Talk:Virginia Tech massacre/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
← Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 →

Contents

Why can't I edit this article?

I want to edit this article, seeing as I have valuable knowledge to add. Please, unlock it.

The article is currently semi-protected, due to the massive amount of edits it is getting at the moment, mostly. It's already being edited every 10 seconds even while protected, if anonymous editing is allowed that goes to every 5 seconds, with much of the edits consisting of vandalism, and all the work required to fix the vandalism would prevent quality edits. Once this situation calms down, the semi-protection will be removed. --Xyzzyplugh 20:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Spree Killer

This doesn't fit the established criteria for a spree killer, at least with the information currently available.

Curious

A news reported (opinionist really) threw the idea out that this started as a passion crime (since the original shooting was only in 1 room and caused only 1 fatality) and then a 2 hour layoff caused the shooter to continue his rage elsewhere. -- Ubergenius 18:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

There are so many sources of informatoin coming in to determine this early what exactly happened. Don the Dev 19:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Student/Staff blogs

I have two links to blogs of affected staff and students but my account is less than 4 days old so can't edit.

http://twoscrewsloose.livejournal.com/143175.html


The students are in lockdown at the moment but can still use the phone and internet. Perhaps we could link these and search for others?

Juzz101 17:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Well THAT's new... I think we should include these, at least for the time being - they might grow out of control later on, but at the moment they're an unique angle. --Kizor 17:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I'll add an external link to the second one. The first one doesn't say much. Ben Finn 17:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I thought that it would be a different angle as the students themselves can say whats happening rather than someone behind a desk. It would be really valuable to get more of these blogs. I can add links and added the second one. Juzz101 18:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The blogs linked to are now receiving some distasteful spam comments via this discussion. Twerptwerp 18:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
There's little useful content on them... shameless pandering for ad clicks I would suggest.141.109.56.143 19:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Before posting someone's personal Livejournal to a Wiki page and exposing it to a lot of potential asshattery, PLEASE ask the user first if it's okay. They shouldn't have to lockdown their journal to maintain privacy. Faetan 19:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Historical background

Virginia Tech's ban on guns may draw legal fire, April, 2005. Va. Tech. banned CCW holders from carrying on campus. Anyone know if this is still in effect? scot 17:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Suicide!

It's been ruled suicide. The shooter committed suicide.

Can you provide a link to this information, or otherwise tell where you got it? That's paramount in these circumstances. --Kizor 17:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Also, it's rather unlikely an autopsy has already been carried out and the results released. As such, I don't see how it could have been 'ruled' a suicide. Perhaps it's been reported as a suicide by someone (media, police etc) but this doesn't mean it's been ruled suicide. Nil Einne 17:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I have not seen anything regarding how the gunman died. So "suicide" needs to be removed from the infobox and the article for now. Also, The Roanoke Times is reporting that nine state employees from the Tidewater area, Richmond and Northern Virginia will be heading to Roanoke to assist medical examiner William Massello, who is the only one in Roanoke. It is unclear whether the bodies will be moved from Blacksburg to Roanoke. -- Bdj95 18:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I heard on Al Jazeera (altho it was from a US local news source) that police refused to answer when asked if it was a suicide or the gunman was shot Nil Einne 18:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

DAO-12 Shotgun

I'm watching the CNN broadcast, I have heard no reports of what kind of gun was used. I sincerely doubt it was a DAO-12, that thing is hard to get, legally or not. Is there any print source? 130.245.242.214 17:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

No mention on BBC. Yankin'. Thanks. --Kizor 17:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The edit adding that claim was made by User:Gamer112, who has already been warned before for unsourced additions to articles. I went ahead and left another warning, but since this is apparently pure sneaky vandalism a block might be called for. -- Rbellin|Talk 20:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

This is a massacre not just a shooting

Someone should change the title. Ruhe1986 17:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC) EDIT: I do see were they added that in the summary.

