| Revision as of 19:02, 27 March 2013 editWwoods (talk | contribs)Administrators46,160 edits fix miszabot ; etc.← Previous edit |
Revision as of 00:46, 28 March 2013 edit undoMiszaBot I (talk | contribs)234,552 editsm Robot: Archiving 3 threads (older than 90d) to Talk:Amanda Knox/Archive 1.Next edit → |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
⚫ |
|archiveheader = {{aan}} |
| ⚫ |
| algo = old(90d) |
|
|
⚫ |
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
| ⚫ |
| archive = Talk:Amanda Knox/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
| counter = 1 |
|
|counter = 1 |
|
⚫ |
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
| ⚫ |
| maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|
⚫ |
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
| ⚫ |
| archiveheader = {{aan}} |
|
|
⚫ |
|algo = old(90d) |
| ⚫ |
| minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
⚫ |
|archive = Talk:Amanda Knox/Archive %(counter)d |
| ⚫ |
| minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|
}} |
|
}} |
|
{{Auto archiving notice |bot=MiszaBot I |age=3 |units=months }} |
|
{{Auto archiving notice |bot=MiszaBot I |age=3 |units=months }} |
| Line 28: |
Line 28: |
|
{{Old AfD multi| date = October 22, 2011 | result = '''keep''' | page = Amanda Knox (2nd nomination) }} |
|
{{Old AfD multi| date = October 22, 2011 | result = '''keep''' | page = Amanda Knox (2nd nomination) }} |
|
|
|
|
|
⚫ |
== Glaring omission == |
|
== Anyone know what's going on with this (Knox arrested again?) == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
:http://kxoradio.com/news/local/2553-not-a-good-christmas-for-amanda-knox.html |
|
|
|
|
|
:The above article seems to indicate that Knox was detained while trying to visit an inmate. I smell shenanigans, but thought I'd ask. It seems to me that, if true, this would garner many more headlines. Seeing as it hasn't been covered much, even if true it would be undue until news sources give it coverage.] (]) 17:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::I agree we should wait until more adequate coverage comes up. Even then, if it is for minor infractions it may not merit mention (unpaid tickets?). Just curious, Led, do you have some advisories sent to you via email when news pops up about her? That was pretty quick response. I haven't been able to find this on any other news outlet so far.<br/><span style="text-shadow:#294 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em; class=texhtml">]</span> 17:35, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:::I believe that arrest pertains to a black female of same name.<br/><span style="text-shadow:#294 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em; class=texhtml">]</span> 17:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I often check googlenews for information when I read a story on a specific site (just to check the coverage). Once in a while as I'm on the site, I check up on some stories I've been following for awhile, including Knox. |
|
|
::::Also out of curiousity, how did you learn it was a different Knox - googlenews still only has the one story.] (]) 19:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::Well it isn't what I'd call a reliable source, but of a retort to the news story on gather.com states, "This sounds like disinformation. The online database I saw listed an arrest for a different Amanda Knox, a black female.Don't repeat disinformation." |
|
|
|
|
|
:::::I tried finding the same database but no luck so far. I'm inclined to believe it until more sources carry the story to the contrary. If it is a mistake that radio station looks like idiots.<br/><span style="text-shadow:#294 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em; class=texhtml">]</span> 19:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::::::KXO doesn't say they are talking about "the" Amanda Knox. They are covering local news and it just happens that the name is not unique to one person.] (]) 19:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::::It would clearly be misleading then. If the other Amanda Knox wasn't notable then they have done a disservice by failing in their diligence to point out that this isn't ''the'' Amanda Knox. I don't see where they cover every arrest in their area so it can't be argued that this is what they were doing.<br/><span style="text-shadow:#294 0.1em 0.1em 0.3em; class=texhtml">]</span> 20:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::::::Oh come on. They are a class C station, comparable to a small town's local paper and a writer that might not know of "our" A.K. or just never gave it any importance anyway.] (]) 20:34, 29 December 2011 (UTC) |
|
|
The source is me. You had to put in the correct county, which was the same as the radio station's. Another issue with VINE 2.0 is that it only lists the offender release date for a limited period of time. If you search now, there is no result. This was a joke that got out of hand, it seems. ] (]) 03:14, 15 January 2012 (UTC) ValkoWhite |
|
|
|
|
|
== life after prison == |
|
|
|
|
|
Some interesting information (and some not-so-interesting gossip). http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082375/Amanda-Knoxs-post-jail-life-On-Skype-Raffaele-Sollecito-parents-debt.html?ito=feeds-newsxml and http://630wpro.com/Article.asp?id=2367859&spid=37719 |
|
|
:] (]) 21:23, 10 January 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Appeal of slander charge == |
|
|
|
|
|
Knox is appealing her conviction for slander. |
|
|
|
|
|
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-02-07/amanda-knox-slander-conviction/53000788/1 |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 19:07, 8 February 2012 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
| ⚫ |
==Glaring omission== |
|
|
The article needs to be expanded. It makes vague mention of how international media fabricated stories about Amanda Knox, something which happens all the time and generally goes unnoticed by readers. We owe it to Amanda Knox to print what those published inaccuracies were and who was responsible for publishing them. Please add this detail to the article. ~Tony <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
The article needs to be expanded. It makes vague mention of how international media fabricated stories about Amanda Knox, something which happens all the time and generally goes unnoticed by readers. We owe it to Amanda Knox to print what those published inaccuracies were and who was responsible for publishing them. Please add this detail to the article. ~Tony <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|
|
|
|
The article needs to be expanded. It makes vague mention of how international media fabricated stories about Amanda Knox, something which happens all the time and generally goes unnoticed by readers. We owe it to Amanda Knox to print what those published inaccuracies were and who was responsible for publishing them. Please add this detail to the article. ~Tony — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tony Interro (talk • contribs) 15:49, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Delete "wrongly" from "wrongly convicted." This is an attempt to victimize her.
She was not acquitted. The appeals court determined the initial trial was improper.
The American equivalent of overturned on appeal.
This entry comes across as intended to exonerate her in the press not as a factual rendering of events.
Not done: While I agree that "wrongly convicted" is editorializing, a conviction that is overturned on appeal can be properly described as a "wrongful conviction". I have instead changed the lead sentence to read that Ms. Knox was "wrongfully convicted" and added a wikilink. —KuyaBriBri 14:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)