While the Biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see the biographies of living persons noticeboard.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Terrorism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles on individual terrorists, incidents and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This section has had an unresolved NPOV tag for a long time, which is not ideal. It was previously discussed here. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the section, but some of the figures for hate crimes produced by pressure groups were challenged.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 08:18, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
None of the three sources say witness claimed to hear them shout"Allau Akbar", The guardian one doesn't,The BBC says Whitehall said it, and the Telegraph cites the BBC Article. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but if it did, there should be a reference that quotes a witness as having said so, otherwise it;s hearsay. Alfietucker undid my work, pointing to the legal precedings section,which states they shouted the Phrase in court, with all due respect, that doesn't prove they shouted it while attacking Rigby.I do take the point that I shouldn't have removed references for other sentences earlier. AnarchoGhost (talk) 20:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
This is based on early reports from the scene which may be confused. In the famous rant video, Adebolajo does not say "Allahu Akbar", but he does say "By Allah" several times. Both men were removed from the court during the sentencing after shouting "Allahu akbar" and fighting with the security guards.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 06:26, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
I think this article should be renamed the killing of Lee Rigby as murder is a loaded term and not NPOV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 07:02, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
Two people were found guilty of ......"murder".--Egghead06 (talk) 07:06, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
By the british state? does wikipedia now follow the definition given by state governments? because the IRA articles will need to be heavily changed then. Also the title of the Derry article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 07:16, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
No not by the British state, by a jury of British people. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 13:57, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
WP:BLPCRIME is the relevant policy here. Wikipedia reports what reliable secondary sources have said, and does not offer personal opinions about what constitutes a fair trial. What is being requested here goes against virtually all of the mainstream media coverage of the case.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 07:23, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
It seems quite biased, that terrorist killings committed by white christians aren't referred to as murder in the articles yet those committed by black muslims are, surely there should be consistency in how such politically motivated killings are referred? Or why is are IRA murderers treated as soldiers but Islamic ones treated as criminals? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 14:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
You appear to be making a huge assumption/generalisation. This particular killing has been identified as murder due to the jury and process of law. That is not to say every killing by a black muslim is going to be termed "murder" in Wikipedia - only in those cases where reliable sources agree that it is. Ditto IRA killings. Alfietucker (talk) 14:11, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Plans to add Rigby's name to the Armed Forces Memorial and for a memorial in Woolwich both have an element of WP:CRYSTAL as they have not happened yet. The article should be updated when there is more information.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 06:14, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Well I suppose you're technically correct on the first issue, though this source suggests his name is now included  and this one shows his name drawn out ready to be added . If nothing else shows up i think those should be sufficient proof but i guess we can wait a week or two. As for the Woolwich memorial, well that has so much coverage that now CRYSTAL becomes irrelevant because the controversy and campaign is of significance itself, and i don't' think I implied it had actaully been built, therefore I intend to restore that material.--Shakehandsman (talk) 07:13, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Well the outcome is quite recent and no doubt things would need to be tweaked once the memorial is built, but the controversy/campaign are clearly of note, and in addition to the various sources there's a lot of radio coverage and even the backing of Boris Johnson. I'm very much in favour of making the text as concise as possible, but the campaign and the opposition to the memorial need inclusion, they're actually much more significant than any material on the Armed Services memorial--Shakehandsman (talk) 08:05, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Shakehandsman I think inclusion of the campaign and opposition are of interest and of value. AnarchoGhost (talk) 11:00, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
The material reverted here is too long and newsy in style. There needs to be a long term perspective about what will be notable in twelve months' time. Also, as far as I can see from the sourcing, Boris Johnson did not have a change of heart as he never opposed the memorial.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 18:38, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I tried to trim what was added, but it has now been completely removed. The article again just says this, in the Victim section: "In June 2014, plans were announced to add Rigby's name to the Armed Forces Memorial in Staffordshire, and for a memorial in Woolwich." 23 words seems too little and I think it may also be in the wrong place? Martinevans123 (talk) 18:41, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
I'm in the process of re-adding it. It was misleading because it may have given the impression that Greenwich Council and Nick Raynsford said an outright no to the idea of a memorial when they did not. Raynsford's concern was "It would not in my view be helpful for the site where Lee Rigby was murdered to be marked in perpetuity by a memorial as this would be a continuing reminder of the brutal murder and might attract undesirable interest from extremists. It is worth remembering that the memorial to Stephen Lawrence, the teenager murdered during a racist attack in South East London in 1993 has sadly been the victim of unwanted focus and vandalism on a number of occasions." According to this BBC News story, Greenwich Council said that the Army had not requested a memorial in Woolwich.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 18:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Oh, I see. Sorry, I did not realise. That quote from Nick Raynsford certainly puts the opposition into much clearer perspective. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:09, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Re this edit:  is a primary source and gives no detail about the Lee Rigby incident, and this source (which I can't get to work at the moment) is not from the mainstream media. Overall, this doesn't seem to have the due weight required for its own paragraph. It also appears to have been added by a single purpose account which may have a conflict of interest here.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 19:34, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Quite agree. A secondary source, which shows a direct link between Shomrim and the Muslim community in these circumstances, would be required. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:41, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Agree. Including this seems undue to me, and looks like boosterism for the Shomrim more than anything else. (an archived copy of the hackneyhive source can be found here ). AndyTheGrump (talk) 19:48, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Have removed cite to Shomrim website as seemed to be redundant, as well as being still "under construction." I guess the question of WP:UNDUE now rests on the relative quality of the remaining two sources - Al Jazeera and the local hackneyhive.com. Other sources here are UK mainstream newspapers. Not sure. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:09, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
I also agree that the material breaches UNDUE--Shakehandsman (talk) 20:58, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
A third source, fro Huff Po, has now been added. But no input here from the editor concerned. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:02, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi. I'm fairly new to Wikipedia, I hope you are now satisfied with all the sources. VarifiedEditor (talk) 21:29, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Just added another link to a vice.com article that explains Shomrim in more depth, and also makes reference to the good relationship between Shomrim and the Muslim community. -- VarifiedEditor (talk) 21:58, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Your last source was largely irrelevant to this article, so I have removed it. I don't think that consensus has yet been positively established on the value of this paragraph. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:07, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
The lack of mentions of Shomrim in the context of the Lee Rigby case by a range of mainstream reliable sources (BBC, CNN, Telegraph, Guardian etc) is the real worry. It is possible to find mentions of anything on the web if you look hard enough, but a Wikipedia article needs to give due weight to the mainstream sources. Also, if VarifiedEditor has any affiliation with Shomrim, it would be best not to make article edits involving it, per WP:COI.--♦IanMacM♦(talk to me) 06:25, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Fair point, however Al Jazeera and The Huffington Post and Vice are major news channels both in the UK and worldwide. This was also covered in the local Hackney Gazett, which is part of the Archant (media group), this was also featured in many other worldwide channels who quoted those original articles. -- VarifiedEditor (talk) 09:06, 3 July 2014 (UTC)