This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Slender Man stabbing article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the Slender Man case, the attorney seems to be revealing his defense strategy ahead of time, which is unusual. There's a very important reason why the attorney is doing this and that is because he wants the case moved to juvenile court where the penalties would be much less severe than in adult court. See American juvenile justice system.
The headlines of news articles don't always accurately capture the gist of the news item. The important point of this filing is not what murder charge is most appropriate, but whether the case should be handled in juvenile or adult court. That this is the primary reason for this brief/filing is evident in the headline of the referenced article:
Thus the requested change in the degree charged of attempted murder is not significant in itself, but rather is significant because the defense attorney wants the case moved to juvenile court.
The defense attorney is in fact not arguing that she should be charged of the second degree crime in juvenile court. He is asking the court to dismiss the current charges. If the court does so, it would be up to the prosecutor to file charges in juvenile court. This is made clearer in a different article.
Also, it appears that it is only the attorney for one of the two girls who is making this argument.
I edited the wiki article itself before reading this second news article. Since it didn't have the facts quite right (it's a request for dismissal), I'm going to revise it again. Ileanadu ( talk) 07:17, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Based on prior discussion at Talk:Slender_Man/Archive_1#Waukesha_Stabbing_and_names_of_minors I have removed the names of minors / juveniles involved in this. The names are obviously published elsewhere, and that information is easily obtained, so no censorship is occurring. Due to WP:BLP, I see no overwhelming need to use their names at this time. If they are actually convicted in an adult court, then we can discuss this again. At age 12, they are minors by quite a few years, psychological issues are involved and it still appears possible they may be tried as juveniles. -- Dual Freq ( talk) 21:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
I am in favor of not having their names on the page but in response to above - both girls are being tried as adults, and the issue of the girls' competency is not being considered as a leniency factor to my knowledge. Frankly I think prosecuting children in this way is disgraceful and blockheaded. morsontologica ( talk) 02:19, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Respectfully, I disagree with Masonpew. The girls were reading adult stories, planning a murder with the sophistication of an adult, and they committed an adult crime; they should be tried in an adult court. Joshualouie711 ( talk) 23:13, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I think not including the defendants' names is an exercise in futility. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, International Business Times, Chicago Tribune and New York Times, among others, have all published their names. Eventually, their names will be added back into the Wikipedia article; and, the longer we go on without including their names, the more tedious that task will be. If you still think their names should be excluded, then I recommend calling them Defendant 1 & 2 or something like that; that way, we will at least know whose court event is being reported. 13ov7 ( talk) 12:29, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Totally agree that they should be named throughout the article. All the major news sources are naming them, and both girls' parents were involved in the HBO documentary so there's obviously no objection to them being public. -- Loeba (talk) 11:16, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
The following reference does not support the statement "which automatically places the case in adult court" and does not use the word "premeditated". There is definitely nothing in the reference regarding adult court being automatic. "Premeditated" can perhaps be assumed because the reference says "they had planned..." but the text in the reference only reads "attempted first-degree murder".
A better reference is needed to support these statements. Gmporr ( talk) 12:29, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that the section labeled "Investigation and court procedures" seems a lot like proseline to me. Should that section be made into a timeline, or even a separate article? Joshualouie711 ( talk) 19:37, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
I see that Spirit of Eagle recently readded the attack section, whereupon DIYeditor re-removed it because it was " phrased as if they have been convicted of a crime". I don't think there's any question that the girls did the attack, and I don't think that saying that they did it is the same as saying they were guilty of committing a crime, as they have not been convicted of one yet and have plead not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect. So I think the section should be restored, but I want to hear what other editors think. Everymorning (talk) 04:26, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Slender Man stabbing. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:57, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Over the last hour and a half or so, I've either uploaded every source into the Wayback Machine, or confirmed that the source was saved there. I saved a handful of sources on Archive.Is as well. Below are a few special notes on certain sources. Note that the numbers refer to the citation number in this revision.
Anyways, please make sure to archive any source you add to the article. This article is built from dozens of internet sources, many of which are local news. Linkrot is going to hit hard, and we're going to be in a lot of trouble if we aren't prepared. Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 05:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Now that both girls have pleaded guilty to the crime, is it acceptable to remove "allegedly" and similar words and give their names, since a court has found that they did indeed commit the crimes? -- Joshualouie711 talk 23:02, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
When an editor who has done little or no work wishes to nominate an article for GA status, they are supposed to consult with the editors who have done significant work on the article to see whether they believe the article is ready to meet the Good Article criteria, and only nominate if it is felt to be basically ready.
In this case, there was no consultation, and the article was nominated despite the requirement. Do the active editors here feel that the article is ready, or do they believe it needs further significant work? Please post your thoughts below. Thank you for your time. In the event that there should be a consensus that the article is not ready, the nomination would then be removed. BlueMoonset ( talk) 16:51, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
>both perpetrators initially pled not guilty by reason of insanity; however, under a plea deal both of the girls changed their plea to guilty. Both were consequently found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect
These three sentences don't make sense in this order unless I'm missing something, and should be explained. If they changed their pleas from insanity to guilty, how were they CONSEQUENTLY found not guilty by reason of mental disease? TheHYPO ( talk) 20:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
an appeal has been filed in this case and both are expected to have to re-go a whole new trail as both of there rights as minors were violated the feds are looking into charges toward the prosecutors office and the judge being disbarred over abuse of minors ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:A000:FA49:F000:DDAB:69E1:F4D0:4D0D ( talk) 18:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Hey I Need help solving a person named Slender.... Where does he live? What Place does he live in? Who is he? How does he treat kids? And Is he alive now? Killershark101 ( talk) 02:15, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
There is a metaphysical difference between the number 0 and a non-existent field of value. The latter is mathematically represented with the Greek letter Phi (Φ), and that Φ is pronounced as "unsolvable" or "undefineable."
If you are familiar with the September 11 Attack as a whole, you know that United 93 was just as much a civilian attack as a plane crash. In any case, both are disastrous events. The Slender Man Stabbing, given that it was an attempted murder, has a fatality count albeit a count of 0. Because that value exists as a 0, and is not a Φ, that makes it reasonable to include in an Infobox.
For an example of something without a fatality count (Φ as opposed to 0), Super Bowl LIV: It was a sporting event and not a disaster. At least by its very definition, it had no potential fatalities, hence why I'd agree that its Infobox shouldn't have a fatality field. By my reckoning, that is not a 0 but a Φ, and my point in bringing it up: No, I'm not saying every event-related Infobox should have a fatality count even if it's 0, only for events that are intrinsically disastrous. In this case, it was an attempted murder for crying out loud! The Mysterious El Willstro ( talk) 17:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Your last sentence is the reason I deleted the 0, the average person who reads this article knows that this was an attempted murder, so there really no point in having the 0 or even an infobox in general. YatesTucker00090 ( talk) 18:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Both those attacks you listed had multiple casualties and this event only had one single victim. I deleted the 0 and 1 and kept the victim parameter adding that she survived. The victims name was already in there so overall the 0 and 1 are redundant when there's was only 1 person. Death of Marvin Gaye also used this format. YatesTucker00090 ( talk) 15:51, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 13:07, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
I see alot of details all over the place about the stabbing, but no real coverage of what happened in the immediate aftermath. In the immediate (minutes) aftermath, everyone in the area was notified to be on the lookout, and to lock our doors and windows since someone dangerous was on the loose.... I can't remember if it was just a notice they put out through our local media, or if they used the emergency alert system... Though I think they might have used the system as we were all notified pretty quickly.
Another thing I've never heard further details on is why the girls fled the way they did, they were found near steinhafels, right near the freeway.... But it's not exactly an urban area. Quite the opposite... To get there they would have had to walk on road right near Waukesha's quarries.. There aren't any bus routes that go out that way (our bus system coverage is pretty bad)... nor is walking that way going to get you to any sort of public transport.... However... right across the street from Steinhafels....... is a park and ride.... I've wondered, were they going to get a ride with someone?... I mean sure they said they were going to walk to Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest... But that's all the way at the very northern edge of Wisconsin, a 100 hour 300 mile walk.
to top it off I keep seeing places say it happened at "David's Park", including here on facebook.. but it didn't... David's Park is where they undoubtedly planned to do it (it had the bathroom facilities they described, your typical waukesha park and rec setup), but the woods where it happened aren't part of the park... it's nearby, but it's separated from the woods by rows of homes — Preceding unsigned comment added by RenatusUpborne ( talk • contribs) 01:17, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
I love you beautiful face love the mega gorgeous 137.25.19.146 ( talk) 22:46, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I attempted to remove Category:Violence against women and Category:Incidents of violence against girls when my edit was disallowed. I was advised to bring this issue up here in the talk page ( special:diff/1227689045) in order to gain input from other users. Are these categories required after all? 197.3.171.40 ( talk) 18:33, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Slender Man stabbing article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
In the Slender Man case, the attorney seems to be revealing his defense strategy ahead of time, which is unusual. There's a very important reason why the attorney is doing this and that is because he wants the case moved to juvenile court where the penalties would be much less severe than in adult court. See American juvenile justice system.
The headlines of news articles don't always accurately capture the gist of the news item. The important point of this filing is not what murder charge is most appropriate, but whether the case should be handled in juvenile or adult court. That this is the primary reason for this brief/filing is evident in the headline of the referenced article:
Thus the requested change in the degree charged of attempted murder is not significant in itself, but rather is significant because the defense attorney wants the case moved to juvenile court.
The defense attorney is in fact not arguing that she should be charged of the second degree crime in juvenile court. He is asking the court to dismiss the current charges. If the court does so, it would be up to the prosecutor to file charges in juvenile court. This is made clearer in a different article.
Also, it appears that it is only the attorney for one of the two girls who is making this argument.
I edited the wiki article itself before reading this second news article. Since it didn't have the facts quite right (it's a request for dismissal), I'm going to revise it again. Ileanadu ( talk) 07:17, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Based on prior discussion at Talk:Slender_Man/Archive_1#Waukesha_Stabbing_and_names_of_minors I have removed the names of minors / juveniles involved in this. The names are obviously published elsewhere, and that information is easily obtained, so no censorship is occurring. Due to WP:BLP, I see no overwhelming need to use their names at this time. If they are actually convicted in an adult court, then we can discuss this again. At age 12, they are minors by quite a few years, psychological issues are involved and it still appears possible they may be tried as juveniles. -- Dual Freq ( talk) 21:57, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
I am in favor of not having their names on the page but in response to above - both girls are being tried as adults, and the issue of the girls' competency is not being considered as a leniency factor to my knowledge. Frankly I think prosecuting children in this way is disgraceful and blockheaded. morsontologica ( talk) 02:19, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Respectfully, I disagree with Masonpew. The girls were reading adult stories, planning a murder with the sophistication of an adult, and they committed an adult crime; they should be tried in an adult court. Joshualouie711 ( talk) 23:13, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
I think not including the defendants' names is an exercise in futility. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, International Business Times, Chicago Tribune and New York Times, among others, have all published their names. Eventually, their names will be added back into the Wikipedia article; and, the longer we go on without including their names, the more tedious that task will be. If you still think their names should be excluded, then I recommend calling them Defendant 1 & 2 or something like that; that way, we will at least know whose court event is being reported. 13ov7 ( talk) 12:29, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Totally agree that they should be named throughout the article. All the major news sources are naming them, and both girls' parents were involved in the HBO documentary so there's obviously no objection to them being public. -- Loeba (talk) 11:16, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
The following reference does not support the statement "which automatically places the case in adult court" and does not use the word "premeditated". There is definitely nothing in the reference regarding adult court being automatic. "Premeditated" can perhaps be assumed because the reference says "they had planned..." but the text in the reference only reads "attempted first-degree murder".
A better reference is needed to support these statements. Gmporr ( talk) 12:29, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
I noticed that the section labeled "Investigation and court procedures" seems a lot like proseline to me. Should that section be made into a timeline, or even a separate article? Joshualouie711 ( talk) 19:37, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
I see that Spirit of Eagle recently readded the attack section, whereupon DIYeditor re-removed it because it was " phrased as if they have been convicted of a crime". I don't think there's any question that the girls did the attack, and I don't think that saying that they did it is the same as saying they were guilty of committing a crime, as they have not been convicted of one yet and have plead not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect. So I think the section should be restored, but I want to hear what other editors think. Everymorning (talk) 04:26, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Slender Man stabbing. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:57, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Over the last hour and a half or so, I've either uploaded every source into the Wayback Machine, or confirmed that the source was saved there. I saved a handful of sources on Archive.Is as well. Below are a few special notes on certain sources. Note that the numbers refer to the citation number in this revision.
Anyways, please make sure to archive any source you add to the article. This article is built from dozens of internet sources, many of which are local news. Linkrot is going to hit hard, and we're going to be in a lot of trouble if we aren't prepared. Spirit of Eagle ( talk) 05:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Now that both girls have pleaded guilty to the crime, is it acceptable to remove "allegedly" and similar words and give their names, since a court has found that they did indeed commit the crimes? -- Joshualouie711 talk 23:02, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
When an editor who has done little or no work wishes to nominate an article for GA status, they are supposed to consult with the editors who have done significant work on the article to see whether they believe the article is ready to meet the Good Article criteria, and only nominate if it is felt to be basically ready.
