Jump to content

Talk:2023 Nashville school shooting/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1←Archive 5Archive 6Archive 7

Anti-white hate crime

Given that the leaked manifesto has been verified as accurate, why does the infobox not have "Anti-white racism" for a motive? --24.125.98.89 (talk) 23:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Verified as accurate by whom? News headlines making opinionated conclusions? Mousefountain (talk) 19:28, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

“This police department is extremely serious about the investigation to identify the person responsible,” the police chief said in a statement about the unauthorized release of the writings. “This action showed a total disregard for Covenant families, as well as the court system, which has control of the shooter’s journals at the present time due to litigation filed earlier this year.”

[1]
Cool, so with that out of the way lets just go ahead and put the "anti-White racism" as a motivation and move on. --24.125.98.89 (talk) 18:39, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Why are you so determined to railroad this? 2600:8804:5409:DB00:E363:FA56:C035:934D (talk) 03:33, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia is built on the idea of citing reliable news sources. Trying to deride such as "news headlines making opinionated conclusions" does not help to improve the article. - 2A02:810A:12BF:E2A0:E845:1444:4AC6:1AB1 (talk) 18:41, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
You would reliable sources that claim this is the motive. I cannot find any reliable sources stating any motive. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:29, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 July 2024

The ongoing investigation into the motive behind the 2023 Nashville school shooting: Despite early suggestions that the shooter, Audrey Hale, may have harbored resentment toward her former school, no clear motive has been established. Authorities, including the FBI and Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, have found Hale's writings to be incoherent, indicating possible mental health issues rather than specific ideological motives. The lack of a clear motive has led to public and political speculation, but investigators urge patience as they continue their analysis. Santoshsendha (talk) 12:44, 17 July 2024 (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. --Super Goku V (talk) 19:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 Sep 2024

The complete shooter manifesto has been published today by RS. See here. Please add a few sentences on this.

Here is a possible example to conform to SPER restrictions.

"Please add the following sentences: The Tennessee Star, a local news outlet, has published the 90-page manifesto written by Hale. The journal, which the outlet claims to have legally obtained from a source familiar with the investigation, contains Hale's writings from January to March 2023 and includes details about her mental health, gender identity, and plans for the attack."

There is much more to add, including in-line citations, but for now the important thing this article sorely needs is adding the above facts (or similar).

2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F (talk) 18:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: Tennessee Star is not a reliable source. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
According to whom? Where is your sourced RfC concluding it is not? Wikipedia:Reliable sources's states that "it is a non-exhaustive list...". So the fact that it is not on the perennial list doesn't exclude it from being a proper source.If you don't like, I'd encourage you to start a RfC first and gather consensus first before posting disparaging opinions.
Furthermore, here are more sources for you:
Townhall
WSMV (local TN news station)
The Tennessean
WKRN (local news station)
2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F (talk) 21:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
See: [2] O3000, Ret. Your other sources all use the Tennessee Star as a source. They are not additional sources. (talk) 21:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
well the Steven Crowder leaks are covered in the article, he isnt a reliable source and no direct link to his site is provided yet other sites which use his website as a source are used in the article. why is this leak any different? 2600:1010:A120:AA91:1D62:CFDE:B7DC:20E7 (talk) 21:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
We use reliable secondary sources. WP:SECONDARY O3000, Ret. (talk) 21:21, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
like the WSMV, WKRN, and The Tennessean links listed above? 2600:1010:A120:AA91:1D62:CFDE:B7DC:20E7 (talk) 22:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
Not when they regurgitate an unreliable source. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:15, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
i will ask again, why then is the Crowder leak included? 2600:1010:A120:AA91:1D62:CFDE:B7DC:20E7 (talk) 22:17, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
You are absolutely correct. This looks like a case of trying to deprecate a source while bypassing consensus.
2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F (talk) 21:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
You are linking to Snopes instead of WP policy? It seems you can't argue your point so decide to say no based on your opinion? Do you have a COI on this topic given your apparent denial without justification?
The above is a legitimate question asked for the benefit of the article.
Else, you are wrongly discarding several legitimate sources because they are not your preferred ones.
I woums also encourage you to open a RfC and try to ban the sources you openly dislike. Else, this is Wikipedia:Due.
2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F (talk) 21:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
First, read WP:PA WP:AGF WP:CIV as you have violated them all. Next you can read [[3]]. This is one of several WP:RSN discussions on Tennessee Star and related fake news sites. O3000, Ret. (talk) 21:57, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
please point out the personal attack from the (other) IP. i certainly do not see a personal attack nor anything uncivil. perhaps me and the other IP could learn a thing or two. 2600:1010:A120:AA91:1D62:CFDE:B7DC:20E7 (talk) 22:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
You are Wikipedia:Please do not bite the newcomers and improperly Wikipedia:Wikilawyering your point. I do not see any violation of civility here and, given your strongly worder opinions and the manner you are conducting them, I don't see your good faith, sadly.
I will ask that you stop replying to me and get an uninvolved administrator if you believe I have done something wrong. Please stop Wikipedia:Casting aspersions.
On the topic of one of the sources being suggested, it has not been deprecated nor blocked given the sparsely participated thread you linked. I would reiterate the suggestion above: open a RfC and find consensus to get the source banned since this is what you want to do. In the mean time, it is a valid source. Moreover, Steven Crowder and others are heavily cited in this article. Much to your disappointment, it would seem - given your staged opinions.
Finally, blocking a valid source since it states facts that don't seem to conform to your vision of this article seems like a violation of Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. I would like to remind everybody that Wikipedia:Ownership of content applies.
2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F (talk) 23:37, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
More sources:
New York Sun
Fox
Tampa Free Press
The Washington Times
A total of 10 non-depcrecated nor banned sources are covering it. This is now Wikipedia:Due.
2601:19E:427E:5BB0:8BAB:B116:675B:AB5F (talk) 23:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
The edit request template is for uncontroversial changes or ones that already have consensus. This is neither. Please do not reactivate the template. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 00:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:2023_Nashville_school_shooting/Archive_7&oldid=1263818917"