Talk:Murder of Susanna Feldmann

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

Add a section for a moment of silence in the Bundestag[edit]

Video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aP_gGrnA-_Q

(Title omitted)

Rather than interpret this I will 'transcribe' the notes section

Published on Jun 10, 2018 Susanna Feldman, a 14. year old German-Jewish girl was gang-raped and murdered by illegal migrants from Iraq and Türkey.

The AfD ("Alternative for Germany") a young conservative party, wanted to use their speech time in the Bundestag (Parliament) to honour the little girl with one minute of silence.

The Greens Deputy leader and speaker of the house, one Claudia Roth, would have none of it and rudely interrupted this modest sign of respect for a victim of Merkel's immigration policies. Her cronies among the Members of Parliament from the Left/Greens, but also members of the fake "conservative" Merkel-Government broke the respectful silence with applause and loud chatter.

Some months earlier, this extreme left and islamophile green politician actually instigated a minute silence in the same parliament for illegal migrants that had drowned in the Mediterrean while followig the siren call of Angela Merkel.

Some people were asking if this decision by the islamophile Miss Roth had something to do with the fact, that the young murdered girl was Jewish.

Link to a video which shows the Reaction of the AfD Co-Leader, Dr. Alice Weidel, to the murder: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.76.55.46 (talk) 00:01, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that the above is relevant to the topic or necessary to include in an article of relatively low importance about a single crime. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Too many citations in German[edit]

This article could do with more English citations. Too many are in German. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:33, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is perfectly normal using sources in German for an event which occurred in Germany. AadaamS (talk) 14:31, 13 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The rule is that English-language sources should be given preference in the English Wikipedia, if available. I am not interested in reviewing this whole article now, but a simple Google shows me that there are plenty of English sources. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:06, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@AadaamS: The Der Spiegel fact-checking article that you first moved and then removed rightly belongs in the Public Debate section, which was where I put it, because it supplies the latest figures available at that point (2018), and covers the years in which the migrant influx suddenly increased, which is all relevant to the "debate". I have now also noticed that a bit says this murder was one which "contributed to the entry of Alternative for Germany into the parliament of Germany in the 2017 elections" - which clearly, it could not have done. IMO opinion the article needs a thorough review and parts re-written with English sources provided - although it's notability in the English-language Wikipedia is somewhat questionable and the entry should probably be shorter or just a section in the general crime article. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:28, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Notability has been firmly established in WP:RS and the event has international coverage - notability is clearly a non-issue. The WP:GNG does not mandate that sources are in English. Are you suggesting that we restore the "Background" section with statistics on migration in the preceding period? AadaamS (talk) 06:36, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I didn't see your note here until after I'd finished having a go at editing the article. I don't have an issue with its notability or need to be included - my issue was the amount of detail and length of the article that doesn't match the relative importance of the topic. It's a single crime. And (see above), it's not about whether German sources are allowed, but that when English sources are available, they should be given preference. No, I don't think that it's necessary to re-quote those stats here actually, as there are two See Alsos and they are referred to there, and other debate about the general issues around immigration and crime are best addressed in those articles. As it is, one woman's voice is given rather too much prominence here - if there is/was debate, then this belongs in the other articles and just a brief comment from her on this particular crime could be included here. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:04, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Susanne Schröter's gender is quite irrelevant. What is relevant is that Schröter's analysis comes from an academic expert in the field of social antropology and offers insights on the event. AadaamS (talk) 21:20, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My point was not her gender, but the amount of space given to her opinion (and nobody else's - she's not the only one in her field in Germany, and it's not hard science) on a broader topic than this particular crime. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 21:43, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
WP:IDONTLIKEIT is the kind of argument to be avoided in talk page discussions. AadaamS (talk) 19:56, 15 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing to do with whether I like it or not. Please re-read WP:NOENG.

English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones when available and of equal quality and relevance. There's nothing in there which suggests that German sources should be cleansed from this article. German sources may have both better quality and better relevance to a topic which took place in Germany. AadaamS (talk) 06:58, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add old material[edit]

