Talk:Arrest of Randal Worcester

Why was Worcester arrested in the first place?

This article seems to justify its claim to fame because there is a video of Worcester being violently assaulted while he was being arrested. The article also needs to explain what Worcester did in the first place to attract Police attention seriously enough for Police to decide to arrest him in such a violent way. Like, was he trying to kill people or blow up the town? Police do not usually arrest somebody in this way for no reason at all; they usually need to have a reasonable cause. Also, what, offences, was he subsequently charged with, if any? Was he injured by the assault? Did he need medical attention? Has he been released? Will he appear in court? - Cameron Dewe (talk) 09:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

• @Cameron Dewe: - the article is a work in progress. I have begun to answer some of your questions (what, offences, was he subsequently charged with, if any ... Did he need medical attention? Has he been released? , with the answers being edited into the article, but I require some time before I return to answer more. starship.paint (exalt) 15:51, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
• what Worcester did in the first place to attract Police attention - now answered. When I eventually have time, I will add more. starship.paint (exalt) 06:02, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
• @Cameron Dewe: - more added - for your information. starship.paint (exalt) 13:04, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
  • @Starship.paint: Thanks for continuing to develop this article. It is far more informative, now, than when I first saw it. However, Wikipedia is not a newspaper, so one needs to avoid writing that reads too much like a news report, particularly the lead paragraph and ordering of events. While this article is currently written as an article about a criminal act, it borders on being an article about living people accused of a crime. Presenting what happened in an encyclopedic style means conventions about both events and biographies should be followed. Due weight needs to be given to the reasons for the subject's arrest, so the article should follow the principle of least astonishment and present the incident that caused the arrest to occur before discussing what happened during and after the arrest. This means the first and second paragraphs describing the incident should be reversed so these paragraphs appear in chronological order. This better demonstrates causality, and explains why the arrest happened in the first place. Also, I wonder if the lead section needs to be revised. While this article started off as being notable for a video showing a violent arrest, the story has now turned into something different, an investigation into unjustified Police use of force and Police legitimacy. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 00:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
    • @Cameron Dewe: - thank you for your input, I have rearranged the paragraphs accordingly. starship.paint (exalt) 09:47, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by CSJJ104 (talk) 21:47, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that a bystander's video of the arrest of Randal Worcester in Mulberry, Arkansas, showed one law enforcement officer holding Worcester on the ground while two other officers beat him? Source: https://apnews.com/article/arrests-social-media-arkansas-little-rock-69b17aad4cb5348320a4ccd0cfc75ea6
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/2022 Iran–Greece naval incident

Created by Starship.paint (talk). Self-nominated at 13:12, 27 August 2022 (UTC).

• Need QPQ, rest of review on hold pending that. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:32, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

• QPQ has been supplied. The article is new enough and long enough. Sources look solid; no quality issues there. Hook fact checks out and is neutral—the article is also neutral. No textual issues. Earwig mostly flags quotes, which are from narratives and included to provide neutrality by not paraphrasing. Good to go. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 09:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@Sammi Brie and Starship.paint: Oh my, I have no idea what I was looking at. I must need new glasses or more caffeine or something. My apologies. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:22, 8 September 2022 (UTC)