Talk:Murchison Murders

Murder method

I disagree with the removal of the murder method and have rolled back. It was well documented and has been the subject of both non-fiction and fictional works. Wikipedia is not censored. Refer: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not censored which is policy.--A Y Arktos\^talk 21:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll concede the point. I disagree with publishing these things if they don't need to be, but I can't fault your argument. Russell Brown 16:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The disposal method was what made this case notable because it had been discussed as a plot for a book and was then actually used. Because Rowles had been party to the discussions, that was why in part there was less doubt about his guilt. Thus in general I would agree with you, but not this time. I wouldn't have written it myself, but I wouldn't remove it unless it wasn't correct. Probably it should be referenced - did it come from a court case transcript, Upfield, or the more recent book on the case? If Upfield then that is a bit different - fact should not be confused with fiction - and what was discussed shoud not be confused with what happened.--A Y Arktos\^talk 20:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

It was definitely discussed, the technique described (with a bit more detail) pretty much as it's now detailed on the page. I've read Upfield's account of the case -- the book titled "The Murchison Murders" and it's clear that everybody he worked with was familiar with the method. The famous discussion that took place wasn't where Rowles first heard about the method, but was detailed in evidence simply to prove that Rowles knew about it. According to Upfield it was in fact it was Ritchie, the deviser of the method, who first mentioned it to Rowles. The first written record would probably have been Upfield's novel; I think this came about before the trial started.Russell Brown 14:45, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Sandsofwindee.jpg

The image Image:Sandsofwindee.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --02:56, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on The Murchison Murders. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20050618150342/http://www.westprint.com.au/Articles%20&%20Stories/murder_on_rabbit_fence.htm to http://www.westprint.com.au/Articles%20&%20Stories/murder_on_rabbit_fence.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)