Talk:Philip Nitschke

Nancy Crick

I modified the Nancy Crick section based on the information from the article. Neither is properly sourced but the story in the Nancy Crick article sounds more believable to me. Nitschke may have suggested her bowel cancer is back but I'm somewhat doubtful her offered her a professional diagnosis. Indeed for all we know he may have suggested she confirm his suspicions with her doctors first. Unless better references are offered which suggest he gave her a professional diagnosis that her bowel cancer was back, it's better to leave it as is IMHO. Nil Einne 13:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Pronunciation of his name

It would be helpful if someone could include an audioclip to more accurately reveal how to pronounce this name. Mramz88 (talk) 21:22, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Philip Nitschke's autobiography

Philip Nitschke writes his autobiography. Damned if I do <http://www.randomhouse.com.au/books/philip-nitschke/a-lifes-purpose-an-autobiography-9780522861419.aspx>

This is reported by WP:RSs including:

<http://www.theage.com.au/lifestyle/between-life-and-death-20130826-2skl0.html>

<http://www.skynews.com.au/politics/article.aspx?id=901606>

<http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Election-2013/2013/08/31/Report_tells_of_Nitschkes_hypochondria_901607.html>

A paragraph, scoured from the above, providing an insight into Nitschke's view on euthanasia, is repeated rejected variously (and cryptically) claiming:

commentary

WP: BLP

WP:MOS

not relevant

WP:SOAP

Please (1) formulate your substitute para or (2) give a more comprehensive reason, as to why Nitschke's autobiography should not be quoted in Philip Nitschke. 1.126.170.158 (talk) 02:48, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

It seems obvious that you already are an experienced editor. Therefore, if you want your opinions on this matter to be respected and properly responded to, then you need to use your account name. I, for one, don't believe that you are a new or inexperienced IP editor. If you choose to edit anonymously then you can't expect other editors to respect your edits. Anglicanus (talk) 08:09, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Here are some obvious problems with your edits:

1. They have nothing to do with his "views on euthanasia" so they don't belong anywhere in that section.

2. They are copyright violations. You cannot take some text out of an already published source and just dump it into an article. Information in articles is meant to be based on reliable sources ~ not to be plagiarised from them.

3. The text that you plagiarised from a published source reads as blatant and contentious personal opinion and commentary. Therefore it had to be removed in accordance with various policies including the BLP ones.

It is also your responsibility to make sure that your edits are acceptable in the first place. If they aren't they are liable to removal. You can't expect other editors to do the work of fixing your problem edits. Anglicanus (talk) 08:42, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

First para > your POV > fine

1 Philip Nitschke's view on euthanasia is an obvious inclusion in Philip_Nitschke#Views_on_euthanasia

2&3 Worthwhile suggestions > Text rewritten

Final para Wikipedia is community encyclopedia. Other editors are free to improve inclusions. 49.184.51.62 (talk) 13:48, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

The last stable version was 12:50, 23 July 2013‎. The IP added disputed content after that and it's since been disputed by two editors. Per WP:BRD, the content should stay out until consensus for inclusion is reached here. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:52, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Nigel Brayley investigation

I've removed the claims that Nigel Brayley was under investigation for the murder of his wife, and that he was also under investigation for other murders. Perth News is saying that Braley believed that he was a suspect [1]. but the ABC states that Braley was never named as a suspect [2]. Given the ambiguity, it seems best not to describe him as a suspect until this is clarified. Similarly, while Nitschke has described Brayley as a serial murder [3], he also stated that he could not prove this, and from the sources I haven't seen any claims over than from Nitschke that Braley was being investigated over other deaths.

At this stage, it seems best to only ascribe the serial murderer claim to an opinion of Nitschke's, and to leave out the claim that Brayley was being investigated until this is settled. Either way, while it might explain Brayley's decision, Nitschke has stated that he was unaware of all of this when he provided his advice, so it isn't core to Nitschke's actions. - Bilby (talk) 04:06, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Did you do any checking? It took me 5 seconds to find that he was being investigated for murder of his wife and former girlfriend.[4]. Please remove your edits if appropriate. Jabba the Hot (talk) 04:10, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

The ABC is very clear - Brayley was not named as a suspect. He may have been questioned in the past, he may have believed that he was a suspect, but according to the ABC he was not named. That's where the ambiguity comes in. It would be more relevant if Nitschke had believed that Brayley was a suspect when he offered his advice, but Nitschke has stated that he was not aware of this at the time. I'd like to be cautious with the wording until this is clarified, especially as the previous wording made it appear that Brayley being investigated was a factor in Nitschke's decision. - Bilby (talk) 04:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Of course he was a suspect ... the police even arrested him initially. The ABC is not the only source to turn to, in fact it's proved to be a poor source recently. PN did not offer him any "advice". You seem not aware of what happened. PN states that he doesn't know why Brayley even came to the workshop — he already had the drugs and knew what to do. Jabba the Hot (talk) 04:24, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

The source you are using states "WA Police refused to confirm that Mr Brayley was a suspect in Lina’s murder." Anything beyond that is conjecture. - Bilby (talk) 04:29, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

The source I cited states that (a) he was arrested in connection with Lina's death and that (b) the AFP had gone to Indonesia to investigate the death of another female in his life. If that's not being under suspicion, what is? Jabba the Hot (talk) 04:32, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

In any case, I used the phrase "under investigation", which he clearly was.Jabba the Hot (talk) 04:34, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

From The Australian [5]: "Nigel Brayley was under investigation by police for domestic violence and the murders of three former wives". Please revert. Jabba the Hot (talk) 04:38, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

"West Australian police suspected Brayley of killing his wife in 2011. Since his death, it has emerged that Australian Federal Police was investigating the 2005 dis­appearance of his then live-in girlfriend in East Timor." [6] Jabba the Hot (talk) 04:42, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

"The husband of a woman police believe was pushed to her death at a Perth quarry three years ago was also investigated over the disappearance of another woman in 2005."[7] Jabba the Hot (talk) 04:44, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

A case can be under investigation without having named a suspected. Bringing somebody in for questioning does not mean he is automatically a suspect. The Banner talk 04:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Is that why the AFP sent men to another country to investigate another mysterious death of one of his girlfriends? Fact is, there are several sources that state he was under investigation and/or a suspect. That should be good enough for Wikipedia. The fact that WA Police refused to confirm that Brayley was a suspect in Lina’s murder is a formality. Their actions clearly show otherwise, and that's why numerous sources state that he was indeed "under investigation". Jabba the Hot (talk) 04:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

You are misrepresenting the first The Australian article, which is describing claims made by Nitschke, not stating that Brayley was under investigation. But I know we'll find articles that say he was. We also have articles that clearly state he was not a suspect.. The issue is that we don't know for certain at this stage anything more than he was questioned and looked into, and either way, it was not a factor in Nitschke's decision. Nitschke is using this to justify his actions post the event, and while they might explain why Brayley committed suicide, they would only be relevant to Nitschke's advice if he'd known about them at the time. There may be some compromise wording we can go for, but we a) can't say he was a suspect, b) can't say that he was a serial murder, and c) can't suggest that this was a factor in Nitschke's actions. - Bilby (talk) 04:53, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Again, what "advice" are you talking about? Jabba the Hot (talk) 04:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

"Police were investigating his possible involvement in the February 2011 death of his wife Lina" [8] Jabba the Hot (talk) 08:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Jabba: The two paras commencing, "In 2014 Nitschke was . ." and "On 23 July 2014 the . ." read like Nitschke-defence-pleas, found on a Nitschke website, rather than Wikipedia. As they stand they are not encyclopaedic, as they have an obvious (and laboured) non-NPOV underpinning. Sam56mas (talk) 06:33, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Not at all, merely giving his side of the story.Jabba the Hot (talk) 08:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC) Q.E.D. My case rests. Sam56mas (talk) 09:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC) We can rephrase if there are other objections to verbatim quotes. I can précis if required. Jabba the Hot (talk) 13:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

"At the time of his suicide, Nigel Brayley was facing ongoing questions about the death of his wife. Two other female friends of his had also died." [9] That's from the mouth of the ABC journo who started this whole brouhaha. Jabba the Hot (talk) 13:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Nitschke killing a dog at age 15

I am wondering why Nitschke having violently killed his neighbour's dog - by slitting its throat - as a revenge attack at age 15 hasn't been raised, there is a long editing history and I haven't seen it there. Surely that's an important aspect of his personality. He has admitted to it several times, most publicly on Andrew Denton's "Enough Rope", which was picked up by press reports at the time (2007). Nitschke "explained" (excused) his behaviour by saying he was "lonely" at the time. How many lonely adolescents brutally kill a DOG? Unless they are mentally ill? Any thoughts?