Talk:James W. Lewis
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Citation Link doesn't work
[edit]The link for this citation doesn't work: Contreras, Russell (February 4, 2009). "FBI announces review of evidence in Tylenol deaths". The Associated Press. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090205/ap_on_re_us/tylenol_poisonings.
It just leads to a yahoo search page. Alanasings (talk) 10:02, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Merger recommendation
[edit]This should be merged into 1982 Chicago Tylenol murders. Lewis isn't notable for anything other than his involvement in that matter. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 22:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Leave as is Recommendation
[edit]I strongly disagree with the recommendation to merge this page with the 1982 Chicago Tylenol murders page. This page should be left exactly where it is, and Lewis should be mentioned on the 1982 Chicago Tylenol murders page with a link to the Lewis page. Lewis has not been found guilty of murder in the 1982 Chicago Tylenol murders, and we are not here to "solve the crime," but, rather, to create and maintain an online encyclopedia. If Lewis, "isn't notable for anything other than his involvement in that matter," it doesn't matter. He IS notable for his involvement in the matter, and that is more than enough to justify this article on the man himself. In addition to the letter to the Johnson & Johnson Company, Lewis has been found guilty and served time on several serious cases. This only adds to his notability, even if it makes him more, "notorious."
Based on the rationale that we combine pages for events with the people involved (even in small ways), I suppose we will combine Jim Jones with Jonestown, because, after all, Jim Jones isn't notable for anything other than his involvement in the Jonestown incident. I mean, yeah, there is a lot of content on the page, but, basically, nobody would find the Peoples Temple in San Francisco of any interest at all if not for the Jonestown incident. In fact, why not combine all three, 1. Peoples Temple in San Francisco with 2. Jonestown and 3. Jim Jones? 76.125.18.96 (talk) 05:25, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Leave as is Recommendation
[edit]I agree: leave as is. I don't understand the compulsive need to delete/merge pages. If the information is useful, well-organized, and factual with references, then leave it be. Energy would be better spent contributing content instead of fighting over deletions Repliedthemockturtle (talk). —Preceding undated comment was added at 16:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC).