Talk:Self-immolation of Aaron Bushnell/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 February 2024 (3)

2607:FEA8:4CA5:2A00:7572:CD29:3A2A:D13C (talk) 20:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

The truth can not be hide Aaron Bushnell is guide Stop the genocide 2A02:2908:5100:D723:254C:585C:50E0:285D (talk) 21:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done because there is no edit requested. If you would like to suggest a particular edit, please feel free to submit a new request. Luke10.27 (talk) 23:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2024

he was protesting the genocide of Palestinians. it wasn’t a reaction to the “Israel-Hamas” war. there is no Israel 2603:7081:B00:C664:5455:DD7:AD5B:563E (talk) 03:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

• Not done - first of all, there certainly is an Israel. Here it is: Israel. Second of all, there is no consensus for this change. -- Rockstone^{Send me a message!} 03:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2024 (2)

remove Israel-Hammas conflict . change to Palestinian genocide 2603:7081:B00:C664:5455:DD7:AD5B:563E (talk) 03:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please see FAQ at top of page Pdubs.94 (talk) 04:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Protection applied

This article is now under extended confirmed protection. Editors who are not extended confirmed can follow the procedures at WP:EDITREQ to suggest edits to this article. Chetsford (talk) 06:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 26 February 2024

The source listed for the incident in December, the first self-immolition of a protestor in Atlanta (1) is inadequate. The source is about Aaron's act and only mentions the earlier incident in passing. There are a number of articles that reported on the December incident concurrently.

May I suggest adding one of the following AP News: https://apnews.com/article/israeli-consulate-self-immolation-atlanta-protester-8f17dd72592f86797a45cda9b60605a5 Reuters: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/protester-self-immolates-outside-israeli-consulate-atlanta-2023-12-01/ NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/30/world/middleeast/protester-fire-israeli-consulate-atlanta.html Jdftba (talk) 17:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

 Doing... Queen of Hearts talk
she/they
stalk 18:18, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

But this is the article on Bushnell's act, so the source should be about that. That the source relates it to the Atlanta act as well is why we do. I dont think we should be using sources not related to this article per WP:SYNTH. nableezy - 18:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, I forgot to do this either way. I'll let more ppl opine. Queen of Hearts talk
she/they
stalk 18:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Death confirmed by public incident report from MPD

Aaron Bushnell's death has been confirmed by a Public Incident Report obtained by Newsweek. Propose to replace "The hospital has not given an update on his condition; however, an independent journalist reported that he had died." be changed to "The hospital has not given an update on his condition; however, a public incident report from the Metropolitan Police Deptartment obtained by Newsweek indicates that Bushnell died in the evening of February 25th, 2024". [EDIT: changed typo from "Bushwell" to "Bushnell"] Sophietlav (talk) 18:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I modified this citing the Washington Post for the Metro police's confirmation. nableezy - 18:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't see that article. Want to also flag the Embassy of Israel, Washington, D.C. page- happy to copy your edit + the WaPo source over (and credit you) if you would like. Sophietlav (talk) 18:59, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

anytime you copy from one article to another all you need to do is include in the edit summary that the material includes content from blah page, see that article's history for attribution. See WP:CWW. nableezy - 19:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Volunteering

Serve The People Akron, a mutual aid organization in Ohio, just posted a statement about Bushnell being a member of their organization, and included an image of him volunteering at a food distribution.[1] They state in the comments that Bushnell had moved from Texas to Ohio in 2023. Would suggest adding in the background section.

Awhalen0601 (talk) 23:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Unclear / misleading wording as regards to mental state

Paragraph 2 of the Aftermath section has wording that is unclear and potentially misleading as to the mental state of Bushnell in preparation for his act. The cited source describes reports of mental distress at the Israel Embassy in the hours leading up to the act, but the wording in this article is unclear as to the timeframe of this distress, potentially misleading the reader to believe the mental distress was documented well before his arrival at the embassy. TheJackMcConnell (talk) 03:46, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request for "See Also" section - for clarity

In the "See Also" section, the last bullet point mentions Malachi Ritscher:

• Malachi Ritscher protested the Iraq War

I suggest changing it to a more complete sentence that matches with the other 3 bullet points:

• Malachi Ritscher, an American musician that self-immolated in 2006 to protest the Iraq War.

Nocreditnoproblem (talk) 03:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree with this change, would make it more consistent with the section. Flubberpuff (talk) 03:49, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

He was not protesting the "Israel-Hamas war"

The current article reads: "himself as an act of protest against the Israel–Hamas war." Aaron Bushnell's final words, the words that he screamed as he was literally burning to death, were "Free Palestine." This is disrespectful to his memory to say he protested the "Israel-Hamas war." Putting aside that he himself called it a genocide, not a war or conflict, the phrasing of this article obfuscates what he opposes about the situation of current events. From this article, one would ask was he protesting Israel? Hamas? The general saddening reality of war?

Please clarify what he was protesting by specifying what he was protesting. Replace "the Israel-Hamas war" with "the Israeli military occupation of Palestine" or "Palestinian subjugation under Israel." 173.66.191.93 (talk) 18:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

This was changed to protesting US support for Israel in the war, which I think is fair. nableezy - 18:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Doesn’t it make more sense to say he was protesting in support of Palestine, or against the subjugation of Palestinians by Israel, or something similar that doesn’t center the United States? He only tangentially mentions the United States when he says he won’t be complicit as a member of the military (from what I see). Most sources just say what he literally did (self-immolate near the embassy), but The Daily Beast calls it "a protest against the “genocide” in Gaza." (punctuation theirs). Zanahary (talk) 20:08, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Id be fine with that too. nableezy - 20:10, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Per the description from the Daily Beast, I changed it to to protest what he called the "genocide" being committed by Israel in the Israel-Hamas war nableezy - 20:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thumbs up Zanahary (talk) 21:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Please do not use the sentence "…what he called the genocide…", it puts an inference on the words that lack objectivity. The page has been updated by another user to a simple statement of his actual words, which is how it should read to maintain a non-biased and objective phrasing of the page in question. 2A0E:1D47:9087:3C00:5D4C:449D:70B0:1EB1 (talk) 00:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I didnt write with an inference it wasnt true, but Im happy with the rephrasing as well. nableezy - 01:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Can someone please update this sentence under the "Event" section as well?

"On February 25, 2024, at approximately 12:58 p.m. local time, Bushnell approached the Israeli Embassy in Washington, D.C., intending to immolate himself as an act of protest against the Israel–Hamas war." 173.66.191.93 (talk) 02:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Because there is not consensus (across reliable sources, but more importantly not on Wikipedia) that the current situation in Gaza and/or West Bank should be called a genocide, we can’t just have it there in wikivoice. The Daily Beast uses the "what he called…" verbiage. Zanahary (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Infobox deaths

The current value "1 (Bushnell)" is somewhat obtuse - should it just read Bushnell or Aaron Bushnell, like the infobox for Wynn Bruce? 202.89.148.53 (talk) 05:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Infobox image

Why has the infobox image been changed to a picture of the embassy gate? The article is about the immolation, so it makes most sense for the immolation image to be in the infobox. GranCavallo (talk) 05:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree with this. The immolation photo should be the lede. The primary photo for the Self-immolation article is of Thích Quảng Đức, so I don't think this is an instance of MOS:SHOCKVALUE. CarmenEsparzaAmoux (talk) 05:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Wikipedia isn't censored, and although the picture is shocking and traumatic, it is the best representation of the subject. A similar conclusion was reached for the image for the murder of George Floyd. TheXuitts (talk) 06:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2024 (5)

Under the Events heading, where it says "But compared to what people have been experiencing in Palestine at their hands of their colonizers—it's not extreme at all.", "at their hands" should be "at the hands. A small change. You can reference the New York Times article where they quote him there too, it should be reference 2.

Also the officer in the all black uniform who pointed the gun at Bushnell is a Secret Service agent. They are stationed at a lot of diplomatic missions in D.C. Editing the article to reflect that would provide more detailed, accurate information. You can corroborate that with this page I believe: https://www.secretservice.gov/protection/places Smahdeey (talk) 11:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I have fixed "at the hands", but I would like a reliable source to identify the one who pointed the gun at Bushnell. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 11:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2024 (4)

the following passage of text is incorrect: "Outside the gates of the embassy, Bushnell placed his camera down and positioned himself in front of the gates. He poured gasoline over himself and exclaimed "Free Palestine!""

he does not state free palestine while pouring fuel on himself. he only says this once he's already on fire.

can this be corrected please? Pdubs.94 (talk) 04:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I have removed the claim as both the BBC ref and the Time ref agree with you he only said it after setting himself on fire. Incidentally while doing this I found out the BBC ref seems fairly useless for this section, not actually verifying anything we mention so removed it. The Time ref supports some of it, however it doesn't mention him setting down his camera etc AFAICT, so we need a reliable secondary source for that. I'd also not the Time ref doesn't really support security officer, it says unidentified law enforcement or security officers. I don't know if there are other refs which says these are security officers so I've also left that part but another thing which needs a better ref. And yeah, I understand that you personally cannot respond to these comments except to make a new edit request as I assume you're not EC, I'm leaving this comment for the benefit of other editors who cannot. Nil Einne (talk) 12:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2024 (3)

In the Reactions section, Patrick S. Ryder's quote is taken out of context and is badly mis-characterized.

Change this: Pentagon Press Secretary Patrick S. Ryder responded to Bushnell's death by stating, "Our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad".[23]

To This: Pentagon Press Secretary Patrick S. Ryder responded to Bushnell's death by stating, "...while our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad, we've also continued to actively communicate our expectations that Israel take civilian safety and humanitarian assistance into account into their operations.".[23]

Also your source is expired, but here is another source with the full commentary: https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3687510/pentagon-press-secretary-air-force-maj-gen-pat-ryder-holds-a-press-briefing/ Flom54321 (talk) 04:11, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I have partly fulfilled this request. I have included the fuller quote. However I have not replaced the source. While I'm fine with including the primary source as an additional one, it doesn't seem that important so I didn't bother. What isn't acceptable is to use it as the only source. If no secondary source has felt it worth mentioning whatever quote we want to include, then it's undue weight to include it from a primary source. Fortunately the Al Jazeera source still works for me and it does include the fuller quote so it didn't matter. It would be ideal to replace the "live update" source with a better one though although again this would need to be a reliable secondary source and not a primary one. Nil Einne (talk) 12:11, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

P.S. I understand you cannot respond to my comment, but if you do find a better secondary source, to replace the Al Jazeera live one, feel free to make a new request, or reactive this edit request which the source. Likewise, since I'm not opposed to adding the primary source, if you really want it to be included, please reactive this request or make a new one, and include a properly formatted reference and I'll add it as an additional source. Although please ping me if you want me to evaluate any request, as I might not be check out this talk page in the future. Nil Einne (talk) 12:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Adding a picture of the person

I think his picture should be added to the page, so people could at least know how he looks like: https://theibtaurisblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/aaron-bushnell-self.jpg LUIGIoo100 (talk) 09:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

LUIGIoo100, I'd wait for the USAF to publish an image of him. That could be used to show what he looks like. — Davest3r08 >:) ^(talk) 15:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

The picture that was added does not look like a USAF photo....wrong uniform. It looks green screened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikeb4789 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Responding law enforcement not portrayed accurately.

Per the Washington Post - a cited resource - "Responding officers put out the fire before D.C. firefighters arrived." In fairness, this should be inserted along with "...a police officer pointed a gun at him" in the first paragraph. 5201blue (talk) 13:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Veracity of Bushnell's uniform photo

The current photo does not look right to me. It seems AI-generated. The USAF does not have a tan uniform that I'm aware of. The individual awards seem to blur and mix together and do resemble anything that I'm familiar with. The unit award (or qualification?) looks like three ribbons with a device tacked together? The collar devices seem wrong too, pretty sure at least one of them should say "US".

Disclaimer: I was Army, not Air Force. But this doesn't smell right. Tiuxo (talk) 13:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

You might be correct. The uniform does look like being photoshopped artificially from Bushnell's photo in a more casual shirt. (Source photo at 0:56 of the video by France24) -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 13:27, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Image will surely be soon deleted, and there is a topic about its uploader here, on Commons. RodRabelo7 (talk) 15:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2024

He was not protesting the Israel-Hamas war. He was protesting Israel's genocide of Palestinians, USA complicity, and "Ruling Class" control and depravity. 204.101.10.84 (talk) 15:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done Please see the FAQ above. — Davest3r08 >:) ^(talk) 15:39, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

gasoline

Twice the article claims that the accelerant used was gasoline, but the three sources provided do not make that claim. Everything I've read about this only states that Bushnell used "accelerant". I do not doubt gasoline was used, but when searching for his name and the word gasoline returns stories that mention the self-immolation in front of the Israeli embassy in Atlanta. Which source states that gasoline was used? Daddyelectrolux (talk) 23:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

The claim's from this BBC article. — Davest3r08 >:) ^(talk) 00:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

The word "gasoline" does not appear in that article either. I have tried to find a source for this claim and all i can find is the claim he used "accelerant". Daddyelectrolux (talk) 00:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

"Police said the demonstrator used petrol, and a Palestinian flag was found at the scene on that occasion." — Davest3r08 >:) ^(talk) 00:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

That was in Atlanta. Ben Azura (talk) 02:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Please replace the sentence He poured gasoline over himself [...] with He poured an accelerant over himself [...] Daddyelectrolux (talk) 03:59, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

 Already done Modified already. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 16:15, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2024 (4)

In this quote: "...as an act of protest against the Israel–Hamas war", the description of the intention of his protest is not of his own words, which makes it both inaccurate and misleading. Wikipedia should not be inserting sectarian politics into his intentions.

Change this: "...intending to immolate himself as an act of protest against the Israel–Hamas war."

to This: "...intending to immolate himself as an act of protest against what he described as a "genocide of the Palestinian people." Flom54321 (talk) 04:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I am not entirely convinced about the mischaracterization. The fact that Ryder put so much focus on Israel's interests before finally (halfheartedly) addressing Bushnell's assertion (journalist's question) that the American weapons are killing many innocent lives perfectly reflects the priority the US is placing. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 11:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: I've removed that phrase entirely, since his intention is already mentioned the paragraph above, and the sentence below. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 16:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

See also

I have no problem with List of political self-immolations, but I wonder what is the point of also listing the four (all US) named people here too? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

No point, removed as it suggests a POV and each of these acts is unique and driven by different factors. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 20:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

