Talk:West Memphis, Arkansas

Wondering how to edit this U.S. City Entry?
The WikiProject U.S. Cities standards might help.

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Arkansas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Arkansas.

West Memphis 3

Information regarding the West Memphis 3 and the related crimes has been continually deleted from this page. It definitely needs to be monitored for a non-POV stance since the convictions are disputed, but the fact remains that it is a significant event in the history of West Memphis. It should at least be mentioned, and then linked to the appropriate related article(s). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grothor (talk • contribs) 23:32, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that should be noted, but not part of West Memphis information in general. Maybe a notation by the names reading - one of the 3 convicted murderers in a group known as the West Memphis 3- This would be accurate and link to the West Memphis 3 page which is a movement, a cause and POV. An entry like the above may stand as it represents both sides of this issue that will continue to be heated. Then again it may not.

Help me understand why it shouldn't be mentioned as part of the West Memphis information - the fact that it happened is not a movement or cause - it is a part of the history of the city. In the last version you reverted, the movement/cause was entirely covered on the related article and not within the West Memphis article itself. Grothor (talk) 00:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is part of the history. The Free the West Memphis 3 is a organization devoted to the belief the three are innocent and the West Memphis 3 page is a vehicle to further this belief which is why that page is plastered with notices from Wikipedia about it being objective and factual. That page is constantly changing. I actually see any inclusion of West Memphis 3 on the West Memphis page offensive and little more than advertisement for that cause. I was seeking common ground if someone thought it was worthy to make them notable people. That being said, mention them for what they are and the affiliation to that page by linking. If someone wants to read about murder they can go there. Should we go to every town on Wikipedia, list the convicted murders and link them? I do not think it relevant or appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mastpupe (talk • contribs) 00:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter whether you like it or not, frankly. It remains a historically - and to be honest, culturally - significant thing. The mention in the West Memphis article, I believe, remains appropriate and inoffensive. The last version you reverted made no mention of any controversy surrounding the case - that matter was left entirely on the WM3 article where it belongs. A statement of fact is not a statement of support.

And you ask - rhetorically, I presume - if we should list all convicted murderers in all cities. If you don't think so, why did you restore the edits from user Gasishigh that do nothing more that list the individuals as murderers without giving any context? Grothor (talk) 02:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, guys. It doesn't look like you are going to reach a compromise between yourselves. I tend to agree with Grothor: the murders and the West Memphis 3 "movement" should be mentioned here, as they are historically and culturally notable. We should try to build a consensus as to how they will be mentioned, in order to preserve NPOV. Maybe we should to turn the WP dispute resolution guidelines for suggestions of how to proceed... Clconway (talk) 21:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]