Talk:Break-in attempted at mortuary housing remains of Kim Jong Nam

Although I could probably get this ready for review today, 1) our very small review team probably needs a break right now, 2) the content here is pretty similar to the article that we already have up, and 3) this is such a fast-moving case that something new and interesting is probably going to go public in the next day or so to merit a refocus (which will be easier with the bones of the article already in place). However, if anyone thinks that Interpol's involvement and the four presumptive suspects is enough, I have no personal objection to moving forward immediately. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:18, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

With the exception that the title would have to change. Interpol is helping to look for "people who could help," not the same four North Korean suspects. I'd fix it myself but why move the article twice? Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:51, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

EDIT: Actually, no we wouldn't have to change the title. We'd just have to add this NBC source saying that Interpol is indeed helping with the search. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:47, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Source breakdown

• CNN: Right now, almost everything in this is from the one CNN article. Because CNN recycles some of its content, a lot of information from the CNN articles used in the previous Wikinews article on the Kim murder is also in this one.
• BBC: This is used for Huong's name and for the one line about Kim Jong Nam's past.
• Guardian: Used for Jalaluddin's name.

Will update. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Other usable sources (again, I don't mind if someone else wants to run with this; if something else happens later we can always write another one): Darkfrog24 (talk) 22:15, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

• CNN Tuesday Body has no puncture wounds
• Guardian Tuesday Paranoia

Surnames

It just occurred to me that I'm not 100% on whether the "Bin" is part of Jalaluddin's surname or not (like the "Van" in "Van Buren"). Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:36, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Similarly, The Independent refers to police chief Khalid Abu Bakar as "Khalid" on subsequent references and not as "Bakar." Do Indonesians give the surname first as well or is it like Iceland with its patronymics? Darkfrog24 (talk) 13:59, 22 February 2017 (UTC) ...but CNN calls him "Bakar," as I would expect. Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:16, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

"Doan" is the surname and "Huong" the given name.[1] Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:35, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

w:Abu Bakar suggests "Abu Bakar" is a patronymic. Referring to Kalid Abu Bakar as "Bakar" may be equivalent to referring to George MacDonald as "Donald". --Pi zero (talk) 17:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Then again, it may be akin to referring to Dwayne Johnson as "Rock". His full name seems to have lots of other stuff on the front. I see a BBC article also referring to him on subsequent mentions as Khalid; and when it comes to which part of a name to use on subsequent mentions, in my experience US sources such as CNN are prone to cluelessness. So I'm inclined to stick with a style that stands a good chance of not being wrong. --Pi zero (talk) 17:47, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Title

We could also go with something like "'No need to tell you': Police decline to say whether mortuary break-in the work of North Korean agents." Darkfrog24 (talk) 14:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC) "Attempted break-in at mortuary housing remains of Kim Jong Nam" is delightfully non-suggestive but it lacks the punchiness of a verb. "'No need to tell you': Malaysian police decline to identify perpetrators of break-in at mortuary housing Kim Jong Nam's remains' is just so long. Darkfrog24 (talk) 17:21, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

One could supply a verb by transformation "Attempted break-in" -> "Break-in attempted". Admittedly, the verb is the implied "is" (implied because headlinese), making it passive voice, but headlines are done that way sometimes. --Pi zero (talk) 18:29, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Review of revision 4290320 [Passed]

Revision 4290320 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 20:14, 23 February 2017 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4290320 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 20:14, 23 February 2017 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: None added. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Doh. I was just a bit fast on the submit button, there (and it's a bit iffy that I self-sighted the fix). I'm not 100% sure that there are still four people in custody; there were four at one point, but there may now be only the three NK was saying should be released. --Pi zero (talk) 20:19, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

One of the numbers did change while I was working on this, but it was the number of people being sought by the Malaysian authorities and Interpol, not the number detained. Also, kudos on phrasing. [Bin] Jalaluddin was indeed detained regardless of whether he is still in detention now. Darkfrog24 (talk) 20:41, 23 February 2017 (UTC)