Talk:Robert Bradford (Northern Irish politician)

Lead

The term "murdered" has been replaced by "killed" with reference to NPOV. Please explain. It is a verifiable fact that Robert Bradford was murdered. Mooretwin (talk) 13:05, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

read the discussion here. --Domer48_'fenian' 13:46, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

And what is your understanding of the conclusion of that discussion? Mooretwin (talk) 14:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

The conclusion of that discussion are on Wikipedia:Words to avoid, such as "Words that may introduce bias" and "Admit, confess, deny". --Domer48_'fenian' 15:43, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

I can't see any of those pages mentioned in the discussion, so I do not see any basis for the suggestion that the discussion concluded with Wikipedia:Words to avoid. Further, none of the pages you have cited makes any mention of the word "murder". Given this, could you please explain your objection to the term, and why you think it is "POV"? This case seems very clearly to have been a murder. I am unaware of any doubt in respect of that. There is even a quotation in the article referring to it as a murder. Mooretwin (talk) 16:35, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Could you address the above? Mooretwin (talk) 16:06, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

The conclusion was that murder can be used to describe convictions, or used in quotes but that "killed" is a totally neutral way of describing it in unattributed speech, and your own opinions about how someone died are irrelevant and have no place in an unbiased encyclopedia.--Domer48_'fenian' 18:14, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I see. So the basis for your objection to the term is because there was no conviction? Do you believe that the absence of a conviction means Bradford's killing was (a) accidental, (b) manslaughter, or (c) lawful? Mooretwin (talk) 12:42, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Is there any dispute as to this killing? There is no dispute that it was unlawful, no dispute that it was intentional, so on what basis is it disputed that it was murder? Mooretwin (talk) 17:15, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

It remains a fact that Robert Bradford, like Edgar Graham and so many more, were murdered. Not killed. Murdered. Assassinated would be a POV term, murdered is a neutral fact.Traditional unionist (talk) 16:18, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you should also mention Séamus McElwaine, killed by members of the SAS after he was wounded and captured?--Domer48_'fenian' 16:32, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

You may be right, but it is more complicated. McElwaine was a terrorist who was preparing to commit murder, he was stoped by legitimate froces of law and order from doing so, and in the process his life was ended. If this was within the rules of engagement then the killing was lawful and not murder. Bradford was murdered.Traditional unionist (talk) 21:17, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

An inquest jury returned a verdict of unlawful killing. --Domer48_'fenian' 12:50, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Then it was unlawful killing. That is probably murder.Traditional unionist (talk) 13:59, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that TU. --Domer48_'fenian' 18:15, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Note that I say probably. It is always complicated when legitimate forces of law and order take the life of someone preparing to commit murder. In the case of Bradford there is no doubt that murder ws committed.Traditional unionist (talk) 22:48, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

LOL. I noted that alright, but thanks regardless. --Domer48_'fenian' 16:37, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Is the discussion above invisible?

Read and weep. We had the discussion, a big discussion at a nice centralised venue. We write from a neutral POV, not Unionist or British POV. I suggest banned sockpuppeteers respect the consensus. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 13:42, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Regarding POV

I think the main problem here is the hagiographers who write and edit on Wikipedia from the pro-irish republican army pov. This is what causes so many problems on what is supposed to be an encyclopaedia. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 19:10, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

recent edits

These edits significantly change article content, can the IP editor please discuss them here? Also, supporting sources would be good. Respectfully, RomaC ^TALK 04:01, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Robert Bradford (Northern Irish politician). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607135614/http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0330/D.0330.198111170057.html to http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0330/D.0330.198111170057.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:20, 3 December 2017 (UTC)