Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Talk:Luigi Mangione

Keep this article for now, pending new developments

Just saw this independent article on the suspect, and of course I do not immediately recommend DELETE for the sake of deletion, or a blank approval for KEEP for the sake of keeping...because we don't lack such precedents as well as similar cases as to whether to create a separate article on a suspect---

Some raised the Dylann Roof's case, but of course that was back in 2015, so probably the rules back then at Wikipedia were much more lenient than now.

On not creating a separate article on suspect, well, the 2022 U. of Idaho killings(2022 University of Idaho killings#Accused) can give us some insights---one whole section of the talk really focused on whether to create an entry for Bryan Kohberger, but of course his case dragged on ever since Jan 2023 when he was extradited to Idaho from Pennsylvania. In that case, of course Bryan waived his right to the extradition, and did not choose to fight it like Luigi is doing now.

On infamous cases throughout the history, one could be like Zodiac Killer(Zodiac Killer), all the list of suspects(including one Arthur Leigh Allen) is within a separate article, but a section itself branching out from the main entry, therefore no separate articles on any of those suspects; Another could be like D. B. Cooper(D. B. Cooper)---though the list of suspects is much longer, but since nobody is identified, so no separate articles on any of them, but since the case is very infamous, so the case stands despite no identified suspect as we speak(of course there're rumors throughout the years claiming such and such a person is the suspect for real, and some of them still alive).

Outside of this article, similar discussions on whether to create a separate article or a brand new entry could be seen in, say, Russian Invasion of Ukraine, because sometimes we don't know whether it's worth creating a whole new article for a battle, a campaign, or an offensive, or whether to even rename them.

Therefore, back to Luigi Mangione's article, I'd say keep it for now, but we can wait for another year or two to decide its fate...no need to rush now, any more than NY Giants releasing Daniel Jones in a hurry and letting Saquon Barkley go and this and that(and we can see what happens to Giants now)... Bf0325 (talk) 23:43, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found this article very useful. [[Comfr (talk) 04:33, 17 December 2024 (UTC)]][reply]
I believe this article on Mangione is just a stretched out summarization for the sake of having an article of the suspect. Everything is already summarized on the main article and a majority of it seems copied and pasted as, again, another reason to have a main article of Mangione.
The reason D.B. Cooper is a separate article is because Cooper's alias is known for his evasion of law enforcement than the incident of him hijacking the aircraft, though this can be debated on.
There has also been a comparison to have this article in the way Dylann Roof had been during the Charleston church shooting. I think it's an odd comparison as Mangione targeted one person in response to his anger with the healthcare system, and Roof targeting people of color in response to his White supremacy. I don't think this justifies a separate article. Vibrioidxire (talk) 17:38, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I guess you didn't elaborate on whether Luigi Mangione should follow Bryan Kohberger's suit despite I mentioned that I noticed such discussion under that case's Talk(Talk:2022 University of Idaho killings#We should immediately remove the name of accused and section about him)... Bf0325 (talk) 22:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manifesto

Have any supposed copies of his manifesto met the editorial standards of Wikipedia? Apyrrypa (talk) 10:22, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is normally done in instances like this is an external link is found of the text, and we put a link to it in the External Links Section. Kingturtle = (talk) 18:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now that Luigi Mangione is added with one charge of being a terrorist by NYC, perhaps one day we may be able to put either a link containing the full text or rather copy, paste, and quote in full in Wikipedia entry---of course Luigi's 3-pg manifesto is much shorter than Unabomber's book... 2607:F470:34:2101:1822:98B5:5F3:E958 (talk) 22:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History merge

My draft Draft:Luigi Mangione was copied and paste into this article, and because of that I feel like there should be a history merge. PopularGames (talk) 20:30, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

:I agree. A history merge would be a sensible and appropriate move. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 00:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A history merge is not appropriate as there are WP:Parallel histories. The copy from the draft space is already properly attributed. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. Thanks for clarifying. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 02:09, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Father dying when he was 11

Regarding this edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Luigi_Mangione&diff=1263655380&oldid=1263655227 Luigi’s father, Louis Mangione, is not dead. The source talks about Nicholas Mangione’s father dying when Nicholas was 11. Nicholas is Luigi’s grandfather. Wafflefrites (talk) 22:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, there was very briefly a mix-up due to some unclearly worded content being copied over from the draft. —Alalch E. 12:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An article for Luigi Mangione

The IP recommended creating an article about Luigi Mangione on Talk:Luigi Mangione, apparently unaware that they are commenting on the talk page of the already existent article about Luigi Mangione, titled "Luigi Mangione".—Alalch E. 12:04, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I believe there should be an article created. Although the circumstances are not yet clear, Wikipedia is a source that many use when researching topics. With the news lately, there should be an article with more information on Mangione as it will help (mainly students) gather more information on the individual as well as produce their own articles on the topic with accurate information. 2600:4808:4972:3C00:8C6E:8C6:F1D2:C573 (talk) 16:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's already an article, and it's the one whose talk page you posted this on. If you would like to argue that this article should be kept rather than deleted, please access the Articles for Deletion discussion of this page. It's linked at the top. Also, Wikipedia is not a news source. guninvalid (talk) 18:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Conspiracy theories?

How is the 286th Pokémon a conspiracy theory? What conspiracy is being considered here? If anything, this would be Cryptographic theories. Kingturtle = (talk) 04:03, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Eievie who just added that section LaffyTaffer (talk) 04:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added it because it's part of the public discourse about him. I agree "conspiracy theory" is not the best term. I used that term because other people online used that same term to talk about it, but I agree it's not very accurate. The notion, I guess, is that it's an easter egg he planted before the crime to denote its meaning, in the same vein as engraving words on bullets? Eievie (talk) 04:11, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's definitely a valid WP:FRINGE theory (read: the countless articles about "286"), but I think it's worded a little authoritatively. If you don't mind, I might try my hand at rewording it to follow WP:EVALFRINGE better later tonight? mooshberry->talk; 04:54, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, "fringe theory" is a good term for it. And of course you can reword it better if you want — the whole premise of wikipedia is that anyone can XD Eievie (talk) 05:03, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think “conspiracy theories” is appropriate wording because that is the phrasing the source uses. Wafflefrites (talk) 18:24, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can note that it's been called a "conspiracy theory". But the definition of conspiracy is that 2 or more people conspire together, and no one's suggesting there's a second person involved in the 286 thing. Eievie (talk) 19:42, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have to put everything that is reported into this article. Wikipedia is not a news source or a newspaper. Kingturtle = (talk) 06:47, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's trivial stuff, it has no lasting significance, and so I've removed it. —Alalch E. 13:01, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Since this is a currently unfolding story and no one yet knows how it ends, at present I don't think you can say it "has no lasting significance." Eievie (talk) 18:15, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how the "story" whatever the story is here will end, but the Pokemon thing is trivial, I confidently predict that it will have no lasting significance, and content about it is not fit for purpose in an encyclopedia. It isn't about a fringe thing being fringe as in fringe theory/beliefs, it's that it isn't sufficiently noteworthy and doesn't deepen a reader's understanding of the topic. Also, please see WP:ONUS. —Alalch E. 21:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was wrong. It IS “out of touch” and not “unjust.”

This is for anyone who makes the same mistake I did and wants to correct the pre-arraignment quote according to the BBC’s reporting. While the BBC reported that he said “unjust,” that is simply not accurate. Hopefully this will save other editors some time. Haydenmyoung (talk) 17:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think one of the refs contains a video. CVDX (talk) 18:02, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
“Out of touch” is already in the article under the Charges section Wafflefrites (talk) 18:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FBI poster

Killing of Brian Thompson suspect FBI seeking information poster

Wondering if the FBI poster is worth including in the arrest section for context per "responding to a call from an employee made in response to a customer who recognized Mangione from images of Thompson's alleged killer released by the NYPD"?

I don't think this is a SUSPECT/BLPCRIME issue, but thought to post on the talk page regardless given the contentious nature of such a BLP article. Maybe there is some specific guidelines or policy on using these type of FBI posters for all I know. Naturally it would need to be made clear these are images of the suspect, not Mangione, but is otherwise highly related to his arrest it seems. CNC (talk) 11:53, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think this poster is very relevant, but I believe its inclusion would be better suited to the Killing of Brian Thompson article, to avoid breaking WP:NPOV in a WP:BLP situation, to avoid implying that Luigi is necessarily the person in the photos.
I realize that it could be included in this article with caveats, but to be safe (considering some people won't read the accompanying text) in a BLP situation, I think it's best not to.
Of course others are free to disagree on this assessment, it's definitely a subjective situation. But this guy isn't getting a lot of neutral coverage, so I think it could make a difference to make this distinction.
If the poster is included, I guess it would also allow users to draw their own conclusions by comparing it with his mugshot and other photos, which is always a good thing. CVDX (talk) 15:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Even if Luigi isn't the person in the poster photos, the fact that someone thought he was and called in a tip on that basis is still a huge part of his story. I would put the poster in the "Arrest" section — he was arrested on that basis. Eievie (talk) 15:40, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, this belongs more on the Killing of Brian Thompson article than this BLP. Some1 (talk) 19:04, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perp walk pictures

Is there any way to get the copyright permission necessary to include some of the perp walk pictures? Eievie (talk) 20:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ask a Wikipedia user in NY to take the photo? Trade (talk) 13:21, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fake ID and name

Shouldn't this article identify the identity used by Mangione at the hostel and at the time of his arrest, that found on the New Jersey ID document? The criminal pseudonym and self-identification of this person at the time of the killing of the CEO. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:36, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Added the name Mark Rosario to the "Arrest" section. Eievie (talk) 19:52, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

Created by Liamashron (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 262 past nominations.

Launchballer 13:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC).[reply]

  • New enough, long enough, hook fact is interesting and well supported. Biography section would do with merging. Earwig is not happy, and looking at the results I feel like bits and bobs could be better paraphrased.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)but that's beyond the DYK purview.[reply]
Earwig is picking up a lot of false positives because of the volume of quotes used in the article. I believe I've fixed all the ones that don't come under WP:LIMITED. The first four body paragraphs are all now one.--Launchballer 14:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Image is NOT approved, however; it is currently at FFD, and very much will end up deleted. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Ethical Concerns in the Case of Luigi Mangione

Please see the template at the top of this talk page which states: This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Luigi Mangione article.

This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. WP:NOTFORUM. Some1 (talk) 15:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

I can't help but wonder: at what point do we, as a society, cross the line from just observing a case to actively shaping its outcome with our opinions? When I look at Mangione, I see a man accused of a serious crime, but I also see a media storm that’s creating a narrative around him that might not even have anything to do with the facts. There’s something deeply troubling about how people are elevating him to some kind of folk hero status, especially when we don’t know the full story yet. Are we forgetting the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" simply because his story fits into a larger cultural frustration with the system? It feels like we’re turning a tragedy into entertainment, and that’s dangerous. When I think about the surge in merchandise and donations to his legal defense, it’s hard not to feel that we’ve lost something important in the way we engage with criminal justice. It’s as if his appearance and the way he’s portrayed has become more important than the actual crime he's accused of. It’s fascinating, but it’s also deeply unsettling. Can you imagine the kind of pressure this puts on the legal system? When public opinion leans so heavily in one direction, can we even expect a fair trial? What’s even more fascinating—and perhaps a little concerning—is how his image, particularly as a "handsome" criminal, plays into the larger narrative we’ve created about criminals in society. We’re used to seeing criminals as either villains or tragic heroes, and it seems like Mangione is falling into the latter category. It’s almost like we're romanticizing him, not for what he’s done, but for what he represents. That’s where I get stuck—because while I understand why people might feel an emotional connection to him, it’s important to pause and think: are we making it easier to forget the severity of the charges against him just because we like the idea of him as some kind of rebellious hero? At the end of the day, I think the real ethical dilemma here is whether we’ve lost sight of what justice truly means. It’s easy to get caught up in the drama, the spectacle, and the story. But the truth is, justice isn't about creating heroes or villains—it’s about ensuring fairness and truth, even when it’s uncomfortable. And right now, it feels like the public's narrative is dangerously far from that ideal. GUmball910 (talk) 15:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Avoid specious, pop culture references

We should watch for, and avoid, specious references to pop culture. Mangione's first name is Luigi. We should simply leave it at that. There is no reason to make references to Luigi, or other game characters or real people named Luigi. There is nothing wrong, or confusing, about the name Luigi. Adding cultural or pop cultural references does not help improve the article, and should be avoided. Juneau Mike (talk) 21:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This post makes it sound like the page once said something along the lines of:
This article is about Luigi Mangione. For other people named Luigi, see Luigi (given name). For the Mario (franchise) character, see Luigi.
and you removed that. Except that never happened. I'm confused about what issue you're trying to address here. Who suggested the name Luigi was confusing? Eievie (talk) 22:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Luigi Mangione Mugshot.jpg"

Kind reminder that Pennsylvania law explicitly states that mugshots are subject to copyright and thus anyone adding the image back will be delibaretely violating the copyright of the State of Pennsylvania

And yes, people are allowed to remove blatant copyright violations from articles so citing the upload of the photo to Commons does not excuse having it here Trade (talk) 01:21, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade So, is there any appropriate image to use? Lililolol (talk) 20:08, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No. Nothing stopping you from contacting his attorney and asking for a freely licensed photo if you want it so badly Trade (talk) 20:09, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you sound so defensive? Lol Lililolol (talk) 01:22, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of "Mangione"

Should the native Italian pronunciation of Mangione (Italian: [manˈdʒoːne]; mahn-jo-ne) be added to the lead section? 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 19:41, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It could maybe be a footnote ({{efn}}) at the bottom, but I don't think it makes sense to include it in the lead section. He's not Italian (or at least, he's not Italian in the way that Italian isn't the main language he speaks, nor a major language he's discussed in). Eievie (talk) 21:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Eievie
what do you mean with "efn"? L.Willms (talk) 16:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
{{efn}} is the template used to create footnotes that are not citation references. Eievie (talk) 17:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A footnote seems satisfactory. Can I (or someone else) add it? 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 17:24, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Eievie (talk) 17:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bis-Serjetà?
I for my part, living in Europe, in Germany with many Italian immigrants, with my basic to middle knowledge of the Italian language, I see an Italian name and word, and pronounce it the standard Italian way. But I don't know how this name would normally be pronounced in North America, where the English language dominates. The original italian pronounciation is clear (to me), but how does this Luigi Mangione himself, his relatives, his class or workmates who live in mainly US-English speaking environment pronounce his name? How do TV and radio speaker in USA and Canada pronounce it? That would help! L.Willms (talk) 17:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The American pronunciation is /luˈiːdʒi ˌmændʒiˈoʊni/ loo-EE-jee MAN-jee-OH-nee; it is already written in the article. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 17:23, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had originally added the Italian pronunciation at Killing of Brian Thompson when this wasn’t yet an article, and other editors disagreed to include it. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 19:36, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Change image?

Shouldn't the image of Luigi be changed? The photo has a bad resolution and perhaps we could use the mugshot of Luigi? Bcom123 (talk) 21:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bcom123 Agreed, particularly since Luigi is only alleged to be the person in this surveillance image. 209.171.85.155 (talk) 21:14, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
People have added the CCTV suspect pictures enough times now that I added a <!-- --> note to remind people not to. Eievie (talk) 01:59, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, there are no freely licensed photos of him, so Lililolol (talk) 01:24, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Editors will have to fill out a "Non-free use rationale" if they upload (copyrighted) images of the mugshot. See this example [1]. Some1 (talk) 16:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is a free drawing and one in color, if you want to use it. Like I've done before, I've made a drawing we can use until we get a free photo. A few days ago I made one of Gisèle Pelicot and it's still in use. It was on the main page (ITN) on four wikis, including en-wiki, and peaked at 151,705,371 views a couple of days ago (well, Simple English use the pencil version). Do as you please, but using a drawing has been done several times before. Cart (talk) 17:00, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:No original research/Noticeboard/Archive 49#Cartoon portraits gives reasons why people might oppose a drawing of a BLP subject: not an accurate representation of the subject, amateurish, quality issues, subjective (e.g. people might think the subject has [facial feature] while others might not), inaccurate/not illustrative, Original Research (their own interpretation of what the subject looks like), etc. Some1 (talk) 20:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wow! Way to go to put down an honest contribution. Of course a photo is always best, but a free one is not always available. And per the discussion we had back when we had none of Kim Jong-un, all the articles we have of people before the invention of camera are subject to the same critique. But, very happy if you've managed to find a free photo for this article. Cart (talk) 21:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There have been no copyright objections to the file Signed complaint mangione.pdf yet. I was just transcribing it to wikisource ( Luigi Mangione federal complaint.). In that process, I pulled all the images in the PDF. Since the PDF itself is copyright ok, would it follow that this picture from page 9 of that PDF is also ok? We could crop it just to his face, like this:

Signed complaint mangione - arrest photo.jpg

Eievie (talk) 21:01, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Try adding it to the infobox and see if anyone objects to it due to (any potential) copyright reasons. Some1 (talk) 21:05, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Surtsicna We're discussing the copyright status of this picture here. Can you explain your relational for removing it? Specifically, if the copyright isn't what I thought it was, what do you think its copyright status is? Eievie (talk) 22:02, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was skeptical about the provenance but it seems that you folks have it under control. Surtsicna (talk) 22:03, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be ideal if this image could be cropped and saved as a separate file on Commons. ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 22:16, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drawing

@IvanScrooge98: added the drawing to the right to the body of the article. I removed it saying not needed; images should not be decorative per MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. IvanScrooge98 reverted and said it's pretty relevant that a figure charged with murder and terrorism is getting portraits of various kind in his honor. If it were labelled as fan art, that's one thing, but the description of the image says The drawing was made as an illustration for a Wikipedia article, so the drawing is not to "honor" Mangione, per se.

What do people think, should this drawing remain on the article or not? Some1 (talk) 23:19, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear! I certainly did not do it as fan-art!!! It was simply made as a Wikipedia illustration when we didn't have a free photo of him. Please don't use it as something it was not intended for. Also, I've reverted IvanScrooge98's edit where he put my name on the Pelicot page. In articles, such illustrations as these should not mention the artist, it's just tacky. IRL I'm a professional artist, but here I'm only in my capacity as Wikipedian. Please respect that. Now that we have (?) photos, the drawing is just good as backup in case some copyvio should arise, or if the only free photo available is so bad, it's hard to see the subject, like in Klaus Schulze, (an image made by request from Wikipedians). Cart (talk) 23:30, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, I apologize for my edits then. (By the way, lovely portraits. Thanks for uploading them!) ~ IvanScrooge98 (talk) 23:46, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Languages

The Luigi Mangione article, after creation on December 9, has already been translated into 11 languages! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 03:03, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2024

Please remove that he is suffering from Lyme disease. It is an insignificant detail, and it also reads like a "stigma." Ggiak (talk) 03:25, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quelle: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Luigi_Mangione