Jump to content

Talk:Gary Webb: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
 
(48 intermediate revisions by 29 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talk header}}
{{talk header}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=B|vital=yes|living=no|listas=Webb, Gary|1=
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject United States}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=mid|USGov=yes|USGov-importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Biography|living=no|class=B|a&e-priority=Mid|a&e-work-group=yes|listas=Webb, Gary
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-priority=Mid|a&e-work-group=yes}}
{{WikiProject Journalism| importance=mid}}
}}
{{WikiProject Journalism|class=B}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=mid|American=yes|American-importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject California|importance=mid|southerncalifornia=yes|southerncalifornia-importance=mid|inland-empire=yes|inland-empire-importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Past Political Scandals and Controversies|class=B}}
}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 11: Line 11:
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 4
|counter = 4
|minthreadsleft = 3
|minthreadsleft = 1
|algo = old(30d)
|algo = old(30d)
|archive = Talk:Gary Webb/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = Talk:Gary Webb/Archive %(counter)d
}}
}}
__TOC__
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=People|subpage=Journalists|class=B}}

== Show the Artwork for the Dark Alliance Series ==

It was "controversial" and "removed" by the paper. That makes it noteworthy, and it should be included in this Article. His paper might have been censored, but Wikipedia is not, and the absence of this graphic is noticeable, particularly given the circumstances and rumors of his death.

It was not censored or controversial because it was false, it was removed because it was TRUE. It should not also be absent from this Article, and for the same reason.

''"The website artwork showed the silhouette of a man smoking a crack pipe superimposed over the CIA seal."''

[[Special:Contributions/2603:8081:3A00:414A:3C79:55E:B074:23B7|2603:8081:3A00:414A:3C79:55E:B074:23B7]] ([[User talk:2603:8081:3A00:414A:3C79:55E:B074:23B7|talk]]) 22:39, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

:Not sure if it is copyrighted or not....but if not, it may be worth including.[[User:Rja13ww33|Rja13ww33]] ([[User talk:Rja13ww33|talk]]) 23:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)


== Complete Absence of Any "Lede" ==
== Semi-protection? ==


I may be wrong, but as a years-long and frequent User of Wikipedia, my understanding of the function of the Lede is to provide a brief overview of the entire Article, so as to "invite the Reader to continue reading the Article", and for the most part, most Articles follow this format and function, however this Article does not, for. some. reason. Noticing patterns, and the absence thereof, is a thing.
Considering the fact unregistered users keep messing with the page as far as the suicide goes.....does anyone think we ought to have the page protected?[[User:Rja13ww33|Rja13ww33]] ([[User talk:Rja13ww33|talk]]) 00:07, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
: {{ping|Rgr09}} {{ping|Location}} - To those I pinged, what do you think? We just had another anonymous user mess with the suicide aspect of the article today. Would protection/semi-protection be an answer to the on-going issues with this? Thanks.[[User:Rja13ww33|Rja13ww33]] ([[User talk:Rja13ww33|talk]]) 16:55, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
::True, the article has had frequent suicide -> murder edits this year: 3 in January, 2 in February, 6 in March, 2 in May, 1 so far in July. I don't know what to do about this. It's an ongoing, long term issue, but generally wikipedia doesn't want to do long term page protection ([[WP:PP]]). Maybe [[WP:PC]], "sometimes favoured when an article is being vandalised regularly, but otherwise receives a low amount of editing." [[User:Rgr09|Rgr09]] ([[User talk:Rgr09|talk]]) 03:54, 5 July 2017 (UTC)


Webb supposedly committed suicide, by shooting himself in the head, twice. Twice.
== Suicide in the lead again ==


You'd think that a Wikipedia Article that follows standard format and protocols would put that fact about his life (and death) prominently in the Lede, and yet for. some. reason. this Article does NOT. I wonder to what extent the CIA is involved in the editing of Wikipedia Articles, such as this one.[[Special:Contributions/70.94.140.138|70.94.140.138]] ([[User talk:70.94.140.138|talk]]) 13:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
The issue of how to refer to Webb's death has come up yet again. The lead was changed to add the following sentence: On December 10, 2004, Webb was found dead in his apartment shoot twice in the head. His death was ruled a suicide.


:If your issue is the fact we don't mention the double shot suicide in the LEAD....I don't see the problem. The LEAD rarely rehashes every detail in the article. We go into that later on within the article.[[User:Rja13ww33|Rja13ww33]] ([[User talk:Rja13ww33|talk]]) 18:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
Exactly this sort of change was the subject of a long discussion above. Webb's death was a suicide. The fact that he shot himself in the face twice is already referenced in the article two times: in the infobox, and in the article under the section on Webb's death. Some editors feel this is not enough, and that it should be mentioned a third time, as prominently as possible, preferably in the lead. This is undue weight, and I've reverted such changes more than once. If you disagree, please discuss your concerns here first, rather than just adding the same disputed content again. And again... [[User:Rgr09|Rgr09]] ([[User talk:Rgr09|talk]]) 22:54, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
"death was a suicide" and "was ruled a suicide" is a huge difference. Either it was proven a suicide, as in the lead, or it "was ruled a suicide" as written in the Death section. Which is it going to be? --Hoffmansk 16:39, 23 May 2018 (UTC) <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Hoffmansk|Hoffmansk]] ([[User talk:Hoffmansk#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Hoffmansk|contribs]]) </small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
:What do you feel is the difference between these two? I am especially unclear what you mean by "proven a suicide." The lead does not use the phrase "proven", but it does take Webb's death to be a suicide. I do not see how this contradicts the description in the Death section. [[User:Rgr09|Rgr09]] ([[User talk:Rgr09|talk]]) 21:40, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
:The people who want to keep adding this "ruled a suicide" business to the lead are doing it in a calculated attempt to imply a murder. If it was ruled a suicide.....that's enough for the lead. The details of his death are given in the main body.[[User:Rja13ww33|Rja13ww33]] ([[User talk:Rja13ww33|talk]]) 22:17, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:18, 2 December 2024

Show the Artwork for the Dark Alliance Series

[edit]

It was "controversial" and "removed" by the paper. That makes it noteworthy, and it should be included in this Article. His paper might have been censored, but Wikipedia is not, and the absence of this graphic is noticeable, particularly given the circumstances and rumors of his death.

It was not censored or controversial because it was false, it was removed because it was TRUE. It should not also be absent from this Article, and for the same reason.

"The website artwork showed the silhouette of a man smoking a crack pipe superimposed over the CIA seal."

2603:8081:3A00:414A:3C79:55E:B074:23B7 (talk) 22:39, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if it is copyrighted or not....but if not, it may be worth including.Rja13ww33 (talk) 23:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Complete Absence of Any "Lede"

[edit]

I may be wrong, but as a years-long and frequent User of Wikipedia, my understanding of the function of the Lede is to provide a brief overview of the entire Article, so as to "invite the Reader to continue reading the Article", and for the most part, most Articles follow this format and function, however this Article does not, for. some. reason. Noticing patterns, and the absence thereof, is a thing.

Webb supposedly committed suicide, by shooting himself in the head, twice. Twice.

You'd think that a Wikipedia Article that follows standard format and protocols would put that fact about his life (and death) prominently in the Lede, and yet for. some. reason. this Article does NOT. I wonder to what extent the CIA is involved in the editing of Wikipedia Articles, such as this one.70.94.140.138 (talk) 13:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If your issue is the fact we don't mention the double shot suicide in the LEAD....I don't see the problem. The LEAD rarely rehashes every detail in the article. We go into that later on within the article.Rja13ww33 (talk) 18:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gary_Webb&oldid=1260801621"