This has been discussed repeatedly above. We follow the established term for the event, and there's none at the time. Additionally, page moves are highly disruptive to editing. A move block is currently in effect. --Kizor 18:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The title should be changed to "2007 Virginia Tech shootings," since more than one shooting occurred. "Massacre" is definitely not NPOV, in violation of Wikipedia policy. dcandeto 18:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree, it should be titled 2007 Virginia Tech shootings, massacre is by far not NPOV. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah noted. Ruhe1986 18:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Then you people may want to take that up with Columbine High School massacre, which is a featured article. --Golbez 18:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
As I wrote above, we are pre-empting the media by doing this. It has not predominantly characterized this as a "massacre" yet. We are primarily here to summarize facts, not to make qualifications about them. --HappyCamper 18:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The fact is that it's a massacre. --Golbez 18:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Can you please share your universally-agreed upon definition of "massacre" and how you have arrived at this incredible unanimity? --ElKevbo 18:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
And besides, the MoS says to have the article at the most common name, not necessarily the "correct name". So even though it may be a massacre, the more common name is yet to be established... but at this point, "shooting" is more widespread. --Ali'i 18:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
1. the unnecessary, indiscriminate killing of a large number of human beings or animals, as in barbarous warfare or persecution or for revenge or plunder.
2. a general slaughter, as of persons or animals: the massacre of millions during the war.
3. Informal. a crushing defeat, esp. in sports.
It's a massacre! --68.145.246.117 18:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
What is a "large number"? I would think hundreds or thousands may qualify as a massacre, but ~30 does not. As noted below, I believe this word is really only meant to be used by people trying to drum up interest/emotion in their article, and does not really convey any factual information.Quanticles 19:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
"Massacre" is reserved for shoddy journalism trying to make headlines instead of trying to provide content. Just because it was used in a feature article before doesn't mean we should repeat the same mistake again. Quanticles 18:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually it kind of does, it sets a precedent. --Golbez 18:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
WP does not work on precedent... you're old here, you should know that by now. --Ali'i 18:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
"Massacre" is not NPOV at this time. KyuzoGator 18:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I have heard several reports that the students were lined up and shot . If confirmed This would make it a massacre in the vain of the St. Valentines Day Massacre Edkollin 19:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

External Links

I don't think that livejournal entries necessarily warrant being external links 141.109.56.143 18:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)ja

Agreed. They don't add anything at all (in this case, anyway). 24.127.51.40 18:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
This is discussed in "Student/Staff blogs" shortly above; please keep the discussion there to avoid confusion. --Kizor 18:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Proposed Move

I Propose we move this article from "Virginia Tech massacre" to "2007 Virginia Tech shootings". Massacre is POV, and innapropriate in the current context. I am making this proposal to preventt possible administrative wheel warring as this article is currently move protected to admin only. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I concur with this move.--JUDE talk 18:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree. This will be huge - we have to get "massacre"out of the title immediately. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 18:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Christ, if you people are going to move it, don't be stupid and put back the damn "2007". --Golbez 18:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Should I go ahead and do it? RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 18:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that would seem fine. alphachimp 18:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Golbez, you're keeping your head cooler than I would be able to in your shoes, but try to calm down nevertheless. There was an attempted shooting at the location in 2006, there's some reason for disambiguation. --Kizor 18:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Please don't call other editors "stupid." Th 2007 was inserted to help differentiate from another shooting-related incident from last year. You may have a difference of opinion but let's lay off the insults, please. --ElKevbo 18:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm only calling you stupid if you actually do it. --Golbez 18:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Bam. --Golbez 18:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but there has already been a "Virginia Tech Shooting" therefore 2006 and 2007 should be in the title, respectively. I think "Norris" and "Ambler Johnston" wouldn't be familiar with the national and international public, therefore the most sensible title would be "2007 Virginia Tech Shootings"--JUDE talk 18:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

There was also a Hurricane Katrina in 1981 but I don't see the article at 2007 Hurricane Katrina. Common sense, people - the previous incident is miniscule and not worthy of equal footing. --Golbez 18:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me sir, my friend was killed in that "minuscule incident", please refrain from offensive comments. He had children and a wife who are still trying to recover.--JUDE talk 18:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I hope you will believe me when I admit I left a few words out of that, I sincerely meant to say "in comparison". I doubt that dulls the impact of my statement, though, and I'm sorry. --Golbez 18:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you Golbez. I understand your sentiment. I think we're all a little shaken up over this since some of our friends are still unaccounted for.--JUDE talk 18:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Agree with the proposed move to 2007 Virginia Tech shootings. No wheel warring, please. alphachimp 18:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Done. ITN on main page changed as well. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 18:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

When I heard of the number shot I typed in "Virgina Tech Massacre" as the very first thing... and bam this page came up... at this point I think the title should stay and as the event unfolds change the title accordingly... obviously the circumstances of the event is going to determine in large part what the ultimate title will be. (→Netscott) 18:16, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Im not adverse to a redirect from it, hoewver i feel currently it is not an appropraite main title for the article. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't really care about the "2007," I just wanted massacre out of the title, although I'm fine with both "2007" and massacre as redirects. RyanGerbil10(Упражнение В!) 18:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

2007 in the title

How does the community feel about having 2007 in the article title? I personally feel it is appropriate. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Why? At what point does the year not become necessary? --Golbez 18:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I concur with 2007 being in the title as the shootings in 2006 are documented on wikipedia as well. To relieve confusion, the year should be included.--JUDE talk 18:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd concur. There have been multiple shootings. The title will be witness to that. alphachimp 18:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
There was more than one storm named Hurricane Katrina, too. --Golbez 18:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, your right. We can all throw facts around. This is NOT a hurricane. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I would certainly concur that we should leave 2007 in the title, for simple clarity if nothing else. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.172.87.163 (talk) 18:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

Luby's added back

The death toll may exceed the Luby's massacre, and this would then be the deadliest shooting in US history, period. The earlier mention was a bit unclear but I think the Luby's massacre is relevant for historical comparison. Shawn Pickrell 18:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

For all who wish to know, with more and more sources confirming 32 dead, this is the deadliest shooting ever in the united states, period. this is so sick~Pirateonthehighseas
The Luby's reference is valid, as the death toll has been confirmed as this being the worst mass shooting ever in the U.S. KyuzoGator 18:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Previous deadly campus shootings

I just heard on Al Jazeera that this is the deadliest campus shooting in US history and also the deadliest since the UT Tower Shooting. We don't appear to have an article on this but 14 people were killed so it appears this might be correct. Any other news media connected these two. [1] Nil Einne 18:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Oops just noticed we already mention this Nil Einne 18:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit restriction

Can we put a restriction of editing of this article from new/unregistered users to prevent vandalism and false information being added? --Ozgod 18:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes. In fact, one is in effect. There's no massive banner on the page, but check the lock icon in the upper right of the article. --Kizor 18:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

2007 Va. Tech Shooting

Shouldn't the article title have the year? I think the move should be reverted. --myselfalso 18:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

People, I know this is important to a lot of you, but let's hold off on this just a little bit. This article has been moved so many times now...Let's keep it as is so we'll have some stability for editing, at least, for the next little bit. --HappyCamper 18:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

HB 1572, which would have allowed handguns on college campuses, died in subcommittee.

this should be added to the article "

http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/wb/xp-50658

"A bill that would have given college students and employees the right to carry handguns on campus died with nary a shot being fired in the General Assembly." .... "In June, Tech's governing board approved a violence prevention policy reiterating its ban on students or employees carrying guns and prohibiting visitors from bringing them into campus facilities." --Jake7457 18:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

  • No - at least not yet. It's POV-pushing and doesn't add to the article. -Halo 18:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Would it have taken effect prior to today? If not, then it's wholly irrelevant. The site is down tho so I can't check. --Golbez 18:25, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes it would have. It bill was killed last year and VA bills tend to take effect on July 1st after legislation session. It is worth to note that NON students may carry in accord with Virginia laws according to AG Opinion: http://www.oag.state.va.us/OPINIONS/2006opns/05-078.pdf Rabbit994 18:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

add "civilian" caveat...

In the paragraph:

The death toll may exceed the Luby's massacre of 1991, and make it the biggest single-incident shooting in U.S. history, in or out of a school.

