Jump to content

Talk:Boxing Day shooting

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Jane Creba)

Comments

[edit]

I have removed this 'trivia' section:

  • Three weeks before she was killed, she said in her weblog that she listened to "Goodbye My Lover" by British songwriter James Blunt over and over again, claiming she couldn't stop listening to it 1.

I don't think it really needs to be explained why the above is not encyclopaedic, but I'm willing to do so if someone requests it. --Saforrest 17:20, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Explain it to me then. The Canadian press made quite a big deal about it, and I was hoping to expand the article to include more about the girl herself, and that's pertinent to her. If that needs to be rewritten or redone, I'll do that.-RomeW 11:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, what is the importance of this information? The only reason I can see is the implied dramatic foreshadowing her own death (her own "goodbye"). Since this is reality, she can't really have known what would happen; I therefore thought the bit unencylopaedic. I guess I'll admit to being a bit offended by it too; I read the implied significance of this tidbit as an attempt to escape from the reality of this girl's inexplicable death into a banal soap-operesque tragedy.
Anyway, if it was reported on so extensively by the media, it should be mentioned, but prefixed with something like "many media sources noted that Creba mentioned in her weblog that...", etc. --Saforrest 19:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Creba is described by friends and family as a top student and excellent athlete, a warm person who was full of enthusiasm, a ‘bright light’, and ‘a loving and caring soul with a cheerful open heart’. " She was perfect" students of her school said. A makeshift memorial of flowers, candles, and stuffed animals was set up at the site of her death, and was removed with her family’s consent on January 9, 2006.

I don't think this needs to be here. The article shouldn't be about Creba, she's insignificant. It should be about the political effect her death had. --Dakese 04:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can have a bit of information on her life. This is an article about a person, not just an event- this should reflect that. There are other articles on people who have had similar legal effects- Terry Schiavo, for instance- and there's at least a little blurb about their lives. Creba deserves no less. -RomeW 19:47, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The public response to her death, the flowers, etc. are quite noteworthy and are probably as significant as the "political effects" (e.g. the federal election influence, the Guardian Angels, etc.) since this establishes the reaction of Toronto to the shooting. --Saforrest 19:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. To say that she's insignificant is not only callus and in incredibly poor taste, it ignores the fact that the name of the article is, after all, Jane Creba. Jaileer 20:45, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The most important part is that last; namely, that she is the subject. --Saforrest 19:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

[edit]