DYK

Hey HadesTTW, the page seems to be eligible for a WP:DYK if you're willing. --Mhhossein ^talk 20:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I created Template:Did you know nominations/Self-immolation of Aaron Bushnell. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 21:30, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome and good wishes for the DYK. --Mhhossein ^talk 20:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

ironclad quote source

"our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad" can we get a source for that? 2604:2D80:B509:2A00:6D04:9D8D:506A:1D4A (talk) 22:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It's a portion of what was quoted by Pentagon Press Secratary Patrick S. Ryder in response to the incident. You can find the rest of what he said here. B3251 (talk) 22:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Citation added. DoctorMatt (talk) 22:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

As long as it's cited later in the article (which it is), there's no need to cite it in the lead. B3251 (talk) 22:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Ironclad statement source?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

This has been discussed several times and the source is right in the Reaction section of the article. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 23:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

---

Was attempting to find a source that states the last sentence on the first paragraph "In reaction to the incident, the Pentagon responded in a press conference that "our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad".". I am unable to find a source the verify the "in reaction to this incident" portion of the sentence. The source I found with this states that it's referring to comments the president made. Were the presidents or the secretaries comments in response to the self-immolation? I'm unsure if there's a good source for this statement at this moment as I see none listed for it and had to look up for myself.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3687510/ NoneStar (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2024 (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.

Mention of Dead Man's Link video

Possibly redundant, but may be worth noting somewhere (1st paragraph of Event, maybe?) that Bushnell sent a dead man's contingency linking to an archive of the livestream to at least two anarchist outlets. If nothing else, these could probably be used as extra sources? Arisenby (talk) 00:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

one is going to have a hard time getting those to be considered generally reliable. maybe The Intercept will do a deep dive at some point. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 00:38, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 February 2024

You have completely misquoted Patrick S. Ryder yet again. Defense.gov has released an official transcript here:

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3687510/pentagon-press-secretary-air-force-maj-gen-pat-ryder-holds-a-press-briefing/

Change this: "From the Department of Defense's standpoint, since Hamas's brutal attacks on October 7, we have been focusing on the four key areas of the Secretary set out from the onset that's protecting US forces and citizens in the region.

   Supporting Israel's inherent right to defend itself from terrorist attacks, working closely with Israel to support and secure the release of hostages from Hamas and ensuring the crisis the conflict between Hamas and Israel doesn't escalate into a broader regional and so those objectives are what continue to inform our approach to the situation in the Middle East and as we've talked about before while our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself as ironclad.

   We've also continued to actively communicate our expectations that Israel take civilian safety and humanitarian assistance into account into their operations. You see that incorporated into every conversation the Secretary has with his counterpart in Israel as well as other US officials and we expect them to continue to adhere to the law of armed conflict and international humanitarian law and we'll continue to do that."

To this: "...from a Department of Defense standpoint, since Hamas's brutal attacks on October 7th, we've been focused on the four key areas that the Secretary set out from the onset. That's protecting U.S. forces and citizens in the region, supporting Israel's inherent right to defend itself from terrorist attacks, working closely with Israel to support and secure the release of hostages from Hamas, and ensuring that the crisis - the conflict between Hamas and Israel doesn't escalate into a broader regional conflict.

And so those objectives are what continue to inform our approach to the situation in the Middle East, and as we've talked about before, while our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad, we've also continued to actively communicate our expectations that Israel take civilian safety and humanitarian assistance into account into their operations. You see that incorporated into every conversation the Secretary has with his counterpart in Israel, as well as other U.S. officials. And we expect them to continue to adhere to the law of armed conflict and international humanitarian law. We'll continue to do that."

This is from the official transcript from Defense.gov I linked above.

Even from the raw video footage it is clear how he phrased his sentences. Get it right. Stop misrepresenting the quote. We know you are doing it purposefully. 172.79.73.124 (talk) 02:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 02:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Better image/screencap

I got a screencap I think would be more recognizable and in general look a lot better then the one on the page right now, who can I send it to to replace it? Thrwaway22224 (talk) 03:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

https://ibb.co/M8WFB3D here is the link to the image Thrwaway22224 (talk) 03:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 February 2024 (3)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

A repeated request does not make your point stronger on Wikipedia. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 03:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

---

Patrick S. Ryder's words are misquoted taken completely out of context here. It actually gives the opposite impression of the full sentence.

Change this: "our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad".

To this: "...while our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad, we've also continued to actively communicate our expectations that Israel take civilian safety and humanitarian assistance into account into their operations."

This is clear from the sourced video footage as well as from the official transcripts here:

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3687510/pentagon-press-secretary-air-force-maj-gen-pat-ryder-holds-a-press-briefing/ Flom54321 (talk) 03:30, 28 February 2024 (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.

@Sameboat: you forgot to mark this as answered. Queen of Hearts talk
she/they
stalk 03:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 27 February 2024 (2)

Change the last sentence of the introduction to quote indirectly rather than directly, from "our support" to "[their] support".

