Talk:Seung-Hui Cho/Archive 2

This contains material from April 19-

Motive Section Removal

• Written in British English (Not American Grammar)
• Cited source build’s motive off hearsay – with no implication of dating

| See for yourself

• Does not fit the bill (Described as loner)

76.109.163.61

STILL NOT A SINGLE US PUBLICATION TO CITE! 76.109.163.61

FACEBOOK COMMENTS ARE NOT A VIABLE SOURCE! 76.109.163.61

I TOLD YOU SO! 76.109.163.61 01:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Ishmael / Ismail Ax

Rather than redirecting Ismael Ax back to this same page, Ismael should direct to Ishmael (God Will Hear) which is how it was spelled in the package he mailed to NBC. Cho compared himself with Jesus in his manifesto, and Ishmael would be another religious comparison.

Cho's spelling was terrible. Figures he'd mispell Ishmael in ink on his own arm. 71.205.216.122 04:47, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Ismail is the Islamic spelling of Ishmael, or so I was told in RE. Obvioulsy, this brings up subjects of was he groomed by Al Quaeda etc?

--~~Lazyguy~~I r needing userboxes plz! 14:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Just a theory and speculation but, according to Christiaity, Ishmael was the unwanted son of Abraham, known as a wanderer, maybe Cho felt that he was unwanted by his parents and society in general, just like Ishmael, since his sister went to an ivy league college (princeton), while Cho got into VA tech, even thought Va tech is still a very good school.Wraith12 06:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)Wraith12

Certainly a plausible assumption. The two plays he penned have been floating around the internet, and they both deal with themes of neglectful/abusive authority figures who don't realize what their children are capable of. Laura 06:35, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I know there are tons of rumors flying around about it. I have been looking on the internet as well. A few things I have come across are...

1. Islamic Reference. 2. Maybe a username for something. 3. It is the name of a character in the PC game Diablo who carries an ax. 4. Maybe mixed uped letter than mean something else.

Are there any other theories? Shotmenot 08:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

"One popular theory spreading across the web comes from a story in the Koran, the holy book of Islam, about Ibrahim and his son, Ismail." "Where Ismail is spelled Ishmael." "James Fenimore Cooper's novel "The Prairie," Ishmael Bush is known as an outcast and outlawed warrior, according to an essay written in 1969 by William H. Goetzmann, a University of Texas History professor. In Cooper's book, "Bush carries the prime symbol of evil - the spoiler's axe," the professor wrote." "from Moby Dick, Ishmael, is considered an enigma who is well educated yet considers his time on a whaling ship worthy of time at Yale or Harvard."

http://www.theage.com.au/news/technology/ismail-ax-sparks-web-frenzy/2007/04/18/1176696889800.html?page=2 Monkeyblue 13:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This is a bit thin, and definitely not to be taken seriously, but anagramming ISMAIL AX comes up with a few entries, the one most curious to me is "ALAS, I MIX" -- given that the shooter was considered a loner...

Interesting point. There are a series of anagrams in this phrase. Some of them include "AX IS MAIL," and "AXIS MAIL." None are to be taken seriously. I agree with "ALAS, I MIX". Very interesting one. Sigmund1989 10:24, 18 April 2007 (PDT)

it was mentioned in Le Figaro http://www.lefigaro.fr/international/20070418.WWW000000339_mais_qui_est_ismail_ax_.html that prior to the events, google search for 'ismail ax' only yield 2 results. Maybe 'ismail ax' is only a googlewhack. 89.80.231.115 20:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It is now being reported that the term was actually AX ISHMAEL. 151.213.177.128 23:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)gnoko

Here's one article on it: [1]. —Ben FrantzDale 01:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

ISMAIL AX, obviously is an anagram for SALAMI XI (salami eleven)207.118.168.114 03:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

All straight from Talk:Virginia_Tech_massacre#ISMAEL_AX.21.21.21 Monkeyblue 09:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I have my theories on Ismael Ax and I wanted to include them on this site for people to read. Ismael Ax was simply the split personality the weak, powerless Cho created for himself in order to feel powerful. Eventually, the Ismael Ax character grew stronger and stronger in his subconscious, and eventually took over completely. He began using the weak "Cho" side of his personality as a disguise to all those around him as he plotted the massacre. This Ismael Ax character demanded fame and immortality, for he was to himself a symbol of great power. Unable to come to grips and cope with the shame over the Cho side of his personality, Ismael Ax decided the only remedy was to go on a shooting rampage and then killing himself.

In the book of Genesis, Abraham has a son Ishmael with his maid Hagar. He subsequently has another son, Isaac, with his wife Sarah. Sarah is jealous of Hagar and Ishmael, and persuades Abraham to banish Hagar and Ishmael from the camp.

Note that the Virginia Tech murderer's sister went to Princeton, a "rich kid" school, whereas the killer himself merely went to Virginia Tech. (As an alum of Virginia Tech, I have great affection for the place and for my years there, and I think it's a fine place, but it clearly doesn't have the prestige of Princeton.) So, just as Ishmael undoubtedly had great feelings of sibling rivalry, perhaps rage even, so might the Virginia Tech killer have had towards his sister. (The killer's sister, by the way, is reported to have also got to do another rich kid thing: Study abroad (in exotic Bangkok, no less).) At least when I was there, Virginia Tech was NOT a rich kids' school (not like Princeton, or even like University of Virginia, say), so it's a bit strange the killer would be enraged at the rich kids at Tech. I have nothing to buttress this other than the public reports, this is pure conjecture on my part, but it seems plausible to me. I could be way off base, and I certainly don't want to add to the pain the killer's family is undoubtedly currently experiencing with an unjust characterization of the family dynamics -- I'm just engaging in speculation.

Note further that the Arabs regard Ishmael as their forefather, whereas the Jews regard Isaac as theirs. This may help to explain some of the Arab-Israeli conflict we see to the present day, and some of the Arab feelings of inferiority, unjust treatment, etc. Note furthermore that the Muslims believe that Abraham agreed to sacrifice Ishmael, whereas Jews/Christians believe that Abraham agreed to sacrifice Isaac -- this in turn leading to additional feelings of unfair treatment on the part of Muslims (i.e., "not only did Abraham favor his Jewish son Isaac over his Arab son Ishmael, but the world has bought the myth that Abraham offered to sacrifice Isaac, when it was OUR forefather that he actually offered to sacrifice!").

Note further that Saddaam Hussein was executed a few months ago at the time of the Muslim holiday commemorating Abraham's offer to sacrifice Ishmael. Furthermore note the VT killer's identification with the Columbine killers, who did what they did on April 20 in honor of Hitler's birthday. (Hitler could be seen, I suppose, as the avenger of Ishmael. Or, I suppose, as the avenger of Christ Himself (who the killer also identified with).) Note that this week is the week of Hitler's birthday. And we just commemorated Christ's death on Good Friday, April 6.

Obviously I am engaging in tremendous speculation here, but I can't help but wonder if there is anything anti-Semitic in the diatribe the VT killer sent to NBC that hasn't been released to the public yet. His identification with Ishmael, his raging against "rich kids", his honoring the Columbine killers (who were honoring Hitler), his saying he was going to die like Christ (who, some have claimed, was killed by the Jews).

On the other hand, it would not seem that a German class would be the most obvious one to pick on to rage against the Jews.

Pet Fish

is the fact that he had a pet fish really relevent? if others agree that it isnt, someone else will have to delete it, as I'm new.Sierrarose23 07:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Unless Cho tortured or killed or otherwise brutalized the fish (as per examples of sado-masochistic aggression acted out on animals/pets by serial/spree killers) it is NOT relevant in any way. 172.165.109.63 07:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

its at the end of the biography section, if you could take it out? Sierrarose23 07:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Be bold and do it yourself. Do whatever you think needs done (other than change the name of the perp  :) --Dynaflow 07:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I cant. The page is locked against unregistered and newly registered editors. I'm newly registered. Sierrarose23 07:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I cannot either (not reg), so someone 'old' will have to do it, but PLEASE DELETE IT per my comment above. As a BS Psy, I am qualified re: WikiEDU/PROF to say "NOT RELEVANT" unless evidence of sado-masochistic/cruelty/abuse toward animals is presented and SOURCED/cited. Thanx 172.165.109.63 07:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

You win. You trump my BA Psych. I'll get on it if it hasn't been done already. --Dynaflow 08:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I utterly disagree. I think the information about him having a fish is relevant. It establishes a frame of reference about the character of the individual. It might even help to know what type of fish it was and in what conditions it was housed. Further, it would not matter if some cruelty to the fish did take place (it is a fish). Your degree in psychology matters little until you have a PhD (at least have your masters). Go to med school and get a degree in psychiatry and than maybe we can have a conversation. Please do not pretend to be an expert after completeing a four year programme. Jeff 11:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

What's the name of his fish?--Sonjaaa 09:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I do rather think that the fact he had fish is relevant. He was described as a loner and he kept fish. From the sounds of it he had no friends or didn't talk to anyone, but he felt the need to have fish in his life. It does seem relevant to him. A page on, say, Aaron Carter having fish would not be useful, but in this rampage guys case it does JayKeaton 15:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Of course it's relevant: this article is a biography, and the fact of his keeping fish is a biographical fact about him --Yksin 17:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Amend: or rather, that is, it would be a relevant biographical fact if indeed he had a pet fish. But I can find no media account mentioning this. The only mention of a fish in connection with Cho I can find is in a Toronto Star article that mentions his & his roommate's names being on a "pink fish" next to their door -- clearly not a real fish, but some kind of construction paper cut-out. --Yksin 22:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

No, NOT relevant, unless you want to go with the argument that every serial/spree killer must have the lineage of all their pets listed for posterity (and they do not ... with good reason). To DYNAFLOW - (lol) - don't know if I 'win' or we 'tie', however I was not aware that Psy was avail in the Arts ... was your program different from my science track? I appreciate that you did not assign (erroneous) meaning to my comments unlike the two snide ref's after yours. I was not being arrogant by any means - just a neutral statement of fact. If I was going for arrogance, I would have listed my post-grad studies/education, certificates, specialities, training, medical preceptorships and MENSA membership. (sigh) Clearly, that was not my intent as I woefully UNDER-represented my qualifications. Abnormal/Cognitive Psychology was my speciality in college and honestly, the Pet Fish is NOT relevant UNLESS there was evidence of torture/sado-masochistic/sexual aggression/behavior towards the pet. SHALOM. 172.163.61.72 22:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

Of course, if it is a fish called Wanda.... pointlessforest 02:18, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Police search inventory lists item 15: "MINNOW IN BLUE PLASTIC HOUSING". Where is this minnow now? --131.193.179.146 03:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Misattributed quote

The following passage is incorrect and needs to be revised:

"According to professor Nikki Giovanni who taught Cho in a poetry class in 2005, Cho was "extraordinarily lonely—the loneliest person I have ever met in my life." She said that he whispered, took 20 seconds to answer questions, and took cell phone pictures of her in class. After becoming concerned with his behavior and the themes in his writings, the professor started meeting with Cho to work with him one-on-one. She said she was concerned for her safety when she met with him. After notifying the legal authorities about his behavior, the professor urged Cho to seek counseling, but he refused."

It was actually Professor Lucinda Roy who said Cho Seung-hui was "extraordinarily lonely-the loneliest person I have ever met in my life." Professor Nikki Giovanni is actually the person who said that it is "crap" when people say that Cho was "troubled". The cited links for the foregoing passage confirms this. This needs to be changed.

Lonesome road 19:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Please Cite in Article

while wikipedia may not be a newspaper article, I think it's important to make sure you add attribution throughout this article. Journalists have to cite everything as police/fire/fbi said, and I think it should be seen in this article too.

Cho Seung-hui was accused of being the shooter in Monday's shooting, university police said. (1) or whatever.

Right now, it reads as if he is definitely the killer, which highly highly probable, but I don't think it's an encyclopedia's job to say who or what did something - especially a massacre. Just give it a written citation, not a footnote, until you get definitive proof from Police, which does not exist yet, that Cho killed everyone in both incidents.

20:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The important thing is that every assertion made has a reliable external source, such as CNN, BBC, the local police website, etc. This article is relatively well-sourced in that respect, it is not necessary to use a journalistic style of "police claim...", etc, but rather cite secondary sources. Anthony.moore 23:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Note?

Did anyone publish the full note? I'm guessing probably not since it's probably considered evidence , but I'm still wondering. --Evilturtlefromhell 20:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

No.. 71.252.244.130 02:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Image

Am I the only person who finds that picture decidedly not-funny? And how did it get in there with an edit lock in place? Gooshy 23:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The image got there because the article wasn't fully protected but semi-protected. See here for more info. -- P.B. Pilhet 23:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Were you looking for one more uplifting? I think the picture says a thousand words. ~ Rollo44 23:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

http://crossfather.skyrock.com/pics/517902982_small.jpg

this is supposedly a picture of him which I found though a Forum, Can anyone else Verify it is him? If so I think we should add it. what about adding his personal infomation like height,Weight etc? Jegal 23:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Um... finding an image online does not mean it's free and can be used on wikipedia. MrMacMan ^Talk 23:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, not only does the person in that photograph not look anything like anything like the person in the other photographs, but simply tracing the address back to the subdomain gives you a blog which photos of the person, who is definitely not Cho Seung-hui. 71.224.249.33 00:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Im well Aware of Wikipedias image policys you can see on my profiles talk Also the link was not working for me thank you. Jegal 00:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Section about the female professor?

I think that the section on the female professor that met with him one on one and suggested counseling needs to be reviewed. Honestly, a story like that coming this quickly after the event seems very fabricated. The actual substance of the passage seems fictional and unlikely. Someone should try to confirm this and make sure its not some product of a media outlet or a "creative-minded" individual. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.150.79.160 (talk) 00:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

These events are taken from and reiterated in several articles from established news sources, and the citations for which are already present in the article (particularly references 25 and 26, from ABC News and MSNBC, respectively). I see no reason, at this point in time, to be pointedly suspicious of these anecdotes. --Noblesavage 02:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Search Warrant

CNN.com has a document from the police department detailing all items seized from his dorm room, found here: [2]. I'm not sure how to go about it, but if anyone wants to, I think this is definitely something that should be included in the article. President David Palmer 01:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Attachment A of this warrent notes that a bomb threat was found at the scene of the incident, and that it is suspect Cho was the cause of the previous bomb threats because of this. Should this be added? Melanie Brouzes 02:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

== Did he fulfill his Korean military service requirement? == *Resolved

I apologize if this has been brought up before, but:

Assuming that Cho indeed was a citizen of the Republic of Korea, as a male over the age of 18 he was under legal obligation to perform 24-27 months of service with the South Korean military. Those living abroad can, I believe, postpone the requirement until later into adulthood than those living in Korea, but they must eventually fulfill this obligation, nonetheless.

Given all these questions about how Cho could be so proficient in weaponry, it would be helpful to know if he had completed his military service requirement, as this would provide at least some basis for his familiarity with the handling of guns. --Noblesavage 01:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that's a pertinent line of questioning, but I'd just like to add that Koreans have an option to defer their military service. I recall talking to a Korean National studying in China saying that you could do it after completing their degree. It's the same with Taiwan too. (Fang Teng 02:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC))

I strongly doubt that he completed or was even enrolled in military training. Just by checking out his biography, he is likely to have never left US and instead pursued to complete education before the possible military service. It's probably either he taught himself or his father (who probably had served) had taught him for when he decided to enlist in either RoK or US armed force. --Revth 02:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

