Talk:Chris Benoit/Archive 4

message: I know that the D.A. said that Chris killed his wife and son, but he didn't mention any type of test that they did to collect the DNA evidence from the cord around Nancy's throat or the cord around Chris's throat. I may just be watching too much CSI and stuff but he didn't mention it. I thought that might be important to mention.Anybody else think he should have mentioned this or am I the only one who would like more information like this? And why are some reporters trying to tie Sherri Martel's death in with this? Aren't they separate? (MgTurtle 19:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DNA? 

message: Since when do the police get to decide if asomeone has committed murder. All they can do is point that the evidence supports such a hypothesis, if he were alive he would have to go to trial before such a statement could be made and his being dead doesnt change that, SqueakBox 20:26, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, being dead DOES change that. A dead person does not have anywhere near the same rights as a living person. A dead person does not get a trial. At best there may be a civil trial but a ruling will likely take years. When all the parties are dead, the authority falls to the invesitgators and local prosecutors to determine what happens. By making their ruling, which you edited the article to include, they confirmed Benoit committed the murder. Whether or not you believe this to be true, the news media have reported this as such, thus it can be used in the article. CraigMonroe 20:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

text: There are some official procedures that still have to be completed by the police department before they can declare the case closed and put the murder-suicide on the record, but it is pretty much a done deal. The Hybrid 20:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Murder

message: The WWE has his texts up that he sent to "Co-workers". I'll just add the link here: http://www.wwe.com/inside/news/chrisbenoittimeline
and leave it up to others to determine the value of adding this info. Billywhack 02:01, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Texts

message: WWE released a statement about the facts of the case. Kingjeff 02:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: WWE Statement

message: http://www.wwe.com/inside/news/chairmanbenoit basically vince stating the show must go on. --Duality344 02:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vinces statement 

message: According to AP she filed for a divorce in 2003 due to "cruel treatment" and wanted full custody of their son and child support, while Chris sought joint custody.  Here's the link to the AP article.  Dionyseus 05:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not mentioned because it was never carried out. Putting such a contradictory thing in Wikipedia is rather unnecessary. If the problems were resolved, apparently, why put that in there? It's not really important. AMReese 05:50, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why would it matter whether or not the divorce was carried out?  What matters is that she filed for a divorce and cited "cruel treatment" as one of the reasons, I think this is a precedent for the eventual murders, and thus notable.  06:22, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because the filing could have been made impulsively and without thinking it through, and after thinking on it, she decided to reverse it. Any number of things could have happened to reverse her decision. If she was really serious about it, she would've followed through with the divorce AMReese 06:30, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it is notable. If nothing else, it will help serve as an extended time line to the current tragic events. As is clearly apparent, this wasn't a friendly marriage. CraigMonroe 11:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why no mention that his wife filed for a divorce in 2003? 

message: Born in '99 or '00? Koberulz 08:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  yes but it doesn't say that. --Fredrick day 13:09, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not directly. Kingjeff 13:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  well that's your answer. We don't imply things in wikipedia articles. --Fredrick day 13:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: You're probably one of those people who tries to have an answer for everything. Kingjeff 13:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not entirely sure what you mean by that, but he's entirely correct. Jeff Silvers 13:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Have you checked my userpage? It's says "This user can do no wrong, especially when it comes to editing Wikipedia." Kingjeff 13:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Are you trying to accuse me of going around vandalising pages? Kingjeff 17:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I heard about this too. Kingjeff 17:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: it's also possable that he was perscribed HGH for his conditionharlock_jds 14:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I now have a link to a story about his illness.  (http://www.news1130.com/news/topstory/article.jsp?content=20070626_212836_4500)  Take it for what it's worth.  Mike 15:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Daniel

message: It should be added to the article some inconsistencies with the police investigation. On June 25, when the story first broke, It appeared Chris Benoit killed his wife on Saturday, Daniel on Sunday, then himself on Monday. By the next day, after the preliminary autopsy, they say Daniel was killed first on Friday and then Nancy early Saturday before killing himself late Saturday or early Sunday. Then, the text messages were revealed by WWE.com, all during the day on Sunday. If he killed himself late Saturday or early Sunday, how could he have sent those messages?
I think Benoit's Death should get its own article, especially as it drags out. This is no longer just a normal wrestling death like Eddie Guererro, it is now a murder case that is being watched by all of mainstream America and beyond. It is the top news story in a pretty busy week (wildfires/flooding ravaging the U.S., Paris Hilton, Tony Blair quitting after 10 years,) If Michael jackson's case and O.J. Simpson's case have their own articles, then i see no reason why this shouldn't. <----
:: because you are looking into a crystal ball and assigning this a future importance it does not current have? If this is still being mentioned internationally in a couple of weeks I will be very surprised (Indeed I haven't see a single mention on UK news programs or channels). Those other cases had sustained interest because of the trial. There might be something that suggests that we need a separate article at some stage but I don't see it yet. --Fredrick day 13:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Who said that he killed his son first and the wife second?  From all the reports I've seen of the autopsy, his wife was killed on Friday, his son was killed on Saturday, and he killed himself late Saturday/early Sunday.  Dionyseus 17:40, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct, sir. The Hybrid 17:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: we'll see if any creditable articles come out skeptical of benoit being the murderer, until that happens adding information about a "Controversy" if he did the killing or not is totally original research and has no place in the article.harlock_jds 14:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Controversy

message: One of the problems I have with Wikipedia is that it gives a soapbox to conspiratorial crackpots and all manner of reality-challenged fools, and nearly every article has s large "Conspiracy" section.  Anyway, get ready for the flood to hit as soon as the article is unprotected.  Both here and at the IMDb boards, wrestling fans just REFUSE to accept reality.  They're saying the family was killed by burglars, that the wife killed herself and the kid and Benoit commited suicide out of "distress", that they were murdered by a rival wrestler (look up Kayfabe guys), that the police/government framed him, or that he somehow "accidentally" killed them and offed himself out of remorse (how a hulking wrestler can "accidentally" bind a woman's hands and feet then strangle her to death, then "accidentally" smother his son with a pillow the next day eludes me).  The admins should be extra-vigilant about keeping the fanboys from adding "alternate theories" to the page because they can't accept that their spandex-clad idol was a juiced-up, homicidal savage. Childe Roland of Gilead 14:42, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dude, read this talk page. Everyone like that shut up after Tuesday's press conference. Get with the times, and on some chill pills dude. The Hybrid 14:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Im still trying to work out how anyone would think he was framed by police ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 14:49, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Hybrid, I've been reading "alternate theories" on  message boards as late as this morning.  This happens with nearly every "controversial" subject.  Just wait 'til they unlock the page. Childe Roland of Gilead 14:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I know how bad message boards can be; that’s why I refuse to deal with them anymore. I was saying that Wikipedia appeals to a more intelligent crowd, typically anyway :P. I'm also personally seeing to it that this page stays locked until at least Saturday, when I will beg for a longer time period, as I also know that wrestling vandals are complete dicks. The Hybrid 14:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  we'll just revert original research out... not sure if we need total protection since many of us are resionable editors and vandalaisim is easilly fixed (and all vandals are complete dicks). The woman article seems to be doing fine with simi protection.harlock_jds 15:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Benoit was more famous. I want full protection for as long as possible because most admins hate WP:PW, and once it gets unprotected they will never full protect it again. The vandalism at a rate of every 30 seconds, LITERALLY, with semi-protection before the full was established shows how bad it can get. Just trust me when I say we need it, please. The Hybrid 16:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In a couple days, we'll drop it to semi protection because the mission of Wikipedia means that articles need to be protected for the least time that it is viable, and also because most of the facts are now known. Hybrid, I would also caution you to think about this.. Alkivar, who most of the PW folks had trouble with, kept his eye on the article for multiple DAYS so you guys could get edits on the page. I'm also willing to work with you guys here. Not all, not even most admins, not even many admins have a problem with PW, and a lot of those who do have Wikipedia based reasons for it. SirFozzie 16:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand why the biased ones hold that bias; I agree with what they say, even. However, they also tend to take their frustration out in seemingly abusive ways. I left before it got too bad, and even now refuse to get involved, but I do watch it. Anyway, I respect the hell out of Alkivar and you, but you both are exceptions to the rules. Many admins write off requests from the project without even looking the issue over. The Hybrid 16:58, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Get ready for conspiracy theories... 

message: The AP story is saying that Benoit called a co-worker on Saturday saying he missed his flight and he sounded groggy and said "I love you" and that was "out of context".  Does anyone know who this coworker was?  Monday night Chavo said the last time he talked to Benoit he said "I love you", but Chavo made it sound like they always said that to each other.  Also, which co-worker did he tell that his wife and kid were throwing up because of food poison.  And who did he send all the text messages to?  I can't view the wwe.com page from work, so I can't see the timeline and I just wanted to know who he was in contact with over the weekend?--SGT Tex 15:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: On prowrestling.com (take the site for what it's worth), I've seen those same reports as well as in the detailed timeline on WWE's website.  That link is a few sections up.  Mike 16:03, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: The AP story says: 
When a co-worker who usually travels with Benoit called him later from the Houston airport, Benoit told the co-worker his wife, Nancy, was throwing up blood and that his son, Daniel, also was throwing up. Benoit said he thought it was food poisoning, according to WWE.
This is all so strange.--SGT Tex 16:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Co-Workers

message: I'm just curious where user:garistotle (from a few sections up) got the information stating the WWE have removed all references of Benoit's career? I,ve found references of his match with MVP at Wrestlemania 23 --Duality344 16:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Must have been added back in recently last night. I scoured the WWE Shop site last night and found nothing. No mention of him anywhere on the site, except for the the statements they are making regarding his death and in the title history. That being said, I didn't check the Wrestlemania 23 page, so maybe it was in there to. Garistotle 16:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I was just on WWE's site and he's still listed with Wrestlemania 20.  Maybe he's off all the listings on WWE Shop, but he is still referenced here and there on the main site.  Mike 16:14, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think they're not going to completely deny the fact that he was employed with them, but the want to make clear they don't want to make any "blood money" from his merchandise. --Duality344 16:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are still gonna list him in things like match results, they are just gonna remove anything that could be seen as honoring him (tributes, his profile, merchandise, etc.). TJ Spyke 20:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Garistotle 

message: I suggest the addition of the following statement in the death section of the article:
:Some media organizations have  hypothesized that a steroid-induced rage may be the cause of Benoit's actions, as some doctors have linked steroid use to uncontrollable anger, among other psychological issues which include paranoia.http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,286834,00.html Fox New's page on Roid Rage's role in the deathshttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19424899/ MSNBC on Roid Rage However, the WWE has stated that they believe the facts of this crime do not support the hypothesis that "roid rage" played a role in the murders. They cite evidence of premeditation in addition to the lack of a toxicology report, and the fact that the steroids found within Benoit's home were legally prescribed to him.http://www.wwe.com/inside/news/benoitpressrelease WWE's rebutal to allegations of Roid Rage
What does everyone think? The Hybrid 14:29, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As written, this is a great neutral stance on the roid rage subject.  The media with their accusations and the WWE defending the subject with their facts and that they too are waiting for the toxology report.  Until that report is released, nobody can say with certainty that steroids played a part in the deaths. Mike 16:05, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: we aren't agreeing with the catagorazation just saying that is the angle most of the media coverage is taking.harlock_jds 18:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, the good news is Nancy Grace from CNN had Alex Marvez on recently, and he pretty much pwned the Roid Rage thing, so some people know the truth out there, at least. The Hybrid 18:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What to add to the article in regards to roid rage 

message: I tried suggesting this earlier, but apparently nobody saw it... I recommend changing the last paragraph of the career section to more accurately describe the situation as to why Nitro substituted for Benoit on the Vengeance PPV.  I'm thinking this might work:
On June 19, 2007, Benoit wrestled his last match, defeating Elijah Burke in a match to determine who would face CM Punk for the vacated ECW Championship at Vengeance. Benoit missed the weekend house shows, telling WWE officials that his wife and son were vomiting blood due to food poisoning.Detailed WWE/Benoit timeline When he failed to show up for the pay-per-view, viewers were informed that he was unable to compete due to a "family emergency," and that he would be replaced in the title match by Johnny Nitro. Nitro went on to win the match and become ECW Champion.
Thoughts?  Comments?  Rdfox 76 17:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I used "failed to show up" because the WWE timeline indicates that he never contacted them to notify he wouldn't be showing up, he simply no-showed.  Rdfox 76 17:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Apparently, that was a mistaken report from one of the wrestling dirtsheet sites; check the WWE timeline at http://www.wwe.com/inside/news/detailedbenoittimeline for details on what messages were sent, and when.  The last text messages sent by Benoit were at about 4AM on Sunday, which jibes fairly well with the time of death ("late Saturday/early Sunday") mentioned at the press conference yesterday.  Rdfox 76 18:08, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Last paragraph of career section (2006-2007 subsection) 

message: After the sentence "They cite evidence of premeditation in addition to the lack of a toxicology report, and the fact that the steroids found within Benoit's home were legally prescribed to him. [91]'" There is a ' that doesn't belong. Placed right after citation 91. It should be removed. Also, Citations 89-91 should be formated. Wikidudeman (talk) 18:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Minor issues 

message: From the statments I have seen/read, I did not once hear an apology for airing the tribute episode of Raw. Am I missing something? fadedx 18:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apologize for what? The article doesn't claim he apologized. Wikidudeman (talk) 18:12, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: He did not use the words "I'm sorry" or "apologize" or "regret", but he did make it clear that Benoit's name would not be mentioned anymore, and that the tribute would be for everyone (beside Benoit) affected by the tragedy.  The tribute section of the death should mention that a) the Raw tribute was before the facts were known and b) that WWE is now refusing to distribute the tribute show, and c)has seemed to cut all ties to Benoit (i.e. merchandising, his WWE profile, etc).  I can provide sourcing for this once the protection expires. Ramsquire (throw me a line) 18:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Here is a youtube video of it  ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 20:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree and I dont think he has anything to apologise for at the time they had no idea and people would be yelling at him for not doing one. ♥Fighting for charming Love♥ 21:21, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah, he has nothing to be sorry for. In fact I feel blessed that he did the tribute. It gave me and millions of other fans one last night to look over some of the greatest moments in his career before finally being forced to condemn him. The Hybrid 22:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That video has been deleted by WWE, it seems that WWE has been on the war path to delete any evidence that there ever was a tribute, threatening lawsuits against anyone that carries the video or screenshots of it. For some reason it seems that they would rather it never existed and that they prefer the public never seeing or hearing about it again. JayKeaton 02:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vince did not apologise 

message: In the infobox, his death date and retirement date are listed as the 25th, while the first sentence has it listed as the 24th.  Whichever one is the agreed upon date should be used consistantly in all three spots (and whatever other locations pop up).  Mike 18:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fixed, though I don't believe the actual date of death has been determined. -- Gogo Dodo 23:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Either way, as long as it's consistant there shouldn't be many complaints.  Mike 02:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Corrections 

message: Should there maybe be something in talking about his murder/suicide talking about how the majority of retail outlets have since removed any Chris Benoit action figures and DVDs? I'm sure something will be properly sourced to show that this is the case in the next couple of days, if it hasn't been already. The only places I've been able to find anything with Benoit's name on it so far is Amazon and Ebay. (note that I haven't checked wrestling-specific sales sites such as Ringside Collectibles)Garistotle 19:17, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Not to mention Amazon's way of trying to make a quick buck off the situation... Mike 19:48, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They had the merchandise before Chris Benoit was post-humorously accused of murder. Besides, would you take all the merchandise off the shelves of Chris Benoit, if you had the chance to make money off a tragedy such as this? A lot of people say that war is profitable. Why not death? AMReese 00:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not talking about them trying to make a buck off the situation, I'm talking about the shameless plug of his DVD in the note about his death when you search WWE.  Mike 02:12, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Retail reaction 

