is disputed. What do others think.] (]) 14:37, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *'''No'''. If there was a murder then naturally ''someone'' committed it, but if that person's identity has not been proven, then Misplaced Pages cannot state that some person is the murderer. ] (]) 01:38, 16 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::''If'' there was a murder. Sometimes deaths look like murder, but turn out to be other things when the facts have been argued in court. Or they actually are murders, but justice failed. In ], we still have to take the presiding judge's word for it. Before a judge rules, best to allow for all possible outcomes. ] ] 02:44, ], ] (UTC) | |||
| ::: That's what I said: if there is a murder. If there was not a murder, this question is irrelevant. How would we allow for all possible outcomes by calling a suspect a murderer? ] (]) 03:04, 16 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::We wouldn't. We'd do it by not calling deaths murders while the process of figuring out if it was a murder is ongoing. ] ] 03:40, ], ] (UTC) | |||
| :::::But you are again missing the point. If it has been determined to be a murder, we cannot call anyone the murderer until ''that'' is determined. ] (]) 17:24, 16 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::There's definitely ''some'' sort of confusion here, either about the question or the answer. It almost seems like we largely agree, despite the '''Yes''' and '''No''' parts. This happened a lot last time, too. Maybe we're on different pages regarding "determining murder". How do you think a murder is determined, if not by trying the suspected murderer(s) in court? ] ] 19:50, ], ] (UTC) | |||
| :How many people can there possibly be that this applies to? ] (]) 16:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Comment''' - This is a bit of an aside... but before the discussion goes further, we need to draw an important distinction: Wikipeida recognizes that there is a difference between NAMING and DESCRIBING. Please read ] (part of our ] policy), ] (part of our ] Policy) and ] ... if an event is routinely ''named'' "The X Murder" by reliable sources, then it should be ''named'' "The X Murder" in Misplaced Pages (regardless of whether the event fits the legal definition of murder). However, if the sources merely ''describe'' the event as ''being'' a murder, we should be much more careful about doing so ourselves... we want to use accurate terms (so this is where legal definitions need to be taken into consideration). ] (]) 15:33, 17 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::A good portion are possibly existent pirates. However I think we have about 5 articles on murderers, maybe a few more, and a few motored on bandits.] (]) 21:40, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::In that case I agree it's odd. I think it depends. Disputed but viewed as historical by a decent amount I'd say is OK. Purely legendary figures, no. ] (]) 21:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Scope question == | |||
| == Help with ] == | |||
| Do you think that war-related activities that involve terrorist groups as participants should be in scope ''generally''? For example, battles that involved ISIS and their control of territory. This has always bothered me when it comes to scoping because it feels more like a MILHIST deal, since their status as terrorists is not super relevant as a designation in that context vs them being a fighting force. I would say no, I do not think the war and the battles and stuff are within the purview of WPTERROR or WPCRIMEBIO. However, acts of terror or war crimes would be. ] (]) 00:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| I've started a ] about a recent massive ip insertion of events not commonly named massacres to the list. Does anyone here have an opinion one way or the other? ] (]) 21:30, 20 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Isn't MILHIST mostly inactive anyway? ] (]) 03:47, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::@] No? It is by far the most active wiki project. ] (]) 04:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :::You are kidding. I keep finding articles on battles and wars which have never been tagged and never been assessed. I thought it went the way of the ] years ago. ] (]) 04:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::::@] With project tagging, the thing is they can be hard to find if they aren’t shortly after they’re created, and the scope is so broad any query would catch a lot of other stuff. This project is pretty active and I tag old articles with it all the time. ] (]) 04:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :@]: If one looks at what ] classifies as crime, (See , pp 23-31), it has a high level category for "''Unlawful killing associated with armed conflict.''" (''107''), it also has categories for "''Terrorism''" (''0906'') as well as a range of "''Acts under universal jurisdiction''" (''1101''), which includes war crimes, genocide, and similar crimes against humanity. What this indicates to me is that the UN does not consider an armed conflict, of itself, to be crime and it is how those authorities dealing with the armed conflict react to the various acts that are perpetrated that counts. A purely military response, therefore, is not a response to crime, but a seeking out of the perpetrators and "''bringing them to justice''" is. While this may be a grey area, I think war-related activities that involve terrorist (or other armed) groups is outside the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, generally, and should instead be included in WikiProject Military History. However, where a criminal response is involved, then that falls in-scope; so a government declaring an individual or organisation to be a "''terrorist''" would mean an article about that person or organisation, such as a biography or profile, ''could'' be included in this project, but an article about the military battles the organisation has with other military organisations, wouldn't be automatically included. What could be included are acts that involve the indiscriminate targeting of civilians not involved in the conflict where these acts are treated as crimes, rather than the collateral damage of war. Thus, the military battles with ISIS for the control of territory are outside scope, but their destruction of cultural objects and their treatment of non-combatant civilians and women are inside scope, in my opinion. - ] (]) 20:23, 25 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ::I agree with this. ] (]) 21:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == ] == | |||
| == Does this qualify for an article? What should it be called? == | |||
