![]() | A fact from Colin Norris appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 10 March 2008, and was viewed approximately 3,850 times (
disclaimer) (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Colin Norris be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
I don't understand why this person is considered notable, but Gary Newlove isn't. Asian Parents, Western Upbringing ( talk) 15:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I suggest some rework is needed in the light of claims by a leading doctor that the medical evidence used to convict him was unsafe. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-15068743 I will start a new section. Almagpie ( talk) 08:42, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Colin Norris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Colin Norris is a *convicted serial killer*, not a *serial killer*. The distinction is I think subtle but very very important. Nobody except perhaps Colin and the good Lord himself actually know whether or not he is a serial killer. He certainly was convicted as a serial killer. ie a law court in a more or less democratic country in more or less normal circumstances found him guilty of a number of murders. The conviction is presently in force. It has not been legally overturned, yet. That might or might not ever happen. Colin certainly does know; I suppose the good Lord knows; but we don't. BTW: personally I believe he is innocent so you could say I have a "conflict of interest" editing the article. But I do believe it is quite OK for me to write about editorial questions (questions of terminology) on the talk page, so that's what I am doing. I may well later follow wikipedia advice ande "be bold". Someone will quickly correct me if it is important and if I'm wrong.
No doubt it is "legal" to call him a serial killer, but I think one does not break any law by calling him an "alleged serial killer". Since it is both true (reliable sources a-plenty) and legal we can say that he is an alleged serial killer, and I think we should say it (reliable sources a-plenty). Richard Gill ( talk) 11:20, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Pandagoestomars: please do not edit war without consensus or attempt to discuss on the talk page. I have restored the content to the status quo. Officially, he is guilty unless the court of appeal overturns his conviction. One way system ( talk) 18:39, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
@ One way system: There can be a difference between being officially guilty and actually guilty. If Norris is found innocent on appeal, he won't have changed from being a killer to a non-killer. The past is already done. He cannot be a killer this week and not a killer next week. If you have any seriousness in resolving this disagreement you could make some effort to find a solution. One possible solution that acknowledges the reality of doubt would be to say that Norris was convicted as a serial killer and found guilty of murdering... etc. This acknowledges the court decision and the very real possibility that Norris may be the victim of a miscarriage of justice. Pandagoestomars ( talk) 02:53 23 April 2021 (BJT)
Is Norris's place of imprisonment known and published? Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:31, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
The article says this: "Norris also admitted that he was the last person to see Hall before she fell into a coma, at 4.30 am, which was half an hour before she became visibly unwell." I'm struggling to understand the sequence of events. Did Norris see Hall at 4.00 or at 4.30? Did she fall into a coma at 4.30, of just become "visibly unwell", or both? Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 12:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
There's way, way, way, WAY too much fawning over cop Chris Gregg. E Eng 05:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
The claim that the odds of "five events, with a 1 in 10 chance, happening are 1 in 100,000" seems wrongly assessed.
This is only correct if those five deaths are the only ones that had occurred. It seems the hypoglycaemia was the criterion for including death, which might amount to the sharpshooter fallacy or circular reasoning? Soundwave ( talk) 16:52, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
![]() | A fact from Colin Norris appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 10 March 2008, and was viewed approximately 3,850 times (
disclaimer) (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
| ![]() |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Colin Norris be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
I don't understand why this person is considered notable, but Gary Newlove isn't. Asian Parents, Western Upbringing ( talk) 15:51, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I suggest some rework is needed in the light of claims by a leading doctor that the medical evidence used to convict him was unsafe. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-15068743 I will start a new section. Almagpie ( talk) 08:42, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Colin Norris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Colin Norris is a *convicted serial killer*, not a *serial killer*. The distinction is I think subtle but very very important. Nobody except perhaps Colin and the good Lord himself actually know whether or not he is a serial killer. He certainly was convicted as a serial killer. ie a law court in a more or less democratic country in more or less normal circumstances found him guilty of a number of murders. The conviction is presently in force. It has not been legally overturned, yet. That might or might not ever happen. Colin certainly does know; I suppose the good Lord knows; but we don't. BTW: personally I believe he is innocent so you could say I have a "conflict of interest" editing the article. But I do believe it is quite OK for me to write about editorial questions (questions of terminology) on the talk page, so that's what I am doing. I may well later follow wikipedia advice ande "be bold". Someone will quickly correct me if it is important and if I'm wrong.
No doubt it is "legal" to call him a serial killer, but I think one does not break any law by calling him an "alleged serial killer". Since it is both true (reliable sources a-plenty) and legal we can say that he is an alleged serial killer, and I think we should say it (reliable sources a-plenty). Richard Gill ( talk) 11:20, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@ Pandagoestomars: please do not edit war without consensus or attempt to discuss on the talk page. I have restored the content to the status quo. Officially, he is guilty unless the court of appeal overturns his conviction. One way system ( talk) 18:39, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
@ One way system: There can be a difference between being officially guilty and actually guilty. If Norris is found innocent on appeal, he won't have changed from being a killer to a non-killer. The past is already done. He cannot be a killer this week and not a killer next week. If you have any seriousness in resolving this disagreement you could make some effort to find a solution. One possible solution that acknowledges the reality of doubt would be to say that Norris was convicted as a serial killer and found guilty of murdering... etc. This acknowledges the court decision and the very real possibility that Norris may be the victim of a miscarriage of justice. Pandagoestomars ( talk) 02:53 23 April 2021 (BJT)
Is Norris's place of imprisonment known and published? Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:31, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
The article says this: "Norris also admitted that he was the last person to see Hall before she fell into a coma, at 4.30 am, which was half an hour before she became visibly unwell." I'm struggling to understand the sequence of events. Did Norris see Hall at 4.00 or at 4.30? Did she fall into a coma at 4.30, of just become "visibly unwell", or both? Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 12:25, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
There's way, way, way, WAY too much fawning over cop Chris Gregg. E Eng 05:45, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
The claim that the odds of "five events, with a 1 in 10 chance, happening are 1 in 100,000" seems wrongly assessed.
This is only correct if those five deaths are the only ones that had occurred. It seems the hypoglycaemia was the criterion for including death, which might amount to the sharpshooter fallacy or circular reasoning? Soundwave ( talk) 16:52, 18 August 2023 (UTC)