If I recall, he left Korea before he was 18. 76.198.148.243 02:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Koreans can defer their requirement until after they've completed their degree (though I've known a fair number of Koreans, both in and out of Korea, who have elected to pre-empt or interrupt their undergraduate education to serve in the military), and yes, he'd lived in the U.S. since he was a child (8 years old, I think?), and yes, I also doubt that he was ever enrolled in the Korean military (nothing in his bio suggests that he ever left to go to Korea for any extended period of time, and current articles available give the impression that he went straight from an American high school into VA Tech). I just wanted to open this for discussion, in case anyone has any concrete information to suggest definitively whether he had or had not completed his training. Thanks! --Noblesavage 02:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Resolved, I think-- citation number 8, a New York Times article, describes Cho as a 2003 graduate of Westfield HS in VA (as already stated in the Wiki article), which would seem to confirm that he went directly from high school to college, leaving no gap during which he could have served in the military. I should have read more closely; thanks anyway to the people who responded. --Noblesavage 02:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It was still a fair point to make. Given that it doesn't even seem that Cho played video games (no, not saying that violent games make people killers, just that killers are drawn to video games, which could help in some aspects of hand eye coordination/strategical movement), where he completed his firearm training seems to be a mystery. He shot over 60 people, many of them several times. Even assuming he had extensive firearm experience, he would have needed to be carrying several hundred rounds of ammunition- it's possible he shot himself only after he realized he was about to run out. Have any records surfaced as to records of him going to a firing range? Unless he had that, ROTC or hunting experience, how did this kid become so adept??

Nature of the killings

Was his killings more of a bang bang bang, kill as many people as quick as he can, or was it more spread out like a hostage thing with him talking to his victims or shouting out statements? It would be nice if this article could reflect that somehow. Also, did Cho file the numbers off the guns himself, or were they filed off before he bought both guns? The article just says that the numbers were filed off, it doesn't say "before he bought the firearms" or anything JayKeaton 02:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

From all the interview's I've heard it is in my understanding that he just busted into classrooms and started shooting people in the head, people in the front rows first, then he just kept shooting, without saying a thing. In the German class he came and killed almost everyone, then left, the few people that were alive got up and barricaded the door. He went back to that classroom and tried to get back in but couldn't. It's all pretty messed up and I don't understand it. 71.252.244.130 02:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The gun purchases were 100% above-board, apparently, which would mean he filed the serial numbers off himself. Natalie 21:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

redirects

Can we make sure that every common variant in the news of this guy's name has a redirect to this page?

• Sueng Cho
• the various ways it's spelled in Korean newspapers

70.51.11.38 03:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

done for Sueng Cho-Randalllin 03:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• • 조승희 and 조승휘 and 조승회
  • perhaps these as well: 趙承輝 - 赵承熙 - 曹承辉

70.51.11.38 05:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Parents trying to commit suicide?

• "조승희 부모 자살기도 확실한 듯(3보) (Cho Seung-hui's parents suicide attempt confirmed)". Naver News. 2007-04-18. Retrieved 2007-04-18.

Anyone know if this is true? NineMSN is calling it "a rumour" [3] cab 03:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

(Oops, looks like I'm late on the "save". Merging sections.)

The Korea Herald is currently parroting a report by Los Angeles-based Radio Korea that Cho's parents attempted suicide after learning of the shootings. It not yet firm enough to put in the article, IMO, but should make it into more credible media sources if confirmed. The Korean media reports have themselves just been reported by MSN. - BanyanTree 03:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

it was reported earlier that this is simply a rumour, a representative on CNN told the press that it is not true. ALSO - I am not very familiar with wikipedia editing, but someone should add information regarding the interview with two of Cho's ex-roommates. Apparently, he had been stalking a girl down the hall. He told his roommates about this, and they told him to stop stalking women. Afterward, he used AIM to tell them he wanted to kill himself. The roommates then contacted campus police. Cho was observed at some type of clinic for 2 nights and released back to Vtech. Also, in another incident, Cho went to a party with his 2 roommates. After a few beers he opened up and admitted that he had an imaginary girlfriend. This imaginary girlfriend was called Jelly (Gelly?) and she called him Spanky. The imaginay girlfriend was a supermodel. This from http://news.yahoo.com/ videos - cho's roommates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.30.167.252 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Staying with the suicide rumor topic, the MSN article linked above, which previously relayed the reports of suicide now refutes the report of suicide. (If it was a wiki, we could see exactly when the article changed, but alas.) Apparently the parents are hospitalized due to shock at the news. - BanyanTree 03:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

His parents probably need protection at this point of time. Chirag 14:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

social anxiety disorder?

Based on the description in this article, I think that he might have social anxiety disorder, perhaps also selective mutism, as he hardly spoke a word in class. Maybe he was frustrated by his condition and so developed an angry personality. I'm not a specialist so I would like to have your opinions on this. --218.102.183.79 05:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, not our place to diagnose his mental illness. --Kvasir 05:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This is precisely why I think we should remove the description of him as a "loner" as, for now, it's too broad and vague, and could be easily misinterpreted and misdiagnosed, like suddenly all loners have Cho-like tendencies and are psycho and would be the target of unfair prejudice. See my comments below. I think the exploitation of this fact in the media and by social commentators is already enough--let's leave it to them.

actually, from a psychiatric point of view (I am), it sounds more like Schizoid personality, these people do not fear embarrassment like the Avoidant (shy) personality. This correlates well with the "weird" vibe that people describe. Of course we cannot know. The odds are that this diagnosis was not used by the mental health professionals who saw him (unless they are very well trained). It is an uncommon diagnosis because these people avoid shrinks : ) Rusty MD

There is no need to be sorry Kvasir. The OP here may bring to our attention or keep in mind when one of us see a real source that mentions this as a possibility. Sure original research has no place, but original research could lead to actual sources. Seeing as this killing is popular with the American media I would say that there is a high possibility that news stories and specials might be out there with specialists, using the information they have, to suggest if it sounds like he had something like this illness in their professional opinion. Reasoning for his rampage would be pretty high up on the information people want when they come to this webpage, so posting about illness and having people search for professional opinions of a possible illness seems ok for the this talk page JayKeaton 15:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It is fair to say in the article somethin like "NBC reported that his classmates and suitemantes (or the police, or whomever)described him as a "loner." It would be a sourced fact that the persons interviewed used the word. It is not permissible for Wikipedia editors to diagnose various neuroses, psychoses, sociopathies, syndromes, or whatever. Edison 22:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

VA Tech gun ban

I added this to the sentence on VA Tech's gun laws: "although Virginia Tech students were forbidden from bringing firearms on campus on threat of expulsion.", in the interest of NPOV. --YixilTesiphon ^{Say hello}_{Be shallow} 05:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Who is changing the name back to Korean-style and why?

There's been an edit war of sorts over the perp's name. There seems to be a consensus on this page that we should be referring to the perp using the name he would have used in everyday life: Seung-hui Cho, rather than using the Korean convention of last-name first. Can someone who is involved in reverting it please tell me why they're doing it, and could everyone who supports the name change please weigh in? Thanks. --Dynaflow 05:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• 1. Cho was never a US citizen - He was always a South Korean citizen.
• 2. English-language consensus stems from the news media reporting: All sources EXCEPT for ABC News use Korean order

WhisperToMe 05:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's have a straw poll on which way it should be, that way one side can claim consensus. GarryKosmos 06:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

External links?

I see there's now an external link to a url called "www.cho-sueng-hui.info" - is this appropriate?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.219.227.6 (talk • contribs).

I've deleted the inappropriate site. The third picture is absolutely NOT Cho. Look at the shape of jawbone. It's different from other pictures. Who commits a blunder! I don't know who is in the picture(third), but it is the infringement of his privacy and right. --2SteamClocks 11:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I previously removed it twice. Can we find out who's repeatedly adding this spam and give them the appropriate warning? THF 11:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

There's always the spam blacklist, which will keep it from being added no matter who does it. Natalie 17:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Loner

The dude sounds like Napoleon Dynamite.

I see putting his description here as merely a "loner" problematic. I mean, was he (a) a loner by choice, or (b) a loner only because he didn't have any social skills and felt left out? Not all loners are socially inept, you see. Conversely, people who appear to be socially active may not even have well adjusted social skills or are awfully awkward. —Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

This is Wikipedia, not a chat room. Take up the "loner" description with the media; the claim is reliably sourced.THF 13:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, this is Wikipedia, not something where just anyone should be able to pick up statements, sourced reliably or not, and draw judgments on that. Leave that to the media (and the social commentators who analyze after them).

He was a person with a serious mental illness that needed psychiatric help, not psychological help. And this fact was ignored by university authorities and the little help he received he received it too late. That's it. Hey, John Forbes Nash was a crazy loner and he won a Nobel prize, so that does not make anyone evil, but he had people around him who helped him and tried to understand him. But I agree this is social commentary that does not belong in Wikipedia. 66.201.172.192

Well, in the case of not being able to classify "loner", this webpage should state "he was described as a 'loner'" rather than "he was a loner" JayKeaton 15:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

yeah, "Loner" is often indicative of schizoid traits whereas "Shy" is more someone who is afraid of embarrassment, both types are by themselves most of the time, but for different reasons. The loner does not feel that he needs people and lacks insight into the lack of social skills, the shy one may have social skills but is so afraid of saying or doing the wrong thing that s/he avoids people, but wishes that s/he could be with people.

"He was a person with a serious mental illness that needed psychiatric help" probably true, but he may have been more criminal than psychiatric, he may have been making a conscious decision to express his anger and impotence by these actions. There is no evidence (so far) that he was, in any way, out of touch with reality. Rusty MD

Excluding the imaginary girlfriend, you mean. Bueller 007 16:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Good point...Though we're still not 100% sure that he thought he actually had a girlfriend. WillSWC 16:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with saying "he was described as a 'loner'" and loner isn't always indicative of schizoid traits.User:jmrepetto

Not only he had an imaginary girlfriend. Some people said he was looking for her and even peeked inside a few classrooms to look for her while shooting.66.201.172.192

I think the relevance lies in the fact that people that knew him personally are referring to Mr. Cho as "loner," and what that means to them, subjectively. Readers may draw their own conclusions as to the meaning, perhaps after reviewing other psychological or sociological articles on the topic of "loner." pointlessforest 19:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Shooter spent time in mental hospital in 2005 - accused of stalking

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18169776/

The gunman blamed for the deadliest shooting in modern U.S. history had previously been accused of stalking two female students and had been taken to a mental health facility in 2005 after his parents worried he might be suicidal, police said Wednesday.

Cho Seung-Hui had concerned one woman enough with his calls and e-mail in 2005 that police were called in, said Police Chief Wendell Flinchum.

He said the woman declined to press charges and Cho was referred to the university disciplinary system. During one of those incidents, both in late 2005, the department received a call from Cho’s parents who were concerned that he might be suicidal, and he was taken to a mental health facility, he said

--Jake7457 15:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

yes these incidents are relevant and should be incorporated. I suggest a new sub-section called "Criminal history" or something under "Behaviour" or "Biography". --Kvasir 18:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

CAVEAT: The term, "mental health facility" is very broad, and includes emergency and non-emergency intervention and assessment services, outatient therapy and clinical offices, community-based residential or day programs as well as acute pyschiatriac care, correctional and forensic hospitals. We should verify the precise nature of the services provided (or offered) ASAP, so that our readers are not mislead; many assume facility = hospital. If he was seen once or twice on an outpatient basis, that cannot be characterized as "hospitalized," and if he was merely "assessed," he was not "treated." Strive for precision, that's my motto. pointlessforest 20:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Behavior

People keep removing the fact that he enjoyed taking photos of female students from under their desks. I think this is a very telling aspect of his personality.Block1of4 16:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

True, this aspect is only the beginning leaning towards his behavior. The stories/papers he wrote, very well describe his Behavior. Nothing has been released about the information on his laptop either, for all we know his "Behavior" could be written like a book inside of his laptop. I believe that the laptop will describe him more than anything, this is my opinion of course. Keihiro 14:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's very relevant. I won't remove it, though. I did take out the "enjoyed" part, because that's just conjecture. --Elliskev 20:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I that Block1of4 has reinserted the "enjoyed" language. I will revert once and no more. Please provide a source that he "enjoyed" taking pictures. --Elliskev 20:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This is an American event in the USA not Korea. His name should be read in Western order, Given Name then Family name. In Korea, they don't refer to George W. Bush as Bush George W., they call him George W. Bush. Therefore this Cho should be called Seunghui Cho.

Section 5

Section 5 seems to be about the massacre, not about Cho. There's a section of the same name with virtually identitcal material in it on the main page. I really think it's not needed here. Ikilled007 18:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree - that section is not about him. MrMacMan ^Talk 18:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)