Talk:Seung-Hui Cho

Motive Section Removal

• Written in British English (Not American Grammar)
• Cited source build’s motive off hearsay – with no implication of dating

| See for yourself

• Does not fit the bill (Described as loner)

76.109.163.61

STILL NOT A SINGLE US PUBLICATION TO CITE! 76.109.163.61

FACEBOOK COMMENTS ARE NOT A VIABLE SOURCE! 76.109.163.61

Cho's name in Hanja

     Cho Seung-Hui in Hanja is 赵承熙, not 曹承辉.

• 赵承熙
• 曹承辉

Disclaimer?

Does anyone else we should have a disclaimer on this page.. something like

"we here at wikipedia have not established this article to glorify a mass murderer, rather we wish to provide information for a public that so needs it at this time, we send our regards to anyone affected in any way by the actions depicted on this page, as such we in due time will be writing articles on those largely affected and the heroes of the massace"

Rankun 02:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Christ. This is so cheesy. "United we stand" ... Are you American?

not realy 70.20.232.243 04:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

No, people who find mass murders cool will see it as glorifying regardless. Zeck 12:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I think we should have a disclaimer

I disagree. Strongly. If this article needs a disclaimer, it should be deleted. Whiskey in the Jar 14:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Good God in Heaven, HELL NO! This shouldn't even be discussed. This is an encyclopedia, there is no glorification being done, and as such, no disclaimer is necessary. This is simply displaying information regarding the perpetrator of a now-historical criminal act.

I am just as horrified as you guys are over this act, but the simple truth is, Wikipedia traffics in INFORMATION, nothing more, nothing less. We tell the facts, and leave it at that. No disclaimer about the INTENTIONS of Wiki are necessary. -- Ubergenius 15:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Links to terrorist organizations?

Why has none of the media pointed out the shiny "magic triangle" that is clearly visible on the murderer's forehead in his student photo? This triangle has occult significance and may indicate a connection (real or fictional) to South Korean militant extremists like Seoul Freemasonry. I understand that Wikipedia articles are not a place for speculation on such connections before they are established by official sources, but I hope that the alternative media (blogosphere) will get to work on this important issue---just as soon as the day's quizzes, party photos, political flaming, pseudo-science, and general wannabe-preening are posted. Thanks! 69.250.43.106 00:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Uh.. before you get too carried away, someone should point out your "shiny magic triangle" is just glare from the camera flash on his sweaty forehead. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.130.9.41 (talk) 01:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

yeah definitely, now is not the time for some stupid conspiracy theory, its definitely a glare.Wraith12 07:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Wraith12

Ismail Ax

I suspect it's a bibilical reference--Genesis 16:12: "And he shall be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him".--Pvednes 08:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

What's the relation between Genesis 16:12 and Ismail Ax? There is no mention of Ismail Ax anywhere in the English bible 212.108.17.165 12:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Genesis 16:12 is the prophecy of Ishmael, and Ismail is an acceptable alternate spelling of Ishmael. Plus, 16:12 seems to work in the context of an amok. Keep in mind this is all just speculation on my part. It could also have something to do with the name Ishmael/Ismail--"God will hear"...ax? --Pvednes 13:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Just speculation, but it appears that his writings suggest he disliked wealthy people. Perhaps the 'Ax' has an inference to Armani AX that has high priced clothing. Koreans are known for coveting luxury goods and designer names. Maybe he had some disdain for the fact?

The tortured English major desired to commit "Malice acts." An intense hatred, inverted and covert found sinister expression in acts of random violence. Written in red, the words became speech acts70.245.112.93 04:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)poyner 17 April 2007

Just speculating: Ismail (Islamic spelling as opposed to Jewish spelling - Ishmael) was the son of Ibrahim/Abraham. Ismail was known as the father of all Arabs. Ax refers to a weapon. As this was tattoed on his arm, it could mean that he saw himself as the instrument or the vindicator of the Arabs - his arm being the weapon of destruction on behalf of the father of the Arabs, Ismail/Ishmael

Oh, puleeze. Speculation indeed, and racially charged to boot! "Koreans are known for coveting luxury goods and designer names." Sounds a lot like "African-Americans are crazy about fried chicken and watermelon" to me. This kind of speculation is truly offensive and has no potential to add anything to the quality of the article. It doesn't belong here. Also, please don't forget to sign your posts with ~~~~ . Cmichael 21:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

How about he played Lineage II like most other Koreans and his in game alias is Ismail Ax, I like my speculation the best. --67.8.139.92 21:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Sotero M: Look up "Isma'il ibn Jafar" there is a section in the wikipedia page about Ish'mail Axe. That may be a link to the shooter. Personally, i think it is.

In James Fennimore Cooper’s story “The Prairie,” the settler Ishmael Bush, who is attempting to escape from civilization, sets out across the prairie with two key tools, a gun and an axe. Each has a symbolic meaning. The axe — which can either kill or provide shelter — stands for both creation and destruction. Could be a possible explanation for why this English major had it scrawled on his arm. Obviously it is speculation, and unless we develop a section for possible explanations for the statement (which I know isn't happening), I'm not going to include it myself. Bluefield 22:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

His second play is called "Mr. Brownstone", which, like his first play, has sexual abuse as its main theme. If he was in fact a Guns N' Roses fan, the "Ismail Ax" reference may be to two of the band's members, Izzy Stradin and Axl Rose. Alternatively, since "ax" is a dialect form of "ask" and since Mr. Cho is known to have signed his name with a question mark, "Ismail Ax" may be a veiled reference to sexual identity disorder: "Is male?" = "Ismail Ax". Writtenright 23:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)Writtenright

This might be of interest. there is the "Asian Network" on tv called "AZN". There are the AX awards there for asian actors/actresses. It stands for "Asian Excellence". I figure this MAY be a link. - Joetheguy 23:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

What about this passage for the meaning behind the tattoo:

In the history of mankind, Ibrahim was the great rebel who opposed idolatry and established monotheism in this world. Although physically tired of sufferings, the prophet of responsibility and leadership had a sharp mind. His heart was full of love yet he carried an axe in his hand! Faith shined from the center of Kofr. A clear fountain of tawheed, monotheism, emerged from the sewage of polytheism!

The first to fight idolatry, Ibrahim was raised in the house of Azar who used to make the idols for his tribe. Ibrahim fought not only against idolatry and Nimrod' but also against ignorance and oppression. The leader of this movement, he was riotous against abjectness. He was the source of hope and wishes, the man of faith and the founder of true unity.

Ibrahim, enter the fire - the fire of oppression and ignorance! Help prevent the people from being burned by the fire of oppression and ignorance! The same fire is ignited in the fate and future of every responsible individual who is indebted to enlightenment and guidance. For those who behave like Ibrahim, Allah will make a rose garden from the fire of Nimrods! You will not burn and leave behind your ashes. It is a symbolic demonstration of how close you get to the "fire" during your struggle and performance of Jihad. To throw yourself into the fire in order to save other people is a bitter experience, but even more painful is the Shahadat.

Ibrahim, sacrifice your son Ismail! Cut his throat with your own hands to save the people's neck from being cut. Which people? Those who have been sacrificed at the steps of the palaces of power or near the plunderer's treasures or inside the temples of hypocrisy and misery! To get courage to seize the sword from the hand of the executioner, cut Ismail's throat with a knife! Allah (Ibrahim's God) will pay Ismail's ransom. You do not kill your son nor lose him! This gesture is a lesson for the sake of your faith. You must reach the point of your willingness to sacrifice your most beloved (Ismail) with your own hands.

Source of this is http://www.al-islam.org/hajj/shariati/14.htm. Just a thought to consider I suppose.

Did he play video games?

Jack Thompson claims video games are common among these things. Any info if Seung Hui played? Video of Mr Thompson talking about this shooting on Fox news here: http://kotaku.com/gaming/jack-thompson/

It's likely, given the fact that the guns were apparently purchased relatively recently and he had quite a high accuracy rate with smaller handguns. However, leave that for the police to speculate on first and WP to report later. -MissingNOOO 18:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I fail to see how a video game that doesn't involve holding anything more than a keyboard and a mouse or trackball could improve one's accuracy with an actual handgun. Perhaps one could make a case for Duck Hunt though... BillG | Talk 20:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

You're suggesting that proficiency with handguns and intention to buy weapons are a likely result of being a gamer. I recommend following your own advice and withhold speculation. Mr. Thompson is skilled at using tragedies to gain media attention and I'd like to see this issue completely shelved unless a direct factual link is demonstrated.--Kwizatch 19:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

No, that is not something I'm suggesting at all. I'm a pretty hardcore gamer myself, and do not own any sort of gun or firearm, nor do I have any shooting accuracy last time I checked because I was a terrible shot last time I tried to shoot (my realm of game playing falls mostly under fighting and role playing games; being a gamer is not the same as being an FPS gamer, something some people -- especially anti-game pundits -- do not seem to understand). However, few people have accuracy that good without a good bit of practice, and light guns provide enough accuracy training that it's effective even if it isn't optimal (some militaries provide some amount of training this way). Regardless of Jack Thompson's situational opportunism and the facts I can pull out of my butt, though, the only "factual link" is that the vast majority of people who play even violent games do not go around actually shooting people with guns. Either that, or GTA series sales have been overexaggerated. -MissingNOOO 20:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I see, you originally suggested that Cho was proficient with handguns despite not owning the guns very long and not having much chance to practice because he may have had some "training" with lightgun type games. I happen to think this is a stretch; I'd attribute it to close quarters firing, blocked exits, (Cho apparently used chains to block doors) and lots of ammo. I think my original point is valid: the only link to video games here is by Thompson, who is a questionable source. --Kwizatch 20:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Going by the information we know about him I'd guess the game he really played was StarCraft. Now I don't see how this leads to violence but imagine if he wasn't good at StarCraft. He'd be singled out, made fun of. How could he possibly go on losing to Zerg Rushes? Now this is my theory, which I wil lbe sending to Jack Thompson, he lost a StarCraft tournament and went to avenge the Terrans. Jack Thompson, I support you and your idiotic, unintelligent accusations upon the video game industry and so I dedicate this to you. Because of you the gamers of today look good, while you look like a senile old fool that even a nursing home wouldn't want. SonnyCorleone 20:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to ask everyone not to continue this discussion unless they feel they have something more constructive than this to contribute. --Kizor 21:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

This whole topic is pretty asinine by itself. I can't stress how ignorant and ridiculous it is to believe that a game, using buttons and thumbsticks, could some how contribute to the careful planning of locking 30+ students in a building and then executing them. Yes, it is a tragedy that affects us all. But using this as a way to gain fame and money for a Crusade against the video game industry? That in itself is a crime. My previous statement was satirizing the whole idea of video games linking to violence. If this was the case then there would be 13 million murderers running wild, as per the number of copies of GTA: Vice City sold world wide. If this was the case then you'd see a massacre much larger than this. Instead of just realizing that the kid had problems we as humans instead try to pass the buck onto other things. Humans will never admit that they are wrongs, probably because we are all arrogant, pompous, prideful jerks. Who's fault is it for this tragedy? A videogame or the criminal's instability? Must we continue the unbelievably immature accusations? As long as we have people like Jack Thompson around, capitalizing on tragedies we will never be able to really confront these troubles, stopping them before they happen. SonnyCorleone 21:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Though Sonny's statements have no place here, he's still correct. Jack Thompson is not someone to be taken seriously, and there is little to substantiate his claims that video games cause violence; not to mention quite a lot of statistical evidence to the contrary. There is absolutely no valid reason to include this in the article unless something comes to light about it, like a journal entry where he says "I practiced for six hours in Counterstrike today... it's almost like real life" or something to that effect. Until then, there is no point to discussing this because it's inconsequential and not remotely encyclopaedic. Ennuified 22:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Fuck u Jack Thompson, Fuck u Fox News, Fuck u Joe Lieberman, video games are NOT real and have ZERO effect on what you do in real life and does not give u a reason to shoot innocent people just because of GTA. Its about time the parents and teachers take some fuckin responsibility for a change.

Haha. Cursing rather unnecessary but its a common sentiment felt by many gamers. Thomson just exploits situations for his gain everytime. MrMacMan ^Talk 00:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Games can teach you how to point and pull the trigger, but no way does it emulate realistic kickback or trajectory, and let's not forget reloading. He knew what he was doing, way beyond the aid of video games. --Palf91 00:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

How does it teach you how to point and pull the trigger? I'm pretty sure a child could point a gun and pull the trigger. The difference between pointing and pulling the trigger and shooting with accuracy is training and motivation. Saying pulling a 360 controller's trigger and a gun's trigger is similar is plain stupid. There is no way playing a game leads to anything with real guns. It can't train, can't motivate, and can't desensitize. Cho Seung-hui wouldn't be able to plan the massacre, start it, and finish it with precision and accuracy by playing a game. He'd have to rehearse this in real life since a game does not come close to reality. It saddens me that Jack Thompson will call a disturbed man innocent because he's got a vendetta against video games. SonnyCorleone 02:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I dont think video games will make a person a better shooter. I do play games a lot (have even played duck hunt, wild gunmen, and other games that involve holding an electronic gun). Although i do well in shooting and many other games, i am a very poor shooter with real guns (i can barely make a 20% accuracy shooting a beer can at 10 feet away). I really think that games are just games and as a stepping stone to real life, a game is a very poor teacher. Also, video games (regardless of violence) does not necessarily make a person a mass murderer. If video games were to foster violence and make a gamer a murderer later, perhaps we could have like a school shooting every week. the only reason i think that video games came to the spotlight as a tool that makes people violent and murderous is because people see it that way. Morever, i am yet to find a "well constrcuted" study to prove that games do make people violent. Because of this, whatever jack tompson or other anti-gaming advocates say about games, their views are no better than a layperson's speculation.

The Note He Left

How about something on the page regarding the note he posted http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/chi-070417vtech-shootings,0,4843160.story

Picture

Here is another picture of Cho from the VT website: http://198.82.160.236/tragedy/images/cho.jpg.

Media outlet

If the NY Times is not a reliable source, who is? //THF 13:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Either way, we are an encyclopedia, and we need corroboration on such a statement. I'm redirecting this to the article for now. --Golbez 13:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That looks like a NYT Blog link rather than a vetted, published story. Looks a bit speculative at this point. Even so, why should he have an article? Is he notable beyond the shooting? If not, then he can be discussed in the partent article --StuffOfInterest 13:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Charles Whitman has an article; this will be an article eventually, too, almost certainly. And it's in the main Times now.[1] And ABC News. THF 13:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm seeing more information at his profile at CNN.com: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/17/cho.profile/index.html --Esprix 18:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Stub picture

In light of the recent events, is the crime-related stub picture really appropriate? 136.165.46.150 13:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I do agree about the symbol for the crime related stub. Can we find another? If nothing else, out of respect?--Witchzilla 13:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I fixed it. THF 13:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. --Witchzilla 13:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

ABCnews.com [2] has "the official" picture of Cho Seung-hui. Since I'm kinda new here, I'll let more knowledgeable folks decide if it should go up. --Semiautomata 14:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The picture referenced above was not about Cho Seung-hui. It was a picture which appears on "crime stubs". Unfortunately the picture depicted something that would have upset people given the circumstances. We asked that it be removed and our request was graciously honored. --Witchzilla 19:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Name

His name is most likely 趙承輝

http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&q=%E8%B6%99%E6%89%BF%E8%BC%9D&btnG=Google+Search

Wikikin 19:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know how but Seung-hui Cho should be redirected to Cho Seung-hui or vice versa

I am not sure, but is the name correctly written? Should it be "Seung-hui" instead? This is the case for instance with the current UN general secretary whose name is spelled Ban Ki-moon, not Ban Ki-Moon. Do we have any Koreans here who could help out on this? --MoRsE 13

38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Also on his first name, are we correct there too?

Hangul	Hanja	Revised	MR	Popular spellings
조승희	趙 or 曺	Jo	Cho	Cho Seung Hee or Cho Seung Hui

--MoRsE 13:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not Korean, but an Asian user also told me that all the Korean name are as you have said. MontanNito 13:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I've made the move. Let's see if anyone complains. Ronnotel 13:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Right now, it looks like all the online news outlets are using the uppercase form : http://news.google.com/news?q=Cho+Seung-hui Danny 13:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think I'd actually trust an Asian before a journalist in this case, even if they were many. :-) Seriously, one problem with this is if e.g. a large agency like AP get it wrong and the story gets more or less copied a lot, a mistake could spread, although that's just a thought. -- Northgrove 14:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I have now also seen many different variations on the name, like Choi, Choe (female version?) and of course Cho (There seems to have been an legendary jazz dancer (a girl) with almost(?) the same name, see Choe Seung-hui. Are these different interpretations of the same name or different ones?--MoRsE 14:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I edit Korean articles. According to the most famous Korean newspaper, the Chosun Ilbo, the gunman's name is 조승희, NOT 조승휘 or 조승회 as was suggested by the infobox. Here's the link [3]. And by the way Choe Seung-hui is completely different. In Wikipedia we use the Revised Romanisation so his romanised name in the infobox is correct. -- Mumun 無文 14:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Can there be consistency with the name? In the table, the Revised Romanization is Jo Seung-hui while the McCune-Reischauer is Cho Sŭng-hŭi. The current name is Cho Seung-hui, which seems to be a combination of the two. For what it's worth, a Canadian radio station read it as "jo sung-i" --Kvasir 18:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Oops nevermind. Not everyone has to anglicise their names in any of the convention. --Kvasir 00:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I've boldly moved the page. We're English Wikipedia, not Korean Wikipedia. (→Netscott) 18:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Your bold move is giving us editors fits. I keep getting errors when I try to save a change. Thomasmallen 18:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes it was lame (a comment I made before the re-merging). Once again I apologize. (→Netscott) 19:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

This person grew up in the US, went to an American school, and his notoriety stemmed from something he did in the United States. I'm pretty sure that most official documents bearing his name uses the Western order and not the Korean order. Why use the Korean way when it doesn't apply? DHN 19:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

because wiki is filled with correctness nazis that lean heavily toward theory instead of actuality. the guy lived in the US for 15 years. he signed his "play" as "Seung Cho". i think it's pretty clear that the article should be listed under that. one of my best friends from grad school (oddly coincidentally named "Seungmin Cho") switched his. also, we referred to him as "SM" sometimes. some of his korean friends hyphenated, but did not capitalize the "M".-Heterodoxus 20:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree that his name should be formatted in the American way unless he actually went by "Cho Seung-hui." This kind of reverse cultural elitism does more harm than good. If he wrote under the name Seung Cho and if he was known to friends, teachers, etc., as such, he should be on Wikipedia under that name. --Dynaflow 21:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

even south korean newspapers do not correctly identifiy the suspect's name, they either use 조승희 or 조승휘. Janviermichelle 15:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

yes, i saw that daum uses 휘 but chosun.com and Yonhap have been using 조승희 at least until the time this message was signed. Perhaps we won't know exactly for a while. Mumun 無文 15:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

However, 禧 is 복희...Mumun 無文 16:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Without a doubt 휘 is used in masculine Korean names and was common in the era when he was born. 승희 is more of a feminine name, though I have seen males with that given name. A female example is Lee 승희, a female model from the US known for her large breasts and scantily clad photos. Eventually we will find his accurate name.

Hui is more likely 휘 but there are variations of 희. 희 can also be used in male names too, but Hee is the most commonly used romanization. Korean press wouldn't know how to spell his name for sure since the info comes from the American press. The korean media can only guess whether its 희 or 휘. mirageinred 21:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

This conversation is largely duplicated and still ongoing here: [4] --Dynaflow 21:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Is there any evidence he actually still used the asian convention of last name first? I understand cultural sensitivity and all that, but he was, to some degree, an American. Did he still put his last name first? Titanium Dragon 01:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

No, he signed his play Seung Cho. This is a case of political correctness run amok. DHN 02:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Whatever he did, someone keeps vandalising the page. Also, ive noted iwthin the article that he is continually refered to be his christian name. I know that, in light of recent events, this is rather trivial, but I think he should be called Seung-hui instead of Cho, at least within the actual article. —ÅñôñÿMôús _{Dîššíd3nt} 08:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Cho is his family name, and we refer to people beyond puberty age by their family names, unless the people do not have family names. WhisperToMe 08:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Birth date format

Until we have exact birth date, format should follow guidelines at WP:Date section 1.9. Use c. 1982. Ronnotel 13:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

January 18, 1984 http://www.npr.org/blogs/talk/2007/04/norris_hall_shooter_identified.html

Web search

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=safari&rls=en&q=%22Cho+Seung-Hui%22&btnG=Search

It appears there's no mention whatsoever of this person on the 'net, by their full name. So much for the Facebook hunting people had done. -- Zanimum 13:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Somebody who has a Cyworld account should search him up (not the American one). Korean people are more likely to use Cy so the chances that he would use Facebook is less. Try Cyworld [5]. Mumun 無文 14:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Searched cyworld and couldn't find his page. Korean newpapers say his family imigrated into the States when he was 2 year old. EDIT: he moved to the States when he was 8. Pessay 15:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Resident alien

What does resident alien mean? Does this mean he had permanent residency in the US (green card I believe you call it in the US). Or simply that he was legally resident in the US, i.e. could have been there on a student permit, tourist permit or work permit (both the later seem unlikely of course since he was a student). Nil Einne 13:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Resident alien means that an individual is here legally, but typically without a Green Card, and certainly without citizenship. Thomasmallen 13:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

According to cnn he did have a green card that was renewed in October 2003, the only difference between a green card holder and a US citizen is that the green card holder can't vote in the presidency elections, i think. [6] on a personal note this is so terrible and sad :( --Witchinghour 20:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

A United States "Green Card" says "Resident Alien" in BIG BOLD LETTERS right across the top of it, so it's not a huge leap to postulate that a "Resident Alien" is a Green Card Holder. Other forms of status such as Student or Diplomatic Visa do not qualify one as a "Resident Alien" since employment and other privileges are often not immediately granted with this type of immigration status. U.S. Permanent Residents have many of the same privileges as U.S. Citizens, with the noted exceptions of voting and serving on a jury. 202.128.1.120 01:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Resident Aliens cannot vote ! [7] Omoo

It's linked now anyway Nil Einne 13:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, you need a green card to be a resident alien. Those who do not are called non-resident alien. 131.215.7.198 22:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Page locked?

You know, this whole collaborative writing process is going to be very slow if no one can edit. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.104.66.1 (talk) 13:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

We were frequently removing racist vandalism directed towards East Asians and Koreans. I'm pretty sure that's why it was locked. Thomasmallen 13:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It's only semi-protected. Log in to edit. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 13:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I tried. I made an account, and it still wouldn't work.

Your account has to be 4 days old John Stattic 14:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

What do you want to edit? Comments on the talk-page can result in changes in the article if other editors agree. THF 14:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, some of the details already in the Virginia Tech massacre article, I guess. Alleged fight with his girlfriend, maybe a brief account of some of the details we have of the massacre. That type of stuff.

Just to echo what many people might say, I think the semi-protection is a good idea. Yesterday there was so much vandalism happening on the main article. MCalamari 16:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Where did he get a gun?

How did this guy find a gun? Doesn't it take years of training and background checks to get one? He was just a kid and had only been in the country for school. Something doesn't make sense here.

You don't need a gun license in Virginia (unsigned comment)

Of course it doesn't require that. Perhaps in other countries or more "liberal" states, but in Virginia you simply have to pass a criminal background check and be of age. And if he wanted to get these guns another way (say, if the legal bars are higher) I know of a guy out that way who sells used 9mm pistols for $350 and new, unmarked ones for $500 on the black market. Thomasmallen 14:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I hope this isn't an argument against gun control. "You" may know a guy who can get you a gun illegally, but I doubt this foreign-exchange student would know where to get one. It is sick that this guy can just walk into a store and buy a gun.Bunbury18 14:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Good point, and thanks for the comment. It let me edit your talk page to the correct version (you had blanked the three vandalism warnings). Thomasmallen 14:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Cho was not a "foreign-exchange student." He had lived here in Northern Virginia since childhood, regardless of what his immigration status was. Foreigners who hold valid permanent residence status, as Cho had, are extended almost all of the same rights as US citizens--including the right to purchase and carry firearms. Only foreigners who are here on "non-immigrant" visas are excluded (and indeed, it is a federal felony for such aliens merely even to possess any firearm).
Moreover, Cho was hardly a "kid" it seems, since he was 23 years old. One must be at least 21 years of age to purchase handguns legally in the United States (or 18 years of age to purchase rifles or shotguns).--Ryanaxp 14:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Blogs (ie. hotair.com) suggest the guns wwere bought here: http://www.roanokefirearms.com/ because the owner posted the name "Cho" on the black-rifles discussion board April 16, long before the ID was publicly known. The poster also claimed ATF told him the receipt was found on the shooter which was also confirmed by officials today. (CraigM)

Any link?--58.104.66.1 14:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

http://www.nickqueen.com/?p=248 Is a link to the text, but the original forums (black-rifles.com) site is not responding currently. (CraigM)

http://www.nickqueen.com/?p=248 Now has a screenshot up of the forum post. (Ash) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.186.63.205 (talk) 16:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Both guns mentioned in the forum post (Glock 19 and Walther 22) match those reported today on CNN (CraigM) 74.120.80.20 16:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this might merit a mention in the actual article. Anyone else think so?--58.104.66.1 17:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Roanoake Firearms is now confirmed as where the guns were purchased (CNN); the forum posting was true. 74.120.80.20 19:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/17/AR2007041701083.html has an interview with the owner of the gun shop. It includes "It was a very unremarkable sale," said Markell, who did not handle the sale personally. "He was a nice, clean-cut college kid. We won't sell a gun if we have any idea at all that a purchase is suspicious." I would consider that worthy of entry into the article.Jersey72 21:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Age

It doesn't bother me enormously, but is there any need for the last sentence saying "According to a press conference on April 17, officials identified Cho as being 23 years old." ? I mean, when I read it I felt as though it doesn't flow well with the rest of the article, as in it looks really weird to have it there and worded thus, and is also kind of redundant since we know his date of birth and death anyway. F. Delpierre 14:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

This was only added when his exact year of birth was unknown, and was speculated as 1982 or 1983. John Stattic 14:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

ChoSeungHui.com

I considered purchasing it because, well, I'm an opportunist, but it already redirects to Virginia Tech. Quick! Thomasmallen 14:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Someone has also already purchased ChoSeung-hui.com.

and Seung-huiCho.com.

Centreville

I'm a big fan of US spellings for US topics (and British for British topics) but for crying out loud the Virginia city is spelled CENTREVILLE. Stop changing it to "Centerville." Moncrief 14:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think its the US vs. UK spellings -- its the fact that the media has the name of the town wrong. MSNBC says 'resident alien with a residence established in Centerville, Va. '... against CenTERville does not exist in virginia... but we having an edit war now because of it. MrMacMan ^Talk 14:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I used to live about five minutes from Centreville, and my office (where I'm entering this) is about ten minutes away via Route 66. I can attest that the name is, truly, Centreville! It has a strong little Korean community west of the intersection of 29 and 66, but overall it's a lame cross between Manassas and Annandale... Thomasmallen 14:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

WHY do we have an edit war over something that is verifiable? The city is spelled that way. Can people please verify that on their own? The wrong way has a red link, for pete's sake!! Moncrief 14:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

4000 articles say Centreville. Why are we going with the one that has it wrong? Centreville is in Fairfax County. The shooter is from Fairfax County. THF 14:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Can we CALM down please? Lets come to a consensus on the name without edit waring? MrMacMan ^Talk 14:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

There may BE a Centerville, but this guy was from CENTREVILLE, a Washington suburb, per the Washington Post. Moncrief 15:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Now that our esteemed colleagues have found a source that says Centreville, instead of fighting over one that says Centerville (Which does exist, but apparently you didn't bother to find out), the fight is over. --Golbez 15:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually you didn't bother to verify that he was from the much more well-known city of Centreville by checking any number of news sources, insisting on a news source in which the name was spelled incorrectly. The fight was wholly generated and perpetuated by you. Moncrief 15:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not my job to vet your sources, it's my job to work with what I'm given. You're the one who constantly mis-cited a source. I suppose I was so busy preserving our treatment of the source that I lacked the time to check otherwise, so maybe I'm lazy too. --Golbez 15:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The source itself was a mis-cite. I take a broader view, which is getting accurate information into an article rather than being pigheaded about an obvious misspelling in one news source. Moncrief 15:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Yet you refused to find a better source, so who's being pigheaded? --Golbez 15:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The Washington Post isn't a "better source"? Moncrief 15:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

What does the post have to do with this? When I was fighting you, the only source was MSNBC saying Centerville. I apologize for getting emotional, but you did the same thing; if it was so obviously a typo, then you could have *easily* (apparently) found a better source. You simply refused to believe that Centerville existed. --Golbez 15:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:CIV and WP:COOL, please both of you. THF 15:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Apology accepted. Moncrief 15:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's all calm down about this. BOTH cities exist. For confirmation, see here: [8] and here: [9]. Different media outlets are claiming that each city are his city of residence. For confirmation, see the posted MSNBC article (CenTERville), and the posted Washington Post article (CenTREville.) Until this is resolved, the wiki article should reflect the ongoing confusion in this rapidly developing story. I will now edit article to reflect the discrepancies in sources and acknowledge that either may be the case. Elambeth 15:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Damm this guy doesn't live too far from me! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.188.204.2 (talk) 15:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Ok... but every media source says he lived in Fairfax look at a map here. CenTERville is not in the north east section of the state. see map here. So -- again -- I'm pretty sure its cenTREville MrMacMan ^Talk 15:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

He lived in Centreville. I live in the same neighborhood. The spelling may be silly and an affectation, but that is how it is spelled. And lest I be accused of contributing original research, please, anyone, check google maps or yahoo map or any map at all, using the zip code of his much-publicized high school. He was in the Fairfax County public school system, and that means CenTREville. The article should not reflect "confusion" when there isn't any; MSNBC was just typing too fast. --Lisasmall 19:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I let myself get way too heated. Sigh. This is a stressful time. I apologize. --Golbez 15:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Well in hindsight, why didn't anybody look up zip code, mapquest, atlas, map, or any other similar independent sources other than related media articles? --Kvasir 00:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

He went to Tree Elementary School, for 4th and 5th grade and went by "Seung Cho" (or so the yearbook says). I believe for 6th grade, he went to Brookfield, and then Stone Middle School prior to attending Westfield HS. Gonnadunk 18:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Speeding ticket

I don't think it could be the cause, but it appears that Cho received a speeding ticket last week. To verify, go to the Virginia General District Court Case Information System and select "Montgomery County General District/Blacksburg", then on the next page select "Traffic," and then search for "cho, seung". --Ryanaxp 15:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I see corroboration for this at CCN: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/04/17/cho.profile/index.html Esprix 18:32, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It's probably of no relevance to the shooting whatsoever, but CNN is mentioning his court record showing that he was recently busted for speeding, and had a court case coming up.

"Court records obtained by the AP show Cho got a speeding ticket from Virginia Tech police on April 7. He was cited for going 44 mph in a 25 mph zone, the AP reported, with a court date set for May 23."[10]

Worth mentioning? Bueller 007 21:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it is, otherwise CNN wouldn't have mentioned it. --Kvasir 01:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I think it should go in. It could have relevence to his state of mind. Most people don't like getting tickets. Ikilled007 21:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Speeding is pretty common though... 132.205.44.134 21:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Um, most people don't go on a murderous rampage after getting a speeding ticket. But, I do see your point. Though, it's kind of petty, I mean linking a speeding ticket which is not a real "crime" in the sense that it stays with you on your record for life to this would seem a bit like original research and not encyclopaedic.Nja247 (talk • contribs) 21:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Not relevant, in the state of Virginia any speeding ticket is pre-payable to avoid appearing in court, so long as the person ticketed was not going over 20mph of the posted speed limit or over 80mph which he was not doing either. If he paid the ticket before the court date, he would not need to appear. I know this being from VA. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by AcePuppy (talk • contribs) 23:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Mentioning about the speed ticket doesn't necessary mean linking it to the shooting. It could be worded as: Cho has no prior criminal record other than a speed ticket blah blah blah." That way it simply stated as fact not leading to any conclusion. --Kvasir 01:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It's really impossible to say if it's relevant or not at this point. I think we should err on the side of strongly-sourced inclusiveness while this is still a current event. Bartleby 14:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

MySpace page

With MySpace being so popular is it known if he had a MySpace page or not? 71.71.254.71 20:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC) —

Does that really matter? Or better... does that warrant posting on wikipedia? I say no. MrMacMan ^Talk 15:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I would say yes it would matter a lot. Perhaps he was showing signs of his mental breakdown on his page. A lot of people who commited homicide have been found to keep blogs and have occasionally foreshadowed something to the extent of what they were intending to do. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.188.204.2 (talk) 15:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

I will try to search for it on my free time, and I will post it on the discussion page before I do anything.SniperWolf1564 16:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if he had a myspace page, but it looks like there is some evidence of web activity. Look at the "Where did he get the gun" section.

Hey remember how lonely this guy was- he sounds like the type who wouldn't bother with a internet thing used to connect people. Leemorrison 21:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, he did have a MySpace page according to several students from Virginia Tech on Facebook. His profile was promptly removed including the blogs and pictures. Several fake Facebook profiles have come up since the attack, all of which have been removed. StatsJunkie 02:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Bold text I agree any webpages or internet activity do matters. As some people reffer to alcohol and drugs to keep away, others do creative writing. Remember people talk about his plays in his English class maybe he did share something online. Some of this loners use the internet to socialize not always in a positive way, they are known as the haters in chatrooms and blogs. I do believe his writing was a crying for attention and if they had the same sexual abuse history on them, that makes it a sign!

