The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British crime, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.British crimeWikipedia:WikiProject British crimeTemplate:WikiProject British crimeBritish crime articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Anglia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of East Anglia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.East AngliaWikipedia:WikiProject East AngliaTemplate:WikiProject East AngliaEast Anglia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
I have trimmed this article in response to concerns about "the level of detail" and BLP in my articles in this discussion on the administrator's noticeboard. Tots & little ones matter! (talk) 00:30, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good start, but you left in a lot of the lurid details; consensus at the AN discussion was that that stuff is inappropriate. I have trimmed that part. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:56, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think this needed to be reworded rather than removed because it was sourced [1]. Such behavior is nothing special for the criminals. They play cards on human life, etc., as described in books by authors who witnesses this themselves, like Varlam Shalamov. My very best wishes (talk) 02:12, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it was sourced. We are not obligated to repeat everything that is sourced. And what is normal for these criminals is not normal for us. Lurid, salacious details about how to abuse children may get into some newspapers, but IMO they don't belong in an encyclopedia. -- MelanieN (talk) 02:17, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Of course this is all shocking and abnormal behavior. But describing modus operandi of criminals is a perfectly legitimate content. We simply describe what they do - per sources, and at the level of detail as needed to understand what it actually is. That is what good writers like Shalamov do in their books. There is nothing lurid, sensational or salacious about it child abuse or other crimes. My very best wishes (talk) 02:37, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. Strongly. Let's take it to the AN board and see what kind of consensus we get. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:03, 1 August 2019 (UTC) -- MelanieN (talk) 03:03, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am not disputing your edit and not sure what we disagree about. That was just a general comment, and it is about the content, not anything to be decided on AN. If we had a disagreement about a specific edit, one could post an RfC. But we do not have such specific disagreement. My very best wishes (talk) 03:57, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Should certain facts/info (X,Y,Z) about a criminal case be included on the page? That depends on the coverage in RS about the case, i.e. this should be decided per WP:NPOV. This page currently has 9 refs, however 7 of them are "local press". I think this local press qualify as RS, but probably should be given less "due weight". We have two "non-local" RS, The Guardian and International Business Times UK. Would it be agreeable to include sourced info that appears in the both "non-local" RS? My very best wishes (talk) 15:50, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If there are no objections, I will include some info that appears in both sources. My very best wishes (talk) 17:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}
