Jump to content

Talk:Execution of Alfred Bourgeois

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

Article is about a child's murder

[edit]

@NelsonLee20042020 and @Inexpiable: This article is about a child's murder. To be consistent with the title of similar articles it should be named after the victim. Since the perpetrator is only notable for this crime the article should be about the crime he committed in order to warrant him receiving the death penalty. His actual execution is not, itself, notable and would never have happened if he didn't commit the murder in the first place. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 05:22, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think we should first make a discussion of whether to move the article and rearrange some of the facts written in the article?? NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 06:20, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With a little rewriting, I think the article could be about the Murder of Jakaren Harrison. Apart from the lead section, and the first couple of sentences of the Background section, I think this article almost reads like it was describing the Murder of Jakaren Harrison, anyway. Alfred Bourgeois subsequent arrest, trial and execution just finish the article off. Rather than the lead section start with talking about Bourgeois, it can start with talking about Harrison. The order of presentation can change, but I think all the necessary facts are already present. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 08:21, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cameron Dewe: and @NelsonLee20042020:: See this is an interesting discussion/debate because what constitutes naming an article about the victim over the perpetrator?

I personally believe it should vary from case to case based on what sources report. In this particular instance, the victim in this case was not really named in many sources. I personally think this article should just be named: Alfred Bourgeois - the "execution of" part I would drop. Reason being, is the notability really came from the fact he was one of the first 5 people selected for execution, and then ultimately was.

Where an article can cover multiple avenues of notability is where I think article names need to be carefully considered. RE: The recent articles surrounding federal executions NelsonLee20042020 has created, my personal thoughts are:

  • Corey Johnson (murderer) - rename to: something else. Perhaps: 1992 Virginia murders or simply Newtowne Gang murders. It is harder to pick a specific article name for this subject but given he was one of three people involved in that crime spree and his two co-defendants are still on federal death row (the longest inmates on federal death row which in itself is notable) I would rename the article to something that can incorporate all of those talking points.
  • Christopher Andre Vialva - unsure - This is also tricky because his co-defendant Brandon Bernard has his own article. Perhaps the two articles could be merged into one, in which case it should be renamed to: Murders of Todd and Stacie Bagley. The problem with that is Bernard's role and execution attracted a lot of attention, so he himself is notable on his own.

There isn't any easy answer when it comes to naming an article is the bottom line. Just my thoughts. Inexpiable (talk) 13:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About Corey Johnson, I have my doubts about the need to rename, because his other accomplices are not as well-known as him, and frankly, there were more sources we can find about him, his background (could be more details not covered I guess) and his own individual responsibility in the murders, which were not covered much from the sources. Given the moratorium on the federal executions, it is unlikely we get to see James H. Roane Jr. and Richard Tipton to get executed anytime soon, and so there is likely little to no need to rename his article.
Keith Dwayne Nelson, we can either keep it or move the article, but my stance is keep of course, though the reasons are valid.
We can still keep the title execution of Alfred Bourgeois, honestly not much details about his life prior to his conviction and execution.
I can fine with merging the Bernard and Vialva together but of course I am concerned about the need to juggle between differing attentions paid to their respective individual cases despite being linked to one another. NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 13:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am against merging Vialva and Bernard into one article unless the new page is titled Murders of Todd and Stacie Bagley. Easiest thing is to keep both articles as they are and separate for now. Inexpiable (talk) 14:04, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can say I agree. And for the record, I might not respond immediately for now since I am busy on my side there, got school projects and also creating a 1994 Florida murder case and this guy gonna get the lethal injection later this month after 30 years since the forest murder happened. NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 19:04, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Inexpiable: Yes, an interesting debate. This is partly because the guideline WP:CRIME (also for WP:CRIMINAL and WP:VICTIM) says "A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person." The guideline then goes on to describe the circumstances when a victim or perpetrator should have an article written about them. I take this to mean a biography written about the person. As a consequence there is a systemic bias in Wikipedia's guidelines against writing biographies about victims and in favour of writing about perpetrators. If one also considers the guideline WP:BIO1E, then WikiPedia is rarely going to write biographies about victims, and then usually because they are notable for other reasons that qualifies them for a biography in any case. Even then, these guidelines are somewhat capricious and random, as these guidelines depend on an article already existing as to whether Wikipedia editors should start a new article or not. The guidelines do not deliver a consistent result about when to create a biography about a criminal or write an article about a crime committed against a victim. I agree that there probably needs to be a case by case debate. For this article about Alfred Bourgeois, he is probably notable enough for his execution as well as the crime he committed, so a biography is a viable option. The question is then is his crime more notable than his execution, as that will tip the balance one way or the other?
As for the others mentioned. I think there probably should be a separate discussion about each article if these are dealt with on a case by case basis, but I was considering raising the same question about the Keith Dwayne Nelson article, which could also be renamed. The others I am less certain about and I think each needs to be debated separately. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 22:38, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]