Talk:Edmond post office shooting

Fair use rationale for Image:Patricksherrill.jpg
Image:Patricksherrill.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Copypasta = Copyright infringement
Most of this article appears to have been copied and pasted directly from http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/mass/work_homicide/4.html. I posted an alert at WP:Copyright problems earlier and am now deleting all of the copied material, as I can't find any "clean" version in the revision history. PLEASE DO NOT restore the material in question without mentioning it here first. If there is conflict we will seek administrator input. The Sartorialist (talk) 06:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Netrality marker?
There is a marker on this article about NPoV, but there is no mention of it on this talk page. Does anybody know what it is about, and if it can be purged? --Donovan Ravenhull (talk) 12:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The author of this article seems to be emotionally invested in the narrative. For instance, under "Possible motives," the author unnecessarily emphasizes in two consecutive sentences that Sherrill's reprimands were "appropriate" and "earned." In my opinion, that's not how an objective narrator would have documented the event. It's almost as if the author has an axe to grind with Sherrill.

The author also emphasizes that those who think Sherrill was being bullied by his supervisors were a small minority. The goal appears to be to trivialize any complaints Sherrill may have had about the working environment. As a long-time resident of the Oklahoma City area, I've experienced this kind of workplace bullying myself on numerous occasions, as well as the same kinds of attempts to trivialize my concerns about that behavior. I also happen to know that many people who live in Edmond can be insufferably cruel to people who they consider to be inferior to themselves. It's not difficult at all for me to conceive that Sherrill may have been pushed too far. - An Anonymous Observer 

What happened to him?
The article doesn't say what became of him.--Hooperbloob (talk) 06:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Date of death is same as the date of the attack. RJFJR (talk)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: page moved.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 00:59, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Patrick Sherrill → Edmond post office shooting – Article should be titled after the shooting, which is notable, and not the individual (WP:BLP1E). Open to other title suggestions as well (e.g. "killings", "rampage", etc.) Plot Spoiler (talk) 17:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Support WP:BLP1E as stated. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Strictly speaking, I think it's WP:BIO1E rather than WP:BLP1E, but the idea's the same. —BarrelProof (talk) 03:40, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Support WP:COATRACK, this is an article on the shooting spree, not the shooter. -- 70.24.249.39 (talk) 04:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - Interestingly, had Patrick Sherrill and Jennifer San Marco committed their crimes not in a day, but in a month or two, consensus would probably be to have an article about them and not the event, though I am not really sure what the logic is behind treating serial killers differently than mass murderers. 14 people killed in the course of a year - article about the perpetrator. 14 people killed in a day - article about the event. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me, since covering the perpetrator often seems the more natural approach, because in the aftermath of such mass killings the lives of the perpetrators are often extensively scrutinized by the media. Also it would spare us the necessity to constantly come up with self-invented titles. (Lord Gøn (talk) 11:45, 24 September 2013 (UTC))
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Reconfigure to event
Now that the article has been moved, shouldn't it be reconfigured to focus on the event and not the perpetrator? --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (talk) 17:56, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Subsequent postal shooting incidents
I added this section because this incident is mentioned in many of the sources for other similar events as the "start of the trend". The other sources also state that the series of shootings brought attention to the workplace conditions in post offices and brought about changes in how employees were treated and managed. If we need more sourced content to that effect, so be it, but that is why this section exists. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 15:36, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Why is this page so short?
I gotta say for being the 11th worst mass shooting in US history, this page doesn't have that much content. Why is that? is it because of the time that it happened in? We all know that this was pre social media, so it definitely harder to find information on the gunman. This article seems more like an essay rather than a regular Wikipedia article for notable events in terms of size length. Of course there are many more shootings with higher/less fatalities than this one and they contain lots of details and sections to put them in. This isn't the only big shooting article with a relativity short page, the Luby's shooting I feel like has less or about the same. From what I can recall, it goes from the summary of events, then list of victims and then the shooter and a short bio about him. These major shooting spree's in my opinion deserve more content and over time they will be forgotten by the general public as these types of crimes will continue to happen. That's just my thoughts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by YatesTucker00090 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 11 April 2019 (UTC)