This article was nominated for deletion on 24 October 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
I accepted this AfC article because there seems to be a large amount of coverage about this individual. It seems a film has been made and at least one TV program. Obviously, the article needs to be written to include these notable facts. Sionk ( talk) 16:44, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
I am distressed that the granddaughter is named in this article. She is a private party, a child, and a victim, including a victim of sexual assault. That's three good reasons why we should NOT be publicizing her name. (See WP:AVOIDVICTIM.) Unless someone can give me a good reason why this should be included (I'll give it a week), I am going to remove all references to the child's name from the article. -- MelanieN ( talk) 18:57, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Is anyone able to find a birthdate for Elkins so I can finish the infobox? @ Mollyandclarence:, I noticed you uploaded the picture, are you able to find a birthdate? Bali88 ( talk) 15:30, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Spencerhuffman1, I think it's a notable case and is worth having on wikipedia, but I also don't want to make someone uncomfortable...is there any way we can edit the page to avoid deleting the page? Bali88 ( talk) 15:52, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
My name is Clarence Elkins Sr. I created this page and felt safe putting my information on the web. Since I created the page I have felt much stress & threatened from people trying to get in touch for all the wrong reasons due to my Wikipedia page. I've had enough stress in my life and I am asking you to please remove this page ASAP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mollyandclarence ( talk • contribs) 20:05, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
The following sentence appears in the article:
I think this needs to change for several reasons:
1. A lot of cases - if not most - are built on circumstantial evidence. The implication here is that there is something wrong with a circumstantial case, when in fact it is the norm.
2. The implication is that forced entry, fingerprints, and DNA are not circumstantial evidence when, in fact, they are. Fingerprints are circumstantial evidence, as is DNA in a many cases, especially in a situation like this where the perpetrator is known to the victim and you would expect to find their fingerprints and DNA at the scene.
3. This case had an eyewitness, which is an example of one of the very few types of evidence that aren't circumstantial. The fact that the witness was scared into saying that she saw something that she didn't is a seperate issue. The fact of the matter is that at the time of the trial it was considered that there was a witness and that is not circumstantial evidence.
Basically the sentence implies that this was a circumstantial case and that a circumstantial case is unusual and/or that a circumstantial case has less merit, when in reality most cases are built on circumstantial evidence and in this case there was a witness, which isn't circumstantial! Does that make sense? FillsHerTease ( talk) 00:40, 18 January 2016 (UTC)