Talk:Self-immolation of Aaron Bushnell

Opinion piece as source for facts, and correcting factual error
The article currently contains this sentence:

"In an Al Jazeera column, Belén Fernández criticized The New York Times, which failed to mention Bushnell's motive in the title of their report, and Time, which implied that Bushnell might be mentally ill without elaborating on the "mentally disturbing" political reality, namely US backing for Israel in the Gaza conflict."

There are two points to make about this: First, the column in Al Jazeera is an opinion column (it is clearly marked as such in the site). Yet it is used here to establish two factual claims: That the NYT didn't mention Bushnell's motive in the title, and that the TIme implied that Bushnell might be mentally ill. Searching through the policy pages I didn't find any such prohibition on using opinion pieces to establish facts (so long as the facts are attributed, and the publication is reliable). Do you agree? I personally have absolutely no problem with that, but I'd like to hear other opinions.

In contrast, the second point is problematic in my view. And it is that the second "fact" mentioned by Belén Fernández seem to be incorrect. The Time in fact did not imply that Bushnell might be mentally ill. If you look at the "proof" she gives it is this: "At the bottom of the Time article, readers are charitably given the following instructions: If you or someone you know may be experiencing a mental-health crisis or contemplating suicide, call or text 988 – which naturally implies that Bushnell was simply the victim of a mental-health crisis". But his seems baseless. These instructions at the bottom are today a standard announcement that any self respecting publication publishes in any report about suicide, for the obvious and justified fear that such reports might rigger suicidal people to commit suicide. It's quite farfetched to present this as "The Time implied that Bushnell might be mentally ill".

Therefore I suggest to change the sentence into: ""In an Al Jazeera column, Belén Fernández criticized The New York Times for failing to mention Bushnell's motive in the title of their report."

@LegalSmeagolian@Sameboat @Parabolist @Iskandar323@Makeandtoss Vegan416 (talk) 10:21, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Does it matter that it seems baseless? Wikipedia is full of inferences that seem baseless to me. Having an opinion that something implied something is just an opinion isn't it? The sentence could be rewritten to make it clearer that these are her opinions rather than what it seems to do now, present it as if the opinions are correct. The way I read the Time claim is that it is just a device, a setup for her punchline - "At the end of the day, anyone who is not experiencing a serious “mental-health crisis” over the genocide going down in Gaza with full US backing can be safely filed under the category of psychologically disturbed", which I assume is her main point. Sean.hoyland (talk) 11:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You mean something like that?
 * "In an Al Jazeera column, Belén Fernández criticized The New York Times, which failed to mention Bushnell's motive in the title of their report, and Time, for not elaborating on what in her opinion is the "mentally disturbing" political reality of US backing Israel in the Gaza conflict." Vegan416 (talk) 12:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * When we say things like "which failed", I hear wiki-voice, not the columnist's voice. Anyway, if it were up to me, I would probably get rid of her examples and replace them with her summary, something along the lines of "In an Al Jazeera column, Belén Fernández wrote that "the US political-media establishment appears to be doing its best to not only decontextualise but also posthumously discredit" Bushnell. Sean.hoyland (talk) 13:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Since it appears in the section about media coverage I think I'll go with this:
 * "In an Al Jazeera column, Belén Fernández criticized The New York Times, for not mentioning Bushnell's motive in the title of their report, and Time, for not elaborating on what in her opinion is the "mentally disturbing" political reality of US backing Israel in the Gaza conflict." Vegan416 (talk) 13:14, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 April 2024
"Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei highlighted Bushnell's actions in two X posts sent a few hours apart." 2A00:23D0:FAE:FD01:20AA:2AC5:DABC:C629 (talk) 20:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Typo fixed. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 21:08, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Change request
Under "See also", please add List of peace activists. I have added Bushnell to that page. Thank you.

WagePeace (talk) 17:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Okay. Sounds reasonable to me. Groceryheist (talk) 18:29, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Oops, you made the link to List of Peace Activists, which doesn't exist because titles are case sensitive. Can you change it please to List of peace activists? Thanks.
 * WagePeace (talk) 19:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, I see it's been fixed. Thanks again.
 * WagePeace (talk) 19:14, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I removed him from that list (which has a major citation problem per WP:LISTPEOPLE and thus removed the list from See Also. There aren’t sources that call him a peace activist, nor an activist for peace, nor refer to anything he’s done as peace activism, or anything to establish him as a peace activist. Zanahary (talk) 16:24, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done  Mel ma nn   19:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

The death toll of 30,000 is according to the Hamas-run health ministry. It is said so in the BBC article that is cited a a source. This information should be added. 109.239.71.50 (talk) 18:08, 5 June 2024 (UTC)