This article is of interest to WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT-related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, please visit the project page or contribute to the discussion.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, realise, defence, artefact), and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Are we comfortable that "His attendance record was mediocre, despite the fact that he frequently volunteered to work overtime." and "He made no efforts to seek sexual contact with any of the peers to whom he was sexually attracted, despite the fact that he later said he had been fondled by an older youth." are how these sentences may be read? The second is particularly egregious, I think. --John (talk) 07:26, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Both look absolutely fine to me. These are both surface level behavioural comparisons, although we don't know really know what was going on in his mind. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:42, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
The first one is fine, in my opinion, because it's contrasting a positive with a negative. The second one does need some rewording, but it depends on the sources. "Although" is okay if the sources indicate that Nilsen claimed to have been fondled in order to show that he did have voluntary sexual contact with his peers, because it contrasts his known behaviour with his later claims/excuses, but it wouldn't be okay if Nilsen was claiming sexual assault of some kind. I don't have the Coffey book used as a reference for that statement - can anyone check the context? Marianna251TALK 08:10, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
That's a fair point. I suspect both are simply reported neutrally. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:46, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Nonetheless, I do have the book. It harks to his claims in History of a Drowning Boy regarding what he refers to as 'embryonic sex games' he witnessed as a child and early adolescent in which he occasionally saw local boys pin down girls and "feel under their clothes" with or without their consent. He claims that occasionally boys would do the same to younger boys, and that he found this exciting, with it once happening to him. He claims he didn't find the experience unpleasant, "although" (my insertion of the word) he was annoyed because the boy was older and stronger than he..--Kieronoldham (talk) 00:28, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
That's really useful, thank you. It looks like Nilsen isn't claiming sexual assault (although I'd say it was, personally, but that's OR), so what are people's thoughts on amending the sentence to read: "He made no efforts to seek sexual contact with any of the peers to whom he was sexually attracted, although he later said he had been fondled by an older youth and did not find the experience unpleasant" for clarity? Marianna251TALK 11:56, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
A quick Google search for "The Kindly Killer" + "Nilsen" yields "About 13,900 results." And the article itself currently says: "Great Crimes and Trials of the 20th Century S02E15 "The Kindly Killer" (1993), commissioned by the BBC"? Doesn't it belong in the infobox? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:49, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Ugh, I hate that nickname (what the hell is kind about killing?) but it does seem to be notable. I've no objection to its inclusion in the infobox. Marianna251TALK 19:06, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Dennis Nilsen died in York Hospital, coroner reveals
I have pointed this out over and over again, however people read new papers and ignore the actual facts. This makes Wikipedia into a joke when the same person continued to undo edits which are true and fact based, unlike their news paper edits which do not tell the true story. Dennis Nilsen the serial killer died in York Hospital, coroner reveals. this is the link to the report from the coroners court in your. https://www.yorkmix.com/news/serial-killer-dennis-nilsen-died-in-york-hospital-coroner-reveals
If people keep making things up and do not bother asking for information then all that will happen is misimformation will be passed on. The Coroner said "the underlying causes of this were deep vein thrombosis and “abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture repair”. If a person that has never talked to Denis Neson, spent time with him, or even actually knows anything about him is allowed to edit the truth out of wikipedia pages then what is the point of a page thats about a person.
Print the truth please and no more of this rubbish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:45, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Hi IP:188.8.131.52., are trying to make a point about what should be in the article? What exactly is "yorkmix.com"? Do you have any more reliable source(s)? The BBC still says he "died in prison": . He may have been DOA at York Hospital? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:51, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
We now seem to have an edit war over competing sources. I'd suggest agreeing what to put here first, to avoid a time-wasting tit-for tat? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:56, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Martinevans123 The problem is what the Prison releases that causes the problem. Being a person that lived with, worked around Denis for a number of years I understand how the prison works. To die in custody means you were a prisoner. Also he went to Hospital on the Thursday, had what appears to be a major operation and then go back to prison in a Cat A Van (because he was a Max security cat A prisoner he could only be transported back in one of those vehicals then you would know that it is impossible to transport a prisoner who would have had open abdominal surgery, he would have burst open after just a few miles.
Remember death in custody in a prison would be documented by the doctors at the prison and York hospital would not have been mentioned at all. Knowing the system and this prison and how it works, anybody that is serving a prison sentence, or under arrest but under police guard, or under prison guard is still on custody no matter where they are. If Denis died at 32,000 ft in a plane but under guard it would still read the same, they would say that he died in custody at HMP Full Sutton. I am not trying to cause issues I just want the memory of my friend to be truthful and correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 16:12, 20 July 2018
Whether or not we knew the subject of an article, or were friends with him, or know how prisons work, or even want to be truthful and correct, counts for nothing at Wikipedia. We just follow reliable sources. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:24, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Martinevans123's point is the most important point here, but I just wanted to add that even if Nilsen was physically at York Hospital when he died, it's still accurate to say that he died "in prison". This is because York Hospital would have effectively a bit of HMP Full Sutton in it while Nilsen was treated, because Full Sutton would have remained responsible for his incarceration. York Hospital would only be responsible for his medical care. You're clearly aware that anyone in custody remains "in prison" regardless of their physical location, so I think this is a bit of a misunderstanding - it's completely true both to say that he died at York Hospital and that he died in prison. On the surface it looks like a contradiction, but it really isn't. (Also, please remember to sign your talk page posts using ~~~~ or by clicking the signature button underneath the text window.) Marianna251TALK 23:09, 20 July 2018 (UTC)