Why is this subject notable? Maybe someone can explain it to me... --Mista-X 12:04, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking as a Torontonian, it was the random and senseless nature of her death that makes her notable. It hit us hard. Handguns are illegal in Canada, and gun crime up until recently was rare by the standards of comparable US cities. So Creba's death really hit home, and made a difference to the way people here think about street violence and its prevention. Hope this helps you understand. -- Clippership (talk) 15:47, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Second thoughts: subject is not notable, her death is. In fact it's the shooting that's the real subject. Two years after the incident now, and new information that is coming out is not about Jane, but about the young people who have been arrested and are now working their way through the justice system, plus the related community movements (Green Apple Project, Guardian Angels). So I've de-biographized it. Clippership (talk) 13:19, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't really cut it for me. I'm a born and raised Torontonian. Been here my whole life, and have never left. In fact, I live in Riverdale, the location of Creba's school and have been a resident in this hood for about over a decade. I also grew up in the downtown area. I feel sorry for her, her friends/family, etc. but the only reason this was a big deal is because it effected white people. Shootings like this have never been unusual in the GTA. But this happened to a white girl and it happened in a space where middle-class white people enjoy their shopping, on a European origin holiday (more whiteness). This is why it was blown out of proportion by the media, and why there was "outrage". Of course there has been outrage about violence in the Black community, not just at the people in their own community, but to the cops who harass and brutalize Black youth. Did any media pay much attention? This was even the subject of discussion in the U of T course Equity Studies. It is definitely a great example of systemic white supremacy in Canada. As well, the neo-nazis have really loved this incident and have used it in their propaganda. Too bad this isn't in the article. The Guardian Angels are a reactionary organization and won't do much good in Toronto. The tried coming here years ago, they failed then and will fail now. Not only that there are other community organizations that will work against them. They don't address the root problems of criminality, violence, inequities and oppression anyways. They simply try to bully people and will be looked at as snitches and impostors by most people. Another thing, not all hand guns are illegal in Canada. As well, guns aren't the problem anyways. Not that I don't think those guys are idiots for blasting in the middle of Yonge, but I don't think harassment of communities, beefed up law enforcement, "tougher" laws, etc. is very helpful in the long run. In terms of notability, the subject Jane Creba is fine as a subsection of this article, but not by itself, and certainly other than this being a tragedy that happened to garner a lot of media attention, it is not as notable as say the racially sparked riot of '92, or the worker's Days of Action that shut down the city, etc. which don't even have articles. Hope this helps you understand. --Mista-X (talk) 06:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow. Thanks. Got it. I don't have the sensitivity to racial issues (because I'm white and middle class and generally don't have to deal directly with the crap) and I really appreciate your taking the time to explain it. I wonder if there's a place for this in the article itself? To get it on the main page we have to be able to cite discussions/research elsewhere. What do you think -- a section on the systemic racism aspects? I think it's interesting and worth including if we can find the research and citations. Clippership (talk) 15:04, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yet again I see the race-card pulled, this time to justify the killing of an innocent teen. So because she was senselessly killed by some primitive Black gangbangers with no concept of civility it's not notable. Mista-X the only people you have to blame are yourselves. I was raised in Toronto, every school I've been to that had a proportion of Black students was subject to unprovoked and seemingly randomn violence, apathy, lack of academic achievement etc. I've seen it first hand. And because so many in this "community" commit crimes it's only reasonable for Police to increase their presence. Think the man is "hatin' on you", stop committing crimes and start behaving like reasonable people and not engaging in wild shootouts in the city core shopping center. Koalorka (talk) 02:23, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
For a guy that smells of fascism/WN and seems so keen of guns I'm not surprised that you would try to pull such reactionary comments. Firstly, calling them "primitive" you reveal yourself as the racist you are. If someone started blasting at you would you simply duck and cover if you were carrying? Or would you pump back some of that H & K or Walther (my favs too) in the name of your white race? BTW, I'm not a Black nationalist or whatever you thought, but your second fav, a white communist. As for violence at the secondary school level, I've seen it at every school where the income of the population is low, rather then the cultural/ethnic backgrounds of the majority students. Certainly more violence exists in communities that have been treated violently and exploited; and I think one would only need to travel to Native communities to confirm this. It's much more rational then your little hierarchy view of "races" that I'm sure you have in your head, adolf. BTW, the police "presence" in this instance took increase at Yonge, not a Black community, so your point is moot. In any cae, the police just cause increased violence and are simply an armed gang of their own, filled with bullies and white cops who run the show with some of their tokens and uncle toms. BTW, the man doesn't hate on anyone except those he can't control, which is why capitalists love fascist so much when things get sticky. I'm sure you have no problems taking a comfortable seat behind your pig masters anytime you feel threatened by the Black community or antifa, though, right? --Mista-X (talk) 23:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An accusation of racism, white supremacy, Nazism and all of those having no relevance to the article or my comment. You've shown your true colours as a bigot and Marxist extremist. I'll be submitting an AN/I report. Koalorka (talk) 19:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another Torontonian here. From what I read, Mista-X wasn't trying to "justify the killing of an innocent teen". He was basically saying that Torontonians don't care as much if an innocent black kid gets shot, compared to an innocent white kid. The Jordan Manners shooting was notable enough that it also got it's own article. He was black, and many people were saying that the media coverage of the incident was "too much". Then again, it was the first shooting death to happen in a Toronto school. Black youths are undoubtedly responsible for the majority of the killings in this city. Last year, about 60-65% of the murders in Toronto were commited by blacks. Even though you think that police should increase their presence, the fact is that we live in a very safe city. Take a look at Crime in Toronto if you want proof. Blackjays1 (talk) 06:49, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Green Apple

[edit]

The wording "Toronto police have since launched Project Green Apple (named after her favourite food[6]) to help control the amount of violence in the area." raises my eyebrows. What area? There has never been a lot of crime and violence in downtown Toronto, other than your everyday misdemeanors, even in Yonge streets seedy days of being not much other than porno and head shops. There is so much security and police presences, surveillance, etc. this "Operation Green Apple" sounds like a P.R. stunt. Maybe someone should actually explain what it is or else change the wording in the article. --Mista-X (talk) 06:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good call. Closer reading of the source shows that the project was specifically to work on this case, not to "control the amount of violence in the area". Clippership (talk) 14:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Guardian Angels

[edit]

I would like to see a source that the Guardian Angels have over 100 members, and then what does that mean? They have 100 people on a list that paid a membership fee or whatever? Or they have actual people patrolling the streets? If so where, because I have not seen or heard of them. I can also buy a black belt online, does that make me deadly? It also seems that they went broke[1], their forum appears dead,[2] and their Canadian website seems to have no recent news about Toronto. --Mista-X (talk) 06:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did a little research and hopefully have clarified things a bit. Clippership (talk) 15:09, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rename article

[edit]

It should be called Jane Creba murder. Jane is the victim here, the article should be about her. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.237.123.46 (talk) 01:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, the shooting is more notable than the victim. Jane Creba redirects here anyways. Blackjays1 (talk) 07:28, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Boxing Day shooting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:56, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Boxing Day shooting. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 02:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Boxing Day shooting. 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:

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) 05:40, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 22 April 2019

[edit]
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: no consensus. (non-admin closure) Calidum 03:11, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]


– There was only one major shooting per year in Toronto in 2005 and 2012, and people from other continents might not know what "Danzig Street" or "Boxing Day" are. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC) --Relisted. Paine Ellsworth, ed.  put'r there  15:15, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because only people from the tiny-population country of Canada would think of a crime in their country. "Boxing Day shooting" refers to Boxing Day shooting for pheasant and grouse. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I didn't know about that. I didn't find anything about pheasant or grouse, but it seems that fox hunters in the UK have "meets" on Boxing Day. Fox hunting § United Kingdom states that 320,000 people attended such in 2006, so it certainly seems notable. Per below, I think that disambiguation would be better than diverting from the recognizable name. However, since there isn't presently another article to disambiguate from, how about a hat note: This article is about the 2005 shooting in Toronto. For Boxing Day sport hunting in the UK, see [article#section]. – Reidgreg (talk) 11:55, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both moves per WP:COMMONNAME. The current titles are the actual recognizable names of the events. Google searches and a glance through the titles of the references for the articles show that the current names are common names, used enough to effectively be proper nouns. "[year] Toronto shooting" looks like a category name or SHORTDESC, lacks precision, requires knowing the year to distinguish events, gets just as many hits about film and television productions in Toronto, and by the proposer's argument presumes that readers know what "Toronto" is. The current titles are used by reliable sources, are natural titles (what the shootings are actually called) and are more precise. If Boxing Day shooting is felt to be ambiguous, I feel it would be better to add to the proper name as Toronto Boxing Day shooting, Boxing Day shooting (Toronto), 2005 Boxing Day shooting or even 2005 Toronto Boxing Day shooting rather than throwing out the recognizable name for the taxonomical 2005 Toronto shooting. Descriptive names are fine when there's no suitable alternative, but we can't overlook the established recognizable names. In this context, "recognizable" means The title is a name or description of the subject that someone familiar with, although not necessarily an expert in, the subject area will recognize. Anyone who knows about the subjects will recognize the current names. "Danzig Street" appears 27 times in that article (not counting the refs). But can a non-expert who is familiar with the event recognize it by the year? I wouldn't count on it. I know I'd have to make a guess. – Reidgreg (talk) 20:27, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Boxing_Day_shooting&oldid=1256555541"