In this case, there was no consultation, and the article was nominated despite the requirement. Do the active editors here feel that the article is ready, or do they believe it needs further significant work? Please post your thoughts below. Thank you for your time. In the event that there should be a consensus that the article is not ready, the nomination would then be removed. BlueMoonset ( talk) 16:51, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
>both perpetrators initially pled not guilty by reason of insanity; however, under a plea deal both of the girls changed their plea to guilty. Both were consequently found not guilty by reason of mental disease or defect
These three sentences don't make sense in this order unless I'm missing something, and should be explained. If they changed their pleas from insanity to guilty, how were they CONSEQUENTLY found not guilty by reason of mental disease? TheHYPO ( talk) 20:55, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
an appeal has been filed in this case and both are expected to have to re-go a whole new trail as both of there rights as minors were violated the feds are looking into charges toward the prosecutors office and the judge being disbarred over abuse of minors ... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:A000:FA49:F000:DDAB:69E1:F4D0:4D0D ( talk) 18:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Hey I Need help solving a person named Slender.... Where does he live? What Place does he live in? Who is he? How does he treat kids? And Is he alive now? Killershark101 ( talk) 02:15, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
There is a metaphysical difference between the number 0 and a non-existent field of value. The latter is mathematically represented with the Greek letter Phi (Φ), and that Φ is pronounced as "unsolvable" or "undefineable."
If you are familiar with the September 11 Attack as a whole, you know that United 93 was just as much a civilian attack as a plane crash. In any case, both are disastrous events. The Slender Man Stabbing, given that it was an attempted murder, has a fatality count albeit a count of 0. Because that value exists as a 0, and is not a Φ, that makes it reasonable to include in an Infobox.
For an example of something without a fatality count (Φ as opposed to 0), Super Bowl LIV: It was a sporting event and not a disaster. At least by its very definition, it had no potential fatalities, hence why I'd agree that its Infobox shouldn't have a fatality field. By my reckoning, that is not a 0 but a Φ, and my point in bringing it up: No, I'm not saying every event-related Infobox should have a fatality count even if it's 0, only for events that are intrinsically disastrous. In this case, it was an attempted murder for crying out loud! The Mysterious El Willstro ( talk) 17:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Your last sentence is the reason I deleted the 0, the average person who reads this article knows that this was an attempted murder, so there really no point in having the 0 or even an infobox in general. YatesTucker00090 ( talk) 18:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Both those attacks you listed had multiple casualties and this event only had one single victim. I deleted the 0 and 1 and kept the victim parameter adding that she survived. The victims name was already in there so overall the 0 and 1 are redundant when there's was only 1 person. Death of Marvin Gaye also used this format. YatesTucker00090 ( talk) 15:51, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 13:07, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
I see alot of details all over the place about the stabbing, but no real coverage of what happened in the immediate aftermath. In the immediate (minutes) aftermath, everyone in the area was notified to be on the lookout, and to lock our doors and windows since someone dangerous was on the loose.... I can't remember if it was just a notice they put out through our local media, or if they used the emergency alert system... Though I think they might have used the system as we were all notified pretty quickly.
Another thing I've never heard further details on is why the girls fled the way they did, they were found near steinhafels, right near the freeway.... But it's not exactly an urban area. Quite the opposite... To get there they would have had to walk on road right near Waukesha's quarries.. There aren't any bus routes that go out that way (our bus system coverage is pretty bad)... nor is walking that way going to get you to any sort of public transport.... However... right across the street from Steinhafels....... is a park and ride.... I've wondered, were they going to get a ride with someone?... I mean sure they said they were going to walk to Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest... But that's all the way at the very northern edge of Wisconsin, a 100 hour 300 mile walk.
to top it off I keep seeing places say it happened at "David's Park", including here on facebook.. but it didn't... David's Park is where they undoubtedly planned to do it (it had the bathroom facilities they described, your typical waukesha park and rec setup), but the woods where it happened aren't part of the park... it's nearby, but it's separated from the woods by rows of homes — Preceding unsigned comment added by RenatusUpborne ( talk • contribs) 01:17, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
I love you beautiful face love the mega gorgeous 137.25.19.146 ( talk) 22:46, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I attempted to remove Category:Violence against women and Category:Incidents of violence against girls when my edit was disallowed. I was advised to bring this issue up here in the talk page ( special:diff/1227689045) in order to gain input from other users. Are these categories required after all? 197.3.171.40 ( talk) 18:33, 7 June 2024 (UTC)