Template talk:ICC indictees (NavBox)

Prominence

Is it right that someone like Kosgey, who has had charges against him dismissed, is mentioned with the same prominence as someone who has been convicted? AndrewRT(Talk) 22:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Under WP:BLP, there obviously has to be some indication of people's different statuses, including that of Muammar Gaddafi, who died before he could be prosecuted. Boud (talk) 21:27, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

But there have to be proper RS's in the respective articles for the people listed. Voice of America is like Russia Today, and not really the most serious sort of reference for Rosgey's status... Boud (talk) 21:28, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Under WP:BLP, it could probably be argued that people for whom charges were dropped should be omitted entirely. I'll add a topic at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard. Boud (talk) 21:42, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

The archive of that discussion is at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive282#ICC - charges of war crimes/crimes against humanity dropped. The main argument against my point of 21:42 13 April 2019 is WP:WELLKNOWN - even if charges are dropped, unless the person stops being a public figure (which is unlikely for ICC indictees), there's no justification in removing the entry from the nagivation box. Boud (talk) 23:14, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Denoting convictions

Is it necessary to denote that someone was convicted with both italics AND (*)? Surely just one would be enough. TRCRF22 (talk) 09:48, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

@TRCRF22: I believe it is necessary as a matter of accessibility. Text to speech programs may not pick up on italics, but they will note the asterisks. At least, this is my understanding. See for example the list of award winners on 96th Academy Awards, which states that "winners are listed first, highlighted in boldface, and indicated with a double dagger (‡)." – Zntrip 22:21, 26 June 2024 (UTC)