Change to:

The death toll may exceed the Luby's massacre of 1991, and make it the biggest single-incident civilian shooting in U.S. history, in or out of a school.

Waco massacre has a death toll of 79, that might fit your general "shooting" description. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.17.144.2 (talk) 18:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

  • Done. -Halo 18:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Good call! Let's not forget about other shootings that have occurred on US soil, including little incidents like the Civil War, Revolutionary Way, Boston Massacre, etc. :) --ElKevbo 18:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Hell, even the Boston Massacre was less than this. --Harlequin212121 18:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I know. Just throwing out a few examples of significant killings that have happened on US soil. You get the point... :) --ElKevbo 19:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Image of Burruss Hall

Is there a reason there is an image of Burruss Hall when the article mentions two other buildings were involved? Is this building related to those? Akubhai 18:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Probably not, but I did move it to the proper spot for you, Whoever added it.Ruhe1986 18:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Burruss neighbors Norris, but I don't see any reason for Burruss to be shown. 204.154.43.244 18:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Can we use this image? http://flickr.com/photos/cipherswarm/51049252/ Akubhai 19:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Change the picture to something more gruesome...

Show the reality of this incident... I don't want to look at some weak-ass cherry blossoms. Starks 18:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Frankly, I agree, but at the moment things are still touch-and-go and I think there was some kind of copyright problem with the earlier images. You'll get your grue, no hurry. --Kizor 18:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I will try to find an acceptable picture to upload to here and Wikinews soon. Funpika 18:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
There is a good image on the CNN homepage.Dwilliams617 18:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes something more weighted needs to be used RMThompson 18:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
There's Another on Fox News PageRuhe1986 18:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Neither of which we can use of course for copyright reasons... Since there were many students and staff involved in this and some are already blogging, we can only hope one of them would be willing to release a good free imageNil Einne 18:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, let's recruit a university student to go and take pictures of the bodies. Titanium Dragon 18:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Map

Anyone know if we can use the map here (http://www.collegiatelabs.com/map.jpg) of the areas affected? Like copyright issues, whatnot? It was liked from the college newspaper website (http://www.collegiatetimes.com). Pepsidrinka 18:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I've been trying to get a good picture of a map whenever I haven't been too busy with other things. If we can use these we could make our own. --Kizor 18:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
A map would be protected under fair use, no?Dwilliams617 18:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
It's my understanding that VT lays no claim or copyright to their images. If we use a handout map, scan it, and modify it ourselves we should be in the clear. Starks 18:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
If that's true then it should be fine but we would nee a better source for their copyright policy first Nil Einne 18:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Victim number discussion

We're getting a massive amount of sections for this; I'm combining them for ease of reading and clarity. If wrong, slap with fish. --Kizor

29 or 32 dead?

The second Reference links to ABC, not CNN, and says 29 are dead, not 32. Ben Finn 18:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, i would go with the abc reference to 29. SUpposedly fox news annouced 32 but i have not seen a tangible source for that. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 18:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Foxnews.com states 32 on the main page. --musicpvm 18:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
They could just be using a higher number to make themselves look more up-to-date than the other news outlets. Quanticles 18:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
VTech college newspaper, [2] is reporting 32 as well. Pepsidrinka 18:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
MSNBC is showing coverage from an NBC affiliate in virginia, and the caption at the bottom of the screen from this NBC affiliate states "32 dead". i can't believe that, even in a moment like this, people love to attack fox news. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.140.218.244 (talk) 18:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC).
At last check, The New York Post reports 32 dead and The Associated Press reports 31. Still checking The Roanoke Times. The NBC afilliate that MSNBC is showing footage from is WSLS 10 in Roanoke, Va., which had a live video link online at last check - --Bdj95 18:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
CNN now reports 31 dead, 32 counting the shooter —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pirateonthehighseas (talk • contribs) 18:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

There is a profound difference between reporting and confirming. All of the sources people are mentioning are reporting a higher count than the confirmation. The reports are speculative and inconsistently reporting 29-31 and the confirmations released have all been consistent at 22. I suggest we go with the confirmed number of 22 and the highest reported number of 32. --208.44.234.50 18:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

number killed

why is the number so out of line on this page with what is actually reported?? cnn.com and vt.edu report 22 (including the murderer).

