Talk:Columbine High School massacre/Archive 6

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6

not the deadliest school shooting at the time

Please change "the deadliest" to a different wording. The text could be written as "one of the deadliest" as the Columbine high school massacre was not the deadliest shooting at the time. Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 03:19, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. While the University of Texas tower shooting left more dead, it is not always considered a school shooting. This nuance is already reflected in the relevant note. If you still think there is a problem with the way this is written, you can discuss it on this talk page (and open another edit request if such consensus is reached). Volteer1 (talk) 16:00, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

That is strange since it is on the list of school shootings. Thanks for the clarification! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 02:09, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Originally it said "deadliest high school shooting at the time" and I would've preferred that, but someone changed it and we rolled with it. Either statement is OK. There isn't a clear "consensus" on whether the UT-Austin shooting should be called a "school shooting" as it didn't really bear much resemblance to the school shootings we've come to know. Columbine was the deadliest undeniable school shooting at the time it happened. --Skjölker (talk) 23:37, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Someone improved the note. Better not complicate things - I think it can stay just the way it is right now. Much less misleading and about as clear as it can possibly be. --Skjölker (talk) 21:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

The initial report of 25 dead is part of the problem. Cake (talk) 01:05, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

Fix last name

Please change Deangelis to DeAngelis. [1] Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 22:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I found DeAngelis mentioned once, and corrected it. If there are other mentions, please give the section names. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:53, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

# of victims killed

Please indicate that Corey DePooter was killed by Klebold and not Harris and Klebold, as a footnote shows Harris killed 8 people and Klebold killed 5 people. Including themselves, Harris killed 9 and Klebold killed 6. Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 16:37, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:53, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Here is a source stating Corey DePooter was killed by Dylan Klebold. [2] Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 18:13, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 Not done for now: That source doesn't look reliable in the Wikipedia sense. Can you find any reports in the media or books with that information? ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

OK, I thought if one killed 9 and the other killed 6, including themselves, then Corey would have had to be killed by Dylan, if you do the math. But I see another source is needed. Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 14:15, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Here is another source mentioning Dylan Klebold killed Corey DePooter. [3] Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 18:43, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Wikia is user generated content and not reliable. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
How about this source? [4] The information about who shot whom is from the lead investigator. There is also a book. Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 19:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. That is also a self published source. The reliable sources link in this reply will explain sourcing requirements. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:51, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Can the Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold page be used? Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 22:41, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
 Not done: That page states that "they simultaneously committed suicide". ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲(talk) 04:29, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
I am referring to the text that reads "Klebold was responsible for the remaining five (Kyle Velasquez, Matthew Kechter, Lauren Townsend, John Tomlin, and Corey DePooter)." 73.167.238.120 (talk) 05:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ––𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲(talk) 06:30, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
I feel as if I am banging my head against a wall. Please change killed under library table No. 14 by Harris and Klebold to killed under library table No. 14 by Klebold. Also, please change fatally wounding to and Dylan fatally wounding. The text above is from the Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold article. Thanks! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 22:10, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
 Partly done:
  • Changed "Corey DePooter (aged 17), killed under library table No. 14 by Harris and Klebold" to "Corey DePooter (aged 17), killed under library table No. 14 by Klebold"
  • Did not change "Both shooters moved south and fired randomly under another table, critically injuring two 17-year-olds, Jennifer Doyle and Austin Eubanks, and fatally wounding 17-year-old Corey DePooter, at 11:35" to "Both shooters moved south and fired randomly under another table, critically injuring two 17-year-olds, Jennifer Doyle and Austin Eubanks, and Dylan fatally wounding 17-year-old Corey DePooter, at 11:35" as the original sentence is not incorrect and the change interrupts the sentence. 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗗𝘂𝗱𝗲 talk 03:29, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

grammar change

Please change 11:29–11:36 a.m to 11:29 - 11:36 a.m. 73.167.238.120 (talk) 21:28, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Current format is correct per MOS:RANGES. ––FormalDude talk 05:48, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 October 2021

Fishing086 (talk) 17:53, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

I'd love to add more information

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:55, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 October 2021 Add Copycat

Add 1 entry at the Copy Cat section at the end of the article for Randy Stair, (see:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eaton_Township_Weis_Markets_shooting) He was strongly implicated as an admirer of the columbine perpetrators and posted numerous videos espousing such on his Infamous YouTube channel before going on to kill 3 people in a super market in the name of a Danny Phantom character. True story. 2607:FB91:3F0A:51B6:64B3:7AC0:460F:3188 (talk) 01:46, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:47, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 November 2021

Change the location of the event from Columbine, CO to Littleton, CO. 9NateDawggg7 (talk) 17:52, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: see Talk:Columbine_High_School_massacre/Archive_4#Semi-protected_edit_request_on_13_May_2014 Cannolis (talk) 20:15, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

Grammar

Hi. I hope you're doing well. I made a contribution on the sub-head "Journals" about Harris's interest in sexual violence and cannibalism and I sourced it with Larkin's book. However, I do think the wording is odd and English is not my native language. I would highly appreciate a review. Thanks to anyone volunteering. Kindest regards. CoryGlee (talk) 23:32, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 November 2021

I think this objective resource for Columbine documents should be added to the external links: https://www.researchcolumbine.com/document-11k-gallery.php

The site lays out all of the documents, not just the 11k, in a format where users can click on page numbers and view what used to be hundreds of PDF files, without downloading anything. It makes the 30k pages of reports available without commentary, just the data, easily accessible. I use it all the time and find it better than sifting through endless PDFs and scrolling.

The 11k is the most popular doc since it's witness testimony.

:) PenguinPiano (talk) 03:06, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. It's unclear whether the person that runs the website is an authority in the field (WP:ELNO #11). ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 10:21, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

time structure

Please change 12:08 pm to 12:08 p.m. 73.167.238.120 (talk) 03:15, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: It's fine. See MOS:AMPM EvergreenFir (talk) 01:44, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
The format is not consistent. 73.167.238.120 (talk) 01:55, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
 Done Ah, I see what you mean. Okay, fixed! EvergreenFir (talk) 01:57, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 02:03, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Membership of interested WikiProjects

I reverted an edit by ProcrastinatingReader (talk · contribs) that removed the banners for several WikiProjects that were described in the edit summary as "Trim". I don't see any justification or need to "trim" the number of WikiProjects as this article is "of interest" to those projects. The collapse setting in the banner hides the full listing so it doesn't take up any more space. If users feel the need to remove WikiProject banners, because there are too many, please justify and discuss their removal on these talk pages and give a reasonable explanation why the article no longer meets the inclusion criteria for each WikiProject concerned. In some cases, the banner inclusion has historic real world significance, so should not be removed because it documents historic real world activities by a WikiProject. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 03:30, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Cafeteria Bombs

How did the cafeteria bombs fail to detonate? Zachbarbo (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 00:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Correction to the city where Columbine High School is.

The correct city is Littleton and NOT Columbine; there is no city by that name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:681:0:51E0:5C78:BE72:976:18FA (talk) 21:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

Sentence Structure "The Massacre"

Opening text needs restructuring: "According to their journals and video tapes, it is believed by investigators that..."

"their" implies "investigators". "it is believed" is the passive tense. "According to" does not imply speculation on the part of investigators.

Suggest rewording:

"Based on the shooters'/pair's/perpetrators' journals and video tapes, investigators believe that..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:D40:633:41A9:1AF:D2C:1245 (talk) 12:35, 5 February 2022 (UTC)

"It was then the worst school shooting in U.S. history"?

Hullo. I was curious as to why this was described as "then the worst school shooting in U.S. history." The University of Texas tower shooting resulted in both more deaths and injuries and occurred well before this event. Why does the Texas shooting not supersede this one? Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 20:43, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe UT is not a public school, it is a University. DN (talk) 01:54, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
Because that is what the source stated. The source could have made a mistake because the complete sentence in that 2008 piece reads:
The Columbine rampage was on record as the deadliest school shooting in United States history until a student killed 32 people, and himself, at Virginia Tech on April 16, 2007.
Looks like the writer, Gina Lamb (who at that time - 2008 - was an Assistant Deskhead at the Times and is now Deputy Editor/Special Sections) probably forgot about/just left out the August 1966 Texas tower shooting...she doesn't cite a source for her statement. Shearonink (talk) 19:39, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
I see. If the goal is to say what the consensus of Reliable Sources say, perhaps it could be changed to "One of the worst school shootings in U.S. history.". As long as the consensus of RS confirms that, I would probably support it. DN (talk) 20:13, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
This particular sentence in the first paragraph of the 5th major section should just be deleted. The "worst" statement's "source" is an unsourced 3-paragraph (THREE!) puff piece/reader's digest summary-of-the-event sort of thing, written in 2008, that offers nothing new and, frankly, is incorrect. Actually, I did just delete it. The article's introductory paragraph states "deadliest high school shooting in US history" and THAT statement is mentioned in the Notes section and the term "deadliest" is mentioned and referenced several times in the main text. Shearonink (talk) 05:30, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Shearonink, as we discussed above, it is extremely notable as ONE OF the deadliest school shootings in the history of the US, that also set a precedent for future school shootings, copycats etc. Your recent edit seemed to have removed that aspect entirely from the lead. Incidentally, the cited source you removed looks like NYT, not reader's digest. As there is a consensus among RS on this, I would suggest replacing it at, or near, the beginning of the lead with some equally reliable source, either from NYT again (there are numerous news articles by them stating this) or perhaps another equally reliable news source, or maybe an academic source such as this one [5] "On 20 April 1999, in one of the deadliest school shootings in national history..." Just because it is also mentioned in the body etc. does not mean we can remove it from the lead, things tend to work the opposite way, see WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY. If you are busy I'm happy to do it myself. Cheers. DN (talk) 16:31, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Darknipples ? I'm sorry but you are mistaken. I removed a single sentence that was referenced from a 2008 unsourced summary of the event. From, as I said above, from the 5th section of this article. I did not remove anything from the lead. By the way, did you read the three paragraph bit? Did you go check out what it actually said? I don't care that it was in the New York Times, just because something is from the Times doesn't mean we have to use it. Again, I removed nothing from the lead section, the introductory paragraph of the article's lead section has been left as is and the multiple deadliest statements that support the lead have been left completely intact. Shearonink (talk) 17:48, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
Shearonink, Oh, I see now, my mistake...Apologies. In any case I believe that something to that effect should probably be in the lead. Would you have any issues with that? Thanks. DN (talk) 19:21, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
The lead section already has, in the first paragraph, the following statement:
  • At the time, it was the deadliest high school shooting in U.S. history.
As to your statement about precedence, that issue is also mentioned in the lead:
  • The shooting has inspired dozens of copycat killings, including many deadlier shootings across the world. The word "Columbine" has become a byword for school shootings.
I'm not sure what you are referring to with "something to that effect in the lead...". As I have pointed out above, 1)The deadliest school shooting and 2)copycat killings are both already mentioned in the first paragraph of the lead - what more do you think is needful? Shearonink (talk) 19:47, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
(no ping necessary) I am just having an off day, I will try to avoid editing when I'm so distracted. Cheers. DN (talk) 20:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
No worries. Shearonink (talk) 00:39, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Victim section addition request

I came to this wiki specifically for names of victims. It seems that finding a straightforward list such as names, ages, injured or killed at minimum would be found on this page. If their stories from that day warrant a main page, then starting that and linking to that main article to not go too far off topic (this might be considered for the background and foreshadowing from this page as it is not part of this actual event). It feels like a very important oversight of important information from that day. If there is a list on this page, there NEEDS to be a link in the TOC. I am not a wiki editor and I apologize if this is a harsh request message. I'll admit that when I landed on this page and could not easily find victims but found all the information about the perpetrators and details of their history, planning, unrelated arrest, and minute by minute execution of the crime, I was disheartened. Thank you. 184.170.166.166 (talk) 12:19, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Wikipedia is not a memorial. There are plenty of places online to find the names of the victims. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:41, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
I'm not requesting a memorial. Look at the Sandy Hook, Parkland, and Virginia Tech shooting pages. They all list names and ages of victims. That is not a memorial, it is relevant information to the event. 184.170.166.166 (talk) 13:20, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
Registered from IP user CircleCityCynic (talk) 14:24, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
I did find a list of fatalities under "Library Massacre" but no information about the injured. CircleCityCynic (talk) 14:37, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
CircleCityCynic, I don't know what the appropriate action is, but in the future please be aware that this type of argument may be met with a link to WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, which says that just because other articles have it doesn't make it the right move here, or even where it already is. Yes I'm aware that link is about deletion but it also can apply to content. dannymusiceditor oops 18:39, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
I do not see it as off-topic at all, but Wikipedia is not exactly a place to make requests, let alone demands. We are a community that works on consensus as well as policies and guidelines. Here are some links that will help you Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines - Wikipedia:Five pillars - WP:MOS - Wikipedia:Teahouse. After looking through those and speaking with someone at the tea house, you could start looking at reliable sources (Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources) that list that information in the right context, and keep a list for others to look at and discuss on the talk page. You can also put something together (practice) in your user page sandbox, so that you can learn how to add this type of content. When addressing the community on talk pages, always try to... Wikipedia:Assume good faith...DN (talk) 19:07, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Back to the possible "list of the victims" request... When I consider WP:NOTMEMORIAL it is clear to me that it is only concerned with writing a stand-alone article to memorialize a friend or relative, an article about a clearly non-notable person as if Wikipedia were Legacy(dot)com or something similar.

Subjects of encyclopedia articles must satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements. Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize deceased friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others who do not meet such requirements.

So...subjects of Wikipedia articles must be notable...subjects. But placing a list of the victims of a mass-death event into an article about that very-same event...is that the same thing as making them the subject of a Wikipedia article? I don't think so - without the victims, the event itself is meaningless so why is NOTMEMORIAL cited to not have victims' names in the articles about these mass-death events? The perpetrator (or perpetrators in this article's case) are mentioned in the Wikipedia articles about the event - Klebold & Harris, Adam Lanza and so on...so why not the individual people they killed. It's a mystery only solved by editorial consensus an an article-by-article basis. Shearonink (talk) 19:34, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

OK..well, I actually went and looked at the article - I admit, I hadn't gone looking directly at CircleCityCynic's concerns within the article but I just now did. As they mentioned above, there is a list of Fatalities. There has been a list of Fatalities or Injuries and deaths in this section/Injuries and deaths in initial incident since August 21, 2005, as seen in this edit. So at one time the injured were included in list/s but they are not now.
As to CircleCityCynic's contention that a list of the injured is included in other articles they are right and they are also wrong. Virginia Tech shooting does not include a separate list of the injured, it mentions the injured within the timeline of that event as it progresses. Stoneman Douglas High School shooting mentions people who were injured, not always by name and it does have a section about survivors/the injured but it does not list them all out by name. Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting mentions survivors in the text and what happened to them but it is the only one that lists injured, 2 people who were teachers at Sandy Hook by name.
If CircleCityCynic thinks that the injured should be included here then that editor could open a Request for comment to see if there is editorial consensus for such information to be included in the article. From the responses here in this section, I would doubt that there is a consensus to include names of all the injured. For one thing, reliable sources would have to be found that mention at length the names of the injured, their issues, where they fit in the timeline...that sort of information. And your fellow editors would have to agree to include the injured. I think including the names of all the injured people might be a bit much...the article already has a Very long maintenance template on it (since December 2021) and yeah, it is pretty big:

  • HTML document size: 678 kB
  • Prose size (including all HTML code): 128 kB
  • References (including all HTML code): 342 kB
  • Wiki text: 185 kB
  • Prose size (text only): 76 kB (12859 words) "readable prose size"
  • References (text only): 40 kB

Adding more text doesn't seem all that needful to me but others may disagree. Shearonink (talk) 23:02, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Is it possible to add a link from the top section "Deaths
15 (including both perpetrators)" to the box with the victims?
I would do it but I wasn't aware that there has to be some sort of editor vote to make changes. CircleCityCynic (talk) 07:28, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
CircleCityCynic I'm sorry but I do not understand what you are talking about with add a link. A link to what? As a group taking action during the event, the following groups of people are mentioned within the article text - survivors are mentioned 6 times, the injured are enumerated as being 24 in number - 21 injured by gunshots, 3 being injured by their escape. 15 of the injured are mentioned by name within the article's text, within the event's timeline and that is because their names appear in reliable sources. You apparently want to have a separate boxed list of the 24 people who were injured at Columbine, the people who were shot by the two perpetrators plus the ones who were injured escaping. Why? What is your encyclopedic point with having a separate boxed list in the article? Another issue to contend with is Wikipedia's policies and guidelines towards living persons, much of which can be found at WP:BLP, particularly WP:AVOIDVICTIM and WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE. There's no vote on this - decision-making around Wikipedia is not achieved through "voting" it is achieved through consensus. I understand that you're interested in this event but you have chosen an article that is controversial and at some points the most-viewed article on Wikipedia. I would suggest you first go through some of the various tutorials now listed on your user talk page and read and study up on Wikipedia:Consensus and then decide on how or if you want to move forward with your concerns. 964 editors have this article on their Watchlist and it's been receiving an average of over 4800 views a day for the month of March, I am sure any proposed changes to this article's structure will receive plenty of feedback. Shearonink (talk) 13:34, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Level of Detail About the Shooting

