Talk:Sudanese teenager sentenced to death for killing husband while raping her

It is not the best headline, how about "Sudanese teenager sentenced to death for killing husband in self-defence after marital rape"? or something better?
•–• 21:12, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

On IRC, pizero suggested "Sudanese teenager sentenced to death for killing husband in self-defence after rape". I would still like to see "marital" in the headline, but seems redundant.
•–• 21:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I might drop the "self-defence" from title. We may think of it as a universal thing, but obviously not under Sudanese law. --SVTCobra 21:21, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

that can be used, inside single quote, but I bet it would be frowned upon; as I realised last night that trying to be too correct, even neutrally, is not always welcomed. I guess I would have frowned upon a headline with self-defence in single quotes, but well, it is your call now. (But if I am not wrong, self-defence is independent of sovereign boundaries; and is related to HR; but I don’t want to create and delay at 3 in the morning.
•–• 21:31, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I am having some problems with the legal details. If I give a fail with a list, can you fix it quickly? --SVTCobra 21:47, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

what details? (This is why we need IM for fixing things quickly.) but yes, I am here.
•–• 21:50, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Review of revision 4405962 [Not ready]

Revision 4405962 of this article has been reviewed by SVTCobra (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 21:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Small items see below NPOV: Passed Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: she was already convicted marriage limit is puberty; but a judge can lower to ten with guardian permission as I understand it, the "victim's" family chose the death penalty instead of money and the court confirmed it Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Revision 4405962 of this article has been reviewed by SVTCobra (talk · contribs) and found not ready at 21:58, 13 May 2018 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Not ready: Small items see below NPOV: Passed Style: Not reviewed. Please address other issues. Comments by reviewer: she was already convicted marriage limit is puberty; but a judge can lower to ten with guardian permission as I understand it, the "victim's" family chose the death penalty instead of money and the court confirmed it Questions about the above? Ask. If possible, please address the above issues then resubmit the article for another review (by replacing {{tasks}} in the article with {{review}}). This talk page will be updated with subsequent reviews.

Oh, and the missing part of the story of how she went from aunt's back to husband after the 3 years. --SVTCobra 22:01, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Missing part is addressed in the lede, and later in the body, the second point can be fixed by rewording, the conviction last year was for "intentional murder", this time it was for "premeditated murder" -- Reuters mentioned it, the third point is how penalty for murder is, in shari'a -- the blood money, as it is called.
•–• 22:04, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

No, she was safe at aunt's. But she was returned to husband's house. It's a two-step story, I read the sources, but can"t write it for you. I know, the blood money bit, but it's not in the article. --SVTCobra 22:11, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

I know the complexity involved -- others are making claims about what happened and what not. I don't want to turn it into quote-farm. I hope the newer version addresses the concern.
•–• 22:14, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

the family decided death, and the judge only confirmed 'yes, ok' ... and her own family is so complicit both in putting her back with husband and giving her to police after the kill. --SVTCobra 22:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Review of revision 4405999 [Passed]

Revision 4405999 of this article has been reviewed by SVTCobra (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:12, 13 May 2018 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: it got a little messy with the deadline ... i hope readers will find any typos quickly 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 4405999 of this article has been reviewed by SVTCobra (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 23:12, 13 May 2018 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: it got a little messy with the deadline ... i hope readers will find any typos quickly 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.

Sure it did. Only if I had decided to write it yesterday, instead of wasting time behind being neutrally too correct to be polite and then engaging my time behind it, thanks for published it.
•–• 23:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Aunt/Aunty/Auntie

@Acagastya, Darkfrog24, Pi zero, SVTCobra: I understand there may be differences of opinion on this spelling but the matter should be discussed calmly on the talkpage by all concerned. Looking through the sources, I note that, of the two sources that use this word, both The Guardian and CNN use "aunt", whilst AlJazeera and Reuters use "relative" and the others don't mention this element of the story. My own opinion is that "aunty" and "auntie" are both informal spellings per Oxford and Cambridge, so it would be preferable to use "aunt". An analogy would be using "her dad sent her" instead of "her father sent her" in the second paragraph. Your thoughts? Green Giant (talk) 08:16, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Informal spelling is not a typo. And changing it is a substantial change for the article after 24-hours duration. And as I have mentioned earlier, “aunty” is the most widely used spelling in India, and it is/was even taught in the school.
103.254.128.130 (talk) 08:20, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

I have not seen widespread use of "aunty" in Indian news. I do see a lot of "aunt" as in this example: link. --SVTCobra 09:16, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Do me a favour and never link the Toiletpaper of India -- there are other websites which you can use -- ToI is a joke, one of the worst news orgs, which are often factually incorrect, and some of their reporters have no journalistic ethics or even common sense. In any case, here is a link
•–• 09:41, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

That appears to be a lighthearted article calling a certain group of cricket fans "aunties" not referring to a family relative. Here is India Today using "aunt" in a serious article. link Cheers, --SVTCobra 09:47, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Please do not restart a nonsensical edit war over a single letter. --SVTCobra 17:12, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Stop changing content 24 hours post-publication -- you are violating official policy by doing that.
•–• 17:33, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Listen, this amounts to a typo. It is not substantive. It is one letter. Furthermore, using an informal diminutive adds the complication that the article could be talking about someone who is not actually a relative. Just look at the usage notes. --SVTCobra 18:09, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
That was never a typing mistake. Do you treat all "informal words" as spelling mistake?
103.254.128.130 (talk) 18:48, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Do you subvert all reviews by changing the reviewers edits? --SVTCobra 18:54, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

I agree with SVTCobra. The two sources, highlighted above, use "aunt" and the dictionaries say "aunt" is the formal version. I disagree with Indian English having anything to do with this because Sudan is a separate country, which if anything was influenced by British English. Let's leave it at "aunt". Green Giant (talk) 19:22, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Author's preference of the sub-dialect; not the country in question.
103.254.128.130 (talk) 19:32, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

I agree with 103.254 here, as far as choice of dialect is concerned. Sudan should not be an influence. But it has not been shown that "aunty" is anything but informal, except for the anecdotal "I was taught that word in school". Well, I learned to spell many informal words in school, too. I have found multiple articles authored in India which use "aunt" when dealing with serious matters. I would also like to point out that I did not change phrases like "self-defence" which is not the spelling in my own particular dialect. --SVTCobra 19:44, 16 May 2018 (UTC)