I found the myspace page of Emily Hilsch's roomate. Is that relevant? Joetheguy 23:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It says he's lonely. So he's probably an emo. which means yes, he has a Myspace page. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 00:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Probably an emo? Suddenly everyone who is lonely is an emo.

  For us older people, WHAT is emo? 141.156.166.127 06:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Allll right.

http://www.myspace.com/seunghuicho

I think that's a fake myspace account or something. Signup was April 17.

Yes, that is fake. They used information from this article or other sources. Nothing original. And the hometown is misspelled. 75.84.142.45 05:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Are u kidding me? that myspace is so fake, whoever did this is a horrible person, they just copied and pasted his picture from a news article, and also Tom automatically freinds anyone who just recently put up a myspace page, and to put that he is a Muslim? This stupid and obviously bigoted person is just looking for trouble. There is nowhere in the media that indicates that this killer was a Muslim, although I did read an article that says that in one of his notes he ranted his religion, Christianity. He probably became an atheist. That page should be removed and the person who put it up there should get his head checked because he clearly has a sick mind.Wraith12 08:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Wraith12

Cell Phone Camera Video

As a reference with all discussions video for factual events is always warranted with that being said, why was the video that is posted on Youtube deleted as a reference? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6HNrBd4kKMgAcePuppy 15:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

A while back people pointed out that, since Wikipedia has a zero tolerance policy towards copyright violations, it doesn't make any sense to allow external links to clear violations of the rights of copyright owners at other sites, notably YouTube. If the video is linked someplace where ownership is attributed and verifiable, and where the owner is getting whatever royalties he can legally claim, Wikipedia can probably link. - BanyanTree 20:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Since the video is not copyrighted and was uploaded via CNN's I-Report, it is in public domain. AcePuppy 23:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

IANAL, but every created work is automatically the copyright of its creator. The video was made by Jamal Albarghouti, so he is the creator and owner of the copyright to the video. Mr. Albarghouti then uploaded the file to CNN I-Report. The small print there states,

you hereby grant to CNN and its affiliates a non-exclusive, perpetual, worldwide license to edit, telecast, rerun, reproduce, use, syndicate, license, print, sublicense, distribute and otherwise exhibit the materials you submit, or any portion thereof, as incorporated in any of their programming or the promotion thereof, in any manner and in any medium or forum, whether now known or hereafter devised, without payment to you or any third party.

So Mr. Albarghouti, maybe without realizing it, signed away most of his rights to his work, which is why so many news broadcasts prominently have the CNN logo, but not Mr. Albarghouti's name. Albarghouti and maybe CNN have the ability to give permission to use the video to third parties. If you don't have that permission, you can't use the video without stepping on someone's copyright. There's always hope that Mr. Albarghouti will license his video under a free license that can be uploaded onto Wikipedia, but in the meantime links to copies of the video that do not appear to originate either from the owner or CNN should be removed. - BanyanTree 03:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Merge discussion

We should merge this stub article with the main Virginia Tech massacre article. The shooter has no notoraity except for his crime of mass murder, which is told in the main article. Mytwocents 15:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Terrible, terrible idea. Do not merge. Moncrief 15:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. I think the easiest example of perpetrators that have their own article is Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold. MrMacMan ^Talk 15:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Do not merge, as per above. – John Stattic (talk) 15:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Strongly disagree to merge, this is the worst school shooting in US History, even beyond the Columbine shooting, if the gunman at the massacre have there own page why shouldn't the Virginia Tech Killer have one as well. AcePuppy 15:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

No no this is a non starter. I'm revoming the box becasue there are too many already, this is a high profile page, and it will put people off. David Spart (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) 15:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Also Charles Whitman. Too early to talk about merging. Let's revisit in a week. THF 15:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

This article is rapidly growing, keep --MoRsE 15:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Remove the box please, this isn't going to happen, and there are 3 boxes now, it looks daft. David Spart (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) 15:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Do not merge. Charles Whitman and the Columbine killers have their own pages. This massacre was worse. The killer here should also have his own page. Bruin03 15:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

He certainly passes WP:N, and I'm sure dozens of articles are going to be written on him in the coming weeks that will allow expansion of this article. Don't merge. --Falcorian ^(talk) 15:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• Support. The content should start out as part of the main article, probably in its own section. Once there is enough content to justify splitting out to a separate article then it should happen. Everyone wants to start an article, so we keep doing this backwards. --StuffOfInterest 15:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose per Bruin03.. 132.205.44.134 16:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• Do Not Merge There are plenty of other major criminals that have their own articles. This one serves to take the focus off the individual on the event page, which should really focus on the event. Already his citizenship and motivation have been discussed. This is a better place for that. MCalamari 17:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose Several spree killers have their own Wikipedia pages --MosheA 20:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• Oppose, Do Not Merge Like everyone else said, this needs to be its own article and there's plenty of precedent for it. Ennuified 22:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• Do not merge Precedent. 74.130.9.41 01:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

romanisation infobox or 'in-text' romanisation

We should not repeat the romanisation information. We should remove the romanisation infobox or the info in the text. Let's not be repetitive. Please check other articles about Koreans. One way or the other, not both please. Mumun 無文 15:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

No need for both tags

I removed the current event tag - IF he "recently died" this is obviously a current event, IE this is tautological. David Spart (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) 15:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Sounds fine. Too many tags is a bad thing in my mind. --Falcorian ^(talk) 15:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

However, the second tag is reasonable because it is both a recent death AND related to the VA Tech massacre. AEMoreira042281 16:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Which is why it is a tautology. David Spart (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) 16:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Motives?

I just read in a discussion forum that it had something to do with his girlfriend, with sounds pretty pathetic to commit his acts. Anyone find anything else? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.188.204.2 (talk) 15:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Nothing has been presented to the media about motive. Its all speculation. And its unnecessary to call the dead guy 'pathetic', don't you think? MrMacMan ^Talk 15:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That fellow killed 32 innocent people, you can call him whatever you want IMO. Yellowking 16:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Not stating that he is a pathetic person. Just stating if that were to be his reasoning for it, which in my opinion is very, very pathetic.

Sounds like he was an isolated, frustrated, and angry person. The girlfriend thing was probably just the match which set him off. ~ Rollo44 18:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Is there any evidence to support the claim that she was even his girlfriend? How do we know this was not someone he was simply infatuated with? TheIguana 01:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

There needs to be investigation into the plays that he wrote, Richard McBeef and Mr. Brownstone. These are show very clear signs that he may have been molested or raped. Very likely a victim of pedophilia. In both of his plays he talks about molestation, pedophilia, and violence..in a very emotional manner.

From Richard McBeef

(Richard gently rests him hand on John's lap.) JOHN What the hell are you doing! (John slaps Richards's hand.) What are you, a Catholic priest! I will not be molested by an aging balding overweight pedophilic stepdad named Dick! Get your hands off me you sicko! Damn you, you Catholic priest....

SUE ..Some stepfather! JOHN He tried to touch my privates!

SUE...Are you a bisexual psycho rapist murderer! Please stop following me. Don't kill me! (She rows wrenches and pipes lying on the ground at him, but he is unhurt.) RICHARD Let me explain! John is a rambunctious pubescent boy! SUE Oh my god! You are a pedophile!

JOHN I hate him. Must kill Dick. Must kill Dick... That fat man murder dad...And he molested me.

From Mr. Brownstone

JOE He a--rapped probably half of the kids in the class. JOHN I want to kill him. JANE I wanna watch him bleed like the way he made us kids bleed.

This really needs to be investigated not only by wikipedia posters, but by the news. So far these plays have been read and talked about; I cant believe no one has put two and two together. Also his parent, there has been no mention of them…

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/franklincoverupexcerpt.shtml

76.80.166.98 07:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)jeit

Not a 'foreign exchange kid".

The guy(the shooter) is not a 'foriegn exchange kid". He has stayed in the us for 14 years - most of the people who come to the US at a small age blend very well into the society. PLEASE DISPEL ANY THOUGHTS WHICH MAKES HIM A GUY WHO CAME HERE JUST FOR SCHOOL OR SOMETHING STUPID LIKE THAT! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sumanthsagar (talk • contribs) 15:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

... Um... I don't see anywhere in the article a mention about him being a foreign exchange student or not. MrMacMan ^Talk 15:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

He isn't necessarily saying that the article does say that. Christopher Connor 16:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

BBC Profile

"According to the Washington Post, his parents live in Fairfax County, an affluent suburb of Washington DC, just outside Arlington and Alexandria."...This is incorrect, Fairfax County borders Arlington county and the City of Alexandria. I also came across a source (Fox, I believe) stating that Centreville is in Eastern Virginia, near Williamsburg! Thomasmallen 16:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Wow the media really sucks don't they. google map of Centreville MrMacMan ^Talk 16:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Links, please. --Golbez 16:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't matter since willliamsburg is nowhere near the location on the map. MrMacMan ^Talk 16:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

MrMacMan, did you pay no attention whatsoever? Centerville ("er") is by williamsburg. So if Fox is mentioning a one by Williamsburg, they mean Cent*er*ville. However, since I can't tell that's what's actually being said, I asked for a map. So, yeah, read. Please. --Golbez 16:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

And since you used a google map link: google map of Centerville, you know someday you'll have to admit it exists --Golbez 16:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think your mistaken... a while back i posted a map of CenTERville in this edit here. You can stop being nasty to me now too. MrMacMan ^Talk 16:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I was just very annoyed at the strawman you created. You show a map of Centreville, then say that it's nowhere near Williamsburg - when obviously they meant Centerville is near Williamsburg. --Golbez 16:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Being a Korean from Centreville, I can tell you that there are a lot of Koreans in Centreville, and that it's more likely he's from Centreville than Centerville, and the Washington Post is generally a source you can trust to get things right about Virginia locations; they cover the local area more or less, and unlike the Times they aren't full of typos on the front page and a message from the Unification church... I'm betting that whatever news sources say that it's Centerville are spelling it wrong, then looking up where that is. Happens all the time, and I would be doubting this less if he weren't Korean. -129.21.96.59 16:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Fairfax county IS one of the suburbs surrounding the Washington DC area.

Revert?

MrMacMan, what on earth was wrong with that? I was trying to make it following more the guidelines on biographical articles. --MoRsE 16:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Well I didn't see why the topic heading wasn't going to be about him. Yes he's notable because of the shooting, but I dont think that would be his entire life. I'm not as familiar with WP:BLP as i should be so if your edits make it better than please change it. I just didn't see that type of format for other school shooters. MrMacMan ^Talk 16:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

조승희

Can someone create a redirect at 조승희 to this article? 132.205.44.134 16:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

• also for hanja 曹丞禧. 132.205.44.134 16:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Created redirect for the first one, doing the second one now. Kntrabssi 16:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Done and Done. Kntrabssi 16:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

photo

CNN has a new photo from the Department of Homeland Security... 132.205.44.134 16:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Anyone know if this photo would be in the public domain? --- RockMFR 16:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It's at http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/US/04/17/vtech.shooting/newt1.vt13.tues.jpg -- attributed to DHS, from his green card ... I guess that counts as created by a government agency and thus not under copyright, right? --zenohockey 16:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Anything by the government is in the public domain. 76.198.148.243 02:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Westfield High School

CNN announced that Cho, two victims and an unrelated shooter came from Westfield high. The unrelated shooter earlier this month killed two cops. Or atleast I think that's what CNN said. 132.205.44.134 16:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

CNN says it was last year that Michael Kennedy Westfield alum, shot and killed two cops in a police substation... 132.205.44.134 19:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

English Major

This is probably splitting hairs at the worst possible time, but was he an English language major, or English literature major (or perhaps even something else)? I know all links on here right now seem to be pointing to English language, but every news source I've seen is pretty ambiguous. 132.170.29.48 17:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It seems he was a student of creative writing, so perhaps neither, or English with a specialization in creative writing. I don't think we should link to the language or literature until this is clarified. It's a good question. Moncrief 17:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

From reading the school's English department website, I don't think he could have been an English language major - their program (like most college English major programs) seems more literature-based. I don't know - perhaps English studies would be the appropriate article to wikilink to? schi ^talk 18:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

He was involved in creative writing classes and evidentally wrote a play. Why do you believe his major didn't involve literature? Nil Einne 19:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why you're attributing that belief to me. His major obviously involves literature - it doesn't mean that it's accurate to say that he's an English literature major. My impression is that the article on English studies is more inclusive (it covers the study of literature as well as creative writing, for example), in the absence of detailed information on his major. schi ^talk 20:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Family necessary?

Is it really necessary to talk about his family? They are innocent and people shouldn't associate him with his family - or even ruin his family's business. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.111.231.185 (talk) 17:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

More importantly, should we really be putting his parent's exact address here?--58.104.66.1 17:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

For Christ's sake, remove the family's address, don't you think they're having enough trouble right now? Who thought putting the address in the article was even a remotely reasonable thing to do?

Agreed. I think their EXACT address is overkill. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 139.60.210.5 (talk) 17:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

If it hasn't been already, i'm going to ask for the address to be OVERSIGHT'd. -- Phoeba Wright^OBJECTION! 17:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Their home address is of no relevance to this or other articles and will most likely only cause the parents more stress one way or another. Away with it. --MoRsE 20:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Can I ask why it's necessary or useful to include the info about his parents' dry-cleaning business and his sister's college? How is that in any way relevant? Cerebus19 00:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Compare Klebold#Early_life. It gives important context. At the same time, nonsense such as home addresses or phone numbers is obviously not proper. 01:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Interwiki

Admin, please add interwiki: pl:Cho Seung-hui and ru:Чо Сеунг-хуи. Bocianski 17:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Done -- feb^OBJECTION! 17:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Korean club

How is this at all notable? There's no reason we should expect him to participate in such activities. Seems racist to think he'd "stick to his own kind". Titanium Dragon 17:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I absolutely agree, especially with the wording as it now exists in the article -- as if there is a implied negative connotation because he didn't participate in those activities. Moncrief 17:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Tried to clean it up some. Lemme know if you think it could be done better -- Phoeba Wright^OBJECTION! 17:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I read the article and it says, "he rarely joined or talked with them." It does NOT say that he refused to talk or join them. Janviermichelle 18:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Why is Korean club even mentioned? He doesn't have an obligation to join even if he was Korean. Why don't we mention he didn't join the chess club or the basketball team and did not talk with them. --Kvasir 18:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It's mentioned in the article as a fact. It's up to readers to draw conclusions from facts. I know many people are quite bad at drawing unbiased conclusions from mere facts, but that's not the issue here.--Svetovid 21:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Parents' home address

I think posting his parents' home address is very inappropriate. They need their privacy during this time as well, and someone in law school I know says there's all sorts of liability for Wikipedia if that stays. 69.234.216.51 17:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Gone per WP:BLP. Can an admin delete the relevant history? THF 17:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I've asked for the history pages in question to be removed through Oversight -- Phoeba Wright^OBJECTION! 17:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

At least one newspaper has printed the address, so this is ultimately futile, alas. THF 17:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not a matter of what the rags print, wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and beyond that being beyond good taste and reason (and potentially, the law), it's unencyclopaedic. Let the paper be sued, don't get wikipedia involved.-- Phoeba Wright^OBJECTION! 18:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm not defending the newspaper or the insertion. THF 18:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

"Asian American" (or "Korean American") category removal

Those who argue that Cho was an "American" by virtue of his mere presence in the US are wrong. Using their logic, Mohammed Atta was an Arab-American.Jameswchen 06:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This is poor reasoning. This ignores the factual data thrown around this discussion and skews the logic used by many people. Atta did not grow up in America and he did not have American citizenship. Atta was not a part of American culture and hated American culture. The guy we're talking about may not have been a citizen, but certainly grew up in America. I may think he's a hyphenated American, but many don't. The ones who do believe so because he grew up here. The others here don't think he's American because he doesn't have citizenship, but at the same time that doesn't mean they don't think he's culturally American at least in part. I certainly believe that someone who grew up here in NOVA of all places would certainly be at least culturally American. If you meant to use reason based on the facts, please rethink how you want to argue what you actually intended to say. I'm assuming you don't normally rely on such asinine arguments.EECavazos 06:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The rationale for removing this category that I've seen in the edit summaries is specious: that he wasn't a US citizen. Why does one need to be a US citizen and not a US permanent resident who has been living in the US since the age of 8 to be considered "American"? Here was an English major, someone who was living in this country from the age of 8, but because he didn't yet have a US passport he can't be considered American. I think this is absurd reasoning, frankly. The concept of "Asian American" has more to do with identification than citizenship, and if you disagree, please cite some evidence for your point of view.

If you disagree with this, I assume you'll back me up if I go through every European American category and delete those people in said categories who never obtained US citizenship but lived in the US for any number of years. Moncrief 18:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

No Passport, no citizenship. If your not an american citizen, your not American.

Can you PLEASE sign your posts? It's "you're" not "your." Who says? You can't even sign your posts; why do you get to define who is American and who isn't? Do you have any idea what permanent legal residency even means? Moncrief 18:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

And by the way, o anonymous one, your "no passport, no citizenship" criterion is pretty funny, considering how few American citizens hold passports. I guess non-passport-holding Americans wouldn't qualify as Americans under your analysis. Moncrief 22:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That wasn't by me (the main anti-"Category: Asian Americans" editor). The point is though, if I live in Argentina for the next 12 years while retaining my American citizenship, I'm under the aegis of the United States and no other nation. However, I might be considered a Buenos Airean, just as this student could be a Centrevillian (which would be, by the way, a very cool bad-guy nickname).

You make a good point about residency, but I don't think that residency alone quite cuts it. Thomasmallen 18:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Why not? What evidence do you have to back your assertion up? Will you work with me to remove from the, say, Italian American category every person who never got US citizenship? Moncrief 18:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Should be Asian American. Note the WP article begins with "An Asian American is generally defined as a person of Asian ancestry who was born in or is an immigrant to the United States." (my emphasis added) schi ^talk 18:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

You're absolutely right. We're supposed to ignore the information in the category itself about who belongs in that category? I will be thrilled to take this matter to Requests for Comment if it keeps getting reverted. Why is it so difficult to accept that someone who has lived in the US since the age of 8 is American? When has "American" been defined solely by citizenship (and permanent residency is in many ways a social equivalent) and not by identification and culture? Are you telling me that if he had been born in the U.S. when his Korean parents were on vacation but moved to Korea at the age of three months and had lived there since that he would THEN be an Asian American? Why not? He would be an automatic U.S. citizen in that case. Moncrief 19:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

"Immigrant" means they have citizenship or are applying for citizenship. If they don't have citizenship or not applying for citizenship, then they're "migrants" or "resident aliens."EECavazos 04:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't know who last reverted, but you won't see more reverting from me. I've already caved :^) Thomasmallen

I’d be inclined to agree with the anonymous guy. He is fundamentally right but has poorly chosen his words by bringing the passport issue into the discussion. Yes, MANY, if not MOST(?), Americans do not hold a passport and this has no bearing whatsoever as to their citizenship. However, it is a plain and simple fact that Cho was NOT a U.S. Citizen and that he WAS a citizen of the Republic of Korea. He could have lived in the United States every day he was alive except for the day he was born in Korea and he would NOT ever have been an American regardless of how Americanized he may have become. The term “American” infers a citizen of the United States and he simply never was, and any attempt to label him a Korean-American is inappropriate. He was a Korean national residing in the United States. 202.128.1.120 01:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

that's the problem being an 'American' does not infer being a citizen of the U.S.A, it only infers that one lives in America which does not require citizenship. It's a cutural definition not a legal oneHarlock jds 02:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

No, it most definitely infers citizenship. Using the “Cultural” argument carries about as much weight as the “Cultural Catholic” tag that people who haven’t been to a church since 1983 try to use. When someone says, “I am an American” it means one thing: "I am a citizen of the United States" and trying to blur that distinction only causes undo confusion. You can be as culturally Americanized as John Wayne but it wouldn’t make you an American. And trying to attach a legal criterion to speech makes for a disingenuous argument. If you want to talk legalisms and law, he was legally a citizen of the ROK, and NOT the United States, and NOT an American. If I lived 99 years in Canada but was born in the United States, I would not ever, ever, ever be a Canadian even if I had Canadian residency, regardless of how culturally Canadian I became.

It's important to note that different countries have different understandings of citizenship and national identity. If I moved to China when I was a little boy, grew up there and went to school there, no matter what I would never be American Chinese because China, like Germany (traditionally at least), has an ethnonationalist form of identity. Even if I were to become a Chinese citizen I would not be an American Chinese, instead I would be a weird gweilo. France right now is struggling with an identity crisis namely whether you can be Algerian French and still be French. America is different because no native identity exists (at least those that weren't wiped out) and instead relies on an "either/or combination" which means you can be culturally American and not a citizen and still be "American" likewise you can be a citizen but not part of the "American culture" and still be a hyphenated American. There is no one path to being American but two.EECavazos 05:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

OH! Key point, if you rely on proving someone is a hyphenated American through the culture analysis and that person is not a citizen, then you have the burden to prove that person is "American" because otherwise any person who eats fastfood and listens to pop music could be called an "American." If a person living in America for fifteen years ever since that person was a little child, grew up and went to school here, went to college and gave no indication of leaving - then that meets the burden of proving the person is an American by the culture analysis.EECavazos 06:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Well said. Simply put, he was not Korean-American. Especially considering there is already a term to describe exactly what he really was, and not some vague concept of possible degree of cultural assimilation. He was a “Korean Permanent Resident.” It’s a better, more accurate term that does not open the door to speculation, debate or doubt and as such is how he should be called since that’s exactly what he was.202.128.1.120 06:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I made myself unclear it seems. I should explain that when you "meet a burden" that means you pass a test. I only emphasized that this is a hard test to pass becauase otherwise anyone with a shred of American culture could be claimed to be American even if they live in Finland and eat American fastfood and listen to pop music. Yes, I agree speculation should be limited, but not to the point of relying on an overly formalistic and exclusive approach.EECavazos 06:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, being a citizen or not is based on a certain, unavoidable level of exclusion. You either are, or you are not. And nobody, who does not carry U.S. citizenship should be able to rightly call themselves an American. I’m not being jingoistic. I think this criteria should apply to all countries. If you’re not a citizen of Argentina, I don’t think you have any business calling yourself Argentinian no matter how long you’ve lived there. There is a substantial German immigrant population in Argentina and unless a German person was born there or until he becomes naturalized, they are not German-Argentinians. It just seems that freely throwing around who should be called “Americans” to include people who just happen to live in the U.S. for a while, and eat at McDonalds, and know the lyrics to a bunch of Britney Spears songs, even though they happen to be citizens of another county, cheapens the term. It’s especially disrespectful towards those individuals who actually go through the trouble of applying for naturalization, studying, taking a test, renouncing citizenship to the country of their birth and swearing an oath of allegiance to the United States and actually really, legally becoming Americans. But for some that effort seems to be irrelevant. All you need to do is live in the U.S. for a while, speak some English and that’s good enough, you’re “American.” It doesn’t seem right. 202.128.1.120 07:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with much of that, especially renouncing citizenship in another country but that doesn't change America. German's are German; South Americans are South American. They define identity their own way. Americans define identity another way, a way unlike any other country. Some may want to be like other countries, but I prefer the American approach over the European (also South American) and Asian approaches that you're advocating. It is by no means disprespectful for someone with a green card to call themselves American or for others to call them American. These green card holders pay taxes, must serve in the military if they get called up in the draft, but they can't vote. That sounds like they're paying their dues while making extra sacrifices for whatever purpose of not going for naturalization (usually family issues and visa issues on visiting, I guess). So they pay taxes, can't vote but can die if called upon, and culturally they're as American as apple pie . . . so where's the disrespect? You disrespect someone by making fun of their moms or dancing on their grave, not by choosing a path that won't allow you to vote even though you pay taxes and may have to go to war. I certainly think that each of the points you made would go into determining the Americaness of a person. I disagree in saying that they're alone determinative. I also disagree in characterizing any of that as disrespectful to those who went through the process. I'm sure none of naturalized folks would care unless someone with a green card cheated on their taxes and voted and dodged the draft(it would also of course be quite illegal), but still then I'm not sure if a reasonable naturalized American would care. They would probably care more if someone came in without papers, but then got the right for applying to US citizenship in an amnesty (but that's just subjective speculation). EECavazos 08:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

If, however, he had at some point become a Naturalized U.S. Citizen, he could then rightly be called a "Korean-American." But he never did and remained and ROK Citizen. He could be properly called a "Korean-U.S. Resident Alien." 202.128.1.120 01:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Whether he's an Asian American or not will ultimately depend on his POV. In the absence of sources for this, the fact he has been there since 8 or 9 should suggest he probably did consider himself an Asian American Nil Einne 19:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

He's a Asian living permanently in America and thus an Asian American, I'm confused why this is an issue.Harlock jds 20:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I wish I knew. If it's reverted again, please revert it back. I've hit my 3 reverts for the day. Moncrief 20:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Could someone please re-add the category? Could the deleter please explain how a 23-year-old who has lived in the United States since he was 8 as a legal permanent resident doesn't qualify as "Asian American"? What criteria are you using in your judgment? How is he a "South Korean student" and not an Asian American when he's lived here for almost 15 years and attends an American university after having graduated from an American high school. Moncrief 22:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Good reasoning. Although I would add more to your argument because the implication of what you say may be too limiting. Culture alone isn't determinative otherwise that means immigrants (people who are American citizens but who were citizens of another country) who are only sightly American culture-wise are then not American (hyphenated or otherwise). A person doesn't have to speak perfect English or even any English to be a hyphenated American. In fact, you don't have to be culturally American to be American, at least entirely. The idea that you have to be culturally American to be American constitutes the French form of identity. To them, to be French you have to be a part of French culture. To be American is broader than mere culture. Since it is broader you can be culturally American and live in America and intend to stay in American and be a hyphenated American even if you're not a citizen. Likewise in America, you could not be a complete cultural American and still be American whether hyphenated or not because you're a citizen who pays your taxes and votes.EECavazos 05:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Xenophobia, pure and simple. Atleast this man was not a muslim, or had come from a muslim state 15 years ago. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

i'll re-add it at a later time when the article calms down since i don't think it'll be useful to do so now (since it'll just get removed again). Harlock jds 22:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Here's a thought. If the Korean/Asian American label is about identification rather than citizenship, then whose identification?

• Does the label Korean/Asian American refer to someone's self-identification? If the label refers to self-identification, then perhaps we should wait to apply any Korean/Asian American label until evidence pops up that he applied that label to himself (which I belive is quite likely even if he has a great deal of national pride for South Korea/Korea/Corea). Perhaps telling, if he wanted to be "American" then instead of just renewing his green card he would have gone for the citizenship test. Many other people his age go for citizenship when they head out to college or are in college. Maybe he had the choice to become a citizen of America but instead chose to remain a permenant resident of America.

• Does Korean/Asian American label depend on others identifying him as Korean/Asian American? If so, then we'd have to ask if either people who knew him identified as Korean/Asian American or on a less strict standard whether an ordinary person who knew of him would view him as Asian/Korean American. More importantly, we should think about the Korean culture part rather than just the American culture part to see if he could have retained his Korean cultural identity as viewed by those who are Koreans in Korea. For example, if you talk to a foreigner and ask them about people from their country who moved to and then assimilated into American culture, often they'll scoff at such people should they claim to retain their native identity. This is pretty universal around the world. At the same, time that gives hyphenated Americans a unique identity and so may turn around and support a label of Korean/Asian American.

• On the other hand, maybe ____ American refers to American citizenship rather than culture and identity. Perhaps maybe the hypenated just refers to the origin of a person, which naturally occurs in a country whose population mostly comes from immigration. To get ahold of this possibility we'd have to ask if other countries also have hyphenated citizens. If they do, I imagine it's asserted by whatever group as a source of cultural pride. This perhaps lends to the likelihood that hyphenated Americans constitute a category proved by culture rather than citizenship.

• Personally, I'd say he's Korean American because he was here since he was a young boy, so he was probably sufficiently assimilated to constitute Korean American. WHY? NOVA has enough of a Korean-American population to allow a nexus of Korean American identity to develop and overwhelm a broader Asian American identity that otherwise would have watered down the Korean culture from his folks. Also, only whiny, angst filled Americans major in English at US Universities (jk!). Although, at the same time, I'd delete from any European American category a person who lived in America but who didn't acquire US citizenship. Contradictory, I know, but that exclusion of Europeans is probably just my prejudice speaking out, and such emotion is not rational and should not be relied upon.EECavazos 23:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I know people that have lived in America for decades and take pride in the fact that they're not American. Mayorcheese 00:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Unless you have examples for Cho Seung-hui specifically his residence in the U.S., going to a school here and no evidence to the contrary are going to allow him to be classified under that category. MrMacMan ^Talk 00:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Huh? In other words, please, sorry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by EECavazos (talk • contribs) 01:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

Just because you know people who reside in the U.S. who don't label themselves as 'american' doesn't mean that Cho Seung-hui didn't label himself as such. MrMacMan ^Talk 01:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry. You're confusing me further with this statement. I'm trying to understand what you want to say with the statement you gave earlier. I think it has something to do with presumptions, but I'm not sure because the sentence was written quickly. Your subsequent statement mars it further because you talk about self-labeling.EECavazos 02:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

i wonder why he was in the states for 15yrs and didnt apply for citizenship. people are eligible after 5 yrs of permanent residency

citizenship requires taking a test amongst many other details found here MrMacMan ^Talk 00:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

additionally Korea does not recolonize dual citizenship so one mush reject their Korean citizenship to become an American citizen. many choose to have the flexibility of retaining their Korean citizenship while having perm residency (which has very few restrictions) in the US. not to mention that in some cases a male would have to serve in the Korean military before being able to renounce their citizenship Harlock jds 01:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

If someone had to choose American citizenship or Korean citizenship and they chose Korean citizenship, that sounds like they'd want to be Korean rather than American. Especially since all you have to do is take the test and that wouldn't be a problem for a high school educated person. However, why would you want to be Korean rather than American if you spend all your time in America? I'm sure there'd be reasons but then you'd have to pry into their life and I don't know how possible that will be. Anyway, I have a friend from college who is in Seoul right now and my friend became a citizen of America in college. He's not serving in the military. Overall, I'd say it's hard to discern personal motive and identity unless they wrote about it or talked about it frequently with many people or they told you.EECavazos 02:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Citizenship doesn't matter it's a cultural definition i don't think you can argue that culturally he wasn't an "Asian American' (aka an Asian living in America' or a Korean American (aka a Korean living in America. if it was a question about citizenship we wouldn't even have the title of Korean American since it's IMPOSABLE to be a dual citizen of Korea and America (Korea considers you one or the other) or Japanese American. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harlock jds (talk • contribs) 02:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

I didn't argue that he's not an Asian or Korean American. In fact, I argued that he is a hyphenated American. Rather than rely on glib reasoning, I prefer to address each of the elements that impact becoming a hyphenated American. Some people prefer to just state "cultural" without quantifying anything and instead rely on it with faith that it constitutes a self-evident explanation. It requires much more work than that. Describing the hyphenated American as merely cultural is over-broad since that means anyone could claim to be any nationality. Someone living in Sweden could claim to be American because they eat fastfood and listen to pop music and have an American grandparent. Someone whose family been American for a hundred years could claim to be Swedish American because they listen to Army of Lovers and had a great grandparent who was Swedish. What do you mean by "imposable"? A country cannot impose citizenship on another, well, unless they're born there. Or do you mean impossible? The hyphenated American thing doesn't refer to dual citizenship. It refers to something else, namely the American part refers to culture/citizenship while the preceding part refers to ancestry/cultural background of the person. Neither impossible nor imposable apply.EECavazos 04:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Cho was a South Korean citizen who held "Permanent Resident" status in the US. That does not make him an American, an Asian-American or even a Korean-American. He could not legally vote in the US, nor was he ever eligible to hold a US Passport. Hence, he was not an American.

I suspect that some people want Cho to be categorized as an "American" in order to make a political point about "those violent Americans". Get over it. Cho was not an American citizen. Period. Jameswchen 01:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Please read the comments and discussion we had prior to your comment here... I don't think people are trying to make a point, its that he lived in the U.S. for 15 years. MrMacMan ^Talk 01:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

So in other words, if Cho had been born in the U.S. when his parents were on vacation at Disneyland, then brought back to Korea at age two months, never to leave the country of Korea again, never to return to the U.S. again, you (the collective "you" above, with your "citizenship" argument) would be OK with calling him an "Asian American". I mean, why not? He would be a U.S. citizen, as all people born inside the U.S. are.

I'm not sure if those against labeling him an Asian American live in places with extremely low immigration rates or if they don't know any immigrants, or what, but most people with any degree of awareness of people who have grown up in this culture whether citizens OR permanent and legal U.S. residents (which, for all intents and purposes other than voting is like citizenship -- you can live here as long as you want as a legal resident and can come and go as you please) know that such people are thoroughly American. We have no proof whatsoever that Cho lived in Korea at any time after the age of 8. How was he not American? Those wanting to paint him as a "foreign student" are doing much more of a disservice to reality than the other side. I'll re-add the Asian American category when things calm down, perhaps after it's gone through Requests for Comment.

And my offer above still stands: do you want to help me purge all the European American category lists of those Italian Americans and German Americans and French Americans who never became U.S. citizens despite living here for years? Moncrief 04:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Eduardo. I don't mean to be challenging or adversarial in this question, but are there really such people listed as German Americans who are not American citizens? That sounds pretty funny. I'd want to check out those articles and see what those people were thinking in the articles discussion pages. Do you know of any offhand who are not citizens? If you know plenty could you list them? I want to check them out.EECavazos 04:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Obviously he was not an American CITIZEN, but does it take a document to show that one is an American? I mean, doesn't every resident alien, immigrant, or non-immigrant who lives in the US and follows its laws and customs have the right to say they are an American? Personally, its pretty sad we're even talking about this, but saying that one is not American because he/she does not hold an US citizenship is kind of wrong, because its not ONLY the citizens who contribute to the development of the US, is it? So basically those who say that only a citizenship makes a person an American, should take into consideration the tens of thousands of non-citizens who believe that America is their country. I'm not condoning this idiot's actions. Rather, I'm speaking for those who find it unfair that people are regarding non-citizens as "un-American. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.39.63.24 (talk) 04:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

Alright -- I believe that being an 'American' doesn't mean you have citizenship. If we look at some fellow Asian Americans we come across NFL player Eric Kimble (born in Korea, moved to US -- no mention of citizenship), nobel prize winning physicist Tsung-Dao Lee (born in china, no mention of citizenship), LPGA golfer Grace Park (golfer), pornstar Lucy Lee (Korean) (born in korea, no mention of citizenship). animator Peter Chung, olympic medalist Toby Dawson (born in korea). I could continue, but I feel this is enough to establish a pattern here. What do we think? MrMacMan ^Talk 05:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This is poor reasoning. They don't list their citizenship so you infer they're not American. Maybe they don't list their citizenship because it's expected that everyone would assume they're American since they're listed as hyphenated Americans. I looked up Tsung-Dao Lee's article and then clicked on the link to his home page. On his homepage it says that he's American [citizen]. Perhaps not all of them have citizenship, but before you start listing people as not citizens you should do more research, at least for a guy who [earned] a Nobel Prize. Immigrants have hard enough time with people assuming they're not American citizens because they weren't born here. Lets forgo assumptions and do more detailed work for wikipedia.EECavazos 05:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Okay, let me say that I disagree with the whole Asian American tag being used for cultural reasons (presumption abounds when defining someone else's culture), like EECavazos seems to be getting at. I tried to make a supported argument for this, but I realized I couldn't because, according to Asian_Americans#Terminology (see the last paragraph in the Terminology section) "Asian American" *can* mean anybody who could be counted as such by the US census, which does not rely on citizenship for its count (according to the article I cited) but only physical presence in the US and ethnic background. On that basis, the tag "Asian American" for Cho stands, although I'd be happy to stop at the more precise and less connotative "Korean immigrants to the United States" tag, which gets the same job done but with less room, in my eyes, for controversy (but even me suggesting this is probably, in fact, controversial). Nonetheless, using the Wikipedia definition says it's okay to label this individual as "Asian American." It seems to me that Wikipedia has spoken, and it's in conflict with my gut; however, I don't outweigh Wikipedia and I'm willing to leave the cultural debate about the appropriateness of calling this person "Asian American" to a venue other than this Wikipedia page. EECavazos, et al., could you go along with this line of reasoning? Insignificant1 07:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

If that's the consensus and it abides the rules of Wikipedia, that's what should be done. A consensus needs well reasoned arguments both ways so that the decision creates a well formulated product within the laws of wikipedia. EECavazos 07:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

wikipedia does have a clear consensus on this according to it's own entry Asian American "is generally defined as a person of Asian ancestry who was born in or is an immigrant to the United States." and "American refers to people either born, raised, or currently living in the United States.". Like i said before i don't see why people are squacking so much about this but i also think a revert war is useless, the issue will get fixed when the article cools down. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Harlock jds (talk • contribs) 11:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

An "American" is a state of mind, not defined by a certain document. His lifestyle was that of an American. Thank you.

Please be careful editing

Please be careful in deleting footnotes that are named: someone deleted the first Newsday footnote, and now two other footnotes have been blanked as a result. THF 18:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Korean norms

Why is English Wikipedia following Korean norms by having this person's last name first? (→Netscott) 18:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

One thing's for sure, every single English news outlet is using Cho Seung-hui. -- RattleMan 18:34, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I suppose they are doing so blindly. There is a redirect in place... so there shouldn't be a problem for people looking for this article. (→Netscott) 18:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

News organizations are not “doing so blindly” they are doing so correctly. And please be careful with comments such as “they put the last name first.” When dealing with many Asian naming practices, they put the FAMILY NAME first. Using terms like “first name” and “last name” needlessly confuses the issue. His name should read “Cho Seung-hui” with his family name first. To do otherwise would blindly ignore millennia worth of Asian naming conventions and would just be downright wrong. And the fact that ABC News can’t get it right doesn’t warrant mention in the article, IMO. Chinese is the same, for example with “Mao Ze Dong” “Mao” is his family name and Ze Dong are his given names. Just because other cultures may have different naming conventions, he will never be Ze Dong Mao just because that’s the way “we” do it here. There’s correct and there’s incorrect and “Cho Seung-hui” is correct and should be left that way.202.128.1.120 05:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This should be put back to Cho Seung-hui. Korean names are last name first, and the MSM outlets are all using Cho Seung-hui. --Scientz

We might be reinventing the wheel here. I imagine there is a style guide for this that spells out how this type of thing is to be dealt with. (→Netscott) 18:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, there was pretty strong defacto consensus on this format as Cho Seung-hui, let's please keep this as was. Ronnotel 18:39, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed as per Ronnotel. Cho Seung-hui it is.Mumun 無文 18:40, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I think an admin is needed here as I've been unable to revert the move, it complains that Cho Seung-hui already exists. Does anyone know how to get around this? Ronnotel 18:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Policy is to use family name first unless the individual is known to prefer otherwise so Cho Seung-hui is according to policy as well Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean) Nil Einne

I've put in a request for moving on WP:AN. (→Netscott) 18:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Having gone through FCPS like he did, I'm pretty sure he was called something like "Seung-Hui Cho" in the Western order by classmates and teachers for most of his life in school and society at large; this is the norm for Asians in American public schools. That's probably how it will go down in the end. However, most coverage out there currently has it in the Korean order, and that's how it should go for now. -129.21.96.59 18:58, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if you look at the cover of the play he apparently wrote, "Richard McBeef", he has listed his name as "Seung Cho". -129.21.96.59 19:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Was the something writen by him tho? It's not that uncommon I suspect for him to be called 'Seung Cho' by crappy programs as well as people who don't understand Korean naming. He may receive letters address to Seung Cho because the naming program is somewhat flawed, it doesn't indicate it's something he uses in real life. BTW, note that asking people to call him Seung-Hui Cho does not establish that it's his preferred order. Many people may choose to use one order for convenience but still prefer the traditional order. I'm Malaysian Chinese and often use the western order for convenience and clarity in New Zealand, as do my siblings, but all of use still prefer the proper order Nil Einne 19:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong, I'm still in doubt as to the authenticity of the play's authorship, even. However, the "crappy program" was probably Microsoft Word, and the typist was probably him, unless you can prove otherwise. After all, if someone else wrote the play, it'd either have another name on it, or it's fake. Encyclopedically speaking, whatever you go by most is the one you prefer, even if you don't like it as much. (Me? My Asian name is my middle name, so no mixing around. Ha!) -129.21.96.59 19:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

By crappy programs I more meant the university's crappy programs. If he printed the play out himself, then I would presume he chose to call himself Seung Cho but if it is something printed out by the university or if the university produces the coverpage or something, then it may not be something he calls himself. However even assuming he did call himself Seung Cho in the play, it's difficult to establish his preferred name as it may again be more of a matter of convience. Actually, it would suprise me less if he called himself Hui Cho. If he had any brothers or male paternal cousins, they may share the same generational name with him (Seung) so calling himself Seung Cho would be a bit strange. But he may not have or may not care. Anyway I guess this is getting too OT should I should stop here Nil Einne 19:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Eh, these days it's unlikely (but not impossible) that they would use specialized software just to typeset plays for the English department. However, I'm thinking it is very very unlikely he would call himself "Hui", because "Hui" as in 희 is a pretty common element in female Korean names (sort of like "ko" is the end of a lot of Japanese girls' names; someone else discussed this in more detail elsewhere on this talk page). More investigation would be needed to justify moving article to "Seung Cho". And yes, we are kind of OT :) -129.21.96.59 20:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I've fully move-protected the article, after Angr untangled the mess made by a bunch of page moves. If there's any need to move the page, request unprotection. --Slowking Man 19:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Cultural taboo

I've taken this out of the article because of WP:SYN. WP:NOR prohibits citing to sources to draw conclusions or do analysis not available in reliable sources discussing the subject of the article. THF 18:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

What is it that you're referring to specifically? Moncrief 18:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It may be a Korean taboo to write or print somebody's name in red ink. However, I am not too sure that the words "Ismail Axe" qualify as as a name of a person. Mumun 無文 18:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Richard McBeef

Apparently, our murderer wrote a play: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0417071vtech1.html

I read it (well, skimmed it thoroughly. It's a brief 10 pages), and that is one awful excuse for a play. Sounds like he threw it together after a night of (name the time-consuming leisure activity). Certainly not on par with the stuff the Unabomber wrote. Thomasmallen 18:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Man do i agree with you on that one. Not only is it poorly written with bad grammar, he plagiarised a section from the movie "Weatherman" almost verbatim. (About the 'asshole' face). I would be embarrassed for that to have leaked since he was an English major. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hsox05 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

The thing I find most disturbing about his plays is that a reputable University would actually accept a person with his standard of writing onto an English course. I would never have passed High School had I written like that --JamesTheNumberless 10:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The info is relevant. I think it should be in the motive section . But 1st it NEEDS TO BE CLEANED UP. _Lilkunta 19:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Will whoever keeps deleting this hold off for ten seconds so that I can put the citation in, please? The attribution has been made by multiple news sources, including MSNBC at 3:45 pm ET this date. --Lisasmall 20:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

"Writings" section needs cleanup

The info is relevant. I think it should be in the motive section . But 1st it NEEDS TO BE CLEANED UP. _Lilkunta 19:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

it keeps getting deleted! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RMThompson (talk • contribs) 19:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

The Writings section, and any relevant information elsewhere needs to be cleaned up. According to a classmate, Cho was in the Playwriting class "last fall" (http://newsbloggers.aol.com/2007/04/17/cho-seung-huis-plays/). According to VT's website, the class was taught by Falco, not Roy (http://www.english.vt.edu/ug/Fall%202006.pdf)

Woo Bum-Kon

Is it really necessary to link to the second Korean mass-murderer? Other than being a Korean killer, what connection is there between these two individuals? Links to the Columbine killers are not present, so why would this be linked? Bluefield 19:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I've reverted, pending any evidence of relevance. Anthony.moore 19:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Both set records in spree killing. Woo Bum-Kon set the world record, while Cho Seung hui set the record for the United States. In any case, it's not unusual for wikipedia articles to link to other similar cases. You see that sort of thing on many crime-related articles. If they weren't both Korean, it'd still merit a link.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Isocyanide (talk

--Isocyanide 20:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC) • contribs) 19:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

I believe that there is a link to the Colubmine killings via the School massacre link in "see also." At least, I've added it twice amid all the vandalism today. I think Woo Bum-Kon is relevant both for nationality, and for the record-setting that both men have in common, as Isocyanide says above. --Lisasmall 19:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

You guys are talking about how they "set records" like it is an Olympic competition or something. Why not link to the article about Shoko Asahara while we are at it? He is an Asian killer. Why not establish who the most prolific killer is in every country in the world and a "See Also" link to them as well? The inclusion of Bum-Kon in this article is unnecessary and there is no reason to relate this kid to a Korean soldier. And the link to the Columbine killers is only through a link to all school shootings, then through the link to Columbine, while Bum-Kon gets a direct link? Totally inconsistent. Bluefield 20:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Bluefield. We need to establish a top 100 list or something for most confirmed kills by one person acting alone. Ikilled007 20:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Shoko Asahara wasn't a spree killer. He was a cult leader who ordered killings, which is a different thing. The similarities with Bum-kon (a former policeman, not a soldier) also go beyond record setting (and if you have a better way to phrase it, please do). Both did not stop after their first set of killings, but moved away to later kill another set of people. The trigger for both has allegedly been a fight with their girlfriends. And of course, both committed suicide. You cannot say the same for any other two spree killers—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Isocyanide (talk • contribs) 20:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Consensus seems pretty clear here to remove the name. I don't see the need in it either. I am removing it for the moment. Please do not add it back as consensus is against it.--Jersey Devil 20:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Before you weighed in, it was 2 vs. 2. I won't re-add it yet, but a consensus has not yet been reached.--Isocyanide 20:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Isocyanide; we do not have consensus. I strongly believe it should stay in. It is not racist — a list of two names does not condemn an entire people — and it would be of interest to someone researching either killer. Finally, even though I think the ethnic link makes the addition worthwhile (and we don't hesitate to link U.S. spree killers to one another as "see also" entries), the resemblances between the crimes go beyond ethnicity and a "see also" would be justified just for that. --Lisasmall 20:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

There are more differences than similarities between the two. One gained access to weapons from a military depot, one from a gun shop. One was upset that he didn't have enough money to marry his live-in girlfriend, the other apparently had a dispute with his girlfriend. One killed people in two separate rural villages in Korea, the other targeted his own university. The fact that they are both prolific Korean killers is not noteworthy at all. The linking of U.S. spree killings is appropriate because this act occurred in America. We don't need to look for spurious connections between Seung-hui and any other person in the world just to build up the "See Also" section of the page. Bluefield 20:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I do not see any direct link between Bum-kon and Seung-Hui except that they are Korean. What is the academic reasoning for adding this into this particular page and the main Virginia Tech Massacre page? FYI, that Bum-kon link in the main event page was also removed as there was no relevance whatsoever. --24.141.67.63 00:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It seems like a racism to me, it seems that including Bum-kon implies that South Koreans are prone to be spree killers, which is not. Janviermichelle 20:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

It seems to me that Bum-kon should not be included at least until this article becomes part of "history" rather than "current events". That's the best reason I can come up with, having felt uncomfortable with the cross-reference but not really knowing why I felt that way. Siofra 00:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, when I heard about VA Tech massacre before the criminal identification, I thought of Woo Beum-gon. He was in strife with his female housemate. he killed TENS of people; he committed it with guns;he stormed 4 villages;he suicided.--Queenmillennia 11:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

His Suicide

The article says he shot himself (in the head?). Do we know which gun he used on himself? Ikilled007 20:02, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

message on 4chan?

http://www.planetblacksburg.com/2007/04/sick_internet_joke_or_real_thing.php

An anonymous user on the English imageboard, 4chan, appears to have posted the following warning Monday just before 5 a.m.

“hey /b/ I‘m going to kill people at vtech today in the name of anonymous”

--Jake7457 20:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Almost certainly a hoax with a backdated post. THF 20:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Link doesn't work. --136.150.200.99 21:15, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

No reason to believe it's authentic and a lot to believe it's not. 4chan thrives on cruelty. --Kizor 21:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

I have to say, that screams fake...how the hell did they find a post from monday morning on tuesday? Any /b/tard knows that it's NEVER that slow, especially with the news there was yesterday. --Anonymous21:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Apparantly the image was indeed a shoop: it contained no leading zeros in the date, while 4chon uses them in single digit date numbers. Also, as Anon said, /b/ moves way too fast to get a message a day later. --86.87.66.216 22:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The message was REAL, the shoop just a recreation. 88.84.152.212 09:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Here is a working link: http://www.thestar.com/StarPM/article/204030 I think at least a mention of it should be put in the articl. It should although be stated that this is the only source that makes this claim. --Dr. WTF 01:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The image included in the original article (which has unsurprisingly has been deleted) is fake. The time displayed on the image of the post was 4:49:27, but 4chan's imageboard system uses leading zeroes for single digit hours, and would have been displayed as 04:49:27, had it been real. Not to mention that even the most popular, high-traffic threads on /b/ don't last longer than a few hours. Kinkify 02:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Correct. I was reading 4chan at the time the image was created, timestamp is wrong and mockups of this kind are made all the time. It was part of a discussion where people were joking about whether the killer was a /b/tard. Some newspapers have been taken in by it, see http://expressen.se/nyheter/1.642133 Ultimately though, pixels, shooped, etc. General Miaow Say Hello! 13:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Killer's scripts

It's now being reported that scripts for two of the killer's plays have been released: [11] [12]

Worthy of mention in the Wiki article? Bueller 007 20:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Been done. See attributed writings —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Isocyanide (talk • contribs) 20:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

This discussion is already happening up above on this page, see Talk:Cho_Seung-hui#Richard_McBeef. The "Attributed Writings" section kept getting deleted (almost to the point of vandalism? or 3x reversion?) but may stabilize now that the attributions have been cited. Please do not discuss here; please go up the page and discuss under "Richard McBeef" thread to keep the discussion consolidated and coherent. -- Lisasmall 20:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Please Cite in Article

while wikipedia may not be a newspaper article, I think it's important to make sure you add attribution throughout this article. Journalists have to cite everything as police/fire/fbi said, and I think it should be seen in this article too.

Cho Seung-hui was accused of being the shooter in Monday's shooting, university police said. (1) or whatever.

Right now, it reads as if he is definitely the killer, which highly highly probable, but I don't think it's an encyclopedia's job to say who or what did something - especially a massacre. Just give it a written citation, not a footnote, until you get definitive proof from Police, which does not exist yet, that Cho killed everyone in both incidents.

20:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The important thing is that every assertion made has a reliable external source, such as CNN, BBC, the local police website, etc. This article is relatively well-sourced in that respect, it is not necessary to use a journalistic style of "police claim...", etc, but rather cite secondary sources. Anthony.moore 23:25, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Note?

Did anyone publish the full note? I'm guessing probably not since it's probably considered evidence , but I'm still wondering. --Evilturtlefromhell 20:33, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

No.. 71.252.244.130 02:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Killer's writings

The text of two of his writings are available on http://newsbloggers.aol.com/2007/04/17/cho-seung-huis-plays/

I don't know how to link them in the article though, or if they should be. Zehly 20:53, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

infobox: criminal?

i have a question....in america, mustn't one be tried and convicted of a crime before one is considered a criminal? --emerson7 | Talk 21:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

in theory, that's generally true, AFAIK 132.205.44.134 21:46, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

What do you call someone that murders 32 people? I'd call them a criminal. I also call people who shoplift from stores and not caught criminals (and thus not prosecuted). I'm sure most would agree. Technically however.... you may be right. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 21:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think dead people are attributed any civil rights anywhere in the world. While Cho Seung-hui would be considered an "alleged" criminal and "innocent until proven guilty" if he were alive, b/c he's dead none of that applies. The term criminal applies in this case.--Alabamaboy 22:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

not really. if it's simply "anyone guilty", then anyone who has ever broken the speed limit is a criminal. or jay-walked for that matter. the term "criminal" is used for those who have been convicted. otherwise... i'm willing to bet just about everyone's a criminal. in some way. hell, look up all the "goofy laws" still on the books... -Heterodoxus 00:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

...should not wikipaedia articles stick with the facts, rather than emotional impressions? --emerson7 | Talk 22:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

So what is your suggestion? Nja247 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

the template:Infobox Criminal is incorrect and inappropriate. i'm suggesting a change to template:Infobox Person oder template:Infobox Biography. --emerson7 | Talk 22:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

If the using that box will render the same result than feel free to do so under WP:Bold. Nja247 (talk • contribs) 22:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Common usage of the word criminal would unquestionably fit as Nja247 says. Legal usage wouldnt fit but we have to use common expressions over legal ones, SqueakBox 23:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur (the thing speaks for itself) would classify him as a criminal for the purposes of a civil tort claim. That's good enough for me. --Chris Thompson 23:47, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

That's not good enough for me. As a tort classification, res ipsa loquitur has absolutely nothing to do with criminal liability. One who is found responsible for a negligent act under res ipsa loquitur is not called a "criminal." They are a tortfeasor. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KyleGoetz (talk • contribs) 10:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

Do we use the criminal infobox for someone who has been accused but not commited of a crime? I think people are letting their emotions run wild here. Remember, NPOV. Titanium Dragon 00:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Image

Am I the only person who finds that picture decidedly not-funny? And how did it get in there with an edit lock in place? Gooshy 23:13, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

The image got there because the article wasn't fully protected but semi-protected. See here for more info. -- P.B. Pilhet 23:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Were you looking for one more uplifting? I think the picture says a thousand words. ~ Rollo44 23:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

http://crossfather.skyrock.com/pics/517902982_small.jpg

this is supposedly a picture of him which I found though a Forum, Can anyone else Verify it is him? If so I think we should add it. what about adding his personal infomation like height,Weight etc? Jegal 23:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Um... finding an image online does not mean it's free and can be used on wikipedia. MrMacMan ^Talk 23:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, not only does the person in that photograph not look anything like anything like the person in the other photographs, but simply tracing the address back to the subdomain gives you a blog which photos of the person, who is definitely not Cho Seung-hui. 71.224.249.33 00:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Im well Aware of Wikipedias image policys you can see on my profiles talk Also the link was not working for me thank you. Jegal 00:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

First name

Gosh, would someone puuullease fix the article so that it says FIRST NAME first (hence the reason why it's called a "first name") and his LAST NAME last??? Cho is a very VERY common last name, and even if the press and the police can't help it, at LEAST wiki should be consistent and make suue his FIRST NAME is written first.

Or maybe since he's an asain, it would make more sense to leave it with the given name first, like how it's traditionally done here?--Nog64 23:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

From the article: This is a Korean name; the family name is Cho and unlike Western family names, comes first when pronouncing full names.Mumun 無文 23:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

interesting how hes been in usa for 15yrs, yet he still puts his family name first

I agree that the title of the article should read Seung-hui Cho. I am familiar with name order in East Asian countries and Hungary, but when people from those countries live here and are longstanding part of society, they do as the Romans do. That's why there's Kazuhiro Sasaki, Ming-Na Wen, Se Ri Pak, and Zsa Zsa Gabor instead of Sasaki Kazuhiro, Wen Ming Na, Pak Se Ri, and Gabor Zsa Zsa.

Having lived in an area in the US with a large Korean population, my Korean classmates always followed the Western-order when using English. In Korean, of course, they employed their usual order. This list of Korean Americans confirms this.

I hope this is changed for the sake of consistency and accuracy, but I am not sure if this is likely since the media (and someone screwed up, and now everyone's following this order) is popularizing this order. Google News gives 2,700+ hits for Cho Seung-Hui while 49 (ABC News among them) for Seung-Hui Cho. ----Chris 01:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Could it be because of his non-citizen status that the media recognise him as non-American, and thus use the Asian order? --Kvasir 01:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps he is a nonresident alien? --HappyCamper 01:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, Kvasir, it does seem plausible that the media thought he was a Korean exchange student on a student visa. As for HappyCamper - even norsident aliens here in the US follow western order when using English. --Chris 02:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

hanja

wow how did people find the hanja version of his name so quickly?

Can we double check if the Hanja is correct? How about 趙承熙? --HappyCamper 01:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, I am having more doubts about the Hanja now. 曹丞禧 was what we had before. But I can find media sources which use a different name, even 趙承輝. --HappyCamper 01:16, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Is it possible that the last name could be 崔? --HappyCamper 01:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The most reliable source of this is probably his parrents at the moment. --Kvasir 01:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It absolutely cannot be 崔 because this is 성최 높을 최. His family name is clearly 조, not 최, and the difference is vast. Mumun 無文 01:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I haven't found any sources at all for the Hanja in Korean media (by checking News.google.co.kr for 曹 and 趙 [13][14]). The only places I see publishing the Hanja are Chinese media, who tend to indicate that it's just a "phonetic transcription" (譯音), i.e. a wild-ass guess. And some of the Chinese media are coming up with blatantly laughable attempts at writing the Hanja, like 周水辉 [15] which hasn't even got a remote possibility of being correct. cab 11:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Section about the female professor?

I think that the section on the female professor that met with him one on one and suggested counseling needs to be reviewed. Honestly, a story like that coming this quickly after the event seems very fabricated. The actual substance of the passage seems fictional and unlikely. Someone should try to confirm this and make sure its not some product of a media outlet or a "creative-minded" individual. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.150.79.160 (talk) 00:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

These events are taken from and reiterated in several articles from established news sources, and the citations for which are already present in the article (particularly references 25 and 26, from ABC News and MSNBC, respectively). I see no reason, at this point in time, to be pointedly suspicious of these anecdotes. --Noblesavage 02:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Search Warrant

CNN.com has a document from the police department detailing all items seized from his dorm room, found here: [16]. I'm not sure how to go about it, but if anyone wants to, I think this is definitely something that should be included in the article. President David Palmer 01:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Attachment A of this warrent notes that a bomb threat was found at the scene of the incident, and that it is suspect Cho was the cause of the previous bomb threats because of this. Should this be added? Melanie Brouzes 02:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Flickr photo: real or coincidence?

http://flickr.com/photos/eldarossell/203788467 has a photo which is attracting mass attention (20,000+ hits), because it has the caption, "He's a South Korean. Ismail is not his real name. He use it because his name is very hard to pronounce, especially for Indonesian people. His real name is Cho Seung Hoo ....... or is it Jo Sung Ho?". Commentators saying they're Koreans are saying this isn't the same guy. I'm no good with faces for anyone. Someone look at this - is it worth mention?

P.S. It's curious that an automatic translation program lists the annotation "Ax" for the dictionary term "Ismail", but this is almost surely another coincidence! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.186.60.218 (talk) 01:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

Thats not him at all however this is a picture of him without glasses if you scroll down which I uploaded. Jegal 02:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Appearantly, the photo of "Ismail" was delted.

The picture has been backed up here.[17] It is most certainly NOT the killer. The person who posted the original photo on Flickr has removed her copy and commented to that effect on the page linked above. Bueller 007 08:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Did he fulfill his Korean military service requirement?

I apologize if this has been brought up before, but:

Assuming that Cho indeed was a citizen of the Republic of Korea, as a male over the age of 18 he was under legal obligation to perform 24-27 months of service with the South Korean military. Those living abroad can, I believe, postpone the requirement until later into adulthood than those living in Korea, but they must eventually fulfill this obligation, nonetheless.

Given all these questions about how Cho could be so proficient in weaponry, it would be helpful to know if he had completed his military service requirement, as this would provide at least some basis for his familiarity with the handling of guns. --Noblesavage 01:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that's a pertinent line of questioning, but I'd just like to add that Koreans have an option to defer their military service. I recall talking to a Korean National studying in China saying that you could do it after completing their degree. It's the same with Taiwan too. (Fang Teng 02:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC))

I strongly doubt that he completed or was even enrolled in military training. Just by checking out his biography, he is likely to have never left US and instead pursued to complete education before the possible military service. It's probably either he taught himself or his father (who probably had served) had taught him for when he decided to enlist in either RoK or US armed force. --Revth 02:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

If I recall, he left Korea before he was 18. 76.198.148.243 02:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Koreans can defer their requirement until after they've completed their degree (though I've known a fair number of Koreans, both in and out of Korea, who have elected to pre-empt or interrupt their undergraduate education to serve in the military), and yes, he'd lived in the U.S. since he was a child (8 years old, I think?), and yes, I also doubt that he was ever enrolled in the Korean military (nothing in his bio suggests that he ever left to go to Korea for any extended period of time, and current articles available give the impression that he went straight from an American high school into VA Tech). I just wanted to open this for discussion, in case anyone has any concrete information to suggest definitively whether he had or had not completed his training. Thanks! --Noblesavage 02:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Resolved, I think-- citation number 8, a New York Times article, describes Cho as a 2003 graduate of Westfield HS in VA (as already stated in the Wiki article), which would seem to confirm that he went directly from high school to college, leaving no gap during which he could have served in the military. I should have read more closely; thanks anyway to the people who responded. --Noblesavage 02:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Nature of the killings

Was his killings more of a bang bang bang, kill as many people as quick as he can, or was it more spread out like a hostage thing with him talking to his victims or shouting out statements? It would be nice if this article could reflect that somehow. Also, did Cho file the numbers off the guns himself, or were they filed off before he bought both guns? The article just says that the numbers were filed off, it doesn't say "before he bought the firearms" or anything JayKeaton 02:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

From all the interview's I've heard it is in my understanding that he just busted into classrooms and started shooting people in the head, people in the front rows first, then he just kept shooting, without saying a thing. In the German class he came and killed almost everyone, then left, the few people that were alive got up and barricaded the door. He went back to that classroom and tried to get back in but couldn't. It's all pretty messed up and I don't understand it. 71.252.244.130 02:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Gun Purchase Date(s) Need Edit

The date(s) listed for the purchase of the gun(s) need to be vetted, and in the meantime, an EDIT needs to be made - at least regarding the section that says the 22cal gun was purchased 'a WEEK prior to the shooting'. Although these are the dates originally reported this am, I have read 3+ news articles that list New Information quoted as being "from Investigators" or "ATF Officials" that now give the dates of the gun purchases as March 13, 2007 for the Glock and ** February (some actually say 'Feb 9') for the 22 cal gun **. I am not registered. Can someone do this please? thx 172.165.109.63 02:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

SECOND REQUEST. Can someone with EDIT capability please remove the erroneous 'purchased 22cal gun a Week Prior to the killings' statement ..... please? Thx. 172.165.109.63 02:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

THIRD REQUEST. Sorry, but each time I read it, it grates on my nerves and since I don't have the authority/ability to correct the error .. I need some Help please. It is in the paragraph several sentences below the first mention of the Glock purchase, with no date given, where it says the second gun, the 22, was purchased A WEEK PRIOR TO THE MURDERS. ThxMUCH. 172.165.109.63 02:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC) BeachBlonde

I made an edit...please double check. --HappyCamper 02:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

         Thank you, HAPPY CAMPER!  I just read it.  Now I can bring it down to the frantic.

Is the source article correct (VA Tech Massacre)? 172.165.109.63 02:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

I made another edit to update the March 13th date for the Glock. I'm still checking and cross referencing the stuff. --HappyCamper 02:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, it looks good now. --HappyCamper 02:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again HAPPY CAMPER. Very much appreciate your help. Cheers - 172.165.109.63 03:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

Collective Soul

Is the mention that he listened to this song/band at all relevant? I don't think so. Also, no source is listed. 142.161.165.178 02:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I added the edit... it's all over CNN from an AC interview with the two roommates. I believe it is very valid and very telling of his character/personality (obsessive, etc.). I'm searching for a source right now, but it's very new stuff.... --Carthaginienses 03:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Another thing - I'm not sure that the song was Shine - I was watching the interview w/ his roomates, and I remember it was collective soul, but I don't think it was shine...

It was most certainly Shine. 24.141.134.77 05:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This piece of information should be removed, unless we could connect the fact in the article itself to the massacre. This is Wikipedia: Let's leave the exploitation of this information to the media, the fundamentalists, and the commentators (like what they did b_tching on 3D shooters right after the Columbine incident).

Section for "Evidence of Premeditation" (and/or "Planning/Advance Planning") -???

Should we add a section titled: "Evidence of Premeditation" or "Evidence of Planning/Advance Planning"?

I think this is a relevant, timely topic that is central to the issues at hand -- ie, what could have been done to prevent/avert this tragedy. It seems clear that the VA Tech President will be taking much heat for decisions made/not made and much gun controversy politics will use this as a platform for their divergent opinions. Evidence of premediation and his efforts towards planning are central to the issue and can be NPOV ... or used as REF in conjunction with the political commentary.

What do you all think? There is SO MUCH evidence coming out with regard to the actions taken by Cho to meticulously plan out this massacre ... I am of the mind that listing it out (the facts, cited) will not only be valuable for reference sourcing, but also for both future legislation/policy/planning AND for emotional catharsis and healing (although the latter should not matter here on wiki ... nonetheless it is true, and it would be an additional kindness). Just looking at the chain of events in cold, hard facts of premeditation would be of scholarly value, as well as the obvious. Anyone want to take it on? 172.165.109.63 03:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC) BeachBlonde

No one is answering yet, so I will start. It could be in a date/timeline format, or just a listing of actions/preparation steps. Perhaps like this:

Fall 2005 - Cho writes the play 'Richard McBeef', a shocking and disturbing account of pedophilia, violence and murder, unnerving both his classmates and teacher. Many students discuss Cho's aberrant behavior and even debate whether or not Cho could be 'one of those School Shooters'. Cho's teacher reports him to the VA Tech Administration.

Fall 2006 - Cho submits additional writings that cause deep concern. Cho's creative writing instructor ends up having to take multiple actions that lead to Cho being removed from the class, being reported to VA Tech Administration, and referred to counseling. Cho's teacher additionally and notably reports him to POLICE OFFICIALS, who respond that UNDER THE LAW, they can do nothing based on PERCEIVED INTENTIONS AND OPINIONS and their hands are tied until Cho takes action or volunteers to seek help. Cho's teacher is so concerned that she risks her own safety and offers to teach Cho 'one on one' in order to keep him under close observation.

2006 - Winter 2007 - Cho stalks several women on campus, takes pictures of females on campus without their permission, and even starts a fire in his dorm.

March - April 2007 - Cho is stopped by police for speeding in two separate incidents.

Feb 9, 2007 - Cho purchases a 22cal gun from a local VA pawnshop.

Mar 13, 2007 - Cho purchases a Glock-19 semi-automatic handgun from a Blacksburg gun shop, along with 2 boxes of what was termed 'practice' ammo.

Apr 9, 2007 - Cho calls in a Bomb Threat to VA Tech campus admin

(?date?) - Cho calls in a second Bomb Threat to campus admin presumably to test campus security response.

Apr 16, 2007 - 5:00am EDT - Cho is seen by dormmate, 'going into the bathroom, dressed in a tshirt and boxer shorts, to put in his contact lenses and complete his morning routine of applying lotion to his face and inserting his contact lenses'. The dormmate reported that Cho was his 'normal silent self - with no expression of emotion of any kind on his face'.

7:15am EDT - Cho is seen and heard arguing with victim #1, Emily (lastname needed), on the 4th floor of her dorm at AJ. When RA 'Stack' Ryan Clark hears the commotion and comes to investigate, he is shot in the neck by Cho, who also leaves Emily dead. Cho exits AJ Dorm with his weapon(s) seemingly without notice. Emily's boyfriend (name needed) was seen exiting AJ dorm and responding police/security focused on him as the primary suspect while Cho quietly slipped back to his own dorm room. Emily and her boyfriend were known to have been shooting at the practice range the week prior to the killings, which added to the confusion and incorrect suspect identification.

7:30am EDT - 9:00am EDT - While Emily's boyfriend is being detained and questioned by police and campus security, Cho finishes his final preparations. In his dorm room, Cho leaves a long, multi-paged, rambling note, accusing 'others' for causing him to assassinate the 50+ students and faculty he targeted (ultimately killing 32 and wounding 19). He also prepares for the killing spree by wearing a distinctive 'costume' made up of 2 vests, one of which he used to carry and conceal an arsenal of ammunition. Chains which Cho used to trap the students inside Norris Hall were packed in his backpack, leaving the unused sections behind. Cho then heads out across campus and the drill field to the Engineering Building at Norris Hall.

9:00am EDT - Students report seeing Cho enter Norris Hall. Several students state that Cho 'poked his head into the classroom(s) several times, as if he was looking for someone'. It is unknown at this time if reports that Cho was 'looking for his girlfriend' are accurate, was something untrue - yet believed to be true by Cho in a deluded state, or was part of Cho's ruse to 'case' Norris Hall and further plan and refine his precision attack on the unarmed, unsuspecting students and faculty, who were coming to the close of their first classes of the morning.

....... and so on and so on.

Comments?

BTW, I cannot add to or edit a locked page/stub, so I will need someone else to add this for me please if you feel it is warranted. 172.165.109.63 03:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

no original research or synthesis, please. THF 12:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

redirects

Can we make sure that every common variant in the news of this guy's name has a redirect to this page?

• Sueng Cho
• the various ways it's spelled in Korean newspapers

70.51.11.38 03:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

done for Sueng Cho-Randalllin 03:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• • 조승희 and 조승휘 and 조승회
  • perhaps these as well: 趙承輝 - 赵承熙 - 曹承辉

70.51.11.38 05:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Parents trying to commit suicide?

• "조승희 부모 자살기도 확실한 듯(3보) (Cho Seung-hui's parents suicide attempt confirmed)". Naver News. 2007-04-18. Retrieved 2007-04-18.

Anyone know if this is true? NineMSN is calling it "a rumour" [18] cab 03:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

(Oops, looks like I'm late on the "save". Merging sections.)

The Korea Herald is currently parroting a report by Los Angeles-based Radio Korea that Cho's parents attempted suicide after learning of the shootings. It not yet firm enough to put in the article, IMO, but should make it into more credible media sources if confirmed. The Korean media reports have themselves just been reported by MSN. - BanyanTree 03:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

it was reported earlier that this is simply a rumour, a representative on CNN told the press that it is not true. ALSO - I am not very familiar with wikipedia editing, but someone should add information regarding the interview with two of Cho's ex-roommates. Apparently, he had been stalking a girl down the hall. He told his roommates about this, and they told him to stop stalking women. Afterward, he used AIM to tell them he wanted to kill himself. The roommates then contacted campus police. Cho was observed at some type of clinic for 2 nights and released back to Vtech. Also, in another incident, Cho went to a party with his 2 roommates. After a few beers he opened up and admitted that he had an imaginary girlfriend. This imaginary girlfriend was called Jelly (Gelly?) and she called him Spanky. The imaginay girlfriend was a supermodel. This from http://news.yahoo.com/ videos - cho's roommates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.30.167.252 (talk • contribs) 03:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Staying with the suicide rumor topic, the MSN article linked above, which previously relayed the reports of suicide now refutes the report of suicide. (If it was a wiki, we could see exactly when the article changed, but alas.) Apparently the parents are hospitalized due to shock at the news. - BanyanTree 03:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

His parents probably need protection at this point of time. Chirag 14:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Imaginary Girlfriend

According to an AC interview on CNN, Cho had an imaginary girlfriend named "Jelly" who referred to him as "Spanky." I added it to the article, but it was reverted.... Did anyone else hear this on CNN and can corroborate? I haven't found a source yet.... -- Carthaginienses 3:51 AM, 18 April, 2007 (UTC)

Yes. It was in a CNN interview and is completely valid. His former roommates speak of the time he told them about his imaginary girlfriend and the names (Jelly/Spanky) are accurate. ~ Rollo44 04:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Find a reliable published source for this. THF 12:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Moving page, renaming article

I have changed Cho's name throughout the article to the American given/surname order, and will be moving the article to Seung-hui Cho, leaving Cho Seung-hui as a redirect, unless anyone objects. --Dynaflow 04:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I object. His name is Cho Seung-hui. — coelacan — 05:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I strongly object - The news sources (except ABC News) all use Cho Seung-hui, as he is a South Korean citizen. WhisperToMe 05:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Wiki articles about Japan have a policy for this. Born prior to 1868, [Last name] [First name]. Born after, [First name] [Last name]. I imagine there's probably also a standard set for Korean people. Cho Seung-hui seems to be the way to go, a la Kim Jong-il.

Class Level, 300 or 3000

near the end it should be 300 level not 3000, right? 70.20.232.243 04:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe it is 300, since most universities use that system of class notation. Additionally, under the behavior section, it is referenced as 300. --Notmyhandle 04:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I second. 300 is the correct level for VA Tech. The 'thousand-place' levels are used at the University of Florida (my alma mater) and some other schools, but not this one. I cannot edit. Someone will have to make this change please. Thx 172.165.109.63 04:28, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

Can someone link to this system i've never seen it before (Gnevin 04:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC))

Instead of the number system which possibly mean nothing to some readers, why not say, third year level or something like that. --Kvasir 05:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

his sister

why do we need to have his sister's name in the article? I removed it. Janviermichelle 04:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I worry for her (safety et al). she is a Princeton grad with a US Govt contract job (with security clearance) at McNeil (great job, likely stellar resume/cv) .... and has clearly worked hard to get a plum position. Her brother's actions (not her own) may well destroy her life. Seung should NOT have the opportunity to claim a 33rd life, imho. 172.165.109.63 05:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

JanvierMichelle, I can't believe you. The detail is reported in the press. The fact that he has a sister is notable about him.

Her name has been quoted in press reports - And 172.165.109.63, no. Her name has already been leaked to the press. WhisperToMe 05:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I thought I was implying that sad fact in my comment (how else would I have known all that private info), however, we don't need to WIKI her ... reminding the entire Planet Earth of her name and personal details. People will forget one day and those FEW News articles will disappear in the massive media blitz and the next 'big 24 hour news break'. So we should NOT be irresponsible and it ought to be REMOVED IMMEDIATELY. 172.165.109.63 05:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

We don't bother with fake "morals" - The press has already leaked her name, so the damage is done - Bleachblonde, I would wager to say lying is a stinging, painful offense, isn't it? Then - Not mentioning her name would be lying. WhisperToMe 05:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

i don't agree with you. we don't need to wiki her. Janviermichelle 05:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Janvier, you need to explain why. Why? Why "we don't need to wiki her." WhisperToMe 05:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Bill Gates and Neil Armstrong mention such names, so, why can't Cho? WhisperToMe 05:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

they are not spree killers. try to be in her shoes. Janviermichelle 05:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Janvier, we have to be cold-blooded to make a real good encyclopedia article. We refrain from using "tragedy," "tragic," "horrible," etc. Let the reader decide if it is horrible! The press has already leaked her name, so trying to cover it is essentially lying to the people of the world. At any rate, Janvier, she will probably be interviewed and will add some insight into the incident. WhisperToMe 05:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is not a valid argument. --Hemlock Martinis 05:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The text here is written mainly about article deletion - It warns that people should take caution when using "precedent" reasons. Now, I would wager to say that Bill Gates and Armstrong have fairly well-patrolled and monitored articles. The articles, representative of optimal biographical articles, keep the references. WhisperToMe 05:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

True, but propagating something because it exists elsewhere is the heart of the argument itself. Your examples of Gates and Armstrong are hardly fair comparisons to a school shooter. --Hemlock Martinis 05:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I find them very much fair comparisons: The heart of this: All three are world-famous public figures. All three became well-known throughout the international media and press. For that matter, I wrote Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold - References to names of parents and siblings stayed too. WhisperToMe 05:43, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, first of all, walking on the moon and founding Microsoft are not the same as a college killing spree. Second, there's a difference between including family members in the article of a famous person and including family members in the article of an infamous person. For what it's worth, I feel that many family member listings in your Columbine perpetrators page are not relevant to the article, but that's a debate for that article. --Hemlock Martinis 05:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

"Second, there's a difference between including family members in the article of a famous person and including family members in the article of an infamous person." - That's a value judgement, Hemlock. I pretend that I have no values and morals when I edit the Wiki. We all should. Strip away the values, and the core is the same. WhisperToMe 06:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

We can't all be heartless like that, Whisper. There remains no good reason to include a relative's name unless it improves the article. --Hemlock Martinis 06:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Listen, it's one thing to include a name of a relative that has not been reported in the media (of course, that would be swatted down by WP:Original research) - But, in her case, her name has already been leaked by ABC News, therefore the information is verifiable. Wikipedia reports information and does not judge on values. WhisperToMe 06:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

ABC News reports that he has a sister. Ok, great. Why is that important? --Hemlock Martinis 06:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It fills holes left by the biography we have now. Right now we mention that he immigrated from South Korea and lived in Virginia with his parents, who worked in a dry cleaning shop. We have a lot of details about his home life here, Hemlock. We are not told about what siblings he has! That one detail will plug that hole in. WhisperToMe 06:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that's fine. In that case, it'd be ok to say he has a sister, but unless she has something substantial to add to the article, her name doesn't need to be used. --Hemlock Martinis 06:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

In that case, I will keep her nameless for the moment :) WhisperToMe 06:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah! Who are we to decide what to hide. In my quest to know more about this person, I'd like to know the complete bio of his sister and parents.

The catch is that - If the news media does not sketch detailed bios of the parents, including bios on here, even if they are true, would be WP:Original research, which is not allowed on WP. WhisperToMe 05:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

WHISPER: I agree that lying is an offense (both by ommission and by direct falsehood) however, we as sinful human beings are ALL GUILTY OF IT and that does not allow any excuse or relief from condemnation (hence why we need a savior, but I will save the obvious and avoid hyperbole). By your own account, WIKI AND the MSM are Fatally Flawed since the names of Cho's parents are not included (as they have been reported - I know BOTH of their Full Names AND the name of their business AND their full address and phone numbers). This info has either been deleted or not reported/added (their names, etc.) and WELL it SHOULD NOT. By all means, state that Cho had a sister/sibling -- even say she is a Princeton alumna, but DO NOT link her name to INfAMOUS Notariety by linking her one and ONLY Name to the all time worst spree killer in the US, her brother. It is not for us to ruin her life and although WIKI must be NROP, cruelty doesn't apply and we must be responsible. In a court of law, the sister could SUE WIKI for publishing and linking her name to a CRIME she did NOT commit ... for example, if she loses/lost her (amazing, hard won) job and can show cause ... bye bye WIKI Funds. 172.165.109.63 06:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

• She would sue ABC News first, since they said it first. WhisperToMe 06:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• • Likely not, as plenty of legal precedent for suing WIKI separately/individually as well as collectively, being that WIKI is a new form of WORLDWIDE electronic media that is designed to be a PERMANENT REPOSITORY for REFERENCE material, scholarly access, and informational purposes and it puts her name/identity out to a MUCH larger/wider audience for a SIGNIFICANTLY longer period of time (infinite vs. finite). Sorry, but you cannot win regarding the legal precedent for this. 172.165.109.63 06:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

• • Firstly, she could sue anyone who published it. There is AFAIK no requirement for her to sue anyone 'first'. Whether she would win or not I don't know. But being sued should not be our only concern as WP:BLP has moral concerns as well Nil Einne 09:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

A link to a story about his sister has been added, and although less blatent than directly stating her name, it still seems like a violation of her privacy. Her name is not relevent, and has the potential to inflict emense consequences on an innocent person. Anyone who doesnt beleive that there are people crazy enough to pose a threat to someone who has done nothing wrong hasnt been following what they're editing. I would like to request that any references to any articles that are so tasteless and vulturelike as to give his sister's name and place of employment be deleted. We may have a responsibility as editors to present the facts, but we have a responsibility as humans to not make the lives of the people affected by this tragidy any harder then they already are. And I do not see how not including her biography, or any links to it detracts from the article in any way. I'd delete it myself but I'm new, and therefore blocked from editing. Sierrarose23 07:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

social anxiety disorder?

Based on the description in this article, I think that he might have social anxiety disorder, perhaps also selective mutism, as he hardly spoke a word in class. Maybe he was frustrated by his condition and so developed an angry personality. I'm not a specialist so I would like to have your opinions on this. --218.102.183.79 05:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, not our place to diagnose his mental illness. --Kvasir 05:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This is precisely why I think we should remove the description of him as a "loner" as, for now, it's too broad and vague, and could be easily misinterpreted and misdiagnosed, like suddenly all loners have Cho-like tendencies and are psycho and would be the target of unfair prejudice. See my comments below. I think the exploitation of this fact in the media and by social commentators is already enough--let's leave it to them.

VA Tech gun ban

I added this to the sentence on VA Tech's gun laws: "although Virginia Tech students were forbidden from bringing firearms on campus on threat of expulsion.", in the interest of NPOV. --YixilTesiphon ^{Say hello}_{Be shallow} 05:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Brownstone

It seems to me that a very interesting and important fact about the character of Mr. Brownstone is that he is a rapist. Each of the other three characters, his presumable students, all say that he raped them. This gives a lot of insight into the type of life Cho Seung-hui was possibly living at home, especially when you consider that the idea of molestation by an older male figure is prevalent in both of these horrifying scripts. --Invisibleinkling 05:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Unless some famous psychiatrist assumes this, I wouldn't add speculation. WhisperToMe 05:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah but he could just of been a basket case chump. I would not jump to the conclusion thet he had other Demons to blame.

Invisibleinkling has a point. We have a spectacular massacre by a deeply lonely and unhappy young man. Something happened in childhood. You don't have to be Herr Doktor Freud to wrap your head around this one. Writtenright 08:12, 18 April 2007 (UTC)Writtenright

Regardless of whether or not you can draw any conclusions from it, the fact that that element is in the play (and mentioned repeatedly) can still be addressed. We shouldn't glaze over that horrific fact about the play just because it is particularly distrubing. If we mention that he is a math teacher (which is only stated in one line), then we should mention that he is a rapist, which is mentioned repeatedly.--Invisibleinkling 11:50, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

This is Wikipedia, not a chatroom. We don't add information to an article unless it is verifiable. See also the no original research rule. THF 12:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is meant to distribute accurate information, and a large part of accuracy depends on what information is displaid and what is withheld. At this time wikipedia does not disply a large part of the scripts written by Cho, and in order to present accurate infromation about these scripts, this item should not be ignored. There needs to be no conclusions drawn, but simply omitting the primary offense of Mr. Brownstone in Cho's script creates a factual blindspot. The rape of the three students in the play is addressed 4 times, and the math teacher is mentioned once. Why is it left out of the description?

Who is changing the name back to Korean-style and why?

There's been an edit war of sorts over the perp's name. There seems to be a consensus on this page that we should be referring to the perp using the name he would have used in everyday life: Seung-hui Cho, rather than using the Korean convention of last-name first. Can someone who is involved in reverting it please tell me why they're doing it, and could everyone who supports the name change please weigh in? Thanks. --Dynaflow 05:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• 1. Cho was never a US citizen - He was always a South Korean citizen.
• 2. English-language consensus stems from the news media reporting: All sources EXCEPT for ABC News use Korean order

WhisperToMe 05:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's have a straw poll on which way it should be, that way one side can claim consensus. GarryKosmos 06:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Naming Order

The point in question: Cho Seung-hui, the way most news services are reporting his name; or Seung Cho, the way the person himself used his name. Which ordering should this article use? Add your vote here. Consensus goes to the majority. GarryKosmos 06:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Cho Seung-hui - Legal name + Name used in all sources except for ABC News WhisperToMe 06:02, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

  Why is this the "legal" name?? I am pretty sure that most official documents bearing his name: his student ID, his green card, etc. use the Western order. DHN 06:47, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

  He is a citizen of South Korea, not the United States. WhisperToMe 07:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

  Oh, so this person, who spent the vast majority of his life in the United States, who attended US schools, who's in the process of becoming a US citizen, who actively used the Western order of his name, should still be judged as a Korean "foreigner" because he still has Korean citizenship? Thankfully I became a US citizen before I turned 18 else I'd still be judged as some gook. DHN 07:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

His citizenship would matter a lot less than his US permanent residency, had be been in the US as long as they say he was. He will be well-entrenched in the government bureaucracy under an American-grokkable name. What I think we're seeing here is hypercorrection on a massive scale in regards to the guy's name. We're all proud of ourselves that we know "how Asian names work" and we insist on using them whenever it looks like we can, even if it doesn't square with actual, proper usage. --Dynaflow 08:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

You seem th be assuming the name he choose to use is his preferred name. We have no way of knowing this. The fact that someone is forced to use a different order then their preferred order because of the inability of people to understand foreign names doesn't mean it's his preferred order. Frankly, while not an American, I find it offensive that you suggest someone has to use the western order to be an American Nil Einne 08:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

We'll never know what his preferred name was because he's dead (though it looks like it might have been Ismail Ax), but we do know the name he was commonly known by, before he was posthumously transformed into a media figure, was Seung Cho. That's all I'm saying. You don't have to use the American order to "be American," but he vast majority who have that option choose to take it, and it looks like Seung-hui Cho did too. --Dynaflow 09:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Cho Seung-hui - Much the same reasons as Whisper. GarryKosmos 06:04, 18 April 2000 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui - Look up Bono and it leads with his legal name "Paul David Hewson" what someone might refer to themselves as, especially when interacting with an alien culture is irrelevant. His name is Cho Seung-hui 202.128.1.120 06:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui - read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Korean)

  I don't think Korean naming convention applies here. This person grew up in the United States and uses the Western ordering himself. DHN 06:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Seung-hui Cho - Seung-hui Cho is not an "unofficial" name, it is simply a Western-style reordering, but a reordering which the subject himself used in his writings and it is the way those who knew Cho referred to him. Cho Seung-hui adds an even more distinct level of foreignness to his name, which the name he commonly used did not (see here for a non-citeable, but still instructive, example. As referenced under the headings "name" and "first name," above, there is a lot of agreement on this page that the name should be rendered in the American fashion, as he was a de facto, if not de jure, American. --Dynaflow 06:22, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • He wrote his plays as Seung Cho - Major difference WhisperToMe 06:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

How often do you use your middle initial (assuming you have one)? If you're in the majority of people who don't use theirs, will you still expect it to go into your obituary and articles about you (assuming you attain or already have some sort of notability)? You bet you will.--Dynaflow 07:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Cho Seung-hui - Just following the populus (ie. media). Can we verify that Cho Seung-hui is in fact the legal name (ie. on US immigration/resident papers)? If so, there is no question but to use CS-h. User:Kvasir
• Seung-hui Cho - This person grew up in the United States, attended a US school, and was an English major who used the name "Seung Cho". I doubt he even knows how to write Korean. Official documents in the United States use the Western order, thus I'm pretty sure most official documents bearing his name (ID card, green card, driver's license) use the Western order. DHN 06:49, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Cho moved as a 7-year old. He has at least some grasp of Korean. Also, official documents may use "Last name, given name" WhisperToMe 07:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Most government agencies have come to understand the needless confusion created by using terms such as “First Name” and “Last Name” especially among people of Asian decent, and you will now see those terms replaced with “Family Name” and “Given Name” on most official forms nowadays. 202.128.1.120 07:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • By that logic, George W. Bush's "official" name would be Bush George. I have a sister who was 8 when she moved to the United States from Vietnam and she couldn't even read a whole Vietnamese sentence. The Vietnamese language, being written with the Latin alphabet, is much easier to read and write than the Hangul-based Korean language. DHN 07:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
      • But, my point was that most forms are useless for determining name order since legal signing is ordered by last name and then first name for all. WhisperToMe 07:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Hangul is entirely phonetic and not very hard to read. I lived in the US from a much earlier age than either Mr. Cho or your sister, but I can read my various ancestors' languages just fine. Speculation about how good his Korean is based on when he came to the US is mainly WP:OR. cab 07:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui - This is the name he is now known by. Atropos 07:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Note: The search warrant used "Seung-hui Cho" http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2007/images/04/17/warrant.pdf - This does not change my stance, though. CNN still decided to use "Cho Seung-hui" - WhisperToMe 07:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Does cable news really trump a legal document? I thought this whole mess was over what was "official" in the first place. --Dynaflow 07:32, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

It's a “legal document” typed up by a low-level bureaucrat who has no concept of Asian naming conventions. It wasn’t filled out by him and is in no way “official” or have any bearing. If you went to Asia and all the legal forms listed your family name first would that make it proper? If he had adopted a Western name like Steve than I’d agree that it should go first “Steve Cho” but saying “Seung-hui Cho” is just plain wrong. It’s like saying Kai Shek Chaing or Ze Dong Mao. It’s just wrong and it doesn’t matter that he happened to live in the U.S. for a while, it’s still incorrect. If he wrote Seung Cho on school papers to avoid confusion as to his family name and given name, it’s also irrelevant. The proper way to write it is “Cho Seung-hui” whether he is in Korea, China, the U.S. or Mars. In Korea, Neil Armstrong is called “Neil Armstrong” because the naming conventions should and are respected there as they should be here.

Neither Chiang nor Mao were Americans (and whatever you say about Cho's citizenship, he seems to have been culturally American). Neil Armstrong never lived in Korea, to my knowledge (or if he did, it would have been on a military base as an armed-services member). Every single Asian-American person I know who doesn't have an Anglicised name uses their "ethnic" given name as a "first name" on legal documents and in just about every other context other than going on trips to "the old country." --Dynaflow 08:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

When in Rome, do as the Romans do. Why keep insisting on a certain way when he himself uses the US order? DHN 07:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Cho Seung-hui - this is not even a question what is right, the university spelled out his name like this, it is also correct according to the naming conventions, Seung Cho can be mentioned in the text.--MoRsE 07:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Personally, I think we should use Seung Cho. It's not the name the media is using, but it's the name he used for himself. That should probably take precedence. --Sleepvivid 07:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui Going by Wikipedia:Naming conflict, this should be the choice as it is the most commonly used name in English reliable sources, in addition to being the official name of the subject that would appear in his passport (without a comma between the family name and personal name) given that he is a Korean citizen. cab 07:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I just looked at my US passport, and my last name is first, on a line of its own called "Surname," with "Given names" following -- passports and other computer print-outs are more or less irrelevant to this. When my name is rendered into Chinese characters (I am not Chinese), my last name comes first, and that is what I am referred to as. This is an English encyclopedia article on an de facto American, and we should follow the American standard, as the decedent himself did. --Dynaflow 07:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • When, for example, Eric Shinseki's name is rendered into Japanese, it is as "Erikku Shinseki", not Shinseki Erikku. The only people in Asia whose names get rendered in family-given order are those who actually take on local style names, such as David Aldwinckle (now Arudou Debito, but never "Aldwinckle David") or Denis Laktionov (sometimes Lee Seung-nam, but never Laktionov Denis). But in my opinion that's neither here nor there because we're not talking about how non-Koreans get referred to in Korea or the rest of Asia. cab 08:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • What about his student ID, green card, driver's license, high school diploma, college application, search warrant, etc.? DHN 07:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • This isn't entirely without precedent. YOO Seung Jun and SON Ho Young, for example, who are both not just de-facto Americans but actual American citizens (in the former case, quite infamous for being an American citizen). cab 07:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Your examples give more credence for the case of using the Western order. Those people, while being Americans, are famous in Korea, thus their names are rendered in the East Asian order. This person is famous for something he did in the US. Consider the Korean cast of Lost: Yunjin Kim, Sun-Hwa Kwon, Jin-Soo Kwon, Daniel Dae Kim. DHN 07:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
        • But Cho is famous as Cho Seung-hui right here in the US of A. WhisperToMe 08:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Drivers licenses: Surname, Given name [19] WhisperToMe 07:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Drivers licenses: Surname, Given name [20] WhisperToMe 07:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
      • • • • And why do you think that comma after the surname is there? It's there for a reason.Secondgen 09:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• This is an American event in the USA, why should you say his name in Korean order? You should not make exceptions for Koreans. The Japanese also say and write their name in FAMILY NAME, Given name order in their own country, but when in an international environment like the USA, they display their names in Western fashion. In the USA you don't call Hideki Matsui, Matsui Hideki nor do you call Ichiro Suziki, Suzuki Ichiro and so on and so on. Koreans need to get with the program.— Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])
• Koreans in the US are typically known by Korean order: i.e. Ban Ki-moon. Japanese people treat their names differently. WhisperToMe 07:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Ban Ki-moon is an international figure, and have only tangential connections to the US. DHN 07:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Seung-hui Cho - When you enter the United States as a legal immigrant, you are required to fill all official documents in this order. Since the age of 8, everyone around him has known and referred to him as Seung-hui Cho or Seung Cho. Just because the media suddenly declares white to be black, does not make it so. An arguement stating that he was a so called "citizen" of South Korea does not warrant the conventional Korean order. There are many places where dual citizenships are allowed. A permanent resident mentioned in wiki, who has lived in the United States most of his life AND has a dual citizenship from 2 different countries, should certainly be known as whoever he was in his residency. Therefore, Seung-hui Choi is appropriate. Secondgen 08:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui Bueller 007 08:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Please do not add the same comment multiple times. cab 08:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui - As I've already explained previously, unless we can establish his preferred order we should use the default order. The fact that he supposedly used Seung Cho in a play doesn't say much. Many people may choose to use a certain name or order for convience. It doesn't mean it's their preferred order. The best way to establish a preferred order would be to ask him. This obviously isn't possible. The second best way would be to look at things like his diploma or other similar documents. Since he never graduated and it's unlikely we can obtain these anyway, this doesn't work either. Therefore, it's best to go with Cho Seung-hui which is also the name the media are using. Nil Einne 08:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • He has a diploma from high school, and I guarantee you it reads "Seung-Hui Cho." Secondgen 08:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Do highschools in the US actually ask you want name you want to have on it? If not, it's irrelevant Nil Einne 08:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
      • The answer is yes. High schools do ask you to verify your name and if any changes should be implemented. For example, middle name included or not. Have you forgotten? Secondgen

If Cho's school didn't grant the option to choose the form of one's name to appear on the diploma (mine did), it would actually strengthen the argument that Seung-hui Cho is the guy's legal name, in addition to being his most common casually-used name for, which has already been established. --Dynaflow 09:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

He lived in the USA for many, many years and I'm sure he used the American custom of personal name first, family name after! To put his family name first is quite pedantic. --Sonjaaa 09:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Cho Seung-hui - its easier that way, and besides his korean.--Lerdthenerd 09:11, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui per the majority of news sources. What he himself may or may not have done is largely irrelevant for us. —Angr 09:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Besides, he is dead does he really care anymore? still im sure what his parents call him is more important--Lerdthenerd 09:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• An inhabitant is someone who resides in a location for a long period of time. He is an inhabitant of the United States. An ihabitant of the United States is an American. Seung-hui Cho is an American. An American is not defined by U.S. Citizenship, Native American Indians. INS will attest to this. Secondgen 09:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• OED: American [noun]: a native or citizen of the United States. Cho was not a native, and not a citizen. He was not American. Bueller 007 11:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • If you want to play the dictionary look up game, let's try m-w.com by Merriam-Webster.
  • Main Entry: 1Amer·i·can
  • Pronunciation: &-'mer-&-k&n, -'m&r-, -'me-r&-
  • Function: noun

   1 : an American Indian of North America or South America
   2 : a native or inhabitant of North America or South America
   3 : a citizen of the United States
   4 : AMERICAN ENGLISH

   Obviously they do not have to be all of the following. 

   Main Entry: in·hab·i·tant
   Pronunciation: in-'ha-b&-t&nt
   Function: noun
   one that occupies a particular place regularly, routinely, or for a period of time <inhabitants       
   of large cities> <the tapeworm is an inhabitant of the intestine>

   Also, there are countless numbers of permanent residents like Seung-hui Cho who are in the United     
   States military. They represent America, therefore are Americans.

Secondgen 11:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Very interesting. Unfortunately, you have failed to make the very important distinction between the two senses. He may be an "American" in the sense that he is an Asian person who lives somewhere on one of the American continents, but he is not an "American" in the sense that you implied when you said "An ihabitant [sic] of the United States is an American." Bueller 007 14:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

• Cho Seung-hui -- easier, the most common name in the media, he is Korean. Mumun 無文 09:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui Ronnotel 11:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Seung-hui Cho simply because this is how he would've been known by his classmates, etc. They would have called him "Seung" and it's likely that most records state his name in this style, first name followed by last. Thomasmallen 12:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui -- Not only is it the technically correct name order for a Korean name, there's also the fact that it's the name being used in the media, and thus the name that people are most likely to search for him under. I know Wiki has some amazing bandwidth and servers, but do we really need the extra load of having everyone look for him under Cho Seung-hui and get redirected to Seung-hui Cho? Rdfox 76 13:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
• Cho Seung-hui -- For much the same reasons as the other pro-Korean order people. -Scientz 09:47, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
• Seung Cho -- It's the name he wrote under, which is the best documented proof we have of the name he used for himself. He lived in American almost all his life, and we have no evidence that he even considered himself Korean. The media is using 'Cho Seung-hui', but that's probably because the first reports mistakenly identified him as a foreign exchange student. Scientivore 14:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Pet Fish

is the fact that he had a pet fish really relevent? if others agree that it isnt, someone else will have to delete it, as I'm new.Sierrarose23 07:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Unless Cho tortured or killed or otherwise brutalized the fish (as per examples of sado-masochistic aggression acted out on animals/pets by serial/spree killers) it is NOT relevant in any way. 172.165.109.63 07:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

its at the end of the biography section, if you could take it out? Sierrarose23 07:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Be bold and do it yourself. Do whatever you think needs done (other than change the name of the perp  :) --Dynaflow 07:51, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I cant. The page is locked against unregistered and newly registered editors. I'm newly registered. Sierrarose23 07:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I cannot either (not reg), so someone 'old' will have to do it, but PLEASE DELETE IT per my comment above. As a BS Psy, I am qualified re: WikiEDU/PROF to say "NOT RELEVANT" unless evidence of sado-masochistic/cruelty/abuse toward animals is presented and SOURCED/cited. Thanx 172.165.109.63 07:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)BeachBlonde

You win. You trump my BA Psych. I'll get on it if it hasn't been done already. --Dynaflow 08:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

What's the name of his fish?--Sonjaaa 09:15, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

South Korean dramatists and playwrights

Is it really necessary to list him under this category? He's hardly a notable playwright. Proserpine 08:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you. Secondgen 08:55, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Removed. Proserpine 08:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

External links?

I see there's now an external link to a url called "www.cho-sueng-hui.info" - is this appropriate?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.219.227.6 (talk • contribs).

I've deleted the inappropriate site. The third picture is absolutely NOT Cho. Look at the shape of jawbone. It's different from other pictures. Who commits a blunder! I don't know who is in the picture(third), but it is the infringement of his privacy and right. --2SteamClocks 11:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I previously removed it twice. Can we find out who's repeatedly adding this spam and give them the appropriate warning? THF 11:45, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Loner

I see putting his description here as merely a "loner" problematic. I mean, was he (a) a loner by choice, or (b) a loner only because he didn't have any social skills and felt left out? Not all loners are socially inept, you see. Conversely, people who appear to be socially active may not even have well adjusted social skills or are awfully awkward. — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]])

This is Wikipedia, not a chat room. Take up the "loner" description with the media; the claim is reliably sourced.THF 13:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, this is Wikipedia, not something where just anyone should be able to pick up statements, sourced reliably or not, and draw judgments on that. Leave that to the media (and the social commentators who analyze after them).

He was a person with a serious mental illness that needed psychiatric help, not psychological help. And this fact was ignored by university authorities and the little help he received he received it too late. That's it. Hey, John Forbes Nash was a crazy loner and he won a Nobel prize, so that does not make anyone evil, but he had people around him who helped him and tried to understand him. But I agree this is social commentary that does not belong in Wikipedia. 66.201.172.192