User talk:WikiMike999

Killing of Sara-Nicole Morales
Hello! And first let me welcome you to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions to the Killing of Sara-Nicole Morales article. I did revert the portion you added to the lead, since it seemed to be contradicted by other sources in the article. If you have citations to reliable sources, by all means, add them and I am happy to help with citations (which can be a bit tricky on the project). Thanks again and if you have any questions or concerns, feel free to reply to this comment and I will see it. TeaDrinker (talk) 05:25, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

I can prove that she was never pregnant and that she was intoxicated when she hit the motorcyclist. you have to request the autopsy from Volusia county to receive it. there is a forum called websleuths, and there is a Sarah Morales thread there. on page 39 posted by FL gator, he sent away for the autopsy report and posted it. it is available for downloading PDF format and I will link it to you here so that you can see and adjust your information. thank you very much Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 05:26, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/fl-sara-morales-35-shot-dead-by-motorcyclist-she-hit-with-car-orange-city-20-nov-20 Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 05:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

http:/www.websleuths.com/forums/threads/fl-sara-morales-35-shot-dead-by-motorcyclist-she-hit-with-car-orange-city-20-nov-20 Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 05:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the links! Unfortunately, original research isn't really something Wikipedia can include. We typically work off secondary (or even tertiary) sources. The reason for this is verifiability--it is very hard to verify a novel claim about what's factual. Instead, we focus on reporting what others are saying (in reliable sources) is factual. Sorry for this, I am sure it is a disappointment. If the work does make it into a reliable source, we should definitely include it. Thanks again! --TeaDrinker (talk) 05:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

it is an official autopsy report. it doesnt get any more reliable than that. not including that information is a SERIOUS injustice. thank you for your help Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 05:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

also, wesh 2 reported on this that the pregnancy wasnt true. the video is on youtube. last few seconds of the video

youtu.be/ImcTpKwRdDc Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 05:48, 21 November 2022 (UTC)


 * I definitely appreciate that an autopsy report is a good primary source for journalists. However, as is outlined in reliable sources and original research, we try to avoid doing that sort of digging into primary sources ourselves. Instead, we report what other sources say the facts are. Your news report from your youtube link definitely is a reliable source, and it seems perfectly reasonable to include a statement that police have cast doubt on her pregnancy (and cite the WFTV article). --TeaDrinker (talk) 05:56, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

thank you! Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 05:57, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

can you do that? i have no idea how Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 05:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)


 * To cite the WFTV report, you can follow the statement with . Is that what you were unsure of how to do? --TeaDrinker (talk) 06:47, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mike ... as the primary contributor to that article, having done the research and written it a week ago, and also doing a lot of true-crime articles here (among so much else) I'm familiar with Websleuths. A link to a forum post (i.e., where the report was posted) isn't itself good enough to be a reliable source because anyone can say anything. Plus it seems you can only access the file if you're a WS member. So, two reasons the forum post alone can't be a source. However, our policy on using primary sources is a little more nuanced than TeaDrinker says. (For one thing, I don't consider an autopsy report to be a primary source; if you really get technical about it the body being autopsied is the primary source while the autopsy report is a secondary source. But this is not the prevailing view). We can certainly quote and/or report verbatim, or paraphrased, what an autopsy report says the pathologist observed or concluded, as I did in our article about Elisa Lam's death. But even if I were a forensic pathologist who did lots of autopsies myself, I would not be allowed to state my own conclusions and inferences from those facts in the article, even qualified as such. We consider that original research. So if we/I get a hold of the autopsy report, and it seems to be authentic, I would limit what we can say from it to what it states as a fact, and not draw any of our own conclusions. I had, in my research for this article, come across some mentions of this elsewhere, on other discussion threads that we similarly can't use as sources. I also found some people claiming on those forums that Derr had previous criminal convictions in three states and that, too, could supposedly be easily found online. I thank you for your interest in this article ... does it have something to do with today (well, at this point, yesterday) having been the one-year anniversary of the incident? Also, if you plan to continue editing, even occasionally, you might want to consider putting in a request to change your username, as while you may have chosen it for perfectly innocent reasons (birth year? old address?) that appended "69" is often associated with editors who come purely to be disruptive, and may make it difficult for other editors to take you seriously (and at worst it can get you blocked until it can be changed). Daniel Case (talk) 07:13, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

If you would like I can send you a copy of the autopsy report. if you continue to leave the story the way it is after I have offered you the autopsy report in its official capacity, you are basically writing a slander story. you should be concerned about this. I am more than willing to send you a copy of the report in PDF form. Regards, Mike Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 14:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

hey guys I didn't realize that my username said 69 at the end. it was supposed to say 66 like my email. I have no idea how that happened. can you please change it for me? thank you! Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 16:52, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, if you've got the report in PDF form, I'd love to see it. Do you know if it's posted online anywhere else? If not I'll tell you how you can mail it to me. As for your username, As for your username, click here), it will take you to where those requests can be processed promptly. it will take you to where those requests can be processed promptly. I'm an administrator but that does not give me the user rights to rename your account; there is a limited group of people with that authority and at least some of them regularly monitor that page. Daniel Case (talk) 19:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

it is posted online at the websleuth's forum. it's on the Sarah Morales thread on page 39. a guy named Gator FL sent away for the report from Volusia county and he posted it there for download in pdf. it's still there. I downloaded a copy so I will send it to you if you message an email. Mikeoxfat69 (talk) 19:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)
 * As I said, when I went there and tried to open it it told me I had to log in. I'll get back to you with how you can email me. Daniel Case (talk) 19:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)