Talk:Trial of Michael Jackson: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 01:56, 2 August 2009

Michael Jackson B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michael Jackson, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Michael Jackson on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Michael JacksonWikipedia:WikiProject Michael JacksonTemplate:WikiProject Michael JacksonMichael Jackson articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary.

Please add only comments relevant to the article.

Because it started to turn into a message board, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

Previous discussions:

Aphrodite Jones book

Oddly located the Bashir documentary section, there is a paragraph about a book on the trial by Aphrodite Jones. It's decidedly on Jackson's side and called "The Michael Jackson Conspiracy" to boot. Yet it's called an "unbiased report" -- as if wikipedia was in the business of telling people which side is the unbiased one. Frankly, the paragraph reads like an ad for the book.

It might be appropriate to reference specific sections of this book in a logical, supportive manner, for example, to support a section that the press coverage of the trial was criticized in some quarters. This use, however, it not suitable for an encyclopedia article. And certainly not in the location about the Bashir documentary.

Sources to use

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4212855.stm
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20050615_spilbor.html
http://books.google.com/books?id=WOug0pzW6_IC&pg=PA219&dq=media+bias+against+michael+jackson&lr=&ie=ISO-8859-1&output=html - Gallup poll conducted on day of acquittal. 44% of US fan base say they are no longer fans.

Change of Californian CSA laws?

I've heard the 1993 allegations died down because as by Californian statutes back then a trial could be held only in case of a civil suit, and because the Chandlers decided not to go forward and in California back then CSA required no public prosecution if no civil suit had been filed by an involved party, the trial did not take place, whereas the 2005 trial was only possible because of a 1999 change of said law now making CSA a criminal offense requiring public prosecution under any circumstances. Is this true? It's a fact that seems most noteworthy for the articles on both the 1993 allegations and the 2005 trial. --79.193.73.20 (talk) 00:44, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good grief! Citations, citations, citations! This article badly needs them!

There will have been many eyes on this article with surely many more yet to come. I hope the community can provide some citations for the huge number of unreferenced statements we have on here. I may try to work on this myself soon. --bodnotbod (talk) 18:58, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Templates for deletion nomination of Template:Jackson timeline

Template:Jackson timeline has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. Solid State Survivor (talk) 03:07, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why does the article only presentes the prosecution side? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harrana (talk • contribs) 19:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 *[[Talk:2005 trail of Michael Jackson/Archive02|Archive 2 (16 June 2005 to 20 June 2009)]]:
 ----
+== Aphrodite Jones book ==
+Oddly located the Bashir documentary section, there is a paragraph about a book on the trial by Aphrodite Jones. It's decidedly on Jackson's side and called "The Michael Jackson Conspiracy" to boot. Yet it's called an "unbiased report" -- as if wikipedia was in the business of telling people which side is the unbiased one. Frankly, the paragraph reads like an ad for the book.
+It ''might'' be appropriate to reference specific sections of this book in a logical, supportive manner, for example, to support a section that the press coverage of the ''trial'' was criticized in some quarters. This use, however, it not suitable for an encyclopedia article. And certainly not in the location about the Bashir documentary.
 == Sources to use ==