Change to: In reaction to the incident, the Pentagon responded in a press conference that "[their] support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad". Fast Umbrella (talk) 18:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done , but I just moved it out of the quote. No need to use square brackets when avoidable. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 04:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Twitch profile picture

The profile picture for LillyAnarKitty, the Twitch account from which Aaron Bushnell streamed their self-immolation, was an Anarchy is Order symbol (https://www.dailydot.com/debug/aaron-bushnell-facebook-post). This should be added as further context next to the mention of the Palestine banner. AethyrX (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure if the Daily Dot would be a considerably reliable source for this topic (see WP:DAILYDOT), and upon looking up possible articles for this topic I couldn't find anything what would be considered reliable enough for encyclopedic purposes. If there's a more reliable source that mentions the profile picture, it can probably be added. B3251 (talk) 20:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I mentioned the DailyDot as a supplementary source, the CrimeThinc article used for the Palestine banner already mentions the profile picture. AethyrX (talk) 04:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

"misleading polarizing statements"

"Before self immolating, he posted on Facebook the following misleading polarizing statements[.]"

These adjectives are neither objective nor encyclopedic in tone and should removed. 2607:F2C0:E74A:710:69C9:64F8:60A8:D7F (talk) 04:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 04:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Picture of Self-Immolation?

I wanted to ask how necessary it is to include the photo of Bushnell on fire. I think it is quite graphic/disturbing and might be inappropriate. But I also understand if others disagree. Thoughts? Flubberpuff (talk) 03:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Considering Thích Quảng Đức's article contains multiple images of his self-immolation, I feel having this image here is appropriate. The act of self-immolation is distressing in the first place. CaptFredricks (talk) 04:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

This seems like a wp:Otherstuff argument. Googleguy007 (talk) 14:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

That is called a precedent. RodRabelo7 (talk) 15:39, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

in review of WP:NOTCENSORED MOS:OMIMG and WP:IMGCONTENT i would lean towards it being included. Pdubs.94 (talk) 04:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:GRATUITOUS I think another photo of Bushnell should work just as well. Googleguy007 (talk) 14:49, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

If the article were titled "Aaron Bushnell" I would agree, but since the article is specifically about his self-immolation, I believe the current image is appropriate. Since the article is about his self-immolation, that is what the image should depict. Luke10.27 (talk) 03:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

After looking at WP:NOTCENSORED MOS:OMIMG and WP:IMGCONTENT, I am also inclined to leave the photo in. I agree with another editor that because the article is specifically about the self-immolation and not the individual, that the image does not fall under WP:GRATUITOUS. YordleSquire (talk) 05:46, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Cornell West?

I am not experienced enough as an editor to directly contribute to the page, but I found Cornell West expressing approval of the protest over Twitter, which might contribute to the Self-immolation of Aaron Bushnell#Within the United States section of the page.

Ecco2kstan (talk) 00:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

added. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 00:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I thought this was possibly undue but found

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/cornel-west-praises-aaron-bushnell/ar-BB1iZ4YR

Will add the source if there isn't a secondary source already for it YordleSquire (talk) 05:56, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Inclusion criteria for reactions

It seems plausible/likely that in the coming days we will get more reactions and statements about the events from activists, politicians, etc.

What is the policy and general guidance or consensus around which reactions to include for an event like this? YordleSquire (talk) 06:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Undue tag on International Reactions section

@Ben Azura mind explaining your reasoning in adding the undue tag? Unless there are other international groups that have since reacted and are being ignored, I think briefly including the statements of Palestinian belligerents is not really undue. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 19:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Is it being reported by mainstream news sources? I wasn't able to find any. There is ongoing debate all over the encyclopedia about how statements made by Hamas and similar groups should be added to articles. I would not include statements from these groups in any article unless reported by at least one mainstream source. Ben Azura (talk) 20:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Good points - I found this MSNBC source where they mention that Hamas described him as "the heroic pilot" - so the Hamas statement has been at least refenced by one reliable source. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't see why they shouldn't be, considering how Hamas and the PFLP are two of the groups fighting in the current war. Undue would be some random commentators living in Brazil or Australia, not belligerents in the very center of the conflict. If you feel like it only covers one side of the conflict then perhaps Israeli reactions can be added. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 20:40, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It's an international response, and perhaps the most prevalent one. It deserves mention. Dmarquard (talk) 06:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Misspelling

If I will be allowed editing privileges, I will make sure things like "first time a US active service etc.etc. immolated themself (sic)" are not written. The correct word was 'themselves.' Luxporphyra (talk) 14:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Luxporphyra, "themself" is correct, see Singular they § Inflected forms and derivative pronouns. And you're always free to file a edit request. Thanks, Queen of Hearts talk
she/they
stalk 16:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I must cordially disagree. While it may seem like 'themself' would be correct, because 'self' is singular, 'themselves' can mean either singular or plural, and is the most widely-used and acceptable English word in that case. Grammarians have acceptably taught that 'themself' is always wrong. It does not roll off the tongue well, and it is not the correct usage. The usage of the language determines the word, not some arbitrary definition nobody goes by. I have never in my life once seen 'themself' preferred over 'themselves.' Luxporphyra (talk) 19:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

As you said, the usage determines what is correct. As you can see usage of "themself" has never been higher in living memory. "themself" is increasingly common and your empirical observation that it is not does not determine what is correct. Hacksid1 (talk) 23:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

The sole fact of this is evidence of contrivance! Luxporphyra (talk) 19:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

According to Al Jazeera, this anonymous protestor was a female,[2] so hopefully we can put this debate to rest. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 08:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

An additional misspelling towards the end of the article, where Israel is misspelled

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 February 2024 (2)

You finally fixed the mis-quote from Patrick S. Ryder in the Reactions section, but now you have added this same deliberate misquote into the introduction.

Change this: In reaction to the incident, the Pentagon responded in a press conference that "our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad".[8]

To this: In response to incident, the Pentagon responded in a press conference that "...while our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad, we've also continued to actively communicate our expectations that Israel take civilian safety and humanitarian assistance into account into their operations."

Someone at Wikipedia needs to stop this nonsense misrepresentation. 172.79.73.124 (talk) 02:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello?

here is the source, again:

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3687510/pentagon-press-secretary-air-force-maj-gen-pat-ryder-holds-a-press-briefing/

Let's get this quote fixed. Flom54321 (talk) 03:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done. The lead section is supposed to summarize the main points of the article in due weight, not providing every single detail. The fact that Ryder stated twice, not once, in the same response about "Israel's inherent right to defend itself" perfectly sums up the priority of the US. Besides, This is a Wikipedia discussion page, not Reddit or any social media/forum, so please refrain from accusing editors of "deliberate misquote" which is a violation of assuming good faith. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 03:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

To blatantly take a quote out of context like this is inexcusable for Wikipedia. I am indeed in violation of "assuming good faith". Flom54321 (talk) 04:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

How is it a misquote? KlayCax (talk) 04:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

This is obviously a bold but false accusation. I can elaborate bit further. The "ironclad support for Israel's right to self defense" aligns with reality, it's a different matter when it comes to "Israel taking civilian safety and humanitarian assistance into account". Just very recently the UN humanitarian office complained about the immense difficulty in delivering aid to Gaza, due to threats from Israel.[3] I'm hesitant to comment on the US commitment to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, but if their actions don't align with their words, Wikipedia has no obligation to provide a platform for their propaganda. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 04:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate what you are saying here completely - I guess I misunderstood your angle. The reason I want this quote fixed is because I feel it at least opens the door in US politics to apply pressure to Israel to adhere to humanitarian concerns and law. I completely agree that the US is not living up to any standard humanitarian concern at this moment - I am hoping that will change. In any event, it is still a gross mis-characterization of the original quote. Flom54321 (talk) 04:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

It's a complete mis-characterization of Ryder's response about Bushnell. This is the full sentence:

"And so those objectives are what continue to inform our approach to the situation in the Middle East, and as we've talked about before, while our support for Israel's inherent right to defend itself is ironclad, we've also continued to actively communicate our expectations that Israel take civilian safety and humanitarian assistance into account into their operations."

Here Ryder is addressing the humanitarian concern which was brought up at the conference in regard to Bushnell's protest action. Flom54321 (talk) 04:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

This has just been removed by @Cjhard from the article lead and I agree with the removal. It provided little to no substance to the event, unless the Biden administration make any substantial policy changes in response to Bushnell's outcry. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 04:57, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, this satisfies my concern. Sorry we had a misunderstanding over our intentions. Flom54321 (talk) 05:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I've closed this edit request. Glad you two could come to an agreement. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 05:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Just a reminder to everyone that since this whole article can reasonably be said to be part of the Arab–Israeli conflict, there's really no need to engage in back and forths with editors who are not extended confirmed. They can make edit requests, and it's probably fine for them to follow up if there is a specific question needing answering or clarification required before you can fulfill the edit request. However if you disagree with their edit request and deny it or only partly fulfill it without needing any clarification from them, any discussion on whether there are any merits to what's being proposed should be restricted to editors who are extended confirm. If non extended-confirmed editors try to participate in back-and-forths, alert them of the Wikipedia:Contentious topics designation for the Arab–Israeli conflict and perhaps also emphasise that they need to be extended confirmed to make anything other than edit requests relating to the topic. If they continue, edit ask for them to be blocked at WP:A/R/E or simply revert them. Nil Einne (talk) 09:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Undue weight?

Do we really need to quote the full statement made by the Pentagon Press Secretary? RodRabelo7 (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I do not think we do, I am sure a reliable source has summarized his comments by now. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 16:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposal with three options: to shorten Pentagon block quote to the following:

Option A keep as is.

Option B keep quote but shorten it to the following:

Pentagon Press Secretary Patrick S. Ryder remarked in a statement that,

"We have been focusing on the four key areas of the Secretary set out from the onset that's protecting US forces and citizens in the region... We've also continued to actively communicate our expectations that Israel take civilian safety and humanitarian assistance into account into their operations. You see that incorporated into every conversation the Secretary has with his counterpart in Israel as well as other US officials and we expect them to continue to adhere to the law of armed conflict and international humanitarian law and we'll continue to do that."

Option C remove statement by DoD.

LegalSmeagolian (talk) 23:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I am using the full quote in order to correctly characterize the Pentagon's priority for Israel's interests than Gaza civilian's lives. If Ryder opened the response with "adhere to the law of armed conflict(...)" I would have preferred a shorter version. But his response barely addressed the question asked by the female journalist in the press conference nor Bushnell's motives for self-immolation. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 23:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Sameboat, I am in the same boat - I do not think his answer really touches upon the question at all and is really just a rehash of the standard US line. Do you think it merits inclusion in the article? It's fine to differ on opinion in this regard. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 23:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I mean it. If this is the closest response from the Biden administration to address Bushnell's refusal to be complicit in genocide, we present it with minimal alteration. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 23:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Including a statement from the DoD or US government is a standard practice. It would be better if the statement was more directly about Bushnell instead of reiterating support and qualifications in a general sense. Ben Azura (talk) 00:16, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm opposed to including the full statement especially based on current sourcing The Al Jazeera source does not include the full statement, and is a live news thing so really should be replaced as I remarked above. Forbes is just a video and the nature of video news reports means you may sometimes include the full part of something talking. And then we have the primary source which doesn't go anyway to establishing any WP:WEIGHT for the entire transcript. IMO if we want to include this, we at least require a reliable written secondary source which includes the full statement and I mean as part of a news report or something rather than just a transcript on some portion of their site. Nil Einne (talk) 09:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 February 2024 (4)

Request to propose speedy deletion for this page for it’s likelihood to increase violence around the world Weisz21 (talk) 11:42, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Improbable, all criteria for notability indicate this article should stay. This also doesn't follow the guidelines for an edit request and will probably be rejected soon. I can give you guides for the future, though: WP:Notability (events) WP:Articles for deletion#Nominating article(s) for deletion Ecco2kstan (talk) 12:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Situations like this is why Wikipedia has a speedy deletion option without a specified reason where you can add your own reason Weisz21 (talk) 12:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: "This page is going to increase violence around the world" is a bit of a stretch, and not a valid deletion rationale. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 13:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

"following misleading polarizing statements"

Come on now, this is Wikipedia not twitter. Whoever added this quip should be permanently banned 75.118.14.101 (talk) 03:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Seems to be an editor who does not understand the WP:1RR for contentious topics. I have notified them on their talk page and will ping them here. @Alpoin117? LegalSmeagolian (talk) 03:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Yikes. That's pretty egregious. KlayCax (talk) 04:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Reverted and warned for vandalism. B3251 (talk) 03:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 03:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Putting that in a quote box is actually an expression of an opinion and the particular opinion is a detriment to Wikipedia, so I am trying to benefit Wikipedia by removing the quote box. Alpoin117 (talk) 03:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

You just violated the 1RR again. Please self-revert and maybe start a talk page discussion if you have an issue with the quote box. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 03:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Calling his statement "misleading polarizing" because you think it is and removing a passage containing what somebody close to Bushnell considered him to be as a person because you somehow must know him better is not "just removing a quote box". You cannot remove and edit what you please just because WP:IDONTLIKEIT. B3251 (talk) 03:36, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Opinions are not Wikipedia policy. Salmoonlight (talk) 03:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

So can we realize this proposed permanent banning of Alpoin117? This is an account with higher rights as it has passed 500 edits - and still not only so disruptive, but insulting other editors for example here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal:Current_events/2024_February_26&action=history IHaveBecauseOfLocks (talk) 15:37, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Alpoin117 is blocked from editing so this discussion is moot. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 15:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes I see it's blocked for now indefinitely. IHaveBecauseOfLocks (talk) 15:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Reactions - Within the United States

I wrote the following text but cannot edit the page. I think it's important this statement is included in some form under the "Reactions" section. This is at least an acknowledgement from the Biden administration of Bushnell's death:

On February 27, when asked if President Biden was aware of the death of Bushnell, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre confirmed, saying:

“The president is aware. It is obviously a horrible tragedy, and our thoughts are with the family of the service member. We can't even imagine this horrible, difficult time.”

She reiterated that the DOD and the Metropolitan Police are investigating the incident and expressed that they are “not going to get ahead of that”.

Source: (38:50) https://www.youtube.com/live/05YigqRK6Ro?si=itxTkOBwuMdhJRHp Xieua (talk) 09:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

We need a reliable source writing about this statement, preferably. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 15:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Aaron Bushnell's Reddit Account Inclusion

I think we should include mentions and screenshots from his Reddit Account, which has been confirmed to be u/Acebush1. I think there is some valuable information on it to provide some more explanation for reasoning, as it seems to many that his cries about Palestine were more based on support, while he appeared mentally ill and his posts suggest anti-American and anti white activism. He, in addition, also has posts supporting the deaths of United States Servicemen and women from other branches. Can I have some further insight on the inclusion, along with maybe a section on "Social Media Activity?" Thanks. TigersTacos (talk) 14:46, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I have not seen reliable sources confirm that those are him - we need them to publish and report on it to merit inclusion. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 15:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

That would be WP:NOR.

