Talk:Suzanne Basso

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Suzanne Basso. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222164933/http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/suzanne_basso/3.html to http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/suzanne_basso/3.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140225040119/http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/suzanne_basso/2.html to http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/women/suzanne_basso/2.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090806085208/http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/drowfacts.htm to http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/drowfacts.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:16, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Prosecutors
Re: the removal of the names of the prosecutors

My understanding is that removing the names of prosecutors (even if they don't qualify for their own Wikipedia article) is a large omission in this kind of article, much like removing the names of a school principal (who, again, wouldn't be notable!) from a high school article. Prosecutors set forth the legal arguments used to convict the parties, and getting convictions advances a prosecutor's career.

My understanding is that an article about a U.S. state-level criminal trial should state who the judge is, who the prosecutors and defense lawyers are, and who the county district attorney is (often the prosecutors are assistant DAs). Using "must have a Wikipedia article" as a criterion for mentioning their names is inappropriate since state judges, county prosecutors, etc. just don't qualify for that and yet are crucial in these trials.

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 19:15, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I would agree, if the prosecutors were referred at all later in the article, and particularly if they are quoted as making compelling or novel arguments that would potentially make their prosecution notable. In this case, their names appear out of the blue, and then they are never heard about again; leading me to ask again what value their names lend to our article. Apparently the trials themselves were pretty unremarkable (since they are all dealt with in 1 paragraph containing 7 sentences), and so was their performance as prosecutors, other than the fact they secured convictions. If I have missed some specific guidance that says that lawyers should be named even if we have nothing else to say about them, could you point me to it?   General Ization  Talk  19:20, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I completely agree that the presiding judge should be named as matter of course; my question is about members of the prosecutorial team who are not mentioned again in any context.  General Ization Talk  19:25, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not a law student, but I'm not aware of any particular "notable attention" on the specific maneuvers by these prosecutors. The reason why I feel the prosecutorial team should be mentioned too, regardless of whether their arguments are novel/unique or whether their names are mentioned again they were an essential element of the section, as in Texas state trials the prosecution and defense are warring sides with the judge presiding.
 * If the specific back-and-forth about the trial is written about in further detail I would find it odd to not mention their names. (a lot of the Houston Chronicle articles about this case are behind a paywall, but I have a library card and can access them for free)
 * I scanned WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography to see if there are particular internal guidelines (not notability guidelines on whether an article should exist or not). I haven't been able to find them.
 * WhisperToMe (talk) 19:36, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking. I'll withdraw my objection, though it does seem to me that we should be focused more on the value of the information we relate to the average reader than on the fact that getting convictions (and by extension, being mentioned by name in Wikipedia) "advances a prosecutor's career". That's exactly how gratuitous the naming of these two prosecutors without further context appears to me (and may appear to others).  General Ization Talk  19:45, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Additional sources
WhisperToMe (talk) 06:52, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Huntsville Item: https://www.itemonline.com/local/x409170012/Woman-executed