| I just created ]. It may be of interest to members of this project. ] (]) 03:59, 27 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| A young mother and her daughter were last seen by their family in 2008 in ]. A woman's body was found in ] in 2010. A child's body was found near ] (1100 km from Belanglo) June this year. The police have determined in October that the bodies are Karlie Pearce-Stevenson and her daughter Khandalyce Kiara Pearce, they were both killed violently, and neither where they were found. Both bodies and the identification have attracted news coverage across Australia. My questions are whether there should be a separate article to avoid undue wight in the two articles about the places where the bodies were found, and what it should be called. I have not found relevant crime notability or article naming guidelines. Thank you. --] <sup>]</sup> 21:31, 22 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| :Draft article now at ] but I don't like the name I used in the first sentence. --] <sup>]</sup> 01:28, 23 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
| ::Someone suggested a better name, so the article is now at ]. --] <sup>]</sup> 03:33, 23 October 2015 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 17:01, 28 December 2024
 | To help centralize discussions and keep related topics together, Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Organized crime task force, Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Serial Killer task force and Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography/Terrorism task force redirect here. |
| This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography and anything related to its purposes and tasks. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 31 days  |
 | This project page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 Archives |
| Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 |
|
Organized crime project discussion pages (now redirects here):
Serial killer task force discussion (now redirects here): Terrorism task force discussions (now redirects here): |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 31 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Requested move at Talk:Battle of Aleppo (2024)#Requested move 30 November 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Battle of Aleppo (2024)#Requested move 30 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Abo Yemen✉ 11:33, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Yemeni civil war (2014–present)#Requested move 7 December 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Yemeni civil war (2014–present)#Requested move 7 December 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Abo Yemen✉ 13:13, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Quinn brothers' killings#Requested move 9 December 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Quinn brothers' killings#Requested move 9 December 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Feeglgeef (talk) 19:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Expectation of privacy (United States)#Requested move 25 November 2024
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Expectation of privacy (United States)#Requested move 25 November 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 02:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
New category, Category:Crimes adapted into films
Editors may have an interest in further populating this category, which at this point only has 11 entries. Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:28, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- This category sounds like it may conflict with Category:Crime drama films based on actual events, but it comes at it from the other side. The difference should be the new category is populated by the crimes themselves, not the films. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn I think this is a useful category - however, could the distinction you mention be clarified in the description? PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:47, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- And also, your edits confuse me, because you just added it to several pages in the reverse to how you described it. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I realized I was adding films into the category incorrectly, and either reverted or, interestingly, many of the incorrect films I added were not yet in the correct category and have added those. Of course a descriptor should have been written, thanks for reminding me of the obvious I missed. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- PARAKANYAA, have written a brief descriptor. I've included crimes adapted into theatrical documentaries, should those be here or a separate 'Crimes which are subjects of documentaries'? Thanks for following up on this discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:57, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think as is fine for now, but documentary films category could be OK too. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, will leave it as is before making another productive mistake. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- I think as is fine for now, but documentary films category could be OK too. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- PARAKANYAA, have written a brief descriptor. I've included crimes adapted into theatrical documentaries, should those be here or a separate 'Crimes which are subjects of documentaries'? Thanks for following up on this discussion. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:57, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I realized I was adding films into the category incorrectly, and either reverted or, interestingly, many of the incorrect films I added were not yet in the correct category and have added those. Of course a descriptor should have been written, thanks for reminding me of the obvious I missed. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn Do you have any thoughts about making similar categories for TV shows? I think that would be useful, though I don't know how that category scheme works. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:50, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting idea PARAKANYAA, and while 'Crimes adapted into television shows' and 'Crime drama television shows based on actual events' would duplicate many of the entries in the films category (JFK assassination, Lindbergh kidnapping, etc.) some would be new. Did you have specific shows in mind? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn My first thought was the 1995 Vercors massacre case which had Anthracite (TV series) made about it (though it’s a loose adaptation so it might not count…) and also some Netflix series I watched ages ago. Surely more, but the Solar Temple case is my pet project onwiki so that’s what sprung to mind. I’ll tell you if I think of more. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks PARAKANYAA. The film category has picked up a good number of entries, thanks to everyone here. If you have enough for a television category please go ahead and do that. Many of the promising but "probably-not" television examples may include too much drama and purposely-fictionized events. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn Yeah if I find like… 5 or so that have straightforward adaptions I might make it. But not now.
- Relatedly, how direct of an adaptation do you think should go in the category? No inspired by just direct? I want to keep this in mind when I tag things. PARAKANYAA (talk) 01:44, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'd say spot-on direct. Inspired by would include such fictional renditions as The Fugitive and many Law and Order episodes, clearly tangential to the topic. Things like the Richard Jewell series adhered to the facts enough that it would fit the crime (the Atlanta Olympic bombing). Randy Kryn (talk) 09:56, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Makes sense. Thanks, I will keep that in mind while tagging. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:13, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'd say spot-on direct. Inspired by would include such fictional renditions as The Fugitive and many Law and Order episodes, clearly tangential to the topic. Things like the Richard Jewell series adhered to the facts enough that it would fit the crime (the Atlanta Olympic bombing). Randy Kryn (talk) 09:56, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks PARAKANYAA. The film category has picked up a good number of entries, thanks to everyone here. If you have enough for a television category please go ahead and do that. Many of the promising but "probably-not" television examples may include too much drama and purposely-fictionized events. Randy Kryn (talk) 01:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Randy Kryn My first thought was the 1995 Vercors massacre case which had Anthracite (TV series) made about it (though it’s a loose adaptation so it might not count…) and also some Netflix series I watched ages ago. Surely more, but the Solar Temple case is my pet project onwiki so that’s what sprung to mind. I’ll tell you if I think of more. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:35, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting idea PARAKANYAA, and while 'Crimes adapted into television shows' and 'Crime drama television shows based on actual events' would duplicate many of the entries in the films category (JFK assassination, Lindbergh kidnapping, etc.) some would be new. Did you have specific shows in mind? Thanks. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Possible rename of Bærum mosque shooting
I have opened up a pre-requested move discussion of the title of this article, since it is not accurately reflective of the coverage on this topic. Please contribute your thoughts here, thank you :) PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:37, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
Categorizing criminals whose existence is disputed
I have noticed there are several alleged criminals who are in the category Category:People whose existence is disputed is disputed and it's subcategories. This seems to me to be less than ideal. I do not think we should place people whose even existence is disputed directly in the crime categories. I think we should maybe make a parallel tree, probably much less developed, for criminals whose existence is disputed. What do others think.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:37, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- How many people can there possibly be that this applies to? PARAKANYAA (talk) 16:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- A good portion are possibly existent pirates. However I think we have about 5 articles on murderers, maybe a few more, and a few motored on bandits.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:40, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- In that case I agree it's odd. I think it depends. Disputed but viewed as historical by a decent amount I'd say is OK. Purely legendary figures, no. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:45, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- A good portion are possibly existent pirates. However I think we have about 5 articles on murderers, maybe a few more, and a few motored on bandits.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:40, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Scope question
Do you think that war-related activities that involve terrorist groups as participants should be in scope generally? For example, battles that involved ISIS and their control of territory. This has always bothered me when it comes to scoping because it feels more like a MILHIST deal, since their status as terrorists is not super relevant as a designation in that context vs them being a fighting force. I would say no, I do not think the war and the battles and stuff are within the purview of WPTERROR or WPCRIMEBIO. However, acts of terror or war crimes would be. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:34, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't MILHIST mostly inactive anyway? Dimadick (talk) 03:47, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick No? It is by far the most active wiki project. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- You are kidding. I keep finding articles on battles and wars which have never been tagged and never been assessed. I thought it went the way of the dodo years ago. Dimadick (talk) 04:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick With project tagging, the thing is they can be hard to find if they aren’t shortly after they’re created, and the scope is so broad any query would catch a lot of other stuff. This project is pretty active and I tag old articles with it all the time. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:12, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- You are kidding. I keep finding articles on battles and wars which have never been tagged and never been assessed. I thought it went the way of the dodo years ago. Dimadick (talk) 04:09, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Dimadick No? It is by far the most active wiki project. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:08, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- @PARAKANYAA: If one looks at what UNODC classifies as crime, (See ICCS, pp 23-31), it has a high level category for "Unlawful killing associated with armed conflict." (107), it also has categories for "Terrorism" (0906) as well as a range of "Acts under universal jurisdiction" (1101), which includes war crimes, genocide, and similar crimes against humanity. What this indicates to me is that the UN does not consider an armed conflict, of itself, to be crime and it is how those authorities dealing with the armed conflict react to the various acts that are perpetrated that counts. A purely military response, therefore, is not a response to crime, but a seeking out of the perpetrators and "bringing them to justice" is. While this may be a grey area, I think war-related activities that involve terrorist (or other armed) groups is outside the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, generally, and should instead be included in WikiProject Military History. However, where a criminal response is involved, then that falls in-scope; so a government declaring an individual or organisation to be a "terrorist" would mean an article about that person or organisation, such as a biography or profile, could be included in this project, but an article about the military battles the organisation has with other military organisations, wouldn't be automatically included. What could be included are acts that involve the indiscriminate targeting of civilians not involved in the conflict where these acts are treated as crimes, rather than the collateral damage of war. Thus, the military battles with ISIS for the control of territory are outside scope, but their destruction of cultural objects and their treatment of non-combatant civilians and women are inside scope, in my opinion. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 20:23, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with this. PARAKANYAA (talk) 21:29, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
Violin scam
I just created Violin scam. It may be of interest to members of this project. Thriley (talk) 03:59, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories: