Talk:Disappearance of Natalee Holloway/Archive 1

message: People who recently disappeared and for whom there were large manhunts?  I think this list should be removed, as it is not comprehensive or really related. Tcassedy 15:27, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: What is this list of individuals at the bottom of the page?

message: "According to the Kalpoe brothers, she was making out in the back seat with van der Sloot."  I checked whether this means (if true) that Holloway could have committed an act of sexual assualt/statutory rape.  This is unambiguously not the case.  The age of consent in Aruba is apparently 16, as is the case for Alabama (relevant because it is illegal in the U.S. for citizens to break U.S. law abroad, though I don't remember the specifics here... it falls under legislation passed to prevent sex tourism where such actions are legal in the host country but not in the U.S.).  Anyway, it doesn't really fit in the article itself except perhaps as a passing reference, and probably not even then.  But I post the information here so nobody else has to bother doing the research.  --Yamla 15:47, 2005 Jun 24 (UTC)
:Not so fast!  It turns out that a different law applies.  18 U.S.C. 2423B.  It turns out that if she traveled "for the purpose of engaging in a sexual act with a person [younger than] 18 years of age"  then she could be found guilty.  I believe that she met up with van der Sloot there and had no previous contact with him, however, so it is unlikely that anyone will charge her with travelling for the purpose of sex.  Can someone confirm that she did not know van der Sloot before traveling? --Yamla 16:40, 2005 Jun 24 (UTC)
*For what it's worth, the Alabama "age of consent" for statutory cases is 18. At 16 you can get a marriage license, though. I have not heard any speculation that she knew Van der Sloot before traveling. Dystopos 17:00, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure about that? This link seems to imply differently.  The age of 18 isn't mentioned at all, though 12, 16, and 19 all are.  I don't live in Alabama and I'm not a lawyer so I am just guessing here.
**Looks like I'm wrong. Nothing on that page would prohibit an 18 year old woman from making out with a 17 year old boy in Aruba, though. Dystopos 06:09, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Age of consent

message: I've heard a number of media commentators discuss the overplay this is receiving, particularly on Fox News.  I think it should be mentioned in the article that her disapperance has generated a media circus much like that of Terri Schiavo, well, almost as bad as hers was, anyway.  Especially since people disappear all the time.
*I agree that there is definately a lot of playing of this in the media as a whole, but firstly, it is mentioned in the article that it's covered quite widely in the press, so you may consider editing that paragraph, and secondly, I don't think Fox News is covering this anymore than CNN or MSNBC, Natalee has been a headline story in all the news casts pretty much daily since she dissapeared. - Lordwow
*There was a discussion about this on an NPR interview I caught part of this afternoon, referencing a particular show on CNN that made a point to show photos of other missing children, but spend a great deal of time discussing the Holloway investigation. I also remember the Birmingham Post-Herald drawing a comparison between this missing person case and a black woman who has been missing in Birmingham for about the same amount of time. Accounts of secondary discussions such as that are preferred over "original research" of how much coverage we think has been given this case. Dystopos 3 July 2005 04:36 (UTC)
**Strongly dissent with the underlying premise.  The primary reason she became news was because crime in general on Aruba is extremely low, and serious crimes such as kidnapping and murder are almost unheard of.  With less than 1% unemployment and a crime rate of around 0.5%, police in Aruba literally perform their jobs in tee-shirts and shorts, and the most common crimes they investigate are burglaries and thefts of bicycles.  The downside of this is that their police forces are almost completely inexperienced in actually investigating crimes of this nature, and already charges of incompetence are being slung at them from several pundits. Xaa
***I am not convinced that Aruba's crime rate has fueled the media sensationalism. If you could cite someone for this claim it would merit more space in the article. I've seen plenty of charges of incompetence, even some theories of conspiracy to conceal drug smuggling rings. I haven't seen much talk in the US (where the media circus is being produced) about how this case is of interest do to Aruba's low crime rate. Dystopos 03:39, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Press Coverage

message: It occurs to me that this page is more detailed than it needs to be. Each time a new turn is announced in the media it seems to gain material without losing much previous speculation. The case is not particularly notable from a long-term point of view. I'm planning to weed out a lot of material I consider unencyclopedic soon. I wanted to put this notice here in case anyone had any comment. Dystopos 5 July 2005 16:07 (UTC)
:That sounds good to me.  It may be worth maintaining a brief timeline, but certainly much condensed over what is currently in there.  --Yamla July 5, 2005 16:17 (UTC)
Also agree with that.  Five years from now, people are going to marvel at how much attention these "cases" received in the American media.  Even now, there are very few people outside of the U.S. who know who Natalee Holloway is or was, and there are even fewer people who'd see her disappearance as significant.  She's being used as gossip fodder -- nothing more, and nothing less.  We've got the media to thank for that, I suppose.
--Jeus July 5, 2005 17:47 (EDT)
:In Holland (where I live) their is also little attention to this case. The Dutch media are saying that this is just another case that shows how hypocrit Americans are. The're is more attention to the fact that Americans don't know that American teenager are misbehaving in Aruba by using severe amounts of drugs and alcohol (even to Dutch standards (which are according to you quite high because)). From Alkmaar, The Netherlands. Yours, Wiki213ip 6 July 2005 17:44 (UTC)
I don't see what's wrong with maintaining all verifiable information.  If the article were 10 pages long and unwieldy, that'd be one thing, but a one-to-two-page article is certainly fine.  We have no lack of space here. --Delirium July 9, 2005 17:37 (UTC)
*Some of our community, motivated apparently by the editorial maelstrom to various pages as a result of Hurricane Katrina, have begun some brainstorming about "recency bias" at Wikipedia:Recentism. Whatever consensus emerges there will surely pertain to this page. Dystopos 20:21, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Recentism sets wikipedia apart from commercial encyclopedia. Does Britannica have articles about this case? Will Encarta tell you who Gordon Freeman is? Sorry for this off-topic remark :) --Mzzl 08:19, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contraction proposal 

message: The two top returns from google for the term Natalee Holloway  are about how this case is overblown with respect to other (nonwhite?) missing persons. As well the article criticises the infotainment value of this story, and asks why this case should get more coverage then other issues (gay marriage, bombing, etc. there is a list.  The two articles are here and here.
Since this appears to be valid criticism, that this story is overblown with respect to stories that in which more lives are directly affected / impacted, it should be included in the article then. --ShaunMacPherson 19:25, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism of the news coverage

message: We've established that the manner of media coverage is of some note. It seems many are convinced that the  manner of investigation is notable as well. "Conspiracy theories" involving the Aruban police, the van der Sloot family, the drug/rave underground, etc. don't seem to have anything verifiable to speak of, but it might be worth watching if anything emerges from the criticisms. Dystopos 20:03, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Criticism of the investigation 

message: The picture on the page, while obviously legitimate, implies that Holloway has been kidnapped.  Should we add a disclaimer?  It is clear that she was not kidnapped (and nobody seems to be proceeding under the assumption that she was) though she may possibly have been murdered.  --Yamla 15:05, July 20, 2005 (UTC)
*The caption used to be longer and said something about how the poster reflected the family's assumptions, but it has since been shortened (maybe even by me). At this point I'm inclined to agree with you. Maybe just cropping out everything except the portrait photo would be the better move. Dystopos 15:34, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kidnapped 

message: It had been reported that the Dutch F-16's sent to assist in the search for Holloway were equipped with infrared and sonar sensors. Sonar is apparently extremely unlikely, as User:Dan100 noted. See this discussion for more information on F16 capabilities pertinent to this case.
Dystopos 19:18, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sonar-Equipped F-16's 

message: It appears an anon poster is trying to replace the entire article with a picture of Conan O'Brien. =\ Xaa 04:50, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Reminder: Talk pages are to be used for article improvement, not editorializing. Dystopos 18:55, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revert war/Vandalism? 

message: *  31 August 2005
*  30 August 2005
*  29 August 2005
*  24 August 2005
This anonymous editor is changing the Natalee Holloway URL on a near daily basis.  Hall Monitor 22:56, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not include both? They're equally relevant websites.--220.238.233.226 17:32, 9 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serial spammer 

message: Has anyone read this site? It is the incoherent rambling that is not supported by any facts. The inclusion of this reference site is in no way contributing to the facts of the case. It's not a blog so it's the opinion of one person and only one person. It's not a media site, news or otherwise so it is not responsible for providing legitimate and accurate facts.  This some private yahoos AOL account. This is not any source of fact whatsoever.  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.179.251.147 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 1 September 2005  (UTC)
: Agreed, and it has been removed as such.  Hall Monitor 17:18, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Merged in section:
I have also deleted the misc link that Patrick posted.  It isn't clear what this is or how reliable the information contained in it is.  For one thing, it contains the old myth about Paulus saying "No body, no case".  I don't think it is a useful site for someone seeking to expand one's knowledge further beyond the article and does not meet the standards for an external link.Wehwalt 16:59, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

text: I'll put it here for the time being: Large collection of texts about the case.--Patrick 17:17, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just a very few articles, much speculation, noth WP worth. --KimvdLinde 17:24, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Very few articles? It may be the largest website about the case, with 12 Mb of text.--Patrick 17:41, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  3 HTML pages, two huge ones, pretty much copy and paste stuff from all over the internet, indiscriminatly whether it is reliable or not. The two large pages are pretty much unreadable and do not provide any usefull information in a readable way. The dye hards have found it already, for the rest it is just a long list of quotes out of context. --KimvdLinde 17:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  World Journier's Natalee Holloway Detailed Timeline & Persons Involved List 

message: Natalie has tought us one lesson: Americans are just not safe outside of America. So please, stay home! The rest of the world does not like you too much anyway, so why bother? Please stay home, it is so much safer in, lets say, south central LA, or the bronx or, hmm, compton...Unisgned comment by User:201.154.89.194
*Thank you for your helpful contribution. Dystopos 04:39, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It sounded to me like the request originated from outside the US (the DNS of the original commenter is registered in Mexico), encouraging US citizens to stay home, along with a sarcastic reference to a few notoriously high-crime areas in the US. Anyway, we are supposed to limit the discussion here to article improvement, not personal improvement. Dystopos 17:08, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Was miss Holloway murdered because she was American?  Unsigned post by User:Mzzl
We're not safe at home, either. Captain Jackson 08:12, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Natalie is history 

message: I have edited the following section, but it still seems to have some POV problems. Comments? Dystopos 21:16, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Aruban media have covered this story. Jossy Mansur of Diario, a newspaper written in the Papamiento language, has focused on this case. Diario reporters have discovered witnesses and assisted in the investigation. On the other hand, Dutch language Aruban publishers, such as Julia Renfro, have been accused of letting their ties to the Van der Sloot family influence their coverage. 
After reading the link, which is a blog post that does not connect Renfro to the Van der Sloots, I've decided to remove all but the bare facts in this section. The new article on Jossy Mansur is a substub and I doubt it would survive a VfD using WP:BIO guidelines. The Renfro article has the same problems, with the added problem of appearing to carry a POV. Dystopos 21:27, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jossy vs. Julia 

message: Obviously this case has generated strong feelings, what Wiki-worlders call a POV.
User:Rjstott has twice deleted external links within the last six hours.His explanation is that the links are "definct" in one instance and "irrelevant" in the other.  However, these two links, [Scared Monkeys and Joran van der Sloot Blog are two of the most active blogs that catalogue and record MSM news, blog news and user comments on this case.  Anyone researching this case would be wise to start their research at those two blogs.  
Rather than get into a revert battle, I have opened this topic to ask this question: where an article is sensitive and there are many points of view, what are the standards for removal (not addition) of links clearly labled as external links? Here, we have the Kuro5hin OP-Ed, whic has a clear POV, listed as a reference, not as an external link. Therefore, what is the justification for removing two of the key blogs, albeit blogs with a POV? How are they less relevant than Kuro5hin? Should Kuro5hin be placed as an external link rather than a reference?
PS on second thought, the Scared Monkeys link should be here: Scared Monkeys at their Natalee Holloway subsection. But it is not "definct" by any means.
*The WP policy reference is Wikipedia:External links. Here's my opinion on the subject: Wikipedia is a natural "first stop" for researchers, so links that are felt to be particularly useful for research should be welcome. The Kuro5hin link has been kept as a reference because it is specifically discussed in the article. The inclusion of that link was fought for a long time before a consensus developed to keep it. I wrote a little bit of context around it so that readers would have an idea about the content and why it was considered important. No such consensus has developed around the various blogs that are repeatedly linked here. Giving an indication of why the site is important for research is helpful in establishing a consensus. In my opinion, an indexed compendium of mainstream news articles or other verifiable info could be valuable, but we would still want to find one primary link - either the most prominent of them or an index to the best of them. Links to "discussion" and "comments" are, in my opinion, not encyclopedic. My opinions are by no means authoritative. Dystopos 20:35, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I just checked  and found it to be working just fine. Perhaps your network is at fault? --Ragib 04:42, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Works about one in ten times, perhaps the site is busy!--Rjstott 09:16, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Links are being deleted when no justification is presented here to explain why they meet the criteria of Wikipedia:External links. In general, forums and discussion are not going to be worth linking from an encyclopedia article. Digests of verifiable source material would be. One exception is the Kuro5hin discussion which achieved note on its own. Wikipedia does want to present the best and fairest information. The best way to do this is to add such info to the article with the proper citations rather than to link to a blog or forum which contains much more than just what is good and fair. Dystopos 15:27, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not preventing you from adding links, though I am deleting them when I see no reason for them to be here. I have just now visited the Joran blog. I didn't see anything that distinguishes it from any other digest of news articles. It is informative, but probably redundant and unnecessary. If you choose to delete it, I won't object. Dystopos 17:24, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm. It wasn't me disallowing your edits. It sounds like a glitch in the software. The content of the site is monitored by volunteer editors like you and me. The administration of the policies are handled by editors and administrators. And the workings of the site are handled by the Wikimedia Foundation, another group of volunteer coders and managers. See Help:Contents for more information. Dystopos 14:49, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent external link deletions, questions for Rjstott? 

message: I found the following text on the Deepak Kalpoe article:
* On September 16, 2005, Beth Twitty stated that after his release, Deepak Kalpoe "admitted",  ‘On the Record’ that he, his brother and van der Sloot raped Natalee: "Beth: Thanks to Deepak it is no longer a mystery what they did to Natalee. Deepak admitted on national media how they all three raped her."
Now I know nothing about this case, the first I heard of it was today, but this information seems to contradict the information in Natalee Holloway. Could someone verify/refute? And if so, could you then merge the two (or let me know and i'll do it), because the Deepak Kalpoe article adds precious little. Jdcooper 18:32, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deepak Kalpoe article 

message: * This is obviously a controversial subject with lots of POV's and hidden agendas -- the Aruban government and it's supporters now troll the net looking to correct negative statements. The Birkinstock/Kuro5hin crowd complains that it's too much coverage of a pretty missing woman. (I think maybe they never had a date?) Meanwhile, the MSM is having a field day with it, and, people like me (whoever I am) are mad about the level of corruption in Aruba and proud of Beth Twitty's courageous fight to find her daughter. 
:Despite this, the article is a good one. It is pretty fair, it has all the right external links. This is Wikipedia at it's best. Bravo! (Or as the pretty white women say, "Snaps! To Wikipedia"unsigned comment by User:209.178.138.202
**On behalf of the many editors here, thanks for the snaps. Dystopos 01:14, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kudos to Wikipedia 

message: *The problem is that most of the sources as to Mathews are in Papamiento from the Aruban papers. A compromise - why not keep the following and merge the rest -- 
This would be the new boycott aruba
Boycott Aruba refers to claims of institutional racism by  Eduardo Mathew, a black inmate whose family and lawyers called for a boycott during his incarceration in an Aruban prison. After his release, Mathew campaigned against alleged racism against black inmates.
A separate campaign to boycott the tourism industry in Aruba emerged due to criticisms of the investigation of the disappearance of Natalee Holloway. 
The rest of the page could be merged to Natalee Holloway.
What do you think, dystopos?
PS the preceeding was from Anonymous 
"User:209.178.138.202 etc etc etc. 
**Sounds ok to me. The development of the Boycott Aruba article has been impressive, but I'm not sure it has the right title or would survive a deletion nomination. (By the way, you can sign a post by typing four tildes (~~~~) at the end. Dystopos 02:40, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Compromise?

message: Here is what I have found about this fellow Mathews, the one that called for the first boycott.
His full name is Eduardo Alexander Antonio Mathew. He  is a Netherlands national who was born in 1973 and lives in Providence, Rhode Island, USA. He is referred to as Eduardo Mathew and also as Alex Mathew. 
He has a pending case in the European Court of Human Rights  alleging abuse in the Aruban prison, as described in the Boycott Aruba article. References are Dutch and English. Specifically, in  Mathew v. the Netherlands (no. 24919/03) The applicant, Eduardo Alexander Antonio Mathew, is a Netherlands national who was born in 1973 and lives in Providence, Rhode Island, USA. The applicant alleges a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) in that during his detention in the Aruba Correctional Institution he was physically abused, placed in solitary confinement in abject conditions and denied urgently needed medical treatment. The case is listed as  Press release issued by the Registrar FORTHCOMING CHAMBER JUDGMENTS 27 and 29 September 2005, so if we wait a week or so, there will be a published opinion on the case. 
In the recent elections in Aruba, the incumbants won and remained in office, but the allegation of institutional racism was  a campaign issue. See  ARUBA, A GOVERNMENT OF RACISM AND HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.  Please read the last article since it does give more substance to the Mathew boycott. 
Anonymous 
"User:209.178.138.202 etc etc etc.
Sounds fair to have a Boycott Aruba article with Mathew info, esp. once the Court issues its judgment, and then, instead of repeating a lot of info, refer the reader to the Holloway page for further info.
Incidently, if this court is anything like the US Supreme Court, a Chamber judgement may not be a full-scale opinion.Wehwalt 09:00, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Should we start a Mathews Article?

message: I just want to say thank you and I did the merger.
When this started, I really was pushing my point of view, but the discussion helped me see that there was another way to do this.
So thank you for your patience.
And I joined up and have an acct now. I was under all those similar
IP addresses on this topic.
Ciao
Joaquin Murietta 00:40, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now done another round of condensing and editing. The biggest change was removing the tally of notable supporters and critics of the calls for boycott, which I see as trivial. Two good sources of Aruban points-of-view have emerged, finally, through Aruba Truth (tourism industry bias) and a source for translations of articles from the Aruban press (perhaps less bias, but verifiable and encyclopedic anyway). Dystopos 02:13, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Merged!

message: *Why revert the talk page?  Let's archive it if it is too long. 
Joaquin Murietta 14:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Reverts to the Talk Page

message: I am following US top 3 news channels every day and I have never seen anything more biased than the coverage about Aruba in the context of NH.
Every grownup American has heard about separation of powers but practically everybody in any TV show pretends he/she has never heard about it and raves every day hundreds of times that "the Aruban Government" (!!!) has somehow to solve the case. And this absurd claim is repeated by bipartisan politicians, state governors, senators, professional legal experts, talk show hosts, EVERYONE !!! Does any of these people think US GOVERNMENT should be boycotted because of letting O.J. Simpson go? 
And, off course, it is totally 'forgotten' that the people of prosecution which US media has problem with are mostly not even residents of Aruba. 
I am absolutely shocked that the society of AMERICA which I have adored is capable of such level of primitive TRIBALISM and lynching mentality ... and about the lack of people there who have any courage to say anything about that. Warbola 05:08, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Please limit discussion here to the content of the article. There are other places to editorialize. Dystopos 05:24, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Governor calling boycott:  Black day of American democracy :  

message: Grassroots coverage of Natalee Holloway has an AfD, should it be merged here? Joaquin Murietta 05:11, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see anything there worth merging. Conspiracy theories are by nature unverifiable. Strong feelings come with POV. External links serve a specific purpose in an encyclopedia which may or may not reflect their "importance" in other contexts. If a contributor wishes to discuss the case without respect to WP policy there are better forums out there. Dystopos 05:24, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am trying to understand your position, but I don't understand what you mean by "If a contributor wishes to discuss the case without respect to WP policy there are better forums out there." Would you mind elaborating?Joaquin Murietta 05:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean that Wikipedia policy discourages original research, unverified and/or unverifiable information, speculation, and opinion. The content in the Grassroots coverage of Natalee Holloway article, uncited original research about speculation and opinion, fits those categories and is unsuited for Wikipedia. It is perfectly suited for discussion forums and blogs, and that is my suggestion for where to take this content. Dystopos 16:16, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger of Grassroots coverage of Natalee Holloway  

message: ::"According to some, Natalee had spent part of the evening drinking and dancing on the bar in a miniskirt. There are rumors that she invited Joran to suck and lick liquor from her navel."
- According to whom?
::"Starting with the confiscation of cameras and cell phones from other students to taking posession of Natalee's luggage and hotel room to asking students to remain silent they have been active in preventing the truth about what when on during the five day binge."
- What is the source for this?
- Dystopos 19:57, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Rumors

message: Although http://joranvandersloot.blogspot.com/ is entitled JvdS, it contains references to video and print media, including a lot of photos and video clips. Based on Dystopos' comments, could we discuss whether this citation belongs in the Natalee Holloway article? Joaquin Murietta 15:26, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blog citation  JvdS blog 

message: Has the boycott issue reached a point now, where it deserves its own subsection, rather than being smushed into the criticism section? Joaquin Murietta 15:32, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  the Boycott issue 

message: Should we delete the Scrux link to quotes by MBHS students. Scrux is essentially a blog, does it meet the standards for inclusion as proposed by Dystopos? Same question as to the "unedited transcript" cite. 
* Joran Interview Unedited transcript
* Statements from MBHS Students
Joaquin Murietta 15:35, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  the Scrux MBHS quotes page 

message: Here are the External links now
* The Birmingham News full coverage
* Aruba Truth, Aruba's "Strategic Communications Task Force"
* Caribbean Net News - Netherlands Antilles
* Court TV full coverage
* Yahoo! News full coverage
* Joran Interview Unedited transcript
* Statements from MBHS Students
* Aruba Getagrip Translated Aruban media articles
* Aruba Judicial System Summary
Should we rearrange them like this:
*References
** Aruba Judicial System Summary
*News media coverage 
** Court TV full coverage
** Yahoo! News full coverage
** The Birmingham News full coverage
** Caribbean Net News - Netherlands Antilles
*Blog coverage
** Aruba Truth, Aruba's "Strategic Communications Task Force"
** Joran Interview Unedited transcript
** Statements from MBHS Students
** Aruba Getagrip Translated Aruban media articles
Joaquin Murietta 15:42, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the current external links be rearranged to make it clear which ones are blogs? 

message: Is this ok? Joaquin Murietta 17:11, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Is this OK?

message: * I think that the bolded sections of the following passage should be removed:
** The search for physical evidence has been unsuccessful and marked by false leads. Blonde hairs attached to a piece of duct tape found by an Aruban park ranger were DNA tested, but the hair was not from Natalee. A small lake near the Aruba Racquet Club was partly drained between July 27 and 30 after a witness claimed to have seen Joran, Deepak, and Satish sitting parked on a dirt road nearby between 2:30 AM and 3:00 AM on the morning Natalee disappeared.  Another witness claims to have seen Joran, Paulus, and Deepak burying a nude, blonde-haired woman in a landfill during the first week after Natalee disappeared. The police searched the landfill by hand for two hours, finding nothing of interest. Later, when a volunteer search team learned about the witness, the landfill was extensively searched with heavy garbage-moving/digging equipment. On August 15 it was reported that when the search team members arrived at the landfill, the excavated area had been filled in with new garbage. Several bones had washed up on an Aruban beach and generated some interest, until an analysis of the bones determined they were not from a human. A blood-stained mattress was discovered, but the blood was canine. On July 4, the Netherlands deployed three F-16 warplanes, equipped with infrared sensors, to aid in the search. This attempt was also without result.
since they do not have anything to do with Natalee Holloway's case, or indeed anything encyclopaedic at all. Any objections if i remove it? Jdcooper 18:53, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Weeding out irrelevant detail

message: Anyone want to cite a source for all the "alleged" behavior we're reporting? --Dystopos 19:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I think it is necessary.  Natalee's actiities before she vanished are necessarily relevant to her disappearance.  Can you say otherwise?--Wehwalt 13:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bellyshots 

message: * To avoid further edit wars, we should discuss the following passage to consensus here:
Due to the false tapes and boycotting actions the Holloyway family can count on an increasing lack of understanding by the Dutch general public.
To me this passage would appear speculative and POV, but i am sure we can take something from it. How about "Due to use of the false tapes, as well as what many see as overly emotive appeals and opportunistic use of the media, Beth Twitty has become the object of much criticism from many blogs." Obviously this would require sources/references, but assuming they could be found (and i know i have read them) at least these claims are verifiable. Thoughts? Jdcooper 16:20, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If all we are talking about is blogs, the sentence should be entirely left out.  If a mainstream Dutch newspaper (i.e. not a tabloid) can be found that shows Twitty is the subject of much criticism, we could use a slightly modified version of Jdcooper's rewrite.  A magazine (real magazine, not a trash rag) can be found, that would be good as well.  That's my opinion, anyway, and I'm willing to discuss why I feel blogs aren't useful here if people wish to know.  As an aside, it might be interesting to see if we can figure out what American public opinion is.  This Canadian's opinion is that Twitty is a raving loony, albeit one who unfortunately suffered a terrible loss.  I certainly don't speak for Canadians in general, of course.  --Yamla 16:48, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see that the opinions of the Dutch public, however accurately recorded, have much importance for an article on Holloway. We'd be wise to start shearing a lot of the trivia from this article. --Dystopos 17:10, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No that is true actually. Ok, forget the opinions of the Dutch public on Beth Twitty. When i Put it like that it does sound completely irrelevant. Jdcooper 17:20, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, Wikipedia is not USpedia, and especially the english language version is international. The Natalee Holloway case has much to do the Dutch, as Joran is Dutch, and the legal system of Aruba is originall molded on the Dutch system. In the Netherlands, this case is getting way less attention than in the USA. --KimvdLinde 17:31, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Precisely my point. We can say that Joran is Dutch, that the Aruban legal system is modelled on Dutch law, and that the Dutch media have not covered this event very much. The opinions of the Dutch public don't really bear on this case. In fact, American opinion would have no bearing except that there is a political movement to "boycott Aruba" arising from this. It's not about being US-centric, It's about being encyclopedic. --Dystopos 18:13, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you want to encyclopedic, I think the difference in respone/opinion etc  between the US and the Netherlands is definiatly a point to be added. And as now, it focusses more on the US side of the story. --KimvdLinde 18:26, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is because it is a US story. The whole reason this topic is encyclopaedic at all is because it highlights a hugely important phenomenon in American media and public opinion (Missing white woman syndrome) As such, the opinion of the US public is going to be a central focus of the article. This case doesnt really say anything about Dutch media and public opinion, so it is not necessary to include details. We could include the opinions of the Argentinian public in the article on Japanese whaling, to make it more globalcentric, but it is unencyclopaedic. Jdcooper 17:07, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is the point, it is NOT an exclusive US story, but one that involves three countries, US, Aruba, and the Netherlands. Yes, it highlights the missing white woman syndrome, but the stricking difference in response makes it very noticable. It in fact highlights that it is a near typical US phenomenon. --KimvdLinde 18:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless there are external sources for "The whole reason this topic is encyclopaedic at all is because it highlights a hugely important phenomenon in American media" and "the stricking difference in response makes it very noticable" then both observations are original research. We have references for the former (though I think we may be using them clumsily), and none for the latter. We can't ourselves say, without a direct reference, that (a) there is a lack of opinion in the Netherlands or (b) that this lack of opinion means something. --Dystopos 16:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Lets agree to disagree. I think you treat two things that I see as similar as two very different things. --KimvdLinde 00:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The above two posts display how US centric this article is without even realising it. There hasn't been a single European mainstream broadsheet who HASN'T covered it albeit just a small footnote - or rather the hysterical media coverage and the boycotts against Aruba, which has been portrayed as completely insane. The entire affair have been subject to much ridicule (ie US lack of understanding of sovereignty and appreciation of other judicial systems than their own). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.216.45.92 (talk) 08:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dutch public opinion 

message: * I'm glad to see that most of the uncorroborated rumors are dying down and can no longer be justified for this article. There's actually less "bloat" here than I remembered. I've removed a few other details (toothbrush DNA, Chandra Levy and 9/11, etc). If any of that becomes important in some verifiable way, I'm sure it will be added back in without delay. The main thing I did was divide the Investigation section into subheadings - and mostly to facilitate discussion here. Sometimes a little organizing can make it easier to see what needs to be improved or dispensed with. --Dystopos 01:44, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article contraction revisited

message: I'm just curious, why is the article at k5 not described in more detail as part of the "media sensation" or in the "criticism of the investigation"?  It's definitely a part of both.  It is STILL first hit on Google for Natalee Holloway.  A page doesn't get that much PageRank without having excited the interest of a great many people.  And the editorial attacks the investigation with scathing venom.  It is certainly critical.
So why not add a note, under the criticism section?  Here is my proposal on what I might add:
::On July 4th, 2005, the collaborative website Kuro5hin.org posted an editorial highly critical of the investigation.  The editorial accused the mass media of subtle racism for covering the Holloway case but ignoring the case of Reyna Alvarado-Carerra, a missing Hispanic girl.  It was also critical of the great expense and time devoted to the search for a single missing person despite many other issues of concern the media could have covered instead.  The openly combative and harsh tone of the editorial sparked hundreds of angry responses, including legal threats directed towards Kuro5hin's staff.
Would this section be acceptable?  I've tried to pare it down for size, but I can't seem to get it smaller without dropping important points (basic facts, accusations of racism and disproportion, combative tone and angry responses).  If anyone can suggest a better write-up of the k5 article I'm willing to hear it.  
Are there any objections, otherwise, to my adding this small section to the "criticisms" section?  -Kasreyn 11:57, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the legal threats are documented in the comments section of the story in archive at k5.  Nothing actually came of the legal threats, but threats were made.  I think it's noteworthy because it shows how worked up people got over the issue, and that they failed to get the point of the editorial.  -Kasreyn 05:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Is primary source, needs the backup of secondary sources. --KimvdLinde 15:07, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right. The content of the editorial is sourced, but anything we say about it also needs to be sourced. --Dystopos 16:44, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we are at the same page on that. --KimvdLinde 17:27, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: So wait, are you saying we literally can't say anything here but "kuro5hin had an editorial.  Here it is."?  Isn't that taking NOR to ridiculous lengths?  How about if I replace some of the comments with direct quotes, as in, according to the editorial, "blah blah blah".  Would that work?  -Kasreyn 05:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The point is that it would be helpful, if we're going to go into detail about this one editorial (among a huge number of opinions written about this matter), for us to have something to say about why it's important, not just what's in it. And to do THAT, we need to use an independent source. Up until now we've relied on the Google rank, which is fine for making it an external link, but to go further and lay out the points made in the editorial, Google alone seams a little weak. Hasn't anyone written an article about the influence of Kuro5hin's boldness in galvanizing public opinions? --Dystopos 05:43, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, well, there was also a k5 follow-up article on the "fuck natalee holloway" impact.  But of course, it wouldn't exactly be appropriate to quote k5 about k5.  -Kasreyn 18:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well maybe, but does the follow-up article give any sources about its impact that we could use as well? Jdcooper 12:22, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  kuro5hin article 

message: A recent edit summary stated that "chaperones" was the "actual term used". Used by whom? I remember reading early on that the older adults on the trip were specifically NOT chaperoning the young adults. --Dystopos 19:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: See the 16,000 Google hits . The quotes are there because they are called this, but they are nor really chaperoning.--Patrick 00:19, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If they are not really chaperones, then why would we call them that at all? --Dystopos 00:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Since the chaperones play no significant part in the story, why bother to mention them?Wehwalt 01:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: These people are irrelevant either way, there is already far too much irrelevant detail in this article. Remove that sentence i reckon. Jdcooper 02:00, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Chaperones

message: I'm removing some excessive wikilinking. See Wikipedia:Only make links that are relevant to the context for the relevant guidelines. --Dystopos 19:26, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I restored some relevant links.--Patrick 00:23, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What you did was revert my changes entirely. Would you like to explain why "security camera" and "midriff" are important links or where you have found the older persons on the trip described authoritatively as "chaperones" or is it enough to just assume that my contributions are made in bad faith? --Dystopos 00:40, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If e.g. the word midriff occurred in thousands of Wikipedia articles one may argue that it is too common, but it occurs much less.--Patrick 01:20, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Also, we always link to locations on Earth (even well-known ones like the US), why not link to a location on the body?--Patrick 01:27, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Alright. Fine. Maybe we should add an illustration, too. --Dystopos 04:29, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Excess linking

message: I think we need a section that is updated with breaking news, including the latest MAJOR BREAK in the story regarding natalee's use of alcohol and drugs, leading to a physiological cause of death. After all, wiki is a living encyclopaedia, and the article needs to reflect that. Kara Thrace 0733, 23 March 2006 (EST)
* Breaking news that fits the criteria of encyclopedic content should, of course, be added to the article. Wikipedia is a living encyclopedia. (See WP:NOT for examples of things that should not be added). In my opinion the view should be toward creating a cohesive article, so new information should be added where it makes the most sense. I don't see a need for a separate section on breaking news. That seems like something for (at best) Wikinews and (at worst) blogs, fora and rumor sites.
: The current, as you have put it, MAJOR BREAK, is notable because it is the opinion of the primary investigator. There is no reason to confuse his suspicions with fact. I'm sure he doesn't. --Dystopos 14:18, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Breaking News

message: WHY on earth do people want to boycot arbuba because holloway went missing? I can  name a few hundred people who went missing in New York, who never turned up. Are there currently any boycots out on New York??? Superdude99 21:12, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Racism.  New York City is thought of as "American" and therefore it's seen as safer.  Aruba is thought of as a foreign country full of untrustworthy swarthy people, and any "decent" white girl who goes there deserves what she gets.  I grew up in the American Midwest, and trust me, that's how the boycott-Aruba people think.  (It's not how *I* think, so please don't jump all over me...)  There was a great deal of racism in the Midwestern culture, both tacit and explicit, and they have a lot of self-aggrandizing Victorianesque fantasies of imagined dangers from other races.  White slavery and other nonsense.  See Missing White Woman Syndrome, moral panic, and mass hysteria.  :P  Kasreyn 23:19, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Something I will never get

message: I think Patrick putting the Leader of the Investigation where it is is jarring and out of place.  And wasn't that guy Van der Stratten at first the leader, and Dompig much later?--Wehwalt 11:50, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Leader of the investigation

message: Is it mentioned anywhere what drugs were possibly involved? It mentions people selling them, her taking them, her possesing them... Which one(s)? I would assume ecstacy (given her age and situation), but we all know what assuming does. -DejahThoris 17:36, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What drugs?!? 

message: I think we should merge Carlos’n Charlie’s, Gerold Dompig and maybe also Joran van der Sloot into this article, as they have no relevance outside this main article. KimvdLinde 21:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd agree.  They have precious little notability even in this article, since the case has largely died down in public notice.  They definitely don't deserve their own articles any more.  In a year's time, the same question will apply to Natalee.  Kasreyn 22:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  My recollection is that some of those peripheral articles were created as a way of editorializing and spamming outside the watch of the people who try to maintain this article. I will be glad to see them gone. --Dystopos 23:17, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

text: * My apologies. I'm sure I was recalling other examples, and not the Dompig article. --Dystopos 05:08, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I can agree with Carlos’n Charlie’s, as it has been modified. I disagree with Dompig, I think his only notability is the Natalee Holloway case. KimvdLinde 00:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well what of Brian Paddick, Ian Blair et al. The top tiers of other countries' police forces are well-documented, why leave Aruba out? Just because the article was created as a by-product of the Natalee Holloway debacle doesn't mean that the topic itself is non-notable. The top policemen of every country should have their own articles. Think eventualism ;) Jdcooper 01:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Merge - While I see what you're saying about systemic bias, the population of Aruba is a little over 100,000. The U.S. and U.K. are closer to 300 million and 60 million, respectively. I don't think the comparison is quite valid. Also, if Dompig is the Deputy Chief of Police, who is the Chief? And why would Dompig be notable enough for an article of his own, when there isn't an article for the position that (theoretically) made him notable? Recent news stories are calling him the 'Police Commissioner,' so I'm not even sure what his position currently is. While the law enforcement system of Aruba is definitely due for an article, I don't think this one man is. As for Carlos 'n Charlies, not too notable. Weak merge. -DejahThoris 01:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, there are about half a dozen Deputy Chief of Police at Aruba, so that will be fun. And in the Netherlands, more than you can count. Maybe it should get listed on its own for AfD and see if it is notable enough. KimvdLinde 02:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The merge patrol might want to examine Julia Renfro, too. --Dystopos 05:17, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging articles 

message: I have started a mild restructuring of the article, which was getting repetitive, and contained outdated information.  I have focused on moving the sentences about the suspects' statements to parts of the article approximately contemporaneous with the statements.--Wehwalt 15:11, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Restructuring of article

message: But it seems to me that the investigation went haywire the moment Natalie's parents and freinds turned up in Aruba and began their own 'investigation'. And would I be wrong in opining that a lot of the truth has and will be forever obscured because of her mother's obesseion with denying that Natalie was sexually active?
This is not a nasty comment, just my own sad persepective on a terribly sad affair. Not fair. Most of all, not fair to Natalee Holloway. Fergananim 17:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: * The purpose of a Talk Page is to facilitate collaboration on the article, not for general discussion. No apology needed. --Dystopos 04:38, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Correct me if I'm wrong ... 

message: I recall hearing somewhere a comparisson between this case and the case about the Lindbergh Baby. A comparison could be drawn between the singular focus of Twitty and Lindbergh in how they are looking at this case. Also the similiarities in the lack of any conclusive evidence and the large collection of witnesses. 
October 22, 2006
:Possibly.  Though I don't think Lindbergh's attitude is well known.  I don't think they are similar, that is more than any other two cases that have been subject to media frenzy.  After all, in this case, there is not certainly a crime.  In the Lindbergh case, there certainly was.--Wehwalt 01:11, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media Portayal