Talk:R v Evans and McDonald

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 April 2012 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the R v Evans and McDonald article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

British crime (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject British crime, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.British crimeWikipedia:WikiProject British crimeTemplate:WikiProject British crimeBritish crime articles

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Wales C‑class Low‑importance

	Wales portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wales, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wales 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.WalesWikipedia:WikiProject WalesTemplate:WikiProject WalesWales articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Victim, or complainant?

Regarding the online naming of the accuser by various parties, the article currently describes her as "the victim" throughout, which is perhaps inconsistent with the finding of not guilty. "Alleged victim" is clumsy, so perhaps it should be "the complainant" throughout? According to the sources cited, this makes no difference to the action of naming her having been illegal. To put that another way, naming a complainant is what the people were convicted of, not naming a victim. MPS1992 (talk) 17:24, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But, according to the BBC at source #46, the judge, in sentencing the party only who went to trail, described the defendant as having "identified a victim of rape". So either the Judge was legally in error, or else, at that time, the complainant was legally a victim. 213.78.82.8 (talk) 19:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see no problem with replacing "victim" with "complainant". Keri (talk) 17:37, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. That is now done, and the word "victim" now appears nowhere in the article except for in the title fields of the citations to the original sources. The result may be rather clumsier than would be ideal, so any more elegant re-wording would be welcome. MPS1992 (talk) 17:50, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]