Talk:Christchurch mosque shootings/Archive 15
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Christchurch mosque shootings. 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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 |
Related incidents and arrests
A minor detail, but this section has a [needs update] notice, apparently referring to the case of the 30-year old man who was seeking to sue the police for false arrest after he was temporarily detained for wearing camouflage gear. Is this the same Christchurch man who was later jailed for unrelated offences? (The name and age match.[1][2]) That might explain why we've heard nothing more about his "wrongful arrest" lawsuit. Muzilon (talk) 06:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
- And that's not today's only newspaper article mentioning someone peripherally related being in another incident... [3] Daveosaurus (talk) 06:35, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
- There can't be many people of that age called Stephen Millar around Papanui, so it probably is the same person. It should be remembered that on the day soon after it happened there was total confusion in Christchurch with various messages being broadcast on the radio. It was thought there was a group of shooters involved in a wider shooting rampage and people were advised to stay inside. That would sort of explain why the police with a gun arrested Millar - a guy in military style clothing outside a school. It might sound an over reaction now but at the time it seemed to be an understandable error. However, if Millar is the same person, the police might back then have known he owned or used guns, so they had another reason for arresting him. Unless a source says it's the same person, we cannot add it to the article, or speculate. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 06:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
- I would have thought some journalist might have picked up on it. "Man wrongfully arrested by police last year now rightfully arrested" or something like that. Muzilon (talk) 07:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
- There can't be many people of that age called Stephen Millar around Papanui, so it probably is the same person. It should be remembered that on the day soon after it happened there was total confusion in Christchurch with various messages being broadcast on the radio. It was thought there was a group of shooters involved in a wider shooting rampage and people were advised to stay inside. That would sort of explain why the police with a gun arrested Millar - a guy in military style clothing outside a school. It might sound an over reaction now but at the time it seemed to be an understandable error. However, if Millar is the same person, the police might back then have known he owned or used guns, so they had another reason for arresting him. Unless a source says it's the same person, we cannot add it to the article, or speculate. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 06:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
The Tarrant Effect
An article has been created called Tarrant effect. That article has been nominated for deletion. The deletion discussion is here. OrewaTel (talk) 08:35, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
- would certainly be good to dive deeper into his legacy on Mass murderers, 4chan and white supremacists. What did the Tarrant effect article contain? I can't find a history. Also, I don't think titling an article like that the "Tarrant effect" woul be appropriate per wikipedia standards. Naming it Christchurch shooting legacy or something along those lines would be better. Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 11:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Sentence
The terrorist received 52 life sentences + 480 years. Genberg47 recently edited the infobox to reflect this. It is interesting that until then, the "Sentence" part had read "life imprisonment without the possibility of parole". Sure, the perpetrator will never be released, but I agree with this edit. Among other articles, multiple life sentences are noted at Terry Nichols, for example. 2A02:AB04:2B5:7200:8057:82C6:D9EA:5BB7 (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
New article
This certainly throws a wrench into the government's story. I've chosen not to edit this article but it is interesting and will probably be elaborated on further. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
- The source is of this article is here. The Press is reproducing it under a CC licence. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 19:04, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oops. Thanks. PARAKANYAA (talk) 19:36, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have done a bit of research into this whole thing. About 10 months ago someone posted a compiled post of some of his 4/8chan posts. Funny how only just now the media are picking it up. reddit post. Kiwiz1338 (talk) 15:44, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- There was a second article published that continued the first. There will be a peer reviewed study published at the end of this, so maybe it's best to add that then, but if this is true (which it seems to be) it is pretty concerning in a lot of ways, and it seems like a lot of the royal commission information was only a partial picture. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:24, 29 March 2024 (UTC)