Talk:Chandra Levy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
An event mentioned in this article is a May 22 selected anniversary
Contents |
[edit] Joyce Chiang
That whole section needs as source if it's going to imply that Condit was involved. "most theories" are very weasel words. Condit should be removed completely. --Tbeatty 18:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] First paragraph
not clear. What "two events?" Is her employment at the Bureau of Prisons one of them?
[edit] Condit's role on House Intelligence Committee
The fact that Condit was a senior member of the House Intel Cmte is of far greater importance to this unsolved murder than similarities with Joyce Chiang, and yet that subject gets several paragraphs. Although Condit's position on the committee was not often mentioned in the media, the fact that this young woman was having an affair with a married man who had considerable oversight on intelligence issues is vitally important. Readers may remember the name Katrina Leung, a Chinese-American woman who had an affair with an FBI agent. In that case, Leung regularly used her access to the agent as a means to view classified documents he carried in his briefcase. An intelligence angle to the Levy investigation has never been reported by any major news organization, but it is no less likely than a serial killer, a topic that regularly receives attention.69.255.0.91 04:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- An intelligence angle to the Levy investigation has never been reported by any major news organization
- Then it is non-notable, and has no place in this article. Wikipedia is no place for slander or unsourced "allegations", particularly for a person who is not under investigation for the crime. Your drawing a connection between his committee assignment and the affair is original research. --Dhartung | Talk 05:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Drawing a connection between Levy's disappearence and Condit's intelligence committee assignment is quite logical, but since it is original research, I didn't include it in the article. However, Condit's commitee assignment in intelligence during the year when America experienced its greatest intelligence failure is responsible to include. The Levy murder remains unsolved after five years.69.255.0.91 05:26, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- And how did Condit's tenure on the commmittee affect our "greatest intelligence failure"? I don't want to be harsh, but we need citations for this sort of thing, not mysterious implications left hanging. We are an encyclopedia, not a Junior Detective Squad. --Dhartung | Talk 09:33, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Well, again, I didn't put any mysterious questions in the article. Just the fact that Condit was a senior member of the House Intel Cmte. The truth is that if both Condit and Levy were attacked by a Muslim extremist and Levy was killed because she took a bullet for him, the story we see today might still be the same. Because Condit served on the Intel oversight cmte, anything pertaining to him could be censored for national security purposes, including the solution to the Levy murder mystery.
I've seen there are some sites on online that cover a lot of details and intrigue about the Levy murder, but I don't really pay them much attention. They are so outlandish that their effect is to squelch legitimate skepticism. So serious questions go unanswered and even unasked because citizens think the only two options are to toe the government line or don a tin foil hat.69.255.0.91 19:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- It's just a fact, sure, and it's a verifiable fact, but what relevance can be demonstrated? Condit's committee assignments are relevant in the article about Condit, not in the article about Condit's girlfriend. If you don't have any evidence of relevance, other than guesswork at possible ways to blackmail, then you're engaging in speculation and original research -- drawing conclusions between two facts without a citation to a reliable source. Welcome to Wikipedia, and please feel welcome to contribute, but you must understand why we have policies and guidelines. Among other things, we don't want to be considered "outlandish". You're quite welcome to speculate to your heart's content on a personal blog, but this is an encyclopedia.--Dhartung | Talk 00:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
A person's connections to intelligence activity are always relevant when a seemingly random violent crime occurs to them or someone close to them. Military people experience violence mostly on the battlefield and in times of declared war, but intelligence people can fall victim to violence anytime. I was shocked to learn of Condit's intelligence committee appointment when the Levy investigation was first in the news. For whatever reason, the media were not widening their context to include that fact, but it was then and is now highly relevant. Imagine if you picked up a newspaper today and saw that a woman who disappeared without warning or trace had recently concluded a sexual affair with a high ranking figure in intelligence. You would immediately know that information on the disappearence might be filtered through the lens of national security. That's why Condit's committee assignment is relevant to an article on Chandra Levy.
For Wikipedia to succeed as an encylopedia then it must have a perspective on events that is more than just what the newspapers say. News organizations produce "the first rough draft" of history, but apparently not the latest rough draft of history.69.255.0.91 17:07, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- You're continuing to argue that original research, that is to say, personal conclusions or suspicions, are permissible. I am telling you that they are not. That is not what we do at Wikipedia, and I'm sorry if you got the wrong impression. There are many places on the web where it is permissible to publish speculation, rumors, or gossip, but Wikipedia is not among them.
- Finally, Condit was a member of an oversight committee. At best, they know of the existence of classified programs, but they do not have operational details. Read about the limited information that committee chairs were given about the NSA wiretapping, for example. That isn't "a high ranking figure in intelligence"; Condit was a legislator. --Dhartung | Talk 17:19, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
I haven't done any of the things you say I've done. Nothing I added to the article references any of the rumors and speculation that surrounded the disappearance. Your example of what intelligence committee members know about operations is post-Levy, and even if it weren't, it would not necessarily hold true in all cases. You say intel cmte members don't usually know about operations? I say interns don't usually disappear without a trace. It is important that people know Condit had direct, long-standing, and powerful responsibilities within the American intelligence establishment. That's an accepted fact. It is not speculation, conjucture, or theory.
What always troubled me about this case was the search. They searched the park with K-9s that were trained to detect dehydrating human remains through concrete dust, or the scent of an escaped convict on a trail. All the dogs needed to find in summer 2001 was a body decomposing on top of the underbrush in humid, slow moving air. If a bloodhound can't find a dead body in a park during a Washington summer, what good is it?69.255.0.91 21:23, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Picture
I edited out the picture of her. It was dated 1994--she was 17 years old in that picture. I don't think we need to have pictures of teenagers with their nipples showing thru their shirts. It served no purpose. --Wandering Minstrel
- Wandering Minstrel, that is the best known photo of Levy, and it has appeared in international news media e.g., so I don't see why it's inappropriate for Wikipedia. The family, I believe, distributed that photo themselves during the search. Also, she's wearing a bra. --Dhartung | Talk 00:58, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
