Talk:Am Cyanide case
(Redirected from Talk:Sararat Rangsiwuthaporn)
Latest comment: 3 months ago by Paul 012 in topic Court proceedings in progress
| 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 Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Court proceedings in progress
edit@Paul012: Court proceedings are still in progress for this person, meaning she is only a suspect for the crimes she is accused of perpetrating. Until there is a conviction in that trial Wikipedia should not be including allegations about this person's crimes in an article about her. See WP:BLPCRIME and WP:CRIMINAL.
That said, it might be possible to write an article about the poisoning deaths, without mentioning the allegations against this person. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 19:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- I did consider that (framing the article around the deaths), but given that the connection to the accused is the only thing tying the cases together, the article is going to have to include the exact same information anyway. The article title could be changed to a non-biographical one if we made up a neutral descriptive title such as 2015–2023 Thailand cyanide poisoning deaths, but that would utterly fail the recognisability and naturalness WP:CRITERIA, and seems to me to just be arguing semantics. The only term consistently used to refer to the case is some variant of "Am Cyanide", but that is even more non-neutral, as it directly ties the accused's name to the crime. Thai cyanide serial killer is recognisable and more natural, but attaches a sensational label to the article, resulting in a worse BLP violation as that label is going to be attached to the accused anyway. Do you have any other ideas? --Paul_012 (talk) 03:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Paul 012: One option is to move the article to either a draft article or a user page until such time as a verdict is returned. The other option is to keep improving the article and see what happens. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 09:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'd say it can wait in Mainspace. The case is notable and was one of the biggest stories of 2023, so an article is warranted whether or not a conviction happens. --Paul_012 (talk) 05:22, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Paul 012: One option is to move the article to either a draft article or a user page until such time as a verdict is returned. The other option is to keep improving the article and see what happens. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 09:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Taking another look at this, it should probably be okay to call it the "Am Cyanide case". I've adjusted the article accordingly. --Paul_012 (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC)