Talk:Jessica Lunsford
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
Contents |
[edit] Vfd
On 24 Mar 2005, this article was nominated for deletion. The result was keep. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Jessica Lunsford for a record of the discussion. —Korath (Talk) 06:50, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
Em actually you have no idea who adds what to wiki. I've seen your edits Cumberbund, most are totally irrelevant to the topic and are mostly about attacks on other wiki editors.65.184.18.231 03:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Troll postings, a letter to Redvers
You may be surprised to know you are dealing with a few of the people intimatley involved with this case. All edits to Wiki have been shown verifiable via links such as cnn, msnbc, as well as links to the actual court documents. For some reason you must have fallen in love with the user Cumberbund, who is in fact a webmaster that wanted the webhosting job and we decided NOT to hire him because of his criminal history. We DID in fact hire Charlotte Web Hosting, which you can plainly see in the supporting links, (CNN has a TON of them) This user Cumberbund has erased anything on the Jessica page he does not agree with. The unfortunate thing about it is, everything we post is FACT and verifiable via affadavits from court and coroner's reports. Cumberbund may choose to disagree with them, but he is doing nothing more then vandilising Wiki, using the tried and true "troll" way of arguing, (Act like the victim in the argument) We may not be as Wiki inclined as he is, that does not mean our points are not valid as much, or in this case way more then his, as we actually hold in our hand court released documents. Cumberbund is in fact a 34 year old person with a very extensive criminal history, you may leave us an email address for more information for conclusive PROOF. Cumberbund has NO reason to be on wiki except to take off any mention of webhosting whatsoever, like the spoiled child who didn't get a lolipop, he whines, and you so far have been doing an EXCELLENT job of helping him. Instead of going in gun ho, read the links, do the research, THEN come to Wiki to have your say. He says the webhosting is not relevant to her story, then ask him why for months he has ONLY made edits to remove the webhosting part and leaving everything else untouched. If he had been hired to host the site, you can BET he would be all over wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jessica_Lunsford
Look at every one of his contributions, he is using wiki for nothing more then a personal harrassment tool. Feeding into him isn't what we'd expect from this kind of person Nicholas.
If you have ANY doubts at all of his sockpuppetry, run an ip search for his postings all over Wiki, you might be very amused. He has already been told by OTHER admins to LEAVE information that has been verified on the jessica lunsford entry, which he has refused to do. I'd also like to mention, he says that the webhosting is not important part of her story, it was VERY important, it DID do a verifiable 9 million unique hits in 10 hours, Alexa DOES show it, and yet once again, google this:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=charlottewebhosting+lunsford+&btnG=Search
Of course, you know, for him it's (If I didn't host it, no one will) He has spent the last YEAR making websites all over the net talking about Jessica Lunsford, putting DOWN Mark Lunsofrd AND Jessica, as well as trying to libel/slander Charlotte Web Hosting in any way he can. I'm sure he's found a friend in you on Wiki. 65.184.18.231 06:04, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Stub tag and photo request deleted
I have deleted the "stub" tags from this article as it is far longer than the stub designation would indicate, sectioned, and contains references. I have also deleted, subject to discussion, a tag at the top of this talk page suggesting that the quality of this article would be improved by adding a photograph. I do not believe that posting a photograph of the child murder victim in this or any similar case would have significant encyclopedic value, whereas it could potentially cause emotional distress to the victim's family to have photographs of their murdered child being disseminated without their consent. Newyorkbrad 03:16, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Pictures of Jessica are now in the public domain, first since she is dead, secondly since her father released them to news media. Jon Benet has a picture of her on her wiki page, so does every other murdered child on Wikipedia. So I'll put one back on. 65.184.18.231 12:59, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unrelated child abductions in "see also" section
Please do not add wikilinks to articles on other child abductions and murders in the "see also" section. There have been way too many such occurances for listing them all to be practical, and besides, that's why we have Category:Murdered children. Jeff Silvers 09:29, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] allegedly
Untill the court finds otherwise in a trial, then the word allegedly MUST be used when the word KIDNAP and RAPE are used in thei article. Other then that, edits to take out such words are not Nuetral. Jessica Lunsford may have been kidnapped in reality, but untill it is PROVEN as is every person's right in court, Nuetrality must remain and so Kidnapped and Raped must be either removed as sub catagories or placed along side of allegedly. Wikipedia isn't about feelings, it's about varifiable facts.
LexiLynn 21:54, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Page protected
I've protected the page because of the reverting and apparent sockpuppetry, and because I'm getting complaints about harassment and personal details being published. I'd appreciate it if someone could explain what's going on. SlimVirgin (talk) 09:39, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Please change Category:Murdered American children to Category:American murdered children. Thank you. --MECU≈talk 22:29, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- And after that please remove the Category:Murdered American children because this article is the only one to use this. Ik.pas.aan 23:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Protected edit request and category deletion request fulfilled.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 02:51, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge Suggested
I suggest that this page be merged with the Jessica Lunsford Act page. The Jessica Lunsford Act is the proper name for Jessica's law. Hoshbaron 15:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose - merging Jessica Lunsford Act and Jessica's Law into Jessica Lunsford. Support merging Mark Lunsford Article into Jessica Lunsford article. Davemcarlson 14:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose to merging Jessica Lunsford Act and Jessica's Law into Jessica Lunsford. Support merging Mark Lunsford article into Jessica Lunsford article. Jessica's Law is a Florida state law. The Jessica Lunsford Act is a proposed federal law modeled after the Florida law. They are separate entities and each is notable enough for its own article. Joie de Vivre 15:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. I also think there is nothing wrong with keeping separate pages for Jessica Lunsford and the Jessica Lunsford Act. Ik.pas.aan 21:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose separate issues. gren グレン 08:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] i think
I think we should ahve to separate stories on the father and daughter... or atleast put the father story under the jessica text..--Matrix17 12:47, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think putting the father story under the Jessica Lunsford text would be a good idea. Davemcarlson 17:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
