Talk:Barry Williams (spree killer)

Name

Barry Street's real name was Barry Williams (http://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/live-serial-killer-barry-williams-7888058), Harry Street was the name given to him as a new identity when he was released from jail. Suggest making a new article under "Barry Williams (Spree kiler) ? Gbickerdike (talk) 12:23, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Moved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:28, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

However, he's now known as Harry Street, and has pleaded guilty to new crimes. If it were an entertainer who'd changed names during his career, the article's name would probably be what he is known by now; Is this situation any different in that respect because he's a criminal? Surely what is most relevant is what he is now known as? Jim Michael (talk) 12:33, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Per WP:Self-identification we should use the name he uses himself, including other names in the article, similar to the Charles Salvador article. That name seems to be Harry Street. Martin451 18:24, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

We don't know what identity he now uses. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:10, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

All the recent media sources identify him as Harry Street; some of them also state his previous name. There is no evidence of him having changed his name again. Jim Michael (talk) 20:53, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

The media reports from last week[1][2][3][4] call him Harry Street, with no mention of his previous name. Martin451 21:20, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

They were legally prevented from using his real name until after the verdict. Reports subsequent to his new conviction all use it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:31, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

His name is Harry Street; that's his identity now - it's not merely an alias. Barry Williams is his previous name. The comparison with Charles Salvador is the most similar case to this that I can think of. Jim Michael (talk) 17:17, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

The sentence remarks from Judge Blair [5] from here refer to the case as R -v- Harry Street. The pertinent sentences are The defendant, Harry Street, is now aged 70. In 1978, when he was called Barry Williams, and ..... i.e. he is now called Harry Street. Martin451 17:31, 8 October 2014 (UTC)

(GA Reviewer) Do any of you know - or can you verify - that he legally changed his name or if his new name is merely an alias? We can go either way, we have many articles on people's most famous name, which is not always their legal name. Middle initials are used on many disambiguation pages, it is actually rather common. Montanabw^(talk) 05:36, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

While it's possible, in the UK, to use a deed poll, no legal process is required for a change of name; one can use any name one likes, so long as there is no intent to defraud. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:06, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

His name was stated in court during the recent case as Harry Street, so that must be his actual name, not merely an alias. I haven't seen it stated whether or not he changed it by deed poll. During the recent prosecution of Dave Lee Travis, the court used his real name David Patrick Griffin - yet we still have his article under the name he's best known as. I don't see the case for keeping this article at its current title when he is no longer known as Barry Williams. Middle names/initials are only used in article titles when the person is known that way, which is not the case here. Jim Michael (talk) 21:59, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

Review here

This review is transcluded from Talk:Barry Williams (spree killer)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. Reviewer: Montanabw (talk · contribs) 00:44, 8 October 2014 (UTC) I will review this article. Some initial thoughts: I note that a short discussion of disambiguation occurred on my talk page. Perhaps to avoid a parenthetical dab that could be viewed as judgmental (even if accurate) , perhaps move to a title with his middle name or middle initial, such as Barry K. Williams or Barry Kenneth Williams. For me this is not a GA issue, but if it is something under discussion, that's my suggestion for solving it. The lead needs to be expanded. Two paragraphs is usually the minimum for a GA-class article. I think you can probably add one more sentence on his background, expand a bit more on his arrest and trial, perhaps note that, per the "spree killer" label, that the 1978 killings all occurred within what looks like less than 2 hours? I am not fond of one-sentence paragraphs, I would strongly recommend adding more material or blending at least some of them into longer paragraphs. Is there any information on Williams' behavior during his hospitalization (hospitalisation, I guess you say in the UK) or any news on why he was deemed "cured'" enough to release? Any expansion on the law in the UK governing such conditions or anything we can add to that section? I would recommend you wikilink "mental health legislation I suggest a rework first sentence of 2013 incident section, it's a run-on. Those are my initial thoughts. More to come. The table below will illustrate what I am looking for: Montanabw(talk) 00:44, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Rate Attribute Review Comment 1. Well-written: 1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Spotted some comma splices and run-on sentences. Note also comments above the chart. 1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. I suggest wikilinking West Bromwich and Nuneaton the first time they appear (in the lead) and delinking them elsewhere. These locations are not familiar to readers outside the UK, so links will help. FIXED 2. Verifiable with no original research: 2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Formatting is within acceptable parameters 2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Footnote #1 has an issue, see below Fixed 2c. it contains no original research. Looks solid, reviewing refs, but see no problems here 3. Broad in its coverage: 3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. I find the article a little sparse; perhaps it can be expanded a wee bit from existing sources OK 3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). But see 3a, could use a bit more material 4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. 5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: 6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. No images, but not required for GA. I also presume that it would be exceedingly difficult to find free images of Williams. That said, any images of perhaps the hospital, the courthouse, or the neighborhoods where any of these incidents occurred? Will pass without them, but curious if any to add? ADDRESSED 6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Looks like a lot of photos of West Bromwich here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:West_Bromwich not sure if any relevant, but might be something worth adding Acceptable 7. Overall assessment. PASSED I disagree with using his middle name or middle initial as the article's title. His middle name is uncited and not mentioned in media sources. He is a spree killer who has been convicted of five counts of manslaughter. It is usual when disambiguating to use what the person is known for in the article name. We don't usually disambiguate by middle name when the person is not known by their middle name. The article lacks important information which prevents it qualifying as a good article, including: date and place of birth, early life, education, previous convictions (if any), his behaviour in hospital from 1978-1994, an infobox and a photo. Jim Michael (talk) 17:13, 8 October 2014 (UTC) Jim, you are not the reviewer, I am. I will exercise appropriate discretion. I presume that some of this information may not be available (such as a photo) and the GA criteria do not necessarily require that we have information that cannot be obtained. Feel free to add an infobox if you wish, that would be helpful. Montanabw(talk) 05:32, 10 October 2014 (UTC) Thank you, User:Montanabw, for your helpful comments. I'm not sure whether I'm supposed to reply in the table, or here. To address your points: There's also discussion of the article name on its talk page; I'll see if consensus emerges Lede expanded All but one one-sentence paras changed. Detail of his time in treatment is (rightly) sparse, but some detail of his discharge added. "mental health legislation" linked. 2013 section run-on changed. Place-names linked. Additional material added. Stafford Court image added. Our only image of Broadmoor is poor and too modern. Will take one of the Birmingham courthouse the next time I pass it. Hope that satisfies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:03, 10 October 2014 (UTC) Lede is much better, additional material is helpful, photo is helpful, links good. I believe that the article name issue is outside the scope of GA, though I must say that I prefer articles to avoid parenthetical disambiguation as much as possible. (My own work on wikiproject horse racing is in a project that is tending toward removing the parenthetical (jockey) in favor of full name with middle initials or other identifiers where possible (i.e. Mike E. Smith, John R. Velazquez, but also see Aiden O'Brien versus Aidan O'Brien). Montanabw(talk) 04:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC) Here's what I still would like to see: The sentence in background beginning "During the mid 1970s, he had been involved in a number of disputes with his neighbours..." is really the first sentence of the "1978 incident" section. I'd suggest moving it. Footnote #1, to coordinates, does not verify that it was his house, only that that address is at those coordinates. Need to fix that. I may to a "Corbett" and make some minor wikignoming edits to the article, if they are acceptable to you. As a reviewer, I cannot contribute substantive content nor can I own my edits, so if they do not seem helpful to you, we can discuss Derbyshire moors is a redlink, a search does not clarify for me where you intend to be linking, but see if you can fix that. I am reviewing the footnotes further and may have additional comments The article had no infobox, I added one, I do hope I was not overstepping by being so bold. Is there any relevance to Michel and Lisa Di Maria being Italian? Seems unnecessary unless being Italian was why they were targeted, or perhaps not being able to speak English was a factor in their demise. If relevance, not it, if of no particular relevance, I'd chop the ethnicity bit. this source notes some things I think may be worth adding in a shortened summary form to increase the comprehensiveness of the article: 1) "Noise had become an obsession for the factory worker who had convinced himself that the neighbours were laughing at him." 2) examples of erratic behavior: "He had dangerously adapted his own “more powerful” bullets and had even demanded moving targets wearing wigs at the club where he spent much of his time." 3) His parents were unaware of his activities. (Their profession could also be added to the background section) 4) That he did have one illegal firearm; 5) The Birmingham mail citation also notes that the car chase reached speeds of 100 mph, which you mention as a "high speed car chase" in the lede, but do not appear to mention later in the article text, and do need to do so. I found the threat to Philip Burkitt a week before the shootings to also be relevant - that Birmingham mail article is a gold mine A question on British English: What does it mean that "Two counts of attempted murder were ordered to lie on file"? He was charged, not charged, charges dismissed, charges deferred...? Clarify? Probably worth noting (several sources verify this) that his release to the bail hostel was a matter of public outcry and not just a MP complaint. I'd add. Fix those and we should be good to go. Montanabw(talk) 04:25, 15 October 2014 (UTC) Optional: What do you think of this image for the 2013 incident section, as it is where he was sent then? File:Ashworth_Hospital_-_geograph.org.uk_-_90341.jpg. I have no need for this image to be added, and it IS from 2005, so maybe outdated, but if you find it helpful, here it is. Montanabw(talk) 05:50, 15 October 2014 (UTC) Thank you for these additional comments. Using your numbering: Not sure I agree. Is that a show-stopper? The address is confirmed by footnote #3, The Times Thank your for these. en-GB uses "pleaded", but the rest are fine. Surprisingly, there is no suitable target at present. I looked! I will create a stub shortly. Noted Noted Mentioned by several sources, but removed Will do That's the only source to mention a speed; I suspect journalistic hyperbole Will do Red-linked; I'll create a stub shortly OK Thanks for the pic, which I'd failed to find. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:01, 15 October 2014 (UTC) 1 is not a "show-stopper" but I think if you keep it in background, then maybe add more of the stuff from Birmingham Mail (if it's adequately RS) on how he threatened them, thought they were making fun of him, etc. to go to his paranoia. I made a tweak of the FN on the address to make it clear at the point it is cited. Montanabw(talk) 14:22, 15 October 2014 (UTC) {{ping|Montanabw} OK, all done, I think. The "one illegal firearm" is covered in the mention of his firearms certificate - it's not clear which weapon was covered by that, and which not. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:18, 18 October 2014 (UTC) Passed. Nice work! Montanabw(talk) 19:00, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Death place + age

The cited sources quite clearly states that Williams was "admitted to a general hospital" before he died; colleagues should not therefore be stating his death place as Ashworth Hospital. Similarly, the source says he was "aged 70 when he appeared in court earlier this year"; not at the time of his death. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

I see a lot of people keep seeking precision for death date, but you are correct that absent a birth date or at least a RS that affirmatively states his age at death, we cannot engage in speculation, OR or SYNTH. As the biography of a recently deceased person, WP:BLP still basically applies. Montanabw^(talk) 00:18, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

this article does say in its body text "Street, aged 70 when he appeared in court earlier this year..." so 70 is probably accurate, given that the only other option is age 69. Montanabw^(talk) 05:13, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Recent reversion of editing

So, I made an effort to try to improve the article recently to help make it better, but it was recently reverted by another editor. Only, I wish to know if a full reversion was needed, or if they could have noted that some of my work was good enough to not need to be reverted. See, I have some issues with how the information is, now that its reverted:

1. Why is information regarding his disputes with the Burkitt family not part of "!978 Incident"? Surely it should be there, since that is what can be put forward as a precursor to what eventually became the infamous incident that saw him kill five people, three of them being the family.
2. If he was diagnosed with schizophrenia, while is that mentioned in release? Surely that would have been uncovered by the psychiatrists during his trial, and thus be mentioned there.
3. If it states he was released in 1994, while does the 2014 quote by the NHS spokesperson state he was released in 1993 by the tribunal?
4. What behaviour did he exhibit to the neighbours he had before he was arrested in 2013? Surely that is worth a mention. According to the special episode by Channel 5's documentary series The Nightmare Neighbour Next Door, his victims in that incident made references in interviews to being harassed with banging on their walls, verbal threats, and Street following them to a new home. Is that not notable for this article?
5. Should not the second gun he used in the 1978 incident be referenced as an illegal weapon, considering he was licenced to own only one semi-automatic gun?

I just have some concerns that these parts aren't good, and need improving. GUtt01 (talk) 21:30, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

1. The disputes with the Burkitt family are in the 'Background' (i.e. "precursor") section. We don't know that they happened in 1978 and not before.
2. We don't know when he was diagnosed. Your "surely" is supposition - do you have a citation for it?
3. Please see sic
4. Again, a citation is needed.
5. This was addressed in the good article review; see above.

Your edits removed several key points from the lede, contrary to WP:Lede; introduced statements not in the cited sources; removed cited quotations from those involved; and introduced unclear or misleading language such as "...severe mental affliction, in which he was detained..." and " a review by police ... as a result of him living under the identity of Harry Street". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:52, 19 May 2018 (UTC)