Talk:John Joubert (serial killer)

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on John Joubert (serial killer). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050424034221/http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1421&scid=64 to http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?did=1421&scid=64
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: ,  , 
I have no quarrel with the recent situation at ANI, regarding behavioural problems. But there are still problems with the article, as it now appears. (My apologies, if I am not presenting diffs, etc., in the proper manner!) For example, this is the way it looked on 27 Feb 2020. . At this point, it had 13 refs.
Then, an IP editor rmved info with a misleading edit summary: "23:39, 12 March 2020‎ 2a04:cec0:1128:fe55:3326:7b8f:f441:49f9 talk‎  [inspect diff] 9,814 bytes -6,482‎  Wrong picture of a middle aged reverend instead of the picture of Joubert", which left the article like this: . Removing the photo, text and 11 or so refs, seems to be "vandalistic" in my opinion. (At this point, it was left with only one ref, cited twice.)
I think that some of the info, but particularly the refs, need to be restored to the article. I am willing to go through, compare, readd cited info, add cite needed tags, etc. But I do not wish to do so, without consulting with some of you. Perhaps you have better insight, etc? Thanks for your time, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 00:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: you may well be right.  But I haven't time to look at this. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 00:27, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks...I know you are much busier than I am! No hurry, of course. I just wished to make it plain that I would not be editing as an agitator. Will wait a few days for responses from others... Then, if no one objects, I will do a bit of work. Thanks for your reply.Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 00:34, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I see no issues with you trying to repair the article, restore references and improve it. I don't think you need consensus to improve it. Canterbury Tail talk 01:26, 4 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , Thanks. I am mainly a WikiGnome, and try to avoid contentious situations. Will work to improve. Regards, Tribe of Tiger Let's Purrfect! 02:44, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

text: I believe the picture of Joubert is wrong.My recollection of Pictures of Joubert was a young boyish clean shaven and short hair. If the picture was from a prison photo a picture of the mug shot should also show his appearance at the time of arrest. AF Mike (talk) 13:05, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restoring info/sources... 

message: Dan Walden was not abducted in Papillion. He was abducted on 48th St in then unincorporated Sarpy Count,(now Bellevue NE).  He was on his way to Pawnee Elementary School.  There were two elementary schools that children traveled that travel intersected in the vicinity of the abduction. At the time I lived two blocks from the abduction. The route crossed the route my children took to school.  The neighborhood was unaware of the abduction until the paper was delivered the following morning.  Please correct location.  Papilion was were he was held and tried.  The County Sherrif's Office is in Papillion, which might have lead the author to believe the incident occurred in Papillion as the date line of the news releases were Papillion. AF Mike (talk) 12:54, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correction of factual error