Talk:Corporals killings
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] POV attributed
WP:NPOV mandates journalistic sensationalism should not be presented as fact, as was happening in this article.
- [1] - "Corporal Wood and Cpl. David Howes (both members of the SAS) were dragged from their car, stripped, beaten and shot by members of a Roman Catholic funeral procession Saturday in Belfast, Northern Ireland" - no mention of "torture"
- [2] - "The men were dragged from the car and taken to a nearby sports ground where they were stripped and beaten. They were then taken to wasteground by Murphy and Maguire and shot repeatedly - no mention of "torture"
- [3] - "who took part in the torture and shooting" - aha, the first mention of torture. Now read further on in the same article and see what the torture consisted of - "The men were bundled into a nearby sports ground, where they were stripped to their underwear and beaten. Murphy and Maguire then took them to wasteground, where they were shot repeatedly by two gunmen" - so it's the exact same as the other sources; stripped, beaten and shot.
Just one newspaper has decided to call the events "torture" but according to policy that doesn't make it a fact. Opinions attributed to the people that hold them, as policy mandates. Freegan 02:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Untrue: "The soldiers were beaten, tortured and eventually shot when they drove into the path of a republican funeral in Belfast in March 1988.". they were reportedly tortured.Traditional unionist (talk) 12:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- This "tortured" nonsense is POV wording for "stripped, beaten and shot", so "tortured" is inherently POV and weasel wording. BigDuncTalk 12:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Tortured is fully sourced from two sources. You are synthasising.Traditional unionist (talk) 12:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- All I am doing is attributing what happened to the description, nothing more. I am not removing "tortured" after all, just attributing it properly BigDuncTalk 13:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- You are adding scare quotes and attempting to dilute the sentense. You are in WP terms adding weasel words.Traditional unionist (talk) 13:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have reworded the attribution and removed the scare quote (since it is a single word, we don't have to worry about quoting for copyright purposes). Attribution is always a good thing, but since we are not attributing everything else that was reported by the news media, we have to be careful that in doing so we are not giving the impression we are casting doubt on its veracity. Rockpocket 16:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Tortured is weasel wording. All sources agree stripped, beaten and shot. Those are the facts. Some sources describe that as tortured, some do not. If they were tortured, state how. This is not an outlet for British media propaganda to be presented. The facts are stripped, beaten and shot, tortured is journalistic embellishment. BigDuncTalk 16:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Its clearly not the most strictly defined term, but then again, neither is the word "beaten". If multiple independent sources say they were tortured then there is no reason that cannot be used here, if properly attributed. The fact that some media source do not use that term does not make it inappropriate when others do. You could argue that this page is not the place for IRA propaganda to be presented, yet we still quote their rather laughable version of events. And rightly so. Rockpocket 17:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
- My edit, and Rockpocket's are essentially the same. Why Dunc haven't you been edit warring with him?Traditional unionist (talk) 11:41, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Its clearly not the most strictly defined term, but then again, neither is the word "beaten". If multiple independent sources say they were tortured then there is no reason that cannot be used here, if properly attributed. The fact that some media source do not use that term does not make it inappropriate when others do. You could argue that this page is not the place for IRA propaganda to be presented, yet we still quote their rather laughable version of events. And rightly so. Rockpocket 17:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Tortured is weasel wording. All sources agree stripped, beaten and shot. Those are the facts. Some sources describe that as tortured, some do not. If they were tortured, state how. This is not an outlet for British media propaganda to be presented. The facts are stripped, beaten and shot, tortured is journalistic embellishment. BigDuncTalk 16:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- I have reworded the attribution and removed the scare quote (since it is a single word, we don't have to worry about quoting for copyright purposes). Attribution is always a good thing, but since we are not attributing everything else that was reported by the news media, we have to be careful that in doing so we are not giving the impression we are casting doubt on its veracity. Rockpocket 16:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- You are adding scare quotes and attempting to dilute the sentense. You are in WP terms adding weasel words.Traditional unionist (talk) 13:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- All I am doing is attributing what happened to the description, nothing more. I am not removing "tortured" after all, just attributing it properly BigDuncTalk 13:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Tortured is fully sourced from two sources. You are synthasising.Traditional unionist (talk) 12:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Intro
I replaced the reference used which related to the aquital of one of those found guilty of murder.--Padraig (talk) 10:51, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
Categories: Start-Class Northern Ireland-related articles | Unknown-importance Northern Ireland-related articles | WikiProject Northern Ireland articles | Start-Class Belfast-related articles | Unknown-importance Belfast-related articles | WikiProject Belfast articles | Start-Class Ireland articles | Mid-importance Ireland articles