Talk:Murder of Felicia Gayle

Gated street

The block on which she lived - 6900 Kingsbury - is gated at one end to prevent through traffic but is open at the other end. Anyone can enter it. Describing it as “gated” is technically correct (or half correct), but somewhat misleading. Asherno (talk) 23:16, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that? Original research is not allowed. Sethcampbell7293 (talk) 23:50, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Not really - this page: [1] indirectly references it (" Ames Place gates to Big Bend are kept closed and are only opened when access to Delmar from Trinity or Kingsland is restricted. Please consult an Agent if other circumstances (i.e. moving vans, construction equipment, etc.) require opening the gates.") but it's probably not clear enough to use as a source. Good to know, though - thanks. Asherno (talk) 14:27, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Google Maps street view shows that it is indeed gated at one end (to prevent motor vehicle traffic only; no gates on sidewalks) and not on the other. Many streets in the neighborhood have this same configuration.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/6900+Kingsbury+Blvd,+University+City,+MO+63130/@38.6541006,-90.3132478,220m/ P.audax (talk) 06:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Extensive Coverage of Topic in Media Due to Claims Williams is Innocent

I don't know how to source the extent of media coverage, but the case of Williams possibly being innocent has a significant amount of media coverage at this time, 2024. Starlighsky (talk) 13:05, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Examples of reliable sources currently covering this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/09/24/marcellus-williams-execution-missouri-faq/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/sep/24/missouri-to-execute-marcellus-williams-prosecutors-objections-innocence-claims

https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/09/23/missouri-execution-marcellus-williams-death-row/75194051007/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/marcellus-williams-death-penalty-innocent-missouri-b2618119.html

https://www.essence.com/news/marcellus-williams-faces-execution-today-in-missouri/

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/24/us/marcellus-williams-scheduled-execution-date/index.html

https://www.vox.com/criminal-justice/373568/marcellus-williams-death-penalty-missouri

I also suspect that this will rapidly change, given that the execution is set to occur today. Horep (talk) 20:19, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Set to be executed vs was executed

Unless you have a reliable source explicitly stating that Marcellus was executed, DO NOT ADD IT. When it is confirmed, we can add it to the article. Until then, there is no need to jump the gun. Horep (talk) 23:15, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Confirmed GalacticEncyclopedist (talk) 00:48, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Article renaming suggestion

Proposition: renaming of the "Murder of Felicia Gayle" article to "Murders of Felicia Gayle and Marcellus/Khaliifah Williams"

Also, someone should REALLY be locking this page soon. 97.113.224.92 (talk) 23:54, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

I don't necessarily disagree that this article should be renamed. However, "Murders of Felicia Gayle and Marcellus/Khaliifah Williams" sounds like Felicia Gayle and Marcellus Williams were both murdered, which is not true. It seems like there is a naming convention on Wikipedia that is being maintained with the current name of this article, but most people would probably recognize this murder by the name of the alleged offender instead of the victim. Gideonrmt (talk) 00:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I can see a world where this article is renamed to 'the execution of Marcellus Williams'. It is already heavily focused on Williams anyway. Either way there is no rush to change anything Horep (talk) 00:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

No matter how you feel about the execuion, we cannot refer to it as a murder unless reliable sources are using that language. Protecting the page would be a good idea, I have already had to undo a bunch of silly edits already, and it will likely get worse as it is reported on. Horep (talk) 00:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Is the correct thing to do to make a request on WP:RFP? Gideonrmt (talk) 00:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I would wait at least a day to make a request, this talk page should pick up attention from other editors soon, along with more outlets. It may be worth checking the number of hits on Google News or similar for Marcellus Williams vs Felicia Gayle. That would help guide to the more common name. Horep (talk) 00:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, yes, make a request for protection ASAP. For some reason I read it as a request to change article name. (I have submitted a request already). Horep (talk) 00:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree with locking this page. Mike Parson's article was mercilessly vandalized by IP users protesting Williams' execution before it got locked and the same problem seems to be occurring a little bit here too. Randomuser335S (talk) 04:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I disagree

They are separate events that occurred in different contexts. Renaming it to your suggestion implies that both were murdered at the same time, which is not the case. You could create a page covering the execution of Marcellus Williams, but it's debatable whether it requires a separate page at this time.

I also submitted a request for protection, but the last attempt was denied after 8 days, so it was automatically denied. Kloripanda (talk) 06:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

this article title would imply that both parties were killed by one killer; this was obviously not the case. it’s a bit misleading. most people are likely looking up marcellus over felisha, so it would make sense to change the title to “the execution of marcellus williams” Hbailey311 (talk) 02:52, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Williams' Last Statement

It's being reported and there is a photograph going around on social media that his last statement has three exclamation points. I would reckon that we leave it as its being reported.

Linked Article for the statement: “All Praise Be To Allah In Every Situation!!!”

Social Media Photo: https://x.com/alexiszotos/status/1838698402823180675 (Posted by Alexis Zotos of KMOV)

Coasterghost (talk) 00:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

@Afddiary I saw that you reverted it. What is your opinion to keeping it as it was released. Coasterghost (talk) 00:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

@Coasterghost - Sorry about that; I was wrong. I saw a source from USA Today stating that his final statement was "All praise be to Allah in every situation." Since then, I've done my research on his final statement, and I have now seen it written out as "All Praise Be To Allah In Every Situation!!!". My bad - you can go ahead and reverse my edit! (I would like to respectfully request, though, that you please remove the "smart quotes" (the quotation marks that change shape and point towards a phrase) and replace them with regular quotation marks.) Again, sorry about that! Afddiary (talk) 00:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

BTW, here was the source I saw (and I reiterate that it is the only source I've seen so far that has his final statement in regular sentence structure): https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/09/24/missouri-execution-marcellus-williams-lisha-gayle/75298897007/

I think you should specify that his statement was written, not spoken, and that he formatted it like that; the statement being shown with that formatting ("All Praise Be To Allah In Every Situation!!!") is what he presented to the Missouri Department of Corrections as his prospective final statement, hours before his execution. I definitely think you should specify that in some way. Afddiary (talk) 00:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I had put that in there in a rapid approach given that its a new update. Coasterghost (talk) 00:45, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Section about reaction to death penalty

I think there is enough information and media coverage to make an entire section (or at least sub section) about opposition to William's death sentence. Examples of opposition include from the victim's family, from the innocence project, and from attorneys on both sides. I also think within the next few days a sub section about the public's reaction to William's being executed should be added. There have been many protests/vigils in New York City and D.C. already. Gideonrmt (talk) 01:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree. There's already been some reactions from prominent politicians too like Cori Bush and AOC. Hsnkn (talk) 02:00, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Merge proposal

@Wikiexplorationandhelping: has created Execution of Marcellus Williams but I'm not sure it really needs its own page. Are there other situations like this where there are substantially separate? Usually they are all in one article, cf. Dustin Higgs or Daniel Lewis Lee, etc. Perhaps this page should be renamed from Murder of Felicia Gayle to something else, but I don't think there need to be two pages. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk/Contribs} 02:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree. The execution of Marcellus Williams is an almost complete copypasta of the murder of Felica Gayle page. Randomuser335S (talk) 02:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Because Execution of Marcellus Williams is just taken from this page I don't think the pages need to be merged. Execution of Marcellus Williams could just be deleted if it is unnecessary. Gideonrmt (talk) 02:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I vote delete, unless the Execution of Marcellus Williams article could be made more distinct from the parent page. Perhaps with adding more information about his personal background Randomuser335S (talk) 02:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Same vote here. The article about the murder of Felicia Hayle had ample info about the case and I found it completely unnecessary to separate the execution into another article NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 02:52, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I wanted to add the reactions and protests regarding this execution. Would this sustain the article? Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 02:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The reactions to the execution of williams could probably be included in this article. Gideonrmt (talk) 02:21, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I agree with @Gideonrmt that this could sustain the article - and I also believe adding information about Williams's past life/upbringing/history prior to the murder could help. (I'm honestly not sure how much information is out there about his past life; the vast majority of coverage of his case seems to focus solely on the murder, the controversy surrounding his prosecution and conviction, and the controversy surrounding his execution. With that being said, if you find enough to sustain an independent article, I think it could stand on its own.)

If the Execution of Marcellus Williams remains as is, then I don't think it should be separate from this (Murder of Felicia Gayle) page because they are far too similar, and nothing currently in the former article warrants there being two separate articles. Afddiary (talk) 04:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Number of times stabbed

As @Themarkofz: has just edited in, many news sources are stating 43 times. However, the court document quotes the autopsy which says sixteen times (on page 13). Not sure why there is this discrepancy. Any ideas? ~Darth Stabro^{Talk/Contribs} 02:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

With that sort of inconsistency, I would simply write it something like "stabbed 16 to 43 times, depending on source" Randomuser335S (talk) 03:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I'd phrase it a little differently - the sources need to be explicit, since one is as a result of an "official" investigation. My approach would be "stabbed 16 times, according to autopsy, with as many as 43 times as reported in media" R0tekatze (talk) 11:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

What's the exact source for the number being 16? Right now, there's only one source, and it's for 43 stab wounds. Cortador (talk) 12:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The court documents say that the autopsy indicated sixteen stab wounds. Cf. Percival, Rosemary E. "IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent, v. MARCELLUS WILLIAMS, Appellant" (PDF). courts.mo.gov. Retrieved 16 September 2024. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk/Contribs} 14:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

That's a better phrasing, will make that change Randomuser335S (talk) 15:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Just the other day, I was going to post about the inconsistent count for stab wounds. What I gleaned from various sources is that she was "stabbed" 16 times and that she was "cut" 43 times. Personally, I did not see a significant distinction between being "stabbed" versus "cut" ... but I can see how/why the medical examiner or autopsy would make the distinction. Anyways, that seems to be the source of the inconsistent number of wounds ... whether we are counting stabs, or cuts, or both. I assume that a stab is a vertical "plunge" of the knife into the body, whereas a cut is a horizontal "slash" of the knife across the body. So, they are quite different. But, who knows? Thanks. 32.209.69.24 (talk) 05:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Move suggestion: Murder of Felicia Gayle and execution of Marcellus Williams

I don't think the two events should be split (and editors seem to agree on that as per discussion above). However, this article is largely about Williams and his execution, whereas the murder and even the trial don't take up even half the article. As @Starlighsky demonstrated above, the execution got a significant amount of coverage already, and the article section on the execution will likely need expansion soon. With so many sources focussing on the execution specifically while covering the murder only briefly, I think including Williams's name in the article title is justified. Cortador (talk) 07:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Very true. There is a lot of trivial information included - is a description of the contents of Williams' last meal encyclopedic? Deb (talk) 08:26, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

A lot of sources (12345) report on that, and we reflect on what sources state. That said, unless you claim that the article has so much "trivial" information that Williams being mentioned in the name isn't justified, this doesn't matter. Cortador (talk) 09:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

This seems like a possible alternative to a split. — The Anome (talk) 12:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 25 September 2024

Murder of Felicia Gayle → Murder of Felicia Gayle and execution of Marcellus Williams – This article now contains more content sbout the execution of Marcellus Williams than the murder of Felicia Gayle. There are two victims here, Gayle and Williams; one most likely murdered by persons unknown, and the other a victim of unjust judicial killing, as criminal conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. However, both topics are inextricably linked, precluding a split. For that reason, it needs to be renamed to cover both topics. — The Anome (talk) 13:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Disagree. Williams was found guilty of murder and was executed. Your personal opinion on Williams conviction on being incorrect and that his execution was an "unjust judicial killing" doesn't warrant changing the name of this entry. Suggest creating a page about 'The execution of Marcellus Williams' if you desire a more in depth coverage of his execution. Bringjustthefactsplease (talk) 14:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Support for the reason I have stated above: the execution of Williams has received significant coverage, and the majority of the article is now about it. Cortador (talk) 14:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Oppose: I think Williams has received enough coverage to have a standalone article. I already made a draft at Draft:Marcellus Williams

(Discuss 0nshore's contributions!!!) 15:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Strong Oppose Wikipedia is not a place to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. Williams killed this woman. The courts and their associated trial repeatedly agreed with this. Buffs (talk) 15:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Oppose: While the death of Felicia Gayle and Marcellus Williams’ subsequent execution are related, media coverage has already started focusing on the execution. If there is consensus that the execution meats notability guidelines, it should be covered in its own article rather than being expanded on here. Keep this article about the title, Felicia Gayle’s murder. Cascadiaunity (talk) 15:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Oppose This is way too lengthy of a title, and I think these two should be seperate. One article for the murder, the other for the execution.

And I mean, when it comes to the execution, right above you can see that 0nshore already has a draft for it.

Also "and the other a victim of unjust judicial killing, as criminal conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt." I personally don't think he was guilty either, although this isn't the place to voice your opinions, neutrality has to be preserved, and this addition to your proposed name change is incredibly useless. Setergh (talk) 16:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Agree. The proposed "Murder of Felicia Gayle and execution of Marcellus Williams" is such a needlessly clunky title, and the only reason for it is NPOV violating activism Randomuser335S (talk) 18:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment, with support The execution of Williams has received significant coverage and as stated by User:Cortador, a significant part of the article is about the execution itself and the controversy leading up to it. I don't think it matters at all whether he is guilty or innocent, and that should not be considered when trying to expand the title or make a new article. This is not a matter of opinion on the killing itself. I think it's significant to warrant either its own page or expanding the name of the article to include Williams' execution. Mannytool (talk) 17:25, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Mentioning the name of a murderer alongside his victim in the title of an article is despicable. 83.27.239.76 (talk) 17:28, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

This is an purely emotional response. Not based on any Wikipedia guidelines. TheXuitts (talk) 18:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

@TheXuitts WP:POL disagrees. Specifically, Technically, the policy and guideline pages are not the policy and guidelines in and of themselves. The actual policies and guidelines are behaviors practiced by most editors. The behavior most commonly practiced with regard to murders and perpetrators of violence is not to feature their name in the title of the article but instead to name the victim and/or the place of the attack. I would be surprised if this proposal succeeds without significant consensus to step outside this norm. Kcmastrpc (talk) 13:09, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

Support, clunky title or not, the execution has received as much if not more attention than the murder, and at the same time it wouldn't make sense to split it into two articles. TheXuitts (talk) 18:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

You bring up good points, but I personally think it would be best for efficiency's sake if one or the other was selected for the title. I've never seen a wikipedia article using that sort of format title on a death penalty case, and there's a reason for that. Randomuser335S (talk) 18:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Support Oppose, change to "Execution of Marcellus Williams" Other replies talking about "righting wrongs", or being upset at a "murderer being included in the title" are emotionally charged and irrelevant. The content of the article is primarily about Williams, and Williams' execution has received equal if not more attention in the media. It is an accurate representation. I would hazard a guess that most people will be googling "Marcellus Williams execution" rather than "Felicia Gayle murder". Horep (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Very true, but I would argue to simply change the article's title to "Execution of Marcellus Williams" in that case. With any other article pertaining to death penalty cases, it's either "murder of [insert victim's name]" or "execution of [insert offender's name]." Combining both is very clumsy and inefficient, and leaves for a very exhausting title to read. Randomuser335S (talk) 18:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I could get behind changing it to "Execution of Marcellus Williams". This page was created in 2017, at a point where the controversy of the sentence was well under way. TheXuitts (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I would also support a change to "Execution of Marcellus Williams", but as the article is currently written I think the title would fit. Horep (talk) 18:46, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Oppose: Overly long and stupid title. No other article is styled that way. Also WP:RECENTISM needs to be taken into account. Inexpiable (talk) 19:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:RECENTISM, a question worth answering: Is Felicia Gayle's murder inherently notable without Marcellus' Williams, his execution, and controversial conviction? Horep (talk) 19:59, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I was going to say the same thing (you literally responded a few seconds before me haha). ⇒ Zhing-Za, they/them, 20:02, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I stand by my decision to oppose, but if it is to be changed then it should just be renamed to Marcellus Williams. Not that ridiculously long and clunky name title as suggested in the proposal. Inexpiable (talk) 20:10, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

What about the simpler Felicia Gayle and Marcellus Williams? ⇒ Zhing-Za, they/them, 20:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

@Zhing'za zï Ïnin: Because that's also an odd title. Those types of titles are usually used for articles on criminal duos typically, or for people who are related in some way, such as through marriage or if they are siblings. I don't think any article on Wikipedia exists that lists the victim's name followed by "and (Killer's name)", it would imply the two were a criminal pair or related in some way which is obviously not the case. Inexpiable (talk) 21:12, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose Move - Support split.Support move to Execution of Marcellus Williams. Isn't a simple solution just to have an Execution of Marcellus Williams and a Murder of Felicia Gayle article? If both topics meet WP:GNG, why not both? NickCT (talk) 19:54, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

• After a quick glance at the sources, it's clear the trial and punishment of Marcellus Williams is sadly more notable than the murder of his supposed victim. It's clear to me the execution is notable. It's not clear to me that the murder is. NickCT (talk) 20:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Support, though I would like to note that I prefer the simplified title Felicia Gayle and Marcellus Williams. ⇒ Zhing-Za, they/them, 19:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. I don't see any precedent for this sort of title, and it definitely comes off as confusing. No objection to a split. 162 etc. (talk) 20:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose The proposed title would be ambiguous and overly broad. Redirect is fine. Kcmastrpc (talk) 23:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose It could be changed into “Execution of Marcellus Williams” instead (as that’s what people are searching up anyway). The proposed title is too long. Astraeides (talk) 00:23, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Strong oppose. Not typically how these articles are written and the rationale here isn't strong enough to break the styling used on every other page. Would be unwieldy also. The execution is a subtopic of the murder, preferable to start it with that. PARAKANYAA (talk) 11:10, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Strong oppose. "most likely murdered by persons unknown" and "unjust judicial killing" are purely your opinions Aleral Wei (talk) 04:41, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Definitely and absolutely a Oppose for me, because it is suffice to use the title “Murder of Felicia Gayle” and the execution of Williams is not a standalone event, but rather a single transaction of events starting from the murder to the ultimate conclusion of the case with his death sentence carried out. I also agree with the points of those who voted oppose in the discussion. NelsonLee20042020 (talk) 13:50, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. The title is clunky and other articles doesn’t have names like this. Paige Matheson (talk) 18:01, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Comment, the notability here obviously comes from Williams, I think the title should be changed from about Gayle to about Williams.

Citation needed

Why is there no citation for this claim? Seems like pertinent information that should have a source attached to it. "Williams was already serving a 50 year sentence for an unrelated robbery when he was sentenced to death on August 27, 2001, by St. Louis County Circuit Judge Emmett M. O'Brien." Noticing-things-hmm (talk) 14:30, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Misleading and Incorrect Reference to Williams

In the section Investigation and trial, there exists a passage that incorrectly refers to Williams, when the accompanying citation is clearly referring to Mr. Cole.

This give the reader the incorrect assumption that Williams was "in and out of prison" and arrested 5 times in the last 4 years for "crimes including armed robbery and homicide"

The passage in the wiki section:

"Williams had already been in and out of jails and prisons, his fifth arrest in the previous four years in February 1999 for crimes including armed robbery and homicide"

The citation:

"Mr. Cole was no stranger to the criminal legal system; his arrest in February of 1999 was his fifth in the previous four years, and he had been in and out of jails and prisons across the United States constantly since the 1960s for crimes that included armed robbery and homicide." DBrain-Wiki (talk) 17:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Somehow completely missed that, my mistake 🤦 Setergh (talk) 19:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Removal of unsourced material

I've removed a large amount of material that (a) represents an alleged description of Williams murdering Gayle as fact, and (b) is totally uncited. I've also added {{fact}} to several other less contentious paragraphs. We can do better than this, people. — The Anome (talk) 17:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Most of that paragraph was martial taken, if not plagiarized verbatim, from court documents. The evidence examined by those court documents really do need to be addressed in this article, but should be phrased and written in original words. Randomuser335S (talk) 18:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Do you have links to the court case documents? They would be very helpful! Horep (talk) 18:44, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Here is the specific document the user took passages from: https://law.justia.com/cases/missouri/supreme-court/2003/sc-83934-1.html Randomuser335S

What we should not do, given the evidence that undermines the court case, is to state any of the findings or allegations in the court documents as fact in Wikipedia's voice. It is fact that these are the allegations; it is fact that the court found them to be true beyond reasonable doubt and found him guilty. But, given the citable evidence that has come up since the court case, there seems to be reason for Wikipedia to consider that there is reasonable controversy regarding the court's verdict, and we should apply WP:NPOV to reporting the court judgment and documents. — The Anome (talk) 18:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Dude, why are you deleting my response to a question inquiring about the court documents in question? Removing sources that present a different narrative that you don't want reflects very poorly on you, and I was sharing those documents with another user that wanted access to them. Randomuser335S (talk) 19:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

I could be wrong, but the other user may have started writing before you added your reply, giving them a conflict when adding, so they lazily overwrote your previous response by accident. Horep (talk) 19:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Lazily overwrote by accident is exactly right. My error. I'll go back and try to undo the damage. — The Anome (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

That very well could be what happened here. That response was written in a kneejerk moment of frustration with them while assuming the worst. I apologize for that and retract those previous responses if it is indeed the case Randomuser335S (talk) 19:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Update: I see the comment's been restored already. Many apologies for my inadvertent clobbering of your comment. — The Anome (talk) 20:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

It's fine, don't mind at all. I also made mistakes with acting on my heat of the moment feelings, really didn't need to confrontational about it at all. Randomuser335S (talk) 20:24, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Williams

Marcellus Williams should probably be its own article now. His execution has been very polarizing (even internationally) with regard to the US justice system, Supreme Court, evidentiary procedures, the death penalty, politics and racism in Missouri, etc. He has encyclopedically become his own subject, not just part of the Gayle subject.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:49, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Disagree. He is WP:BIO1E. He may or may not have been involved in a single event. I personally wouldn't mind it but much more well covered (outside a brief burst like this one) killers or alleged killers have had their articles deleted on that ground, and I don't see a stronger case for inclusion here given that this article is not very lengthy (so sizesplit is not valid). All the coverage on him is in reference to whether he did or didn't murder Gayle. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Williams is know for two things: the supposed murder and his execution, which happened 26 years later. Considering the number of sources that have comparably little information about the murder and focus mostly on the execution, I'd say these are linked but separate events. Cortador (talk) 07:00, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

1) I disagree. An execution is the result of a crime, whether the person is the person who did it or not; they are two parts of a whole and cannot be easily disconnected. Neither article would be particularly long to justify the split, all you can say there is legal battles and the actual bit on the execution, while in the Murder article's case it would be the entire aftermath missing.

2) I doubt the execution will get covered for long, therefore not passing WP:NEVENT. We should wait and see if it does pass NEVENT before splitting it off. PARAKANYAA (talk) 09:32, 27 September 2024 (UTC)