Talk:Abduwali Muse

This article was nominated for deletion on 18 April 2015 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles Somalia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somalia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somalia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SomaliaWikipedia:WikiProject SomaliaTemplate:WikiProject SomaliaWikiProject Somalia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Piracy Mid‑importance This article lies in the latitude of WikiProject Piracy, a crew of scurvy editors bound to sharpen up all Wikipedia's piracy-related articles. If you want to ship with us and help improve this and other Piracy-related articles, lay aboard the project page and sign on for a berth.PiracyWikipedia:WikiProject PiracyTemplate:WikiProject PiracyPiracy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Piracy To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks you can do to help with WikiProject Piracy: Requests: John Lopez (pirate), Lords of the Spanish Main, Benjamin Bennett (governor) (see What links here), Thomas Walker (pirate), Richard Bishop (pirate) Expand: Charles Vane, Edward England, Emanuel Wynn, George Lowther, Pierre Le Grand, Roche Braziliano, Thomas Cocklyn, Woodes Rogers, Piracy in the Indian Ocean Verify: Daniel Johnson (pirate), Henry Jennings, François l'Olonnais, Olivier Levasseur, Edward Davis (buccaneer) Copyedit: Golden Age of Piracy Images: MV Delight, MV Powerful,

It is requested that an image or photograph of Abduwali Muse be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Archives

Archive 1

I removed the statement in the introduction that he is a pirate, since that violates the Wikipedia policy on biographies of living persons. It also interferes with his right to a fair trial in U.S. federal court, if Wikipedia says he is guilty ahead of time. Edison (talk) 22:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Umm.. Don't get me wrong but no one wants to prejudice his trial but I think calling him a pirate is fairly reasonable. He was afterall a member of a group who hijacked a ship on the high seas(putting allegiedly in the opener twice in my mind makes it far too vague[you would not for instance say US Marines allegiedly shot his three companions]). This point is not being disputed by anyone, it is his age that is an issue. Furthermore, his trial is already dubiously fair with all the media attention, wikipedia does not interfer with this.--Wilson (talk) 23:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be merged into Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse, which is the name the media is now using for the alleged pirate. This NY Times articles states that the name initially used by the media for the alleged pirate was inaccurate. Kevin143 (talk) 01:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin placed {{mergeto}} and {{mergefrom}} tags on this article, and on Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse. I responded to this suggestion on Talk:Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse.

I am not really an expert on how Arabic names work. But I know enough to know we probably don't have his name -- or the name of his father correct. The MSM is reporting his father is named: "Abdiqadir Muse". Note that this is subset of four of the six names we have for the youth. Many people who follow European naming schemes are confused as to whether Arabic speaking people use European inheritable surnames. They don't. Sons do use one of their father's names. Sons use their father's first name as a kind of last name. But it is not a surname. Every generation in a family has a different last name.

If his father was really named Abdulqadir Muse, and the youth's given name was Abdulwali, then his name would be Abdulwali Abdulqadir. Muse may not really be part of what we would consider his name at all. It may specify his tribal affiliation, or the geographic region he is from.

I regard this as a further reason to hold off on renaming the article until his real name is authoritatively established. Geo Swan (talk) 05:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This FBI press release uses the name Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse. Since that is the name he is being prosecuted under, it has presumably become his real name, whether or not it is truly accurate. http://newyork.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel09/nyfo042109.htm Kevin143 (talk) 08:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the article on Mohamud Muse Hersi ([Maxamuud Muuse Xirsi [Cadde]] Error: {{Langx}}: text has italic markup (help), Arabic: محمد موسى حرسي) to see one way to handle this. I would recommend keeping the name as is, with a list of alternate spellings, until this issue is sorted out in the news and the courts. Pustelnik (talk) 10:52, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per consensus on the other page, I have edited that page to be a redirect to this page. There was no information in that article that hasn't been mentioned in this one already. ~Pesco^{So say•we all} 04:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK -- I now propose that this article be remained Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse. Kevin143 (talk) 06:47, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That is the name on the indictment. It looks like BBC is using another form of the name. How you spell this may depend on whether this is a transliteration from the Arabic, from Somali, or use of a Roman script form of writing Somali. T.E. Lawrence mentions similar problems in the Seven Pillars of Wisdom. See also Somali alphabet and Somali language Pustelnik (talk) 12:26, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At least for legal purposes, it look like Abduwali Abdukhadir Muse is his legal name in the U.S. If there are no objections, I will move (rename) the article to this is a few days. Pustelnik (talk) 20:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC) Well, I would if I could figure out how. Anyone want to give this a try? Pustelnik (talk) 02:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The way to do it is to open a section on WP:requested moves. I'll take care of it. Geo Swan (talk) 14:13, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• done Geo Swan (talk) 14:22, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Guardian is wrong, as there was a much more recent trial in Hawaii. See United States V. Shi, 06-10389 http://www.metnews.com/articles/2008/shi042508.htmPustelnik (talk) 11:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Shi trial was not exactly a piracy trial. The defendant in that case was not charged with "piracy as defined by the law of nations," as Muse is being charged with. Although the judge in the Shi case seemed to suggest that he was being tried for what essentially amounted to piracy and therefore universal jurisdiction applied, the actual charges were not piracy. The Shi case is nonetheless interesting and informative on this issue, in part because it goes to the heart of defining "piracy," a term that gets used a lot but has many different definitions depending on the context (i.e. criminal law, international law, insurance law, etc.). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.120.207.1 (talk) 20:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorism as defined by consensus in the article includes the criteria that the acts were "perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a materialistic goal or a lone attack)". There should be no reason why individuals should include the terrorism infobox on this page since he is obviously not a terrorist. There is a pirate infobox template and infobox templates for criminals. There is no reason to use the one for terrorists. 69.68.238.142 (talk) 20:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Can we all back off and use the Infobox person template? It is generic, but contains all the relevant information (and then some). Pustelnik (talk) 21:27, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Pirate infobox does not have provision for aliases and alternate names. The WoT infobox does. This individual has half-a-dozen alternate names and alternate transliterations. I regard this as a very valid reason to use the WoT infobox. If someone who knows how to do so were to add provision for aliases and alternate names to the Pirate infobox I would have no objection to it being used in place of the WoT infobox. However, until it is fixed, I think we should stick with the WoT infobox.

The suggestion that pirates who aren't politically motivated shouldn't be listed using a War On Terror infobox is a good question. But the pirates have been described as having ties to terrorism. The USA has contributed to a Guantanamo-like prison in Kenya for captives suspected of a tie to terrorism. It has held over 200 captives US special forces. Over the last couple of years there have been lots of claims that the pirates are tied to terrorism. Just within the last couple of days, Sa'id Ali Jabir Al Khathim Al Shihri, the number 2 in Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula called upon Somalia's pirates to continue their efforts.

"To our steadfast brethren in Somalia, take caution and prepare yourselves. Increase your strikes against the crusaders at sea and in Djibouti."

FWIW it seems like every other Pirate listed using a Pirate infobox was active during the days of sail.

FWIW I see it as a real weakness to the overall infobox initiative that the various infoboxes do not use consistent names for what are essentially the same field. Similarly, various infoboxes use different rules for whether or not fields that contain the names of flags, maps or photos should have the "File:" or "Image" prefix included in the file name. It is a mess. All infoboxes that have similar fields should use the same name for the similar fields. All infoboxes should interpret filenames and other fields that require interpretation to be interpreted in the same way. Geo Swan (talk) 23:43, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As par the first question; add the alias',translations,etc after his name at the start of the article like other people/places/things that have multiple names. The second point about ties to terrorism is a problem in that no one has found a link between this individuel and terrorism. The quote by al qaeda being irrelivent as its in their interest to encourage others to fight the Americans(takes flak off them).

"FWIW it seems like every other Pirate listed using a Pirate infobox was active during the days of sail."

-There hasn't exactly been alot of notable piracy(or pirates) since then, tho you could check S. Asian piracy. I'd propose no infobox is needed(at least not at this time).--Wilson (talk) 23:59, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't think adding the alternate names after, or in, the lead sentence is a workable alternative. This individual has half a dozen alternate names. Geo Swan (talk) 01:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then go with some of them, including all of them probably goes against notability, how about:

"Name,also known as name2,name3 and several other alias'"

That way we get the idea and we don't bog the start down with what is(besides the fact he has so many) irrelivent information--Wilson (talk) 16:15, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am hoping the contributor who made this excision can provide an explanation. There has been a lot of hysteria and confusion about Wal-i-Musi's age and the charges. Personally, I think covering that confusion is an important part of covering this topic. Geo Swan (talk) 19:57, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One was an incorrect report that he had already been indicted, and the other a correct report that he had not yet been indicted. As he now has been indicted, and that is documented elsewhere in the article, these are obsolete and irrelevant references. The parts referring to his undocumented age remain. Pustelnik (talk) 20:34, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. There was confusion -- hysteria even -- about the event, and his capture and transport to the USA. If I am not mistaken his actual age remains in dispute. Even if his age was firmly established I believe the article should record, in a neutral manner, the confusion that surrounded his age. Similarly I believe it is worth recording the effects of the confusion and hysteria around the charges against him. We couldn't state, without reference, something like, "so much confusion and hysteria surrounded the charges against him that some American news sources jumped the gun and reported that charges had been laid against him prior to his arrival, when he wasn't actually charged until after his arrival." That would lapse from WP:NOR. But we can report that there were conflicting accounts, without adding an interpretation, allowing the reader to draw their own conclusion. Geo Swan (talk) 14:09, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article quotes civil rights lawyer Ron Kuby about the shooting of the three other Somalis, under a flag of truce.

Someone added

"However, later analysts pointed out that Mr. Kuby's analysis was incorrect. The principles of truce in warfare on the high seas apply to nations and their official military forces—not to pirates."

It is unreferenced. It could be interpreted as the wikipedia indulging in editorializing.

Being unreferenced doesn't make it incorrect. The perps were not members of a military force, there was no declared war between the United States and Somalia, and there's no part of admiralty law that requires would-be pirates to be treated as honorable combatants. The Navy would in fact have been acting legally if they had simply held a military trial, convicted the perps, hung them, and buried them at sea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.131.153.242 (talk) 10:17, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think since this passage remains unreferenced it should be removed. Geo Swan (talk) 01:13, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Under the 'Additional Attacks' section it states: In 2010, Muse was charged in connection with two additional attacks on international shipping.[14][15] The indictment does not name the two vessels involved, hijacked in April and May 2009. Given that he was under arrest in April 2009, I find it implausible he was connected to a May 2009 hijacking. Are these dates correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.85.78 (talk) 14:16, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is very poorly put together. 'very short'. Also he is not a 'hijacker' that it not how you describe someone, you can put it into the context of any offences a person has committed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.231.36.36 (talk) 04:12, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Right, not a hijacker, a savage. Should have been shot at the scene. Now I have to pay for his care for 30 years. rediculous — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.44.65.161 (talk) 19:24, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORUM 50.111.57.6 (talk) 01:27, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Abduwali Muse. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110216/ap_on_re_us/us_piracy_suspect

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:22, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]