Jump to content

Talk:2011 Tucson shooting

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good article2011 Tucson shooting has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 15, 2012Good article nomineeListed
In the newsA news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on January 8, 2011.
On this day...Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 8, 2013, January 8, 2021, and January 8, 2024.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2011 Tucson shooting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on 2011 Tucson shooting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on 2011 Tucson shooting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


New video, audio, photographs from the shooting released by FBI April 2018

[edit]

The FBI just released a whole load of evidence from the shooting which can be found here:[ https://vault.fbi.gov/2011-tucson-shooting/2011-tucson-shooting-media?b_start:int=0 ]. It's a lot to go through and i've just started looking through the documents myself. I'm still pretty dang new to contributing to Wikipedia, so with as much information as this is and with such an important page I don't really feel comfortable adding all the new information myself... I hope that sharing this helps! 2601:647:4500:EE3E:AC6A:17E8:F6D0:776F (talk) 07:52, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link. Unfortunately, It would take the average person a month of Sundays to look at everything in this archive, and there is no summary or thumbnails to help with sifting through it. I'm not sure if this is suitable as a cite or an external link for this reason.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:24, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I quickly skimmed the list. Here are some potentially usable photos, but someone would need to upload them to commons:

--K.e.coffman (talk) 00:32, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As for using the images in the article, the weapon is the one that could be added. The others aren't all that useful for adding to the article. The images are public domain.[1]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 05:09, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ChaseK7, regarding your edits to this article, there is no need for citation overkill. See WP:Citation overkill. Regarding your tag, I'm not sure what is meant by "outdated sources," unless the article is actually reporting on outdated matters that newer sources have shown to be in error, but as for broken links, it's easy enough to replace them or change them. Also see WP:Dead links. And keep in mind that this is a WP:Good article. Your contribution history shows that despite your account being new, you are not a new editor. So you perhaps do not need to be told any of this (except for the citation overkill part). Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:57, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see that ChaseK7 was, unsurpsingly, blocked as a sock. Springee has reduced the material ChaseK7 added. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:56, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Loughner's political views

[edit]

Re this edit: A single source does not "prove the claims misplaced", it is simply a contrary viewpoint. I'm concerned about the style and tone of this edit, and also that it relies on a source that clearly dislikes other media sources and is largely based on Paul Bond's personal opinion.[2]--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 16:54, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The edit was in clear violation of MOS:WEASEL and WP:NPOV, hence my modification to it. Incidentally I didn't realise it was a new addition. I hadn't heard of this shooting before yesterday and when I read this article for the first time that wording just clearly stuck out as extremely biased and problematic. How do you feel about the current wording ianmacm? I was almost going to move the sentence out of the lead and into the body myself, and probably would have done so if I had realised it was a recent addition. Damien Linnane (talk) 23:43, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There is a much better source discussing this here. What often happens after mass shootings is that the media comes up with theories about the motive that are subsequently disproved. This is why Template:Current exists. Sarah Palin faced criticism for the crosshairs map which was regarded as tasteless political debate, but it is not seen as a motive for the shooting; Loughner may never even have seen it, as the Washington Post source says. I wasn't very keen on the Hollywood Reporter source because most of it is taken up by Paul Bond launching into criticism of other media outlets. The article should make clear that the theory that the crosshairs map was somehow a motive for the shooting is now disproven, but it doesn't need to be in the WP:LEAD and is probably best to have it in the main body instead.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:36, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That seems like a good neutral solution; however, if we include the allegations against Palin, should we also not include that they (at least appear to be) misplaced? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Viktory02 (talkcontribs) 21:28, November 18, 2021 (UTC)
I think that has been included. "No link was proven between the crosshairs map and the shooting, and it is unclear whether Loughner ever saw the map." Damien Linnane (talk) 22:57, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]