The ABC link (mislabelled CNN) says 29 - I'll change it. Ben Finn 18:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

"Feds confirm 32 killed" (timeline)

Where's the citation for this? Thus far I've heard/seen no report with a number higher than 29. If you can't provide a citation, don't report it. --Yksin 18:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

NPR just broadcast it. Specifically, I'm listening to "To The Point" and they have a brief NPR news update at the very beginning of each show. --ElKevbo 18:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
It's now on the Fox News frontpage in big huge letters, and apparently can be considered the offical line. --Kizor 18:23, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
servarl sources have confrimed this, including Fox and CNN

AP Confirms 31

Just heard on MSNBC that the associated press has confirmed 31 deaths, reference? Dwilliams617 18:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dwilliams617 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

CNN is also reporting 31, but no source other than visual news.--JUDE talk 18:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Fox News is reporting 32 from feds. The current procedure, where the main article reports the lowest confirmed numbers and the infobox gives a number of different press sources, seems like a very good one. --Kizor 18:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
AP's website says 21. I've removed that reference.J. M. 18:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Update on the AP site, http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/V/VIRGINIA_TECH_SHOOTING?SITE=MATAU&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

Dwilliams617 18:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

CNN Claims 31

Turn on CNN, they now claim 31. Can anyone change that, and get a source of it? Or...Oreo

If you read carefully, CNN is reporting that the Associated Press is claiming 31 dead, but if you read more carefully, the police are only confirming 22. --208.44.234.50 18:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18134671/ H2P (Yell at me for what I've done) 18:40, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the report you're quoting says, "Twenty-one were confirmed dead, NBC News reported." Again, it's claiming 31, but confirming only 21 (1 less than the article from the VT paper).--208.44.234.50 18:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

CNN just claimed 32 (10 seconds ago). Lg1223 19:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

There's a contradiction on the page - it says CNN claims 31 and 42 (?) dead...where does this number come from? Lg1223 19:27, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Death/Body Count

The major news sources I'm reading from the Washington Post, NY Times, BBC, et al are quoting 32 dead, but reporting a police confirmation of 22. It seems odd to me that Wikipedia is reporting 32 as the final count when that's just a headline number and not confirmed by police or hospitals. --208.44.234.50 18:37, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It's confirmed on the VT Newspaper's site: http://collegemedia.com/ Akubhai 18:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The VT Newspaper isn't quoting a police or hospital count, but a speculated count and that's when you can actually access the site. And not to be tactless, but their only reporting 21 if you do the math, "As of now, 32 people are confirmed dead. One person from West Ambler Johnston Hall and at least 20 people from Norris Hall have been killed. The shooter as well has been killed, but it is uncertain as to whether it is a student or not." That's 22 confirmed and the other 10 are where? --208.44.234.50 18:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

death toll as of 2:42 EDT

at least 31

Ehobeckracin 18:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


Where? I'm still trying to find where 31 has been confirmed. The VT site only confirms 22 and the police are confirming 22. There hasn't been a verifiable source that is confirming 22, but speculating 30, 31, or 32. --208.44.234.50 18:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
BBC is saying 31 including the 1 gunman according to the BBC on the air. They also spoke to someone from the student radio station, who said they'd heard there were two gunmen, but obviously not much evidence for that. -- Mithent 19:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually the BBC is saying "We have a ballpark figure on fatalities. It's at least 20 fatalities," Virginia Tech police chief Wendell Flinchum said. Not to be crass, but I'd take the word of a police man over a student on lock down. As I've said, we should police confirmation of the number, and not a loosely report student speculated number. --208.44.234.50 19:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh, those two were actually unconnected. The student saying he heard there were two gunmen is definitely unconfirmed, but one of the anchors said on air that the wire reports they were getting were saying 31 including the gunman. -- Mithent 19:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The death tolls listed on the side (some 31, some 32) I imagine are getting their information from the same sources, with some counting 31 + 1 shooter = 32, and some just counting 31 killed by the shooter. Either way, I'd assume they're the same totals. Of course, that's completely unconfirmed.President David Palmer 19:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Presidents wife says 32

Is that a good enough source?????????

22 vs 32

It looks like every source is saying at least 20 dead at place X, one at place Y, plus the shooter and 32 dead total. It looks suspiciously to me like someone made a typo (32 instead of 22) and everyone just copied them. This would explain why the numbers don't add up but are off by exactly 10. Titanium Dragon 19:14, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

  • It's sourced by multiple places. I think if it was wrong, it'd be cleared up by now. -Halo 19:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
The last i heard, the Associated Press is reporting 31 dead with 29 injured. dposse 19:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, sourced multiple places, but it's mostly the same source. NBC, ABC, Fox, CNN, et al doesn't matter if they're all reporting the AP article. So actually it is pretty reasonable to have 1 error spread like that. --208.44.234.50 19:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

CNN now confirming 32, but not final

The lady on the news said 22 was at the time of the interview, 32, including the shooter is current.Ruhe1986 19:20, 16 April 2007 (UTC


"46 reported by Fox and Collegiate Times and CNN"

I've been watching for the past hour, both CNN and Fox News and the number hasn't been anywhere near 46. The highest number of dead is at 32 currently. Don the Dev 19:35, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

You typed this in the same time I didRuhe1986 19:28, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Adamantiaf added that. I fixed it. Akubhai 19:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
On MSNBC within the last few minutes, someone interviewed said that it may actually be closer to around 50 with students from 49 states and 30something countries killed and injured. --164.107.223.217 19:39, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Atrocious grammar in lead

This needs to be changed, where it says "The Virginia Tech shootings were a school massacre...". Immediately. John Stattic 18:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

"Biggest Shooting?"

Shouldn't "biggest mass shooting in American history" be "biggest mass shooting in modern American history", as the source actually claims? I'm pretty sure that the Wounded Knee Massacre was larger, for a pre-20th century example. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.60.222.126 (talk) 18:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

I copied that text straight from the cited source. It was likely changed afterwards in the original text. It is, as you already noted, a bit of a vague claim that overlooks or trivializes events in our distant (and not-so-distant) past. Recentism at work in the popular media! :) --ElKevbo 18:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I think we need to remove the line that says it is the worst in US history. It claims that it was said by CNN but there is no source for that.Akubhai 18:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I think that it's the deadliest shooting insindent BY ONE CIVIlIAN PERSON in US history. I believe this issue was already addressed.~Pirateonthehighseas

CNN keeps saying it is the worst shooting incident i US History oover and over again ad nauseum. I'm not sure Wounded Knee should be compared to this. Anyway, editors should link to the other incidents to give people perspective.LiPollis 19:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Two shootings related?

Are we sure that the two shooting incidents--the first in a dormitory, the second in a classroom hall--were committed by the same person? FOXNews (which should be taken with a grain of salt, I know) is reporting that police aren't yet sure that the two are linked http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266310,00.html. I would suggest putting in a disclaimer about this. --Ball&Chain 18:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It's been confirmed repeatedly that it was the same guy... Starks 18:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Many sources are already discussing whether anything could/should have been done in the intervening time so I would assume it's considered confirmed Nil Einne 18:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

gun used?

Anyone know what type of gun the shooter used? 129.120.205.238 18:45, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I read somewhere two nine mm handguns. Don't remember where though. Try looking through the sources at the bottom of the page. 71.226.56.79 18:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Update. I was wrong. "Law enforcement officials said the gunman carried two weapons, a 9-mm handgun and a 22-caliber gun, Williams reported." http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18134671/ 71.226.56.79 18:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
A 9mm, with a clip, and a .22 caliberDwilliams617 19:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


Why can't article be moved to "2007 Virginia Tech Massacre"?

It's a far more fitting title that captures the gravity and scope of the incident. Starks 18:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

There is no clear definition of "massacre". We call the Columbine Massacre and Boston Massacre that because those are their established names. At the moment, there is no established name. If this comes to be called a massacre in general use over the coming days, we'll change. Also, name changes have gotten out of hand with this article a couple of times and are very disruptive to all other editing. --Kizor 18:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
We've already had a move war. This can be discussed when this has settled down. -Halo 18:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
My reasoning is such: If this isn't a massacre, lets just call Columbine a petting zoo. There is ZERO reason not to call this incident a massacre by name. Starks 18:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Let's just deal with the article on this page right now, and let it calm down. In a couple days we can deal with what the title should be. Right now, the important thing is to lay the facts down, regardless of what title is at the top. Rebby 18:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Hear, hear. --Kizor 18:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Victim Identites (The first two)

From what I understand (looking for confirmation) the first two victims, in the dorm, were an RA and the shooter's girlfriend.Dwilliams617 18:46, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I've heard it claimed he was looking for his gf but it's unlikely this can be sufficient sourced at the moment Nil Einne 18:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
It would make sense, but this is still just throwing out ideas since we don't even know his (hers? Nah, his) identity yet. --Kizor 18:49, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Shooter is 100% confirmed male. Starks 18:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

What happened to the description of the shooter?

What happened to the description of the shooter that used to be in the article sourced from Fox news? It disappeared. Fox news says: "The students and faculty were barricading themselves in their classrooms after what one person described as an Asian student wearing a vest opened fire. The shooter was "wearing a vest covered in clips was just unloading on their door, going from classroom to classroom … they said it never seemed like it was going to stop and there was just blood all over," Harrison said." (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,266310,00.html) 71.226.56.79 18:48, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

See discussion above. Basically, this is wikipedia, not wikinews. A detail which appears to be from one eyewitness can hardly be considered reliably sourced Nil Einne 18:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it is because it's just one person saying that, and just one news site citing it.

Thanks for clearing that up. 71.226.56.79 18:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

MSNBC is now reporting (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18134671/) that the shooter was Asian based on multiple eyewitnesses. Fox News had previously reported the student as being Asian.64.35.225.1 18:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

For the time being perhaps there should be a statement telling people to turn on the news for the most up to date info... "we can't type that fast"

Just a thought, since people want the right info ASAP, and this is such an enormous tragedy.

TheGoogle 18:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure people can figure that out themselves, and it wouldn't be encyclopaedic. -Halo 18:51, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
.:P
Not the worst of ideas, but I think we CAN type that fast... anyway, there doesn't seem to be (much) more confusion here than at most news sources, and we quote a number where reports vary. --Kizor 18:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
We can type that fast, but it seems we have a problem reaching a consensus over what we're reading as sources. :) --208.44.234.50 18:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually if people want news they should be checking out wikinews, or some other news site. This is an encylopaedia and us such we only report encyclopaedic details. However telling people to turn on the news assumes people can do that. People not in the US may not have access to live reporting of this event if they don't have access to continuous international news services like CNN-I, BBC World and Al Jazeera English. Nil Einne 18:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I've been changing the victim count, now it's 32.


CorinneQ 18:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Corinne Quinones

Is the death toll now confirmed and final? Television news are no longer saying "At least" Ruhe1986 18:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


I'm getting the total from the MSN headlines.....they keep updating and updating, it may go higher but I'm not sure.

CorinneQ 18:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Corinne Quinones


I'm sure your intentions are good, but you should realize the numbers you're reporting aren't police confirmed. Yes, ABC News, and Fox News are both "confirming" that the count is 32, but it's being reported by students who are actually under lock down, and imaginably unable to have an accurate body count. All the latest updates that state specifically police confirmed and not simply confirmed are counting only 22. Even the student paper is reporting 32, but confirming 22. I'm sure the number will go up, but right now there are 2 different numbers available and it should be written as such. --208.44.234.50 19:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for the correction


CorinneQ 19:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)Corinne Quinones

It's amazing how inaccurate the media is. It's very unprofessional to confirm a number that isn't truely confirmed. Aren't there laws against broadcasting news that isn't true. Shame on you FOX,CNN,ABC, and so forth. Ruhe1986 19:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Massacre

It's a massacre, guys. Multiple news agencies are referring to it as a massacre on their front pages, including CNN, ABC and CBS (CBS uses the term "Virginia Tech Massacre"). The event is larger than the Columbine massacre, which is undisputedly referred to as a massacre in their title. I don't think calling it a "massacre" violates NPOV anymore. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 18:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

BBC still going with shooting.Geni 18:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I don't give a damn about what the Brits say... This is happening in America, where local and cable news are king. Starks 18:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm sure it is but no need to rush. If "massacre" catches on the Bc will follow
Any opposition to combining the sections about this to one section, as was done with the body count? --Kizor 18:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
"Massacre" is not NPOV and is therefore inappropriate per Wikipedia policy. Furthermore, all the major news networks calling something a "massacre" does not make that a neutral POV. dcandeto 18:59, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Explain. How is this not a massacre. Nobody will dispute that this is a massacre. If you keep up your attitude people will start moving "Columbine Massacre" to "Columbine Shooting". Starks 19:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
If it's the common name then it's the common name. Kitch, could you please provide some links? --ElKevbo 19:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
see use common names.Geni 19:00, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

This is being discussed under the heading "This is a massacre not just a shooting". Please try to keep discussions closed under one heading.Quanticles 19:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The shooter has been confirmed male by numerous sources.

I'm including it as "Unknown male". Starks 18:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

It is quite Unnecessary to put that the unknown male shooter was Asian. Does there really need to be an explination why?Ruhe1986 18:57, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes. It is all the data we have on him at the moment, and better than saying nothing at all. --Kizor 18:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Deadliest "Shooting"

Doesn't need to be modified as the deadliest "school" shooting anymore - with the fatality count over 30, it is the deadliest non-war shooting in US History (the Civil War having obvious exceptions - Antietam, et al.). Editor Emeritus 18:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Without a cited source, I disagree that "school" should be omitted. Ward3001 19:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Actually, it does. That is what CNN and MSNBC and the other media outlets are reporting. dposse 19:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I just heard that on CNN TV. Can TV be sourced? -- RattleMan 19:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
No need. They reported it on their website. dposse 19:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
It's in and cited - http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3045574&page=1 Editor Emeritus 19:06, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I added both, with both this CNN link [3] and your ABC News source. There's no reason why we cannot have both. dposse 19:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Suicide not confirmed

The infobox includes "suicide", although the latest police statement I saw said that they are still investigating whether or not the killer was shot by police or died from self-inflicted wounds. Fickman 18:59, 16 April 2007 (UT

I went ahead and removed the categorization for the time being. . . didn't see a need to leave it in and specify that it was possible but not confirmed. Fickman 19:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Please add the link to the german wiki

[de:Massaker in der Virginia Tech

Done. Thank you! --Kizor 19:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Someone should tell the Germans that massaker is a POV term. --Golbez 19:22, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

You people disgust me...

How can someone oppose any notion or attempt to move the page to "(2007) Virgina Tech massacre" and at the same time allow "Columbine High School massacre" to remain for the Columbine incident. USE YOUR HEADS PEOPLE, WIKIPEDIA POLICY IS NOT THE BIBLE. Starks 19:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

On wikipedia, it is. dposse 19:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Calm down, this is an ongoing news story which is only a few hours old. As time goes on, it will be renamed, if necessary, to whatever the incident becomes known as. --Xyzzyplugh 19:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Instead of bitching about the title, focus on the content of the article. We can discuss the title later, but right now, it does not matter. Rebby 19:07, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Quit whining; Columbia High School massacre is a stupid name anyway, and I just call it the Columbine High shootings. Its all sensationalism. This is a shooting. Blah blah blah. Titanium Dragon 19:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

"Virginia Tech" is a POV term. I don't think the native Americans called this place Virginia. In fact, everything in the world is POV. Everything. Nutmegger 19:42, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Umm ... --BigDT 20:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Micheal Jackson?

What in the world does Micheal Jackson have anything to do with this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CorinneQ (talk • contribs) 19:08, 16 April 2007 (UTC).


ok nevermind, deleteted is was. Someone was messing around.

CorinneQ 19:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)