Until a reliable source confirms that those accounts belonged to him and reports on his social media activity, it can't be considered for inclusion.

Even in such an instance, it remains to be seen what kind of language, if any, would be suitable to include. ConcurrentState (talk) 18:16, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Article Namespace for Aaron Bushnell

Won't it make sense if we consider having "Aaron Bushnell" Namespace per se his biography till death? I wanted to Start an Article to the Namespace but I found out it got a redirect to this page. What do you guys think Fugabus (talk) 20:12, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

He is not notable individually (WP:1EVENT). EvergreenFir (talk) 20:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

This is my personal opinion though but I saw an article written similarly of Thích Quảng Đức. A page for Aaron Bushnell will expand as his details unfold. We continue here. Fugabus (talk) 20:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Atlanta self-immolation

The Atlanta event should be mentioned as well. Does anyone know the name of that person? Onceinawhile (talk) 08:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

There doesn't seem to be an article on the Atlanta self-immolation. AlexandraAVX (talk) 12:06, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I found one from CNN

https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/01/us/israeli-consulate-atlanta-fire-protest/index.html Κυπρομέδουσα (talk) 16:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Another, from the NY Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/30/world/middleeast/protester-fire-israeli-consulate-atlanta.html

I guess the Aaron Bushnell immolation is more known since it was livestreamed and therefore there is video of it. 185.210.18.16 (talk) 09:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Is there a reason for an article to be written on the Washington event, but not on the Atlanta one? C.eddy.garcia (talk) 23:19, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

DOD response

https://www.dvidshub.net/video/913841/pentagon-press-secretary-holds-briefing Video here is the quote that’s currently in the article I believe (otherwise it’s from another day) I’m on mobile otherwise I’d migrate it. Victor Grigas (talk) 00:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

There is no issue or dispute about what was said by DoD the issue is the weight of the inclusion. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 00:22, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I’m not commenting about that, I’m just pointing to the media in case anyone wants to include it. Victor Grigas (talk) 23:56, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

“He posted on Facebook the following misleading polarizing statements..”

Can we neutralize this sentence which is clearly using biased language? LaggyMcStab (talk) 04:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Removed "misleading polarizing." Will try to find source for the actual statement. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 04:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

The "misleading polarizing" thing was added by Alpoin177 who has been very disruptive. There's already been a discussion about them just above. Salmoonlight (talk) 04:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@ARandomName123 I think that user keeps re-adding that language despite it being repeatedly removed. Zaviya (talk) 14:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

The user has been blocked, should be fine now. nableezy - 14:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Date of Death

Which day did he die? (Probably the silliest discussion ever, but it is being kick-started by a multi-day edit war on Portal:Current events/2024 February 25 and Portal:Current events/2024 February 26, due to source disagreement).

• Option 1 — February 25
• Option 2 — February 26

Discussion

This has got to be the dumbest discussion I have ever started, but with a multi-day edit war occurring due to source disagreement, it actually needs to happen. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 14:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

According to this Washington Post article, he died 7 hours after the immolation. According to this Time article, he self-immolated at 12:58pm. This would mean that he died on the same day that he self-immolated: February 25. GranCavallo (talk) 15:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

• If there is a disagreement over the date of death amongst sources, the usual practice is to look for a consensus. If just one or two are saying the 26th they can be disregarded. If there is no clear consensus among the sources then use both dates with a brief explanatory note, i.e. "He was transported to a local hospital by DC Fire & EMS, where he died either later that day or on the 26th (sources differ). He was 25." -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

New reactions from within the United States

Within the United States:

Statement from Chicago-based NGO Justice For All stating Aaron Bushnell's self-immolation should "send a strong message to the United States": https://www.justiceforall.org/palestine/statement-on-aaron-bushnell-self-immolation/

Opinion piece from MSNBC writer Zeeshan Aleem defending Aaron Bushnell's self-immolation as an act of protest: https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/aaron-bushnell-immolation-israel-protest-rcna140722

Commentary from Talia Jane, who originally published the footage of Burnell's self-immolation, from Rolling Stone: https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-commentary/aaron-bushnell-self-immolation-protest-hard-important-story-journalist-1234978325/

The Guardian's (US) Moira Donegan on Bushnell's death, calling it 'our loss he is no longer with us': https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/28/aaron-bushnell-self-immolation-gaza-israel

Ramesh Ponorru writing for The Washington Post, stating Aaron Bushnell was 'not a hero' and criticizing self-immolation as a form of protest: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/02/28/aaron-bushnell-protest-fire-dangerous/ Cadenrock1 (talk) 19:31, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 1 March 2024

It’s Palestine vs Israel. Israel killed more children than terrorist. So it’s only right to stop saying Hamas. They are killing Palestinians. 96.230.252.100 (talk) 03:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate.