Jump to content

Talk:Killing of Nahel Merzouk

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Some1 looking (talk | contribs) at 23:45, 2 July 2023 (Problem with the validity of source chain). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was merged per WP:DOIT- Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 21:53, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Killing of Nael M seems to be the same article, should it be merged into this one? FatalFit | ✉   16:59, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support and frankly this is a case of WP:DOIT. - Knightoftheswords (Talk · Contribs) 17:06, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Title

Would the article title of "Fatal Parisian Police Shooting of Nael M." be more accurate? Jaiquiero (talk) 07:41, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. WWGB (talk) 11:39, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be far too long. Killing/Shooting of [name] is the usual format. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 20:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The riots are larger than the killing now. This should has been merged into the riot article, not vice versa. Sgnpkd (talk) 20:18, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and the riots are more notable than the shooting, as well as more costly. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 20:38, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Background

The current content of Background section is quite woke - along the lines of "police is evil, arabs are discriminated". No mentions of real context - recurrent terrorist attacks by islamists in France, no-go zones, arab ghettos, elevated terror threat levels for years, with military patrols in cities - the context explaining why French police gets nervous in the situation this killing took place. Birdofpreyru (talk) 10:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree; it portrays the authorities as being routinely racist against people of Arab & African descent. There's no mention of the demographics or incidents of crime in France. Post 9/11, it has by far the highest incidence of terrorism of any country in the Western world. Jim 2 Michael (talk) 14:01, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you guys can read the sources (that themselves discuss background in relation to this event) and, if warranted, suggest improved phrasings. Of course, the immediate mention of islamists and the idea that France having a high incidence of terrorism is necessary context suggests to me that the concern here is not in good faith. Kingsif (talk) 03:42, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll leave it to folks who read French, as I don't. I don't see why mentioning islamism and terrorism in the context of this event is a bad faith? These attacks happen in France routinely, the last time less than a month ago some dude of Syrian origin butchered some kids (https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20230615-france-knife-attack-suspect-transferred-to-psychiatric-hospital). Sure it is completely irrelevant context for an event when French police sees three arab yongsters driving around a Mercedes and trying to escape police. Birdofpreyru (talk) 08:40, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Surname

Is there any reliable source for the subject's surname, and therefore the title of the page? My Google News only shows it on Yahoo, which isn't the best for fact checking or non-Anglosphere stories, in my personal opinion. French Wikipedia has the surname in one reference, but that's probably added by an over-eager editor, as the source itself uses just the initial in the title. [1] This is very basic WP:V stuff, how can an article be titled after an assumption? Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:53, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Omission of facts in the "Shooting" section

The current version of the "Shooting" section states as course of events that led to the shooting: "Nahel, who had Algerian heritage, was stopped by two police officers at approximately 8:30 am (CEST) near the François Arago crossing, close to the Nelson Mandela Square, due to traffic violations." This gives the impression that the police officers overreacted with drawn guns to a harmless "traffic violation" like switching lanes without signaling. According to an article of Reuters however, the police officers had tried to perform a first (routine) traffic stop of Nahel Merzouk for the illegal use of a bus lane before the shooting. Instead of complying, Nahel Merzouk sped off and committed not only several additional traffic offences, but also endangered the life of a pedestrian and a cyclist due to his reckless driving. When the police officers were finally able to approach his car - which had stopped because of a traffic jam - they were thus not just approaching someone "due to traffic violations" but someone who had just committed several felonies, had fled from a traffic stop and was still in control of a deadly weapon (his car). The current version of the "Shooting" section ommits all these facts and should be rewritten in a way that mention these facts and thus gives a more balanced description that explains the "guns drawn"-approach of the police officers. MiBerG (talk) 00:24, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm MiBerG I don't think we should fetishize "felonies" here, which might mean something completely different in a different country anyway, and which are alleged. I mean, I am sure you wouldn't want to assume that whatever the police officers wrote up in their report is automatically true. Nor am I sure why you'd assume that "traffic violations" are automatically harmless--I actually don't know of any traffic violations that are inherently harmless. So I think it's a pretty decent term to use in a summary. Drmies (talk) 00:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"During the pursuit, several traffic violations were observed, including driving through crosswalks, endangering a pedestrian and a cyclist." Source: https://www.lemonde.fr/en/france/article/2023/06/29/hour-by-hour-from-a-deadly-traffic-stop-to-the-march-in-memory-of-nahel-m_6039689_7.html --91.54.1.234 (talk) 01:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So according to one source, albeit a reliable one (unless Le Monde is quoting someone?), certain things were "observed"--by whom? how accurate were their observations? etc. Indeed, Le Monde calls them traffic violations, for better or for worse, so we should stick to that. Drmies (talk) 01:06, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And drug dealing and use should not be deleted without explanation. I restored the deletion! He didn't have any criminal record. But a thick judicial file.--91.54.1.234 (talk) 02:00, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea what you mean by "fetishize felonies". The fact is, as reported by Reuters, that he fled from a traffic stop, endangered the life of other people by his reckless driving and didn't stop voluntarily to cooperate with the police but was stopped by a traffic jam. Considering all this it is factual wrong and misleading to summarize the course of events as "he was stopped due to traffic violations" and thus ommit the other extraordinary facts that made the police officers approach his car with a much higher concern about their and other people safety than it would have been during a routine traffic stop. MiBerG (talk) 12:44, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nahel Merzouk Background

The following discussion 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.


The current subsection on the background of Merzouk is very confusing. It says that he did not have a criminal record, and then immediately after says: “But he was "known to the police, particularly for resisting arrest," and in fact had been charged with resisting the previous weekendand five times since 2021. His judicial file included 15 recorded incidents, including use of false license plates, driving without insurance, and for the sale and consumption of narcotics.”

The information in this paragraph seems to contradict the opening sentence. It says he did not have a criminal record, and then elaborates the details of a lengthy criminal record. Is there a technical definition of “criminal record” being used here? If so, I think that definition should be elaborated, so that the paragraph makes sense. Is it that he was never convicted in these 15 incidents? Or that he was not charged?

In either of these cases, I would think it would be more accurate to say something like “Merzouk has not been charged or convicted in any criminal case, however he does have an extensive record of contact with law enforcement.” The rest of the paragraph would make more sense in that case. Currently it is a non-sequitur. EthanZappa (talk) 03:28, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is the lack of a “criminal record” a technicality based on the fact that he has a minor and has only been arrested and charged as a juvenile? I cannot read the French sources, so I am unable to verify. But the way this is written seems fallacious. Why would the topic sentence for a paragraph about a person’s history of criminal charges state that the person has no criminal record? EthanZappa (talk) 03:31, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a technical definition of “criminal record” being used here? - a "criminal record" has always referred to convictions. This does not need to be spelled out. Kingsif (talk) 03:35, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Basically in France the justice is pretty lenient (especially with underage offenders) and tends not to sentence offenders before several offenses have been committed. The term "casier judiciaire" means the official record of people who have been sentenced, and Nahel had none as he was never sentenced. But he did get arrested 15 times for various offenses. 90.119.26.215 (talk) 05:11, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That is not specific to France, that's just what a criminal record is everywhere. If you want to continue chatting about Nahel's arrests, social media exists. Kingsif (talk) 05:30, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You are missing a nuance in EthanZappa's comment and it's not professional behavior to write this question off the way you do and to try to close the discussion. If France never gives underage offenders a criminal record, then it is of course non-informative to state that Nahel does not have a criminal record (as no-one his age does, however bad they may be), and not expanding on the fact that he has been arrested many times may be an unfortunate omission, as the age of criminal responsibility differs widely between different countries: in France this statement may be completely non-informative, while in Canada it would mean he has not been arrested for a serious crime since the age of 14. Without clarifying his arrest record, this article is not internationally accessible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.71.59.107 (talk) 19:14, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Split Proposal

I have a proposal. Should the 2023 French Race Riots be split into its own article named 2023 French Race Riots? The template in the Nationwide unrest section has it named as that. Cwater1 (talk) 15:15, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like Nahel Merzouk protests was split off of this article or from an article that was merged to this article. --Super Goku V (talk) 22:37, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Super Goku V Hi. I saw that earlier ago. Thanks! Cwater1 (talk) 03:46, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

21-year-old death

According to this source https://www.nicematin.com/faits-divers/emeutes-dans-les-banlieues-le-jeune-homme-blesse-durant-une-attaque-est-decede-858266, a 21-year-old man has also died due to the riots. How do I edit this in? Brocen (talk) 15:56, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Issue resolved, edit made Brocen (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"You're going to get shot in the head."

As someone who speaks French, this is not what can be heard on the video found in this very article. What is heard is Nahel's voice, less loud because inside the vehicle, saying to the officer "Pas dans la tête!" ("Not in the head!") as he is getting punched in the face. The officer only says "Coupe!" ("cut", aka "turn off the engine") repeatedly and "Depêche toi!" ("quickly"). Nahel then says "Tu m’as foutu un coup dans la tête!" ("You hit me in the head!") to which the policeman answers "Coupe!" and then the conversation ends. 90.119.26.215 (talk) 18:27, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a source that say this, we could add it. --Super Goku V (talk) 22:40, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If it is plainly wrong, we should not add it if a source says it. Indeed, other sources discuss with hesitation who is saying what. Here is my interpretation, unsure of who is who. "Not in the head!" "Cut, cut!" "Hurry up!" "You hit me in the head! "Cut!". Note: not trying to add my version, just thought it would be relevant. The last bit is more difficult to understand. Chamaemelum (talk) 22:57, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If my previous response was unclear, then I apologize. My original comment was that we cannot use our interpretation of what is said in the video due to the No original research policy, so we need a source for it.
However, I did not consider WP:TRANSCRIPTION when I made that comment. Faithfully translating sourced material into English, or transcribing spoken words from audio or video sources, is not considered original research. So it seems that it is fine to attempt to translate what is said in the video. --Super Goku V (talk) 23:25, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good thought. Since the audio quality is poor, it would be nice to get other native French speakers' transcriptions. I could be mistaken. Chamaemelum (talk) 23:38, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's Yanny or Laurel. The audio is bad enough that we'll hear whatever transcript we've first read.
Nevertheless, the family's lawyers say that the old transcript is the correct one, and prosecutors have hired forensic experts to figure out what was said in the video (sources: RTL, state broadcaster, Le Parisien, all reliable). So we could just hold off until they release their conclusions. DFlhb (talk) 06:54, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Makes sense to me. Chamaemelum (talk) 06:55, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi protect request

people are putting porn on this page so semi protect it Sebbog13 (talk) 10:02, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Documents"

Merzouk rented the car through an application that did not require any documents.[1]

References

  1. ^ Deleon, Alina (29 June 2023). "Another night of fury and fire in France for the death of a young man shot by a police officer". Archived from the original on 30 June 2023. Retrieved 30 June 2023.

I'm gonna boldly remove this bit for now, because it seems like a Frenchism that doesn't really make sense without more context in English. An application is a document. Are we talking about an "app" like on your phone? The source doesn't offer any clarity. GMGtalk 12:10, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing confusing about that at all. It's obviously referring to a computer/smartphone application. We tend to shorten the word to "app" in English, but using "application" instead is not incorrect. No reason to assume a grammatical error in the translation. 2603:8001:8700:1739:7C0F:8C3D:2E4D:4A3D (talk) 13:31, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm just trying to be sensitive to language differences, and honestly...I'm a little skeptical about the source...cause...it looks kinda crap. It looks a lot like a dolled-up blog. There's lots of empty sections, and a lot of obvious errors in things like grammar and capitalization that make me suspect it's AI generated, or at least AI assisted by someone who doesn't speak English very well. GMGtalk 13:46, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 2 July 2023

Top section: Change “The official version of events” to “Initial reporting on the incident, informed by police statements,” Trilomonk (talk) 16:35, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Xan747 (talk) 16:53, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with section Police version challenged by a video

The article cited to corroborate the fact that the video challenged the version of event provided by cops(1) is itself citing an article(2) from 2022 to corroborate its statement, I hope you see the problem here. I tried and I cannot find the original police statement to verify that claim. All other news site points towards Le Parisien to report the fact that the police allegedly lied. This is really weird. Can we find that original statement? If not it seems like this whole section should be rewritten to account for this incongruency.

1. https://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/nanterre-un-homme-tue-par-un-tir-de-la-police-apres-un-refus-dobtemperer-27-06-2023-NUHSC3W3X5GYDGWDXCA36APNUU.php

2. https://www.leparisien.fr/faits-divers/refus-dobtemperer-ces-versions-qui-saffrontent-apres-les-tirs-mortels-de-policiers-a-paris-07-06-2022-B5LPKFQF2BAXVINWAI3ILAMBQQ.php