Talk:Omar Khadr

Poorly written introduction

The lead in this article is extremely sloppy and requires a lot of work.

• It notes in three different paragraphs (first, second and last) that Khadr has plead guilty (it should be mentioned once in the lead).
• The lead is WAY too long and details the supreme court case in Canada (which is a detail and should not be in the lead).
• It has a completely unnatural composition. It starts by mentioning that Khadr is a convicted war criminal. Khadr is not notable because of this. He was notable primarily because he was the youngest and last western detainee at the Guantanamo Bay detention center. The article should start by introducing the subject in the context in which they are notable.
• The lead notes the details of Khadr's trial and conviction, but only tangentially notes that his conviction was "widely denounced" by newspapers and civil rights organizations. This is not in-line with Khadr's notability.

Given that making changes along this line with substantially change the article, I thought we would discuss before I made any changes. Please advise. Poyani (talk) 20:23, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Agree with your points about why he was notable - also, he pleaded guilty in a plea agreement; he was not convicted in a jury trial. There is a difference. Agree Lede is too long.Parkwells (talk) 15:35, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

This entire page has some issues. While informative, there is both an over inclusion and under representation of information. I agree with changes proposed to the LEDE. However, the organization of the LEDE leads me to believe that it was pieced together by sevearl parties. Can we make it more cohesive?Gray106 (talk) 15:01, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Too much detail on US raid/firefight

There is too much detail on the raid in which Khadr was captured, as if there were some attempt to try the case in the article. It all seems to be told from the US point of view and was apparently taken as a major victory. Perhaps there should be a separate article on the "firefight"; for a biography, I think there is far too much detail (all the names and ranks fo US soldiers, the names of bombers and helicopters, guns, weapons, etc.) to be appropriate for a biography article. Events need to be summarized concisely, with a focus on what relates to Khadr. It makes the article unbalanced and is unusual for a bio article, particularly one in which the subject's notability is related more to what came after - his detention, charges and proposed trial.Parkwells (talk) 15:35, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

The details on the firefight make it quite obvious that Khadr was not the "innocent child" that his supporters have spent years trying to portray him as.

Too many photos from video and firefight event

Similar to objections above, I think there are too many photos from the video (delete one of Khadr waving) and of the firefight/related events: recommend deletion of at least one of two battlefield scenes of wounded Khadr, delete pic of medics reportedly working on Khadr, delete smaller pic of bombed complex, delete two photos of three American soldiers - put in their articles. Just because these photos are available does not mean they have to be used.Parkwells (talk) 17:40, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Delete internal gov't suit from Lede

The internal gov't suit and SCC case settled that the gov't had failed its duty to Khadr, but did not affect the length of his tenure in Guantanamo, so I deleted it from the over-lengthy Lede.Parkwells (talk) 16:52, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Move most of firefight to Ayub Kheyl

Since the stub article on the village has essentially only information about the firefight and the capture of Khadr there, perhaps more of the firefight description could be moved out of this article to that one - as that is probably how it is referred to, by the name of the village.Parkwells (talk) 19:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)