Talk:Murder of Kirsten Costas/Archive 1

Edited For Neutrality
The previous version, particularly the Background section, had a strong undertone condemning "less popular, less affluent" high school students, as well as Roman Catholics. Removed all mentions of popularity and unpopularity and all statements speculating upon Protti's motive (i.e."envy" and "jealousy".)

67.174.97.24 (talk) 23:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal
The article Bernadette Protti is essentially no more than a fork of this article, with no content of its own. I suggest merging it back into this article - we don't need a separate article for the murderer and the victim, they can both be covered in a single article about the case. Terraxos (talk) 02:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I think out of respect for the family of Kirsten Costos that the two articles should not be combined. Kirsten should be remembered for who she was and not for the last few minutes of her life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.51.10.119 (talk) 03:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not the place for memorials. Our articles exist to provide information on notable people and things, and Bernadette Protti is not notable except by her killing of Kirsten Costos - so she should not have her own article. I have redirected her article to this one; all the information on this case is now presented here. Terraxos (talk) 00:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


 * In that case Booth shouldn't have article all he was famous for was killing someone. why not merge him into Lincolns Article. 2 articles are in appropriate. Same thing could be said about the people that killed Dr. King. Anyone that did anything important shouldnt have a article?  so not Bill Gates article that all belongs under Widows ( which belongs under Microsoft)  same thing for Steve Jobs right.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.70.31.100 (talk) 18:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

That is pretty warped logic there. John Wilkes Booth would meet the notability standards for a Wikipedia article if he had never shot Lincoln. The man was a famous actor of his time, and a matinee idol at that. The other examples where you attempt to compare Bill Gates with a miscreant such as Protti do not even merit serious comment or discussion.

As for your comment that "out of respect" for the Costas family, a separate entry should be maintained for Kristen, that is not the criteria determining such matters. Like the other poster said, we are not an online memorial site.(75.69.241.91 (talk) 06:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC))

And the name is Costas NOT 'Costos' as you both wrote. Is it too much to ask that you glance up at the top of the browser where the subject name is displayed??(75.69.241.91 (talk) 06:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC))

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because there's been an article here on the topic since 2008. I don't know why no references have been added in that time. I've just added three. Not speaking to notability at all, but the page shouldn't be speedied. I left a message on the nominator's page regarding the AfD process. --  Wikipelli Talk   17:41, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Rename
I propose renaming the article to Murder of Kirsten Costas. Kirsten Costas is notable because she was murdered and her murder case was made into a TV movie and then featured on an episode of Deadly Women. The article is mostly about the murder anyway... Paris1127 (talk) 08:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Wrong description of suspect car given throughout by police and media
The suspect car was widely described by police to the media (Orinda Sun and Contra Costa Times, as well as television stations, radio, etc) as a Red or Orange Ford Pinto. In actuality it was a mustard colored Chevy Vega. Reports to police about a mustard colored Vega parked in site from the road on the Protti property were rudely dismissed by the arrogant and relatively new Orinda Police Department. Upon incorporation, Orinda stopped using the Contra Costa Sheriff's Dept. References to the descriptions given can be found in the "Sun" and "Times" newspapers referenced above. Also, it was a well known fact to Orindan's that Orinda Police harassed people (drivers) extensively during this period of time, as they were completely clueless as to how they were going to solve the murder. It was widely speculated in Orinda that many people suspected Protti in the murder, but for some reason were keeping silent. Locals attributed the rabid Police actions against residents as some sort of threat to get the people who knew to talk. Pover12 (talk) 08:21, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You need to provide a source for this information. You can't just say the newspapers' names, you need actual articles, online or in print. What you want to add to the article requires a source and is otherwise just speculation. Paris1127 (talk) 03:11, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank ou for your thoughts Paris1127. Do I really "need" to document and reference on a talk page as if I was editing an Article?  I thought the talk page was for many things, including some things that slipped through the cracks.  For instance you will not ever find in a newspaper article that a wrong description of the suspect car was issued throughout in this case.  It just was never mentioned.  The red or orange Pinto description could be found if you had archives going back to 1984, and that description is still wrong.  It was in fact a mustardy colored Vega the whole time.  And the other things I mentioned were similarly not discussed in newspapers for I think fairly obvious reasons.  On the talk page here, I believe it is incumbent upon you to "prove" me wrong, rather than the other way around.  Or is the talk page of an article just fluff?Pover12 (talk) 06:01, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * On the talk page you don't need references, but if you're putting the info in the article then yes. That's why your edits have been reverted. I never said you were wrong, merely that you can't go writing whatever you want without a source to back it up. Paris1127 (talk) 07:00, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * The article talk page is for discussing changes/improvements to the article - nothing more, nothing less. Paris1127 is correct in that your edits have been reverted because you haven't provided a reliable source to back up the assertion about the car. That is one of the site's polices. If you can't find this information in a legitimate newspaper, book or magazine, it shouldn't be in the article. All Wikipedia does is re-report what reliable sources have already written about. We also can't include unreported hearsay, speculation and theories about anything. Lastly, it's not incumbent upon other editors to "prove" that the information you want to add is incorrect, it's the other way around actually. See WP:PROVEIT.  Pinkadelica ♣  09:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes Paris1127, thank you. Of course I rarely go writing whatever (I) want, otherwise I would tell Pinkadelica what I really think of their poorly thought out comment on something we were not discussing.  We are talking "talk" page here Pinkadelica.  Of course everything I have said on the talk page is truthful and accurate.  Sorry to say I was there.  Were you?  Too bad the truth cannot make it to articles, as the truth is more often than not quite elusive.  Yes, all wikipedia does is re-report garbage that has made it into the mainstream already anyway.Pover12 (talk) 06:07, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Pinkadelica's argument is perfectly relevant. The talk page is for discussing the improvement of the article. Your knowledge of the case is interesting, but without a reference does not belong in the article. You do not need a reference to put something on the talk page, but references are always a good thing to have. Paris1127 (talk) 06:59, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Paris1127, that is all lovely, and Pinkadelic is relavent, except we were talking about the talk page, not the article page Pinkadelic discussed. The real question here is--Why is this article so pathetically scant on information?  Not the talk page we are on here, but the article; you know, the article article, not this talk page.  I guess Bernadette or whatever her name is now, got in on wikipedia early on when she figured out she could diddle wikipedia and the article about herself into obscurity.  For instance, why is there no mention that where Protti lived was a much more exclusive area of Orinda than where her victim lived?  I guess that would make Proti look bad.  Can't have any of that here on wiki now can we? And by the way, people magazine wrote in 1985 the color of the car was "mustard" not red as had been widely disseminated.Pover12 (talk) 09:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)