Talk:Keli Lane

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 September 2010. The result of the discussion was delete.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Australia: Crime Low‑importance

	Australia portal Keli Lane is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian crime (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Re-creation

This appears to be a bit of a fait accompli but shouldn't this have gone through the DRV process before being re-created, especially as a BLP article? At the very least, the deleting administrator should be asked for his/her thoughts on the matter, which I have not heard. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 04:13, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The closing admin left the way open for re-creation with his closing comments: "If convicted, do no harm might well not be applicable, so if that happens, at that point, rewrite and reinstate". He has provided me with a copy of the deleted article, which can be used to expand the current article once the immediate threat of re-deletion has passed. WWGB (talk) 06:11, 14 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That reason (given by that administrator in the past which I read somewhere) was why I went ahead and created a new page. I couldn't find the old one and it would have been more appropriate to undelete that old one. But now it is more practical to expand this page since it is already showing up on google searches 00:04, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Water polo player in lead para

I suggest that the point about whether Lane being an 'Australian water polo player' as the leading comment of the article be clarified in light that she did not actually represent Australia at the Olympic games in 2000. According to the article on Water_polo_at_the_2000_Summer_Olympics she was not a part of the gold medal winning women's team. The media coverage of the issue certainly makes use of the epitaph of water polo player and it is easy to assume this is case - her water polo career, whilst a relevant part of her character may not be the ideal lead to this article.Charles evesson (talk) - 26 June 2011.

Whilst I understand your point, the purpose of the lead is to give a biography an occupation. The lead does not claim that Lane was an Olympic water polo player. I think the inclusion of her occupation as a water polo player is worthy because of the motive of her actions; viz "Self-advancement, especially to increase her chances of representing Australia in water polo at the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games". According to Duffy (14/12/2010):

"In terms of Lane's long-term motive for murder, the Crown produced evidence that she was prepared to abandon her children at birth to increase her chances of representing Australia in water polo at the Olympic Games in 2000. There was also evidence she believed children would interfere with her educational plans, her social life, and the regard in which she was held by parents and friends."^[1]

I acknowledge that this is a media source - Duffy has a solid reputation as an investigative journalist. I have not read the transcripts of proceedings; neverthless, the jury accepted these arguments in a majority verdict. Inclusion of her occupation as a teacher may be appropriate if it related to some actions, whilst she was a teacher, that led to her criminal offence(s). In this case, her occupation as a teacher is secondary to her former Olympic ambitions. Jherschel (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Argh, just lost a whole post which phrased my objection to the water polo lead much better. I'll reply in brief: I intend to pull apart the Supreme Court case notes from AustLii and add reference to them across the article to clarify evidence with the media reports (I will do this in sandbox first and link you when i'm done). I'm sure most of the media reporting is fairly accurate but I don't think it's the most reliable source to be had. I'm wary of the lead as a waterpolo player because whilst it is a relevant part of her character and worth of inclusion in the background section, the most important point is that she is a convicted murderer and that she is currently appealing the conviction. When i'm looking through the transcript of the judgement I'll see what emphasis is placed on her Olympic ambitions and let you know.

I think the classification of the article as a BLP is a moot point as the enduring value of this case is the prosecution's use of lies as evidence and the appeal to the CCoA during the trial. It is also a high-profile case of neonaticide and provides interesting insights into the criminal trial process in terms of returning a conviction with a majority verdict (although we have no idea whether it was unanimous or 11 to 1, though we assume it was 11 to 1) and a guilty verdict with no evidence of a body. I'm a newb in terms of wiki politics and classification of articles, perhaps it would be better as a page about the legal case? Charles evesson (talk) 12:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bravo for removal of infanticide category. The correct term is neonaticide. Charles evesson (talk) 10:10, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Duffy, Michael (14 December 2010). "Steadfastly silent on Tegan's fate until the bitter end". The National Times. Fairfax Media. Retrieved 16 December 2010.

[NTsilent-1] Duffy, Michael (14 December 2010). "Steadfastly silent on Tegan's fate until the bitter end". The National Times. Fairfax Media. Retrieved 16 December 2010.

[1]