Talk:Mahmoud al-Mabhouh: Difference between revisions
kudos |
|||
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
If anyone finds this information it would be great! [[User:Quilby|Quilby]] ([[User talk:Quilby|talk]]) 22:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC) |
If anyone finds this information it would be great! [[User:Quilby|Quilby]] ([[User talk:Quilby|talk]]) 22:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC) |
||
:Answers #2- http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/world/middleeast/17dubai.html?ref=middleeast . 17 people were involved.[[User:Quilby|Quilby]] ([[User talk:Quilby|talk]]) 22:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC) |
:Answers #2- http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/world/middleeast/17dubai.html?ref=middleeast . 17 people were involved.[[User:Quilby|Quilby]] ([[User talk:Quilby|talk]]) 22:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC) |
||
Given the subject matter, amazingly NPOV. Good job to all involved - your work is the sort of thing that makes Wikipedia worthwhile in spite of the inherent pit falls. |
Revision as of 18:48, 18 February 2010
Palestine C‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||
|
United Arab Emirates: Dubai C‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
Recent move
Mabhouh isn't notable only for one event, though one event (his death) created a flurry of Wikipedia activity related to him. I think the article should be moved back to Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. At some point, a WP:SUMMARY and WP:SPINOUT regarding the topic of his death may be in order. Also, "murder" is not appropriate for the title; if he was deliberately killed, as the UAE police say he was, "assassination" would be the proper term. Jalapenos do exist (talk) 15:04, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- Agree.--Gilisa (talk) 15:14, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- Third. We've got articles on a lot less senior Palestinian leaders, and it's not like there isn't a decent amount of notable bio on this guy. Joshdboz (talk) 15:38, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
The article is now neither a biography, or about a murder, it is just an unreadable mess. What little non-murder related content there was in it has now been bizarrly split between the lede and the main body, rather than being summarised in the lede and covered in detail in the body, and it is now even harder to make sense of the whole article than before I moved it. MickMacNee (talk) 19:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yes it needs a lot of work - this is what happens when information comes out in drips (often contradictory) as over the past few weeks. Clearly it's heavily weighted towards the assassination. This is not necessarily a bad thing, as it is one of the major factors of his notability (though certainly not the only one, as his considerable rap sheet indicates). It might be a good idea to spinout a specific article on the killing, but as stated above that doesn't mean we should sacrifice a bio. In any event, I appreciate you trying to bring some order to this mess; it's better to have this debate than no progress at all. Joshdboz (talk) 01:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Mugshots of the suspects
The best pictures I could find are located at- [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quilby (talk • contribs) 21:20, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- This one also has their names- [2] Quilby (talk) 21:29, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
- Do we know about the copyrights? They're all labeled as coming from the "Dubai Ruler's Media Office" whatever that is, via AP. The Google link to the AP story says "(AP Photo/Dubai Ruler's Media Office) EDITORIAL USE ONLY" which I think would make it legal to use noncommercially, but is still perhaps against Wikipedia policy. Then again, the chance of finding a replacement photo = 0. The media also seems to be making liberal use of the video provided by Dubai police. Joshdboz (talk) 01:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- At this time the information (as stated also in the article) suggests that the passports were falsified; thus the persons listed as suspects had their identity stolen and should not be named or shown.Ekem (talk) 05:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- I agree. It seems to me a violation of of wp:blp. Ann arbor street (talk) 17:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
- At this time the information (as stated also in the article) suggests that the passports were falsified; thus the persons listed as suspects had their identity stolen and should not be named or shown.Ekem (talk) 05:42, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Do we know about the copyrights? They're all labeled as coming from the "Dubai Ruler's Media Office" whatever that is, via AP. The Google link to the AP story says "(AP Photo/Dubai Ruler's Media Office) EDITORIAL USE ONLY" which I think would make it legal to use noncommercially, but is still perhaps against Wikipedia policy. Then again, the chance of finding a replacement photo = 0. The media also seems to be making liberal use of the video provided by Dubai police. Joshdboz (talk) 01:43, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Missing information
There are two things that are missing from all of the articles I have read covering this incident:
- In the videos, you can see a second woman. Who is she and why has her name/photo not been published?
- Where were the passport photos obtained from? Where they obtained from the hotels? Or from the airport? If from the airport, how come during their entrance, the Dubai authorities did not notice that the passports were fake?
If anyone finds this information it would be great! Quilby (talk) 22:05, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
- Answers #2- http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/17/world/middleeast/17dubai.html?ref=middleeast . 17 people were involved.Quilby (talk) 22:37, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Given the subject matter, amazingly NPOV. Good job to all involved - your work is the sort of thing that makes Wikipedia worthwhile in spite of the inherent pit falls.
- C-Class Israel-related articles
- Mid-importance Israel-related articles
- WikiProject Israel articles
- C-Class Palestine-related articles
- High-importance Palestine-related articles
- WikiProject Palestine articles
- C-Class United Arab Emirates articles
- Low-importance United Arab Emirates articles
- C-Class Dubai articles
- Mid-importance Dubai articles
- WikiProject Dubai articles
- WikiProject United Arab Emirates articles