Talk:2023 Allen, Texas mall shooting

Time of shooting

This dashcam video shows the shooter getting out of his vehicle at 2:55pm local time.

https://twitter.com/dannyc_dc1111/status/1654985455467651072?s=46&t=elPZGTF_qPcwJSpYCtweSg Zifted (talk) 02:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn't use this video as an official source. Especially because it's entirely possible the dashcam's time is not correct (I've seen videos, even from police dash/bodycams, that have blatantly incorrect times - so it's possible that the driver hadn't properly updated it to account for previous daylight savings, etc.). SuperbowserX (talk) 02:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Article title

I think referring to the actual business name is a little too specific, especially since most of our sources are using variations of "Texas mall shooting", "Texas outlet mall shooting", etc. I've also restored the year per WP:NCE. —Locke Cole • t • c 04:55, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

This article has been moved at least 4 or 5 times in the past few hours. I've protected it from future moves until there is some agreement here on what is the appropriate title. Or a week has passed. Whatever comes first. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

This article has been moved at least 4 or 5 times in the past few hours. I wasn't aware of that... 🤷‍♂️ When you "view logs for this page", the only thing it shows is the protection from vandalism, no moves. Even if you change "log type" to "Move log", it was/is blank... —Locke Cole • t • c 05:23, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The article's history shows the various page moves. The current title is too long; I don't think anyone refers to it as that. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 11:31, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The word "outlet" does not need to be in the title. WWGB (talk) 11:52, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I can take it or leave it. I only included it, because "outlet" malls are typically outdoors, where most traditional malls are indoors. —Locke Cole • t • c 16:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't think anyone refers to it as that. CNN and NBC News did. They also use "Texas mall shooting". —Locke Cole • t • c 16:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't doubt that many people & orgs call it the Texas mall shooting, but they don't call it the 2023 Allen, Texas outlet mall shooting. Jim Michael 2 (talk) 17:37, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

WP:NCE will help you understand the year. —Locke Cole • t • c 17:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

As I stated in another section on this talk page, calling it Allen Premium Outlets shooting would be consistent with other shootings at shopping centers, in the US like Westroads Mall shooting or Trolley Square shooting, or abroad like Morumbi Shopping shooting in Brazil or Sello mall shooting in Finland. Paris1127 (talk) 16:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Completely agree with this. There are two outlet malls in Allen, the Premium, and Watters Creek. So it should have the name "Allen Premium Outlets shooting", it would make it more recognizable. Also as you said, mentioning the article consistency if it happened to occur in a remarkable building or building complex. For example, the article for Uvalde isn't named "2022 Uvalde, Texas school shooting". Trakaplex (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The Uvalde article is at the WP:COMMONNAME. As this event is less than 24 hours old, we should be following WP:NCE. I also seriously question the wisdom of being too specific with the where that NCE prescribes; it would be akin to titling the page May 6, 2023 Allen Premium Outlets shooting (going overboard on the when in this example). Readers are also far more likely to know where Texas is, and perhaps even be aware of where Allen is within Texas, than they are to know that Allen Premium Outlets even exists or where it is located within the world. The general locale (city/town, state) should be sufficient until a clear name emerges from our RS that can satisfy WP:COMMONNAME. Additionally, there's a risk of citogensis if we use a specific name for the event and our RS pick up on that as "the name" they should use to describe it. As to the other articles, that's just WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS: are they named because of RS naming the events that, or is that because someone got too descriptive with the where as is being attempted here? —Locke Cole • t • c 19:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Possible title move: 2023 Allen, Texas shooting

Does 2023 Allen, Texas shooting work as a better, more concise title for the subject? I read the above discussion and understand that the article shouldn't be moved until a decent amount of agreement or time, but in the meanwhile I'd like to evaluate a possible title. OfTheUsername (talk) 05:57, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

If you look at Category:Attacks on shopping malls, most of the titles include reference to a mall or shop name. WWGB (talk) 06:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Ah, thank you, didn't see that. OfTheUsername (talk) 14:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

If anything, it might make more sense to rename this "Allen, Texas outlet mall shooting" or "Allen Premium Outlets shooting", since there isn't another such shooting in another year requiring disambiguation. If you look at other attacks at shopping centers, like Westroads Mall shooting, Trolley Square shooting, or Morumbi Shopping shooting, no year is used in favor of the name of the specific mall. Paris1127 (talk) 16:12, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The year is included regardless of the need to disambiguate, per WP:NCE. —Locke Cole • t • c 16:33, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

From WP:NOYEAR (further down on the WP:NCE page): Some articles do not need a year for disambiguation when, in historic perspective, the event is easily described without it. As this is a judgement call, please discuss it with other editors if there is disagreement. Paris1127 (talk) 17:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

in historic perspective *checks watch* It's been less than 24 hours... —Locke Cole • t • c 17:29, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the naming convention for categories, but... that seems very poorly named. Nobody is "attacking" a "shopping mall", if anything they're attacking people in or at a shopping mall. As to the mall name being included in the title of related events, I'd be curious what the sources refer to those events as. I can't imagine they're all using the shopping center name, as that seems far too specific (unless you're a local familiar with that specific mall/outlet/etc. and know it's located in X country, Y city, etc. then it's just a name with no context for the reader of where, generally, the event occurred. —Locke Cole • t • c 16:36, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2023

A few hours after the shooting occured, The Stonebriar Mall in Frisco, Texas was evacuated after a shopper called 911 that they heard gunshots in the food court. Police searched around the mall for any weapons, but has found nothing, and no one has been wounded or injured. 2600:1700:70D1:8D50:B8D0:994F:4DF5:5C62 (talk) 09:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 10:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Since nothing happened, nothing to add to this article. WWGB (talk) 10:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Suspect

According to the BBC, the suspect is a male dressed in black. As of this time, his age, name, date of birth, where he originally lived, and early info were not released yet. I knew it was going to be another one of these male suspects shortly before it arrived. Newly-released info from WFAA said that the shooter is in his 30s (according to the FBI), lived with his parents, and lived in the northeast side of Dallas at the time of the shooting, but was unknown how long the shooter lived in Dallas. 2600:1702:5225:C010:304D:114:91CA:FC34 (talk) 12:27, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Very strange how after a day we still don't know much about the shooter, especially with how high profile this incident is. Onion1981 (talk) 17:58, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

To add to the text of the article

To add to the text of this article (in an effort to make it more properly encyclopedic): the type of weapon that was used. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 15:00, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Allen suspect's Dallas home

The FBI and the Dallas Police Department is currently investigating the suspect's home in Northeast Dallas but was unknown what area or neighborhood the suspect is in before traveling up I-635 and Highway 75 for the shooting. Also, thanks to the video up above, it could be similar to what totally happened in Atlanta a few days ago.

A bit of a possible note that the suspect had suffered mental health problems and reports of unusual behavior, so that gave us a clue. 2600:1702:5225:C010:C10D:B04B:F352:D690 (talk) 16:13, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

We only report what reliable sources state. Not adding. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Okay, but I was just reminding. 2600:1702:5225:C010:C10D:B04B:F352:D690 (talk) 16:18, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

The name of the 33-year-old suspect: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/mauricio-garcia-allen-texas-mall-shooting-suspect-what-know-rcna83242 173.88.246.138 (talk) 18:39, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

CBS and NBC are both reporting that they were, separately, provided the name—NBC cites "two senior law enforcement officials"; CBS says "multiple sources". I think that's enough to include the name in a statement that officials identified the shooter as the name, but I usually work on articles about really old criminal cases, and I'm not sure the extent to which WP:BLPCRIME applies via WP:BDP, so I'm going to hold off until another editor can offer input.--Jerome Frank Disciple 18:55, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, another user added it.--Jerome Frank Disciple 18:56, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

I know, it's identified as 33-year-old Mauricio Garcia (October 24, 1989 – May 6, 2023), a Northeast Dallas resident who lived in a Northwest Dallas motel prior to the time of the shooting. 2600:1702:5225:C010:C10D:B04B:F352:D690 (talk) 20:34, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Gun control debate

The shopping mall where this shooting took place bans guns.

Source: https://www.simon.com/legal/code-of-conduct

Kyle Becker tweeted, "The Allen Premium Outlets in Texas have a gun-free zone policy. So, we can stop blaming Texas gun laws for the mass shooting tragedy today. We can instead blame the murderer and ask the better question: If there were armed Texans there, would he have been killed sooner?"

Source: https://twitter.com/kylenabecker/status/1655070810061545472

Compare this to the Greenwood Park Mall shooting, where a law abiding gun owner killed the would be mass shooter just seconds after he started shooting. We'll never know how many lives the law abiding gun owner saved.

I think this should be included in the article.

I realize that better sources will be needed. But I wanted to get this discussion started, and to ask people to please be on the lookout for better sources.

SquirrelHill1971 (talk) 19:20, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene tweeted: "End Gun free zones and allow Americans to protect themselves and others."

Source: https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1655202757119291393

SquirrelHill1971 (talk) 20:41, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

This article is not a vehicle to advance any position, pro or con, on a political issue. Please stay focused on improving the article through the use of reliable sources. Dumuzid (talk) 20:44, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Who is Mauricio Garcia?

Just wanted to note that The Washington Post is reporting that the acronym mentioned was "RWDS" for "Right Wing Death Squad." Dumuzid (talk) 20:47, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Added. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 00:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Can you also add his 2008 U.S. Army removal due to Garcia's mental health concerns as well? 2600:1702:5225:C010:A46D:FF24:3135:67F9 (talk) 14:40, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Requesting more information about Garcia

Although an officer shot Garcia, do we still count it as "Suicide By Cop?"

Also, can you add Garcia's date of birth (October 24, 1989 – May 6, 2023; according to a Twitter post) in the perpetrator section, as well as Garcia being a Northeast Dallas resident who lived at a Northwest Dallas motel at the time of the shooting, and his 2008 U.S. Army removal due to his mental health concerns?

I know this is not a biography but the page forgot to add a little more of his history, his whereabouts, and where he lived at the time of the shooting. 2600:1702:5225:C010:C10D:B04B:F352:D690 (talk) 02:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

The citations are listed in blue above. Click on one and it will take you to the page. 2600:1702:5225:C010:4456:68FE:6CFD:584 (talk) 13:23, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

I declined your request for a few reasons. The main reason is that your requests are not in the form of "change X to Y". That is, you should provide suggested wording with proper wiki markup for the cites. See WP:ERSAMPLE for a properly formatted requested edit. Additionally, the first sentence in your comment—"Although an officer shot Garcia, do we still count it as 'Suicide By Cop?'"—is not a specific request. If you'd like other editors to address that question, I would recommend starting a new topic on this page. Finally, a Twitter post is not a reliable source.

Once you've resolved those issues, please feel free to reactivate your request.

Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 21:11, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Is this time-line correct?

The article states: The shooting began on May 6, 2023, at 3:36 p.m. CDT. ... The Allen Police Department said that calls from the mall came in at 3:40 p.m., ... and tweeted that law enforcement was at Allen Premium Outlets at 4:22 p.m. It took police almost an hour to arrive? That does not seem correct. Is it? Thanks. 32.209.69.132 (talk) 04:37, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that struck me as strange, and most likely incorrect. WWGB (talk) 06:48, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

The tweet stating that law enforcement was on the scene was sent by APD at 4:22 pm CDT. The tweet did not state that LE arrived at the mall at 4:22 pm CDT. One can imagine that tweeting was relatively low in the priority of tasks APD was handling between 3:36 pm and 4:22 pm. General Ization ^Talk 13:36, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

OK, that makes more sense. The tweet itself was sent at 4:22 pm. The current wording makes it sound as if the tweet -- whenever it was sent -- indicates that the police arrived at the mall at 4:22 pm. I think it should be re-worded more clearly. In other words, the time of 4:22 p.m. is not particularly relevant ... if it only refers to when the tweet itself was sent. Mention of the specific time would be relevant if the police arrived at 4:22 pm. Thanks. 32.209.69.132 (talk) 01:53, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Filmed killings?

The first 30 seconds of this shooting were captured on dashcam video, should the article be included in "Filmed killings" category? Yodabyte (talk) 08:09, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Given the ubiquity of surveillance cameras, dashcams, body-worn cameras and other cameras in public spaces, nearly every killing in such spaces is "filmed" in some sense. I believe the intent of that category was to include killings that were "filmed" or broadcast with intention by the killer(s) and/or sponsors of the killing. I would not think the mere existence of video that captures all or a portion of the killing in this case would justify the inclusion of this event in that category. General Ization ^Talk 14:07, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

In the news

The ITN close seemed premature. It's one of key news items other than the coronation with major global coverage this week. Might be worth re-nominating, or making a DYK with the hook of being the second deadliest US shooting this year. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:44, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

time zone

Please add CDT to the infobox. 130.51.141.135 (talk) 16:18, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: The time is already noted as 3:36 p.m. (UTC−5), with the UTC offset indicator reflecting the difference between local time and UTC, and linking to Central Daylight Time. General Ization ^Talk 16:22, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

text

Before quotations, take that out. You can insert that between believe and he. 130.51.141.135 (talk) 17:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done (but more context would be appreciated in the future - mentioning particular sentences is really helpful) Tollens (talk) 18:03, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know! 130.51.141.135 (talk) 20:50, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 May 2023

Add information about the aftermath including related shooting threats or false calls, such as the one at Stonebriar Centre or the threats made at Lowery Freshman Center, or Frisco ISD schools that made attendance to those schools optional. Shuwus (talk) 18:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC) Also, that there were other memorials of people gathering outside of the closed shopping mall yesterday that a lot of videos have been shared from. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shuwus (talk • contribs) 18:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

There's some new known victims, including the pair of siblings that went to school in Wylie. Sofia and Daniela Mendoza. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/live-blog/texas-mall-shooting-live-updates-rcna83297 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shuwus (talk • contribs) 18:36, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Information about "related shooting threats or false calls" is not particularly relevant to this article. Nor is information about "memorials of people gathering outside of the closed shopping mall yesterday", which is a fairly common reaction by a community to mass shooting events. Some of this content may end up in the article as it evolves, but it should be kept in mind that this is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. Our focus right now is and should be on the facts of the event itself, not color commentary. General Ization ^Talk 18:41, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Just a bit of information

I wanted to note this Twitter thread from a researcher associated with Bellingcat. Obviously nothing usable there currently, but I'd be very surprised if that information doesn't start showing up in reliable sources very soon. Figured some here might like to peruse for an idea of where coverage might be headed. Cheers, all. Dumuzid (talk) 19:33, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

In furtherance to the above, NBC News has now reported some of the details. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 21:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

List of victims

I have boldly removed the list of names and ages of victims in this event from the article. The content was sourced, but see the essay Victim lists. The families and friends of those killed are entitled to some degree of privacy at this point, and the names and individual ages of the victims add nothing useful to our coverage of the event in the encyclopedia. Wikipedia is not a newspaper or a memorial. General Ization ^Talk 20:17, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Also see the companion essay Casualty lists, which offers the opposing view (with which I do not personally agree). General Ization ^Talk 20:20, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

My understand of WP:MEMORIAL is that it applies to article only covering a person, not an event. Hence, Subjects of encyclopedia articles must satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements. --Super Goku V (talk) 22:43, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

The remainder of that sentence is Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize deceased friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others who do not meet such requirements. That principle should apply both to articles about people and articles about events. General Ization ^Talk 22:55, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

That's not at all what WP:NOTMEMORIAL says. See WP:NOTNOTMEMORIAL Esb5415 (talk) 23:08, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

What I placed above is a verbatim quote. I offered a number of reasons why I believe the list of victims should not appear here, and linked to essays both against and for its inclusion. My only reference to WP:NOTMEMORIAL was the link underlying the word memorial in my comment. I did not say that the guidance at that link prohibited such inclusion; my point in including that link was only that memorializing victims is not the purpose of Wikipedia, which is what is being discussed at WP:ISNOT. Also, please note that WP:NOTNOTMEMORIAL is an essay, not a policy, and not all editors agree with its suggestions concerning the intent, meaning or application of the policies at WP:ISNOT. General Ization ^Talk 23:15, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

The subject of this article is the shooting, not the victims, so WP:NOTMEMORIAL doesn't apply. Esb5415 (talk) 23:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

And I reiterate: The families and friends of those killed are entitled to some degree of privacy at this point, and the names and individual ages of the victims add nothing useful to our coverage of the event in the encyclopedia. General Ization ^Talk 23:28, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

The families and friends of those killed are entitled to some degree of privacy at this point Our reliable sources are publishing them, so we are not invading privacy. the names and individual ages of the victims add nothing useful to our coverage of the event in the encyclopedia I highly disagree; WP:UNDUE clearly states we need to include them to have a neutral point of view. Esb5415 (talk) 23:33, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Not everything published by reliable news sources belongs in an encyclopedia. Exercising editorial oversight to determine what is and is not relevant to the purpose of our article is not a violation of neutral point of view. General Ization ^Talk 23:39, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Since we name the weapon, and discuss the shooter (his name, occupation, possible motive), WP:UNDUE applies to cover the other "viewpoints": the victims. Esb5415 (talk) 23:58, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

No, a verbatim quote would have included Subjects of encyclopedia articles must satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements. You omitted that, because it quite clearly says [s]ubjects of encyclopedia articles; nobody is proposing we start Victims of 2023 Allen, Texas outlet mall shooting, nor any articles on the individual victims themselves. As noted above, see WP:NOTNOTMEMORIAL, specifically the RFC's linked at the bottom, for further guidance. TL;dr: it's a WP:DUE concern, as these articles typically lean heavily on the perpetrator's history, background, etc. while relegating the victims to naught but a statistic. I consider naming the victims the bare minimum we can do to bring some balance to these articles. —Locke Cole • t • c 00:39, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

No, I omitted that phrase because the editor to whom I was replying had already reproduced it, just above my comment. The perpetrator invited inspection and the level of detail appearing in our article through his acts. The victims did not, and I'm not at all convinced that they or their families would view the inclusion of their individual names and ages in an encyclopedic article a matter of "balance" with information about their murderer. What "viewpoint" is served by this inclusion, or being suppressed by their omission? General Ization ^Talk 00:53, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

What "viewpoint" is ... being suppressed by their omission? The victims? That people, real people, died? Not just dry statistics like genders and ages? Our sources routinely cover the victims, often dedicating entire pieces to them, the lives they lead, and the grief their families endure. The absolute minimum we can do is give them the benefit of being named as victims, not just numbers. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:31, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I think you have lost sight of the fact that this is an encyclopedia, not a magazine. The personal identities and lives of the victims should be explored by reporters who can actually talk with the families and develop this content in a fair, considerate and thorough way, not by editors who are specifically prohibited from doing so. General Ization ^Talk 01:37, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I haven't. I'm telling you we must follow our sources on this, not omit details because some editors don't like them. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:39, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

We very regularly omit details that are incompatible with our purpose and policies as an encyclopedia. That's called editorial oversight. General Ization ^Talk 01:43, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