Is it necessary to include so much detail of the shooting, particularly the conversations between the perpetrators and victims, such as in the Library Massacre section? Some of those exchanges graphically illustrate the power the shooters held over the victims in a way that is likely to serve as inspiration for future mass shooters. They could particularly resonate with youth who are considered to be “unpopular” and perceive themselves to be at a power deficit compared with the “popular” kids at school, as they may envy the Columbine shooters’ ability to, in that moment, turn the tables on those “popular” kids who to that point may have ignored or scorned them. When editing these kind of pages, I think it is important to keep in mind that future school shooters are very likely to visit them for information and inspiration. --Djpowell2 (talk) 00:51, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Your concerns are noted, but Wikipedia is not censored. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:47, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
I kind of understand where you are coming from, but there is a flip-side in that it gives insight into why school shooters do what they do, which can be useful and beneficial in identifying causal factors and prevention methods. If only there was some way to prevent schools shootings other than not studying them. I can't think of anything at all...hmmm...What could we possibly do? Welp, we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas, it seems...DN (talk) 03:54, 5 April 2022 (UTC)
In response to DN, while those details may indeed give some additional insight into why school shooters do what they do, I don’t think that academics who study this issue use Wikipedia as their source. But I guarantee that disgruntled teenagers do. I agree that the powers that be could be doing more to prevent school shootings, but just because someone else is not doing everything they could to help the situation, does that mean we should then go ahead and do things to make the situation even worse? Djpowell2 (talk) 01:47, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
Making a suggestion about what to include in a particular article does not equal “censorship”. If it did, these Talk pages would not exist. Besides, there is the note from Dec 2021 at the top of the article saying it “may be too long” and suggesting that it be condensed. I think this would be a great way to begin condensing it. Do pages about genocides give a narrative of the taunts the perpetrators said to their victims before killing them? Removing or limiting sensationalist, tabloid-like details (that contribute to making the article too long anyway) is not an abdication of our responsibility to the truth, and if not doing so increases (at all) the chances of more dead children, then why not do it? Djpowell2 (talk) 01:44, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Copyright issue with infobox image - that still from the High School's security camera video...

This issue was also discussed at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, see the now-archived discussion at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions/Archive/2022/April#A still taken from some security camera footage - copyright issue?...

I was trying to run down the copyright status of the still from the school security video that is presently in the infobox.

Purpose of use - The cafeteria footage of the shooting has become an iconic image associated with the event; it shows the two students with guns, in the mass chaos of the cafeteria in the minutes after their initial shootings and before they committed suicide. The image aids in identifying the students, the nature of the incident as it occurred within the school, and the scene is highly associated with the shooting incident.

This image has a legal copyright that belongs to Getty Images. Regardless of the concept that "the scene is highly associated with the shooting incident" its legal status is, at best, murky.

I am not sure that the various templates in use at the Wikipedia File page - "Non-free fair use", "Non-free historic image", and "Non-free video screenshot" - are applicable for this article or in its infobox. It is clear that the rights for any still images from the security cameras in the school library reside with the Jefferson County Sheriff's Department via Getty Images...so then, can Wikipedia use any of these images in any articles associated with the Columbine massacre? I don't think so but maybe I'm wrong...I realize that this issue is fraught with controversy, others will most probably disagree, so let's have a discussion here or on the talk page for the File and reach a consensus according to Wikipedia policy. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 22:58, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

The video game section

Does it really matter what games they were into and whether you think that video games make kids violent that is an opinion and this is for facts not opinions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OHYEAH1107 (talk • contribs) 12:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2022

Incorrect spelling of victim's name: In 'the massacre' -> '11:19 am shooting begins' , please edit Dan Rohrborough to Dan Rohrbough 121.128.106.187 (talk) 14:20, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 14:24, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Remove tag

Hi. I'd like to know if anyone wants to work on removing the tag under Media speculation . Thanks. CoryGlee (talk) 00:19, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

changing the # of sentences

In February 2016, after Klebold's mother, Sue Klebold, surfaced to speak out on mental health and suicide prevention, she was condemned by then Attorney General of Colorado, Cynthia Coffman, who tweeted that Klebold had been "irresponsible and inflammatory" for her interview with Diane Sawyer, she also added on a follow-up tweet that Klebold had been "selfish" and that her interview could have "very negative consequences".

In the above sentence, please change the comma after Diane Sawyer to a period. Then start another sentence.

Thank you! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 18:03, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

 Done - Adolphus79 (talk) 20:21, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

brackets

Please change (MDT (UTC-6)) to MDT (UTC-06:00) 73.167.238.120 (talk) 00:24, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: the infobox automatically formats the date field that is displayed on the page based on a few template parameters, so the change you described isn't really practical. I have, however, removed the UTC offset altogether to prevent the odd double parentheses. PlanetJuice (talk • contribs) 00:36, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:52, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Edit request; 15 September 2022

In the writings subhead where it is written about Harris's sexual deviancy, it should be wiki linked to sexual cannibalism instead to cannibalism, which is broader. 190.246.97.81 (talk) 17:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 November 2022

Hi, I don't know if this belongs to this article but John Stone, the Sheriff in charge of the investigation, died last week aged 73. (CBS News) 190.246.97.81 (talk) 22:28, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't see how it would fit into this article Cannolis (talk) 03:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Verb Error

In the suicide section:

"Klebold lit a Molotov cocktail on a nearby table, underneath which Patrick Ireland was laying.."

