Talk:Osama bin Laden

Article Based on Hearsay

Osama bin Laden was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article.

I fail to see how this will ever be a good article when it's whole premise is based on heresay evidence. I see NO physical evidence presented that would convince a court of law that a corpus dilecti exists/ed. The DNA has no time stamp on it or to it. When a judge tells the bounty hunter to bring 'em back dead or alive, he doesnt say bring back a story, which is all you have here. Where are the eye witness reports out of Abbottabad? Nice try! Keep trying, the sentient among us arent buying the WH story repeated here or any of the many ever changing version, that is.

Abbottabad Neighbor Claims Bin Laden Raid Was Botched ... May 18, 2011 ... Abbottabad Neighbor Claims Bin Laden Raid Was Botched ... In a BBC News report, Orla Guerin interviewed dozens of people who were adamant ... clipsnews.com/abbottabad-neighbor-claims-bin-laden-raid-was-...

Billyc69 (talk) 19:14, 2 June 2011 (UTC) billyc69

Wikipedia is not a court of law. AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

This is the official version of the event. Just because one little person disagrees with it wont get the article taken down, I can guarantee that. Case in point = Official 9/11 articles. J.Rly (talk) 03:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

listen bro,sometimes,one historic event can have many versions,they are called conspiracy theories by some,this is the case especially in the life of a famous person but they cannot become part of this article,include them in this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Osama_bin_Laden_conspiracy_theories Xxrvdfan1000xx (talk) 10:21, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

This isn't an encyclopedic entry, it's an Anglo-American government story. There is zero content about the highly disputed year of Bin Laden's death, for example. If Wikipedia is going to publish American government propaganda, please advertise the website as American government-centric and stop pretending to be objective. Guv2006 (talk) 21:04, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

That is because it isn't 'highly disputed'. The beliefs of fringe conspiracy theorists are irrelevant to an article based on mainstream sources. Convince them, and the article can change. This is how Wikipedia works. If you want to see us a part of the conspiracy, fine. Nobody is stopping you. We aren't going to change policy to suit your beliefs however. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Beliefs? Plural? You have fallen into the trap of believing anyone with an alternative theory must a) have a plethora of them, and b) adhere to what you term as conspiracy theorists' views as a matter of course. My view on this matter is widely supported globally, so hopefully someone with more time on his/her hands will provide said sources: I have enough time for occasional comments, but not for expansive re-writes of articles. In the meantime, you might want to visit Google - if you can be bothered. Guv2006 (talk) 17:39, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Beliefs and ideology

When next unprotected, can you clarify the origin of the condensed quote:- //According to former CIA analyst Michael Scheuer, who led the CIA's hunt for Osama bin Laden, the al-Qaeda leader was motivated by a belief that U.S. foreign policy has oppressed, killed, or otherwise harmed Muslims in the Middle East,[42] condensed **by Scheuer** in the phrase "They **(Muslims)** hate us **(non-Muslim superpowers)** for what we do, not who we are."// — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.76.194.250 (talk) 09:12, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Get it straight

every other page says he died on may 1st 96.50.210.249 (talk) 03:45, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Because this site is the website that everybody can edit. See FAQ why he died on May 2. ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 03:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Is there any way to make the FAQ more noticeable? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 14:38, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Can the FAQ box be made permanently open (uncollapsed) and the "STOP" warning altered accordingly (perhaps bold the first sentence following stop as well)? Wayne (talk) 06:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

infobox FBI ten most wanted

That's a pretty big infobox and a lot of that information is redundant to the lead infobox. Do we need to have every repetitive field (like year of birth, nationality, etc.) filled out in this infobox or could we pare it down some? – Muboshgu (talk) 19:00, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

The infobox is redundant and irrelevant. Everything in it is covered in the article. Wayne (talk) 00:49, 24 June 2011 (UTC)