Talk:Marybeth Tinning

Parole denied - March 28, 2007
I won't pretend to be some sort of article editor. Maybe someone else can update this article. I was watching the "Most Evil" show on "Murderous Women" tonight on the Discovery Channel which featured this woman. It mentioned her parole pending in March of 2007 and so I decided to check and see what happened. This article is out of date and still states "She is eligible for parole in March 2007." I found sources on the internet which claim she is in denial of the murders and the parole board, quite expectedly, declined to parole her.

These seem two articles, by the same author, have a bit of information:

http://timesunion.com/ASPStories/Story.asp?storyID=580347&newsdate=4/25/2007&BCCode=MBTA

http://www.timesunion.com/TUNews/author/AuthorPage.aspx?AuthorNum=162

CodeAddict 08:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering if we can list her as having "9" victims, when she was not, as I understand, convicted of 9, but 3?71.63.119.49 17:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

She was actually only convicted of 1 murder. Additionally, if we're going to mention the fact that she recanted, should we also mention that she actually appealed her confession, saying it was coerced by police? 68.48.185.231 (talk) 20:06, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

This is like a " i did not do it please let me go" aricle
it really sounds like she did not do anything wrong, who wrote this she, herself ? come on this article is awfull, either expand it or delete it. it really sounds like somebody was trying to change public opinion obout herself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.99.214.74 (talk) 09:47, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Opening sentence
The opening sentence has been reverted to describe Tinning as a serial killer. I'm just opening discussion here to establish consensus one way or the other. I can understand the argument that serial killer status may not be dependent on criminal convictions. When I look to determine how most reliable sources describe her, it seems like the serial killer designation mostly arises in websites without editorial control. I just want to make sure that we come up with an opening sentence that falls within WP:BLP. EricEnfermero (Talk) 15:55, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 * @User:EricEnfermero the problem is is that it is potentially libelous and not verifiable as you mention.

Children's deaths section expansion/clarity
Hello, Any thoughts/feedback about placing each child into its own sub section with repeated content, example:  John Doe - third born - fourth death  Content includes; Name, birth date w/birth count, death date w/deathcount, age at time of death, original reported/documented cause of death. Number of hospital visits (once/twice) if more than once, note time span between hospital visits. Note whether the body was exhumed after 9th child murder.  Jane Doe - sixth born - fifth death  Content includes; Name, birth date w/birth count, death date w/deathcount, age at time of death, original reported/documented cause of death. Number of hospital visits (once/twice) if more than once, note time span between hospital visits. Note whether the body was exhumed after 9th child murder. Thanks for taking the time to read this talk, any feedback is appreciated. Vwanweb (talk) 07:03, 22 November 2017 (UTC)