"Should apply" is not the same as it actually applying nor does it make it a principle. Based on past discussions, I do not believe that this principle exists as claimed. This also means that I disagree with your claim in your edit that WP:VICTIM, WP:BLPPRIVACY, and WP:BLP1E apply in regards to preventing them from being mentioned at all. (In fact, two of the three are focused on not making a standalone article in certain situations, which this isn't.) --Super Goku V (talk) 23:52, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

So, I am very much with General Ization on this one, and I am not sure policies actually cover the situation one way or the other. For me it is a case of pure editorial judgment, and I would exercise that in favor of being cautious, for at least a short time after the event in question. I don't see the need to rush. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 01:04, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE would be the policy that applies. Esb5415 (talk) 01:19, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

And how would WP:UNDUE apply? Dumuzid (talk) 01:21, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

WP:UNDUE says Neutrality requires that mainspace articles and pages fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources and Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to the depth of detail. Since we give the shooter weight, we need to give the victims weight as well. There is a section about the shooter, listing his name, occupation, motive. There's a listing of the gun used in the shooting. But there's just a generalization about victims, with simply the age range and number of victims. Finally, Keep in mind that, in determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public. Our reliable sources list the victims [1] [2] [3] Esb5415 (talk) 01:28, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

As I stated above: The perpetrator invited inspection and the level of detail appearing in our article through his acts. The victims did not, and I'm not at all convinced that they or their families would view the inclusion of their individual names and ages in an encyclopedic article a matter of "balance" with information about their murderer. What "viewpoint" is served by this inclusion, or being suppressed by their omission? You seem to be drawing a rather disturbing false equivalence between the murderer and his victims. (Also, as you clearly note, this data is available from sources linked in our article to those who wish to obtain it. We are under no obligation to repeat everything news sources report.) General Ization ^Talk 01:32, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

The victims did not That's a hot take: can you explain why we should deviate from our reliable sources and go your way on this? —Locke Cole • t • c 01:36, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, are you suggesting that the victims somehow invited this attention and the exposure of their individual identities in an encyclopedia? And our reliable sources are news outlets, not encyclopedias. I'm sure you understand that there are significant differences in editorial focus between the two. General Ization ^Talk 01:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

And as I stated above, Our reliable sources are publishing them, so we are not invading privacy.

You seem to be drawing a rather disturbing false equivalence between the murderer and his victims. What is that, specifically? I think the only equivalence I'm trying to make is that both the victims and the shooter were involved in this shooting.

What "viewpoint" is served by this inclusion, or being suppressed by their omission? The victims.

PS, heading to bed. Esb5415 (talk) 01:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Esb5415 -- "Undue" generally refers to giving a minority viewpoint more coverage than it deserves. It does not somehow involve balancing the equities between participants in an event. The fact of the victims is not a "viewpoint." It is a fact, and certainly a verifiable one, but verifiability does not guarantee inclusion. Again, for me, this is simply editorial discretion. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 01:42, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@Dumuzid Would you be so kind as to self-revert to the prose version of the victim list? I'm not a fan of the bulleted list that is now in place. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:34, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Locke Cole - I would, but that's actually not my doing? That was done by Pinecar. Dumuzid (talk) 01:37, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

That was me. Did not notice there was discussions going on. I used articles on other such incidents as guide, while I added the information. I used as official as it can be (though did not give it's reference, as it was part of FB page). I wish, we can have the victim list the way it was published. If other authors prefer not to publish victim info, I am OK (not as passionate one way or the other). Thanks. (Pinecar (talk) 02:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC))

Requested move 8 May 2023

2023 Allen, Texas outlet mall shooting → 2023 Allen mall shooting – Per WP:CONCISE. This event is highly unlikely to be confused with any other event that has occurred in 2023 at a mall in a city or town named Allen. The first 20(!) pages of Google search results for "Allen mall shooting" are all about this event. Carguychris (talk) 21:42, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose I would oppose this just on the basis of the utility of including "Texas" in the title--sometimes I know I forget the specific place but remember the state. That said, happy to go wherever consensus leads. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 21:45, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose See Allen#United States. There are at least 15 cities, towns and unicorporated communities within the United States named "Allen", and it is unclear from your proposed name whether the name refers to geography, the name of a mall, or something else. The inclusion of ", Texas" provides simple and effective disambiguation, minimizing any potential confusion. General Ization ^Talk 21:59, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation is only important when the subject of a Wikipedia article is likely to be confused with a different, similarly named subject (e.g., Midway Airport or King Charles). What other notable subject is likely to be confused with this one? The proposed capitalization makes it clear that the name doesn't refer to the mall itself ("Allen mall" rather than "Allen Mall"), and it's no more likely to cause confusion than the current "outlet mall" name. Carguychris (talk) 22:37, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Mixed I don't agree with removing the Texas portion of the title, but I would be okay with both removing the outlet portion of the title and having "2023 Allen mall shooting" redirect here. --Super Goku V (talk) 22:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose, see #Possible title move: 2023 Allen, Texas shooting and #Article title, above. As Dumuzid notes, omitting Texas is a non-starter for me. I'd be willing to see the "outlet" go, though I think it helps readers understand that it's not your typical indoor mall (which just "mall" implies). —Locke Cole • t • c 00:41, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. There are at least 15 places called "Allen" in the US. The proposed title is ambiguous. WWGB (talk) 00:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 8 May 2023_2

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

2023 Allen, Texas outlet mall shooting → 2023 Texas mall shooting – Per WP:CONCISE. There is not other mall shooting in Texas as of the moment. In the slight chance there is another one, we can disambiguate PalauanReich^🗣️ 22:20, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose It ain't broke; I see no need to fix it (and having multiple RMs in progress simultaneously is generally a bad idea). General Ization ^Talk 22:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose As above, I simply think leaving out "Allen" loses more in precision than it gains in concision. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 22:24, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

More Garcia info

• According to a CNN article, Garcia joined the U.S. Army in June 2008 right after he graduated from Bryan Adams High School in the Casa View section of East Dallas in May 2008.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:5225:C010:4456:68FE:6CFD:584 (talk) 22:52, 8 May 2023 (UTC) After his removal, an Army official told CNN that Garcia was removed from the Army in September 2008 because of designated physical or mental health conditions after three months.

• The Dallas Morning News reports that Garcia is born and raised in Dallas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:5225:C010:4456:68FE:6CFD:584 (talk) 22:43, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

• At the age of 25, Garcia worked as a security guard in 2015 for Northwest Dallas-based Ruiz Protective Service, but the company’s head, Hector Ruiz, told CNN that Garcia resigned after a few months.

• Garcia did have some arrest history from neighboring Garland and in his home in Dallas according to The Dallas Morning News. Although DMN said that Garcia has no history of incarceration within the state prison system, Texas Department of Criminal Justice Director of Communications Amanda Hernandez confirmed. He had an active misdemeanor warrant for drug paraphernalia in Garland from 2020, according to police records. Another source said that his last arrest was in February 2022 for unknown reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1702:5225:C010:4456:68FE:6CFD:584 (talk) 22:45, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Also can you re-add his date of birth? 2600:1702:5225:C010:4456:68FE:6CFD:584 (talk) 22:25, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

That is not a reliable source. WWGB (talk) 22:38, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

What reliable source? CNN, Twitter, TDMN, or all of the above? 2600:1702:5225:C010:4456:68FE:6CFD:584 (talk) 22:41, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

You have edited the above since WWGB's reply, but I believe the meaning was that the Twitter link was not reliable to use for the date of birth. --Super Goku V (talk) 23:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Oh. Well I'm still looking for other sources than Twitter to see if the DOB is correct. 2600:1702:5225:C010:4456:68FE:6CFD:584 (talk) 23:46, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

References