Talk:Killing of Tyre Nichols

The lead is too wordy

Please trim to less words, and about 4 true paragraphs. A guide essay to follow is: WP:CREATELEAD. Take care. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 12:51, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

"Allegedly" assaulted

The word allegedly should be removed from the lead when it's pretty obvious the police officers assaulted him as there is video evidence of them doing so... Inexpiable (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. Reliable sources also don't talk about this as an "alleged" assault. It undoubtedly happened. 72.14.126.22 (talk) 21:44, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

The police have been charged with assault. That crime remains "alleged" until there is a court finding of guilt. WWGB (talk) 23:12, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Any criminal conduct is certainly alleged, but Nichols was clearly beat up by the police, which is not in question. Maybe the language could be refined to make that more clear? 72.14.126.22 (talk) 23:26, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

@WWGB: This is getting absurd. Of course Nichols was injured at the hands of the police before arrest. Nothing about that statement is incorrect. What is going on here with denying reality and the sources? 72.14.126.22 (talk) 05:29, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Where is it said he was injured BEFORE arrest? WWGB (talk) 05:32, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Okay fair point, it depends on what is considered "being arrested" (the process of, versus the final outcome of such an event). I changed it to say "while being detained" which should work. 72.14.126.22 (talk) 05:35, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Copyright violations by AgntOtrth

AgntOtrth has riddled this important article with constant copyright violations, so for the protection of the project I am going to blank the entire article body, leaving only the lead, which is not a copy/paste nor is it close paraphrasing nor unattributed direct quotes, as most of the article is.

This is sad, but we can quickly rewrite in our own words and unmask it. That being said, I am exhausted and won't be able to assist. Take care always. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 19:43, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

If this is all my fault, then why did you remove sections I did not edit? AgntOtrth (talk) 05:15, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

There is no source or evidence of copyright infringement mentioned in the listing. The copyright violation template that you added to the article links to a Copyvios report which analyzes the current revision and does not find any copyright violations. I ran another Copyvios report on the last revision before your edit removing the entire page, and the report finds "Violation Unlikely" with only 39.4% similarity to any sources it could find (link here). The similar text is all from names, titles, and direct quotes - nothing concerning. All other wikipedia pages which have been flagged for investigation into copyright infringement in the last 5 days have had at least 87% similarity to other sources when tested with Copyvios. I do not see any justification for deleting the entire page and asking other editors to rewrite it, nor does that action seem to follow WP:CP. If you still think there is a copyright violation, I believe the correct course of action is to discuss it on the listing page, and/or ask for a review from a WP:COPYCLERK. In the meantime, I am going to revert to the last edit before this page was erased in its entirety. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 05:50, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey, Combefere. I sense you are acting in good faith, but please read the page notice. A lot of the issues are with one-sentence copy/paste, unattributed full quotes, etc. Take care always! Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 07:44, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

so instead reverting a 5th time, would you identify the offending edits? AgntOtrth (talk) 07:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey WikiWikiWayne, thanks for responding on here! I have read the page notice, as my response above indicates. As I mentioned above, the Copyvios report linked on the page notice does not find any evidence of copyright violation. The "issues" you mention are not listed on the page notice, nor the report, nor the listing that you created... so it is unclear why you have erased the entire page and made the report in the first place. You have not linked the source whose copyright you are claiming that this page infringes on the listing page nor on the page notice. I do not believe that pre-emptively deleting the entire page before a copyright investigation has been concluded is part of Wiki policy. This kind of behavior - nuking an entire page, filing a copyright violation listing that is completely blank, and edit warring to keep the page destroyed - strikes me as vandalism. I'm hoping we can talk it out here without getting an admin involved. Could you please explain which source's copyright has been violated, and which parts of the page violate it? And ideally update your copyright listing with this information as well (like all other listings on that page include)? Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 08:08, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Yo, Combefere – You're not allowed to unblank the page portions that are blanked. I did not revert anything. Those were not net reverts. You saw this, eh?

Do not restore or edit the blanked content on this page until the issue is resolved by an administrator, copyright clerk or VRT agent.

No worries, but please do not disparage me for protecting the project within our policies, etc. My hands were tied to restore the templates. Also, the template can only be set by substitution. No edits or comments are allowed. AOT fully well knows what they copied. Courtesy pings to: @Elli, AgntOtrth, and Ritchie333:. Take care always. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 20:29, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Using the earwig copyvio tool, I don't see a copyright violation. I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Right now it just looks like a blanked article.

https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=&oldid=1145547953&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0

Philipnelson99 (talk) 20:43, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

WikiWikiWayne it sure seems you are not trying to help get supposed violations corrected. Point out the violations, discuss the violations, offer suggestions for correcting the violations. That would show you acting in good-faith AgntOtrth (talk) 23:08, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey WikiWikiWayne – , not trying to disparage, just honestly trying to understand both Wiki policy here and the specific claims of copyright infringement on this page. If it's standard procedure to blank an entire page while the copy clerk team reviews, then I won't revert.

However, I am still wondering what exactly is supposed to be copyrighted material. The listing on WP:CP just says it contains copyrighted information from "source(s)." The Copyvios report linked in the template gives an error message because it is set up improperly - instead of a working url to an actual source, it is trying to compare the wiki page to a website with the url "http://source(s)" which obviously does not exist. The word "source(s)" is not a source. What is the source? What specific copyrighted article, video, or other media has actually been infringed here? It feels like this most fundamental part of a copyright investigation has been completely omitted, and the page has been blanked for no reason. Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 21:07, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I get it. The process is not set up with any place within the template to add reasons or notes. I left the lead alone because was clear of copyvios. But, bam, existing consensus text in the lead was overwritten with 95% copy/paste of the ref's headline. My mop was broken by then so I blanked one sentence only, trying to save the lead. It's not my job to babysit the page against somebody who thinks that everything we post has to use the exact word that the citation uses. I could go on but this is a huge suck on my time for productive and enjoyable editing. Having fun when I can. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 00:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

WikiWikiWayne Why didn't you start a talk page discussion to address specific issues. It is not other editors job to decipher vague claims made by others? Why did you blank portions of the article I never edited? AgntOtrth (talk) 00:47, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Combefere – I was not expecting the blanking. I was expecting a curtain.

The template bundle is hard to use.

Maybe post on the template talk page with your questions. A bot is supposed to clean up any buggy expansions of the template. Take care always. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 01:00, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

WikiWikiWayne –  - This isn't a problem with the template, it's a problem with your use of it. You are required to provide a url indicating the source where the content was copied from. You have not provided one. You just typed "source(s)." That's not a valid url. The word "source" is not a source. It's getting very difficult to continue assuming good faith here when you have continued to evade this simple and fundamental question. I have asked three times now, and others have asked as well - it seems like we are clearly in WP:ICANTHEARYOU territory. What is the specific url to the source whose copyright you are claiming has been infringed? Combefere ❯❯❯ Talk 01:16, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Combefere – No, I typed nothing into the template. It's automatic, and a bot is supposed to repair any transclusion errors after it is substituted and saved. I only come in good faith. Please take your issues with the template to their talk page. Not my problem and I have no solutions. Sorry.

Take care always. PS: I will read the verbose template doc again. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 01:37, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Ref using Archive as title

The ref using "Archive" as its title should be changed to this |title =: 'Deputy Chief Cerelyn "C.J." Davis'. Take care always. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 04:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Resolving vs wikilawyering

Hey, all. I am here in good faith to improve this article and the wiki within our boundaries. I abhor conflict and wikilawyering and to that end, I am getting fresh eyes on the conflict with many of AgntOtrth's content edits and their conduct around their editing, and their battling with me.

Come here if you can help resolve the conflict. Please comment and add your perspectives, own issues, and solutions (with me or them).

I wish them no harm, and I will assist them if they ask, and if I am able. Take care always. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 15:53, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

You engaged in at least two edit wars in the article, could explain how that is being here in good faith?

You have made almost 22% of the total edits, seems like you are trying to take ownership, yet you label my < 7% as trying to take ownership - could you explain how that is being here in good faith?

An editor identified that a copyvio search found it unlikely their were violations, without utilizing the talk page you reverted multiple times - could you explain how that is editing here in good-faith?

AgntOtrth (talk) 16:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Don't use an editor's history in other topic areas against them. It's low, and a personal attack. Bowler the Carmine | talk 17:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Hey, Bowler the Carmine and AgntOtrth – I truly appreciate your replies and I hear you both. AOT is assuming bad faith. That's not the wiki way. But, I hear and see their point(s), even if it's unfounded and violates our 5-pillars.

In the past 3 days, I have seen that 98℅ of the editors assume bad faith and that the worst are our admins. It's super toxic. The admins are trying to indef ban and block me, and I had zero chance for due process.

AOT: You have to assume good faith. Otherwise, there's drama. Drama is toxic to the movement.

The edit count does not mean much. Some editors add 5000 words in one drop and walk away. I edit by section, not by the page, and I hit every section. I also have user scripts that do not allow bundling the edits. I am shocked about having 300+ edits here but many are 0-5k in size. I mostly MOS, style, format, unify, and minor copy edits... so those edits pile up quickly. I do delete for redundant redundancy. But, mostly I just try to polish up what you "guys" put up.

Another editor might make 100 edits and only add 10 words.

I have never made an ownership edit in my 37,000 edits over 11 years. AOT, it's none of my business but why are you so rabid, cocksure, and combative about this one article? And, only this one. I would like to understand. Also, I truly appreciate and acknowledge the time you asked for my advice. I know you're not a sockpuppet tooling us. You might be a meatpuppet. I don't know, and I don't care right now.

Bowler: Thanks for having my back. My whole world turned upside down on Friday... and your kindness and looking out are appreciated and timely.

Can't we all just get along? I apologize for anything I have done to frustrate that. Take care always. PS: AOT, if you add even a single dot to your user page, your username will stop being red. It makes our pings to you easier to proofread. Cheers! {{u|WikiWikiWayne}} {Talk} 19:47, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

It is your choice for us to get along. Your conduct speaks against the assumption of good faith. You have spent so much time in past 24 hrs doing so much; except for helping the article. And now two editors have posted they do not understand your claim. And instead of helping them or helping me, you persist in only claiming good faith, and you have not engaged in discussion to resolve anything. Your actions speak volumes against your words. AgntOtrth (talk) 23:02, 20 March 2023 (UTC)