Difference between revisions of "Talk:Seung-Hui Cho"
m (→Other mass murderers: reminds me of Gavin de Becker's account of the postal worker) |
(→Ed? Why are you removing legit details?: In what way are they "legit"?) |
||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
The sad truth is that hind sight is 20-20. It's nearly impossible to tell the difference between a potential psycho and a harmless crank until it's too late. [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 09:42, 18 April 2007 (EDT) | The sad truth is that hind sight is 20-20. It's nearly impossible to tell the difference between a potential psycho and a harmless crank until it's too late. [[User:Czolgolz|Czolgolz]] 09:42, 18 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
| − | == | + | ==Removal of some details== |
I thought those details were useful, why did you get rid of all that? [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 09:40, 18 April 2007 (EDT) | I thought those details were useful, why did you get rid of all that? [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 09:40, 18 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Tell me what purpose they serve. Do they explain why he did it? Do they show a pattern, or an indication of a larger problem? This is not Eyewitness News ("details at ten!"), and we do not need to generate an audience. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 09:47, 18 April 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 13:47, April 18, 2007
We should probably mention (somewhere) that Chinese, Japanese and Korean names go in [family, given] order. So that "Mr. Cho" is would be called Seung-Hui by his parents or close friends (not this this kid had any close friends, but ...) --Ed Poor 19:50, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
- For the purposes of the article, I believe the (first, last) combination will be searched much more, and as the Anglicized version, can stand to stay on Conservapedia. I don't have a grasp of east Asian languages, though. --Hojimachongtalk 19:53, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
- I think it should go back to Seung-Hui Cho, given that the source cited, and most of the news, calls him that. ColinRtalk 19:55, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
- What news are you looking at, Colin? I've only seen Cho Seung-Hui on CNN, ABC, MSNBC, and the Today show :/. --Hojimachongtalk 19:56, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
- I think it should go back to Seung-Hui Cho, given that the source cited, and most of the news, calls him that. ColinRtalk 19:55, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
Either way, a redirect can be set up. DanH 19:56, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
32 fellow students?
I think at least one of the casualties was a professor, if not more. DanH 20:06, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
- Fixed. You're right, Dan, one was an Israeli-American. --Hojimachongtalk 20:08, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
New article?
Perhaps one article on the shooting qua the shooting - with timelines, victims, etc, and this one on the human-piece-of-crap (sorry, a little editorialisation there) that did it? Jacobin 23:23, 17 April 2007 (EDT)
Overlooked?
They have been trying to get stricter gun laws in Virginia, as they don't keep records on bought shotguns, rifles or private handguns. And they don't check the amount of guns bought against recent crime waves. But Bush vetoed the decision.
Funny this doesn't seem to be widely known.
Other mass murderers
This case reminds me of Gavin de Becker's account of the postal worker who (the media said) "suddenly" went besersk and "without warning" killed several co-workers. The media account was wrong, of course. The postal worker had shown anti-social signs for years before the incident. But everyone was afraid of the legal repercussions of dismissing him. I'll have to look it up, I have the book in a box somewhere. --Ed Poor 09:39, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
The sad truth is that hind sight is 20-20. It's nearly impossible to tell the difference between a potential psycho and a harmless crank until it's too late. Czolgolz 09:42, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
Removal of some details
I thought those details were useful, why did you get rid of all that? Flippin 09:40, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
- Tell me what purpose they serve. Do they explain why he did it? Do they show a pattern, or an indication of a larger problem? This is not Eyewitness News ("details at ten!"), and we do not need to generate an audience. --Ed Poor 09:47, 18 April 2007 (EDT)