| Revision as of 10:56, 3 November 2009 editJustforasecond (talk | contribs)2,975 edits →Better get this shaped up← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:45, 4 November 2009 edit undoJustforasecond (talk | contribs)2,975 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
| Xymax, please ADD or REFINE content, don't remove cited info. If the name are published we are in the clear. ] (]) 10:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC) | Xymax, please ADD or REFINE content, don't remove cited info. If the name are published we are in the clear. ] (]) 10:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ==The race angle== | |||
| Unless the trend changes, it looks like most of the attackers were Latino. Probably need to address this at some point. | |||
| ] (]) 00:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:45, 4 November 2009
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 2009 Richmond High School gang rape article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
| Archives: Index, 1 |
Help
Help with the article! Currently working on this, and I would like all to help with it. it's a big case that's gotten america's attention. Cyanidethistles (talk) 17:07, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Title
Richmond rape incident?? Pretty awful title.
Better get this shaped up
It's only a matter of time before someone comes along and wants to delete this article. So get it in good condition and make it noteworthy Justforasecond (talk) 18:39, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
- Why is this a standalone article, rather than being merged into Richmond High School (Richmond, California)#Crime? tedder (talk) 18:53, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
- Incidents like that shouldn't be merged in with an article about the school itself. For example, Virginia Tech doesn't mention the shooting on its campus on its article, on in the template, because it has no relevance to the school itself. Cyanidethistles (talk) 19:56, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not crazy about this article, but I think that the incident is notable enough to qualify under WP:N/CA. I have made a few changes to be conservative in the treatment here, the biggest of which is commenting out the names of the juvenile defendents. The school article does not mention their names, and juveniles's names often are not reported. However, quite clearly reliable sources have published the names. Because I want to at least have the issue of whether to list the names discussed, I have placed comment tags around their names for now. If there is consensus to include, them, the information is still there in the source text. Xymmax So let it be done 15:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- What is the justification for removing the names? Justforasecond (talk) 00:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- I commented out the names (they're still in the text, but hidden by <!> tags) because some of the reliable sources covering the case have chosen so far not to release the names of the juveniles - see here and here for examples of non-California media that have to date not released the names. Since my understanding of WP:BLP is that we act with caution, I commented out the names until we have consensus here that it is appropriate to include them. Xymmax So let it be done 03:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- Xymmax, what exactly do you mean by school article? Also, their names were released because of the seriousness of the case. Cyanidethistles (talk) 00:32, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- By "school article" I meant the Richmond High School article Tedder linked above. I know that some sources have released the names. As best I can tell, there's a split in how the reliable sources are handling the issue, and was trying to err on the side of caution. Xymmax So let it be done 03:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- I think in the non-CA articles the names weren't released because the names were just being released at the time, and it was the local news sources that added them on first, I believe on Wed. or Thur. when their names were given out. CNN has given out the minor's names.
- By "school article" I meant the Richmond High School article Tedder linked above. I know that some sources have released the names. As best I can tell, there's a split in how the reliable sources are handling the issue, and was trying to err on the side of caution. Xymmax So let it be done 03:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- What is the justification for removing the names? Justforasecond (talk) 00:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not crazy about this article, but I think that the incident is notable enough to qualify under WP:N/CA. I have made a few changes to be conservative in the treatment here, the biggest of which is commenting out the names of the juvenile defendents. The school article does not mention their names, and juveniles's names often are not reported. However, quite clearly reliable sources have published the names. Because I want to at least have the issue of whether to list the names discussed, I have placed comment tags around their names for now. If there is consensus to include, them, the information is still there in the source text. Xymmax So let it be done 15:04, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- Incidents like that shouldn't be merged in with an article about the school itself. For example, Virginia Tech doesn't mention the shooting on its campus on its article, on in the template, because it has no relevance to the school itself. Cyanidethistles (talk) 19:56, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Xymax, please ADD or REFINE content, don't remove cited info. If the name are published we are in the clear. Justforasecond (talk) 10:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
The race angle
Unless the trend changes, it looks like most of the attackers were Latino. Probably need to address this at some point.
Justforasecond (talk) 00:45, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Category: