User talk:BoyintheMachine

Welcome!

Hello, BoyintheMachine, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! KillerChihuahua^?!? 15:19, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OUTING on Smiley face murders talk page.

Please understand that revealing an editor Real Life name (even if you are incorrect) is considered to be a breach of policy and will likely get you blocked from editing Wikipedia. Padillah (talk) 12:44, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whether the guy doing the edits is who you think it is (almost certainly is, I agree) doesn't really matter for our purposes, as the person doing it has clear problems with WP:COI and WP:UNDUE. Naming a name isn't helpful, so just stick to edits.

Incidentally, I think you mentioned somewhere that the people behind the theory are no aiming for a Satanic conspiracy kind of thing. If you can cite specific media appearances and state it as factual instead of just a conclusion you draw from their commments, it might be worth documenting in the article. DreamGuy (talk) 15:29, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I never mentioned on this entry anything connected to Satanism. However, both Kristi Piehl (former ktsp news reporter, sfkillers.com) and Bill Szostak (deceased's father) have publicly stated an 'Anti-Christian' motivation for the 'murders'. I have blogged on my personal blog my fears that this could turn into a witch hunt, but again I have never written anything on this wiki entry about Satanism or Satanic Cults.BoyintheMachine (talk) 17:07, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, OK, Confused "Anti-Christian" with "Satanic". If you think it rises to a noteworthy level and can cite it, by all means add it. DreamGuy (talk) 20:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, but at this time it's pretty much 'beating a dead horse'. The theory has been rejected by both local law enforcement and the FBI. As far as I'm concerned the only changes that should be made it is if, and I should stress, if actual evidence is presented lending any credibility to the theory, evidence that would convince the FBI and law enforcement into accepting the theory as valid.BoyintheMachine (talk) 01:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up about the new book. It' published through Amazon's CreateSpace, which means it's self-published. Any nutjob off the street can self-publish anything through them with no editorial oversight, so it's no better than just making a blog. Until some mainstream coverage tackles that angle it's probably not something we can mention. DreamGuy (talk) 18:34, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know that about that company. Interestingly, I found out that the book is actually critical of the theory.BoyintheMachine (talk) 03:27, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]