message: They are doing autopsies and toxicology and lord knows what else we are not told about.  Why not wait until there is absolutes of what happened here?  Right now it seems like guessing.  Of course this is just my opinion but I think it all should stay out of the article until all is really known. Of course changing the info box to him being dead should be done, but then again when it is know when he died for sure. --CrohnieGalTalk 21:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We can never know anything "for sure", we just have to believe that the police told us the truth. And the police have told us that he killed his wife one day and his little boy the next, followed by himself. The police could be lying to us, but I sort of trust the police. They risk losing their jobs if the public find out they lied. JayKeaton 08:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think anyone wanted to hear that he murdered his own family, I certainly didn't.  Dionyseus 15:06, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why not wait for all the details and tests to be done? 

message: This is at the top of the page:
:Please note that this talk page is for discussion of changes to the Chris Benoit article. Off-topic discussions, including tributes, are not appropriate for Wikipedia and will be REMOVED. Thank you for your cooperation. 
It could be to limit the talk page from becoming massively large. Salisbury Steak (complaint dept. - contribs) 15:28, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah but some pretty important pages and comments were deleted that directly related to the event.  I think some admin or someone is making person choices to crop this down before the cops gets on this page.  That's my opinion.  If I'm not right, then restore the pages back to where they were.  There wasn't anything on the page before it started getting deleted today that was not approiate or did not speak about the article directly....I think someone is getting scared that this page is in Polices eyesight now.The Cleveland Browns are awesome! 15:31, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am just stating what is at the top, you might have to find an admin for explination on this one man, I am not one.  Also using a colon(:) will indent your post so that it looks like a response and not all one response, no offense. Salisbury Steak (complaint dept. - contribs) 15:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

text: How about some help admins for User:2-Bar Quack on this? Salisbury Steak (complaint dept. - contribs) 15:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am still learning some of the coding here on Wikipedia.  LOL, yeah, I mean, I just don't understand why people would delete stuff it if it directly relates to the page and the info we are finding out about him.  I mean, I got enough rights to go in there on his page and make changes, but I like to talk about them here before anything and to be honest, I don't even want to touch his page until all the facts come out.  People been jumping quickly to want to make changes to his article page, I just figured until we get more details about it, we can use this page to gather information in what we are going to do for his article once the tox. test comes back.The Cleveland Browns are awesome! 15:59, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: People should be more like you then, instead people will put anything on the page just for the purpose of saying that "he's a killer" and reasoning that with half-ass truths when the whole story is not there. Salisbury Steak (complaint dept. - contribs) 16:13, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Remember Wikipedians

message: I believe that some of us should focus on the rest of the article and chill out on the death section. It's in serious need of a re-write, most of it is WP:CRUFT simply because of the way it is written. I was reading the article, especially the Early Career section with the second paragrpah where it explains "The Dungeon", and I read the first sentece literally had no idea what the hell it was talking about (granted I'm not a HUGE wrestling fan, but imagine someone who knows nothing about Chris Benoit. I'm pretty confident that random people have heard about Benoit on the news lately and come here to find out more about him). Suggestions? --VorangorTheDemon 17:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, and I don't know enough about Benoit to re-word the article, so I'll leave the re-write to you. The way that ALL articles should be written is as if you were explaining it to people that have no idea who the person is (which I bet that numerous people who have come here in the past week don't have any idea who he actually is, they've just heard of some pro wrestler named Chris Benoit on TV who murdered his wife and son, and they want to know more about him). --VorangorTheDemon 18:33, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Other work

message: I don't like the new photo.  The old one was better.The Cleveland Browns are awesome! 19:49, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The new photo does seem to show him a little grumpier-looking than usual in my opinion. Crenel 20:06, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

text: It wasn't a free image and probably got deleted. Chopper Dave 01:24, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: I know that the D.A. said that Chris killed his wife and son, but he didn't mention any type of test that they did to collect the DNA evidence from the cord around Nancy's throat or the cord around Chris's throat. I may just be watching too much CSI and stuff but he didn't mention it. I thought that might be important to mention.Anybody else think he should have mentioned this or am I the only one who would like more information like this? And why are some reporters trying to tie Sherri Martel's death in with this? Aren't they separate? (MgTurtle 19:55, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep DNA testing is very time consuming and pricey, the CSI shows have really made it a little bit harder on us, as everyone expects us to be able to instantly check DNA, or do other off the wall stuff like lifting fingerprints from something porous. Some things just aren't possible. Dureo 06:44, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Another reason why they probably didn't do DNA is that it's Benoit's own house, so his DNA is everywhere, making it nearly impossible to distinguish what DNA contributes to the case, and what doesn't. The could look for his epithelial tissue (skin) in the cord that he strangled his wife with, but again, how reliable is it because it's in his own house? Another reason is that DNA is usually only used for convicting people in cases, and the suspected killer is already dead; and they don't have reason or tangible evidence to suspect anyone else. --VorangorTheDemon 18:40, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  DNA? 

message: Since when do the police get to decide if asomeone has committed murder. All they can do is point that the evidence supports such a hypothesis, if he were alive he would have to go to trial before such a statement could be made and his being dead doesnt change that, SqueakBox 20:26, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, being dead DOES change that. A dead person does not have anywhere near the same rights as a living person. A dead person does not get a trial. At best there may be a civil trial but a ruling will likely take years. When all the parties are dead, the authority falls to the invesitgators and local prosecutors to determine what happens. By making their ruling, which you edited the article to include, they confirmed Benoit committed the murder. Whether or not you believe this to be true, the news media have reported this as such, thus it can be used in the article. CraigMonroe 20:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

text: There are some official procedures that still have to be completed by the police department before they can declare the case closed and put the murder-suicide on the record, but it is pretty much a done deal. The Hybrid 20:42, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The police dont get to decide or there would be no trials merely a police state, and a done deal (a few wikipedians thinking it so) doesnt mean anything, SqueakBox 22:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, but investigators of the crime scene do and they stated it was a double murder-suicide. Verifibility, which would be the news media and the police investigations, are more important than the truth. — Moe ε 22:56, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is, without a doubt, the saddest true summation of Wikipedia I've ever seen. Liu Bei 18:02, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

text: From what I understand the ruling stands unless someone brings hard evidence against the decision to give good reason to the authorities to reopen the case.  His father did not deny that Chris did it, he wants to know whether or not drugs were a factor.  Dionyseus 03:48, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dionysus, you nailed it on the nose. It would be different if Benoit was alive. As I pointed out earlier, a dead person does not ahve the same rights as a living person. Some people can't accept this. Its as if they want the authorities to charge a dead body with murder and put it on trial. Speaking from experience, the courts have better things to do. If they are looking for vindication for Benoit, they will probably have to wait for a civil trial decision in a year or two. Other than that, the determination by local authorities is basically final. Even if you don't believe this, the fact there are numerous articles saying he committed the murder is enough to meet verifiability requirements and allow it posted in the article. CraigMonroe 12:00, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Murder

message: Chris' career is narrated as if he were an athlete competing in an (unscripted) sporting event.  It sounds as if it has been written by a fan, rather than an objective observer..
:I have to say, as someone who has never watched WWE wrestling, this article is incredibly meandering and difficult to follow. You have to ask a serious question as to whether every scripted event in the man's wrestling career is worthy of mentioning in a wikipedia article and whether it should be, as you say, described as though he were an athlete competing in a genuine sporting event. Surely the direct correlation here isn't a genuine sportsman but an entertainer - such as a theatre actor or someone taking part in a musical. It's far from an encyclopedic tone. Blankfrackis 02:02, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: POV and Context

message: Apparently WWE has banned all their superstars from talking to the media. This is possibly if a wrestler starts making comments about Chris -Sha0000 22:16, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree MgTurtle. Vince was quite quick dismiss steriods as the cause of Benoit's murders, and even made up excuses to why it couldn't of been steriods. If they find steroids in Benoit's system, that could be the end for the WWE. Vince will get his license taken away and all the other wrestlers could be out of jobs. Benoit could've been on steriods but then went off them for a while before the test that he had in April, and then went on them again. Some athletes do that, they take steroids only occasionally so they have a better chance of passing tests. And you notice that all those wrestlers that you named have either gotten fired, suspended, or have chosen to leave the WWE? Coincidence? I beg to differ. --VorangorTheDemon 18:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I wasn't jumping the gun at all Sherick. I never said that Vince WOULD lose his license, I said that he COULD lose his license. There's a difference, and Vince almost lost the business in the '90's due to his wrestler's taking steriods. Granted that this isn't the first time that the WWE has been caught with steriods, but (if the effect of Steroids actually were the cause of Benoit's actions) this is the first time that it's resulted in extreme collateral damage. The death of a woman and child. No doubt the feds will get involved, and I'm positive that they'll do quite a bit more then slap Vince on the hand and tell him no. --VorangorTheDemon 04:46, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Media

message: As he's clearly no longer wrestling, is this the best infobox to use? I'm not sure where WP:PW stands on deceased wrestlers but many of the fields in the current infobox are irrelevant now. DavyJonesLocker 01:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, a lot of that info doesn'r really apply any more. What can we change it to? JayKeaton 02:03, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Make a new infobox for deceased athletes if one doesn't exist yet. Crenel 02:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Former Wrestler!!! --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 02:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrestler infobox

message: "He was regarded as one of the best technical wrestlers in his time." in the first paragraph. I don't know performance wrestling terms, but can anyone else suggest a way to distinguish his being one of the best wrestlers of the performance wrestling from real sports wrestling such as "Freestyle wrestling" and "grappling"? Anyone that reads this page may think that it is talking about like the Olympic sports wrestling, when it is actually talking about the "entertainment wrestling". I don't want people to be mislead or confuse him for a different class of wrestling that he was not a part of or "one of the best" of JayKeaton 05:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As he was trained at the New Japan Dojo, Benoit is regarded as a legitimate catch wrestler. east.718 20:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Best technical wrestlers

message: Seriously, the Benoit story has quickly developed into one of the most, if not THE most
reported news stories of any kind in the year 2007. Anyone who has heard the story at this point has been living under a rock, Chris Benoit (for the wrong reasons) just turned into a household name. This story is affecting sports in general, not just WWE. Wrestlers, past and present have been appering on mainstream news shows (Greta Van Sustren, Anderson Cooper, Bill O'Reilly) talking about this. It needs a page of its own end of story. The FBI are on the verge of entering this case, how much bigger does it need to become for it to be a notable story? Benoit's tragedy has brought up the moral dilemma of athletes (I know WWE isn't techinacally athletics, but still) being role models, and also has brought up the issue of steroids and performance enhancing drugs. Come on guys, you should at least give this case its own page if for nothing else, it made Wikipedia more famous, lol. <-------Darth Caton
:::WWE is athletics, even if it is scripted. --hiphopchamp 21:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that there needs to be a new page it's just gettin' rediculous. I'm vote one for a page JUST on the whole Benoir tragedy. --Zero Cool 05:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it's very notable, I have yet to meet anyone who hasn't heard of it.  Dionyseus 05:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with all the above.  Fighting for Justice 06:22, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fourthed.  I came here with the intention of saying that we should try to trim down the section on his death, but it would also seem to merit its own page, given its significance to wrestling as a whole (IMHO, much more than The Fingerpoke of Doom). Hezekiah957 06:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I vote for a whole new page for the story and all the hysteria involved. The murder/suicide can be briefly discribed here and linked there like a lot of other stories. Billywhack 06:34, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll second that nomination. A new page would be worthy of such an event, and it would clear alot of clutter on this page. Evilgohan2 07:28, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm doubtful I would have heard of this story were it not for wikipedia and I'm sure this applies to most of the world. Perhaps there has been extensive coverage in the American media, but not so much outside America. You might want to get out from the 'rock' your under and learn that there is in fact a world outside of the good ole US of A and wrestling Nil Einne 08:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

text: It seems like pretty standard practice for wrestler articles to have an amount of detail comparable to that which is in Benoit's article.  A recap of feuds is common, as is a list of signature moves.  In no way does the inclusion of his wrestling information (feuds and the like) detract from the information about his death.  I feel quite the opposite of you, that his article is being dominated by the murder-suicide.  It's also pretty standard, from what I've seen, to arrange articles like this (see Eddie Guerrero's page). Hezekiah957 07:08, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But he's not just a wrestler anymore, unlike Eddie Guerrero who is only a wrestler. This page is now the biography of one of Americas most famous killers JayKeaton 07:25, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, that seems to be the way things have gone.Evilgohan2 07:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I disagree with creating a whole new page. Other people don't have single pages on a certian event that occured in their lives (whether they've murdered or otherwise, we don't have a single page on reports of Ted Bundy's murders or Ed Gein's murders, and they're probably just as famous as Benoit for murdering). Even if we did make a new page, it'll no doubt be merged into this one later on. If you really want to make Benoit's murders the main subject of this page, what we should do is re-write his page that way. And as a side note, whoever is doing it, stop removing acceptable comments from this page. You can be reported for incivility if you keep it up. All mine so far have been deleted, and they haven't violated anything for the talk page. If you delete this one, I'll find out who you are and report you. --VorangorTheDemon 15:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, there is no reason why the information on this page can't be trimmed down. There really is no need for a new page. -- Scorpion0422 16:06, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

text:  I don't think that slimming down this page is the best option. Benoit's wrestling career is notable and all that I've read says he was well-respected throughout the wrestling world. He is famous outside of the wrestling world for being a murderer. I guess it makes me think of what the policy is for editing articles for other people famous in groups but maybe not so well-known as a whole. An example I can think of would be maybe John Carmack, who outside of the technology circle isn't that well-known or even notable. If he was to murder and become famous throughout the nation, what would take precedent, what he gave to the technology circle or the event of murder? Benoit was famous for being a great technical wrestler as is said on his page, so why would it be necessary to trim down that part of the article to make it more centered around one event in his life, even if it has made him famous? I know that some of the details may be quite in-depth, but this is an encyclopedia talking about the life of a person, and I don't think that selectively cutting pieces out in order to adjust the balance of notable events is the right move. Paris Hilton doesn't have a page specifically for her recent arrest and jail time, but that had a ridiculous amount of news coverage. So, really, I think the death section could be used to present information about the case, and nothing else. The death section should only hold the facts of the case. I think that anything else, including what the WWE has done in response, or anything regarding what people have done, should go to their article, not Benoit's. That way, the death is presented as it should be and it does not cause, in my view, considerable controversy regarding what was more important in the life of Benoit, his wrestling or his murders. That's just what I see here. Goofyman 20:04, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Persoanlly i the parts about the wikipedia angle on the murder needs to be put on a seperate page since it really doesn't relate to Benoit at all.as for the carrer section it seems a bit overdone... do we really need a angle by angle retelling of the wrestling storylines he's been in?harlock_jds 20:09, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we should wait a few weeks until the case is closed or solved, there's still facts that are unclear and quite a few un-answered questions. And as I said, there's no reason for another page, it's the same person, just from 2 different views. If another page is created, I guarentee that it'll be merged into this one later on. And not every detail about his murder/suicide is encyclopedic. The content word for word of the text messeges that he sent out serve no encyclopedic purpose. Neither does what he said to Chavo on the phone, ect, ect. --VorangorTheDemon 04:56, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: It's Time for a new page