Talk:Charles Whitman

Template:WPCD-People Talk Archive: One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six

I see two people with the title "Fr." in this article. I'm fairly well read, and have never seen this abbreviation for "Father" before, and had to look it up to be sure of its meaning. I'm going to change these to "Father" if nobody objects. - LafinJack 05:47, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

No objection, it seems straightforward to me - but I'm probably the one who used them :) Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 12:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Is that a "con" (Confession) or gluttonous pride, two of the "Deadly Sins"?

Discharge type

It seems unlikely that he would have been honorably discharged following imprisonment and demotion. He was more likely generally discharged, I'll check and make sure. Tyrnell (talk) 16:06, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Pop culture reference missing

A Drawn Together episode had Wooldor say "If anyone needs me, I'll be in the clock tower." He then proceeded to eject a bullet from a sniper rifle and walk off screen.

Pop culture reference incorrect

At no point in the Tom Waits song "Down by the Train" is Charles Whitman mentioned. The only shooter mentioned was John Wilkes Booth. I am removing this completely incorrect statement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.64.105.177 (talk) 01:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:WhitmanTimeCover.jpg

Image:WhitmanTimeCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Edits re calibre reverted

I edited a minor change and included comment why - 6mm (rifle) is the proper size designation, there is no such thing as 0.35 caliber in that Remington rifle, and when calibers are designated in mm calibers aren't used. Also pistol designated as 0.38 caliber was changed to .38 caliber as there is no leading zero in size designations. Then my edits were anonymously reverted citing vandalism. Does this happen often? Should I edit back? Or just quit? (Style manual "Numbers between minus one and plus one require a leading zero (0.02, not .02); exceptions are performance averages in sports where a leading zero is not commonly used, and commonly used terms such as .22 caliber."(Emphasis added) Pob45552 11:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Brain tumour

If he had a brain tumour, and it was the cause for the behaviour that ended his life (the clock tower shooting), then he should be considered a victim, just like the people he shot and wounded or killed... RingtailedFox • Talk • Stalk 18:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Whitman didn't succumb to the brain tumor, the police shot him. If he had died from cancer or the effects of the tumor, then he would have been a victim, so to speak. The tumor also wasn't proved to be the source of his actions. It might have played a part in it, but no one knows for sure. That is why the article states that some theorize and speculate about its effect on Whitman. Pinkadelica 04:30, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Stephen King's "The Dead Zone" also has a brain tumour victim perform a shooting (assassination attempt) --81.190.121.150 23:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Autopsy? Cremation?

In one part of the article it says Charles' suicide note requested an autopsy. Another part says it asked for cremation. Which one's right? -WarthogDemon 17:18, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

They're not contradictory, he requested both. An autopsy is performed before the burial/cremation. Sherurcij ^{(Speaker for the Dead)} 18:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

According to http://www.popsubculture.com/pop/bio_project/sub/whitman_letter.pdf (letter written after killing his wife) he requested autopsy.

"After my death I wish that an autopsy would be performed on me to see if there is any visible physical disorder." There was. He had a cancer tumor in the brain that is believed to provoke emotional instability in him. There is no mention of cremation though. (All letters/police reports can be found at http://www.popsubculture.com/pop/bio_project/charles_whitman_docs.html ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.243.152.55 (talk) 23:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

GA Sweeps (delisted)

In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of October 9, 2007, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR.

Ruslik 08:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The reasons:

1) The general lack of inline citations. The article makes a lot of claims without them. I tagged the sections and paragraphs, where they are necessary.

2) Lead is too short.

3) The list of victims should be removed, because there is a separate article, which contains their names. The embedded list actually adds nothing to the article itself. In addition the list does not cite any sources (together with List of Charles Whitman's victims article).

4) 'References in popular culture' subsection is completly uncited and should be IMO moved into a separate article.

