David the July 23 story at issue was reported in The New York Times (NYT), The British Broadcasting Company (BBC), HaAretz, Israel National News (INN), Agence France Presse (APF) and Al-Hayat Al-Jedidah.
I do not remember if any of them used the word "murder". I used the word "murder" based upon the wikipedia article definition.
I have heard your position regarding INN. Perhaps your re-emphasis of this one point is due to my lack of acknowlegement.
Could you repond to my questions regarding the use of the term "murder" at wikipedia.
Do we honor our own definition?
Please see previous email regarding the question and others.
Sincerely, Lance6Wins
--- David Gerard fun@thingy.apana.org.au wrote:
On 07/28/04 18:07, Harry Smith wrote:
with regard to calling an act murder. The common definition of murder and the definition that
appears
in wikipedia is: Murder is the crime of intentionally causing the
death
of another human being, without lawful excuse. If we accept this definition, then we need to ask
if
the individuals that shot the boy had lawful
excuse.
From the articles, the reason for the shooting is
that
the boy and his family opposed the attempt to use
the
family's property/land. Does the family's refusal constitute lawful excuse for the shooting?
The particular case isn't the issue. What is at issue is your habit of using the linked words [[terrorist]] and [[murder]] when you contribute INN news pieces to [[Current events]]. It's blatant emotive slanting of the story. And the real problem is it isn't informative - how was the "murder" in question performed? [[terrorist]] vs [[freedom fighter]] vs fighter without major military hardware? Etc.
Your usage of terms in a blatantly emotive way that adds nothing to the informational content of the piece is a real problem.
- d.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@Wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail