Talk:Norwich sexual abuse ring

Norwich child rape and sadistic abuse ring listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Norwich child rape and sadistic abuse ring. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. MelanieN (talk) 14:54, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The redirect has been deleted. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:57, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Trimming of article
I have trimmed this article in response to concerns about "the level of detail" and BLP in my articles in this discussion on the administrator's noticeboard. Tots &#38; little ones matter! (talk) 00:30, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Good start, but you left in a lot of the lurid details; consensus at the AN discussion was that that stuff is inappropriate. I have trimmed that part. -- MelanieN (talk) 00:56, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I think this needed to be reworded rather than removed because it was sourced . Such behavior is nothing special for the criminals. They play cards on human life, etc., as described in books by authors who witnesses this themselves, like Varlam Shalamov. My very best wishes (talk) 02:12, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was sourced. We are not obligated to repeat everything that is sourced. And what is normal for these criminals is not normal for us. Lurid, salacious details about how to abuse children may get into some newspapers, but IMO they don't belong in an encyclopedia. -- MelanieN (talk) 02:17, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Of course this is all shocking and abnormal behavior. But describing modus operandi of criminals is a perfectly legitimate content. We simply describe what they do - per sources, and at the level of detail as needed to understand what it actually is. That is what good writers like Shalamov do in their books. There is nothing lurid, sensational or salacious about it child abuse or other crimes. My very best wishes (talk) 02:37, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I disagree. Strongly. Let's take it to the AN board and see what kind of consensus we get. -- MelanieN (talk) 03:03, 1 August 2019 (UTC) -- MelanieN (talk) 03:03, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I am not disputing your edit and not sure what we disagree about. That was just a general comment, and it is about the content, not anything to be decided on AN. If we had a disagreement about a specific edit, one could post an RfC. But we do not have such specific disagreement. My very best wishes (talk) 03:57, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

How to decide what needs to be included
Should certain facts/info (X,Y,Z) about a criminal case be included on the page? That depends on the coverage in RS about the case, i.e. this should be decided per WP:NPOV. This page currently has 9 refs, however 7 of them are "local press". I think this local press qualify as RS, but probably should be given less "due weight". We have two "non-local" RS, The Guardian and International Business Times UK. Would it be agreeable to include sourced info that appears in the both "non-local" RS? My very best wishes (talk) 15:50, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
 * If there are no objections, I will include some info that appears in both sources. My very best wishes (talk) 17:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

"Draft:Norwich child rape and sadistic abuse ring" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Draft:Norwich child rape and sadistic abuse ring. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Adam9007 (talk) 16:34, 1 August 2019 (UTC)