Talk:Murder of Rachel McLean

	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
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

University of Oxford Low‑importance

	University of Oxford portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject University of Oxford, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the University of Oxford 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.University of OxfordWikipedia:WikiProject University of OxfordTemplate:WikiProject University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rank?

Quote:

On April 28, Detective Bound, now convinced that McLean was dead, [...]

In British police forces, there is no rank of "Detective" (see this), so what is the correct rank? (Perhaps it's safer just to say "Police" or "investigating officers".) --RFBailey (talk) 04:00, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's the wording that was used, but it was one of the most poorly-written articles (the section was a timeline, to be precise) I've read. Any decent grammar was a bonus. - Dudesleeper / Talk 16:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've rephrased it, using "police" as the opearative word. --RFBailey (talk) 22:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFBailey, it is incorrect to assume that there is no rank of 'Detective' in the British police. Please read beyond the picture of insignia in the article you are quoting.--Kudpung (talk) 03:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about the research

I am pretty sure Miss McLean was born in August 1971, not June 1972 (and - by the by - how can someone born in June 1972 be 19 by April 1991?). And I am pretty sure she was born in Essex, not Blackpool.

Which not only means your article is wrong, but the categories are wrong too.

Did anyone even research this before posting it? Cause these aren't matters of opinion (like the supposed fact they were engaged, and the motive and so forth), they are matters of fact. Leonardo burrows (talk) 21:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See the section above. Did you not research this before posting it? - Dudesleeper / Talk 22:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've now changed her date of birth to August 1971. Awaiting your source. - Dudesleeper / Talk 22:56, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel was born in 1971. My source for this is that I knew Rachel and she was 19 when she died, that is a fact. I think August 1971 is correct month but I don't remember her birthday. I have happened upon this article and signed up to Wikipedia just to post here. I'm not sure how editing works but I may try and edit this article further . Thank you.Lindos2001 (talk) 13:15, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, your "fact" that you knew her doesn't hold much water for Wikipedia's reliable sourcing. Also, just because she was 19 when she died doesn't mean she was born in 1971. - Dudesleeper / Talk 20:02, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your article is full of contradictions and mistkaes, and yet you think someone who knew her is less of a reliable source than the "poorly written article" you claim is the source of this article? Have you ever considered that other people might know things you don't, and that you should listen to them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leonardo burrows (talk • contribs) 11:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel's age as 19 was already given throughout the article and in news paper accounts of the time but this article originally gave her date of birth as June 1972. Something which is not possible, you would be 18 in April 1991 if you were born in June 1972 so one of these had to be wrong. So I was really just confirming that date of June 1972 has to be an error rather than the age of 19. You could be 19 in April 1991 if you had been born in January - March 1972 so 1972 could be correct year not 1991. Of course there is meant to be independant confirmation of stuff on Wikipedia and I could be anyone but if we accept Rachel was 19, as this article already does,then without some kind of birth record we're a bit stuck for a verifiable date of birth.I agreed with August because ( again my "opinion " ) they did meet at her 19th birthday party and that was during the summer holidays of 1990 and I do recall her memorial service with dates 1971-1991. Not verifiable I know but sticks in your mind to see that. Anyway, would be nice to settle on a firm date somehow. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lindos2001 (talk • contribs) 05:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Football club

Tanner was a fan of Chelsea, not Forest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.170.75 (talk) 19:49, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He supported Nottingham Forest while he was living in Nottingham and attended some matches. Though Chelsea may have been his official team. My source here is conversations with Rachel, don't think Tanner ever mentioned it directly. I was told that he planned to attend the FA Cup Final if Forest made the final, they had reached the semi final in March. Forest actually played the semi final on 14th April and beat West Ham 4-0. Lindos2001 (talk) 13:18, 28 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedited

Any information provided in this talk page but not corroborated in the article by references has been edited out of the article or tagged respectively. All references to the Blackpool Gazette have been removed as these linked back to a Wikipedia article about the newspaper, but carried no mention of this murder. Some new references have been provided.--Kudpung (talk) 03:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a photograph of the Gazette's front-page headline to support the reference. - Dudesleeper talk 13:53, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Place of Birth

So - I looked it up, and in 1971 only three Rachel McLeans were born, one in Paddington, one in Epping and one in Leicester. Of these, only one was named Rachel Margaret McLean, born in Epping in the 3rd Quarter of 1971.

[[[1]]]

Which means she couldn't have been born in Blackpool. So can I go ahead and remove that from the article and put at least one of the mistakes right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.232.123 (talk) 19:32, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Request for deletion

This quote is taken from the 9/11 talk page :-

Suggest IP:178.148.5.47 post their conspiracy theories on one of the many crazy sites on the internet. Wikipedia is a encyclopedia that deals in properly sourced facts and not ideas from second rate "experts".....David J Johnson (talk) 17:33, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Given the claim that "Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia that deals in properly source facts", and given the COMPLETE LACK of citations for most of the so called"facts", I am requesting that this article be deleted because clearly it doesn't meat any of the criteria laid out for wikipedia's requirements.

Either that or all the facts that are not substantiated by citations be deleted (which would pretty much just leave her name and date of birth) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.192.232.123 (talk) 12:13, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

mass changes

@Doris Kami: - please consider using the {{dead link}} template, instead of just removing them altogether. Or, you could just find an updated link, such as the very first one you removed. I found an updated one here. Please don't remove useful blue links and don't remove red links simply because their red. The red link guidelines say for them to be left in to encourage article creation. Also, please do not add unsourced content and explain all your changes with an edit summary. Thanks - ^theWOLFchild 14:54, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]