Talk:The Murchison Murders
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Australian crime, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide on crime in Australia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
|
WikiProject Australian crime To-do:
|
|
I disagree with the removal of the murder method and have rolled back. It was well documented and has been the subject of both non-fiction and fictional works. Wikipedia is not censored. Refer: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not censored which is policy.--A Y Arktos\talk 21:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I'll concede the point. I disagree with publishing these things if they don't need to be, but I can't fault your argument. Russell Brown 16:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- The disposal method was what made this case notable because it had been discussed as a plot for a book and was then actually used. Because Rowles had been party to the discussions, that was why in part there was less doubt about his guilt. Thus in general I would agree with you, but not this time. I wouldn't have written it myself, but I wouldn't remove it unless it wasn't correct. Probably it should be referenced - did it come from a court case transcript, Upfield, or the more recent book on the case? If Upfield then that is a bit different - fact should not be confused with fiction - and what was discussed shoud not be confused with what happened.--A Y Arktos\talk 20:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- It was definitely discussed, the technique described (with a bit more detail) pretty much as it's now detailed on the page. I've read Upfield's account of the case -- the book titled "The Murchison Murders" and it's clear that everybody he worked with was familiar with the method. The famous discussion that took place wasn't where Rowles first heard about the method, but was detailed in evidence simply to prove that Rowles knew about it. According to Upfield it was in fact it was Ritchie, the deviser of the method, who first mentioned it to Rowles. The first written record would probably have been Upfield's novel; I think this came about before the trial started.Russell Brown 14:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
