Talk:Tim Kretschmer

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

Merge?[edit]

I added a merger tag to this article. Since it seems like his only claim to notability is for shooting, I think it might be more appropriate to merge his biography in with the article, at least until such a time when there is enough information to warrant a separate article.--Witan 14:41, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I think this is a case of WP:ONEEVENT, which links to BLP-issues. So let me quote from there: "If the event is significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article for the person is sometimes appropriate. I think BLP trumps notability, so I don't think a different article for the perpetrator is warranted at this time. Lectonar (talk) 14:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As i said earlier in another discussion this isnt just another school shooting or shooting at all. It is a national trauma for Germany and a worldwide news story. Just because Tim wasnt american (as most american school shooters has their own articles) doesnt mean that he is less notable than them. I say lets keep it.--Judo112 (talk) 14:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As you might have noticed, I'm German myself, and I still don't think he warrants an article at this point. Lectonar (talk) 14:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oneevent says to avoid articles for low-profile individuals known for only one event; Kretschmer is not low-profile. Nietzsche 2 (talk) 14:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Agreeing with Nietzsche Oneevent doesnt apply here. This is not a low-prpfile person obviously he is all over the news stations and newspapers wherever you are. I say Keep the article.--MarkusBJoke (talk) 14:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Tim is no longer a living person; so I'm not sure why BLP is being used here (except to protect the identity of his parents; but that's a separate topic IMO). Fightin' Phillie (talk) 14:45, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you scroll down a bit at the BLP page, you will find a mention of that. Lectonar (talk) 15:13, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BIO1E (rather than WP:BLP1E) doesn't seem to matter whether the subject is living. Cover the event, not the person. By all means have a section on Kretschmer in the main article, but his notability does not exist independently of the incident. BIO1E does, however, state "If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate." I'm not sure though if this is the case with this incident – especially with the example of Gavrilo Princip. Cycle~ (talk) 17:01, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Keep Found the information on deceased on the BLP page, but it doesn't really state anything other than "be good." The reason I think this article should exist separate from the incident article is this: we will never know why he did it (unless a confession note is found that was known to exist ahead of time). Thus, including information about him playing counter-strike, or poker, or table tennis, or his social status, or (...) cannot be clearly tied to the shooting. Thus, these things don't belong in the article about the shooting(s), but rather on his biography page. Sure, it's worth mentioning that he was a marksmen (because it demonstrates that he knew how to use a handgun), but it's impossible to say that his motive for the shooting was because of his ability to play table-tennis, or his lack of a girlfriend from the school, or ... Fightin' Phillie (talk) 17:44, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But are informations about him playing counterstrike etc. relevant enough for an article? Lectonar (talk) 08:33, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Merge - completely non-notable outside this one event.139.48.25.60 (talk) 19:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Merge - sure, an article might be more appropriate a couple weeks or a year down the track but right now coverage in German newspapers is still breakingnewish, and English reporting is even worse. There aren't enough good sources to make an article that's more than a section's worth of the Winnenden school shooting in size. Nevard (talk) 21:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Keep - Just to make it clear. my reasons above.--Judo112 (talk) 21:19, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Keep this page has potential. expect a zillion pages of analysis to come around by the media and authorities, that could be added. 123.129.143.62 (talk) 05:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Keep - very, very important page. Tomasz W. Kozłowski (talk) 08:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Merge Notable only in light of incident. --Ferengi (talk) 10:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Keep - as it isnt just another school shooting. effecting a whole nation. this isnt just another guy.--MarkusBJoke (talk) 10:31, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Merge - as sad and heartbreaking as this shooting has been, this is 'just another guy' as the editor above put it. He is notable for just one thing and all information about him can be located in a small section in the main article. I can see no reason whatsoever to keep this article, since all it would be able to do to grow would be to rehash the things written in the more important article about the incident. This boy did a terrible, unforgivable thing, but unfortunately, there is nothing new about his actions. He is not the first person to walk into a school and open fire, and he is not the first kid to go to a school and open fire. It is also not the first incident of it's kind in either Europe or Germany, so I don't see a reason to keep an article on the perpetrator on that kind of notability grounds either. As crude as it may sound, there is nothing new or 'stand-out' about this boy, and certainly nothing outside of the murders that would get him an article here. Merge as soon as possible in my opinion. Sky83 (talk) 11:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Should we delete Seung-Hui Cho, then? He's 'just another guy', too. 'He is not the first kid to go to a school and open fire.' as well. Tomasz W. Kozłowski (talk) 12:10, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No, I think you're missing the point. Take a look at this article. It is a stub and very likely to remain that way. The Cho article is not. If (and that is a very big if) there is something that makes this kid particularly notable in the future, such as the depth and range of information included in the Cho article, the decision (if that is to merge) could be looked at again. At is stands however, there is nothing about Kretschmer that can't be included in the main article and Wikipedia does not keep articles on the grounds of potential or future notability. Additionally, Cho was particularly noteworthy due to amount of victims, both dead and injured. Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to trivialise these murders, but the bottom line here is that there is nothing special or groundbreaking about this kid outside of him firing a gun. This is a bit of a grey area though, so I understand where you're coming from. It might be helpful to take a look here to see that a large proportion of school-related murders are included on the incident alone, not the perpetrator. Sky83 (talk) 12:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
One reason that this article is "still a stub" is that the "Suggested Merge into" banner is scaring people away. Do you really think that "he enjoyed playing table tennis" belongs in the school shooting article? I think the real discussion is how important is Tim Kretschmer. I'll rework the article to look more like a biography than a collection of 1 line statements. Fightin' Phillie (talk) 13:05, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
err - do YOU really think "he enjoyed playing table tennis" is interesting in any way? Perhaps Reagan, Nixon or Kennedy also enjoyed table tennis, perhaps specially as a kid - so should we find out and add a section (well, one for each sport or hobby) about that to the article? 129.105.14.237 (talk) 06:17, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Merge If that shouldn't be clear. Lectonar (talk) 12:25, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Merge He's only famous for the shooting and the article is too short, can't be compared with Seung-Hui Cho. 98.119.177.171 (talk) 06:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support merge: Easy WP:BIO1E case. Cosmic Latte (talk) 18:29, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It would indeed seem like the case to merge. There is not sufficient relevant data on the perpetrator to justify a separate article. Further in that aspect, the natural fact that the media, and German media especially, is going to be covering this individual heavily for the next few weeks is not, in itself, a justification for an article as a repository of the countless analyses that will be vehicled about him (as in WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, item 5 — News reports). I believe the correct format to be followed here, regarding the perpetrator, is that of the Jokela school shooting and the Kauhajoki school shooting, to mention the two recent incidents in Finland. Redux (talk) 20:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. This article does not right now contain any information that isn't already covered on the shooting page. In fact, the largest section of this article is about the shooting itself, with outdated information that has since been corrected on Winnenden school shooting. This split/duplication is a maintenance nightmare and does not provide any conceivable benefit to our readers. I will support a separate article about Kretschmer if and only if the "Perpetrator" section of the main article ever gets disproportionately large, which is not now the case.
Talk:Winnenden_school_shooting#Tim_Kretschmer_merge_discussion seems to favor a merge as well. AxelBoldt (talk) 21:10, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Merge. BIO1E. Kittybrewster ☎ 18:57, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge: "I added a merger tag to this article. Since it seems like his only claim to notability is for shooting". Nothing more to say. Hervegirod (talk) 23:19, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious merge - no claim of notability beyond the shootings, clear-cut WP:BIO1E. Otto4711 (talk) 02:23, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

School[edit]

When did he leave? What qualifications did he gain? Was he ever in any trouble there? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 15:07, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He finished the german Realschule in summer 2008 with relatively poor grades - more or less equivalent to highschool. He then started an apprenticeship but quit after a while. I therefore would not call him a student - he was basically unemployed if I see things right. --The O o (talk) 23:28, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Was he ever suspended or excluded? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 02:23, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed by authorities before shooting spree?[edit]

Were social services, police or mental health professionals ever involved in his life? Nietzsche 2 (talk) 15:10, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Post-mortem personality[edit]

http://translate.google.de/translate?prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fde.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FPostmortales_Pers%25C3%25B6nlichkeitsrecht&sl=de&tl=en&history_state0=

so why do you say his name?? --80.131.246.29 (talk) 19:03, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Easy: Because German law does not apply for an English page hosted in the United States. Also note that there are several German media publications telling his full name. --AR,19:20, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
And personality rights will end with death (also in Germany) --NiTeChiLLeR (talk) 02:17, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Which is not really true; the German article google translated above is about this. Famous cases have been : Tron (hacker) and Marlene Dietrich. Lectonar (talk) 08:30, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well, but with around 13000 German google news hits at the moment of this writing [1], it is hardly handled as a secret right now, so I think we don't need to bother either. Should a court decide it should not be published it can still be renamed/removed (however futile that is) 129.105.14.237 (talk) 06:27, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Filmed suicides[edit]

I may be overlooking something, but I've looked through the articles cited as references and nowhere does it mention in any of them or in any article on Wikipedia that his suicide was filmed, yet he is one of the people listed in the category of "Filmed suicides". Where does it say anywhere that his death was filmed? NIRVANA2764 (talk) 01:52, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is footage of him shooting himself dead, so the category applies. It has been shown on British national television, but with the actual suicide cut from it. The article should state that the suicide was filmed, and say who filmed it. Nietzsche 2 (talk) 02:20, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sister[edit]

He had a 15-year old sister. His father (49 years old), a mathematician by profession, had a own company with 100 people. [2] --Syker Fotograf (talk) 16:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Free Time Activities[edit]

Some of the points mentioned under this section have recently turned out to not be true; for example the family having a shooting place in their houses basement where Tim practiced the handling with weapons. --87.180.49.212 (talk) 19:41, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BZ[edit]

The Berliner Zeitung is not a reliable source at all. Maybe what was included from the site in this article is true, but BZ shouldn't be linked.

Weapon -where did it come from[edit]

A vital part of the story is missing, probably because of the recent nature of the event: where did he acquire a firearm? 66.61.141.157 (talk) 16:36, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was his father's weapon which was not locked away as the legislation in Germany requires. --Noebse (talk) 22:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Tim Kretschmer/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
I am competely opposed to this entry. It is already a dangerous tendency that the media report so extensively about the school shootings that, in the end of the day, these criminals become famous personalities. Research has shown that the vast media response to the Columbine shootings set the incentive for other killings that followed. That's why I consider it absolutely forbidding to give the school shooting gunmen a monument on Wikipedia, along with truely important people like Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King and others. Admittedly, this idea would also hold true for Hitler, Mao and Stalin. But there is a difference - even though these people don't merit to be remembered due to their virtues and achievements they did play a crucial role in history. That's why it's important for following generations to learn about them. But what on earth can we learn from gunmen? That’s why I think that this entry should be deleted. Some information about Tim Kretschmer could be included in the entry devoted to the shooting as such.

Last edited at 18:26, 16 March 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 08:48, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Tim_Kretschmer&oldid=1181540775"