- The 4chan Serial Killer
- 08 The 4chan Serial Killer
- 08. The 4chan Serial Killer
- 08 The 4chan Serial Killer
A 2013 article asserted that the original image of Jeff the Killer was an extensively edited picture of a girl who committed suicide in the fall of 2008. However, in 2018, after extensive research on 4chan's /x/ board, this rumor was debunked; the original image came from Japanese website pya.cc from September and November 2005. Harold Frederick Shipman (14 January 1946 – 13 January 2004), known to acquaintances as Fred Shipman, was an English general practitioner who is believed to be the most prolific serial killer in modern history. He becomes a serial killer who sneaks into houses at night and whispers 'go to sleep' to his victims before killing them. 15 According to a 2013 article, the original image of Jeff the Killer may be an extensively edited picture of a girl who allegedly completed suicide in the fall of 2008.
< Talk:Mike Myers
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Whiskey Leg
The first sentence of this article was 'Mike Myers has a fake leg that he keeps whiskey in and his family calls him whiskey leg.'
I'm guessing that not true, so I'm removing it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.211.23.31 (talk) 02:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Citizenship
I'm assuming that A Myers has dual British/Canadian citizenship, since he is so frequently described as Canadian and was born in Canada, and several sources say he carries a British passport. I've edited the article to say that (and correct the birthplace!) but I can't find any sources that say explicitly that he has dual citizenship. However being born in Canada would grant him Canadian citizenship automatically, so unless he renounced it when he came of age I would expect it to still be valid. Has anyone any more sources? DJ Clayworth 18:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- Wouldn't the fact that his parents were born in Britain automatically grant him British citizenship?
- If they were British citizens, yes. It would give him dual nationality.Fatswaller (talk) 20:57, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- he is not known to be a U.S. citizen: Anyone want to do some digging around for info on this? He was married to an American for 12 years, and lived in the US for quite a long time; it seems unlikely to me that he wouldn't have American citizenship, unless there are restrictions on how many countries a person can belong to. --Tellybelly 03:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
- Citizenship is not granted automatically upon marriage or upon its lasting the required number of years; one has to file. Some people choose not to file despite qualifying. Nonetheless, I agree it should be researched. Lawikitejana 14:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- The Kanye West article mentions that Mike Myers once joked about having his American citizenship revoked, and having to fall back on his Canadian one. Just a joke, but may be valid info. Bueller 007 12:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- Citizenship is not granted automatically upon marriage or upon its lasting the required number of years; one has to file. Some people choose not to file despite qualifying. Nonetheless, I agree it should be researched. Lawikitejana 14:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- he is not known to be a U.S. citizen: Anyone want to do some digging around for info on this? He was married to an American for 12 years, and lived in the US for quite a long time; it seems unlikely to me that he wouldn't have American citizenship, unless there are restrictions on how many countries a person can belong to. --Tellybelly 03:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
He does have dual citizenship. Therefore by Wikipedia's standards, he is British - Canadian. Norum 14:02, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
Myers states himself on the Marc Maron WTF podcast, 27th July 2014, that he is a British, Canadian AND U.S. Citizen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.61.95 (talk) 09:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Vanity Fair 1999 controversy
http://www.saja.org/vf.html <-- Shall some mention of this be included perhaps? --Rebroad 15:53, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
cited - Mr. Mullins —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.1.206.187 (talk) 18:01, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Myers thinking about making a War Movie
So I've heard many times that Mike Myers is really keen on working on a war movie of the type Saving Private Ryan/Bridge too far/Longest Day, of the Canadian Landing at Dieppe (or Juno.. i forget). Wouldn't it be good to include it into here? paat 23:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
well i dont think so becuase that has not been told to the public in the first person who knows if your infor mation is incorrect???
At the Upright Citizens Brigade Theatre in NYC in summer 2005, he was interviewed as at the theatre's monthly show, Inside Joke, where he stated that he had been interested in doing a project set in WWII, as he's always been fascinated by the period and his mother's stories of working for the Royal Air Force where she helped move pieces on scale battle models and maps.
Ancestry
FYI Ancestry does NOT have an 'o' in it.
Early lifeBoth of Myers' parents are from Liverpool, England, and Myers has British as well as Canadian citizenship. His ethnic heritage is English, Scottish and Irish, and he has stated that he considers himself to be British although he is also very vocal about being a proud Canadian.
I thought he was partially Jewish also? Considering Myers is a pretty common anglo-adapted Jewish Surname?
[Novalis]Yes, that is true, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Myers_(judge)sometimes in Germany/Deutschland,too. But Meyer/Maier/Meier..are NOT everytimes jewish names,There are many 'Meier' 'Meyers' 'Maier' in Germany, like 'Smith' and 'Jones' in the USA.But I had think, that his Ancestory were German, because I never hear, that the name 'Meyers/Myer'is britisch. you can see:http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/MeierIf you an protector for the (manors)aristocracy (or someone like this), in early middle century,you can have gotten this name in Germany/Austria etc.or:http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meyer
- No, he isn't Jewish, he's said that several times. 'Myers' can be a Scottish/Anglo name, too. Mad Jack 03:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed the phrase '..and he has stated that he considers himself to be British[citation needed] although he is also very vocal about being a proud Canadian' from the Background section. It has been tagged for some time as lacking a citation. If someone can find a source, we can move it back into the article. --Skeezix1000 12:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
Wheither he likes it or not, he's not British. It doesn't matter what he conciders his ancestory, if he wasn't born or raised there, he's not British.
- Whether you like it or not, if both his parents are British and he holds a British passport (and one can find quotes of Myers referring to a UK passport), he's as British as anyone born in the UK. Based on my experience of Wikipedia over the years, I'm willing to bet a not insubstantial sum of money that you spend a lot of time adding 'Irish' to articles. Those who argue against connections and/or links to 'British', 'English' etc usually do. 86.7.211.128 (talk) 00:47, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Were his parents born in Britian? Because if so then he most likely has dual nationality. ~ H.D.E.
- British is ethnicity as well as citizenship. Mike Myers is 100% British. It doesn't matter if he was born there or not. One doesn't say to someone that they lose all ties with the land where their ancestors have lived for thousands of years simply because they weren't born there. Would you tell a native American born outside of the United States that they were no longer a native American? 220.253.165.119 (talk) 15:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
- Actually, British is not an ethnicity, but English, Irish, Scottish, Welsh are. Britain is a civic/political union 99.236.245.18 (talk) 01:25, 5 August 2010 (UTC) Sorry English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh are not ethnicities. In the UK there are people of all manner of ethnicity. In Scotland as an example there are people of West Indian, African and Indian heritage. White British IS an ethnicity as recognised by all government documentation. Mike Myer's ethnicity is White British. Sue De Nimes (talk) 07:26, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
Fraiser
Is the mention of Fraiser killer'Catchphrases' section really a criticism? It's more of a statement on how annoying it is to have someone constantly repeating the same phrase than a criticism of Myers.--Agent Aquamarine 12:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
See above^ I can see why is would be a criticism of Mike Myers, or more to the point, Austin Powers, because haveing some things, such as those catch-phrases, quoted over and over again can be far more annoying than, say, someone saying 'Meedlemeedlemeedle' Over and over again, if you catch me. ~ H.D.E.
- What are 'Fraiser killer 'Catchphrases'? 86.7.211.128 (talk) 00:50, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Katrina Controversy?
I find this section to be absolutely useless. At best, Myers' mere presence at the incident deserves a Trivia-section mention.
Thoughts? 128.103.14.20 18:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Avoid Trivia, it's un-Wikipedic. Barfbagger 08:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree with both of you. It really isn't significant to myers (it barely involves him other than his saying that his citizenship was revoked) and doesnt deserve its own section. However it also shouldnt be in a trivia section. Can anyone think of a way to integrate the information into the article some other way? Glassbreaker5791 00:45, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- I don't see that there is any information relevant to the article. It's really rather pointless. Unless someone can make a case for its retention, it ought to be chucked. Vilĉjo 21:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
But you gotta admit, those glances at West were pretty darn funny. Th900bbepr 05:56, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
Catchphrases
Myers takes credit for so many catchphrases it makes one's head spin. While he claims to have popularized '..not!' the same ironic speech can be found in many films from the 40's and 50's. Now Myers is taking credit for inventing 'that's what SHE said!' Please be the dam that blockades Myers's high-jacking of our subculture. 76.80.19.161 07:49, 5 May 2007 (UTC) Maynotlast
Not sure the history on either catchphase, but both gained cultural notoriety with the first airings of Wayne's World. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.227.24.172 (talk) 10:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
The 4chan Serial Killer
Ethnicity
Myers should be listed as British-Canadian instead of Canadian-British.
Usually when labeling a person; ancestory is listed first, then the primary nationality.
For example, an American of Irish ancestory (even one with derivative Irish citizenship) would be labeled Irish-American, not American-Irish.
72.82.175.2 06:23, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Movies
Myers was also in a movie called So I Married An Axe Murderer. He played himself (Charlie) and his father, and made the movie before doing Austin Powers. It's one of Myers' greatest comedies! Why isn't it mentioned on this page?
Geelin 03:07, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Is there point to the Shrek 5, 6 and 7?
4chan
All the vandalism on this page is caused by 4chan. Not Ebaumsworld, 4chan.org
Ebaums getting credit is pretty much what ebaums is, getting credit for the work of others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.138.244.206 (talk) 09:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
British-Canadian or Canadian?
There seems to be a bit of an issue as to whether Myers is described as a Canadian actor, or a British-Canadian actor. While he may have been born a British subject through his parents, Canada did not (as I understand) allow dual-citizenship until 1977. In any event, it isn't up to us editors to be interpreting conflicting citizenship rules, which would be a violation of WP:OR. If we can find a reliable source that states that Myers is also a British subject, then great -- we should revise the article to describe him as a British-Canadian actor. In the meantime, I do not think there is anything wrong with describing him as a Canadian actor of British descent. Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I fall into the same category as Myers (re Cdn and British citizenship) and although you may theoretically be a British citizen you do essentially have to apply for recognition of it (it's not automatic). Unless someone knows that he did this, then Canadian of British decent is more accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.189.135.87 (talk) 17:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
I also fall in the same category - as do many in my family, and if you are born in Canada of British parents, you are automatically Canadian and have to apply for British citizenship. I didn't do this until I was an adult, and wouldn't have been recognised as British before that (though definitely of British descent) thus Canadian of British descent is most accurate.
Also - I have relatives who were dual citizens pre 1977. I'm quite sure this was permitted for the UK at least (the UK was a special case for a long time). My father and his brother and parents immigrated in 1957 from the UK to Canada. They did not renounce British Citizenship and became citizens in the 60s. I know my dad said he applied I think after university in order to be eligible for some federal jobs he couldn't apply for as a Brit, and I was born in 1977 and he was definitely a Canadian citizen before then (and had travelled internationally on a Canadian passport).
Myers orientation rumours
New York Daily News yesterday and the blogs today are saying that Myers is gay. Whatsapp web apk for pc. I don't personally care as to whether or not he is or whether or not his sexuality gets put in the article but I know Wiki well enough that there's probably going to be revert wars and passionate discussion about this utterly trivial fact so you folks might as well decide now what to do before the drama starts.--72.1.223.3 (talk) 20:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Saturday Night Live
No career info for Saturday Night Live? Redirecting to the SNL page doesn't give much insight as to his personal interaction with SNL. Many other cast members have references to their career with SNL, and being most career starters, I figured it would fit with the rest of the page. Just a thought.
Birth location
The info box states Myers was born in Ontario, but the article states that he was born in Liverpool..which one is right? I'll correct info box to match article..unless anyone else knows better. Darkieboy236 (talk) 23:38, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
- Someone screwed around with the article. The infobox was correct - he was born in Canada. Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:27, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Dual citizenship
I remember his having dual Canadian and American citizenship.
He even mentioned it in a guest appearence on SNL when K. West was the musical host. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.228.249 (talk) 23:27, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Mike Myers Looks like Supreme Court Nominee Elena Kagan
They look exactly the same!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.139.1.68 (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
Victim of a fake death rumor?
I just came across this clip on YouTube from 2008 that purports to be a tribute to the 'recently deceased' Mike Myers: [1] . So does that mean there was a fake death report in 2008? It could also just be a YouTube nutter, but while fake death reports are almost an epidemic on the Internet these days, in 2008 they were still somewhat newsworthy. Bengali to english date converter free. software download for pc. 68.146.64.9 (talk) 21:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Not to be confused with a fictional serial killer?
Is there really a legitimate fear that Mike Myers might be confused with the *fictional* serial killer, Michael Myers? Please.. this doesn't warrant a sentence in the 1st paragraph of the article. It should be relegated to a disambiguation box. 128.249.1.194 (talk) 14:27, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
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. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 09:03, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Mike Myers (actor) → Mike Myers –
- The original move was done long ago by somebody that apparently didn't understand primary topic disambiguation. People have tried to just redirect 'Mike Myers' to the actor page, but that has been reverted since it is not the right solution. Looking through all the Michael Myers, it is clear that the actor is still the primary topic for the term 'Mike Myers'. DudeOnTheStreet (talk) 22:31, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Transferred from Wikipedia:Requested moves#Current requests. Page Michael Myers lists 7 men called Mike/Michael Myers/similar, and how dominant a meaning is the actor, among these 7, and among actors? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:07, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Support: I didn't go through all the traffic stats but as far as I can tell none of the other Mike Myers approach the actor in terms of popularity. –CWenger (^ • @) 08:47, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Michael_Myers_(American_football)-489
- Michael Myers (judge)-178
- Michael Myers (politician)-538
- Michael Myers (Halloween)-58903
- Mike Meyers (baseball)-304
- Mike Myers (actor)-139116
- Mike Myers (baseball)-1063
- Weak Support - He accounts for just under 70% of the page views related to this dab. Not entirely sure that is a large enough amount to make him the main, but if anyone deserves the main page he does. It is close, IMO.--TonyTheTiger(T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for finding those numbers, Tony. The rule of thumb I have heard is a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC should have about an order of magnitude more traffic than the next most-visited page, a threshold not met in this case, unless you treat Michael and Mike separately. So what if we move Mike Myers (actor) to Mike Myers, as suggested, and Michael Myers (Halloween) to Michael Myers. Hatnotes on each could refer to Michael Myers (disambiguation) and perhaps a special mention of the most popular article with the variant name (i.e., Mike Myers (actor) notes Michael Myers (Halloween) and vice versa). –CWenger (^ • @) 20:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- There are some oddities regarding the Mike Myers (actor) and Michael Myers (Halloween character) connection. For some reason, somebody insisted on putting the latter in the lede of the former's article. I'd wager (although no real evidence) that many of those Halloween hits are from people thinking 'WTF?' and clicking on the link in the lede of the actor article. I mean, page views are fine, but use Google or ask any few dozen people you know. It's also been pointed out by Tony Sidaway on the talk page for Mike Myers that many of the Wikipedia links are actually for the actor. Ultimately, this is why we have primary topic disambiguation. If people are going to be linking to the actor most of the time, it makes little sense for them to have to type 'Mike Myers (actor)' each time, if they knew to do so. In any case, I think distinguishing between 'Michael' and 'Mike' is a good idea. Anyone typing in 'Thomas Cruise', for example, may still be looking for the actor, but the likelihood of searching for the footballer instead has increased. --DudeOnTheStreet (talk) 22:31, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for finding those numbers, Tony. The rule of thumb I have heard is a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC should have about an order of magnitude more traffic than the next most-visited page, a threshold not met in this case, unless you treat Michael and Mike separately. So what if we move Mike Myers (actor) to Mike Myers, as suggested, and Michael Myers (Halloween) to Michael Myers. Hatnotes on each could refer to Michael Myers (disambiguation) and perhaps a special mention of the most popular article with the variant name (i.e., Mike Myers (actor) notes Michael Myers (Halloween) and vice versa). –CWenger (^ • @) 20:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- Support, clearly the most likely to be called 'Mike'. PowersT 20:55, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Support, clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. --Born2cycle (talk) 21:44, 8 June 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.
See also Talk:Mike Myers/old. Andrewa (talk) 09:04, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
2012 movies
Three films were listed in the filmography as 'in production' for release in 2012:
- Marvin the Martian
- Bunnicula
- See Me Feel Me: Keith Moon Naked for Your Pleasure
But I couldn't find any evidence that these movies are in production at all, let alone due for release in 2012, so I deleted them. Barsoomian (talk) 03:21, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Canadian or British-Canadian
There has been continuous edit warring about the description of Mike Myers in the lede of the article, as 'Canadian' or 'British-Canadian'. Barsoomian (talk) 18:53, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
Since Myers was born and raised in Canada, he's therefore Canadian unless evidence otherwise is presented. The statement that he has dual citizenship is uncited. Do people actually self-identify as 'British-Canadian'? Does Myers? If so, where is it cited? Barsoomian (talk) 05:54, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- The lead is for nationality (place of birth) not for citizenship or ethnicity if its not relevant to the persons notability. See WP:OPENPARAGRAPH.. He is both a naturalized American citizen and a British citizen - hes nationality is Canadian by birth before he was famous and got other citizenships. That said it should be noted in the article that he does refer to himself as a Canadian of British decent that holds 3 citizenships. Yes in Canada we have this self identifying term see Canadians#Ethnic ancestryMoxy (talk) 06:09, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- I personally (lifetime Canadian resident) have never heard or seen the term used in any sort of normal life. Welsh-Canadian or Scots-Canadian or Irish-Canadian yes, but never British-Canadian. Note Moxy that the link you give is to data based on the long-form 20% sample data census, which allowed multiple choices (only the top 148% are shown in that table) so it could be just a grab-bag choice on a form rather than an actual term of use. Franamax (talk) 07:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Agree the term is not used often - but it is a choice that many many many Canadians have chosen. Not up to us to say its wrong, as all we can do is regurgitate what is out there. I think we should removed British from the lead or have them all. I have added a ref for his 3 citizenships in the first section. I assume we all agree that citizenship's and nationality are 2 different things. There are many many Canadians that have multiple citizenship's after they have had international success. That said this is a problem that many Canadian articles seem to have - that is there secondary citizenship's are listed in the lead. Michael J. Fox is a great example of Americans talking claim of a famous Canadians just cause he has duel citizenships for work. Moxy (talk) 08:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Where is the proof that describing himself as 'British-Canadian' is a choice he made, and that it isn't just some editor's assertion? I haven't seen any cites to that. His family history and citizenship is detailed in later paragraphs, it's a matter of whether it really is so important as to be noted in the first sentence. The cite for 'He holds three citizenships, American, British and Canadian', is to a book, has can anyone verify this is in fact what the book (Mike Myers by Paul Harrison, 2005 -- a 48 page illustrated juvenile book, apparently) says? Barsoomian (talk) 08:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Agree no need in the lead .but it was in that bad ref from before 'Off screen, Canadian-born Myers stated he considers himself to be British although he is also very vocal about being a proud Canadian' and is also at IMDb.com, Inc. Naturalized US CitizenMoxy (talk) 08:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Agree with Moxy. Not only is British-Canadian an odd term, but we should generally shy away from 'x-Canadian' terms as they convey a sense of identity that article subjects may or may not share (do we have verifiable sources to show that Myers calls himself 'British-Canadian', as opposed to British and/or Canadian?). 'Canadian of x descent' is more factual. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:27, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Agree no need in the lead .but it was in that bad ref from before 'Off screen, Canadian-born Myers stated he considers himself to be British although he is also very vocal about being a proud Canadian' and is also at IMDb.com, Inc. Naturalized US CitizenMoxy (talk) 08:53, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Where is the proof that describing himself as 'British-Canadian' is a choice he made, and that it isn't just some editor's assertion? I haven't seen any cites to that. His family history and citizenship is detailed in later paragraphs, it's a matter of whether it really is so important as to be noted in the first sentence. The cite for 'He holds three citizenships, American, British and Canadian', is to a book, has can anyone verify this is in fact what the book (Mike Myers by Paul Harrison, 2005 -- a 48 page illustrated juvenile book, apparently) says? Barsoomian (talk) 08:37, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Agree the term is not used often - but it is a choice that many many many Canadians have chosen. Not up to us to say its wrong, as all we can do is regurgitate what is out there. I think we should removed British from the lead or have them all. I have added a ref for his 3 citizenships in the first section. I assume we all agree that citizenship's and nationality are 2 different things. There are many many Canadians that have multiple citizenship's after they have had international success. That said this is a problem that many Canadian articles seem to have - that is there secondary citizenship's are listed in the lead. Michael J. Fox is a great example of Americans talking claim of a famous Canadians just cause he has duel citizenships for work. Moxy (talk) 08:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- I personally (lifetime Canadian resident) have never heard or seen the term used in any sort of normal life. Welsh-Canadian or Scots-Canadian or Irish-Canadian yes, but never British-Canadian. Note Moxy that the link you give is to data based on the long-form 20% sample data census, which allowed multiple choices (only the top 148% are shown in that table) so it could be just a grab-bag choice on a form rather than an actual term of use. Franamax (talk) 07:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- This has been so many times before and has been settled. Why re open an old case? He's got a dual citizenship and actually considers himself British rather than Canadian. It says so in the link that I provided. @Moxy Maybe you havent heard that term before, but mind you, there is no such term as English, Welsh or Scottish citizenships since those countries are not independednt, but for a part of the United Kingdom. Norum 14:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- It certainly wasn't 'settled'. You just declared that was the case and edited it accordingly, then defended your edits and called anyone who changed it a 'vandal'. The question is not what is his legal citizenship; that is covered separately. If you can provide a citation where Myers identifies himself as 'British-Canadian', that would be convincing. You haven't, and I can't see any RS that does either. Every article I've seen, including the one you cited, says he is simply 'Canadian'. Not everyone has a need to classify himself primarily by ethnicity. Barsoomian (talk) 15:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- Barsoomian could you read the links that I have been provided above pls - as they proven his statement that he calls himself British-Canadian (are they reliable who knows). What we are arguing is if its relevant in the lead. So far all but one believe 'British-Canadian' is misleading and should be omitted. No dough hes a Canadian with American and British passports but do we need this in the lead?. No way would we add all the countries Nelson Mandela is an honorary citizen of - we only mention his nationality in passing in the lead and mention the rest later.Moxy (talk) 22:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- This brings us back to the Igor Korolev case.. he has a dual citizenship, therefore he is called a Russian - Canadian player (as much as I hate that, because I have considered him to be Russian, not Canadian, all my life). Myers has a dual citizenship and he admits to feel mre British than Canadian. And that is because of his parentaghe, not honourary. On the other hand, look at Jim Belushi. He's got a honourary Albanian citizenship and that is why he is not considered as American-Albanian actor. Norum 03:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- 'links that .. proven his statement that he calls himself British-Canadian' : Where does he use the words 'British-Canadian' when referring to himself? Korolov is irrelevant, he wasn't born in Canada as Myers was. Barsoomian (talk) 03:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- For the third time pls read the links above. you keep asking the same thing over and over that was replied to days ago. That seen I think the consensus is that Canadian is best.Moxy (talk) 03:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- I have looked, more than three times, and I still can't see the phrase 'British-Canadian' at either link (superiorpics or IMDb). In fact the text at superiorpics: 'Myers stated he considers himself to be British although he is also very vocal about being a proud Canadian' implies that he identifies his nationality as 'Canadian' when it comes down to it. And Googling for the phrase finds nothing except numerous copies from the article here, at least for the first several pages of hits. All of this goes to how he self-identifies ('Canadian'), and it seems that all the uses of 'British-Canadian' stem from the edits here. This is just one consideration, but I wanted to clarify it. I do of course concur that 'Canadian' is most appropriate for the lede. Barsoomian (talk) 04:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- If Myers self-identifies as Canadian, then that's what we should go with IMO. CanuckMy page89 (talk), 11:12, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- He also identifies himself as British. Norum 17:37, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Mike Myers identifies himself as Canadian, therefor the lead should remain as Canadian. Karl 334☞TALK to ME☜ 18:19, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- He also identifies himself as British. Norum 17:37, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- If Myers self-identifies as Canadian, then that's what we should go with IMO. CanuckMy page89 (talk), 11:12, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- I have looked, more than three times, and I still can't see the phrase 'British-Canadian' at either link (superiorpics or IMDb). In fact the text at superiorpics: 'Myers stated he considers himself to be British although he is also very vocal about being a proud Canadian' implies that he identifies his nationality as 'Canadian' when it comes down to it. And Googling for the phrase finds nothing except numerous copies from the article here, at least for the first several pages of hits. All of this goes to how he self-identifies ('Canadian'), and it seems that all the uses of 'British-Canadian' stem from the edits here. This is just one consideration, but I wanted to clarify it. I do of course concur that 'Canadian' is most appropriate for the lede. Barsoomian (talk) 04:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- For the third time pls read the links above. you keep asking the same thing over and over that was replied to days ago. That seen I think the consensus is that Canadian is best.Moxy (talk) 03:39, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- 'links that .. proven his statement that he calls himself British-Canadian' : Where does he use the words 'British-Canadian' when referring to himself? Korolov is irrelevant, he wasn't born in Canada as Myers was. Barsoomian (talk) 03:30, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- This brings us back to the Igor Korolev case.. he has a dual citizenship, therefore he is called a Russian - Canadian player (as much as I hate that, because I have considered him to be Russian, not Canadian, all my life). Myers has a dual citizenship and he admits to feel mre British than Canadian. And that is because of his parentaghe, not honourary. On the other hand, look at Jim Belushi. He's got a honourary Albanian citizenship and that is why he is not considered as American-Albanian actor. Norum 03:22, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Barsoomian could you read the links that I have been provided above pls - as they proven his statement that he calls himself British-Canadian (are they reliable who knows). What we are arguing is if its relevant in the lead. So far all but one believe 'British-Canadian' is misleading and should be omitted. No dough hes a Canadian with American and British passports but do we need this in the lead?. No way would we add all the countries Nelson Mandela is an honorary citizen of - we only mention his nationality in passing in the lead and mention the rest later.Moxy (talk) 22:24, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- It certainly wasn't 'settled'. You just declared that was the case and edited it accordingly, then defended your edits and called anyone who changed it a 'vandal'. The question is not what is his legal citizenship; that is covered separately. If you can provide a citation where Myers identifies himself as 'British-Canadian', that would be convincing. You haven't, and I can't see any RS that does either. Every article I've seen, including the one you cited, says he is simply 'Canadian'. Not everyone has a need to classify himself primarily by ethnicity. Barsoomian (talk) 15:41, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
- This has been so many times before and has been settled. Why re open an old case? He's got a dual citizenship and actually considers himself British rather than Canadian. It says so in the link that I provided. @Moxy Maybe you havent heard that term before, but mind you, there is no such term as English, Welsh or Scottish citizenships since those countries are not independednt, but for a part of the United Kingdom. Norum 14:11, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
British-CanadianNeutral - 'Self-identification' is the standard/test supported by policy here. The 'superiorpics' reference offered by Moxy is pretty clear on this subject. Myers identifies as both Canadian and British. The lead should reflect that. Does anyone have anything refutes Moxy's reference? NickCT (talk) 19:03, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- Also, let me point out the article entry for Igor Korolev. I actually know how Barsoomian feels like, because I wsas in the same situation when I was editing that article. I have always considered Korolev to be a Russian player as he was born, grew up and played most of his career in Russia, but because he became a naturalized Canadian, he is now listed as Russian - Canadian, which, to be honest, i find to be absurt. Yet those are Wikipedia's rules. I believe that Myers has more right to be called British-Canadian (parentage and dual citizenship) than Korolev to be called Russian-Canadian (naturalization). Also, Barsoomian, you claim Korolev is irrelevant because he was not born in Canada. On the contrary, those two cases are similar which I just explained. Myers has more right to be called British - Canadian than Korolev to be called Canadian - Russian. Norum 23:01, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- @NickCT - I was the one who provided the link at first. Norum 23:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- 'The superiorpics reference .. is pretty clear' 'Clear??? There is nothing to refute. The superiorpics text (which is of unknown provenance and reliability, being primarily a site that collects photos, and is not a direct quote), does not support Myers identifying as 'British-Canadian' SINCE THOSE WORDS ARE NOT USED. And as for Korolov: still irrelevant and not a 'similar' case at all. He was born in Russia and became Canadian. Myers was born in Canada and is now and has always been Canadian. He isn't a hyphenated Canadian. Just 'Canadian'. No one has provided a quote by Myers identifying himself as 'British-Canadian', for anyone to infer this is synthesis, and pushing a fairly distasteful line of ethnic categorisation. Myers certainly has the 'right' to describe himself as 'British-Canadian', but he doesn't and no one has the 'right' to insist that he does. Barsoomian (talk) 23:45, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
- @Barsoomian..first of all, mind you that one can not have English or Scottish nationality because those countries are not independent, only part of the UK. Also, Myers does identify himself as British and Canadian in one sentence. If you insert hyphen between the two, you get British-Canadian. I dont think I can make this any clearer. And yes, situation with Korolev is in a way similar. He gets called 'Russian-Canadian' just because he obtained Canadian citizenship. Myers is 'British-Canadian' because of the parentage as his parents are English. Not to mention he also spent some time in England and has a British citizenship. What I am trying to point out is that Myers has more rights to be called 'British-Canadian' than Korolev to be called 'Russian-Canadian'. Norum 00:12, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Korolov is STILL irrelevant. And 'if you insert hyphen between the two', that is synthesis: 'If no reliable source has combined the material in this way, it is original research.' Barsoomian (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Objective observation is what we are looking for from or editors here.. Hes a Canadian (we all agree on that as does Mike himself) that calls himself British (we all agree on this aswell and is proven by his passport) and you believe that adding a hyphen is synthesis or original research? Yep going to have to prove that a hyphen is original research to me. Its not a made up conclusion its fact that he uses these two terms to refer to himself. That said the point in mute because the majority dont think his secondary citizenship(s) should be in the lead anyways. The only problem I see is that British-Canadian is misleading as in it does not explain things properly. Hes a Canadian of British decent I dont see British-Canadian as OR at all its just lacking proper definition in this context.Moxy (talk) 16:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC) Moxy (talk) 16:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Saying that Myers is 'British-Canadian' by deducing it from two other statements can be nothing but WP:SYN. Since Myers has evidently never characterised himself as 'British-Canadian' we should not decide that for him. That term is not simply an abbreviation for the statements presented to justify it. 'British-Canadian' seems to be more like an ethnic label. His statements about feeling British could reflect, say, that Myers feels a part of British culture (as do many in Commonwealth countries), but that isn't the same thing. It's all guesswork and assumptions, and we should not be doing that in an article, especially not a WP:BLP. His citizenship(s) are discussed later in the article, no facts are omitted, only a label that seems to have been invented by some editors and is not in common use.Barsoomian (talk) 17:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- PS: Seeing your addition of 'British-Canadian .. lacking proper definition', it seems we have come to the same conclusion, that is exactly what was bothering me. Is it ethnic, cultural, or what? We shouldn't use label that isn't clear. Barsoomian (talk) 17:15, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- @Barsoomian - If I'm understanding you correctly, you're not arguing that Myers isn't both British and Canadian, but instead, you're saying that the hyphenated term 'British-Canadian' is somehow invalid. If this is the case, then I'd make two points; the first is that I have difficultly seeing your POV. 'British-Canadian' to me, and I imagine to most WP readers translates to a person who is both British and Canadian. The second point is - perhaps we're just arguing over semantics here? Can we just say Michael John 'Mike' Myers (born May 25, 1963) is a British and Canadian actor? That wording seems a little more clumsy to me, but I'd be willing to accept it if it could avoid all this frivolous debate. NickCT (talk) 04:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- 'is a British and Canadian actor': definitely not. It's a clumsy form of speech, and makes 'British' primary. He was born in Canada. Her hasn't relinquished his Canadian nationality. He has worked in and visited the UK, never settled there. He's never called himself 'British-Canadian', and neither has any reliable source that wasn't quoting Wikipedia, as far as I can determine. I have the feeling that undue weight has been given to Myers' 'Britishness', perhaps due to him playing up his Austin Powers and Shrek characters. Anyway, I asked Canadian editors to comment and they seem to concur that the most appropriate form in the lede is just 'Canadian'. His nationality, citizenships, family are all discussed in detail in the second paragraph. Barsoomian (talk) 04:57, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- @Barsoomian - If I'm understanding you correctly, you're not arguing that Myers isn't both British and Canadian, but instead, you're saying that the hyphenated term 'British-Canadian' is somehow invalid. If this is the case, then I'd make two points; the first is that I have difficultly seeing your POV. 'British-Canadian' to me, and I imagine to most WP readers translates to a person who is both British and Canadian. The second point is - perhaps we're just arguing over semantics here? Can we just say Michael John 'Mike' Myers (born May 25, 1963) is a British and Canadian actor? That wording seems a little more clumsy to me, but I'd be willing to accept it if it could avoid all this frivolous debate. NickCT (talk) 04:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- Objective observation is what we are looking for from or editors here.. Hes a Canadian (we all agree on that as does Mike himself) that calls himself British (we all agree on this aswell and is proven by his passport) and you believe that adding a hyphen is synthesis or original research? Yep going to have to prove that a hyphen is original research to me. Its not a made up conclusion its fact that he uses these two terms to refer to himself. That said the point in mute because the majority dont think his secondary citizenship(s) should be in the lead anyways. The only problem I see is that British-Canadian is misleading as in it does not explain things properly. Hes a Canadian of British decent I dont see British-Canadian as OR at all its just lacking proper definition in this context.Moxy (talk) 16:51, 23 February 2012 (UTC) Moxy (talk) 16:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Korolov is STILL irrelevant. And 'if you insert hyphen between the two', that is synthesis: 'If no reliable source has combined the material in this way, it is original research.' Barsoomian (talk) 00:19, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Concur .. all said better in the article. The lead is not the place to emphasize his historical roots or connections - we have a whole article for that.Moxy (talk) 05:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
- @Barsoomian - re I have the feeling that undue weight has been given to Myers' 'Britishness' - Well that's just great. Problem is, 'Britishness' isn't something you can measure with a yardstick. It's sorta subjective, as are things like race, ethnicity and religion etc etc. The subjectiveness of these attributes led to policies like Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity,_gender,_religion_and_sexuality and WP:BLPCAT, which point to 'self-identification' as being key in these matters. A source has been provided saying that Myers considers himself British and Canadian. Unless you can find a reference in which he says he thinks he is less British than Canadian, then I don't see how your argument is supported by policy.
- re I asked Canadian editors - I don't see why you're asking Canadians. The seems like it might be conflict of interest. Anyways, Canadians are tremendously unreliable (sarc mark!)! NickCT (talk) 00:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, self-identification is the key, as I said several times. Myers has never been cited as self-identifying as 'British-Canadian'. Concluding that he is from other statements is synthesis; read the above discussion and the linked policy. I asked Canadians because they would be familiar with how such terms are used in Canada. Usage of such hyphenated nationality phrases is different in the US, apparently. Barsoomian (talk) 00:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- @Barsoomian - re Myers has never been cited as self-identifying as 'British-Canadian' - Ok. So we agree self identification is key. I think we agree that Myers has self-identified as Canadian and that he has also self-identified as British. I don't understand how we're not making logical next step here to saying that we can call him 'British and Canadian'. NickCT (talk) 13:13, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- 'logical next step ' = synthesis. (Even if I agreed that it was 'logical', which I don't.) And have you ever seen anyone described as 'British and Canadian'? Has Myers ever described himself in those words? (Which would imply that he was British first, Canadian second.) Why do you want to do this? Barsoomian (talk) 14:05, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- @Barsoomian - re 'logical next step ' = synthesis' - I'm having a really tough time following your argument. You seem to be saying 'Yes, Myers is Canadian. Yes, Myers is British. No, Myers is not British-Canadian, or British and Canadian, or Canadian and British, or what-have-you'. Seems very confusing.
- re '(Which would imply that he was British first, Canadian second.)' - I don't care whether you want to call him 'British-Canadian', 'Canadian-British', 'British and Canadian', 'Canadian and British' or whatever. I simply think that 'British' should be mentioned. Your concern really strikes me as picking at straws. NickCT (talk) 15:10, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry you don't get it. We seem to be in a loop: you say you don't understand my position and state what you think it should be, regardless. We're just talking past each other. However, while you may ignore my reasoning, I don't think you can ignore that the consensus arrived at is just 'Canadian' in the lead. 'British' is certainly mentioned, much more than 'mentioned', and explained fully, in the next paragraph. Barsoomian (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I see about as much of the 'consensus' you are mentioning as I do the 'reasoning'. Regardless, you're right, we are talking past each other, let's see what the closing admin has to say. NickCT (talk) 19:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Anyway, Superiorpics probably isn't a reliable source.[2]Epbr123 (talk) 20:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- I see about as much of the 'consensus' you are mentioning as I do the 'reasoning'. Regardless, you're right, we are talking past each other, let's see what the closing admin has to say. NickCT (talk) 19:24, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry you don't get it. We seem to be in a loop: you say you don't understand my position and state what you think it should be, regardless. We're just talking past each other. However, while you may ignore my reasoning, I don't think you can ignore that the consensus arrived at is just 'Canadian' in the lead. 'British' is certainly mentioned, much more than 'mentioned', and explained fully, in the next paragraph. Barsoomian (talk) 17:55, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- 'logical next step ' = synthesis. (Even if I agreed that it was 'logical', which I don't.) And have you ever seen anyone described as 'British and Canadian'? Has Myers ever described himself in those words? (Which would imply that he was British first, Canadian second.) Why do you want to do this? Barsoomian (talk) 14:05, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- @Barsoomian - re Myers has never been cited as self-identifying as 'British-Canadian' - Ok. So we agree self identification is key. I think we agree that Myers has self-identified as Canadian and that he has also self-identified as British. I don't understand how we're not making logical next step here to saying that we can call him 'British and Canadian'. NickCT (talk) 13:13, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, self-identification is the key, as I said several times. Myers has never been cited as self-identifying as 'British-Canadian'. Concluding that he is from other statements is synthesis; read the above discussion and the linked policy. I asked Canadians because they would be familiar with how such terms are used in Canada. Usage of such hyphenated nationality phrases is different in the US, apparently. Barsoomian (talk) 00:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- 'no description of me is complete without saying `Englishman'.'
- he has stated that he considers himself to be British
- Clearly multiple sources out there saying Myers self-identifies as British/Enlgish. NickCT (talk) 22:43, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- Regarding these cites: the second, Moono.com? What is that? In any case, it opens with 'Michael Myers (born May 25, 1963 in Scarborough, Ontario, Canada) is a Canadian actor, comedian, screenwriter, and film producer..', a verbatim copy of our article. Clearly this was just sourced from a version of Wikipedia; a circular reference. The first, Stuff.co.nz begins 'Mike Myers loved playing horny, buck-toothed spy Austin Powers and the heavy metal-loving doofus from Wayne's World, but the Canadian comedian says there was something special about crawling into the green skin of the giant ogre, Shrek.' It describes him IN THE LEAD SENTENCE, as just 'Canadian'. As we do now, and goes on to talk about his English heritage, later; the same as our article does now. Barsoomian (talk) 02:13, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- @Barsoomian - It describes him IN THE LEAD SENTENCE, as just 'Canadian' - Yeah that's certainly true, and a majority of the articles I've looked at seem to treat it the same way. Not all do though:
- From www.squidoo.com/mike-myers 'Mike Myers is a British- Canadian comedian, actor, screenwriter, and film producer.' - Note the use of the term 'British Canadian' ;-)
- 'He has said in many interviews that he regards himself as British'
- You know, I'd agree with you that Myers is probably 'more Canadian' than British (whatever that actually means in light of our earlier conversation about measuring nationality). Actually, somehow when I first read the lead I managed to miss the fact that 'of British parentage' is included. That being said, I think the lead already provides a reasonably accurate and neutral POV regarding Myers' nationality/heritage, which, as Barsoomian mentions, seems in-line with the majority of references available. While I think there's still an interesting point about 'self-identification' to be made here, I'm not sure I see the need to further emphasize Myers' 'Britishness' in the lead. Accordingly, I'm striking my my initial support for the use of the term 'British-Canadian' and changing my position to neutral in regards to the proposition.
- Side-note : I'm not sure his facebook page is actually affiliated with him, but it's interesting to note the wiki article is used here. NickCT (talk) 13:25, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- The squidoo quote, like many others, were copied from Wikipedia. The whole sentence is exactly the same as it was here until recently. And IMDB accepts contributions from anyone; anyone can submit anything to it and it'll probably get published. You can get a real circle jerk of sites quoting each other and then using each other to 'verify' the quote. Earlier I noted that I did spend some time searching for any sites that called Myers 'British-Canadian' that weren't direct copies of WP: I really couldn't find any. So thanks for (re)considering the case. Nice to know that some people can change their opinions. Most arguments on WP either peter out or become more and more bitter. (Or maybe I'm just jaded.) Barsoomian (talk) 13:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- I sorta like it when the conversations turn bitter and resentful. I'm not getting enough of that in real life!
- I'm still a little confused about your objection to the use of the term 'British-Canadian' as a synonym for 'a person who is both British and Canadian'. It strikes me that combining national identifiers (e.g. Mexican American) is pretty standard practice in a wide array of RSs. But regardless, to avoid risking things getting bitter, why don't we let that one lie. NickCT (talk) 16:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- The squidoo quote, like many others, were copied from Wikipedia. The whole sentence is exactly the same as it was here until recently. And IMDB accepts contributions from anyone; anyone can submit anything to it and it'll probably get published. You can get a real circle jerk of sites quoting each other and then using each other to 'verify' the quote. Earlier I noted that I did spend some time searching for any sites that called Myers 'British-Canadian' that weren't direct copies of WP: I really couldn't find any. So thanks for (re)considering the case. Nice to know that some people can change their opinions. Most arguments on WP either peter out or become more and more bitter. (Or maybe I'm just jaded.) Barsoomian (talk) 13:49, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- @Barsoomian - It describes him IN THE LEAD SENTENCE, as just 'Canadian' - Yeah that's certainly true, and a majority of the articles I've looked at seem to treat it the same way. Not all do though:
- Regarding these cites: the second, Moono.com? What is that? In any case, it opens with 'Michael Myers (born May 25, 1963 in Scarborough, Ontario, Canada) is a Canadian actor, comedian, screenwriter, and film producer..', a verbatim copy of our article. Clearly this was just sourced from a version of Wikipedia; a circular reference. The first, Stuff.co.nz begins 'Mike Myers loved playing horny, buck-toothed spy Austin Powers and the heavy metal-loving doofus from Wayne's World, but the Canadian comedian says there was something special about crawling into the green skin of the giant ogre, Shrek.' It describes him IN THE LEAD SENTENCE, as just 'Canadian'. As we do now, and goes on to talk about his English heritage, later; the same as our article does now. Barsoomian (talk) 02:13, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- comment I feel the way the lead is worded at the moment is neutral and is accurate to the souces. SD (talkcontribs) 01:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- I was asked to comment. This is the sort of argument over nationality which wastes the time of everybody concerned. The thing to do in general is to add all countries with which there is any substantial association, unless there is actually a dispute about it in the published literature, in which case add them all and reference the dispute, without making any attempt to decide. But , one point 'More Canadian than British' implies both.
- All the countries are mentioned. The question is about the specific wording and emphasis. Barsoomian (talk) 06:12, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
personally i think he should come under Canadian-British because he was born in Canada and his parents were born in Britain Tony (talk) 23:15, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- If we follow that logic 41% of all Canadian would have some sort of hyphenated Canadianism.Moxy (talk) 23:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Adding categories: People from London/Chicago
If Tom Cruise can be listed in People from Ottawa, why can't Mike Myers be listed in People from London/Chicago? Ottawahitech (talk) 01:16, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
That's just a weird Wikipedia policy. They have a lot of work to redo their guidelines on some of the categories, nationalities and ethinicites. I agreee, Cruise and Myers should not be listed in those categories. It is just ridiculous. Norum 02:22, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- Why not list everyone as from everywhere they've ever visited? That would be the democratic thing to do. It's fascist to insist they actually be 'from' the place. Barsoomian (talk) 02:56, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
- For once we agree on something, Barsoomian. Norum 16:13, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Tom Cruise lived in Ottawa as a child for several years, it is not clear how long and when Myers lived in Chicago/London, howeverer the article does specifically mention that he has both UK and US citizenships. Ottawahitech (talk) 06:11, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
- The category isn't 'People who lived in XXX' or 'Citizens of XXX', it's 'People from XXX'. Myers was born and raised in Canada, didn't travel to either Chicago or London till he was an adult. It's absurd to claim he is 'from' those places. Barsoomian (talk) 00:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Jewish culture
Why is 'Jewish culture' listed as one of Myers' subjects when he is not a Jew? Zacwill (talk) 21:47, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mike_Myers/Archive_1&oldid=751007626'
< Talk:John Allen Muhammad
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Appeals
A line at the end of the second paragraph needs to be updated. 'Some appeals had been made and rejected, but others remained pending.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.59.117 (talk) 03:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
That line is extremely misleading. He had exhausted all of his appeals for the murder of Dean H. Meyers (for which he was being executed). Any remaining appeals were unrelated to his execution. Clemency from the Virginia Governor was the only remaining legal route to stay the execution. 71.59.2.102 (talk) 14:51, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Irony vs. coincidence
Entry currently says that people reacted to the 'irony' of 9:11 as the time of death, in light of the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01. The far more proper word is 'concidence.' An irony is an event that was not expected to occur in light of something else; For example, if Muhammad were a follower of Gandhi and did not even know how to use a gun, his conviction and execution would have been ironic. The mere concidence between 9:11 and 9/11 is NOT something unexpected; in fact, it was a very real possibility since the execution started at 9:00. Sorry for this slight rant, but please change 'irony' to 'coincidence.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.225.200.150 (talk) 02:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- You have a point, the problem is what does the source say? I don't necessarily agree with your definition of Irony (nor wikipedia's for that matter), but you are correct, 'irony' should not be conflated with 'coinicidence'. If the source says the term 'irony' was used by stony faced officials in the presser after this wretched chap's death, then 'irony' has to be used in the article. Crafty (talk) 03:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Understood, but the source is not being quoted here. You either need to put irony in quotes or else you need to exercise editorial judgment and use the proper word. If a source said that Bill Clinton was impeached for angering God, would Wikipedia print that Bill Clinton was impeached for angering God? An encyclopedia should use proper words for things; it should not be a Wolf Blitzer-like sounding board that simply propagates bad use of logic and language.
- Let me take a look at the source and see what I can do. Crafty (talk) 03:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- It appears that User:Bdb484 has removed the press conference as a primary source noting it to be 'totally lame'. Crafty (talk) 03:30, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Execution
Someone added text that Muhammad had chosen the electric chair as his method of execution. CNN, AP and several other news sources all say he declined to choose a method and will get lethal injection by default. I corrected the statement and added a ref to CNN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stmdc (talk • contribs) 01:29, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
He was executed by lethal injection. In Virginia inmates may select either the electric chair or lethal injection. A failure to select either option defaults to the lethal injection option, and this is what happened in this case. His selection was not made at all, and therefore the law stated that lethal injection was selected for him. The Virginian Pilot, the Hampton Roads largest daily paper, stated in a concurrent story to the execution that since the change in the law in 1998, only 5 inmates have selected the electric chair, and some of them, as in the case of Earl Bramblett in 2003, selected the electric chair as a protest to point out the barbarity of executions in general. The vast majority of inmates since the selection law took effect in 1998 has been to lethal injection. Themoodyblue (talk) 02:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Gulf War
I once read/heard Muhammad was the individual who fragged some guys in Gulf War I (Operation Desert Storm.) Can someone verify if this is the case?
- I have been following this story since 2002 on an informal basis, and I have never heard or read that, even in some of the extremist articles. It seems a lot of his evil thinking and actions developed as he failed in civilian life after his time in the service. IMHO, with what we are now hearing in court from Malvo, assuming it is true, it is probably a good thing Muhammad failed as so many things, or harm to others would have been even worse than what he did accomplish stateside. Vaoverland 22:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
- It appears that the Seattle Times published an article by Alex Tizon which quotes a witness to an incident in the 1991 Gulf War (see: http://alextizon.com/articles/killers/John%20Muhammad%27s%20Meltdown.pdf on page 11):
- The story, according to Berentson and at least two other former members of the 84th, was that Muhammad threw a thermite grenade into a tent housing 16 of his fellow soldiers. Thermite grenades — made of finely granulated aluminum mixed with a metal oxide, and blasting heat up to 1,200 degrees — are used to destroy equipment during battle. The attack could easily have killed or maimed, but all 16 in the tent, some coughing and choking, escaped unharmed. Berentson was in the tent. He says the grenade went off near him and near a staff sergeant with whom Muhammad had fought earlier that day. The Army's Criminal Investigation Division, Berentson says, concluded Muhammad (then named Williams) was the lead suspect. Muhammad was led away in handcuffs and eventually transferred to another company pending chargesSlowjoe17 (talk) 17:37, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
One of the reasons that people would still be wondering why the snipers did what they did is political correctness, in this case, the mainstream media's 'revisionism and sanitization of Islam', i.e., the 'politically correct whitewashing of the truth aimed at pleasing Muslim groups like CAIR': 'When news of the snipers' identity first broke, CNN anchors were so determined to avoid making the obvious connection to radical Islam that they called the lead sniper, a Muslim convert, by his old name. Police were looking for John Allen Muhammad, but CNN insisted on referring to him as John Allen Williams.' To further quote Rehabbing The D.C. Snipers by Investor's Business Daily (which presents a 'pile of courtroom evidence'): 'Nowhere in [CNN's] one-hour special — promoted as 'The Minds of the D.C. Snipers' — is Islamist brainwashing even hinted as a motivating factor behind their serial assassinations. Yet the evidence is overwhelming that they were on a jihad.' Asteriks 17:52, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
'On a Jihad'? You have to be kidding. The guy is a member of the Nation of Islam (which is considered a deviant sect and not Muslim by almost all Muslims, especially hardcore Salafi Jihadists), and left Tarot cards and a note that said 'I Am God', and then demanded 10 million dollars. Sounds like classic Al-Qaeda to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.220.73 (talk) 02:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
Or perhaps classic whack job (which Muhammad clearly was) using the recent Al Queda attacks as a ruse to throw suspicion off of him. Either way, it was very definitely a terrorist act. I lived in Hampton Roads at the time and I remember how terrified everyone was to be out at all. Why ever he did it, it was terrorism and cold-blooded, vicious, nihilistic murder. I am not much of a supporter of the death penalty, but if there was ever a case for it this was the one. If they had not executed this man, then they should have commuted everyone else's sentence on death row and then been done with it. Themoodyblue (talk) 03:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)--
The following is an example article containing the allegation that Muhammad was suspected of fragging in GWI:http://townhall.com/columnists/MichelleMalkin/2003/03/26/mswa_muslim_soldiers_with_attitude?page=2
also:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/bal-md.malvo05dec05,0,4954387.story—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.40.144.103 (talk) 03:55, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Meanwhile, references #1 and #6 are identical.
![The 4chan Serial Killer The 4chan Serial Killer](https://i.imgur.com/3uXyLAT.jpg)
Georgia
The article says they were responsible for crimes in Georgia, but doesn't explain any details. Thus, I've removed the mentions. Superm401 - Talk 08:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Number of victims?
The article says 10 killed, the infobox says 16. RomaC (talk) 08:54, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- I believe that the number 10 refers specifically only to the Beltway sniper victims' deaths .. and that the number 16 refers to the total number of deaths by Muhammad (that is, the Beltway sniper victims plus all of his other victims). Thanks. (64.252.124.238 (talk) 16:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC))
- I see. I wasn't aware he had killed others before the Beltway shootings, maybe a new section 'Other victims' would be appropriate? RomaC (talk) 02:20, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- 15 people were killed by the two of them, 10 of them were part of the DC sniper shooting. However I don't know how many of the were actually killed by John Allen Muhammad. NWH5305 04:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- I see. I wasn't aware he had killed others before the Beltway shootings, maybe a new section 'Other victims' would be appropriate? RomaC (talk) 02:20, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Semi-protection
Given the high rate of IP vandalism this article is attracting today, I've petitioned the WikiGods for semi-protection. May they smile upon my humble request. [UPDATE: This guy is dead.] Crafty (talk) 21:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- What's your citable source? ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 02:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
The press is making it known.-J0hn76.102.32.59 (talk) 02:26, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- 'What's your citable source?' Please tell me you are kidding. You might turn on the television, radio, internet or the two cans with a string held between them in your backyard. This is all over the media, there have been official press conference from the Virginia Department of Corrections and enough coverage on this to choke a horse. What on earth do you consider sufficiently citeable? Seeing the guys body in person? Themoodyblue (talk) 03:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- By now it's old news, but seeing it on TV doesn't really count, for wikipedia purposes anyway. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 05:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Stop reverting please..
I noticed some people edit the page into what it will be in 10 minutes but someone is reverting it..just let it be. The Fear (talk) 02:13, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- I know. Too bad they don't realize they need a reliable source confirming his death. - 02:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- I removed the reference to whoever called ACDCGAMER what they called him - that language is completely unacceptable and unnecessary. The problem probably was that a number of people were trying to update and it became a bit of a traffic jam. Insulting people that were trying to improve the article (and I notice that the loser who made the insult did not sign it) is a real jerk move and it needs to stop throughout Wikipedia. Discuss and debate, fine. Insults and ad hominem attacks are the last bastion of the weak minded. Themoodyblue (talk) 03:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Oh shut up. I wasn't the one getting high and mighty about people adding John Muhammad's time of death, after he had been confirmed dead by multiple sources. Why don't we force people to use citations when stating 'the sky is blue', or 'the grass is green', while we're at it.
- Well, there is an essay that explains why we don't need to cite that the sky is blue, although some would say you need to do exactly that. Bzweebl (talk) 23:33, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
- Oh shut up. I wasn't the one getting high and mighty about people adding John Muhammad's time of death, after he had been confirmed dead by multiple sources. Why don't we force people to use citations when stating 'the sky is blue', or 'the grass is green', while we're at it.
Time of death
9:11 pm local, per news conference —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.13.223.188 (talk) 02:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- Confirmed now per Fox News. JungleCatShiny!/Oohhh! 02:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Look, guys
For those of you who personally trolled/attacked me on my talk page, I'm sorry for that edit; I did not know that Fox News had updated their page confirming his death by the time I made that edit, because it was not updated when I checked their website a few minutes ago. Still, for pretty much 'anything' on Wikipedia, including his death, you HAVE to have some sort of reliable source that confirms that information. Even if John's death was planned already, there still needs to be a legitimate source that confirms that he actually was executed. - 03:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Hey Gamer, please note my entry above under 'reverting'. Sorry some jackass decided that insulting you was the only way he can make his point. Notice that he (or she) did not sign the insult and showed themselves to be what they were calling you. To quote (well, paraphrase really) John Wayne, 'Don't let the idiots on wikipedia get you down!' Themoodyblue (talk) 03:37, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- *huggles*, homo.
- Also, I'm not the one who edited his talk page. I know it's hard to believe that multiple people get angry when some high and mighty creep goes around reverting their edits for no good reason, but bear with me here.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.80.116.234 (talk) 02:06, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
- Meh, they're probably trolls from 4chan or something. I've dealt with MAAAAANY people like them before. On different sites. - 04:54, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Victims
In the Beltway sniper attack victims section there is a table of victims. More victims are listed below that. Does anyone have more info about those below the table? Did he confess to shooting them? Did he shoot them on his own, with Malvo or with someone else? Where in the US were they shot? When did those shootings occur? Did each die or survive? Lkjhgfdsa 0 (talk) 10:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
I belive that the last survivor on the table was marked as being in the wrong location. I was eating in the Ponderosa where he was shot while walking out of, and this was in Richmond, Virginia, not Ashland. Just tryin to help! 98.140.188.30 (talk) 20:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)Actualy, disregard that last comment, I looked into it more and it was in Ashland, I just didn't remember it being that far away, possibly because I fell asleep on the ride home (considering that they wouldn't let us leave the resturant for hours, and I was much younger at the time).98.140.188.59 (talk) 20:03, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
What about the murder in Montgomery, AL? That is never mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.197.14.47 (talk) 23:00, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
'Spree killer' or 'serial killer'
'Serial Killer' appears to be a more appropriate label. Even the link to 'Spree Killer' offers a definition that is inaccurate for this entry: 'The U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics defines a spree killing as 'killings at two or more locations with almost no time break between murders.'[1] According to the FBI the general definition of spree murder is two or more murders committed by an offender or offenders, without a cooling-off period; the lack of a cooling-off period marking the difference between a spree murder and a serial murder.' In contrast, the Beltway Sniper Attacks lasted approximately three weeks, and only ended with arrests. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.39.69.35 (talk) 09:07, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
- I totally agree. That jumped out at me immediately when I was reading the article. Tithonfury (talk) 06:31, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- The problem with that is that serial killers are nearly always associated with sociopathic personalities, i.e. killing as part of a weird ritual of some kind. These guys seemed to be doing it for political reasons. It appears to have been de facto terrorist attacks, and they certainly succeeded in creating terror in the public, but I don't think the media called them terrorists as such. In an odd way, their plan reminds me a little bit of John Brown, who was also delusional and also ended up getting put down, by a rope instead of a needle. ←Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?carrots→ 06:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
- Perhaps something along the lines of 'politically-motivated serial killer' would be appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.192.59.117 (talk) 03:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
- The media did not necessarily refer to them as 'terrorists' .. but I believe that 'terrorism' was one of their official legal charges. Thanks. (64.252.124.238 (talk) 16:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC))
- The Beltway Sniper Attacks lasted approximately three weeks, but there was no significant cooling-off period in between the murders. He also didn't have a type, which serial killers usually do. Among [most] experts on the topic of serial killers, he certainly wouldn't be defined as one. Spree killer fits him best, which is why I altered the lead to this. Flyer22 (talk) 21:00, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
- The media did not necessarily refer to them as 'terrorists' .. but I believe that 'terrorism' was one of their official legal charges. Thanks. (64.252.124.238 (talk) 16:07, 10 November 2009 (UTC))
@Flyer22. Those observations are vague and arbitrary. Please provide sources which suggest 'no significant cooling-off period' and quotes of 'experts' who would 'certainly' not define him as a serial killer. As to having a 'type' of victim, neither did David Berkowitz (Son of Sam), who, per Wikipedia, is classified as a 'serial killer.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.172.133 (talk) 02:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
- There is nothing vague and arbitrary about it. There are perfectly reliable sources in the Serial killer article and the lead (intro) of the Spree killer article to show you what a serial killer is. If we went by your and some others' definition of a serial killer, then there would be no such thing as spree killers; they would all be classified as serial killers by experts. But just to indulge you on whether there was a significant cooling-off period for these two individuals, all one needs to do is look at the dates of their attacks. No source is needed to establish that there was no significant/true cooling-off period between the murders. And as for 'type,' I said 'usually' (serial killers usually have a type). Flyer22 (talk) 23:00, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
- Due to the Maintaining a difference between serial killers and serial murderers discussion on the Serial killer talk page some months ago, I changed the lead to this. As Legitimus states: The Beltway Sniper's typology is debated even by experts in the very books we're reading. The Crime Classification Manual contains them as a case study, and implies they are both spree and serial. They are mentioned directly under Spree Killer, yet the case study contains this statement: 'The thirteen victims, ten dead and three wounded, qualify this crime as serial, given the cooling-off period between each of the shootings. It could also be argued that the crime was a group cause given that Malvo has been directly implicated in at least two of the shootings and the actions were committed by two individuals who arguably had similar ideologies.'
- I still say that there was no true cooling-off period, per my reasoning in the linked discussion, and that most experts would not classify these two as serial killers, but anyway.. The current lead still labels Muhammad as a spree killer first, seeing as he is even placed under that category in the Crime Classification Manual, but also notes the seemingly apparent debate among experts about what to call him (a spree killer or a serial killer). If needed, another source could likely be found showing that some experts may disagree on which category to place him in..or that they may place him in both. It would also be a good idea to have a section on this in the article, since it is so debated by the public..or rather so many people have never heard of a spree killer. Flyer22 (talk) 20:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
- @Flyer22, Please, don't put words in my mouth: I'm not proposing 'my' defintion of a serial killer but referring to the FBI's definition (if you would take the opportunity to fully read what I wrote). In addition, I'm not asking for 'indulgence' but that you do what any half-rate scholar would do: Cite a credible source as I did. I see loads of self-referencial pronouns ('I still say..', 'I believe..') but few outside sources in your argument. As to the 'cooling off period' this is a very subjective term as no quantitative interval is supplied in the FBI's definition. Is it one hour? One day? Subsequently, the FBI, through a symposium composed of academia and law enforcement officials, has worked to revise this definition: 'Central to the discussion was the definitional problems relating to the concept of a cooling-off period. Because it creates arbitrary guidelines, the confusion surrounding this concept led the majority of attendees to advocate disregarding the use of spree murder as a separate category. The designation does not provide any real benefit for use by law enforcement' (http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder). As to 'type,' I supplied an example of a murderer, typicially classified as a serial killer (Berkowitz), who did not have specific 'type.' So there's the black swan to your premise. As to the _Crime Classification Manual_, there's a start, a credible source, good find--perhaps he could be identified as both (as Berkowitz). So, why assume the burden of proof applies to his status as 'serial killer' and assume that he is a priori a 'spree killer'? (Conversely, we could identify him as a 'serial killer' in the first sentence and afterwards mention that some (e.g., Flyer22) might identify him as a 'spree killer' but I assume you would find this presentation objectionable). Nonetheless, the FBI symposium, offered the following: 'The different discussion groups at the Symposium agreed on a number of similar factors to be included in a definition. These included:
- I still say that there was no true cooling-off period, per my reasoning in the linked discussion, and that most experts would not classify these two as serial killers, but anyway.. The current lead still labels Muhammad as a spree killer first, seeing as he is even placed under that category in the Crime Classification Manual, but also notes the seemingly apparent debate among experts about what to call him (a spree killer or a serial killer). If needed, another source could likely be found showing that some experts may disagree on which category to place him in..or that they may place him in both. It would also be a good idea to have a section on this in the article, since it is so debated by the public..or rather so many people have never heard of a spree killer. Flyer22 (talk) 20:11, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
- • one or more offenders
- • two or more murdered victims
- • incidents should be occurring in separate events, at different times
- • the time period between murders separates serial murder from mass murder
- In combining the various ideas put forth at the Symposium, the following definition was crafted:
- Serial Murder: The unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events' (http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.247.91.117 (talk) 00:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
- IP, I do not feel that I put words into your mouth. And I use 'self-referencial pronouns' such as 'I still say' and 'I believe' to counter what you still say and believe. You say 'do what any half-rate scholar would do: Cite a credible source as I did.' I did cite a credible source, as even you have admitted. My source specifically mentions John Allen Muhammad as a spree killer. Your FBI source does not. We go by WP:Reliable sources here. Not interpretations (aka WP:Original research) of what the FBI means when they define serial killer. Not to mention, the FBI is not the only authoritative source to go by with regard to defining a serial killer. As for the concept of the cooling-off period, I have never seen a reliable source define it as one hour or one day; the period is usually defined as 'significant.' And while what is 'significant' can also be debated, it goes without saying that one hour or one day is not a significant cooling-off period for serial killers (at least it goes without saying for those who have thoroughly studied this subject). That's why the term spree killer even exists. Attendees advocating to disregard the use of 'spree murder' as a separate category doesn't mean that it's been discarded. If 'serial killer' was only defined as the 'unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events,' then the term would apply to everyone who has unlawfully killed two or more people, except for mass murderers. But that isn't the case. As I mentioned in the Maintaining a difference between serial killers and serial murderers discussion, multiple murders are often committed by gang members and mob bosses, but these people are hardly ever defined as serial killers. There's more that goes into the definition, even if arbitrary to you and some members of the FBI. And once again, as for 'type,' I said 'usually' (serial killers usually have a type). The type factor is supported by various scholarly sources (both old and modern), so I'm not sure why you are debating that aspect of my comments again..mentioning Berkowitz yet again (this time as a 'black swan to [my] premise'). Furthermore, as shown above, I'd already compromised on this topic by having the lead label Muhammad as a spree killer first, seeing as he is even placed under that category in the Crime Classification Manual, but also having it note the debate among experts about what to call him (a spree killer or a serial killer). So why you felt the need to show back up after all this time (only 'after all this time' if you weren't also this IP who kept getting reverted[1][2][3]) and revert back to 'serial killer' while rewording the hidden note and removing the reference is perplexing to me..other than you wanting Muhammad to be defined as a serial killer first and foremost. I've had the lead label him as a spree killer first because, like I stated, he fits that definition more accurately than he fits 'serial killer.' But I am obviously willing to compromise. Are you? We could refrain from definitively defining him as a spree or serial killer in the first line, and simply let the 'Although' line and/or a section on it take care of this. The 'Although' line could be tweaked to include 'spree killer,' going like this: 'Although the pairing's actions were classified as psychopathy attributable to serial killer characteristics by the media, whether or not their psychopathy meets this classification or that of a spree killer is debated by researchers.' Flyer22 (talk) 01:42, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- Serial Murder: The unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events' (http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.247.91.117 (talk) 00:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Misleadingly 'Islamic' feel to article due to questionable source material
Regarding this sentence near the beginning of the article:'Drawings by Malvo describe the murders as part of a 'jihad' (Arabic for 'struggle in the way of God').'
I think this is very misleading,(1.) because the the style and some of the words expressed in the source material are scarily Islamophobic, and further sources are not given in that linked article to make it seem authentic(2.) The article implies the drawings were made by John Muhammad's partner after the incident and while in prison. By not including these facts in the sentence AND putting it in the very beginning of the article, it gives John Muhammad too Islamic of a flavor that he didn't even claim to have or want, at least as far as I can tell from all the other information as well as what we have already proven to know on the talk page.
To keep the information we have in there now, it NEEDS a better source than the one provided. Notice my changes in the history that were revoked. I included a line that the information was subject to media biases, and it was removed basically saying that the fact that the source was biased is not information given by the source itself. Okay, I understand.. But let's find a better source about Malvo's drawings, until then I propose that the 'jihad' reference be removed entirely, or, at the very VERY least, as supported in the reference, it should be mentioned that these drawings were supposedly found after the fact and not before, and this should be moved to elsewhere in the article. Otherwise, at it stands, it is very misleading. Sawyer207 (talk) 03:46, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
Merger proposal
08 The 4chan Serial Killer
I propose that John Allen Muhammed (J.A.M.) be merged into Beltway sniper attacks. The biography article of J.A.M. falls under WP:BLP1E & WP:PERP. J.A.M. is primarily notable for the series of events that are the subject of the article Beltway sniper attacks. The size of Beltway sniper attacks, is slightly greater than 50k, which is below the size that would require a sub-article per WP:LIMIT. The size of the J.A.M. article is slightly greater than 30k size; merging the J.A.M. article into the Beltway sniper attacks would not exceed the size prescribed in LIMIT.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Per WP:MERGE, I am notifying the involved WikiProjects of these two articles of this proposal, and leaving this notification per WP:CANVASS#Appropriate notification.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:48, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose because, due to the articles and books that focus on this person and/or his killing partner (Lee Boyd Malvo), there's a lot more that can be added to this article; such additions, because there's not much to state that wouldn't be more about the Beltway sniper attacks, would be analysis of Muhammad's thinking and behavior. Whether or not he fits the criteria of a serial killer or spree killer (or a even a combination of the two), which is touched on in the lead, is an example. And there's very likely a lot more to be written in such vein (thinking and behavior) about him and Lee Boyd Malvo in the future (yes, I know about WP:CRYSTALBALL). To me, if a merge is desirable, it would be better to merge the John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo articles together (under the title John Allen Muhammad and Lee Boyd Malvo). Why not propose that the Lee Boyd Malvo article also be merged? Flyer22 (talk) 19:04, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
- I would support a merger of Lee Boyd Malvo as well per WP:BLP1E & WP:PERP to the Beltway sniper attacks article. As they are only the felons who have been convicted of the event which is the subject of the Beltway sniper attacks, and they are primarily notable for the subject of that article, BLP1E and PERP apply to both. Both their articles can be summarized, and merged. If even after summarization, content is expanded, a Sub-article can be recreated with the name suggested by Flyer22.
- I will tag that article as well. Thanks for the idea.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:11, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose. I simply don't see what would be gained by merging the articles. If it works, don't fix it. Also, Flyer22 makes good arguments against a merge. – Herzen (talk) 23:27, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Oppose. There are plenty of articles about murderers on Wikipedia, some much less prominent than Muhammad. See John William Byrd, Jr.. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 06:46, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
- Those articles may not follow the guideline WP:BLP1E and WP:PERP and might be good candidates for merger to the article of the event. Also WP:OTHERSTUFFEXIST just because some articles don't follow relevant guidelines or essays, doesn't mean other articles shouldn't.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
Malvo Shooting helped get us into the Iraq War..
The single biggest accidental effect of the Malvo shootings gets ignored by everybody. The Senate debate on whether to go to war took place at the same time. War was declared on October 11, 2002. The Malvo shooting spree dominated the headlines and pushed the war debate completely off the front page of most newspapers for the entire debate. The last chance to oppose the war was lost in a sea of headlines screaming 'SNIPER !!!' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.42.41.105 (talk) 21:09, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
08. The 4chan Serial Killer
- Please read the talk page guidelines. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 13:10, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Reason for killings
I was just made aware of this tonight, since his wife told the story at Mizzou's (University of Missouri, Columbia) campus tonight. (thurs. sept 30, at 7pm) The reason for the killings is because he was after his wife. He had kidnapped their three children, and lost the trial for custody. He then decided to go after his wife. He proclaimed that he was innocent the whole time. The day of his execution hsi children asked to speak with him, but he never contacted them, and the execution went on that night. It was later revealed the reason he didn't speak to his children is for fear of being asked the question 'why?' because it would've broken him and the facade he put up to stay confident in his belief of his innocence would have crumbled.
08 The 4chan Serial Killer
- Nobody knows definitively what the motive was, except for John Allen Muhammad (who is dead now). However, his wife is mentioned as a possible motive in many sources, and it sounds like a plausible one. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 13:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Allen_Muhammad/Archive_1&oldid=644921116'