Talk:Burke and Hare murders

1184: 1095: 545: 1074: 1105: 219: 666: 598: 577: 343: 252: 786: 986: 965: 776: 755: 996: 392: 374: 489: 462: 881: 860: 1685:

Knox because his wiki article makes no reference to Knox losing eyesight and had that been the case the work he was doing in his last years in London would have been impossible.) I am a little surprised that something that was given currency as late as the 1970s-80s appears to have been discredited without it being known. I am open to correction.

891: 402: 1684:

I have read in a book about names that became common words back in the 70s (in relation to the phrase 'to Burke up the evidence'), and heard from a 1980s TV programme presented by Magnus Magnusson about the murders that Hare 'died blind and destitute' . (I don't think I was confusing him with Robert

1419:

for more details. There is a caveat in the policy that allows information from some SPSs, but that is in a case where they "may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party

1379:

2) Burke and Hare did not rob graves. They were accused of grave robbing by the court. They never confessed to it, nor was any evidence supplied that they did. The reason it was established in the court case was that Burke's common law wife was also on trial, and her defence rested on the claim that

1743:

in February this year (so five and a half months ago - recently?). The claim you make “it sound like it would go to an article specifically about the sixteen killings” is the same for the extant version (“were a series of sixteen killings”) as the version you were edit warring to “protect” (“were

1616:

No. As has already been discussed, "As at" is correct in formal British English. If you can persuade a template writer to bring a BrEng version into play, that would be OK, but there is no reason to use something wrong (and it's an American term, not British) just because the guideline of the MoS

687: 1818:

Season 2, Episode 1 of "Lore" (Amazon Prime Video, 2017-2018) was literally all about Burke and Hare. This should be mentioned/linked in the "media portrayals and popular culture" section of this article. I'm not familiar enough with Knowledge (XXG) rules or I would add it myself.

1752:

being taken out, although I can see an argument for it being left in. Having said that, when I co-wrote the article six years ago, I don’t remember too many references to them being serial killers (there were one or two, but very few, given the number of sources used). -

1712:. That wording makes it sound like it would go to an article specifically about the sixteen killings, not a general article about the concept of serial killers. This is a problem because it's misleading, so I have reverted it. It was only recently introduced so per 1414:

I am afraid that I just removed the information that someone had included from this book (it was only about one very minor point, so no real problems on the integrity of the information) as I see that the book is a self-published source (SPS). Please see

1298:"could not sleep at night without a bottle of whisky by his bedside, and a twopenny candle to burn all night beside him; when he awoke he would take a drink from the bottle—sometimes half a bottle at a draught—and that would make him sleep." 1583:

This will save the editor from updating the page every year, and I think the reader will find seeing number of years in print quite astonishing. There are other methods of accomplishing this, but you get my general point—I'm not married to

554: 472: 1657:, Lochar Pub., p. 139 : "loved to exhibit to the interested the treasures of his black museum of criminal souvenirs (...) the fragment of William Burke's skin, inherited from his grandfather which he kept in a snuffbox..." 1650:, Sept. 1979, vol. 235, no 1364, p. 146-153. p. 152 : " loved to exhibit to the interested the treasures of his black museum of criminal souvenirs, such as the fragment of William Burke's skin which he kept in a snuffbox..." 294: 233: 153: 1859: 1189: 1793:

The wording is essentially the same. Both versions are about the killings, not the killers. The link is removed (better because they are not defined as serial killers in the text), so the point is moot.

535: 1854: 1795: 1754: 500:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join 1904: 501: 1954: 937: 258: 1525:

tag; name "inflation-UK" defined multiple times with different content". I haven't the time to figure out how to correct it just now—I'm afraid to damage such a well-developed article.

313: 1894: 1234:"Burke had met Margaret on previous trips to Edinburgh, but it is not known whether he was previously acquainted with Hare. Once Burke arrived in the close, they became good friends." 559: 1563:

I accept "as at" as idiomatic in British English, however, I do think the fact of the skeleton's permanent residency should be presented using a more evergreen template, such as the

496: 467: 147: 1939: 947: 1949: 1767:

You're talking about the different wordings, I'm not interested in that, I'm interested in what is wikilinked. I have no issue with the version you just linked. I have issue

1161: 1984: 1889: 1799: 1758: 1151: 1272:

be useful to point out that they had no prior association before moving in to the close; but then I think we've said that elsewhere, so there maybe no need for this.

1959: 1884: 525: 44: 913: 737: 79: 1483:

This whole Scott quotation in the "In media portrayals and popular culture" section uses older forms of spelling - it seems simpler to remove the current two

1989: 1127: 1056: 1924: 727: 842: 420: 1979: 1969: 1046: 904: 865: 648: 1934: 1879: 832: 85: 1974: 1874: 1849: 1320:

My mistake on saying it was a quote from Burke, but it's still a quote, so if we get rid of the quote marks, we need to re-word the remainder. –

1118: 1079: 703: 424: 1944: 1914: 638: 1022: 1864: 1194: 190: 808: 1919: 1869: 1664: 1399: 30: 419:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge (XXG)'s articles about people. All interested editors are invited to 1964: 1826: 614: 1929: 428: 694: 671: 415: 379: 168: 99: 1899: 1569:

template: "Burke's skeleton was given to the Anatomical Museum of the Edinburgh Medical School where, and has been there since 1829

1392:

P.S The cover shows an rendering of Burke's face using his death mask and skeleton. It was generated at the University of Dundee.

1009: 970: 135: 104: 20: 1672: 1909: 1236:? It was kinda stuck out there all on its own and looks like it was moved during a copy edit (possibly mine) and not put back. 799: 760: 74: 354: 605: 582: 228: 65: 129: 1444:

When a lodger in Hare's house died, he turned to his friend Burke for advice and they decided to sell the body to Knox.

1565: 1448:

That a lodger who had died would then seek advice is probably not what was meant. How should this best be rephrased?

251: 185: 125: 109: 1560:

First, let me say that this is one of the best articles I've read on Knowledge (XXG), in every conceivable way.

1213: 199: 342: 218: 1668: 1403: 360: 238: 175: 1830: 1453: 896: 1822: 1660: 1618: 1395: 1724:

was not present at that time. It's not the wording I have the issue with, it's the misleading wikilink. -

24: 1364:

A recently published book by a University of Edinburgh researcher sheds some light on the life of Burke.

55: 1694: 1540:

I'm away until Sunday evening with only limited access; if it isn't sorted by then, I'll work it out. -

1425: 1373:

The book sources lots of historic documents archived at the university and other sources. Some tidbits:

1126: