Talk:Orren Stephenson

Court Case

Due to the amount of interest, and the fact that it has been widely reported and the suppression order lifted. It may be suitable to include a short amount of information in a Personal Life section. Can still be protected, but it will at least provide verifiable information that anyone who is looking up the page will be able to find. Because that is the main thing that anyone searching the page is going to be looking at.

Something along the lines of "In March 2024, Stephenson's son Patrick was charged with murder after the disappearance of a woman in Ballarat." This is able to be well sourced, is notable given the interest in the topic and is not libellous.

Basetornado (talk) 09:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

But it's irrelevant. It's NOT about the subject of this article. It simply doesn't belong here. HiLo48 (talk) 10:05, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

But it's not irrelevant. It's been widely reported, including in relation to the subject of the page. It's the main reason people would be looking up the page. Not having it is just inviting more vandalism or it being listed in the wrong spot. Basetornado (talk) 10:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

It's irrelevant to Orren Stephehnson's biography, which is what this article is. Please click on that link and have a good read. It belongs in Disappearance of Samantha Murphy. HiLo48 (talk) 21:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

It's quite common to have links and information about family in biographical articles. I'd support (at the bottom, not the lead) a sentence along the lines of "In March 2024, Stephenson's son Patrick was arrested in relation to the Disappearance of Samantha Murphy near Ballarat, Victoria." Orren Stephenson is linked from that article, it's reasonable that there be a link in the other direction too. --Scott Davis ^Talk 00:57, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Have included that wording, including a link to the ABC which also references Orren. It's relevant. It adds to the article. It helps prevent vandalism. I don't think anything else needs to be added or removed. I have already read that link. In this case there is a reason for listing it. Given that the two have very similar names. When you search for Orren Stephenson the first links are all related to his son and he is mentioned in these articles prominently. Having a small line that clearly states the facts of the matter as they are, only adds to the article and to better understanding of the matter. Basetornado (talk) Basetornado (talk) 01:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi all. I created the article for Samantha Murphy's disappearance.

Per WP:SUSPECT, A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations and arrests do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures—that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures—editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured. Hence, the alleged killer of Murphy is not included in her disappearance article, and I absolutely disagree with the alleged killer being named in an article about the individual's father. There is a mere arrest and charge at this time.

There has not even been an initial plea hearing. There is absolutely zero evidence available to the public that any one person has done anything wrong other than the charge.

I do believe if the police confirm the body is found and/or a reliable source publishes an admission by the son of murdering Mrs Murphy then it may be warranted to include the name of the alleged killer. As of yet, it is not.

@Basetornado I did see your edit summary stating to discuss before reverting, but boldly reverted anyway. I believe the onus is on the contributor adding information to an article to justify it, which is in accordance with both consensus and current guidelines. In this case, the information is not according to either. Currently, I consider the rough consensus to be that this information does not belong in the article. — MaxnaCarta  ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:49, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Glad you didn't read anything I said before you "boldly" reverted it. I mean I gave justification. But as you said you didn't read it.

Happy to leave it now, because it's better to have poor information, than what's actually reported. Basetornado (talk) 02:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

@Basetornado - Orren Stephenson's name is no longer mentioned in that other article, because I just removed it. The ONLY reason you say the names are similar is that police use full names when naming suspects. It's actually very rare for people's middle names to be even known to most of the rest of the world. I'll bet the suspect is just known as Pat to everyone else who knows him around Ballarat. HiLo48 (talk) 01:53, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Sure it's rare for peoples middle names to be known. Except when they've been charged with a crime and when you search their name, that's the first thing that shows up.

In addition, I have also read that policy you both are throwing at me. No where does it state not to list it. It states "editors must seriously consider not including material". "Consider" is the key word. I have considered it. I have looked at the public interest. I have looked at how the topic has been covered.

Not including the name does nothing but make wikipedia a worse place. It's meant to be to inform people. A small line that says the facts of the matter as they are, instead of throwing your head in the sand and ignoring what is happening, does not make it a better place. Like I said, when you search the name, the case is the first thing that shows up. It's not like i'm throwing out there niche knowledge, which is what the policy is intended to protect from.

I won't re add because you'll just blindly revert it, citing policy that does not say not to do what I did. Just to consider if I should. Basetornado (talk) 02:15, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Implying that someone's alleged crime has something to do with that person's father does nothing but make Wikipedia a worse place. We are not a tabloid news outlet. HiLo48 (talk) 02:24, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

It's information that has been reported widely by every media organisation reporting on it, not just tabloids. It's listed in personal life. Basetornado (talk) 02:26, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Patrick seems not to have had a plea hearing, but he has been in front of a court on the charge, and has been remanded in custody until his next appearance. It seems to me that this would be a pretty big thing in Orren's life, whether his son ends up being found guilty or released with an apology. A simple statement here to point readers to the other article feels appropriate, maybe with the mention that Patrick is the middle child with two sisters, as "three children" is definitely in scope for this article. Plenty of news articles yesterday and today about Murphy's disappearance link the accused to Orren Stephenson. --Scott Davis ^Talk 11:42, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

How I see it as well. But you have a couple of editors who want to put their head in the sand and ignore what has been widely reported and can be sourced. They like to throw policies at you, without realising that the policy is aimed to prevent niche information being made public. Rather than something that has been heavily reported in relation to Orren as well. Basetornado (talk) 09:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Here's a policy that very relevant right now - WP:NOPERSONALATTACKS.

We don't base Wikipedia content on factors such as "It seems to me...". HiLo48 (talk) 09:16, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Possible neutral "Personal life" section

I agree that the article should not include the charges that have been laid against the article subject's son. But I think a neutral personal life section that is about the article subject is appropriate. A suggested wording:

---

Personal life

Stephenson is married to his high school sweetheart Whitney with whom he shares three children: Emilie, Patrick and Sophie. He is a trained electrician and telecommunications technician.

---

The source is a decade old but still seems accurate. For consideration. 1.145.147.127 (talk) 12:10, 10 March 2024 (UTC).

No. We don't include the names of non-notable children in articles. "Notable" in out terms almost always means having a Wikipedia article of their own. HiLo48 (talk) 22:00, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes you are probably right about his two daughters. I am also convinced by the arguments by Scott Davis and Basetornado above that this incident is a notable enough event in Stephenson's life for inclusion in the article. How about this:

---

Personal life

Stephenson is married to his high school sweetheart Whitney with whom he shares two daughters and a son, Patrick. In March 2024 Patrick was arrested and charged with murder in relation to the disappearance of Samantha Murphy.

---

Is there a policy rationale for excluding this? 1.145.147.127 (talk) 23:33, 10 March 2024 (UTC).

Yes. Our definition of notability is for the person to have their own article. Patrick doesn't. HiLo48 (talk) 00:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

No one is asking for a separate article, hence the GNG is not at issue here. 1.145.147.127 (talk) 00:33, 11 March 2024 (UTC).

Without a separate article, we don't have notability. Being charged with a crime does not bestow notability. HiLo48 (talk) 00:37, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Please link to the policy that specifically states if an incident is unworthy of a separate article it should not be included anywhere else on the encyclopedia. As said by Scott Davis above, this is "a pretty big thing in Orren's life", and a simple sentence seems appropriate. I would be contented if the name Patrick was deleted and it simply said "... with whom he shares two daughters and a son. In March 2024 Stephenson's son was arrested and charged with murder in relation to the disappearance of Samantha Murphy." 1.145.147.127 (talk) 01:24, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

But it has nothing to do with Orren. This is an article about him, not his son. You are speculating about the impact of this event on him. We don't do that here. HiLo48 (talk) 01:33, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Are you seriously saying "Stephenson is married to his high school sweetheart Whitney with whom he shares two daughters and a son." has nothing to do with Orren Stephenson? 1.145.147.127 (talk) 02:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC).

No. Are you seriously saying you think that's my objection? HiLo48 (talk) 02:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Well you seem to objecting to any attempts to amend the article. Now we agree that sentence should be added please would you add it? I do not have the privileges. 1.145.147.127 (talk) 02:30, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Please read what I wrote more carefully, And read WP:NPA as well. HiLo48 (talk) 02:32, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

HiLo. If you're going to continue to misuse policy to avoid listing information that any lay person would consider relevant. Don't hide behind NPA and non signed comments, because you can't understand that the policy is designed to prevent niche information being shared. Not information that has been in literally every piece of media about this, and was front page news on all media sources. Basetornado (talk) 01:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)

References

I support this being added to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.124.10.34 (talk) 02:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)