This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If he has never been diagnosed with that disorder it is wrong to list his as an Asperger's sufferer.
Strongly suggest you reword or remove this article. This article should be removed until such time as the outcome of the trial (if so ordered) is determined. Otherwise, strong wording should be used to show that he has only been charged, has not been ordered to stand trial and no verdict has been reached.
I would strongly rebuke the author of this article for what, is in my opinion, an article that is inappropriate at this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.46.35 ( talk • contribs)
Does anyone agree that describing him as a 'child sex offender' is appropriate? The term would be used in a reliable newspaper like the Sydney Morning Herald and that's what he is after all.
58.152.161.213 ( talk) 12:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I removed this line from the article several times, but Pocoloco keeps reinserting it:
I don't know what you think this line says, but it adds nothing to the article. It's just personal conjecture that the "veracity" of the denial is debatable. What do you mean "non-legal perspective"? Who's doing the debating? Australian "organizations" would not be affected by an order issued in the UK, no matter what the debators might think. The line is confusing and unverifiable, and does not belong here.-- Cúchullain t/ c 19:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
This article will be protected from editing if the current state of edit warring persists. Please use the talk page to dicuss changes rather than constantly reverting each others edits in the roundabout fashion that's been occuring. Please make an attempt to identify problems with the state of the current article and work them out here rather than the main article space thanks. Also, be mindful of the official policies against reversions, in particular, the Three revert rule. -- Longhair 01:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Does anybody else feel some of the references used in this article do not meet the guidelines as per Wikipedia:Reliable sources? -- Longhair 07:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
FWIW,
Snopes has updated its' page on the Bulger incident to refer to the recent email circulating concerning Arthurs. See
here. --
Longhair 01:56, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
What is Snopes worth exactly? What does it cover that has not already been covered here other than adding a "FALSE" stamp?
I recommend that your link to Snopes be removed. Given the sensitivity of the rumour, common sense would dictate that it cannot be conclusively proven as false at this stage with the trial still in progress.
Now that the trial is over, does anyone know if restrictions placed on the press about this convicted murderer have been removed? There doesn't seem to be any further public informaton on his background that has since been released such as accounts of his behaviour and personality from past empolyers, teachers or fellow pupils.
If not, there doesn't seem to be any public explanation given. I don't believe that Dante Arthurs is the same child murderer used to be called Robert Thompson. However, authorities should give an explanation as to why such information is still not available if they are going to consign this conspiracy theory to history.
( 58.107.195.184 10:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC))
There's some info. on his wayn.com profile:
http://www.wayn.com/waynprofile.html?member_key=231852
58.107.189.40 ( talk) 13:22, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Sofiarodriguezurrutiashu.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
| |
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 23:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC) |
An image used in this article,
File:Sofiawikipedia.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 8 August 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 23:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC) |
Western Australian Attorney-General, Christian Porter, has since revoked Arthurs' non-parole period, making him one of three Western Australians to have their papers marked "never to be released"
-- article
The userbox and opening paragraph contradict Arthur's non-parole period. The legal proceedings section also makes an claim that I can't verify. Does anyone know of a source? In fact, one news article I came across had someone say in the comments "but Wikipedia says he is never to be released". Matthew Thompson talk to me bro! 04:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Dante Arthurs. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:32, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 4 external links on
Dante Arthurs. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dante Arthurs. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:54, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Dante Arthurs. 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.
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
If he has never been diagnosed with that disorder it is wrong to list his as an Asperger's sufferer.
Strongly suggest you reword or remove this article. This article should be removed until such time as the outcome of the trial (if so ordered) is determined. Otherwise, strong wording should be used to show that he has only been charged, has not been ordered to stand trial and no verdict has been reached.
I would strongly rebuke the author of this article for what, is in my opinion, an article that is inappropriate at this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.46.35 ( talk • contribs)
Does anyone agree that describing him as a 'child sex offender' is appropriate? The term would be used in a reliable newspaper like the Sydney Morning Herald and that's what he is after all.
58.152.161.213 ( talk) 12:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
I removed this line from the article several times, but Pocoloco keeps reinserting it:
I don't know what you think this line says, but it adds nothing to the article. It's just personal conjecture that the "veracity" of the denial is debatable. What do you mean "non-legal perspective"? Who's doing the debating? Australian "organizations" would not be affected by an order issued in the UK, no matter what the debators might think. The line is confusing and unverifiable, and does not belong here.-- Cúchullain t/ c 19:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
This article will be protected from editing if the current state of edit warring persists. Please use the talk page to dicuss changes rather than constantly reverting each others edits in the roundabout fashion that's been occuring. Please make an attempt to identify problems with the state of the current article and work them out here rather than the main article space thanks. Also, be mindful of the official policies against reversions, in particular, the Three revert rule. -- Longhair 01:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Does anybody else feel some of the references used in this article do not meet the guidelines as per Wikipedia:Reliable sources? -- Longhair 07:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
FWIW,
Snopes has updated its' page on the Bulger incident to refer to the recent email circulating concerning Arthurs. See
here. --
Longhair 01:56, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
What is Snopes worth exactly? What does it cover that has not already been covered here other than adding a "FALSE" stamp?
I recommend that your link to Snopes be removed. Given the sensitivity of the rumour, common sense would dictate that it cannot be conclusively proven as false at this stage with the trial still in progress.
Now that the trial is over, does anyone know if restrictions placed on the press about this convicted murderer have been removed? There doesn't seem to be any further public informaton on his background that has since been released such as accounts of his behaviour and personality from past empolyers, teachers or fellow pupils.
If not, there doesn't seem to be any public explanation given. I don't believe that Dante Arthurs is the same child murderer used to be called Robert Thompson. However, authorities should give an explanation as to why such information is still not available if they are going to consign this conspiracy theory to history.
( 58.107.195.184 10:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC))
There's some info. on his wayn.com profile:
http://www.wayn.com/waynprofile.html?member_key=231852
58.107.189.40 ( talk) 13:22, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Sofiarodriguezurrutiashu.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
| |
Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (
commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 23:56, 7 August 2011 (UTC) |
An image used in this article,
File:Sofiawikipedia.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at
Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 8 August 2011
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 23:29, 8 August 2011 (UTC) |
Western Australian Attorney-General, Christian Porter, has since revoked Arthurs' non-parole period, making him one of three Western Australians to have their papers marked "never to be released"
-- article
The userbox and opening paragraph contradict Arthur's non-parole period. The legal proceedings section also makes an claim that I can't verify. Does anyone know of a source? In fact, one news article I came across had someone say in the comments "but Wikipedia says he is never to be released". Matthew Thompson talk to me bro! 04:57, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Dante Arthurs. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 15:32, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 4 external links on
Dante Arthurs. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 16:36, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Dante Arthurs. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:54, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on Dante Arthurs. 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.
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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:21, 4 September 2017 (UTC)