Talk:Attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Florida

BLPCRIME

Is the current title of this page a WP:BLPCRIME violation? The accused individual seems not to have been convicted of an attempted assassination. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 19:53, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

It's not a BLPCRIME violation. The accused individual left a note directly saying it was an attempted assassination. Also, reportedly, feds are charging Routh for an assassination attempt. Unnamed anon (talk) 20:17, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

@Unnamed anon: Is an exception listed in BLPCRIME for a suspect who left a note stating that they would commit the crime of which they later would be accused? –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 20:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

If a charge for an attempted assassination is brought against the accused individual in the future, then the title would cease being a BLPCRIME violation. But we would have to wait for a court to formally issue that charge. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 20:33, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

It sounds like you’re convicting someone based on your perception of the evidence. Wikipedia is based on what reliable sources say, not on our individual perceptions or political beliefs. This article is not notable enough for a separate Wikipedia article. 71.114.123.162 (talk) 23:41, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Routh was charged with attempted assassination of a presidential candidate earlier today. [1] David O. Johnson (talk) 23:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Again, that does not mean that he is notable enough for an entire separate Wikipedia article. This is pure recentism and an attempt to use Wikipedia to further a particular political narrative during an election period. This could easily have just been one or two sentences in the article on security incidents surrounding trump. 71.114.123.162 (talk) 05:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

You're misinterpreting WP:BLPCRIME. The title does not say that Routh committed a crime, but rather that there was an attempted assassination against Trump in Florida. The body of the article describes what officials believe happened. In describing the criminal act itself, the word "man" is used. Other factual information, such as the note written by Routh, the SUV owned by him etc. are also included.

Nothing in the article title or body violates WP:BLPCRIME. MightyLebowski (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The article implicates a particular person in this crime, however. 71.114.123.162 (talk) 05:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

No it doesn't "implicate" anyone. The article neither states nor implies that the accused person is legally guilty of anything. That is up to the courts to determine. There is no BLP violation here. Cullen328 (talk) 05:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The article is currently titled "Attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Florida", and the "suspect" (the BLP) is listed. I'm not really seeing how this isn't a BLPCRIME violation, and a rather serious one at that. Even our secondary sources in the RM above were hedging their language with "apparent", but BLPCRIME goes further, stating that a mere accusation isn't enough as BLPCRIME says there is a presumption of innocence. The previous title that classified it as a security incident was far more appropriate and in-line with the sources. —Locke Cole • t • c 15:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The article is about Donald Trump, not Routh. Routh is a named suspect and the title isn't Attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Florida by Ryan Routh for that reason. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:02, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

The existence of this article is implicating a particular person in this crime. This article should not exist. Wikipedia is not a tabloid. 71.114.123.162 (talk) 17:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

They're not implicated, since they haven't been convicted. David O. Johnson (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Once again, people are misinterpreting WP:BLPCRIME:

For individuals who are not public figures—that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures—editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured for that crime.

Routh is a public figure, so WP:BLPCRIME does not apply in the way that you are describing.

We can describe Routh based on what WP:RS say, including the notion that he's an alleged assassin.

The previous title that classified it as a security incident was far more appropriate and in-line with the sources.

I can't tell if you're being serious or not. Every WP:RS source now describes this as an assassination attempt.

A few days ago, the FBI formally charged Routh with attempted assassination of a major presidential candidate. MightyLebowski (talk) 22:35, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it's a pretty obvious BLPCRIME violation. Article titles shouldn't implicate living people (including public figures) in crimes they have only been charged with (see WP:KILLINGS for comparison). That's why I thought we should go with something like "alleged assassination attempt". ^Falling_Gravity 09:43, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't see why it matters, the article is about the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, it's not an article about Routh. Routh is a named suspect in the matter, which has nothing to do with the title. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:00, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Routh son arrest

This was present in the article and then removed as tangential. The investigation into his son was conducted as a result of this assassination attempt and should be included in the aftermath section. I find this similar to Criminal charges brought in the Mueller special counsel investigation, which lists many people, many of whom are non-notable except for their crimes (which not all were convicted for), and not all were found guilty/accused of colluding with Russia. They're relevant to list there just as his son should be listed here as investigations resulting from the initial targeted investigation led to their charges. poketape (talk) 20:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

My concern would be BLPNAME: The presumption in favor of privacy is strong in the case of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved, otherwise low-profile persons. The names of any immediate, former, or significant family members or any significant relationship of the subject of a BLP may be part of an article, if reliably sourced, subject to editorial discretion that such information is relevant to a reader's complete understanding of the subject.^[e] Does the arrest of his son give a reader a complete understanding of the attempted assassination? Note that the father has only been charged with the attempt and not convicted while his son is charged with actions outside of West Palm Beach.

Regarding the Criminal charges brought in the Mueller special counsel investigation article, OTHERSTUFFEXISTS does point to the essay Wikipedia:When to use or avoid "other stuff exists" arguments which notes at SSEFAR that checking related articles is a good idea in this case. --Super Goku V (talk) 23:02, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Many articles have been published regarding the arrest so I don't think BLPNAME applies as he's no longer low-profile. He also participated in an interview after his father's arrest, which further negates the low-profile argument. poketape (talk) 00:50, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Leave it out, WP:BLP1E and WP:BLPCRIME. Kcmastrpc (talk) 23:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't think BLP1E applies, just BLPCRIME (which is what I'm debating if it applies or not), as I'm not saying to make an article about his son (which would be where BLP1E applies), but whether or not it should be mentioned here as a result of the investigation into this article's topic. poketape (talk) 00:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2024

2600:6C46:4400:11E2:1F8B:11B8:BC72:8844 (talk) 03:14, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

<!== The Military is revamping there resources on line of publication Time -1:00 p.m. This will be a new Database source of information for everyone. ==> [] ~`~`

<!== Kimberly Karyl Yerhot. ==>

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. What change are you asking for? RudolfRed (talk) 04:01, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested Move 30 September 2024

I am officially proposing a move review from Attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Florida to September 2024 attempted assassination of Donald Trump for the following reason: the ladder option is more precise because it includes the specific time frame of the event (September 2024), which clarifies when the attempted assassination occurred. Option A does specify a location (Florida), but it lacks the temporal detail that can be important for context. Readers with lacking information would not be given enough context in the title to determine which came first, which is more important than the location it occurred in. Best, Zeke (talk) 22:09, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Procedural oppose - a discussion regarding the previous move request is currently open at MR. estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:12, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Withdrawn - Oh God I did not see that nor do I want to get involved in that mess. Best, Zeke (talk) 22:14, 30 September 2024 (UTC)