Talk:Normandale Park shooting

Context
This shooting is directly connected to the summer 2020 BLM protests George_Floyd_protests_in_Portland,_Oregon and the 2017 attack by Jeremy Christian 2017_Portland_train_attack It has received international attention. I am gathering news sources, including NYT, WashPost, WSJ and Intercept as well as detailed local perspective from Portland Mercury. Also related to the frequent Proud_Boys and Patriot_Prayer incursions into Portland. Details to come. Art to Tech (talk) 05:25, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Normandale Park shooting - sandbox draft Here's general direction I would take the article. Art to Tech (talk) 06:49, 26 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Can you create an on-wiki draft, in your sandbox, instead of a Google doc? It also seems early to be making such broad connections when so little is known about this event. Beccaynr (talk) 10:13, 26 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Normandale Park shooting - sandbox draft is done. I noticed the Justice For Patrick Kimmons ongoing (2 years) protest is missing from Wikipedia, it is a fixture of Portland Protests, I will add it to that page when I get a chance. Art to Tech (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * As an initial matter, please review WP:BLP policy and related discussions on this Talk page; in the meantime, I will edit your draft accordingly, including per the WP:BLP policy: Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. Beccaynr (talk) 16:40, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I also think there are some WP:COATRACK issues in the draft, because it looks like an attempt to connect a variety of subjects without WP:SECONDARY sources making those connections directly. Please also note per WP:RSP There is consensus that The Intercept is generally reliable for news. Almost all editors consider The Intercept a biased source, so uses may need to be attributed. Beccaynr (talk) 16:58, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you Beccaynr for your thoughtful assistance, I am a relative newbie. Art to Tech (talk) 17:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, I appreciate your thoughtful and cautious approach to developing this article, and look forward to ongoing discussion. Beccaynr (talk) 17:19, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

Redirect
This breaking news, with multiple references for the same/similar information and no current indication of lasting major consequences, or affecting a major geographical scope, or significant non-routine coverage persisting over a period of time per WP:EVENT, appears suitable for a redirect to List of mass shootings in the United States in 2022 at this time, because it is a topic [...] described or listed within a wider article. Beccaynr (talk) 05:27, 22 February 2022 (UTC)


 * The shooting is notable because it happened during a protest, and because the perpetrator was probably politically motivated.Dunutubble (talk) 14:10, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * At this time, it does not appear there is objective support for an article, and there are policy reasons, including because Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and also not a tabloid, so sensationalist allegations about living people appear inappropriate per WP:BLPCRIME. Beccaynr (talk) 15:33, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:BLPCRIME is applied extremely poorly here. The alleged shooter's name is never mentioned; all "allegations" are specified to clarify that they might not be the case.
 * With regards to the tabloid journalism, I don't see any sensational content whatsoever in the article, just an attempt to add more content to the article. The reason this looks like WP:NOTNEWS is because it is repeatedly prevented from reaching a somewhat more quality-content article. Dunutubble (talk) 16:55, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , you had added an alleged suspect's name to this Talk page, so I refactored it. And from my view, it is sensationalism to use allegations and breaking news about living people, because this appears to be contrary to WP:BLP policy as well as what Wikpedia is not. Specifying "allegations" about people who are relatively unknown does not excuse the addition of sensationalized tabloid-style content about living people. And Wikipedia does not lead, it follows, which appears to be part of why we are encouraged to be cautious and conservative when building encyclopedic content, e.g. it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. Beccaynr (talk) 17:12, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * And initial information is already adjusted, e.g. in an article by The Oregonian discussing two mass shootings and a police shooting in Portland over the past weekend: [Chief Chuck] Lovell said the Police Bureau’s initial reference to the Normandale Park shooting suspect as a "homeowner" was probably a result of information that may not have been thoroughly vetted before it was made public or "semantics that can trip us up a bit.", which seems like an example of how breaking news can be problematic for the encyclopedia. Beccaynr (talk) 00:18, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Accused suspect
As of today, multiple news sources (at least three  ) seem to be reporting a prime suspect. There hasn't been an arrest or police statement to that effect from what I can find and none of those sources are rated WP:RSP reliable, so I'm not adding them yet, but these may be useful later on. —Kimberly Grey (talk) 13:16, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I think several policies apply to the issue of whether to add information about suspects and arrests. The following sections of WP:BLP policy, in addition to the policy that Wikipedia is not a newspaper, appear to weigh against publishing information about arrests (which are still allegations), particularly of anyone who is relatively unknown, including their name:


 * Per WP:BLPCRIME, A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures; that is, individuals not covered by, editors must seriously consider including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed, or is accused of having committed, a crime, unless a conviction has been secured.
 * The WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE section of the policy, which applies to people who are relatively unknown, includes, Material that may adversely affect a person's reputation should be treated with special care, and the WP:BLPNAME section includes, Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When deciding whether to include a name, its publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories.
 * With regard to the notability tag I added to the article, it is encouragement for editors to find sources that objectively help demonstrate notability as outlined in the WP:EVENT guideline. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 14:36, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Just here to encourage editors to read sources closely. At this time, there is only one version of events. We haven't heard the shooter's version of events. Also, the police have video. I appreciate the NPV of this article so far, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.164.167.85 (talk) 17:02, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

New Lines Magazine
This does not appear to be a reliable source, based on the article description New Lines Magazine, as well as the content of the particular source that has been attempted to be used and added to the article. This at best questionable source does not appear suitable for the WP:BLPCRIME-related claims it makes about the suspect. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 23:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not censored. You seem to be diligently removing almost everything that discusses the broader context of this shooting. A reason the shooting is notable is because of its context. Minnemeeples (talk) 23:18, 16 February 2023 (UTC)


 * What do you specifically mean about it not being an RS? Based on the article description and the about page it seems fine. And is this what you specifically dislike per BLPCRIME? Again that's not very specific. I don't see how the added narrative would violate some reading of BLPCRIME. tedder (talk) 23:30, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * New Lines Magazine redirects to Fairfax University of America, and after I reviewed the source and the article, it appeared WP:QUESTIONABLE to me, e.g. generally unsuitable for citing contentious claims about third parties. But I did not review the about page, which does make the source appear to be WP:RSOPINION (and it is labeled "Argument"), and appropriate for the Further Reading section. When I saw it as an unreliable source, removing it from the Further Reading section seemed additionally supported because of how it discusses a living person accused of a crime, and related to using it for statements of fact about a living person accused of a crime (e.g. ).
 * I think the source could be used in the Reaction section, attributed to the author at New Lines Magazine, for "It was, and remains, a searing and traumatic night for the entire Portland protest community. Few people I know can talk about it without crying." A reason this event is notable is because of its impact, and this appears to be a good source according to that guideline. I hope this helps clarify my thoughts on this. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 00:04, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

ADL sources for Normandale
There are already many sources in the article about the extremism connection, so putting them here in case other find them useful for other citation reasons. tedder (talk) 17:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC)