Talk:Death of Kumanjayi Walker

Vandalism

Just a friendly reminder that removal of highly relevant, well-referenced material from this article is clear vandalism.Dippiljemmy (talk) 10:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Actually it may not be so. Even when it's inappropriate it still may not be vandalism. Please re-read WP:Vandalism, it covers a lot less than you seem to think including some very bad edits. False accusations of vandalism are disruptive even when the edits themselves were disruptive but not vandalism, and such false accusations and can even be seen as a personal attack. Nil Einne (talk) 11:31, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

I've re-read it and unfortunately I'm even more convinced that it is vandalism. The flagrant and repeated deletions of encyclopedic content clearly meet the criteria outlined, which is sad but not unexpected.Dippiljemmy (talk) 06:14, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Well if you want to be blocked or ignored be my guest I guess. Or you could just describe what is happening without resorting to lame inaccurate descriptions and be taken seriously. Nil Einne (talk) 07:01, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

I cannot tell how much love Wikipedia. Best. Platform. Ever. Cheers bro, I'll look out for that.Dippiljemmy (talk) 07:12, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Use of paywalled references

This article extensively uses references that are locked behind paywalls. I invite a discussion on the usefulness of an article whereby the paywalled references are not readily accessible and therefore cannot be verified as credible sources. Perhaps they could be replaced with articles that are not paywalled. Many thanks.(Dippiljemmy (talk) 10:04, 20 March 2022 (UTC))

While it is frustrating that not every source is immediately available to all users online, a great many newspapers, peer-reviewed articles and books are either paywalled or available in hard-copy only. This fact does not detract from their credibility, or their appropriateness for use on Wikipedia. You may find your local, school, university or state library can provide you with access to this kind of content. VisitingSamG (talk) 10:09, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Actually it does detract from their credibility and it also detracts from the credibility of the article in that most people cannot check the reference and therefore cannot know if the claims made by the article are accurate. Non-paywalled sources are readily available on the subject, I don't understand why paywalled sources would be used when they can be easily replaced by sources that are readily accessible.Dippiljemmy (talk) 10:15, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

My intention will be to replace the paywalled references with non-paywalled references. Consensus on this would be appreciated. Many thanks.Dippiljemmy (talk) 10:17, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Except for the public broadcasters (SBS and ABC), almost every australian news outlet is paywalled these days. Trying to avoid them is impossible. JT_dale^Talk~ 10:23, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

See WP:PAYWALL. There is absolutely nothing wrong with paywalled sources, nor does it affect the article's credibility. I suggest paywalled sources are supplemented with non paywall ones rather than replaced, but in any case, if you do ever replace a paywall source please make sure it is of equal quality and properly supports every statement in our article that the source you are replacing supports. And again, the credibility of paywalled sources is not affected by them being behind a paywall so please do not think a source is of equal or better quality just because it is not behind a paywall. Nil Einne (talk) 11:29, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

The first reply is not true, there are many non-paywalled news sites available, and since this topic has made international news that also broadens the range of new-sites to utilise. I agree with the second reply. The problem with this article is that its core information comes from paywalled sites. If there were one or two provided for adjunct info that would be reasonable, but to have most of its content referenced with paywalled sites makes it very difficult for most people to ascertain its veracity, especially as there is alternative nonpaywalled sites of equal or better quality readily accessible.Dippiljemmy (talk) 06:22, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

There is nothing in WP:PAYWALL which supports the view "The problem with this article is that its core information comes from paywalled sites". The sources being behind a paywall is not a problem. If you are able to supplement them with non paywalled sources, you're welcome to do so, but it doesn't change the fact paywalled sources are not a problem simply because they're behind a paywall. Nil Einne (talk) 07:03, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I'm very happy to supplement this article with nonpaywalled references. Thank you very much for your consensus. Dippiljemmy (talk) 07:20, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

There does, however, appear to be an over-reliance on The Australian (I have just counted 13 out of 37 - over a third), when there are plenty of other available sources. I would like to see more balance (especially as we know that this paper is not NPOV). Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:10, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

This over-reliance does still need to be addressed and not be met with reverts when genuine attempts are made to rectify it. Dippiljemmy (talk) 07:41, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I definitely agree that there's an over-reliance on The Australian articles. I'm also dubious of The Australian's information on here - while it's considered a reliable source it is also noted that some editors (myself included) consider it partisan and its reporting on some topics has been quite problematic. I'd argue that The Australian's reporting not just on Kumanjayi Walker but on Indigenous affairs is extremely racist. I know that The Australian's reporting and criticisms of it is discussed in this article, yet the article itself just lifts information (and racist ideology) from The Australian.

"A series of articles about his life, which portrayed him as little more than an habitual criminal, and included a description of his final moments, were published in the paper after the acquittal of the officer charged with his murder." - his biography in this article does the exact same thing

Among other issues in Kumanjayi's biography section, I question why "little sister" is in quotes. In my opinion, the article 'The unwanted baby who became a violent abuser: Kumanjayi Walker’s tragic life before he was shot by NT cop Zachary Rolfe' alongside other Australian articles on Walker & Rolfe are clearly partisan and serve to justify Rolfe's actions. Just by the title of that article, it's clear the author is employing the narrative of deficit discourse. The source it is corroborated by, 'The death of Kumanjayi Walker' via The Monthly, also appears to be written from a perspective that sympathises with Rolfe and demonises Walker (both also notably use his birth name, which goes against cultural protocols).

I really think this article needs an overhaul... AnElectricShangriLa (talk) 06:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

NPOV

I have reverted recent edits by User:Dippiljemmy which are clearly NPOV. I can appreciate that this incident, trial and media coverage make the user angry, but Wikipedia isn't the place to express this. For a start, naming a reference "Murdoch is a disgrace" shows a clear political intent. VisitingSamG (talk) 06:56, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

I have un-reverted recent edits by SammyG who wishes only to display the version carried forth by The Australian newspaper. I have not removed any of The Australian articles used extensively by Sammy and that Sammy wishes to remove any well referenced material that adds context to the The Australian view is indicative of a clear political intent. Wikipedia isn't the place to express this. Thank you Sammy for your interest in this subject.Dippiljemmy (talk) 09:52, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Could you please discuss here what it is you feel is POV about the existing text? I'm not really interested in getting into an argument about whether there is an Australian "version" of this matter (whatever that means) since I appreciate you harbour some kind of animus towards Rupert Murdoch. As you are aware, I have used a range of sources including News Corp, Fairfax, the ABC and the Guardian, as well as the published judgements – a pretty broad selection I would have thought. VisitingSamG (talk) 10:06, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

User:Dippiljemmy, your edits represent a clear violation of BLP. Attempting to link him to war crimes is an obvious example of this. I would like to make sure the article is balanced, so please do discuss here what it is specifically you feel is POV about the existing text. VisitingSamG (talk) 10:21, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

In no way have I attempted to link him to war crimes. All I've done is added extra information which is readily available. I've even used the sources you've provided! And I have not removed or deleted any of the references that you have provided. I also thank you very much for creating this article, well done! I encourage other Wikipedia users to add to this article as I'm sure this subject will be a developing one! Thanks so much!Dippiljemmy (talk) 10:35, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

BLP issue

{{BLP noticeboard}} The user User:Dippiljemmy continues to add material clearly intended to impugn the reputation of a Zachary Rolfe (a living person), material which does not add to one's understanding of the shooting that is the subject of this article:

• "The Rolfe family have been good friends with alleged war criminal Ben Roberts-Smith since 2011, with Roberts-Smith described as being a mentor to Zachary."

The attack on Rosemary Neill is gratuitous, biased and irrelevant to the subject of the article:

• "Columnist Rosemary Neill (who has previously been shown to write articles with "multiple misrepresentations and misunderstandings")"

He also has a strange obsession with Rupert Murdoch, who has nothing to do with the incident, leaving various notes ("Murdochisadisgrace", and, after being called out, "Murdochisgreat") as the names of references. VisitingSamG (talk) 13:07, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Renaming article

I have renamed this article as the subject is universally known as Kumanjayi Walker and, as pointed out in the article, the use of his previous name is culturally inappropriate and insensitive especially to his family, friends and thousands of Aboriginal Australians who have or will access this article. Many thanks.Dippiljemmy (talk) 21:55, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

This is not right. I'd suggest reading Taboo on the dead – "Kumanjayi" is a temporary epithet used during a mourning period only. While it is used in media outlets and by the family (and indeed by Constable Rolfe), it is not used in legal proceedings and need not be used as the primary name for Wikipedia. (cf. Galarrwuy Yunupingu). VisitingSamG (talk) 22:51, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 20 March 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. (non-admin closure) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:02, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

---

Death of Arnold Walker → Death of Kumanjayi Walker – As discussed previously I have renamed this article as the subject is universally known as Kumanjayi Walker and, as pointed out in the article, the use of his previous name is culturally inappropriate and insensitive especially to his family, friends and thousands of Aboriginal Australians who have or will access this article. It has been reverted, which is wrong. The reasons given are inadequate in their referencing and do not address the first point that the person involved is universally known as Kumanjayi Walker. I encourage further discussion on this so a possible consensus can be reached. Thank you so much! Dippiljemmy (talk) 23:00, 20 March 2022 (UTC)

• So if I'm understanding this correctly, the name he went by during life and at the time of his death was "Arnold Walker" but after his death, he was referred to by the name "Kumanjayi" because of cultural taboos regarding using a deceased person's real name. Is this correct? Rreagan007 (talk) 01:39, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

Yes, he was known as Arnold Walker at the time of the incident in question. It is true that in certain Aboriginal communities, the first names of the recently deceased are replaced or omitted during a mourning period. (This lasts for a few months for children to a few years for elders.) It is also true that, out of respect, most (not all) media outlets have replaced his given name with "Kumanjayi", in the aftermath of the shooting, but this term is not intended to permanently replace his name. Further, the deceased's 'real' name continues to be used in legal contexts (other than coronial inquests). As I pointed out to Dippiljemmy, an article on a more high-profile Aboriginal man, provides a precedent: Geoffrey Gurrumul Yunupingu was referred to as simply "Yunupingu" in the media immediately after his death, in line with the cultural protocols of his people. But the Wikipedia article uses the full name. VisitingSamG (talk) 05:16, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

I have mixed feelings in regards to this. The MOS |WP:PSEUDONYM does say "The name used most often to refer to a person in reliable sources is generally the one that should be used as the article title, even if it is not the person's "real" name" which would seem to back using the Kumanjayi, and there are allowances for changed names or cultural names to be used, for instance Eliot Page is a good example. I feel a lot of people will be searchign for this article using the name Kumanjayi, even though it is not his real name. I wish there was a more comprehensive policy specifically around this issue though. Dauwenkust (talk) 09:33, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• Redirects have been established for “Kumanjayi Walker” and there’s a note on the alternative name in the intro. There’s no risk someone looking for this content under Kumanjayi wouldn’t find it. VisitingSamG (talk) 11:09, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

I don't have the time to look at other issues in this article now, but I'm pretty sure that WP:COMMONNAME would apply here, and he continues to be referred to as Kumanjayi by his family and pretty much every source bar perhaps legal proceedings, as far as I am aware. The Gurrumul example is different because, while he was referred to as Dr G Yunupingu for a while after his death, he is still referred to by his full name or just Gurrumul everywhere else, including website, catalogues, etc. In the case of this man, he became known to the general public as Kumanjayi. If future usage switches back to Arnold, the page can be moved. (It doesn't fit the definition of a pseudonym, which is "a fictitious name that a person or group assumes for a particular purpose...".) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 12:18, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

• Exactly. Kumanjayi is, by tradition, a temporary term (for which the temporary period is likely to have expired). Whereas, say, Bono isn’t going to revert to being Paul Hewson (to take a WP:COMMONNAME example). VisitingSamG (talk) 00:01, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support moving. Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I support moving the page to Kumanjayi now, as this appears to be his common name. If future sources start referring to him as Arnold, it can be moved back. I haven't yet had a chance to examine the source(s) which explain the change in name, but wp goes by what is used in most of the sources, which has been Kumanjayi for a considerable amount of time now. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:25, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

• The problem with that approach is that it is unclear who decides when the mourning period is over (though it almost certainly is), and if such a decision is made, there is no forum in which this would be made public. It should also be noted that the term Kumanjayi is not specific to Walker – it is applied to any deceased person. Having looked at a few more sources, all of which present the name differently (including confusion over the order of his names), the most authoritative option appears to be to follow the style of the NT Supreme Court (Charles Arnold (“Kumanjayi”) Walker) or High Court (Charles Arnold (Kumanjayi) Walker). The latter seems better suited to use in an article title. VisitingSamG (talk) 04:28, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

  Maybe some-one should ask his family and see what they would like the page called. I guess I could try and do that if you like. Dippiljemmy (talk) 06:26, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

  btw so if there's confusion whether its charles or arnold, why not just use Kumanjayi which is what everyone refers to him as. seems quite straightforward to me. Dippiljemmy (talk) 06:37, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

I have added citations relating to the cultural naming naming convention, but have not so far come across anything suggesting that the name is changed back after a certain period of time. The Yolngu convention (as in Gurrumul) may be different from the Warlpiri one - I don't know. I came across this Facebook campaign video posted recently where the family refer to him as Kumanjayi many times and talk about ensuring that his name is remembered. The campaign name is just called "Justice for Walker". Laterthanyouthink (talk) 12:31, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

• Another suggestion What about Shooting of Kumanjayi Walker? There are several precedents for this title, and it is more specific. Also, can a few more editors who have been editing recently add their opinions to this move proposal, please? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:03, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
• Comment See also the section below. I cannot see any justification for using "Arnold Walker" without several reliable sources stating that that was his common name. (And he continues to be referred to as Kumanjayi in multiple Australian and international sources.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:32, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
• Support move, as it is the common name by which the deceased is known in the media. WWGB (talk) 01:40, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, WWGB. On the basis that this has been posted on two project pages, and the proposer, WWGB, and I have all expressed support, with Dauwenkust implied support, and no opposers, I will request a technical move. (I still think there is a case for changing to "Shooting of...", but that can be discussed in a separate move proposal.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:55, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Ben Roberts-Smith mentor to Zachary Rolfe

Hi all, just thought I would start a discussion about a certain piece of info. I added an article about Zachary Rolfe's family being long term friends/mentor with Ben Roberts-Smith a VC who is also an alleged war criminal. I think it is highly relevant but it has been deleted previously from this article due to it being defamatory or something. The article is freely available and you can read it as reference at the end of this post. The info was freely provided by Zachary's mother and is also freely available in the public sphere. Let me know what you think. I'm also thinking on doing a page on Deborah Rolfe, she is quite a notable person, thoughts on this too please. Many thanks! Dippiljemmy (talk) 07:59, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

• This again. Tell us why you think this is relevant to the shooting of Walker. VisitingSamG (talk) 08:56, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

I really struggle to see the relevance of this information, to this specific article. If the article was was a biography of Zachary Rolfe, then it might potentially be included. The inclusions only purpose seems to be to create a guilt by association. I think a good example for me is the Tanya Plibersek article, in which he husband has a well publicised criminal record before he met her, but it has been agreed that this has no bearing on her biography, and including it would be to give undue weight. I would agree with this assertion. That said by the same token I do feel there is still far too much information on Walker's criminal record that gives it undue weight as well. It is certainly important to include. For me his mum petrol sniffing doesn't seem well connected, unless there was evidence it impacted his mental state which the source article does not indicate. Dauwenkust (talk) 23:23, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

References

Charles / Arnold Walker

Independently of "Kumanjayi", is there a reference that states that he was known before his death as "Arnold Walker" rather than Charles Walker? Most common Australian practice is that middle names are dropped in common use ("John Paul Smith" --> "John Smith") although using the middle is not unknown ("John Paul Smith" --> "Paul Smith") Mitch Ames (talk) 12:51, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Mitch Ames - yes, it is odd, and I cannot find a reliable source that refers to him as Arnold Walker or confirms that he was called by this name. I'm not sure why the article title adopted this form. (And as I've stated above, I support a move to Kumanjayi.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:54, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Bio sections for Walker and Rolfe

It is interesting that User:Mitch Ames has decided to remove virtually all well-referenced material from Rolfe's family background/prior police background but has chosen not only to keep but to priortise Walker's family and pre-shooting background referenced by a highly criticised tabloid paywalled article. It's almost like one type of person is being treated much differently from another type of person. I wonder why that may be. Mitch may later choose to delete Walker's background info for the same reasons as he deleted Rolfe's, but he may also choose not to. It looks like Zachary Rolfe needs his own page created. Dippiljemmy (talk) 02:56, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@Dippiljemmy: My edit comments [1][2][3] explain (briefly) the reasons. Note that I'm not judging the references; I'm assuming that they are all sufficiently reliable.

priortise Walker's family — I've listed Walker first because the article is about his death - see the article title.

one type of person is being treated much differently from another type of person — Yes, the person who is the subject of the article is being treated differently. I think that is reasonable.

... delete Walker's background info ... — I do think the section "Arnold Walker" (previously "Walker's life before the arrest") could also be trimmed a fair bit. I suspect much of it is not directly related to his death - but I think it is more related than the material I removed from Rolfe's section.

It looks like Zachary Rolfe needs his own page created — WP:SINGLEEVENT suggests not - "The general rule is to cover the event, not the person."

Mitch Ames (talk) 03:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I do agree, I think the section involving Walker could also be paired back quite a bit, and some of it summarised. I think it is especially notable that almost all of it comes from the Australian as a single source, and even the article itself mentions that there is criticism of that specific reporting, which means that there is a strong argument from reliable sources against it's inclusion. Dauwenkust (talk) 03:58, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Following on from the above here is my proposed copy for the walker section. I am still not sure it has the right balance, but I have paired it back while leaving the info that directly leads up to the incident. I am also not 100% on whether his mother's name should be included:

Charles Arnold Walker was born on 13 October 2000 in Alice Springs to Luritja woman Selina Lane. She gave the child up and Walker was raised by one of his mother's friends at the Warlpiri camp on the outskirts of Alice Springs. His home environment was marred by alcohol abuse and physical violence, and a constant struggle between various relatives for custody. He spent time in Adelaide and Katherine before moving to Yuendumu in 2010.

Walker had a history of breaking and entering, vandalism, theft and assault throughout his teens.

In November 2018, Walker faced court charged with two counts of assault. As a condition of his bail, he completed a rehabilitation program at the Central Australian Aboriginal Alcohol Programs Unit and returned to live at the Warlpiri camp in Alice Springs. Having complied with these conditions through to March 2019, he requested permission to visit Yuendumu for a funeral, and this was granted by his Community Youth Justice Officer. However, on arrival at Yuendumu, he tampered with his electronic monitoring device. Two days later, he broke into the town store with an accomplice, destroying equipment and stealing as much as $7,000 worth of cigarettes. Dauwenkust (talk) 04:09, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

That cut down version of Walker's bio is better.

However, if there is a reference that explicitly states that Walker had fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, we should mention it, because it's likely to have contributed to his behaviour (which ultimately led to his death) - which we should also mention if a ref supports it.

I think we should remove the mother's name - and have done so from the current article - it adds no particular value, and WP:BLPNAME recommends we exclude it.

Mitch Ames (talk) 05:07, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I couldn't see that reference as under pay wall but I have been able to find two others that do state his family believed he had fetal alcohol syndrome. How about the first two sentences then reading "Charles Arnold Walker was born on 13 October 2000 in Alice Springs to Luritja woman. His Mother drank heavily during the pregnancy, and his family believed he may have suffered from fetal alcohol spectrum disorder." I am a little uncertain on how to word it, cause I can't find a confirmed diagnosis, just mention that it was believed he was a sufferer. If that is all good with everyone, I will go ahead and update it on the page. Dauwenkust (talk) 06:17, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

That seems reasonable except "believed he may have ..." is too vague; should it be "family believed he had" or "he may have had"? (according to whom?) Could you provide links to the non-paywall refs please. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:18, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again! I have gone with "family believed he had. this was the ref I found, but not sure if everyone can see it? https://www.smh.com.au/national/three-shots-in-3-13-seconds-police-officer-faces-murder-trial-in-darwin-20210815-p58itg.html Dauwenkust (talk) 07:54, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

The changes made are helpful and the balance is improving. There was also a recent media article entitled "NT Chief Minister says Zachary Rolfe's Immediate Response Team disbanded following shooting of Kumanjayi Walker" stating that Michael Gunner has disbanded the IRT and that he is also considering legal action against the response to his "consequences" statement. Dippiljemmy (talk) 07:24, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Just a note about FASD: this source says "The Weekend Australian quoted an elder saying the deceased had a “mental disability”. “Others,” the report said, “describe it as a learning difficulty or, possibly, foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, an under-recognised condition in outback Australia, according to several submissions to an ongoing federal parliamentary inquiry.” " So it doesn't sound as if he had an official diagnosis. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:43, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Having just had a read of the Walker bio section, I think that the 2nd paragraph could be considerably condensed. It's all a bit wordy. How about:

"Walker exhibited poor impulse control at school, and it was suspected that he suffered from cognitive difficulties. He first committed a break-in when he was 11, and after starting to use alcohol, cannabis and inhalants around the age of 13, caused serious criminal damage to property several times, and also stole cars. In 2014 he assaulted a fellow student at a residential treatment program and threatened to bash a social worker. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:52, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I have just shortened it as per the above conversation, if thats not adequate though, I am still trying to pin down the right wording Dauwenkust (talk) 07:56, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Access behind paywalls and a couple of comments

For anyone in Australia, you should be able to access The Australian and several other paywalled sources by joining your state library and getting online access to their resources. There's a website called NewsBank whereby you can look a the scanned paper versions as well as electronic versions of the article, and search by keywords. The downside is (apart from taking a few days to organise) that it's slow and tedious, compared with clicking on a link in a citation, and the web version differs from the scanned versions. However, right now, I am looking at the 14 March 2022 edition (as cited in refs 10, 11 and 13), and I am struggling to find articles matching those headings. There's "Kumanjayi Walker bashed me, but I loved him" by Kristin Shorten on p.1 (which mentions "Before his death, Kumanjayi Walker was known by his birth name, Arnold Charles Walker.") and is about him assaulting his girlfriend. Then there is an editorial (p.10) titled "Right verdict in a painful trial, which mentions some of the poor childhood circumstances ("his mother was reportedly a 'sniffer' who drank heavily while she was carrying him", he was given away, grew up in a cycle of domestic violence and alcohol abuse, suffered from ear infections, scabies, chest infection, nits, etc.) The final message is about addressing the problems which affected his life, involving joint efforts between police, community, government, etc.
I don't have time (nor will) to sift through the nitty-gritty of this case, and the plethora of information about it, having a long list of other more interesting and less contentious topics to work on. However we need to try to present an encylopaedic entry which tells the story and provides enough links to non-paywalled sources so that others can read up on details that don't belong in the article. It's fine to represent factual content from The Australian, but there's no way we can cover a fraction of what has been published by them or anyone else. As far as the name goes, I am still of the opinion based on everything I've seen (some mentioned above) that it should be Kumanjayi, until and unless the reporting of the case starts calling him something else. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:39, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Coronial inquest

@Laterthanyouthink: re [4][5], I still think that the second paragraph is unnecessarily speculative ("It is anticipated...", "The family ... are hoping...", "the Northern Territory Police Association thinks that it will..."). Perhaps some rewording might help.

Aside from the contents, should that section be move to after "Issues raised by the shooting and the trial", so that the sections are in chronological order? The issues were raised before the inquest. Mitch Ames (talk) 11:40, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mitch Ames. Yes I did have some passing thoughts about the order, possibly moving it to a follow-up section - but it's too late and I'm too tired to do any more tonight. I do think that a brief mention of the ongoing commentary from both sides in anticipation of the inquest is worth documenting because it's obviously going to continue to attract press coverage until and after the inquest. A bald statement of the inquest date with only links to the announcement doesn't add much value to readers who may not understand the purpose of an inquest. Feel free to tinker with the wording but please don't remove work that took some time to find and document, without discussion at least. (See WP:QUO.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 12:19, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

I've moved (without otherwise changing) the section to the end. (See also my comment in #Re-ordering? about MOS:BLPCHRONO.) Mitch Ames (talk) 14:13, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Re-ordering?

I was wondering whether the whole article should be shuffled slightly to put the bios of the two men concerned after the court case. The article is about a death, the circumstances around it and the court case and all that goes with that. I feel that telling that story first makes more sense. Then the backstory with a few details about their lives. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:57, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

I tend to overly rely on other similar articles to make these judgements, but this layout does seem to be standard practice. Both the Killing of Treyvon Martin and the Murder of George Floyd start with a people involved section that include short bios of the people involved, followed by the events in question. So it seems to be a pretty standard article format? Dauwenkust (talk) 10:06, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Ah, good thought, Dauwenkust. I must say that I haven't looked at the layout similar articles. Fair enough. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 10:57, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

The biographical sections describe events before Walker's death. In the absence of separate articles, this article is effectively the biography of Walker, and MOS:BLPCHRONO says "In general, present a biography in chronological order". Mitch Ames (talk) 14:07, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

Wording in "Second arrest attempt and shooting"

@Melbguy05: Trying to find a compromise on the wording. The sentence "Walker had arranged with his girlfriend's grandfather and the Yuendumu chief sergeant Julie Frost to hand himself in to police after the completion of the funeral." has been removed twice now. I understand the issue is that this may imply more agreement on Walker's part as the source article says "Walker had nodded and the plan was organised with the Yuendumu sergeant, Julie Frost." However if the sentence is removed, the next sentence no longer makes complete sense as it says to "if he didn't show that evening as arranged." this still refers to the arrangement, but now without the original reference to it. Would a replacement sentence along the lines of "Local members of the community had arranged with the Yuendumu chief sergeant Julie Frost for Walker to hand himself in to police after the completion of the funeral." This keeps the sources info and makes the following sentence better understandable without implying more action from Walker? Dauwenkust (talk) 03:08, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

@Dauwenkust: I believe the discussion in regards to Walker handing himself in between Sgt. Frost and the girlfriend's grandparents took place on the Wednesday shortly after the axe incident and on the Thursday morning. In the "Suspended sentence and first arrest attempt" section, I added that Sgt. Frost spoke to the girlfriend's grandparents and informed them that he had two hours to hand himself in. I think that is when the grandfather spoke to him and he nodded. Krien in The Monthly reported it was the Wednesday. The Australian reported that the police didn't hear from the grandparents afterwards. The following day Frost went back to their house and discussed with the grandparents that he could hand himself in after the funeral. I added three new references NT News, The Guardian and The Australian. regards, --Melbguy05 (talk) 05:13, 5 September 2022 (UTC)

Removal of name?

Just regarding the recent edit and revert, should Kumanjayi Walker's name be used throughout the article? Currently the article starts by mentioning he is now being referred to as Kumanjayi Walker, and this is backed up by the article title and references, but then his former name is used again. Before I remove his former name from the heading, is there some consensus around doing this, or not? Jimmyjrg (talk) 05:35, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles usually include the living name of deceased Aboriginal people: Death of Ms Dhu, 2004 Palm Island death in custody etc. WWGB (talk) 07:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for those examples. I think the Charles Walker section could be renamed as Kumanjayi Walker so it is more consistent with the naming of the article. What do you think? Jimmyjrg (talk) 06:35, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

I would support this. The full name only needs to appear once for an accurate record and then the preferred name can be used. Brigid vW (talk) 05:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

I think that the Charles Walker section could be retitled Kumanjayi Walker. During the inquest proceeding, the lawyers use Kumanjayi and not Walker. Throughout the Wikipedia article Walker is used. Perhaps, Walker in the article could be changed Kumanjayi similar to the inquest. His full name Charles Arnold Walker would remain in the introduction. Melbguy05 (talk) 14:49, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

The MOS says to use the surname after introducing the full name. WWGB (talk) 15:35, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Given the MOS disregard the suggestion to not use the surname. Melbguy05 (talk) 15:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC)