Talk:Hamida Djandoubi

Needs references

Added one reference, needs more to cover the article content. Tag added--FloNight 05:01, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Reference link is dead, article seems to have been flossed from Mental Floss site. Geir Gundersen 13:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• I removed the dead reference link and eliminated the Reference heading as there really isn't any more information available on the executee.

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 03:37, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Neutrality

This article refers to Christian Ranucci as a "child murderer", despite the fact that his guilt is highly contested. At least two books that I know of (Le Pull-over rouge & Christian Ranucci: Vingt ans après) present the case for his innocence in documented detail. Wouldn't it be more accurate & neutral to describe him & the other executee as having been convicted of the murder of a child? Cmissy (talk) 07:59, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

From a journalistic standpoint, once a person has been convicted of a murder, it is correct to refer to them as a murderer. The conviction itself is what defines a person as a murderer. This would stand until the conviction has been legally disproved or the person has been pardoned. In other words, if you are convicted, it does not actually matter if you did it, you are a murderer. Murder isn't a semantic or logic term, it is a legal one. Prior to conviction one would say "alleged murderer." Encyclopedic articles don't normally become involved in controversies unless the article is about a specific controversy or the topic of controversies in general. The mention of this person in this particular article is of minor consequence and relatively trivial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.191.249.22 (talk) 00:18, 27 August 2016 (UTC)