Talk:Gareth Penn

message: http://d550.blogspot.com
I just stumbled across this today. If this is what it appears to be, then it is a confession by Gareth Penn.
:Good find. I didn't read the entire thing (Penn's self-regard was tedious) -- but was it not more a satire than a confession? Since Penn himself has been accused of being the Zodiac killer (a fact which I'll expand on and cite in the article, if I can find the source document I'm thinking of). Cheers. Salon Essahj (talk) 22:50, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Solved?

message: Embarking on a rewrite of this article to give it a better tone, remove puffery, unsourced statements, and generally weed out the vanity etc...
: Ok, this article seems to have a lot of original research and synth implying that the subject is a murdered, using online message boards and innuendo. It appears to be a massive BLP vio, and much of it in my opinion needs to got straight out the window. I've asked folks at the BLP notice board for a second opinion and will wait on that. In general, original research implying someone is a serial killer is a no-no.Bali ultimate (talk) 16:28, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok. We have left a guy who wrote a bunch of stuff for his local MENSA chapter newsletter, and a book. Yes? KillerChihuahua?!? 17:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sounds good. I'll keep an eye out for iron-clad sourcing on future additions (there's nothing online, beyond the archives of the mensa newsletter).Bali ultimate (talk) 17:36, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not at all sure his paper on Tristan is worth including - it has nothing to do with his reason for notability, which seems to be that he wrote a book about the Zodiac killer, which no one serious takes seriously, and he accused a professor of being that killer. KillerChihuahua?!? 17:39, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  It exists as filler to bulk up the sourcing and justify Penn's "notability," clearly. It's one of the few solid things we have about him, but... it's largely irrelevant to whatever claim he has to notability (his zodiac interest) so could probably go on those grounds. But it does no harm by staying here, either (unlike the rest of it).Bali ultimate (talk) 17:43, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  What exactly is this individual's notability? The sourcing seems very thin - half of it appears to be things he's written himself. -- ChrisO (talk) 20:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm all for deletion, but AfD's regularly fail when a wall of bad cites are available, overriding policy and common sense.Bali ultimate (talk) 20:06, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

text: actally, WP:BADSITES had been reected as a good reason to violate an article through a violent WP:aFD process so i dont think that ta delet enom on those gournds will survave. Smith Jones (talk) 01:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

text:  Smith Jones -- no offense, but what you just wrote is completely incomprehensible.Bali ultimate (talk) 01:41, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  the game is up. we cannt delete articles based on "bad sites" as you put it right here. even if you blieve that they "ovveride polic & common sense" deletions should be based on actual policy. instead, my recommendation si that we continue to work together to improve the qualite of the article through adding better sources and removin unsourced statements. Smith Jones (talk) 02:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

text:  Am i to understand you don't understand that "cite" and "site" are two very different words? I'm not sure what's worse; your not knowing, or knowing but being fey.Bali ultimate (talk) 02:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

text: sorry i assumed it was a typo. you have made a few typos in the past so i think we can all forgive and forget re: this grieve error. Smith Jones (talk) 17:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've edited this article before (long ago) and have mixed feelings about the discussion here.  Not to shill for Gareth, but without him there would be no Robert Graysmith, no Zodiac movies, and not half the public awareness that exists of the notorious case today.  He was the guy who pretty much resurrected it for public viewing from the dustbin of unsolved homicides.  I took a crack at two parts of the page that were not so much inaccurate as incomplete, adding sources and clarifying.  Editors and admins should realize that some of these sources are not online, but in a library or on microfiche.  From what I've seen, they've been properly bibliographed (like the California magazine article) and continually yanking them implies editorial bad faith.  Also, if you need confirmation that Penn was never a suspect in Napa, call the police and sheriff. They will tell you, as they've told many others, that they have no record of any suspect named Gareth Penn. And read Times 17.  Virtually everything in this article is somewhere in that book.  Scijournalist (talk) 06:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Much of what you've written above shows you have no idea how wikipedia works. We can not do ANY original research. We should rely on what reliable secondary sources report. Self-published, fringe works are generally out. A generalized link to the Napa country court system is NOT a citation. Please, the internet is full of places for amateur sleuthing, conspiracy, whatever you want. This is one of the few places we're it's not really welcome. If you have citations to reliable sources that are relevant, bring them here; no, quasi-literary stories about fictional encounters by other Zodiac buffs (i.e. Cabal) are NOT appropriate for an encyclopedia article.Bali ultimate (talk) 14:43, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-write

message: This apparently now defunct printer focusing on true crime was a vanity press, which means all of his works on the zodiac killer were self-published. The article can probably stand as is, but it's worth keeping in mind going forward.Bali ultimate (talk) 00:10, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: We should so note in the article (self published). KillerChihuahua?!? 15:39, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Foxglove Press

message: Michael O'Hare has written an article (http://www.alternet.org/media/140351/how_a_conspiracy_theorist_who_thought_i_was_the_zodiac_killer_almost_ruined_my_life/?page=1) that I thought might make a good reference for this page, but rather than edit the page I will simply point it out here and let a more experienced editor make that call. Jgoulden (talk) 18:53, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article by O'Hare 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Gareth Penn. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080120135026/http://foia.fbi.gov:80/foiaindex/zodiac.htm to http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/zodiac.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gareth Penn. 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/20090529112910/http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2009/0905.ohare.html to http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2009/0905.ohare.html
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) 04:11, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gareth Penn. 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/20090529112910/http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2009/0905.ohare.html to http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2009/0905.ohare.html
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) 01:43, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified