Jump to content

Talk:Burke and Hare murders/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Hare's later years

No mention of what happened to Mr. Hare after he testified against Burke. I might have to do a bit of research :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Famous Mortimor (talk • contribs)

See William Hare - also please sign posts with four tildes "~~~~" to add name and date stamp. Cutler 09:59, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

West Port Murders???

Just to say that despite reading more than one book on Burke and Hare, the title of this article: 'West Port murders' means nothing to me. Wouldn't 'Burke and Hare' be a better title, and one that people would recognise?. Colin4C 17:24, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Well, this article is about the murders, not the people. Burke and Hare redirects here. Feels right to me cos that is what the murders are called and some people may want to search on that term. Think we need some more views on this. Cutler 16:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
When I came upon this page I was looking for information on the crimes, not the people. It doesn't pose any problem, as this is a very useful and informative article, but it definately seems to be a good point. Letsfckpeaches 19:54, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Pub frequented?

I don't suppose anybody has any information on a pub frequented/lived in by Burke & Hare in Edinburgh called the Castle Of Coughts or something? I am doing some research, and have failed to find any information. It has now been demolished, I know, but apparently it was quite famous because of these events. If this question isn't appropriate for the talk section, please delete it. Thanks in advance. Letsfckpeaches 19:54, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

See also Medicinal_Purposes.

213.84.74.36 (talk) 13:18, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Unclear Wording: "broke his back"

It says that "Burke and Hare argued over the boy, but then Burke broke his back and sold both bodies for £8 each." What does this mean? Does it mean that one person conceded the argument or that his back was literally broken? If the latter, was it accidentally or a result of a physical fight between the two? Who broke their back? Was it Burke who's back was broken or was it Burke who did the breaking? 216.36.186.2 (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Took me a few reads to understand this too. I think what it's saying is Burke broke the boys back, leaving them with no further argument. Perhaps "however Burke broke the boys back and they sold both bodies for £8 each." --Delta-NC (talk) 00:22, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


Untitled

William Burke article merged: See old talk-page here
William Hare (murderer) article merged: See old talk-page here

Factual accuracy and neutrality issues

Factual accuracy/possible vandalism: Skin from Burke's body was used to make the leather binding of a small book. This book can now be seen in the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh. His skeleton hangs in the anatomy library of Edinburgh University's Medical School.

Neutrality: In the 1989 children Series TUGS, there are two characters parodied off of Burke and Hare named Burke and Blair who are scrap dealers, a clear equivalent to selling bodies for tugboats.

--momoricks talk 08:50, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I found several sources confirming the information about his skin and skeleton, so I put it back into the article...whoa... momoricks talk 14:08, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

I did a small amount of copyediting on the article and noted that the no footnotes tag is no longer necessary. Also, I trimmed the popular culture section back to include only those items that were specifically about Burke and Hare, removing the sort of "incidental" characterizations that were essentially trivial. I also removed the TUGS mention. It seems quite an OR issue to me and isn't relevant to an understanding of the pair. That allowed me to remove the neutrality tag. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:22, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Burke and Hare in media

I was about to add a reference to Robert Louis Stevenson's The Body Snatcher, and Val Lewton's movie based on it starring Boris Karloff and Bela Lugosi. Then I saw the embedded comment and decided to add this note instead. The Stevenson novel, while a fictional account, is explicitly based on the case of Burke and Hare, and the movie version goes so far as to mention "burking." I'll leave it up to the full-time wikipedians to decide, but is there a compelling reason not to include a cross-reference to the Stevenson novel and the Lewton movie here? Granted, fictional adaptations of the case are common, but surely R.L. Stevenson and Val Lewton are more notable than most -- I found this article because I was trying to learn the factual account behind the Stevenson and Lewton accounts. 71.67.110.168 (talk) 05:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

The note is added to prevent runaway additions of every single mention that this gets in songs and episodes of The Simpsons and Family Guy. There's no reason not to add these two items. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:34, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Burke and Hare in Media

I do not want to edit anything in the article, and I am sure there may be very many mentions of them in the media. I wanted to give a little info and a minor link if any of you think it has merit to the article. There is a play called "Bloodless: The Trial of Burke and Hare". It is fantastic, sticks mostly to facts, and is the reason I looked up the murders. Here is a link to it's review, I don't want to dig up a ton of info if it is not considered "big time" enough to make a mention in this article. Just wanted to point it out. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/special/fringe/reviews/Bloodless-The-Trial-of-Burke-and-Hare-50540382.html I'm just passing through, thought I'd share the reason I looked it all up. Fascinating stuff here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.76.57.184 (talk) 05:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Burke and Hare in media portrayals

updated the 09 release of Burke and Hare. Added Simon Pegg to the cast list. Blockbuster.com list the movie release date as 9/29/09 http://www.blockbuster.com/browse/catalog/movieDetails/427593 Sydtrolls (talk) 15:25, 15 September 2009 (UTC)sydtrolls

Seems a bit daft to me that the upcoming film based on Burke and Hare keeps being removed from the media portrayals section. Oft quoted if that its a future release... So? It's actually happening. Filming has wrapped, Wikipedia even has an article on the film itself. Wikipedia shouldn't be about everything, granted, so every fleeting reference isn't necessary, but this is a relatively major contemporary production. I strongly suggest that now if the time to insert references to this film - especially as people are likely to start looking for information on it. Kouros (talk) 20:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
What you don't seem to understand that it is a rule of thumb to not include future films in articles such as this until it is released. Until that time, any of number of things can occur that prevent a release - lack of distributor, shelving of the film, etc. That there is an article on the film is sufficient and anyone who cares to look for the film will not come here first. And if it is that widely publicized, some other reference besides Pegg's twitter should be available. There is no reason to make an exception in this article when we don't even list the Bonnie & Clyde film on that page. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:36, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
What you don't seem to understand is that anyone searching for Burke and Hare in Wikipedia will come here first (and rightly so) but there is nothing on this page to point people to their desired destination. As far as I can see anywhere there are no rules for your rule of thumb - this seems to be a fairly arbitrary decision on your part. The production of the film has been widely publicised, but on the day of completing filming the first reference to that fact is Pegg's Twitter. If you want reference to the film existing try http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1253173/Shaun-Of-The-Deads-Simon-Pegg-bodysnatcher-new-film--Gollum-sidekick.html or http://www.slashfilm.com/2010/02/25/first-look-simon-pegg-and-andy-serkis-in-burke-and-hare/ or http://www.totalfilm.com/news/first-pics-of-burke-and-hare or http://www.empireonline.com/news/feed.asp?NID=26791 . Even assuming that the release is prevented for any of the reasons you've plucked out of thin air, why not include reference to the production in the meantime? I don't think anyone would suggest an overhaul of the whole article - just a line or two to provide information. Wikipedia is supposed to be useful and not a bureaucracy. Kouros (talk) 11:35, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Don't bother arguing with Wildharlivie. If the film hadn't been shot yet, her arguments might have been valid, but that is not the case. I'd say for now that Simon Pegg's official twitter is a good enough source regarding the film's completion, though it will probably be replaced later with more complete sources. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 14:31, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
The Twitter post confirms nothing that has been added to this article. And keep your personal aspersions to yourself, Jean-Jacques Georges. There are scores of films that never reached the light of day and any future film falls under this rationale. Wildhartlivie (talk) 19:16, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
The Twitter post confirms that Simon Pegg has wrapped his scenes. As he is the main actor, we can therefore assume that the film is completed or near completion. But, whoops ! That would original research, right ? As for personal aspersions, I'll stick to my opinion regarding the attitudes of certain users. Jean-Jacques Georges (talk) 19:41, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

The Twitter post means nothing in regard to the overall film and is just plainly a pointy addition. I'd note that administrators have redacted some of your comments as personal attacks, so strike out your attacks here or be taken to AN/I yourself for posting the same all over the place. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Burke and Hare in media

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Doctor_and_the_Devils — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.233.91.90 (talk) 23:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Fate of Margaret Hare

At the top of this page, it says that Margaret Laird (Hare) became one of Burke and Hare's victims, but at the bottom, it suggests that Margaret Hare 'escaped lynching' and went back to Ireland. Obviously, only one of these can be true. I have no idea which one it is, but someone should find out and fix it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.10.127.240 (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC) I can find no mention that she was a victim. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:02, 27 October 2009 (UTC) I hold in my hands at this moment the official confessions of William Burke, therein he admits to 16 murders and the snatching of one body from the coffin. Margaret Hare plays no part in any of it as accomplice or victim. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.104.139.29 (talk) 16:11, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Smellie and Hunter compared to Burke and Hare

William Smellie and William Hunter have recently been compared to Burke and Hare.[1][2]

1. Shelton DC. The Emperor's new clothes. J R Soc Med 2010;103(2):46-50.

2. Campbell D. Founders of British obstetrics 'were callous murderers'. The Observer. 2010 (7 Feb).

--peter_english (talk) 09:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

When?

The article states "In late 1838, Burke and M'Dougal moved into Tanner's Close". Which would be an impressing feat, given that Burke was executed in 1828. Presumably the date should be 1818, since Burke and M'Dougal might have been dating since somewhen in '17. 87.123.71.72 (talk) 22:09, 18 February 2011 (UTC) Ah, I erred here (as it wasn't Burke who was executed, but Hare was), but still the date is off -- the murders having taken place ten years earlier.

And "late" '28 would be too late, since in February '28 they've already "done" body #3 (Simpson). 87.123.71.72 (talk)

Burke's first name

The article says "the killings were attributed to Irish immigrants Brendan 'Dynes' Burke and William Hare" and also "this is written with the blood of Wm Burke". Did Burke change his first name at some point? Fatman UK (talk) 01:20, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for catching that. I've looked, and the name seems to have been changed from William Burke to Brendan "Dynes" Burke last November by 193.117.31.4 (talk · contribs)[1]. It was changed again today from Brendan "Dynes" Burke to Mark "Finlayson" Burke by Pencil-man86 (talk · contribs)[2]. The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography does not give justification for either of those changes, so I've reverted to the name of "William Burke". Girlwithgreeneyes (talk) 13:25, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

This may be a minor point, but I thought that Burke's wife or mistress wsa put on trial but acquitted. I remember a one-man play "Cocky" where Russell Hunter played Lord Cockburn, who defended her, he gave the closing speech to the jury. PatGallacher (talk) 17:54, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

The external link titled "Searchable collection of printed materials from the New York Academy of Medicine, related to the murders, trial, and execution of Burke" no longer, if ever, points to the correct page, citing Page Not Found. Presumably the site has been reorganised, and the link needs to be corrected if the original files can be found. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.24.41.80 (talk) 22:51, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Major revision of article

I have taken the liberty of rewriting the page, so that many of the points raised above have been hopefully addressed. Kim Traynor (talk) 15:17, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

William Hare

Does anyone know what happened to him after he disappeared shortly after being released or when he died?Jtyroler (talk) 10:10, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Only what's already in the article. All other "sightings" are spurious. Kim Traynor | Talk 10:13, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Burke and Hare murders. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:29, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Burke_and_Hare_murders/Archive_1&oldid=1136583847"