This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

I feel like this article needs some editing, specifically at the following points:

• "James Dreger was his bitch lover for life." (Early Life, end of 1st paragraph)
• "He developed an interest in seeing little girls undressing" (Early Life, second paragraph)
• "Black eventually got his first proper girlfriend" (First Crimes, second paragraph)

The article's tone just seems to be deliberately provocative, some points seem to be sensationalized and, in particular, the above lines have what seems to be a derisive tone to them. There is also no explanation of how this person got from Mobile, Alabama to England. One remains slightly confused on this point. I'll try to do some research and see if I can update this article, but it would be really great if someone who knew more about this than I could at least glance over it and see if most of the stuff in here is correct. Submitting to the clean-up list. Una sola 07:14, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

"Black developed a sexual awareness at an early age. He claims to have compared genitalia with a girl about the age of five."

Now that's normal for kids! I think it's ridiculous to put that in here. 61.17.202.175 17:06, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 03:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

"...Black told Wyre..." is the only mention of Wyre anywhere in the article. Who? — Tamfang 17:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Ray Wyre is an expert in Child Protection, director of Ray Wyre Associates an Independent Child Protection consultancy that tries to rehabilitate paedophiles. This section looks like it was cut and pasted from the Crime Library article. -- Epocalypse2 10:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I have removed material from this article that does not comply with our policy on the biographies of living persons. Biographical material must always be referenced from reliable sources, especially negative material. Negative material that does not comply with that must be immediately removed. Note that the removal does not imply that the information is either true or false.

Please do not reinsert this material unless you can provide reliable citations, and can ensure it is written in a neutral tone. Please review the relevant policies before editing in this regard. Editors should note that failure to follow this policy may result in the removal of editing privileges.-- Scott Mac (Doc) 17:20, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Black was a White Van Delivery Man who delivered Advertising Posters to small businesses around the U.K. He worked alone and friequently delivered Posters to empty Premisses. Petrol reciepts and witness statements linked Black to the crimes he was found guilty of. He was detained at Wakefield Prison. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnwrd ( talk • contribs) 23:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

"Apart from suffering from shock, the girl was uninjured. She had been sexually assaulted."

The girl was 6 years old. If she'd been sexually assaulted, that would injure her. I'm confused as to how this is written? Is there a better way to write this point up? I mean, it's a sensitive subject... But I thing there's a logical failure here. Being sexually assaulted is injurious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KaylaraOwl ( talk • contribs) 01:19, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

This was edited, as the source does not mention shock.-- ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 11:00, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The second line down, reads: The policeman who discovered the child in the back of the van, tied up, gagged with tape and stuffed head-first into a sleeping bag, was the girl's father.

It may seem a small point, but may I ask this might be reworded? For example: She was discovered by a police officer, who was also her father, in the back of the van, tied up, gagged with tape and stuffed head-first into a sleeping bag.

Given the natural emotion of the case, as written, it seems somewhat disjointed. 86.16.68.132 ( talk) 11:40, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Black may well be a psychopath, but the claim is backed by a reference that cannot be readily checked. I have found no scholarly sources online that describe Robert Black as having been diagnosed as a psychopath in the clinical sense. I suggest this is removed unless further, verifiable citations can be provided. Michael Heseltin ( talk) 00:20, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The source refers to Robert Black - Coigreach Gun Chogais (Without Conscience) which was broadcast on BBC Alba and is in Scottish Gaelic. I agree that this is not ideal as a source and the programme is not currently available on iPlayer anyway. The psychopath claim may need to be removed.-- ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:15, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

It is very inappropriate for the following text to be under 'early crimes' "While living with the Tulips, Robert Black developed sexual self-awareness at a young age. He later said that from the age of eight he would often push objects up his anus.[3] This was a practice that he would continue into adulthood. As a young child, he also had an interest in the genitals of other children. At the age of five, he and a girl both took off their clothes and compared each other's genitals.[3]" These actions are not crimes in the slightest, regardless of his future. Sexual experimentation is completely normal, and most every child will compare genitals with other children. It is wrong to suggest that these actions are perverse or unusual. They should be moved to a section regarding his childhood if they are kept, they do not fit at all in early crimes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.22.73.39 ( talk) 22:14, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Firstly you have placed your comment in the wrong position, It should be at the end of the Talk page and secondly you failed to sign your "contribution". Regarding the placement of Black's time with the Tulips, your comments are POV and not supported by any evidence other than your personal opinion. Considering Black's record his sexual self-awareness experiments are in the correct section. Please abide by Wikipedia conventions when contributing. Thank you, David J Johnson ( talk) 09:19, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

What does 'allowed the prosecution to impart towards the similarities' means? The word 'impart' in particular puzzles me. 109.157.12.18 ( talk) 16:38, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

To make information known/be divulged (to the jury).-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 18:34, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

1. Of or relating to work or a job regarded as servile. 2. Of, relating to, or appropriate for a servant.

I don't like this word. It drives a coach and horses through the middle of WP:NPOV. I have been a part-time barman and a delivery driver. While they were not the best-paid jobs, I did not feel like a servant while doing them. -- John ( talk) 09:07, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan was a lifeguard, and found it a pivotal experience in framing his political philosophy. I don't think he thought it was menial, though he gave it up for other reasons. Would "casual" be a better word here? -- John ( talk) 11:06, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Casual could be determined as work not exactly taxable or guaranteed to last? I said that between '68 and '70, his other jobs were in factories as well as a part-time barman. Maybe "unskilled" would be better than "casual"? -- Kieronoldham ( talk) 01:04, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

• The Doe Network
• True Crime
• True Detective
• Real-Life Crimes

What makes any of these suitable sources for a BLP? My feeling is that these are not reliable sources for Wikipedia, let alone WP:BLPSOURCES-compliant. -- John ( talk) 09:29, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Black's dead now isn't he? Cassianto ^Talk 09:31, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

He died six months ago. The policy still applies " for people who have recently died, in which case the policy can extend for an indeterminate period beyond the date of death—six months, one year, two years at the outside. Such extensions would apply particularly to contentious or questionable material about the dead that has implications for their living relatives and friends, such as in the case of a possible suicide or a particularly gruesome crime...". Good sourcing is good sourcing. Is this good sourcing? -- John ( talk) 09:43, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough. Most of the people I write about tend to have been dead for around 70+ years. So BLP is completely foreign to me. I'll take a look at the sources now. Cassianto ^Talk 11:32, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

• The Doe Network are a group of volunteers with an interest in missing persons. They are not a recognised organisation like, say, the National Crime Agency. In terms of TDN being reliable, I don't know, but they do appear to specialise in their field of work - but in America. The are based there, so I don't know what makes them as reliable as the English variant NCA. The NCA shoulder the work of such cases and would be very reliable. I would therefore say that TDN fail as a RS. Cassianto ^Talk 11:39, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks once again for looking at these. I don't think the Doe Network would qualify as a reliable source or adds anything to an article. My worry about the other three is that they are not verifiable to me or to others. Web sources can be checked, and I am in the process of working through these to check they reference what they claim to. Book sources can too, although it is harder and would need a trip to a library or dipping into the pocket. These three seem to be inaccessible through either route and this seems to work against their usefulness. -- John ( talk) 12:25, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

User:Kieronoldham, are you able to comment on these? Do you have ongoing access to the book sources that are used in the article? You mentioned having this article peer-reviewed, which I think will soon be a good idea. One of the things people will look at is the sourcing. At present, most of it is good, some of it is less good (see above), and there is still that Gaelic TV source which cannot be verified. Is there scope for upgrading most or all of the poorly-sourced material to better sources, books or high-quality web sources? -- John ( talk) 23:29, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Yes I have the lot, John. I did "dip into the pocket" to read further on this case before I opted to expand it beyond how it stood in mid-January. If you want to create an e-mail address I'll do likewise and scan any pages you like, to you, for verification. (Of course I know editors who contribute significantly to articles cannot revied GA submitted articles.) If you have an Amazon account, you should log in and sometimes you can 'look inside' books you have either bought or not bought for a preview. Some pages are omitted from preview of course. I know your issue isn't with the books. I fail to see how these magazines are 'reliable sources' beyond your personal criteria (and that is not a personal slight, just an observation) but appreciate reviewers' scrutiny. These are hardly fanzines. However, if you want to 'trim back' on the number of instances they are in use, feel free to list particular ones you'd like superseding and I'll look into books I have - or online reputable sources - and replace them over the next few days. I just hope that there will not be issues with too heavy a reliance on so few reference sources (i.e. the books). I suppose I/we can look at other reputable online sources like BBC archives, Independent archives etc., too. Even though there has been minor friction between us both, collectively, we're getting there with this article. I have little issue with the Doe Network, but wouldn't refer to it as 'unreliable'. Further reference support may suffice? Perhaps it could. Best regards,-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 23:57, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Feel free to list any you like you'd like superseding or upgrading.-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 01:16, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Ok. Robert Black – Coigreach Gun Chogais, BBC Alba, 6 January 2010 is a TV show which is not viewable online so cannot be verified. The Doe Network is a voluntary organisation so not the best, as User:Cassianto agreed above. True Crime and True Detective look like mass-market magazines. What is their editorial policy? How well are their facts checked? It is hard to say as I cannot verify them, other than by buying the back issues. Real-Life Crimes (1993). Robert Black: Evil Child Killer Of Susan Maxwell, Caroline Hogg and Sarah Harper. Issue 108. Eaglemoss. ISBN  978-1-858-75042-2 at least has an ISBN number but I am not sure it is much better really. The BBC Alba source should be replaced immediately. Surely there are better sources that Black called himself Tulip when he lived with his foster carers? Long-term all these weak sources should be upgraded to books or quality web sources. -- John ( talk) 20:19, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

I'll make a start on this either tonight or tomorrow, starting with the BBC Alba source. Should I supersede any that are still not as reputable as could be, feel free to inform me. Regards,-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 23:56, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

This section should be written as far as possible in prose. -- John ( talk) 20:24, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Let me know what you think regarding the edits just made. I saw a little too much saturation of "disappeared while" or "was a" with the previous version following names. We're getting there. Regards.-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 02:21, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Robert Black never got a whole-life tariff, he was given a minimum 35 year tariff for his 1994 convictions, and a minimum 25 year tariff for his 2011 conviction. So why is he listed on the list of prisoners with whole-life orders article? The Good Dante ( talk) 17:21, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, I can't find any murder conviction for Black which had a whole life tariff. The article list of prisoners with whole-life orders says "at least one subsequent Home Secretary went on to rule that Black's life sentence should mean life". This is unsourced, and it is now controversial because Home Secretaries can no longer do this.-- ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:02, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Exactly, plus it says on that article he got the whole-life tariff in 1994, but his sentence in 1994 was only a minimum 35 year tariff. The Good Dante ( talk) 20:10, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Some news reports regarding the Cardy murder may have led to confusion over there. Needs removing from the See also section here.-- Kieronoldham ( talk) 22:00, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

@ Ianmacm: or @ Kieronoldham:, could you possibly remove Robert Black from the list of prisoners with whole-life tariffs? I feel like as a new editor I will just be reverted if I was to remove his entry. The Good Dante ( talk) 19:16, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

 Done: Yes, it should be removed for the reasons given in this thread.-- ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:25, 27 January 2022 (UTC)