Ruslik 08:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Charles Whitman's corpse.png

Image:Charles Whitman's corpse.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:29, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Charles_Whitman&curid=105038&diff=168236754&oldid=168203554

Which was never finished; the suicide note or the autopsy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LafinJack (talk • contribs) 01:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:WhitmanLifeTexasSniper.jpg

Image:WhitmanLifeTexasSniper.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:31, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:WhitmanTimeCover.jpg

Image:WhitmanTimeCover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 07:31, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Misleading IQ

The article mentions that Whitman scored 138 in an IQ test at the age of six. It doesn't mention--and most people don't seem to know--that children's IQ scores reflect ability in relation to age group norms. They aren't comparable to adult IQ scores. And the scores of six year olds aren't comparable to those of ten year olds. Children may easily achieve seemingly high IQ scores merely by being a bit ahead of their age group.

I know some people like to obfuscate the fact that low IQs, more than anything else, correlate with criminal behavior. Sometimes these people try to obfuscate it by ascribing genius to mediocre lunatics like Whitman. They do this by using insignificant pieces of information and taking advantage of people's ignorance.

I'd like to remove the bit about IQ, but since it's one of the few cited bits in the article, I won't even try. I'll just leave this here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Javas7 (talk • contribs) 08:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Well obfuscate, correlate, or speculate, he was a Marine, he did get a scholarship from the Navy to attend UT, he was admitted to Mechanical Engineering, so I don't see what point you are trying to make. To say he was a lunatic is, I hope you agree, somewhat unscientific and speaks to the repulsive nature of the crime. Besides, many adult 138 IQ's, are held by totally dysfunctional individuals. What about Autistic Savants(?), some of them have IQ's that are immeasurable, does that make them genious'? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.34.203.161 (talk) 03:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

RFC: Victim Lists

Wikipedia:Victim Lists is an attempt by me to create community consensus on the inappropriateness of lists of victims on Wikipedia. Titanium Dragon (talk) 22:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Body Count

I read a book that Whitman killed 18 people and wounded 30 people. It also says on the picture of the newspaper in the article that he killed 14 people but only wounded 29. Can anybody confirm the actual body count?--Bending Unit (talk) 13:55, 16 May 2008 (UTC) Bending Unit

• Your confusion is probably because of this, Whitman killed only fourteen people shooting from the tower, however he killed his wife and mother the night before, and he clubbed to death the receptionist and shot several tourists as they arrived at the top of the tower, some of whom died. The newspaper most likely was printed before all of these had come to light, or before some victims finally succumbed to their injuries. His final official toll is the higher number. This should account for the discrepancy. As for the diffrent counts of wounded, all such counts are only estimates, no official number has ever been arrived at. F-451 (talk) 20:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Pop Culture Reference

There was an episode of King of the Hill where Dale was barricaded in a tower while the police were called out, thinking he was a vigilante with a rifle. I cannot recall the title, but it was an obvious throwback to the Charles Whitman incident and should be in the "references to popular culture" section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.110.77.118 (talk) 03:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Pop culture references to leading news events are not notable and actually should be swept out of the article. Tempshill (talk) 22:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Ugly gear lists

There's a list of weapons and a list of gear that are very ugly and out of place in the article. They also aren't very notable. Do I need to know that he had a hammer? I'm removing them. I think they are like a trivia list, and like a trivia list, the important and notable information in them should be integrated into the text of the article instead of made into a list like this. Tempshill (talk) 22:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

THe information of what he brought with him for an extended shoot-out from the tower is relevant and does belong in the article, but definitely does not belong in the prose of the article - hence its need to be in a sidebar. Sherurcij ^{(speaker for the dead)} 22:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I concur with Sherurcij, the gear list is very relavent because his choice of equipment demonstrates his objectives, his bringing food, water and copiouse amounts of ammo is first-hand evidence that he was prepared for a long shoot-out, while many of the other pieces of equipment show that he prepared for variouse contingencies, though I admit the hammer is odd. It would require an expert to discern which peices of equipment are relavent and which are trivial (such as the hammer.) F-451 (talk) 00:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)