This article is already verging on Wikipedia:Too much detail. The incident has been covered in detail and more general topics are covered in other articles. A change was recently made which reinstated an outdated German source, which contradicted or misrepresented info contained in the current German Wikipedia article on Dieter Romann, so may have been mistranslated in the first place (and that source currently appears to be behind a paywall). Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:13, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Read WP:PAYWALL. Your lack of access is no excuse to cleanse out the article. XavierItzm (talk) 06:50, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
WP:TMI is an essay, not a guideline. German Wikipedia is not a WP:RS. AadaamS (talk) 06:52, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
XavierItzm You seem to have missed my point. The bit about the paywall is in parenthesis and therefore not my main point, even less an "excuse". Please re-read my comment, and try to understand my points. One is about the list of other crimes not being relevant to THIS article - no matter which source some of them may have been cited in. They belong in one of the more general articles mentioned as See Alsos. This article is about a specific crime. Secondly, you have reintroduced a citation error. Please revert your last reversion. I am following WP:MOS and all other guidelines.
AadaamS I know this, and have not cited German Wikipedia as a source in the article - I have mentioned it on a talk page, because one can easily look at the content and source there and quickly see that Dieter Romann is NOT currently being sued.
The public prosecutor's office in Frankfurt am Main then initiated a preliminary investigation against him, which has now been terminated (as per wiki.de). Several respectable sources in English here and here and here which explain why the investigation took place - because Germany does not have an extradition treaty with Iraq, and so what he did was quite possibly or likely technically illegal. Now if you really want to explain all of this in an article where this is only a peripheral topic, then explain it in a neutral tone, and use these sources, not from an old German source which does not give up-to-date information. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 08:33, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, yet another article ruined by political bias. But at least the tag will warn readers not to take it at face value. Deb (talk) 08:48, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The placement of the NPOV tag template is a misuse unless arguments are raised on the TP as to why it is believed the tag is appropriate. Note to other editors: this is not the first article on which this user has incorrectly placed the tag. XavierItzm (talk) 08:59, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
While it may be true that there are NPOV tags on other articles, other articles are irrelevant to this talk page per WP:OTHERSTUFF and NPOV tags may be challenged on the talk page of those other articles.
Laterthanyouthink, per and use these sources you simply don't have the authority to dictate to other editors which sources they should use or forbid them from using German-language sources. Really? A .pk domain news source? What's freedom of the press like in Pakistan? AadaamS (talk) 19:30, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
A list of crimes, if listed in a source about this crime is clearly relevant to this crime. It is the source which makes the list relevant, not editor approval/objection. Omitting such a list would be a non-neutral representation of the source. AadaamS (talk) 21:28, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Removing stale POV tag form page because editor who added it has not specified bias, and other editors are not perceiving it.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:09, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
AadaamS My interest is purely in the quality of the article. I spent quite a lot of time on this a while ago, adding several English sources, including a long one which expresses the mother's point of view, which interested readers can refer to. My point about the investigation into the policeman who got the suspect back is that what is now in the article there is not correct. There was a preliminary investigation, based on several complaints because of the lack of an extradition treaty, and this investigation is now complete - and what is left in this article is not supported by those sources, regardless of their quality. I'm sure there are others to be found. I did not mean to dictate nor imply that those were the best sources. (And my other point was that I don't see that story or particular relevance to the murder anyway.)
My point about the list of crimes is that it belongs in a separate general article, not in this article about a specific crime. There was already more than enough in the Aftermath and public debate section. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:29, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
* Laterthanyouthink per There was already more than enough in the Aftermath and public debate section you don't have the authority to claim that those sections are full, or forbid other editors from adding material to that section. The list is in sources which treat this crime, therefore the list relevant in this article. It may be relevant in higher-level articles, too. The policeman's doings are relevant to this story, that's what the sources say. The murderer and how he was brought to justice is clearly relevant to this story. Let's just go with what the sources say. If the sources say something is relevant in connection with this murder, that is what editors are obliged to use. AadaamS (talk) 07:54, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List article proposal =[edit]

* E.M.Gregory List of crimes committed by illegal migrants in Germany such a list article can only come to pass if there are source using that scope treating that topic with WP:SIGCOV. Do you have any? There's a better case for a category named Category: Crimes committed by migrants in Germany (removing "illegal") since there is already a main article Immigration and crime in Germany. AadaamS (talk) 07:54, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Never created a list article before, but the guideline for creating one and determining whether such an article has enough WP:GNG to be a standalone article is WP:SAL (stand-alone lists). AadaamS (talk) 17:56, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trial[edit]

I just heard of this case today because of the trial verdict news but I can't see anything really clarifying what the evidence was beyond the accused's own statements (initially in Iraq by Kurdish security forces apparently but can't see any details of that process).

I read something about a younger kid having gone to police saying it was him, but one article reported that kid as saying he was one possible one. I read in the other rape case he was one of a number of suspects based on the perp's name being said to be Ali.

If she texted that 'they' were holding her against her will, apparently likely in the refugee shelter, who were the others detaining her? Has this guy given any details at all in any of his confessions?

Tryoutin (talk) 17:03, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Murder_of_Susanna_Feldmann&oldid=1209261533"