Talk:Brown's Chicken massacre
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
from VfD:
This page was listed it on cleanup; I've done some work on it. However, I'm not sure if it falls within our purview. As one who lived in the area at the time, I can testify that this event got a lot of media attention. Not sure what long term effects it had, if any. No vote. [[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]] 05:20, Oct 16, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. I think the murder of 7 people probably is encyclopedic, and Wikipedia is not Paper. Darksun 10:37, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- What's this Brown guy got against chickens? Ha ha. Anyway, I suppose it's notable enough, keep. Everyking 14:53, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Seems notable enough to me MarkS 15:15, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- K absolutely. Wolfman 18:37, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. The murder of 7 people is notable enough. Nadavspi 19:22, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. a bit of history. -R. S. Shaw 02:50, 2004 Oct 17 (UTC)
- Worthy of a keep. And best keep your day job, Everyking. Denni☯ 03:03, 2004 Oct 17 (UTC)
- If a mass murder's not notable then what the hell is? Keep. -- Necrothesp 18:15, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Strong keep, both for content and my belief that things should not be nominated for deletion unless it's clear to the nominator they merit deletion. —siroχo 19:55, Oct 17, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. Intrigue 20:37, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)
- Definite Keep. Radman1 14:38, 18 Oct 2004 (PST)
- Keep. Its a notable event and I still hear it brought up around the local area from time to time. ScottM 23:50, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
end moved discussion
Article is a bit sketchy. I can't tell what led to the arrest of the two killers. Was it the dna chicken thing or the girlfriend's conefession? I thought the girlfriend came first and was confirmed by the dna, but I can't tell from the article, and I'm not sure. ThaddeusFrye 18:52, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I checked and confirmed my memory with <a href="http://venus.soci.niu.edu/~archives/ABOLISH/aug02/0482.html">the chicago tribune</a>, and edited the article accordingly. ThaddeusFrye 19:47, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] reverted anonymous changes
An anonymous editor changed the article to say that the DNA match was a partial one and that the details cited by the girlfried were only "not known" to have been made public. Since these changes were made without citing and documentation, I reverted them back to the version of the story as it's been decribed in media sources I've seen.
