Jump to content

Talk:Mark Bingham

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Previous discussions without headers

[edit]

>> Holm describes Bingham as a brave, competitive man, saying, "He hated to lose — at anything."

Need a citation for that.

Randal Oulton (talk) 05:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For an August 2004 deletion debate over this page see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Rodney Dickens et al

Paul Holm was not Mark's partner of eight years. Paul was Mark's former partner of 6 years. The two had not been together for a couple of years.

9-11-03 You are not forgotten. Thank you for your sacrifice - you gave us all hope on a hopeless day.

I would like to see some references for the claim that he prevented the deaths of "hundreds of thousands" of people. Less than 3000 were killed during the entire 9/11 attacks, was this passenger jet loaded with nuclear weapons or something?

--66.153.153.59 (talk) 12:15, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it says "hundreds or thousands". Either way, you'll never know. 僕曜日 (talk) 23:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mark_Bingham2.jpg

[edit]

This image problematic on several counts.

  1. It is non-free and there is already a non-free image in this article. It fails WP:FAIR #3a, 8
  2. My removal was reverted and the edit sum was "... the other showing him doing what he is famous for" i.e. rugby. Well, he is not famous for playing rugby; he is famous for being a passenger on foomed Flight 93. This explanation provided by the editor is insufficient rationale for a fair use claim. Lionel (talk) 00:28, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The championship game of the gay rugby association is named after him. His "athletic physique" which helped challenge gay stereotypes is due largely in part to his participation in sports, his sport of choice being rugby. In 2001 stereotypes about gay men did not include them participating in sports. As we learned more about the backgrounds of all of the 4 men, the main defining story about Mark outside of being gay was that he played rugby. Considering rugby is not a widely played sport like baseball, American football or soccer, he probably is one of the most well-known rugby players due to his overall high profile. 2601:985:782:32D0:6CE7:D645:E70F:7F18 (talk) 10:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there are no objections, based on policy, I will remove the offending image in violation of WP:FAIR. Lionel (talk) 00:28, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine based on policy, he is certainly known for playing rugby, that is his recreation.STL1989 (talk) 04:47, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It seems as though you are dismissing my points out of hand. With all due respect, did you even read WP:FAIR? Lionel (talk) 06:47, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gay American

[edit]

It a shame the author is afraid to mention that Mark Bingham was gay. Gay American would take pride in having that fact mentioned in the article, because that's part of who he was. --Eddylyons (talk) 01:57, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's a very strange omission in this article. I've just added a statement to the lede that Bingham was gay. Textorus (talk) 07:10, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

This article mentions several people who've honoured and character-played this victim in the media; but neglects to explain his significance.Beingsshepherd (talk) 01:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)Beingsshepherd[reply]

The final sentence of the Lead section explains his significance:

As a gay man, Bingham has been widely honored posthumously for having "smashed the gay stereotype mold and really opened the door to many others that came after him."

In addition to this, there's the fact that he was one of the four ringleaders who came up with the plan to take the plane back from the hijackers. This was not adequately stated in the Lead or the article, so I added it, with a citation. Thanks for pointing this out. Nightscream (talk) 05:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The wording of this opening final sentence made more sense than what I saw in 2024 and changed. 2601:985:782:32D0:6CE7:D645:E70F:7F18 (talk) 10:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Mark Bingham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:53, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mark Bingham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:18, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Puffery

[edit]

In general, this article needs some tightening up. While it's clear that Mark Bingham acted bravely with his fellow passengers on that airplane, the article is tends to glorify him and includes information such as he had saved lives on several previous occasions, including that of his partner's twice. This may be true (and documented) but is it really relevant here? The events of 9/11 caused many people to act in heroic, extraordinary ways no matter what they had done previously. Also, I cleaned up some extraneous information, such as the names of many of the Hoagland (his mother's) family who survived him; such detail weighs down the more relevant parts of the article.ChiHistoryeditor (talk) 13:03, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, all of the 4 men have been glorified and had myths built around them, not just Mark. If these incidents you reference are true and documented, then they are part of his story, and it is relevant. 2601:985:782:32D0:6CE7:D645:E70F:7F18 (talk) 10:09, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The height of several passengers?

[edit]

In the 9/11 section it says: "Bingham, Burnett, and Glick were each more than 6 feet (1.83 m) tall, well-built and fit."

Is this necessary? Bingham's height is noted elsewhere in the article, but this sentence feels superfluous and doesn't add anything, nor is there an explanation of why it matters. Lindsey40186 (talk) 22:45, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The cited source mentions it when it describes how the three men spearheaded the attempt to retake the plane. Nightscream (talk) 16:01, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can appreciate that it was mentioned in the source material. I guess I'm just wondering if it's important enough to mention in the article. I'm fine with whatever the consensus is. Lindsey40186 (talk) 12:34, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article wouldn't suffer without this information, but its inclusion serves two purposes. A) It explains why these particular men were the most suited to engage in a physical altercation with the hijackers - they were big guys. B) In the opening synopsis of the article, Bingham's athletic physique is mentioned as part of how he helped challenge circa 2001 stereotypes about gay men all being effeminate and weak. He wasn't a token part of the group; he was an equal. 2601:985:782:32D0:6CE7:D645:E70F:7F18 (talk) 10:19, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to the most recent back and forth in line 58 about "the gay Bingham"

[edit]

Anyone who knows anything about Bingham is well aware that is he was gay. This article in its 2024 state addresses this in detail and also refers to the Bingham Cup which is the name given to the championship game in the gay rugby league which anybody would have to assume was named after a gay man.

In the opening synopsis I, as a gay man, thought the wording "the gay Bingham" sounded ridiculous. Especially when in the same paragraph it mentions how his role in the incident helped challenge stereotypes about gay men. Why else would his role have done this if he wasn't gay himself? There is no need to be redundant and I just had a visceral annoyance seeing him referred to that way. It reminded me of a Margaret Cho line making fun of her mother for calling one of her gay friends "a gay". "gay Bingham" reminds me of being called "gay [name redacted]" to distinguish me from another friend in my social group with the same first name. I just wanted to be "[name redacted]" and I'm sure Mark just wanted to be Mark.

A lot of masculine binary gay men, not all, are really tired of having their sexuality be seen as a major defining character trait where they are singled out this way. It is an important part of Bingham's story, especially when considering the cultural impact his death had within the early 21st century zeitgest - and the state of gay stereotypes and gay rights at the time of his death in 2001.

However, it's worth noting that it's highly unlikely Beamer, Glick or Burnett even knew Bingham was gay nor was it at all relevant in the moment. These were 4 strangers that came together in a moment where they knew they were facing almost certain death to avert a larger catastrophy. It's only when the world came to know the stories of all of these men's lives that Bingham's sexuality became an important part of his story and the impact his representation left when considering his cultural legacy. How many times though to we need to remind the readers that is he was gay? People aren't stupid, they can assess this from the myriads of other times it is mentioned in a more relevant manner. 2601:985:782:32D0:6CE7:D645:E70F:7F18 (talk) 10:03, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mark_Bingham&oldid=1260740033"