Talk:Richard Reid

Proposed deletion of related article

Deletion of Religious conversion and terrorism is proposed.

For discussion see: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Religious_conversion_and_terrorism --ISKapoor 22:21, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

According to an unpublished report Reid was a member of the conservative party. I'm going to add this information to the article.Reinoe (talk) 18:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Clarification of sentence

I find this rather confusing:

He was sentenced to life imprisonment on each of the three charges, 20 years imprisonment on four other charges, and 30 years on four other counts, to be served consecutively, followed by five years of supervised release.

When is this "supervised release" supposed to take place? Are they expecting him to die and be reincarnated three times, and then live to the age of 200? -- Sakurambo 桜ん坊 17:04, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

It's partially bureaucratic, but it's in part so even if one sentence gets overturned or reduced, the others are still there.--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

And it's partly to make sure he will not be paroled in the foreseeable future, even if he behaves perfectly in jail. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Name of page

To conform with naming conventions, i.e., use the name person is known by most commonly and then use a disambiguator in parentheses if necessary, shouldn't this page be renamed Richard Reid (shoe bomber) or Richard Reid (terrorist)? I've never heard him referred to by his full name, except in court documents, of course Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 00:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move. JPG-GR (talk) 06:37, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

My comment above failed to generate any discussion, so I'm formally proposing the move, which will likely be better at producing some. My reasoning is that Reid's full name is not the name he is most commonly known by; he is known as "Richard Reid" and is usually referred to in sources as "shoe bomber Richard Reid", with or without "attempted" at the beginning of this phrase. The only time I have ever seen his full name used is in court documents and in WP. Richard Reid (shoe bomber) already redirects. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 02:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I think there would be a fairly strong argument for calling this the primary topic of "Richard Reid" and just moving the article to the plain title. Dekimasuよ! 02:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Agree with User:Dekimasu. This Richard Reid seems to be the primary topic. — AjaxSmack 04:38, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

As do I; the others at the dab are already disambiguated. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 05:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

As nom, I would be fine with that too and agree that it seems like the primary usage. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 21:43, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• Support Richard Reid (shoe bomber). Prefer disambiguation at Richard Reid. Compulsions70 (talk) 00:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

You think he's not the primary topic? Dekimasuよ! 03:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

• Support - shoe bomber. Do what you wish with the disambig - maybe it should be another RM. The Evil Spartan (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
• Support, but keep the dab page where it is. This Richard Reid may be the primary topic at present, but he's unlikely to be in a few years time. Dan1980 (talk ♦ stalk) 18:10, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Other names

The name "Richard Reid" is English, but the names he used, Tariq Raja and Abdel Rahim, which redirect here, are Arabic names.

They are aliases and we don't know if they were ever written in Arabic. This guy is British-born so he may not even know Arabic. Mirror Vax 01:41, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

If you guys need 'em - Tariq Raja (طارق راجا), Abdel Rahim (عبدالرحیم) Mustaqbal 09:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Background

I've stuck in a link to a short local newspaper article which has a bit more about Reid's background. J.nicholls 16:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Picture

We really should put a picture of this guy on here.

Forbidden articles

From article:

Strangely, despite the obvious security risk to passenger aircraft presented by matches and lighters, these are still absent from the FAA list of items forbidden in aircraft cabins. It has been suggested that the tobacco industry successfully lobbied the Bush administration to have them kept off the FAA forbidden list.

The above POV would fit the article better if attributed to its proponent.

• Who says matches and lighters are an "obvious security risk"?
• Who says it's "strange" that the FAA hasn't forbidden them?
• And who was it who "suggested" that tobacco lobbied Bush?

--Uncle Ed

Fair enough Uncle Ed, but I'll answer your questions:

• Who says matches and lighters are an "obvious security risk"? - The FAA (before they were out-lobbied by the tobacco industry).
• Who says it's "strange" that the FAA hasn't forbidden them? - Michael Moore and probably everyone else who gets on a plane nowadays.
• And who was it who "suggested" that tobacco lobbied Bush? - The Whitehouse insider who came forward to explain the backgound to the list and the surpising ommission. It's all in Michael Moore's chapter.

p.s. I agree - a picture would be great.

When I went flew yesterday both lighters and matches were on the list.

JesseG 02:32, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

Other pages

Hope you didn't mind the change of webpage, Mav. The one that you had had two irrelevant articles ( one about Joe Millionare!!) and a trancript dwarved by this one. Arno 07:54 Feb 15, 2003 (UTC)

Richard Reid was not born in Sri Lanka

Removed incorrect information about Richard Reid being born in Sri Lanka.

He was born in Farnborough Hospital in Bromley, southeast London, in the summer of 1973.

http://www.hvk.org/articles/0503/26.html http://discuss.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/zforum/02/astrologer011402.htm http://www.dailymirror.lk/archives/dmr261201/News/wou.html http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/bomber.htm --User:Share Bear

Background before conversion to Islam and becoming a terrorist

I remember reading in an article (probably Daily Telegraph, can't remember the date) that prior to converting to Islam and then and becoming a terrorist he was responsible for a number of petty crimes in the UK. Does anyone know what these were?

Richard Reid, terrorist

In case anyone has any doubts about the title of this article one only need to read what the very judge at Reid's trial called him. Netscott 14:56, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Additionally see Terrorism#Key_criteria. Netscott 15:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

So lots of other people have said he is a freedom fighter. Just because the US court system is hypocritical doesn't mean Wikipedia has to agree. Of course as the US prevents, what others see as it's terrorists, going before courts and having judges say anything about them.--87.75.130.187 21:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Despite efforts to debase the language, "terrorist" does mean something. It's not an insult. Whether you believe Mr. Reid is a freedom fighter has no bearing on the question of whether he's a terrorist. Mirror Vax 21:51, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

The povs of people are irrelevent in naming. He is well known as being the Shoe Bomber, and it makes sense that that is the name, rather the POV term "Terrorist" or "Freedom Fighter" or even "Jihadist".--Irishpunktom\^talk 10:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

"Terrorist" is not a POV term, any more than "murderer" or "rapist". At least not when applied properly, as in this case. Mirror Vax 10:55, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Page move-protected

This article has been protected from page moves to stop a reversion war. Please see the dispute resolution process; if you disagree with the move-protection of this article, please contact me or see Requests for page protection. Note that disagreement amongst editors is the reason the article is protected, and should not be used as an argument for unprotection. // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 10:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the move protection, per the assurances of one of the editors that the page move war will not continue. // Pathoschild (_admin / ^talk) 10:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Clarification

I don't understand the relevance and wording of this line:

"He visited Israel in June 2001 and onboard the El-Al flight to Tel Aviv was accompanied seated close to an armed air-marshall."

Was he seated next to an air-marshall because he was deemed a threat? Coincidence? What is noteworthy about this flight?

Consecutively? really?

"He was sentenced to life imprisonment on each of the 3 charges, 20 years imprisonment on 4 other charges, and 30 years on 4 other counts, to be served consecutively, followed by five years of supervised release." So...he's 29 when he attempts to blow up the plane. 29+life (30 years?)+20+30=he'll be about 100 when he comes out for the supervised bit? Am I misreading this?

Yes. He's serving three life sentences; after he dies three times, then he can serve the 50 years (or 200 years?).--Prosfilaes 02:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Its the very same as when a murderer with 3 victims is sentenced to three consecutive life sentences. If he appeals two of those convictions and they are overturned, then he's obviously still in jail for life. If Reid were to challenge in a court of appeals the 3 charges that he's got life in prison for, and were to win those appeals, then he'd still served the time on the other counts. Prosecutors and judges do this so that there will be no question that the guilty party will serve the rest of his life in jail, no matter how many appeals he's able to win, unless of course he wins all of them. Batman2005 21:09, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Relevance of statement

How is the following statement relevant or even interesting?

He visited Israel in June 2001; onboard the El-Al flight to Tel Aviv he was seated close to an armed air-marshall.

--Storkk 18:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

whoops... didnt see someone else had already questioned it. No replies to previous question, so I'll remove the statement --Storkk 18:17, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Feds seek to question Reid anew

Associated Press reports that Federal investigators are seeking to question Richard Reid for important information about terrorism plots. Notably, they want to question him without the presence of his federal public defender. The federal government says that he is not entitled to an attorney as his federal case is over. The federal judge in Boston wants the case transferred to Colorado where he is serving an immense amount of prison time. Associated Press reporter is Denise Lavoie.claimman75 01:33, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Rename

The new name is bad. This is a person who is widely known as shoe bomber. That is what people search for when they seek this information. It should be renamed back. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 09:29, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Nah, he's actually the shoenabomber. :-p Tomer^talk 08:49, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Shoe removal at airline security

I noticed that there was no mention of how after his attempt, airline passengers had to remove shoes at security. I added that. See "U.S. asks air passengers to remove shoes" from USA Today, 07/11/2003 and "No small feat, tightening up shoe inspections" from San Francisco Chronicle, July 12 2003. Edison (talk) 16:49, 8 July 2009 (UTC)*

Requested move 2

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. I have also moved the DAB from the target, although strictly there should have been a heads-up on that talk page first I think it most unlikely that would have affected the rough consensus here. Andrewa (talk) 01:30, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

---

Richard Reid (shoe bomber) → Richard Reid – WP:Primary topic. More page views than all the other Rich Reid's combined. I'd settle for a move to Shoe Bomber as I am told that is primarily what he is known as. Marcus Qwertyus 23:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support: I'd like to see the traffic stats but none of the other Richard Reids seem particularly notable. I prefer the proposal over a move to Shoe Bomber as it is more neutral and not any less common in my own experience. –CWenger (^ • @) 00:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
• Support: Here are some traffic stats for you:

Richard Reid (shoe bomber) was viewed 28126 times in 2011-05.

Richard Reid (cricketer) was viewed 70 times in 2011-05.

Richard Gavin Reid was viewed 325 times in 2011-05.

Richard Reid (UK politician) is obviously a redlink, although it was reportedly viewed 7 times in 2011-05.

Richie Reid was viewed 121 times in 2011-05.

Richard Reid (journalist) was viewed 631 times in 2011-05.

—BarrelProof (talk) 05:26, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Footnote 1: Richard Gavin Reid is a Featured article, and it appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 1, 2010.

Footnote 2: Richard Reid (journalist) has very little information in it, and is tagged (since Nov. 2009) as having a potential problem with justification of adequate notability.

—BarrelProof (talk) 05:47, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

• Oppose per WP:Recentism. The shoe bomber will be forgotten in a few years. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:04, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

  And the gossip journalist won't? Marcus Qwertyus 08:18, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

• Support. Stats speak for themselves Sotonchris (talk) 16:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Shoe removal outside the US

I removed this His crime led to the new requirement of American, and subsequently many other countries' airline passengers having to remove their shoes for inspection before boarding a flight or entering an airline terminal. I fly a lot and have never had to remove my shoes anywhere but in the US. I admit I have not flown everywhere, but I suspect it is a requirement in the USA only. Anyone have a cite? Paul, in Saudi (talk) 05:35, 7 September 2011 (UTC)