Jump to content

Talk:Otto Warmbier

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mabandalone (talk | contribs) at 15:14, 20 June 2017 (→‎Botulism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:WPUS50

Notability

Resolved
Extended content

Can someone tell me why this guy needs a page this early into a brief detention? Yes, if he becomes a prisoner like other famous DPRK prisoners it would make sense, or if some elaborate swap/deal is made because of this guy and more media sources surface then sure...but I'm having a really hard time understanding why he deserves a Wikipedia page just because he was supposedly dumb enough to steal a banner and get detained temporarily by North Korea. GoldenSHK (talk)

GoldenSHK Wikipedia has objective criteria for what concepts can have articles. If you like, check Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Basic_criteria for the guideline on biographies. If you feel this article (or any other) does not meet notability criteria, then please either nominate it for deletion by the process at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion or ask someone to start a deletion discussion on your behalf. Thanks for asking about Wikipedia standards. Please speak up if you see something out of order. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. :) Thanks for the constructive response. I just feel like it shouldn't be quite as notable as people are making it out to be but I appreciate the time you took to respond. GoldenSHK (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have tried to AFD "one eventers" before, and unfortunately it's an uphill battle. IMO there should be a single "foreign prisoners of North Korea" article and all of the individual articles should be merged into it. - Frankie1969 (talk) 12:36, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Great story, but ... IMO, OK - keep it all... 15:03, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Please delete this after you fix it. I just want to point out that the introduction claims that DPRK authorities claim that one cause of his coma was "feminism".

Do not delete

Resolved
Extended content

The guideline says:

A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person.

This article should not exist, only if this information is in another article. So we can:

  • Leave the article,
  • Or (my option) move it to another article. Eloy (talk) 13:45, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I had to delete your formatting for your signature that makes it justify right, it was screwing up the section heading for the section I created below. I've never seen anyone format their signature like that, and I suggest you stop doing that in the future, it is unnecessary and can cause problems for text below your signature, causing unnecessary frustration and work for other editors to compensate for it. Moving on, I think this case is really more a matter of international relations than crime, and I think the more general Biographies of living persons - subjects notable only for one event guideline is the more pertinent one. It says:
"We should generally avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met:
If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.
If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view. In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article.
If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley, Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant and his role was both substantial and well documented.
The significance of an event or individual is indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources."
The first and second conditions are certainly met; other American students who have been convicted in North Korea usually pass into obscurity relatively quickly, like that guy who went there deliberately to get arrested a couple years ago. The persistence of coverage of these kinds of events is pretty low, this case is in the news right now, but in deciding to make or keep this article we should remember that Wikipedia is not a newspaper and should consider how significant this guy is likely to be in a year. Mmyers1976 (talk) 14:57, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Todd Miller does have his own article.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:46, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions for merger

Since Warmbier is known for only one event, perhaps it would be prudent to merge this article into a new section in Human rights in North Korea#Criminal justice or Foreign relations of North Korea, along with articles of other people, or possibly create a new article that combines all these pseudobiographies into one more useful article. Mmyers1976 (talk) 14:30, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT?

Resolved

An LGBT-related category has been added to this article, which mentions nothing about gay/LGBT. ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:39, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Category has been removed. 116.89.224.150 (talk) 01:02, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Occupation

Occupation is currently listed as 'Sex Slave'. I don't see any evidence for that and will change it to college student as that is how he is described in the media reports I have read including ones already sourced in the article. Dethen (talk) 19:23, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Already updated. Should have been quicker. Dethen (talk) 19:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Was drinking vodka until 5am

The Independent (UK) says another person on the tour said Otto's tour group was drinking vodka until 5 am. Maybe not fit to put in BLP? Only other source that says this is Time and they quote the Independent. Raquel Baranow (talk) 07:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article doesn't even say if Warmbier was with them or was drinking vodka himself. I would leave it out. FuriouslySerene (talk) 13:38, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Allegedly?

Does anyone deny he did it?--Jack Upland (talk) 22:37, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. I fact there is a video footage with him stealing the banner.--5.12.134.86 (talk) 16:21, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The person in the footage can't be identified. Reliable sources say allegedly - https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/16/north-korea-sentences-us-student-to-15-years-hard-labour 2.102.185.65 (talk) 00:44, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
According to the source he has confessed and has been convicted by the supreme court. The time for presumption of innocence has passed. No one is suggesting that he didn't do it.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is indeed reported as alleged theft by the majority of sources:[1], [2], [3]. Check yourself! 80.132.81.204 (talk) 11:33, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Summary: out of 3 articles you've provided 1 confirms the crime, 2 were written before the final verdict, hence the "alleged".
1. Foxnews: "The so-called hostile act against North Korea committed by college student Warmbier, [...], was purloining a propaganda poster off the wall of the Yanggakdo Hotel in Pyongyang”.
2. CNN's article doesn't mention the final verdict. Indeed, at the time the article was written the crime hasn't been proven yet, hence the "alleged".
3. Dailymail. Again, the article seems to be written before the final verdict was announced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA8A:F200:9903:E9EB:D36B:2C71 (talk) 08:05, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In any case, we don't need to use a particular word because media sources use it. The use of the word "alleged" implies there is some kind of dispute as to whether the act took place. But I have not seen any source that disputes the truth of the charge.--Jack Upland (talk) 08:50, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Are you talking to your own sockpuppet Jack ? Anyway there is no consensus for your (strange) version here. 80.132.74.42 (talk) 11:10, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WP:EQ, I'm nobody's puppet. You can address me as 2A02:C7D:CA8A:F200:9903:E9EB:D36B:2C71, or simply 2A02.
You didn't comment on my findings tho. None of the articles you provided support your point of view. Foxnews confirms the theft took place. CNN and Dailymail use "alleged" as both articles have been drafted before the verdict was announced. Take a look at latter articles by Dailymail: [4], [5], [6]. None of them show any sign of a doubt: "Warmbier stole a banner with a political slogan from his Pyongyang hotel". --2A02:C7D:CA8A:F200:88B6:6DEA:E4CF:81DE (talk) 13:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

3O Response: declined as an RFC is underay. Yashovardhan (talk) 11:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Request for comments dated 28 April 2017

Do we report the official North Korean propaganda, or do we stick with the majority of sources?Relisted at 06:30, 4 June 2017 (UTC) by Winged Blades Godric in light of the new proposal put forward. Initiated by 80.132.74.42 (talk) at 11:16, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification for new participants: The RFC is asking whether the word 'Alleged' as used in the article to indicate an alleged theft be kept or not. Yashovardhan (talk) 03:30, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Please state your view with keep allegedly or remove allegedly along with a brief explanation. Do not reply to views expressed here but discuss in the threaded discussion section below.

  • Remove allegedly: As stated above, Warmbier has confessed, has been convicted, and no source has been provided that disputes what he did. By using the word "allegedly", we imply that there is some dispute about what he did, and that the court process is ongoing.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:46, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove allegedly. Wikipedia is not in the position to hold an investigation to establish whether or not poster was actually stolen. Since the final verdict, the majority of media articles that I've seen are quite explicit in their wordings: "Otto Warmbier stole the poster". --2A02:C7D:CA8A:F200:F4CA:500:13D5:9F71 (talk) 00:34, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep allegedly, obviously. Admitting something while being held prisoner by North Korea is not confirmation of it happening. Neither is conviction by a court in North Korea. We can't report something as fact if we don't know it's fact. 2.102.185.65 (talk) 18:31, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep allegedly. We have exactly two pieces of evidence that Warmbier stole anything:
    • A coerced confession obtained using torture.
    • Low-quality CCTV footage of somebody (whose face cannot be seen) removing the poster and placing it on the floor. Keep in mind that the alleged theft involved him removing the poster and walking off with it, NOT placing it on the floor. So our CCTV footage shows a different crime than the one alleged.

That's it. We have nothing else suggesting a crime was even committed, alone Warmbier being the guilty party. Raider Duck (talk) 16:43, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Remove allegedly. Wikipedia compiles information from reliable sources, and the accepted sources state that he stole the poster. Whether or not he did is not for us to determine. Natureium (talk) 18:17, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What sources state he stole the poster? Look at the discussion thread, all the sources either simply describe what he was jailed for, or cast doubt that he actually did it. 2.102.186.194 (talk) 12:14, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alternative. Why not just change it to something such as "he was accused of stealing a political propaganda poster . . ."? Such language neither accepts the truth of North Korea's charge, nor implies that there is a dispute over it. --Usernameunique (talk) 17:31, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alternative that Usernameunique proposed above; it seems like a good compromise. (Summoned by bot.)Prcc27 (talk) 11:40, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove allegedly. [https://www.google.com/#q=otto+warmbier+poster&tbm=nws The overwhelming number of reliable news sources say he either stole the poster or tried to steal the poster. So we should say one of those. But as others explain, from a verifiability standpoint there is nothing "alleged" about it. He verifiably did it, so we can and should say he did it. (As a side note, the RfC is grossly non-neutral and misrepresents what the reliable sources say.) (I am not watching this page, so please ping me if you want my attention.) --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:58, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peter K Burian (talk) 00:06, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep allegedly. The accusation of the regime and the confession are an unsufficient basis for the claim. The father said that the story about stealing a poster (for a church, in return for a used car) is nonsensical. Observers confirm that anyway the whole case was not about what Warmbier did or did not, but that the regime needed a victim to use it in its negotiations with the USA. - The article can explain what the regime said, what Warmbier said in court, and report also the father's denial. Ziko (talk) 21:25, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Alternative: Posted by Usernameunique above. Keeps it straight to the facts. TarkusAB 22:38, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep allegedly There are reliable sources which state the confession was likely coerced. The alternative proposed by Usernameunique could also work, but given the sourcing regarding likely forced confession, I think we need to stay clear of saying Warmbier stole the propaganda poster. --DynaGirl (talk) 23:41, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Threaded discussion

Please state your opinion in the survey section above and use this section to discuss about the matter.

Snow to keep or remove? --2A02:C7D:CA8A:F200:B5D7:74B8:BAB5:9476 (talk) 08:57, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I take back my words. Initially there was only one sided support but now things seem to have changed a lot. It could rather be a tough call deciding the consensus. But let's wait for some more time. By the way, I've no opinion on this topic and am only acting neutrally. Yashovardhan (talk) 10:40, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • May I kindly ask that "keep" voters support their opinions with reliable sources. The majority of sources report that the crime actually took place:
  1. Human Rights Watch: "North Korea's sentencing of Otto Warmbier to 15 years hard labor for a college-style prank is outrageous and shocking, and should not be permitted to stand", [7];
  2. New York Times: "It was impossible to determine whether Mr. Warmbier had been coerced into making the statements", [8];
  3. Fox News: "North Korea is currently holding prisoner American student Otto Warmbier, sentenced to 15 years hard labor for stealing a propaganda poster from his hotel in Pyongyang during an organized trip to the country in 2016", [9];
  4. The Independent: "On Wednesday the 21-year-old student was sentenced to 15 years’ hard labour for stealing a propaganda poster from his hotel", [10].
--2A02:C7D:CA8A:F200:C4E2:8240:96CE:A939 (talk) 00:38, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
None of those are saying the crime actually took place. That's just describing what he was jailed for. 2.102.185.65 (talk) 13:46, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • For starters, there's this from Time Magazine: "In a fanciful and apparently forced confession..." [11]
  1. And this from CNN: "North Korea has sentenced an American student to 15 years of hard labor after accusing him of removing a political banner from a hotel." [12]
  2. Similarly from the U of Virginia's Cavalier Daily: "...his sentencing to 15 years of hard labor for allegedly attempting to steal a political banner..." [13]
  3. And from Bustle.com: "...when he was arrested for allegedly trying to steal a propaganda poster..." [14]

At this point, the only established fact is that the North Korean government claims Mr. Warmbier tried to steal a sign. This same government also claims that nobody in the Kim family has ever pooped, the country's populace is well-fed, and the United States is cowering before NK's superior military might. None of these other ridiculous lies is presented without dispute. And neither should this band of genocidal liars be believed about whatever Mr. Warmbier did or did not do that night. Raider Duck (talk) 13:48, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but that is fake news. The NK government has never claimed that Kims didn't poop (I think that comes from a misreading of the book, Aquariums of Pyongyang) etc. I don't see a source that says that Warmbier is innocent. There doesn't seem to be any alternative explanation why this particular tourist was singled out. Though there might be some disagreement about the details, and though the government stands accused of overreacting, most of the Americans arrested in North Korea did pretty much what they were accused of doing. We shouldn't do detective work, speculating about whether his confession was forced or the CCTV footage is genuine. That belongs on a conspiracy theory website.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:34, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, North Korea rarely does false accusations when detaining US nationals.
  1. Evan Hunziker. Accused of: Illegally entering North Korea. What he really did: swam across the Yalu River from Dandong on the China–North Korea border, on a dare from a friend with whom he had been drinking.
  2. Euna Lee. Accused of: Illegally entering North Korea. What she really did: crossed into the Democratic People's Republic of Korea from the People's Republic of China without a visa.
  3. Laura Ling. Accused of: Illegally entering North Korea. What she really did: crossed into North Korea from the People's Republic of China without a visa.
  4. Matthew Todd Miller. Accused of: Acts hostile to the DPRK while entering under the guise of a tourist. What he really did: Miller later revealed that he was curious about the country and simply wanted to talk to North Korean people and ask them questions beyond what he could as a tourist.
  5. Jeffrey Edward Fowle. Accused of: Acting "contrary to the purpose of tourism" by leaving a Bible at a nightclub. What he really did: deliberately left Bible behind in the restaurant toilet at the Chongjin Sailor's Club. --2A02:C7D:CA8A:F200:795E:FD01:FE59:F613 (talk) 09:49, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Who knows why Warmbier was singled out? You come off like an apologist for the North Korean government (which would make you one of the few in the western world), but the fact remains that no evidence has been presented that he committed this crime. NONE. The CCTV footage would be laughed out of any western court, as it doesn't even pass the basic test of showing the alleged perpetrator's face. Other than that, we have only the word of the North Korean authorities and an obviously out-of-it Warmbier (who couldn't even walk in and out of the room under his own power) hysterically reading a typewritten confession in front of some cameras. None of this should be taken as evidence of guilt. Therefore, the word "alleged" should remain in the article. Raider Duck (talk) 14:00, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The CCTV footage would not be laughed out of a western court. In a western court, he wouldn't get a trial if he pleaded guilty. Once he pleads guilty there is no need to provide evidence. But this is not the place to play detective or barrack-room lawyer. I still haven't seen a source that suggests he didn't do it. Therefore, the word "alleged" is misleading.--Jack Upland (talk) 16:01, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In a western court, he wouldn't be tortured until he pled guilty. Once again: Please present even one shred of credible evidence that Mr. Warmbier did anything illegal. Until you can (and I know you can't), the word "alleged" is entirely appropriate. Raider Duck (talk) 17:51, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Are people supposed to be convinced by you bolding the word "alleged" over and over? Natureium (talk) 18:15, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Of course not. I bold the word because when writing technical documentation, I often bold a word indicating a menu item or button needing to be clicked. For instance, I might type: "In the Safari menu, click Preferences, then...." So I've become used to bolding a specific word I'm talking about. Raider Duck (talk) 21:19, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
According to this, Warmbier had a trial featuring evidence such as fingerprints and the testimony of his tour guide and hotel staff, as well as the CCTV footage and his confession. Of course, you can claim all this was fabricated or coerced. But personally I don't think it's credible to argue that the North Korean government orchestrated an elaborate frame-up of a young tourist over the theft of a souvenir. And, so far, no one has produced a reliable source that says this. It's clear from this discussion that those who support the word "allegedly" are not concerned with a mere word, but are trying to advance an alternative theory unsupported by sources.--Jack Upland (talk) 22:21, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The alternative proposed by Usernameunique, saying he was "accused of..." is not very different to "alleged", but perhaps it is softer. It does suggest that he didn't do it. I think it is inappropriate to talk about someone being "accused" of a crime when he has confessed and has been convicted. If you want to avoid saying what he did, it would be better to say he "confessed to and was convicted of"...--Jack Upland (talk) 19:30, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but "confessed and has been convicted" in a country infamous for a myriad of human rights abuses including both forced confessions and false imprisonment. "Accused of..." may be a good compromise. Raider Duck (talk) 19:29, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Replacing a word with a synonym is not a compromise. And, again, your motive is clearly to suggest he didn't do it. So the "compromise" just reiterates what you have been arguing all along.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:04, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relist RfC?

Do we really need to relist the RfC? The RfC was launched by an IP editor who appears to have left the discussion. Yes, I launched the discussion with a short query, but never would have escalated it this far. It's clear there's no consensus, and I for one am not about to launch an edit war to remove "allegedly".--Jack Upland (talk) 08:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You should remove it, your reasoning is correct. LaceyUF (talk) 17:33, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jack Upland and LaceyUF: Recruited by Legobot In my opinion, you can go ahead and close the RfC if it aligns with common sense to do so. -- I dream of horses  If you reply here, please ping me by adding {{U|I dream of horses}} to your message  (talk to me) (My edits) @ 05:17, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Censorship: Why and what?

The images I've seen of the poster all have a censored section at the left end of it. Does anyone know why it's censored and what has been censored? --Lance E Sloan (talk) 17:27, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Lsloan: They covered up the name of the Dear Leader. I'm not sure 100% why, but I think it's because he is basically God-like and is related to that. —МандичкаYO 😜 20:53, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Murdered abroad

I've removed this page from Category:American people murdered abroad as it is not NPOV and moreover he died within the US. --2601:140:4102:75E0:B42D:30A2:383F:8D (talk) 23:48, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the cause of Warmbier's death is not known, but he certainly died in the US.--Jack Upland (talk) 23:56, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The case is not so "clear cut". Not so "black and white". Warmbier could have been murdered abroad, and still have died in the US. A death (from a murder) does not have to immediately follow from the murderous act. It's very feasible -- in fact, very likely -- that that is exactly what happened in this case. No? We often see cases where a victim is assaulted, then they go into a coma or a vegetative state or what have you, and then they die like 20 years later. And the person charged with the original assault is then charged with murder. So, my point is that a death (from a murder) does not have to immediately follow from the murderous act. And, in this case, that's probably exactly what happened. It is not NPOV. And the fact that Warmbier died on US soil is essentially irrelevant. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:10, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the case is not clear cut. We do not know the cause of death. Various explanations have been given and disputed. The claims of murder seem to be based an outpouring of emotion, rather than logic or evidence. The theory that Warmbier was selected at random, framed for a crime he didn't commit, and then murdered seems completely incoherent. As discussed previously, we shouldn't act as amateur detectives or lawyers and try to make a case here, however probable we think our case is. Yes, the fact that he died on US soil doesn't legally mean that he wasn't murdered in North Korea (but it's not irrelevant — for example, it could mean the case fell into an American jurisdiction...). But we are not writing a legal treatise here. Saying he was murdered "abroad" is potentially confusing to the ordinary reader. The statement — "And, in this case, that's probably exactly what happened. It is not NPOV." — speaks for itself. That is very POV. To sum up, the claim that he was murdered is emotionally charged speculation, and saying that he was murdered abroad is potentially confusing. We should allow the story to unfold and not jump in with misleading tags.--Jack Upland (talk) 02:01, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jack Upland: You missed my point entirely. Both of the posts before mine stated, in short, that "he died in the USA, so he could not have been murdered abroad". I was pointing out that it is not an inconsistency to be murdered abroad and to still die on US soil. So, I believe that you missed the point that I was making. (In response to the two posts that had preceded mine.) Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think I acknowledged your point. The main problem with the category is claiming his death was murder when this is pure speculation.--Jack Upland (talk) 05:20, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. True. But, I did not assert that the category should -- or should not -- be affixed to the article. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 06:18, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Sanctions against North Korea" in lede and "See also" section

I don't know why the "sanctions" part is in the lede, not in body. Also, it's in the "See also" section. If it can't be removed, at least there should be sources. --George Ho (talk) 08:02, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Botulism

Brandon Foreman, a neurointensive care specialist at the hospital, confirmed that there was no sign of a current or past case of botulism, which can cause paralysis but not a coma.[1][2]

References

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference nbc61517 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Svrluga, Susan (June 15, 2017). "Otto Warmbier has extensive loss of brain tissue, no obvious signs of trauma, doctors say". The Washington Post. Retrieved June 15, 2017.(subscription required)

This does not reflect what the sources cited actually say. The general medical opinion appears to be that botulism is not likely to cause a coma, but a sleeping pill could. The sources actually say the doctors aren't sure what happened.--Jack Upland (talk) 12:47, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the claim about 'paralysis but not a coma' as it's not in the sources cited, as you say. In fact this claim comes from another source[1] in the article, so if someone wants to add back this claim it should be done in the section that this source is used in (Dr. Englander), rather than mixed in with the statement of a different doctor (Dr. Foreman).
I've been trying to read up on whether a diagnosis of botulism from a year previously is possible or not? As Foreman's words that there was 'no evidence indicating botulism' doesn't make this completely clear. Anyone know? Mabandalone (talk) 15:13, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ "Cincinnati doctor questions cause of Otto Warmbier/s coma". WLWT. June 14, 2017. Retrieved June 14, 2017.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Otto_Warmbier&oldid=786619794"