Talk:Steve Centanni

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.

Biography Portal

Stub

This article has been rated as stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

[edit] Hostage Video

Fox just broadcast a hostage video of Centanni and Wiig. Looks ominous; kidnapped by an unknown group, seated in front of a black cloth, seemed close to tears, etc. Roland Deschain 14:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why is Fox News under-reporting this Kidnapping?

I also noticed the same thing with the Christian Science Monitor concerning the Carroll kidnapping. The kidnapping does not seem to be front and center on the Fox News website. Is this journalism 'ethics?' -Northridge03:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes. They are part of the story. It's standard practice whether it's news about the anchor (see CBS coverage of Dan Rather) or a kidnapping. In the case of kidnappings, giving notoriety only emboldens or inflames the kidnappers. Fox is part of the story now and that's the last place news organizations want to be. I would argue that "low key" is more of a journalism ethic than the sensational reporting that typically goes on everywhere else.--Tbeatty 04:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Duress

Surely a video taped under duress does not constitute a reliable source. Jill Carroll was forced to say a lot of things on camera, too. --Dhartung | Talk 13:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad no one put him in Category:Converts to Islam. I mean I'm no authority on Islamic law, but I think this would not count as a real conversion.--T. Anthony 14:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Yea, I read this earlier today before I had to leave home and had a laugh at it. They even had his "islamic name" next to his real one... ~Rangeley (talk) 15:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad nobody moved the article to "Khaled (journalist)". The person obviously wasn't familiar with Arabic names ("Halec"? "Yaco"?). --Dhartung | Talk 22:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[1] Good stuff. ~Rangeley (talk) 02:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Forced conversions are a very old psychological weapon. It would be useful to the article to note what they were forced to convert from.

So is he a Muslim now or what?

If the article says he has converted to Islam, then he is a convert to Islam, and belongs to category "converts to Islam". Its totally logical. There might be islamic law that says this is not a case of "real" conversion, but if there is such law, we need to know about it before counting on it. You can not base categorising to laws that you think might exist. Category "converts to islam" does not exclude people because of the way they were converted. Actually muslims says that being muslim is like being pregnant, there is no partial pregnancy. You are true muslim or you are not muslim at all. There is nothing between, no "half muslims" exist. This seems to contradict user T. Anthonys idea that there are conversions and there are "real" conversions. If article says he is converted, then we must follow this information we are giving, and categorize him such (until someone who knows islamic laws tells us better information). 193.65.112.51 17:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)