Talk:Oba Chandler/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Hi! I am going to be reviewing this article for GA status, and should have the full review up shortly. Dana boomer (talk) 17:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    • The third external link (The case of Oba Chandler) deadlinks.
    • The lead needs to be cut down. For an article of this length, it should be two paragraphs, or three at the very most. And don't just combine paragraphs, information actually needs to be removed. The lead should be a concise summary of the article, containing no new information (such as the info on his possible execution at the end).
    • The information in the Media concerning the case section should be combined into paragraphs with transitions between sentences. As it is, it is basically a trivia list.
    • The information in the Features and background of the case section should be moved into the relevant sections of the article and integrated into the prose. As it is, it is just another list of trivia, and both lists and trivia sections are discouraged.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    • All references need to be formatted with publishers and access dates, and authors and other information should be included where available.
    • There are several places that need references. For example, the ends of the first two subsections in the Background section and several spots in the Media and features section.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    • There are several issues with the MOS compliance and referencing of this article, so for the moment I am placing the review on hold. I have not completed a full prose, completeness, reference reliability or NPOV check on the article - this I will do when I see that work is proceeding on the above issues. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana boomer (talk) 17:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
    • I see that most of my prose/MOS concerns have been addressed, but not the reference issues. Are you still working on these? It has been almost a week since I've placed the article on hold, and although there has been some work completed on the article, there has been no response from the nominator here on the review page. Dana boomer (talk) 16:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
    • I am going to have to fail this article due to a lack of response from the nominator. There has been some work done on the article, but not enough to make it GA status, and several of my original concerns have not been addressed. There are still referencing deficiencies in this article - and this is an article that needs to be extra-well sourced for two reasons: 1) It's a BLP and 2) It's about a sensational crime. The references also need additional information, such as publishers and access dates at the very minimum. There are also quite a few prose issues that need to be addressed. Chandler should always be addressed by his first name, not his last. And in places where it says things such as "Obas fathers death effected" this should either be written as "Oba's father's death effected" or rewritten in "The death of Oba's father effected". This is just one example of a place where the prose needs to be improved. Also the short "Facts leading up to the crime" section should be combined with one of the others. A two sentence section does neither the reader nor the article any good. When the referencing and prose issues have been addressed, please feel free to renominate this article at GAN. Good luck! Dana boomer (talk) 16:15, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

i think this article need a more ingoing description about the murders and about oba chandler. this is one of the state of floridas most famous murders--Matrix17 16:10, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

the MSN groups link added to source "Oba Chandler is still a prime suspect in at least two other cases." is not sufficiently a reliable source so it has been removed.--Isotope23 19:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

maybe it could be possible to put up a photo fo oba.or maybe of hes victims...--Matrix17 20:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be rather tasteless to add pictures of murder victims? And, as it has been pointed out to you several times - if there are images available then they'll probably be added anyway or if you have any yourself, feel free to upload them to Wikimedia Commons. --Strangnet 21:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

well it has been done with Laci Peterson ,she even has her own article for example. but maybe you right maybe wrong i dont know.--Matrix17 22:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't you think Laci Peterson's case received quite a lot more publicity thus warranting an article about her? Images of Oba Chandler's victims in an article about him just doesn't feel right. --Strangnet 23:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
The Peterson case was a rather large media event in the States. The Oba Chandler case was virtually ignored at a national level. Comparing it to the Peterson case is apples and and oranges and I have to agree with Strangnet, pictures of Chandler's victims are not necessary in this article.--Isotope23 14:27, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

isnt it a bit sleazy then to have a article on a dead person, even if the case is notable like laci peterson? but i dont know.

Allegedly similar cases

I've removed this statement from the article:

"Oba Chandler is still a prime suspect in at least two other similar cases."

It was marked as needing a citation since February. It seems like, if it's true, a citation would be easy enough to dig up. Otherwise, it's libellous and not cool.Jessicapierce 15:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

A source that only concluded that the m.o. was similar and that "linking Chandler to this fourth killing would be a challenge" was used. Claim removed once again. Articles in Wikipedia is not for raising suspicion or conduction criminal investigations. --Strangnet 17:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Then all stories on killers and so on should be removed due to that no one actuallty knows if they killed the persons. We cant raise suspicions with out real proof right? i mean how can WE know that they actually have killed a person?haha--Matrix17 19:37, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

No, but the article source you added didn't back up the claim. If there are actual articles sources that have official police and law enforcement statements about Oba Chandler, then by all means add them to the article. What's not needed are unsourced statements that speculate about what has happened or not - Wikipedia is not a tabloid newspaper. And please don't call other's comments "strange" as you did in the edit summary - the rest of us are just eager to see quality content here, not random accusation and first hand info. WP:NOT is a good start for you to cover. --Strangnet 22:42, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Execution date

I have put in a execution date that i found dont know if it is a actuall date. If anyone finds the accurate date please insert it in the article.--Matrix17 22:10, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

If you don't know if it is the actual date; please don't put it in the article. See WP:BLP. Find a reliable source before adding information like that to articles.--Isotope23 12:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Thoughts

In response to the request on my talk page, here are a few thoughts I have on the article. This is not a GA review, simply a list of things that need to be improved on the article for it to be of GA or FA status.

  • References still need to be improved. There are several areas that still need to be referenced, such as the first paragraph of the Early life section and the second paragraph of the Speculation of crime itself section. These are just examples. Because this is 1) a BLP and 2) an article about a sensational crime, it needs to be extra-well referenced.
  • The sources could be a bit more varied. This probably won't be a problem for GA status, but will probably be questioned at FAC. Currently, 27 out of 41 references (well more than half) are from the St. Petersburg Times.
  • Ref 16 is to About.com, which is generally not considered reliable. The author is a private detective who seems to work mainly in investigating insurance fraud, not murder cases.
  • Ref 36 is a self-published Geocities site, and is not reliable.
  • References should have authors listed where available.
  • There are quite a few one and two sentence paragraphs, which should be expanded or combined with other paragraphs. Occasionally one and two sentence paragraphs are OK, when deliberately used to make a point, but there are currently too many for this length of an article.

Overall, the prose and layout of the article appears to be much improved over my last GA review. My suggestion would be to do some more work on the references, and then nominate this article for GA status. The GA review can often highlight problems that would be grounds for immediate "opposes" during FAC. If you have more questions, please let me know! Dana boomer (talk) 21:57, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

John Rogers

In the subsection "Second suspect", a seemingly random change of focus takes place and needs to be clarified: "The second suspect theory is belied by Chandler's approach of two Canadian women; that he had the willingness to approach more than one potential target by himself.[28] John Rogers was released on parole in 2004, but is estranged from the rest of the Rogers family." The next paragraph then mentions initial suspicion against Rogers, and an incident of abuse against one of the victims (?), but other than the brief mention highlighted above, his name does not appear anywhere else in the article. Could some info be missing from a previous version? María (habla conmigo) 21:26, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Fixed it. So now John Rogers is a part of the article.--195.84.41.1 (talk) 09:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Re-nomination

I have re-nominated the article for GA, after looking trough some old nominations by some users sutch as an GA and a Peer review i have found that all concerns has been taken care of also the concerns from Dana Boomer above has been taken care of by a number of editors. Thats why i believe this article is GA ready and among the better crime articles on Wikipedia.--ÅlandÖland (talk) 13:59, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

  • Good work so far on the article. I'm hoping to stop by later to formally review this article, but one suggestion in relation to #Early life is that some challengeable material in pg. 2 should probably be referenced. I fixed one tiny other thing in the article, but otherwise I see no problems. AGK 23:44, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok sounds great. But by monday evening i will be leaving for a week to go to Cyprus for a holiday. So please try to review it before that. I hope that it will pass directly anyway as it is a great article. One tiny problem can be fixed after it passes to. Thank you so mutch.--ÅlandÖland (talk) 23:56, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I definitly support this article as GA instantly. Its a really comprehensive article on a criminal. Let see what you find:) cheers.--ÅlandÖland (talk) 23:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
I have now taken care of that single issue you had of the article.--ÅlandÖland (talk) 10:24, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Good article status

I've reviewed this article's nomination for good article status, and I'm pleased to say that I promoted it today. Well done to all who contributed! AGK 12:50, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I think this article is soon going to be a Featured article. Its great and has very few flaws if any. Please feel free to nominate it when anyone feels its ready.--194.30.146.154 (talk) 14:06, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

FA status nomination

I have now nominated the article for FA status as i believe that it passes trough all the FA criterias. Also as a crime article it is really good and among the better ones on Wikipedia.--ÅlandÖland (talk) 12:26, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Reverted the nomination for now. I saw some things that needed to be done.--ÅlandÖland (talk) 15:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Execution set

Oba Chandlers execution has been set for November 15, if the execution goes ahead as planned there will be alot of edits that day.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Good job on the references!

Lots of helpful articles. Very well done. Manny may (talk) 22:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Please update "Execution" section

Could somebody please correct and update the "Execution" section where it refers to his appeal to the Florida Supreme Court? The article says "This appeal was heard in a court in Tallahassee at 9:00 AM on November 9, 2011." That is not accurate.

The Court originally scheduled oral arguments on his appeal for November 9, but on November 3, the Court cancelled oral argument. http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/summaries/briefs/11/11-2055/Filed_11-03-2011_Order_Cancelling_Arguments.pdf

The Florida Supreme Court then denied Chandler's appeal on November 7, 2011 without ever having any hearing or oral argument. http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/summaries/briefs/11/11-2055/Filed_11-07-2011_Order.pdf

I would make these corrections myself, but I am not sure how to add to the "references" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.157.91.64 (talk) 19:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Well done every one

...the biography is very well written; this is excellent work in my humble opinion. I came across it randomly. Take a bow all who've contributed. 86.41.2.94 (talk) 23:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Neutral Language?

My own personal preference when discussing court cases is to use language like "Oba Chandler is an american man convicted and executed for the murder of..." as opposed to "Oba Chandler is a murderer". I realize he was convicted, but to me, I think it's better to stick to things that we can know for sure. There's always a possibility with any case that someone could be wrongfully convicted and not truly be a murderer. But we can know for sure that he was convicted. Also, the section that says "Chandler lured Canadian tourist Judy Blair onto his boat". To me, the language is a little bit presumptive. How do we know he lured her as opposed to simply asking her if she wanted to go for a ride? It takes facts and paints them in a certain light. I think it would be more accurate to say "Judy Blair stated..." I feel like it improves the neutrality of the article to present the facts in this light. I didn't alter the article myself because I'm not terribly familiar with the case and don't have time to devote to it now. How does everyone else feel about this? Bali88 (talk) 03:41, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

OK I will take care of it. Thank you :)--BabbaQ (talk) 12:06, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Done and completed.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:10, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Photo of decomposition - is it really necessary?

A photo of the bound, decomposing hands and arms of one of the victims is being used to illustrate this article. I'm not squeamish, but it seems unnecessary to illustrate the article since there are three other photos and Wiki policy is to minimize the number of photos. Also seems a bit disrespectful to the victim, particularly since there is no photo of the victim as a living person. I normally don't see photos of victims' decomposed bodies on Wikipedia; rather they usually seem to be in the source material that is linked from the article. The decomposition of the body is also not some big unusual feature of a crime (decomposed bodies are found all the time). Does anyone else feel that this photo crosses the line a bit/ is unnecessary? TheBlinkster (talk) 17:42, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored, so anyone coming across certain articles on murders should expect to see such eventually. Personally, a bloated and discolored hand doesn't seem to be quite disturbing, especially compared to the Jack the Ripper corpses that I can never seem to erase from my memory. The presence of the picture at least gives the reader a representation of why the bodies remained unidentified for a week after being underwater for only a few days. I guess I'd be open to more discussion regarding the images of the remains. As for the statement of disrespecting the victim, I suppose images of the victims could be added as replacement, if it's necessary. --GouramiWatcher(?) 02:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Execution set

Oba Chandlers execution has been set for November 15, if the execution goes ahead as planned there will be alot of edits that day.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Good job on the references!

Lots of helpful articles. Very well done. Manny may (talk) 22:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Please update "Execution" section

Could somebody please correct and update the "Execution" section where it refers to his appeal to the Florida Supreme Court? The article says "This appeal was heard in a court in Tallahassee at 9:00 AM on November 9, 2011." That is not accurate.

The Court originally scheduled oral arguments on his appeal for November 9, but on November 3, the Court cancelled oral argument. http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/summaries/briefs/11/11-2055/Filed_11-03-2011_Order_Cancelling_Arguments.pdf

The Florida Supreme Court then denied Chandler's appeal on November 7, 2011 without ever having any hearing or oral argument. http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/summaries/briefs/11/11-2055/Filed_11-07-2011_Order.pdf

I would make these corrections myself, but I am not sure how to add to the "references" section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.157.91.64 (talk) 19:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Well done every one

...the biography is very well written; this is excellent work in my humble opinion. I came across it randomly. Take a bow all who've contributed. 86.41.2.94 (talk) 23:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Neutral Language?

My own personal preference when discussing court cases is to use language like "Oba Chandler is an american man convicted and executed for the murder of..." as opposed to "Oba Chandler is a murderer". I realize he was convicted, but to me, I think it's better to stick to things that we can know for sure. There's always a possibility with any case that someone could be wrongfully convicted and not truly be a murderer. But we can know for sure that he was convicted. Also, the section that says "Chandler lured Canadian tourist Judy Blair onto his boat". To me, the language is a little bit presumptive. How do we know he lured her as opposed to simply asking her if she wanted to go for a ride? It takes facts and paints them in a certain light. I think it would be more accurate to say "Judy Blair stated..." I feel like it improves the neutrality of the article to present the facts in this light. I didn't alter the article myself because I'm not terribly familiar with the case and don't have time to devote to it now. How does everyone else feel about this? Bali88 (talk) 03:41, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

OK I will take care of it. Thank you :)--BabbaQ (talk) 12:06, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Done and completed.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:10, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Photo of decomposition - is it really necessary?

A photo of the bound, decomposing hands and arms of one of the victims is being used to illustrate this article. I'm not squeamish, but it seems unnecessary to illustrate the article since there are three other photos and Wiki policy is to minimize the number of photos. Also seems a bit disrespectful to the victim, particularly since there is no photo of the victim as a living person. I normally don't see photos of victims' decomposed bodies on Wikipedia; rather they usually seem to be in the source material that is linked from the article. The decomposition of the body is also not some big unusual feature of a crime (decomposed bodies are found all the time). Does anyone else feel that this photo crosses the line a bit/ is unnecessary? TheBlinkster (talk) 17:42, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not censored, so anyone coming across certain articles on murders should expect to see such eventually. Personally, a bloated and discolored hand doesn't seem to be quite disturbing, especially compared to the Jack the Ripper corpses that I can never seem to erase from my memory. The presence of the picture at least gives the reader a representation of why the bodies remained unidentified for a week after being underwater for only a few days. I guess I'd be open to more discussion regarding the images of the remains. As for the statement of disrespecting the victim, I suppose images of the victims could be added as replacement, if it's necessary. --GouramiWatcher(?) 02:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Oba Chandler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:26, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Oba Chandler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:34, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Oba Chandler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:28, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

I want to say thank you to everyone that has helped to improve this article over the years. It is really interesting and good now. --BabbaQ (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Refdump

Some refs removed from the lead which can be used elsewhere:

  • French, Thomas (1999). "Angels & Demons". St. Petersburg Times. Retrieved July 1, 2009.
  • Donnelly, John (November 17, 1992). "Billboard Yields Serial-Killing Suspect". The Seattle Times. Retrieved July 1, 2009.
  • Clary, Mike (September 30, 1992). "Billboards Help Police Get Suspect in Triple Murder". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved August 14, 2009.
  • "Oba Chandler #1275". Clarkprosecutor.org. Retrieved 2012-08-08.94.234.52.108 (talk) 23:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Minor edit war against User:64.83.227.253

Could someone please explain how this edit was so bad that it was worth reverting twice, without any comment whatsoever? Why was this IP user treated as a common vandal? Why was s/he warned for this?

To me, it seems to be a perfectly proper edit. What am I missing? —Wasell(T) 15:48, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Though the one issue should have been addressed rather than reverting the whole edit, I'm guessing it's because you removed a reasonable {{citation needed}} tag without citing a source. By the way, you won't hear back from the other editor, in response to your note on their talk page,because that editor's been blocked. Largoplazo (talk) 16:08, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Oba Chandler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:22, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Removed reference

I have removed the following reference from the article per WP:DAILYMAIL because its source is no longer considered reliable.

<ref name="dailymail1">{{cite news |first=Beth |last=Stebner |url=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2062276/Evil-man-raped-killed-mother-daughters-executed-Florida--17-years-death-row-visitors-sandwich-meal.html |title='Evil' man who raped and killed mother and two daughters executed in Florida – after 17 years on death row without any visitors and a three-sandwich last meal |work=Daily Mail |date=November 16, 2011 |accessdate=July 24, 2013 |deadurl=no |archiveurl=https://archive.is/20130420025233/http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2062276/Evil-man-raped-killed-mother-daughters-executed-Florida--17-years-death-row-visitors-sandwich-meal.html |archivedate=April 20, 2013 |df=mdy-all }}</ref> Baffle☿gab 22:26, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Oba_Chandler/Archive_1&oldid=1146572158"