Talk:Murder of Nabra Hassanen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Title of article[edit]

Is the title of this article appropriate? Until the perpetrator for this crime has been formally indicted for "murder," it's breaking the "innocent until proven guilty" clause of WP:BLPCRIME. I recommend changing the title to Killing of Nabra Hassanen. Kamalthebest (talk) 07:43, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, Kamalthebest. As a person who rarely creates articles in this category, I wasn't familiar with WP:BLPCRIME or relevant policies. Moving it to the title recommended would be better, until the case is further clarified. Kou Dou 09:12, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suspect in lead[edit]

@Jusdafax added a description of the suspect to the article lead so that it read:

On June 18, 2017, Nabra Hassanen, a 17-year-old American Muslim girl, was assaulted and killed in an act of road rage by an undocumented immigrant youth from El Salvador. Hassanen's family and several civil rights groups believe that this might be a hate crime. The police believe that the killing was motivated by road rage.

I've got a couple of concerns about this. Firstly about weight - does putting the suspect in the lead create a presumption? Secondly the current wording doesn't say 'suspect' and implies guilt, which is not established.

Based on this, I'm reverting, but open to ideas. Cheers, AntiVan (talk) 08:48, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

==Notability==

Since this turned out to be a tragic traffic accident, not a hate crime, it is not clear that it is meets WP:GNG.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:36, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Traffic accident? Did the car "accidently" rape her too? E.M.Gregory for someone who prides themselves on finding every little namedrop possible and spinning it as "lasting coverage" I find it incredibly difficult to believe you missed the ongoing trial for murder and rape.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:07, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please assume good faith. I make mistakes. In this case, I remembered the coverage form a year ago, and was surprised to see this article still here. and, as you imply, I did not check for updates.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:16, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]