Talk:Beaumont children disappearance

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Move to a new name?[edit]

I propose we move this article to Beaumont children disappearance to bring the article title more in line with the remainder of the Australian crime articles covering disappearances, such as the Azaria Chamberlain disappearance, and the Peter Falconio disappearance. -- Longhair | Talk 13:22, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Fine by me. Ambi 14:12, 1 May 2005 (UTC)`
I'm not opposed.--Cyberjunkie 05:03, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
Done -- Longhair | Talk 06:06, 2 May 2005 (UTC)


Should that Biography WikiProject banner really be there?  — AnnaKucsma   (Talk to me!)

Other cases and a possible solution?[edit]

The section titled "Other cases and a possible solution" is deceiving and should be cleaned up in general. There is no "possible solution" presented, although it may be inferred due to the mention of other children who had been murdered. If there is a definitive "possible solution" to explore, it should be explained. GCD1 20:15, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

You're right. Have changed it to "other cases" which I think could be improved upon, but I can't think of a better header at the moment. Rossrs 20:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
"Other Possible Related Cases" maybe? Just a suggestion...Engr105th (talk) 10:15, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Bevan Spencer von Einem[edit]

When describing the claims of the witness (presumably Mr. B, though the article fails to name him), the article relates his claims regarding what von Einem said as fact, rather than hearsay. For example, "Von Einem also told the witness that he had taken two girls from the Adelaide Oval during a football match." Since this is not proven fact, shouldn't it read "Von Einem also allegedly told the witness that he had taken two girls from the Adelaide Oval during a football match"? Evil bacteria (talk) 22:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The statement that "Von Einem matches the police sketches of the suspect in both the Beaumont and Adelaide Oval cases" is not correct. He is elsewhere said to "somewhat resemble" the man in the Beaumont case.Royalcourtier (talk) 19:18, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Don't use self-published sources as this article has BLP ramifications[edit]

Per WP:BLPSPS, we cannot use self-published sources to discuss who might be the perpetrator. Some of the people involved with this crime are still living. I just removed three of these blogs and websites. Binksternet (talk) 02:34, 22 September 2014 (UTC)

the day was a scorcher... that's why Nancy gave them permission.[edit]

Adelaide that day was sweltering through a scorcher... that's partly why Nancy gave them permission to go to the beach. It should be mentioned. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 22:13, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

No, it really doesn't need mentioning. It's not especially relevant and it's really rather dull besides. (talk) 05:10, 4 March 2016 (UTC)