Talk:Osama bin Laden

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Osama bin Laden article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite, and welcoming to new users Assume good faith Do not attack other users For disputes, please see our guideline	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article contains a translation of Osama bin Laden from en.wikipedia.

We need to figure this out..[change source]

Reports are that Osama bin Laden is dead. Only the US media seems to be verifying this, although the White House did announce it. English's article has gone ahead and listed him as dead. Should we follow suit or wait for more confirmation? Kansan (talk) 03:05, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've written that he's been reported as killed. I think that's what to say. I've also added the current event template Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 03:31, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not just 'reports of officials', it's been formally announced by the President, as reported by NY Times and BBC. Talk about reliable sources! Macdonald-ross (talk) 04:23, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DNA tests have apparently confirmed it. -DJSasso (talk) 17:28, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Canadian media is verifying it now.[1] —This lousy T-shirt (talk) 17:31, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, okay, there's no doubt. The BBC has being banging on about nothing else since 6am. I think there's no doubt we're all being convinced it's happened. So no more debate needed on that. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:00, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of things[change source]

His body was "buried at sea" (bad move US troops, but hey), so this needs to be added.
That's not a picture of Bin Laden, it's a digital enhancement of one taken many years ago. The caption needs updating to reflect this to prevent misleading our readers.

The Rambling Man (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We should probably add a whole section about his death (en has a whole article, but that's probably overkill). Not exactly sure why burial at sea is a bad move...except I've heard people wanted to parade his body around the United States so people could spit on it Purpleback pack 89≈≈≈≈ 17:25, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I think it misses the fact it happened on the 29th... --—SEPTActaMTA8235— (t — c — l) 17:27, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Being a bad move depends on a number of things, they had 24 hours to get his body "burried" or risk massive issues with the muslem world. And no country apparently wanted his remains. So thats why he was burried at sea. -DJSasso (talk) 17:30, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see that it removes the issue of him being "paraded" around but a lot of Muslims are upset about the way it was conducted. In any case, the article needs that to be clearly and concisely and neutrally updated. Seeing all that partisan stuff in the USA, with people chanting "USA" is all very well (and serves Al Qaeda well) but this Wikipedia needs to be neutral. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]