Talk:Michael Guider

Michael Guider was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
December 12, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Australia: Crime Low‑importance

	Australia portal Michael Guider is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian crime (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Untitled

Hi folks.Hope you find the article useful. Feel free to add feedback. Sardaka 08:16, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Failed "good article" nomination

Per the quick-fail criteria of the GA process, any article that contains cleanup banners (such as the one at the top of the article currently) must be failed immediately, and does not require an in-depth review. Please remedy any issues brought up by such banners, and remove them before choosing to renominate. You may also wish to carefully read the GA criteria and check out a few GA-class examples in order to assess the article's readiness for renomination. If you feel this decision was in error, you may seek a reassessment. Thank you for your work so far, VanTucky ^talk 23:34, 12 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Messy timeline

I find the timeline very hard to follow and conflicting.

In the "Imprisonment section": "He received a fixed term of six years and six months' imprisonment in 1999"

In the "Samantha Knight" section: "After a lengthy investigation, Guider was arrested and charged with Knight's murder on 22 February 2001 "

How can he be arrested if he was already in Jail by then??

MarmotteiNoZ 03:43, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the word "arrested" to eliminate any ambiguity. As for the passage in the "Imprisonment section," I can't see any contradiction. That sentence simply slotted in to his other sentences. Sardaka (talk) 08:50, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Guider

I know Guider has internet access, so he would have looked himself up for sure. If so, he would have seen this article, because it's the first thing that comes up if you do a search for Michael Guider. I think he might even have worked on it. In the section on Samantha Knight, someone added the statement: "...saying she regained consciousness and he then gave her a second dose because he did not want her to recognize him." I wonder if MG might have contributed this passage himself. There's no reference for it and I don't think I've seen it in the media. Chances are MG himself is the only person who would have that information.

Sardaka (talk) 08:28, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

After further research, I found that the statement about MG giving Samantha a second dose has in fact appeared before, coming from Frank Soonius, who knew MG in prison (it's on YouTube). Nevertheless, I know Mick has at least seen this article and quite possibly worked on it. Say hello, Mick. Sardaka (talk) 10:14, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sardaka What is the point of these comments? Especially when they're based on guesswork. Bryan Krippner (talk) 11:43, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]