Talk:Kyle Rittenhouse: Difference between revisions
Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> Self-defense is already mentioned in the first paragraph. <code><nowiki>'''[[</nowiki>'''[[User:CanonNi]]'''<nowiki>]]'''</nowiki></code> ([[User talk:CanonNi|talk]]<nowiki>|</nowiki>[[Special:Contributions/CanonNi|contribs]]) 13:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
:[[File:Red information icon with gradient background.svg|20px|link=|alt=]] '''Not done:'''<!-- Template:ESp --> Self-defense is already mentioned in the first paragraph. <code><nowiki>'''[[</nowiki>'''[[User:CanonNi]]'''<nowiki>]]'''</nowiki></code> ([[User talk:CanonNi|talk]]<nowiki>|</nowiki>[[Special:Contributions/CanonNi|contribs]]) 13:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
:By that reasoning the jury verdict in the Scopes trial forces Wikipedia to say evolution is false. -- [[User:M.boli|M.boli]] ([[User talk:M.boli|talk]]) 13:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
:By that reasoning the jury verdict in the Scopes trial forces Wikipedia to say evolution is false. -- [[User:M.boli|M.boli]] ([[User talk:M.boli|talk]]) 13:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
||
::I don't think that is logically sound and comes off a bit as attacking a newbi. In this case the jury wasn't asked to rule on scientific fact. The view that Rittenhouse acted in self defense is very reasonable and we shouldn't treat the view that the lead underplays the self defense aspect as unreasonable. It certainly is reasonable to assume that the combination of a self defense claim and an acquittal = "acted in self defense". However, since many RSs reported in a way that doubted that claim it's best to stick to the facts we know to be true, that he testified that acted in self defense and that the jury, at minimum, had reasonable doubt that he didn't act in self defense. [[User:Springee|Springee]] ([[User talk:Springee|talk]]) 13:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:57, 14 April 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kyle Rittenhouse article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 21 July 2022. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
cause célèbre
I suggest we change "Rittenhouse's prosecution attracted widespread media coverage, and became a cause célèbre for right-wing organizations and media." to "Rittenhouse's prosecution attracted widespread media coverage, and became a cause célèbre for organizations and media on both sides of the political spectrum". Seeing as the case became a politizised cause célèbre for both the left and right, it seems misleading to single out right organizations/media for this in the intro. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.220.250.130 (talk) 19:26, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Subject’s book
Under the “Media projects” section, Rittenhouse’s 2023 book Acquitted should be mentioned, along with reviews and sales. It was written along with Mark Richards and Michael Quinn Sullivan and was released on Kindle on November 19, where it reached number 510 on the Kindle Nonfiction book rankings on December 2 (source here). By December 5, it had fallen to a ranking of 557 (source here). Autographed copies sell for $59.99 (source here). General sources covering the book are here, and here, among many others. —2601:8C0:380:35C0:F0A3:D34F:C26E:1CB3 (talk) 04:18, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Update article to mention self-defense.
Hi,
This article needs to be updated noting that Kyle Rittenhouse acted in self-defense after being attacked by 3 men who chased him for 800 yards and tried to beat him with a skateboard and other objects, and had an illegal firearm pointed at him.
Update this article for accuracy immediately. 2600:6C5E:14F0:9BC0:B94C:B55A:286:EC7A (talk) 11:05, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
– Change busineses to businesses
The first sentence says: "In late August 2020, 17-year-old Rittenhouse traveled from Antioch, Illinois to Kenosha, Wisconsin to help protect local busineses..."
– Adjust sentence for clarity
Currently reads: After a man chased Rittenhouse into a parking lot and grabbed the barrel of his rifle, the youth fatally shot him. His name was Joseph Rosenbaum.
Suggestion: Shortly before midnight, a man named Joseph Rosenbaum chased Rittenhouse into a parking lot. When Rosenbaum reached for his gun, Rittenhouse fatally shot him.[1] Mayifixthatforyou (talk) 15:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. Irltoad (talk) 21:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2024
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The first paragraph intentionally obfuscates the fact that Rittenhouse acted in self defense. The only mention of self defense is within the final sentence: "He testified that he had acted in self-defense." This verbiage is uncommon and nonsensical outside of an article discussing an ongoing trial. The question of whether or not he acted in self defense has been settled in a court of law, where evidence beyond his own testimony was presented. As a result, I suggest the opening paragraph be changed to:
Kyle Howard Rittenhouse (born January 3, 2003) is an American man who shot three men, two fatally, in self defense during the civil unrest in Kenosha, Wisconsin, in August 2020, when he was aged 17. Rittenhouse was acquitted at his trial in November 2021. CodingApe (talk) 12:58, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not done: Self-defense is already mentioned in the first paragraph.
'''[[User:CanonNi]]'''
(talk|contribs) 13:02, 14 April 2024 (UTC) - By that reasoning the jury verdict in the Scopes trial forces Wikipedia to say evolution is false. -- M.boli (talk) 13:18, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think that is logically sound and comes off a bit as attacking a newbi. In this case the jury wasn't asked to rule on scientific fact. The view that Rittenhouse acted in self defense is very reasonable and we shouldn't treat the view that the lead underplays the self defense aspect as unreasonable. It certainly is reasonable to assume that the combination of a self defense claim and an acquittal = "acted in self defense". However, since many RSs reported in a way that doubted that claim it's best to stick to the facts we know to be true, that he testified that acted in self defense and that the jury, at minimum, had reasonable doubt that he didn't act in self defense. Springee (talk) 13:57, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- Biography articles of living people
- C-Class biography articles
- C-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Low-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class WikiProject Illinois articles
- Mid-importance WikiProject Illinois articles
- C-Class Wisconsin articles
- Mid-importance Wisconsin articles