User talk:Not new user

Hi. Like your name. This is just my opinion, but, adding a sortable table for victims is unnecessary for an article of this kind, as his victim profile is the same (this in addition to elongating the article). The Ted Bundy article is GA, and I (and quite likely others) use this Wiki. as a reference point when populating articles of this nature. Of course if consensus upon the talk page goes against me I'll abide. I have not seen edits on other Wiki. articles (or, for the most part, elsewhere) to describe ages like "17 years" etc. Seems anachronistic.--Kieronoldham (talk) 01:09, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't wish to hurt or offend you. I appreciate your efforts. I own a copy of all the printed format of references used upon the article. If you need references to tweak sections, feel free to ask me. Kez.--Kieronoldham (talk) 01:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

-- Hi Keironoldham - Please please keep the table. I added the table because I find it much much easier and much more interesting to engage with, even if not everyone does (my partner also much prefers the sortable table format). In my opinion (and in the style conventions of the places I have worked) long text lists are a no-no (I hate them). There is a good reason for this. People find it harder to take in anything over six bullet points. Putting the information into a neat table, helps your eye to take in the detail and to see patterns by helping your brain create chunks of like-information. I think that facility is even more important in topics related to serial killers where patterns are of particular relevance and interest. Being able to sort the list is even better. So, in short, I won't be a happy chicken if the table is permanently deleted.

Re: point of 17 years. My own preference would be to just put '17' but i compromised in case that was going too far for Wiki. Just '17' rather than '17 years' is the convention in newspapers now, so i think it would be better and I would be very happy if you deleted 'years'. In most sentences, I don't think 'years old' is necessary or consistent with Plain English conventions. I havn't seen dashes between this phrase '17-year-old' for a long time (yet Wiki kept it, so you can't be that style vigilant). Eventhough it conforms to old grammar rules about dashes, this convention has been largely dropped in recent decades as the Plain English revolution takes hold (we would definitely be told to take it out if we tried to use it in my workplace). This is because, at my workplaces the general style convention has been to drastically reduce the use of '-' between words and in sentences. The other reason I changed these sentences was to put emphasise the victim's name, by putting it first rather than focusing on their age, as this seems more respectful to these unlucky human beings. To me, the table is a more appropriate place to highlight patterns in ages. Personally, I think Wiki needs to use tables more, not less.

As a general point, I think Wiki needs more Plain English editors, preferably paid qualified professionals. Too much is hard to read because of unnecessary complexity in writing and poor heading structure (not just due to multiple authors making a collective mess). I usually feel compelled to edit when i have had particular difficulty comprehending long or unnecessarily jargon-speak sentences and simple changes can make it better. I know that if I found it difficult, then others would too. But I am not an editing expert (though I have done a lot of it) so getting professionals would be better - or at least developing Wiki style conventions around Plain English would be good.

I don't know whether you or not disapproved of my incomplete changes to the structure of the Fritz Haarmann page (because i can't find the unapproved or reverted edits section in Wiki, nor have I ferreted out yet any rules about preferred structures) but I am adamant that even if you didn't like what i did, the page needs to have a better structure. It is not good at the moment which makes it more difficult to read and take in all the information. Personally, inconsistent, poor, or lack of heading structures drive me wild (eg in Haarmann you have something like First murder then 1924 but missing out 1923! Not to mention that 1924 is in itself a weird and not very useful heading). Again, the style convention for headings in my workplaces have been moving rapidly towards using informative headings rather than older style short headings with long, multi-point sections (which seems to be Wiki's default style). In some contexts, informative headings can even mean writing a succinct sentence that sums up the key point of the para. These changes have been designed to help inform busy people, like Ministers, who need to skim lots of content and get the overall gist quickly before diving into detail. Hope that explains my perspective clearly. Not new user (talk) 02:14, 30 March 2020 (UTC)kay
 * I have reinserted the table for yous. Again, I hope I did not offend you. I don't think about the topic matter and compartmentalize it (few others devote time and focus to articles of this nature). I'll reassess the detail as it stands withn the table going forward, to make sure nothing is missing or incorrect. Hope you are all well, and all the best to you.. Hope you stay on Wiki. :)
 * I'll say again I am sorry if I in any way offended you. You are right in many respects regarding complexity, but this is a project which fights dismissive attitudes to the site. There are no shortage of sites (and casual social comments) which are mocking or dismissive about Wiki. It is by everyone and for everyone. I want to do my bit within this section (I chose true crime after noting my initially preferred topic of music had no shortage of active contributors). Please stay/remain here, and build.--Kieronoldham (talk) 03:01, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't believe Wiki. pays individuals to populate and research articles. I do this voluntarily, as I find this endeavour rewarding. I try and trim jargon myself, but agree "multiple authors [can construct] a collective mess".Conglomerate, to a degree, I suppose. I just try, in my own way, to help and improve.--Kieronoldham (talk) 04:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)