Talk:Murder of Polly Klaas

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
Photo request It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality.
Criminal justice Portal
This article is part of WikiProject Crime, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide on true crime and criminology-related articles 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.
Mid This article is on a subject of mid-importance for crime-related articles.
WikiProject Crime To-do:

[edit] Biography assessment rating comment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article.-- Jreferee 22:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merger with Foundation

The Polly Klaas Foundation and this article should probably be one article, presumably with the Foundation merging into Polly Klaas as it doesn't appear to be notable independent of her. MLA 12:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)'


Isnt it smarter to move the Polly klaas foundation to the Polly Klaas article? no one who wants to read about polly search for the polly klaas foundation but for polly klaas. --Matrix17 10:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Sounds right. 193.1.172.104 09:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that sounds like a more sensible idea. --cosmic_quest 02:15, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
I think we should keep these as separate articles. Fredsmith2 00:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I've added some information to the Polly Klaas Foundation article, and removed the merger tag. It's now pretty obvious that they're deserving of different pages, since the Polly Klaas Foundation has been involved in a lot of different stuff, almost all of it separate from Polly Klaas, since the mid-1990's. If anyone wants more info on these before this discussion is closed, please re-tag the article.Fredsmith2

[edit] NPOV?

User:71.239.125.15 has added the NPOV tag to the Winona Ryder section. Is there any reason for this? I can't see any judgment calls there that aren't well sourced, and when I re-wrote the section last week I saw many more essentially identical sources that I didn't bother to cite. The user didn't leave a comment here so I wanted to ask here before I removed the NPOV tag. Wellspring (talk) 00:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

i can't speak for 71.239.125.15, but i think a problem with it is that it diverges too far from the actual topic of this particular article. if the focus is upon the murder of polly klaas, then these peripheral details, many years later and not directly related to the events, seems out of place to me. the details may be salient to the winona ryder article. to this article....i don't think so much, no.Anastrophe (talk) 00:58, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Undue weight makes sense. Fine by me, so long as any material left is well sourced. In its previous iteration, the text was deeply flawed factually. I wouldn't object to abbreviating it. Wellspring (talk) 06:38, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
If it's factually correct and neutrally formulated, I absolutely think it's relevant to this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Looskuh (talk • contribs) 14:56, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
OK it's been more than a month with no complaints, the originator of the tag never spoke up, and the section seems factually correct, neutral and well-sourced. So I'm clearing the tag. Wellspring (talk) 14:32, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
doh, i just reverted the removal requesting discussion here, before seeing this. however, i disagree that the POV issue is resolved. the mention at ryder's shoplifting trial really doesn't belong in this article. it belongs in the winona ryder article. it has no direct relevance to the Murder of Polly Klaas. Anastrophe (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
NP, if there's still something to discuss let's hash it out. I'd agree that it doesn't deserve significant weight; however, I think there's probably a good case to be made for mentioning it. I considered editing it down a bit, but I can't really do it without biasing the account one way or another. The main issue is that it's a notable element of the fallout, both from Ms. Ryder's direct and public participation and Polly's father's involvement. Things like this are mentioned in our other articles all the time, and this is fair, neutral and well-sourced. I'm not married to this position, but my feeling at the moment is that it should remain. Wellspring (talk) 01:55, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
i think the matter actually falls less under the aegis of NPOV as it does under notability/weight, particularly for this short an article. again - within Winona Ryder, it may deserve some mention. for this article, it devolves into trivia. however, i'll see if i can trim it further as a compromise. Anastrophe (talk) 02:17, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
well, i stripped it down as best i could, and now it's a "whopping" 113 bytes shorter. but it is a simpler declaration of the details. i dunno. i pulled the tag, since really it wasn't a POV issue. bigger scheme of things: this is not worth any more effort by anyone! Anastrophe (talk) 02:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
I think your edits are great. Taking the time to perfect it is a worthy endeavor. :) Wellspring (talk) 14:39, 23 February 2008 (UTC)