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
Undid revision 915017252 by Rja13ww33 (talk)
 
(44 intermediate revisions by 27 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)
== Suicide in the lead again ==


== Complete Absence of Any "Lede" ==
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.


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.
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)


Webb supposedly committed suicide, by shooting himself in the head, twice. Twice.
Ruled a suicide by a coroner, as if coroners are paragons of uncorruptible virtue. can't be threatened, don't have political proclivities.Webb was shot twice in the head, and the coroner said it's happened before.https://www.editorandpublisher.com/news/gary-webb-s-death-confirmed-as-suicide/. Two head taps is a signature of a professional hit, full stop period.There was another reporter who ran afoul of the CIA and died mysteriously while working on an expose of the CIA.. [[Michael Hastings (journalist)]]: "he drove a brand new Mercedes C250 coupe. The vehicle hit a tree at high speed, burst into flames and the engine was launched 100 feet down the street. One witness compared the sound coming from the blast to a bomb explosion. The impact shook nearby houses. Mercedez-Benz said their cars/software “couldn’t malfunction as such” and offered to make a complete “autopsy” of the car/computer."https://truthfeed.com/flashback-reporter-killed-in-freak-car-crash-while-working-on-cia-expose/55719/. So it was reported that his family thinks it was an accident,and that is definitive?


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 FBI denied having an investigation open on Michael Hastings, and that was subsequently proven to be a lie.


: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)
And we are to believe that the CIA, Think Tanks, Corporations, Political Parties,Foreign governments, Religious organizations, etc do not have personnel (paid or unpaid) monitoring social media outlets and public information sites such as WP posting and discrediting adverse information. Anyone interested in a bridge?[[User:Oldperson|Oldperson]] ([[User talk:Oldperson|talk]]) 18:29, 10 September 2019 (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"