Jump to content

Talk:John Balcerzak

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Headers Needed

[edit]

Perverted. Getting back pay for assisting murder and getting elected as president? Probably only in the US... ~~

Unions are important, but cases like this show they sometimes have too much power... 67.175.167.58 21:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to live in the same town with this particular local, and they don't have a very good record as far as union solidarity goes. But speaking as a sometime union steward for another union, I will point out that from their point of view, the cops were fired for being too accomodating to what they thought were two members of a gay community which in prior years they were encouraged to persecute. A union's job is to keep their members from getting punished to an extent not proportionate to that of the mistake. The "members of the year" thing, on the other hand, was obnoxious and in the worst possible taste; but was aimed mostly at the department and the then-chief thereof (with whom they were not happy).--Orange Mike 22:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What a bizarre country is the US. This sick son of a bitch is gonna get his, sooner or later. Why no website advertising who this sick fuck is? 201.19.129.197 13:57, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"...not getting punished proportionate to their mistake." - Let's see, a fourteen year old boy, with a hole drilled in his head, is wandering naked, and all the good officers do is return him to his abuser and ultimate killer. A simple background check would have revealed Dahmer as a twice convicted sexual abuser and more questions would have been asked. A simple background check on Sinthasomphone would have shown he was fourteen and certainly should not be left with a grown man. And doing both would have revealed that Sinthasomphone was the brother of the boy Dahmer molested and got ten months for. I doubt the gay community would have gotten too up in arms over a few simple checks such as this. And then to make jokes about it over the police radio band, likely as Sinthasomphone was being killed. Nice police work. But let's not fire them or anything. That would be too drastic, policeman who don't do their jobs so severely that a boy is dead, as are several others, had Dahmer not been on the street. But by all means, let's make him Union president for his courageous fight! It makes be ill. But we only have ourselves to blame. We get the government, and bureaucracy, we deserve. If we accept that policemen aren't there to actually protect us when clear violations have been commited, but instead sit preditorially by the highways and byways to pick up the Dillingeresque speeders going ten over the speed limit, then this is what we get. Perhaps someday we'll learn that the State isn't your friend. The Barney Fifes persecute the least dangerous and let the dangerous do as they please. Which makes revenue for the State again...?

Point of talk pages and "orphan" status

[edit]

As disturbing as Balcerzak's actions were, the Talk pages on Wikipedia aren't open forums for discussing your opinion of the person or event in the article; they are for discussion of how to improve the article itself. Also don't forget to sign your comments with four tildes.

Also I removed the "orphan" status heading and category links because I added a "See also" link from the Jeffrey Dahmer page. Inoculatedcities 14:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite correct Inoculated, but some friendly advice - you may want to refrain from commenting in what can be interpreted as a condescending tone. It could be taken the wrong way. Happy editing!  :-) CanadianMist 15:27, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You both are virgins arent you...

this article is badly written

[edit]

someone needs to go through this and sort out the article, a lot of it sounds like children wrote it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.23.56.12 (talk) 02:27, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Such as? --Orange Mike | Talk 21:36, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
While I don't necessarily agree that this article looks "like children wrote it", I do agree that it should be cleaned up in order to separate info on his connection to the Dahmer case and his subsequent service as President of the Milwaukee Police Association, rather than switching back and forth. Furthermore, the article should ideally be expanded to include additional details of Balcerzak's life and career. --TommyBoy (talk) 21:34, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, articles are written in chronological order. As to the rest: he's a marginally notable figure at best, and as a Milwaukee historian I'm telling you, it's extremely unlikely that the article can be meaningfully expanded from the requisite reliable sources. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:57, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I kind of figured there might not be a whole lot of publiclly-available information of Balcerzak beyond his connection to the Dahmer Case and his service as President of the Milwaukee Police Association, because like User:OrangeMike said "he is a marginally notable figure", but at least the article looks better. --TommyBoy (talk) 00:01, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article is inappropriate in its overt slant and value judgments.

[edit]

This article is completely unacceptable as an encyclopedia entry. I am not defending John Balcerzak as I am not an expert on the facts. But could it be any more obvious that the author has engaged in a smear campiahn by stringing together as many negative facts and assertions as possible in order to paint a deliberately unflattering portrait of the man?

One other issue: I can understand couching the word "righteous" in quotations since it is a strongly positive value judgment, and the author would want the reader to understand that the term is not his own. But there is no justifiable reason for placing the phrase Officer of the Year in quotations: it is an objective term, the title of a particular award and honor. The use of this phrase does not in any way imply approval of the awarding of this honor to Balcerzak. One might say that the quotations were simply used as a matter of good punctuation, except for the fact that the phrase is deliberately left uncapitalized, as if to belittle the honor. The obvious reason for the quotation marks and lack of capitals is to pass judgment on the fact the award was given in the first place. It drips with sarcasm and doesn't belong here.Dmacewen (talk) 19:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC) —Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|Dmacewen (talk) 19:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)]] comment added by Dmacewen (talk • contribs) 19:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have other information about the subject, go ahead and add it. What's in here is all properly sourced. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:44, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Balcerzak. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:22, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 8 October 2022

[edit]

Request 1: Change "Dahmer murdered Sinthasomphone by strangling him" to "Dahmer murdered Sinthasomphone by injecting hydrochloric acid into his skull". The UPI article said "Dahmer murdered Sinthasomphone by strangling him", but the article was published in 6 August 1991. In 1993, Dahmer testified in court that he killed the boy by injecting acid into his skull.

sources: https://www.upi.com/Archives/1991/08/06/Dahmer-charged-with-dozen-killings/6458681451200/

https://apnews.com/article/6d4c170c7590b4207f0879b3eac8ec46

Request 2: Change "bleeding from his anus" to "bleeding from his buttocks area"

source: https://www.upi.com/Archives/1991/08/01/Tape-Police-thought-boy-was-Dahmers-adult-lover/4451681019200/ 103.156.42.6 (talk) 11:56, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:52, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 October 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved (non-admin closure) >>> Extorc.talk 06:05, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

John Balcerzak → Killing of Konerak Sinthasomphone – As the article mostly focuses on the killing of the victim and how both of the police officers handled the situation, i suggest changing the title to "Killing Murder of Konerak Sinthasomphone", and moving down "John A. Balcerzak (born April 13, 1957) is an American former police officer from Milwaukee, Wisconsin" and the "Service as union official" to his own section, maybe titled "John Balcerzak" or similar. If these changes were to happen, i also suggest adding more information about the murder in the lead, in addition to the current lead that mainly focuses on the attention the police officers received. 𝙨𝙥𝙞𝙙𝙚𝙧-𝙬𝙞𝙣𝙚-𝙗𝙤𝙩𝙩𝙡𝙚(🕷) - (✉) 17:00, 8 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 17:55, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support move to "Murder of Konerak Sinthasomphone" per WP:1E. Since Balcerzak is really only notable for this one event, the article should be about the event.
According to the flowchart at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (violence and deaths), the title should be "Murder of..." instead of "Killing of..." since there was a murder conviction. Surachit (talk) 13:17, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - to "Murder of..." --Orange Mike | Talk 13:39, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Dedicating a standalone page to a single one of Jeffrey Dahmer's murders strikes me as unnecessary. For one, Sinthasomphone was one of many he killed in his apartment, so I don't think it's worth framing as an isolated incident. Two, everything about the murder is in his article already, as it should be, so this would be a redundant content fork. Three, the info about Balcerzak's later life would be very tangential if the article wasn't directly about him, otherwise you might as well include everything related to Gabrish too. If Balcerzak isn't notable (I have my doubts that he is) the page should simply be merged/deleted, not retitled. Nohomersryan (talk) 21:56, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That's a fair point. While there is precedent for articles about individual murders committed by serial killers (like Murder of Georgann Hawkins), the Dahmer article goes into more detail about the Sinthasomphone murder than I thought. And it appears to be more well referenced, as well. I would be open to a merge/redirect, but that would be a separate discussion from the move request. Surachit (talk) 23:29, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The main article on the murder is Jeffrey Dahmer. Having a separate article on one of his killings makes no sense. To be honest, I'm not sure we even need a separate article. John Balcerzak should just redirect to Jeffrey Dahmer and anything additional in this article should be merged into that one. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:08, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DISAGREE. OPPOSE. FORBID. This case is different than the others. Do your research, THEN comment. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:E7:1712:5D00:5C92:3031:AC5A:78F6 (talk) 09:30, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography has been notified of this discussion. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 17:55, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: to generate a more thorough consensus. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 17:55, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, per Necrotesp's comment above. Moncrief (talk) 04:28, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Necrotesp and usernamekiran. --TylerBurden (talk) 16:57, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Balcerzak&oldid=1208723098"