The last verb should be "lying." "To lay" is a transitive verb meaning to place (an object) on a surface. "To lie" is an intransitive verb meaning to recline, etc. 135.180.193.96 (talk) 04:56, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2023

This states that the event occurred in Columbine, Colorado. There is no such place. It transpired in Littleton, Colorado. Datplayboi (talk) 05:45, 1 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Lightoil (talk) 07:55, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Columbine High School is in Littleton, CO -- see:
https://columbinehs.jeffcopublicschools.org/ Strahant (talk) 12:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect School Location

Columbine High School is in Littleton, CO. Not Columbine. 71.211.232.237 (talk) 02:00, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I think the real issue is whether we should use the census-designated place, which is Columbine, Colorado, or the municipality, which is Littleton, Colorado. Most sources use Littleton, and I would recommend that we stick with that. Acroterion (talk) 02:08, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 April 2023

I am a Columbine shooting survivor. The picture of Eric and Dylan in the cafeteria with weapons is inappropriate and offensive to post on this page as well as potentially dangerous for copycats. Please remove it. NewZealandTeamDragon (talk) 04:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: @NewZealandTeamDragon: Wikipedia is not censored. —C.Fred (talk) 04:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
This is an ethical norm. [6]https://www.reportingonmassshootings.org/ NewZealandTeamDragon (talk) 07:34, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
[7]https://nonotoriety.com/ NewZealandTeamDragon (talk) 07:52, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Oklahoma City bombing
Christchurch mosque shootings
Virginia Tech shooting
None of these include the picture of the perpetrator, let alone with weapons in the crime scene in the act of committing the murders. NewZealandTeamDragon (talk) 07:56, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Maybe because there are no images of those people during the event? Also, the websites you linked are not reliable sources, just a couple non-notable organizations begging the same thing you are. As C.Fred already said, wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED. If you don't like it, don't look. - Adolphus79 (talk) 13:25, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
I was not trying to look. I was Googling the name of my former school to get a close match to the color of our school colors and that picture always shows up. Plus, just because you can do something does not mean you should. I am not begging. I am making a point from a survivor. NewZealandTeamDragon (talk) 15:22, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Did you read WP:NOTCENSORED, or are you continuing to make this request simply because you WP:DONTLIKEIT? Oddly, I just searched "Columbine High School", and this image comes up nowhere on the first several pages. Are you sure you are being honest in your purpose here? Maybe just accept that, as a WP:POLICY, Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED, and move on? - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Also, considering this is the article for the massacre itself, and not Columbine High School (which very clearly states the school colors as Navy Blue and Silver), maybe the image is poignant? - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
Poignant does not mean it should be used. You can do whatever you legally are allowed to do, but I think it is important that you understand free speech does not mean it comes without cost to people it may hurt. NewZealandTeamDragon (talk) 17:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
If you don't like it, don't go searching it out just to complain about it... - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
I didn't search it. If you put in Columbine in the google bar, that image comes up. A Columbine is a flower, and that image should not come up. Is there someone over you that I can talk to because you have no empathy and are only insulting to a survivor. How did you get the authority to have this page? NewZealandTeamDragon (talk) 07:07, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
I don't have any authority here, I simply reiterated the Wikipedia policy that C.Fred had already pointed out when you tried to argue with the policy, and then continued trying to point you to that policy (among others) when you wanted to argue with me about it... lol - Adolphus79 (talk) 07:45, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
@NewZealandTeamDragon: If you are Googling "Columbine" and that image comes up and you don't want it to, you'll need to contact Google.
To hide this image for yourself when viewing this Wikipedia article, copy the following code into your css file, located at Special:Mypage/skin.css.
a[href="/wiki/File:Columbine Shooting Security Camera.jpg"],
Geniac (talk) 09:50, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Status as a "terrorist attack"

Hello! There is currently a debate over whether this event should be listed as one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in American history on the Terrorism in the United States talk page. That debate has relevance to this page because there has also been some back and forth here on whether Template:Terrorist attacks in the United States by deaths (which is based on the aforementioned list) should be included on this page.--Jerome Frank Disciple 14:24, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2023

At the part where it says the name “Teresa Miller”, her name is actually spelled as “Theresa Miller” 2601:482:2:E920:E99F:5665:9CD9:5EF4 (talk) 18:23, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done Denver post source uses Theresa, don't have access to the books cited but if they contradict this, feel free to revert me Cannolis (talk) 18:37, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

No longer the deadliest shooting in Colorado

This is listed as the deadliest shooting in Colorado. That is incorrect as it was surpassed by the Aurora movie theater shooting. 2601:281:C500:B30:7013:3767:E1C3:6F4E (talk) 01:20, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Not according to this. --ZimZalaBim talk 01:39, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect info

I don't know who edited this or why, but the "do you believe in God" conversation with Rachel Scott never happened, she died instantly upon being shot. The only sources for this are misreports from 1999 and a Christian martyr propaganda movie that gets just about everything else wrong as well and doesn't even claim to be a documentary. While Castaldo claimed this happened after he was shot, he was in a delirious state of mind at the time and there's absolutely no other evidence to support it. This page reflected that until a few days ago, and somehow no one has gone through the process of changing it back. Since this page is protected, I'd appreciate if someone could do that, as I don't think it's appropriate for Wikipedia to be spreading blatant misinformation like this, especially about such a serious and important event. 2603:8080:F304:BA00:3899:34E8:18C4:9417 (talk) 11:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

  • It was stated by an eyewitness and reported by reliable sources. We don't get to determine if Castaldo was accurate in his memory or not. And who is disputing that she died instantly after she was shot in the head? I don't see that in there at all. I do agree that the newish section and edits appear to be trying to make a point or express a POV. Niteshift36 (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
    Castaldo was flat on his back in a hospital and under heavy influence from pain meds when the initial interview where he reported this was conducted, and he's given varying accounts over the years and keeps contradicting himself. He is not a reliable witness, considering he was shot, in agony, paralyzed, and nearly unconscious when all of this supposedly happened, and couldn't give a consistent story afterward. None of the other witnesses or survivors reported anything that corroborates his initial story, nor does the physical evidence. Scott was killed instantly by the fourth bullet that hit her in the same initial barrage of gunfire that paralyzed Castaldo; neither of the shooters said anything to either of them directly as they were too far away when firing the shots. Aside from Castaldo's testimony, there isn't a shred of evidence to support that Scott remained alive after the initial shots or that either shooter said anything to her or Castaldo.
    An identical myth has been pushed about Cassie Bernall's death in the library, and that has also been thoroughly debunked. This myth originates from Valeen Schnurr being asked about her faith by Klebold, which this new edit also completely mischaracterizes. Klebold did not fire at Schnurr again after she answered yes, he reloaded and walked away from the table. This is established by Schnurr herself and several other witnesses, another student heard Klebold and Schnurr talking and mistook Schnurr for Bernall. Since then, churches can't keep their story straight on whether it was said by Scott, Bernall, or both, but various churches and the families of the girls have profited quite a bit off of the myth and actively tried to prevent Schnurr from telling the truth.
    All of this has been well-known for many years and hard evidence can be found in the 11,000 documents released by the Jefferson County Sherriff's Office. It is very clear that the new edits are made by someone with a very biased perspective and bad information, considering that one of their only sources for this new informataion is a dramatized movie made by a Christian production company. This edit should be reverted, it's irresponsible and disingenuous at best for the debunked testimony of an unreliable witness to be presented as the absolute truth in this way. 2603:8080:F304:BA00:3899:34E8:18C4:9417 (talk) 18:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
  • You seem to have very strong personal feelings about this. Have you ever read WP:TRUTH? And again, you talk about Scott being killed instantly, but I see nothing trying to refute that. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:33, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
    My personal passion for a case I've spent a large amount of time researching doesn't discredit anything I've said here. As I mentioned, you can easily back up everything I've claimed by sifting through the official 11k documents from JeffCo and reading other resources that have obtained a more full picture of the case, rather than immediate and inaccurate news reports from mid-1999. All of this was previously accepted and there was nothing wrong with this article as it was until one person decided to run with their own personal narrative without evidence to back it up.
    I don't know whether we have a language barrier or something when it comes to Scott's death? The current article states "Scott was initially injured with wounds to her left arm, left leg, and chest when she was hit four times with rounds fired from Harris's carbine." and "Harris then turned to Scott, who was crying. He "pulled Rachel's head up by her hair." Here, the situation is disputed. Several students witnessed Harris say something to Rachel, before lifting his gun up to her temple, and firing a fatal round." Previously, it read "Scott was killed instantly when she was hit four times with rounds fired from Harris's carbine; one shot was to the left temple." The former version states that Scott died instantly as do most reputable sources, the new version states that she was injured and remained alive for longer. Also, the claim that "several students" saw Harris walk up to Rachel and say something to her while she was still alive is not only false, but it still wouldn't be enough solid proof even if witnesses did claim to see it, considering how Castaldo's recollection may have swayed them along with the narratives that followed.
    From looking through that help page, it seems like that would apply far more to the person editing this article to further their own "truth" without being able to verify it than it would to me or the hundreds of other editors who were able to verify the original version. I have no interest in turning this into an edit war or argument of any sort, just thought it important to lay out the facts and suggest that we not spread false narratives on what's supposed to be a hub of objective information. The fact that such a baseless edit hasn't been reverted yet concerns me about using Wikipedia for research, personally. 2603:8080:F304:BA00:3899:34E8:18C4:9417 (talk) 21:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
    As I have written in the article, evidence shows that Rachel Scott was injured first, before being approached by the killers and fatally shot. It was not my intention to make any sort of argument on the subject, but I feel the article does not fill Wikipedia's requirement of a neutral view. I did not state that she was targeted for being a Christian, I said that the subject is disputed (and it is, obviously.). I don't think Wikipedia, as an unbiased source, should ever take a side on such a dispute; rather it should present the information and let the reader decide for themselves. It seems you pounced on me the instant I edited this article. There also happens to be "a shred of evidence" and a lot of it too. A Columbine Site is a reliable source that recounts the experiences of survivors and victims, while providing the most verifiable information on the attack. Quote: "A Columbine Site is the property of the USA incorporated non-profit organization Semper Memento Inc. It was founded April 21, 1999 as a memorial site and quickly developed into an information outlet to present and preserve the truth about what happened on April 20, 1999, and why. Its purpose is to be a free resource to researchers, students, educators, and other interested individuals and groups who want to study the tragedy and learn from it. Check the blog on the main page for the most recent news." It has been used by several reliable news outlets and it has been used by colleges.
    Quoting its page on Rachel Scott (note: it uses autopsies and survivor accounts as its source): " As it was, she was eating lunch on the grass with friend Richard Castaldo when the shooters opened fire (offsite link) on the west entrance near where she was seated on the grass. According to witnesses, she was hit and fell to the ground where, moments later, one of the shooters (Eric Harris) came down the hill and shot her at point-blank range when she tried to get up. She died from gunshot wounds to the head, chest, arm and leg, and was one of the first victims of what would soon become one of the nation's most deadly mass shootings."
    Point-blank range means a shot fired very close to its target, in this case the gun was held to her head.
    Also, Castaldo was not the sole surviving witness. There were several students who were in the courtyard at the time of the shooting, including Mark Taylor. A Columbine Site tells what he saw:
    (http://www.acolumbinesite.com/victim/injured6.html#mark)
    "As he watched, [Eric] went over to where [Rachel] lay bleeding and shot her again as she tried to get up."
    The Denver Post also reports that, "This much appears confirmed: Rachel Scott was shot and injured in one volley of gunfire, and Harris later returned and said something to her before firing the fatal shot."
    (https://extras.denverpost.com/news/shot1216b.htm) The Denver Post is a reliable news source
    (https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/denver-post/) with a slight left-center bias and HIGH FACTUAL REPORTING. I will edit this article again, to make it as neutral as possible. History406 (talk) 13:01, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
  • Don't come at me with this condescending "language barrier" nonsense. When I commented, it read "Scott was killed instantly when she was hit four times with rounds fired from Harris's carbine; one shot was to the left temple." Your comments based on edits made days later aren't what I was discussing. Niteshift36 (talk) 18:20, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

Recent edit

FYI - A recent edit added 2 photos of the Harris/Klebold weapons to the article. These 2 photos have been reported on Commons as copyright violations, since they are not images taken by the Commons contributor but rather photos under copyright by getty images that were taken by another person. Shearonink (talk) 20:44, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

How?

How was the perpetrator a Neo-Nazi, white-supremacist, prominent, multi-millionaire Jew?

Am I the only one confused about that? 79.106.203.98 (talk) 08:18, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

  • What are you talking about? I don't see that in the article. Can you point it out? Niteshift36 (talk) 16:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

"This section may lend undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, or controversies. Please help to create a more balanced presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message." regarding the section about bullying

I believe that I have resolved this issue by adding direct quotes and citations from eric that he made in his personal journal regarding bullying as noted by Peter Langman. Thus, I believe the message can be removed. Tellium (talk) 02:23, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Removed section

I removed a section using unreliable sources here. The sources were based on fictional events from a movie and not real-life occurrences. Came accross it on Reddit. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 20:05, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 January 2024

"Motive inconclusive" to "Motives Mental health, bullying and school safety improvements." 2601:346:A80:3760:F0FB:6153:C4D3:B472 (talk) 17:51, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Cannolis (talk) 18:20, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Should Austin Eubanks be considered an indirect death from the shooting?

Austin Eubanks died of a heroin overdose in 2019 after developing an addiction to opioids and other painkillers after the shooting. Should it be considered due to the shooting since, even though Harris and Klebold didn’t kill him, his death occurred because of the shooting and wouldn’t have happened (when it did and the way it did) if Columbine never happened, even though he’s never been (to my knowledge) considered a death from the attack by news outlets and other sources? MountainDew20 (talk) 07:48, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

I think it should be considered an indirect death from the shooting. NewZealandTeamDragon (talk) 08:07, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Columbine_High_School_massacre/Archive_6&oldid=1220254524"