Talk:Lyle and Erik Menendez/Archive 1

Bob Menendez redirect

I think the redirect should go to a disambiguation page since Bob Menendez is now a U.S. senator. But I don't know how to do this. Bruxism 19:51, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Erik's age

According to his date of birth and time of murders, Erik was just 17 years old. Isn't this technically a minor and thus could be sentenced as a juvenile? Although even 14-15 year old murderers get sentenced as adults, just wondering if his age was a consideration at all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.49.155.106 (talk) 22:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

From my experience with the court systems (misdeamonors, minor crimes) they consider you an adult in the eyes of the law at 16. You can no longer use your youthful offender (get out of jail free with no record) at 16. This may vary from state to state, however. I'm speaking from a Connecticut perspective. I would assume that it would be incredibly rare for age to have a bearing on any serious crimes if they were 16 years old or older. Tainted42 18:37, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's common knowledge that Erik was 18 years old at the time of the killings. He was born in 1970, not 1971. Smitty48 (talk) 13:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

aasdjkajsdoqwoeqwleas,d.lzliqwoqqwlqw8e12l1ooiae.lzcu zxczx pa qwoqeasdo98qoeqi2323i23kqkwelasdyailzuqweuiacasd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.92.184.108 (talk) 09:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Book menendez.jpg

Image:Book menendez.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Judalon Smyth

Check the facts. Judalon Smyth, L. Jerome Oziel's mistress, went to the police after Oziel let her listen to a tape he had made of the confession. Oziel was the psychiatrist whom the Wiki article mentions as threatened by Erik. The facts in this article should be verified. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Altj1 (talk • contribs) 12:55, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Parents' wealth

Any idea what happened to the remainder of the family fortune? Juve2000 (talk) 02:47, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.nytimes.com/1994/04/05/us/estate-left-menendezes-by-parents-is-dwindling.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.52.146.12 (talk) 00:55, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely, the defense attorneys for Erik and Lyle Menendez got it all. — Quicksilver^{T @} 20:32, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gratuitous mention of irrelevant brand names?

This might seem a trivial issue, but isn't this article absolutely swimming in brand names? It's almost as though it's trying hard to rub in how wealthy the family in question was- making for a really annoying read. I'm not saying that including these are completely baseless, but detailing the brand of the car, watch, or firearm every single time one is mentioned is quite inconsequential and detracts from the article's continuity and quality. Or is it just me? —Tshloab (talk) 03:13, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to agree. I suggest the name of the restaurant that was purchased might be good to edit. I came here hoping to help with the backlog of BLPs lacking references, but this article seems fully referenced. As a newbie, I do not understand why this is not published and then edited further as needed. I also don't understand this much discussion without any actual "be bold" editing. Responses welcome! — Anne9853 (talk) 23:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Missing paragraph in the Crime section

I noticed that part of the article seems to have been deleted from the crime section. The section goes from describing the indictment to the retrial trial. It entirely skips the 1st, more controversial trial. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.94.129.225 (talk) 20:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Lyle Menendez' birthplace

There is confusion about Lyle Menendez' birthplace. The article, based on one Web reference, says just "Illinois". Some other Web sources say New York City, New York. NNDB says Cedar Grove, New Jersey. Which one is correct? — Quicksilver^{T @} 20:32, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Most likely, it was New York City, based on the Crime Library article by Rachel Pergament. She writes that Jose and Kitty Menendez moved to Illinois in 1969 with their infant son, Joseph Lyle. Jose had been working for the accounting firm of Coopers & Lybrand, which apparently had offices in Manhattan. Of course, this doesn't necessarily mean the couple lived in New York City at the time of their son's birth; they could have lived in one of a number of nearby towns, with him commuting to his job; Cedar Grove, New Jersey, is not out of the question. Pergament's article does, however, rule out Illinois as the birthplace. — Quicksilver^{T @} 21:47, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Last Man Standing

I somewhat doubt that this crime was mentioned in this movie when you take into consideration the fact that it was set in the 1930s. 2A02:C7F:7401:8700:540C:AEBC:15D5:7307 (talk) 14:23, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lyle and Erik Menendez. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:08, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

The same picture is used for Lyle and Erik. Its Erik's picture twice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:186:4580:1387:4D61:6AED:343B:3BBE (talk) 13:58, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Number of Gunshots

I've seen multiple sources state the total number of gunshots was 15, but if Jose Menendez received 6 shots and Kitty Menendez got 10, that would add up to 16 shots total. Can anyone explain this discrepancy?

(I did a simple Google search and multiple articles listed the 15-shot total) 66.91.36.8 (talk) 20:51, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Composition I - Writing Wikipedia, section 2

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 August 2022 and 6 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Chickenoodlesoup05 (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by DarthVetter (talk) 17:31, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Popular Culture

In Season 8 Episode 20 (1996) "Married with Children", Al references them in a joke. Drsruli (talk) 06:51, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion to add an article

Why not add page about pedofile José Menendez?/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.113.46.53 (talk) 15:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Menéndez vs Menendez

Should this be formatted as "Menéndez" in the title? --Jennica✿ / ^talk 04:17, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jennica: I've fixed it.★Trekker (talk) 21:50, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COMMONNAME Menendez is more common than Menéndez.--Wester (talk) 16:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Wester, just a question out of curiosity. Because I see that you are now changing this name everywhere. But what is the official spelling of their name? Or does that not matter? RuedNL2 (talk) 21:38, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wester, this page should not have been moved since there was no consensus on the talk page. You need to prove WP:COMMONNAME with many reliable sources; you can't just say it's common and move a page.

Additionally, you cannot change the spelling of names without proper sources to back it up. Please stop removing "é" from their names.

-- Mjks28 (talk) 21:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read the source materials linked in the article. They all mention Menenedez without é. It's the common name in English. See also https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=now%201-d&q=Menendez,Men%C3%A9ndez&hl=en You also seem to forget the page was moved to the hyper-correct Menénedez without much discussion. The two brothers were English speaking Americans, not Spanish speaking Cubans. --Wester (talk) 21:51, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

Regardless of how the page was previously moved, a proper consensus is still required before you move a page. —Mjks28 (talk) 21:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did not know that at the time the change was made without consultation to add the "é". But I do agree with the change to Menendez. If you actually look at the sources in the article, the greater majority of them write about "Menendez". In addition, all film/series titles are also without the "é". — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuedNL2 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

What about gun residue on the hands 2600:6C4A:4FF0:990:B4DE:7E5E:9160:7335 (talk) 23:23, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to the TV documentary I just watched, the police did not test them as initially the authorities did not consider the brothers to be suspects.

Wschart (talk) 16:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

People Article Notesd That The Brothers claimed Abuse Stopped When Lyle Was 8 and Erik Was 6

It is a good article.[1]

 That is miscommunication. As what is stated in the portion of the article "The brothers claimed that when Lyle was about 8 years old, José stopped sexually abusing him and began sexually abusing 6-year-old Erik." Notice the key word, "began"?[2]

I Don't Trust Rossello's Credibility

He also previously made a separate sex abuse claim which was able to get televised in 2014.[3] Though his claim against Edgardo Diaz would lead to the a police investigation in 2023, [4] it has still not resulted in any breakthrough. I like claims that are neutral and with good credibility.Speakfor23 (talk) 20:14, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's some sense of credibility, whether we disagree or not. Erik Menendez himself witness Rosello going into a room with Jose Menendez (in 1985, the year of said assault). Right now, it's plausible speculation at this point of time. Edfl22 (talk) 03:09, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know why there’s no page for the brothers father Jose? Seems strange.

I was searching Wikipedia and I could not find an article for the 2 brothers father (and victim) Jose. I find it odd since he was a Hollywood producer and a major figure at the now defunct Caralco pictures. There's no mention of him on the Wikipedia article in the article on Caralco either. Does anyone else find this strange or have an explanation as to why this is? Thanks for any reply in advance! Dacroce1 (talk) 06:11, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dacroce1 Was there an article at some point before that's gotten deleted? If not, then it's likely that the reason is just that no one has gotten around to it. You might want to check if there is a draft for it. If there isn't, you could create one. Mjks28 (talk) 07:02, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reply! There's plenty of news articles on the the father so it wouldn't be too difficult to create with citations from those sources. Please forgive my typos as I tend to type quickly and fail to proofread! Dacroce1 (talk) 03:15, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citation 55 broken

The address of the article this cites appears to have changed. It can now be found here: https://people.com/archive/life-love-behind-bars-vol-64-no-19/

I do not know how to edit references, could someone update this? SageShortForSagebert (talk) 19:03, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems Epsteined. They hide truth

Eps 213.113.46.53 (talk) 15:34, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 29 September 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: withdrawn. Discussion below reveals that this page was incorrectly moved a year ago to the incorrect name that this RM proposed to move back to. (non-admin closure) Mjks28 (talk) 23:48, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lyle and Erik Menendez → Lyle and Erik Menéndez – This page was improperly moved without a consensus on the talk page, so I'm starting a formal discussion here. The reason for the move was cited as WP:COMMONNAME. However, the mover failed to prove how the lack of é is the common name with sources. —Mjks28 (talk) 21:54, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read the source materials liked in the article. They all mention Menenedez without é. It's the common name in English. See also https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=now%201-d&q=Menendez,Men%C3%A9ndez&hl=en You also seem to forget the page was moved to the hyper-correct Menénedez without much discussion. The two brothers were English speaking Americans, not Spanish speaking Cubans. --Wester (talk) 21:51, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't see what being English speaking Americans has to do with it. Other American people, such as Héctor Elizondo, are English speaking Americans, but still use the "é" in their names, despite sources erroneously using "e". —Mjks28 (talk) 22:08, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the boys are American obviously means nothing, since their father did come from Cuba, so that spelling is possible. But if you actually look at the sources in the article, the greater majority of them write about "Menendez". In addition, all film/series titles are also without the "é". RuedNL2 (talk) 22:18, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nit: These "boys" are 56 and 53 years old. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That should indeed have been "brothers" or "men". Only after seeing the series I forgot that it was already 35 years ago haha. But you understand what I meant to say. RuedNL2 (talk) 22:29, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but even back then, they were adults. They were 21 and 18 years old at the time of the killings. It seems important because characterizing them as "boys" was part of their defense strategy, if I remember correctly. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Before the undiscussed move of 29 September 2024‎ that was mentioned above, there was a previous undiscussed move on 19 April 2023‎ in the opposite direction. Before April 2023, the title was Lyle and Erik Menendez for 19 years. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:23, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As previously stated, all series and film titles are also written as "Menendez". In addition, Netflix's upcoming documentary, in which the brothers themselves give an interview, will also be released as "The Menendez Brothers". See for example this Netflix article, I assume that they write the names of the people (in this case the brothers) they interview in the official way. To be clear, I am in favor of the spelling Menendez. And I am against the change back to Menéndez RuedNL2 (talk) 22:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, I oppose this proposed move. We shouldn't be putting accents into the names of high-notability Americans unless there is some clear reason to do that. Such a reason seems currently absent in this case. I just checked and found what appears to be evidence of improper editing of the article. At least four of the cited sources that were identified as having an accent in their headlines and in two direct quotes do not actually have an accent in the sources themselves. The change of the birth names given in direct quotes seem especially egregious. I invite others to check what the sources say and to look in the article history for changes of the titles and quotes from the cited sources. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:47, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

After your post I found five sources that had "Menéndez" in the headline here on Wikipedia, while the sources themselves also simply mentioned "Menendez"... RuedNL2 (talk) 23:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article also incorrectly included accents in the titles of five books in the "Further reading" section. None of those books have accents on Amazon. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Between myself and RuedNL2, a lot more sources have been found that improperly showed accents in their headlines. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How many, if any, sources use the accented name? Mjks28 (talk) 23:44, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zero. I also found third one with a direct quote that incorrectly included an accent. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:47, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

None of the 94 sources in the article... RuedNL2 (talk) 23:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the majority of the sources used in the article spelling it "Menendez", which I didn't know were changed, I now oppose the move. "Menéndez" is still their real name, so it should be spelled as such in the lead, but since "Menendez" is the common name, that should be used as the article title. I will not withdraw this RM because this section should still be open for discussion so other editors can contribute their POVs. Mjks28 (talk) 23:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How do we know that their "real name" includes an accent? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:18, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mjks28 do you have sources that their real name includes an accent? Since all mediaworks, like documentary/film/series/book titles are all without the "é". RuedNL2 (talk) 23:21, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Australia, so I can't access a lot of the sources that give details about the brothers' actual identities, so I just trust that the sources have been properly checked and applied to Wikipedia. Now, as I see the amount of headlines, quotes and books that have been changed, I realise that seems to not be a good idea. Mjks28 (talk) 23:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you now oppose the move yourself, I don't understand why you say you will not withdraw it. It has been unanimously opposed. The article has about 100 cited sources and "Further reading" and "External links", and as far as I can tell, none of them include an accent in the cited sources. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:39, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But wouldn't it be better to withdraw this RM? Since there is no evidence that their names are written with an accent. And this only came about because someone on Wikipedia changed the title without consultation. While everything indicates that it is written without an accent, just like all media titles work and the vast majority of sources... RuedNL2 (talk) 23:42, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So far, only four editors have contributed to the discussion. It should stay open for other editors, who may have differing POVs and sources that can back up the accented name, to contribute. It may be unanimous now, but it's only been two hours, which isn't enough time. If a day or so has passed and nothing has changed, I will withdraw the RM. Mjks28 (talk) 23:47, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but this is the upside down world. There is nothing in the article to indicate that the name was written with an accent, you can't even cite a source yourself. While all 94 sources in the article write the name without an accent. RuedNL2 (talk) 23:53, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The names were changed for seemingly no reason, yes. However, the RM should stay open to give editors a chance to explain why the "é" was added or should be kept. It's important to hear both sides. Mjks28 (talk) 23:56, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Having looked through the page history, it is clear that the names were changed from Menendez to Menendez without any sources and for seemingly no reason. Seeing as this is the case, their names should be changed back to Menéndez. Mjks28 (talk) 23:55, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is one improper edit that I found. It was at 04:18, 8 June 2017 (UTC) by Jennica (talk · contribs). It introduced an incorrect representation of the titles of many cited sources. There was no edit summary. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that it was that editor which first raised the idea of moving the page to Menéndez last year. Mjks28 (talk) 00:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to the two sources cited in the paragraph about their parents, and also the article in Psychology Today, their father's name was Jose, not José. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:33, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BarrelProof Do any sources use José? Mjks28 (talk) 02:49, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is used here. The number that use "Jose" seems to far exceed the number than use "José". —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:35, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Other important evidence that Menendez is the correct spelling, look at Erik's wife's book, both her name "Tammi Menendez" and the title "They Said We'd Never Make It: My Life With Erik Menendez" do not contain an "é" on the cover. RuedNL2 (talk) 23:12, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The longstanding stable title of the article is "Menendez". It was moved without discussion to "Menéndez" in 2023, then reverted today. 162 etc. (talk) 04:07, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. The OP (User:Mjks28), per the above discussion, now appears to support "Menendez" and should probably consider withdrawing the RM. 162 etc. (talk) 04:07, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@162 etc. I will keep the RM open for a day or so to encourage more discussion from other editors who may have differing POVs. if nothing has changed after that and the consensus is still Menendez, I will withdraw the RM. Mjks28 (talk) 04:24, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Why is the mother not mentioned?

Mention why they killed Mary Louise "Kitty" Menendez and stop being double standard between the genders. 2600:1016:B03C:532:A55B:4547:19A5:C3AD (talk) 21:26, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look at the version of the article at the time this comment was made, and I did not see this alleged gender bias of "the mother not mentioned". The killing of their mother was discussed in several places in the article. I notice the word "why" in the comment, and perhaps it is a comment about motive. Of course their motive may not be known for certain. It can be helpful if a comment is more clear and specific. For example, some specific additional sentence could be suggested, along with citation(s) to reliable source(s). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 03:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 October 2024

This edit request to Lyle and Erik Menendez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change "Kyle" to "Erik"

"Smyth alleges she heard Lyle tell Kyle that they must kill both Oziel and his wife to protect their secret." to "Smyth alleges she heard Lyle tell Erik that they must kill both Oziel and his wife to protect their secret." 128.240.225.14 (talk) 12:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done PianoDan (talk) 16:45, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute over edits/lead by Iimitlessyou

Hi, Iimitlessyou instead of edit warring, I'd like you to explain your reasoning aside from making vague and inapropriate edit summaries. Wikipedia is not WP:CENSORED. Presumptions about my editing ("pro prosecution editor" and "obviously proven") are a failure to WP:ASSUMEGOODFAITH. The article should reflect the reliable sources, and it is acceptable to include the prosecution's argument. That is my intention. The tapes are one of the few pieces of evidence which were not hearsay and a key element of the prosecution.

A number of your edits are unusual. Here you trimmed all mention of the fact the brothers confessed to premeditating the murder, from both lead AND the body. That is inexplicable to the point I do have to wonder about WP:CENSORSHIP, especially given the premeditation was clear in the tapes. I'm going to assume good faith here, and hope you will clarify.

The prosecution argued three main points: motives of hatred and greed, and a fabricated abuse story ("Prosecutors contend that the abuse is a fiction" source). You've tried to trim the lead so no mention of their counter argument is included. There is just no good reason to do this.

I can see very interested in the case, as you've done some heavy editing on the Netflix series article. You'll need to provide some proper explanations/reasoning here and let's discuss them. However, consensus is ultimately determined by what the WP:RS say. Thanks. Zenomonoz (talk) 00:03, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 October 2024

This edit request to Lyle and Erik Menendez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the second paragraph, change "The confession later lead to their arrest." to "The confession later led to their arrest." Nuclearpinguino (talk) 02:33, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done Zenomonoz (talk) 02:54, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Major misrepresentation of source

I'm refraining from intervening on limitlessyou to avoid edit warring. In this edit limitlessyou added: "Erik's prosecutor, Lester Kuriyama, also theorized that Erik's confusion about his sexual orientation suggested that José's alleged molestation was consensual".

This is not in the source. The prosecutor never suggested this. The source states: Lester Kuriyama suggested that Erik Menendez is gay, and that his sexual orientation--not molestation by his father--fed the family friction that led to the killings .... if Erik Menendez is gay, Kuriyama said, that would explain how he could have described for jurors various sex acts that he testified his father forced him to perform. He did not mean that acts between Erik and his father ever occurred, nor did he say anything about consent. The prosecution was arguing the claims of abuse were falsified.

Needs a revert asap given the article is receiving north of 100,000 views per day. Zenomonoz (talk) 05:28, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Iimitlessyou, you need to revert your edit. Zenomonoz (talk) 05:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added a ^{[failed verification]} tag to Imitlessyou's made-up claim the prosecution suggested Erik was molested consensually. Imitlessyou immediately deleted it. Disruptive editor not here to build an encylopedia. Zenomonoz (talk) 07:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 9 October 2024

This edit request to Lyle and Erik Menendez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This might not be super nessesary but please change the "pp" template to "Edit fully-protected" for people to know that this is admin-only protected as as of now it says "semi protected" which is pretty misleading. Thanks Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:29, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Miminity it is displaying the 'F' lock for me. Can you check again? "Edit fully-protected" template is meant for new sections on the talk page of fully protected article when requesting edits to be made on the article. – robertsky (talk) 13:16, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why it is the semi one is on it earlier. But, yeah the edit fully protected is an edit request, I just look it up but thanks anyway. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 13:26, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likely it was cached for you, and now the cache is cleared. – robertsky (talk) 13:45, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 9 October 2024 (2)

This edit request to Lyle and Erik Menendez has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Request to change citation 69 from cite web to cite AV media, to make it clear to our readers we are referencing a video clip, and to include a timestamp in the video clip to support the relevant quote in the article. That video clip is one hour and forty-six minutes long, for the convenience of our readers, a timestamp should be included, so our readers don't have to go hunting for it themselves. Per WP:HOWCITE – This information is included in order to identify the source, assist readers in finding it, and indicate the place in the source where the information is to be found. Thanks.

<ref>{{cite AV media |people=Pamela Bozanich (Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney) |date=December 1993 |publication-date=June 19, 2020 |title=87-CA v. Menendez: OPJ: Lyle Menendez Jury Instructions |type=Video |url=https://www.courttv.com/title/87-ca-v-menendez-opj-lyle-menendez-jury-instructions/ |access-date=June 1, 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210602220137/https://www.courttv.com/title/87-ca-v-menendez-opj-lyle-menendez-jury-instructions/ |archive-date=June 2, 2021 |time=1:12:23 |publisher=[[Court TV]]}}</ref> Isaidnoway (talk) 00:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done as requested. Thanks for providing the long cite Star Mississippi 02:08, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is on the admin noticeboard and is potentially WP:UNDUE. It's not mentioned in any RS until recently, because it was not an "argument" made in the jury trial, but a query over definitions which occurred during discussion of jury instructions (not before jury). I would favour this being re-included if it were clarified in context via secondary sources, but it was questionably framed by Wiki editor Imitlessyou, who did not use a source, and then this particular framing appears to have been repeated verbatim in a few very recent secondary sources. This type of quote mining is persuasive to readers who are unfamiliar with lawyers definitional disputes, but it was likely never mentioned in any of the RS sources (even books very sympathetic to the brothers) for a practical reason. Zenomonoz (talk) 02:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 9 October 2024 (3)

Here Imitlessyou modified a sentence to read: "The prosecution argued that there was no evidence the photographs were taken by Jose, despite them being documented and kept by Kitty". The cited source does not say they were "documented and kept by kitty" on page 12508 nor elsewhere in the source. Also looks like POV pushing language.

Imitlessyou also deleted "the rest of the film roll showed the photos were taken at a children's birthday party" from the end of the sentence.

Zenomonoz (talk) 03:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It may be useful to retain the ninth court source that Imitlessyou cited, however, if this type of source is allowed (it seems non-primary as it is from 2005 court of appeals?) Zenomonoz (talk) 03:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Protected edit request on 10 October 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Change the wikilink for Ian Brennan to Ian Brennan (located in the notes section). The current link is pointing to the disambiguation page. Jolly1253 (talk) 03:19, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jolly1253:

Done. Thanks for the catch. – robertsky (talk) 04:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]