Talk:Jim Jones

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateJim Jones is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Good articleJim Jones has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
March 10, 2022Good article nomineeListed
April 27, 2022Peer reviewReviewed
May 23, 2022Featured article candidateNot promoted
Current status: Former featured article candidate, current good article

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: withdrawn by nominator:
It's common practice for nominators to have real-life obligations that prevent them from providing a QPQ. In this case, I or others, who have many QPQs in reserve, are generally happy to assist as a show of kindness and donate one of our QPQs to the cause. However, I'm not inclined to give any such leniency to a user who shows a basic unwillingness to engage with DYK's rules, and similarly not inclined to let other editors enable this behavior by donating their own hard-earned QPQs. So, I'm going to mark this as the withdrawn nomination it is. A shame that we lose out on such an interesting hook, of an infamous man, in this way. theleekycauldron (talkcontribs) (she/they) 20:31, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Alt 1... that Jim Jones's initial popularity arose from his participation in the Latter Rain movement and joint healing campaign appearances with William Branham? Source: Reiterman & Jacobs 1982, pp. 50–52 Collins 2017, pp. 177–179

Improved to Good Article status by Charles Edward (talk). Self-nominated at 15:16, 10 March 2022 (UTC).Reply[reply]

  • Recently promoted to GA - Correct inline citations. I do not find the hook interesting but the article is. I think a hook related to the fact that he engineered and ordered the mass murder-suicide of 909 people would generate more interest. The copyvio is tripped by long quotes, but it does not appear to be a violation. Many of the references are inaccessible so I assume good faith. In addition to the hook, I also think you need to complete a QPQ based on the fact that this is your eleventh DYK nomination. Bruxton (talk) 19:08, 10 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Bruxton! The Reiterman source is available on google books for the pages cited, if that helps. As far the hook, I am fine with changing it to whatever. I think most people already know Jim Jones is a mass murderer, so I was trying to bring light to a lesser known fact. But maybe just going with the obvious hook is the way to go? Actually this will be my 39th DYK. :) My first one was in 2009. Back in the day, the last time I really looked at DYK rules anyway, there was volunteer clerks appointed by an admin who there only one permitted to do the reviewing and approving. Sounds like times have changed. I will see what I can do. —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 19:27, 10 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I added an Alt 2 hook for consideration
I like the new hook, but still waiting on a QPQ. @Charles Edward: Bruxton (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No thanks. :) I see that is a newer requirement (2015ish?). I don't like that requirement or think it is appropriate, so I will withdraw my nominations. Quid Pro Quos are a gateway to unethical behavior that represent a serious danger to our project. Thanks, and sorry! —Charles Edward (Talk | Contribs) 19:23, 16 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Moved out unsourced claims about the punishment techniques[edit]

According to Layton, one of the ways that members of the cult were controlled was by being sent to the "extended care unit". "Brave people who spoke out against the atrocities in Jonestown were taken to the 'medical unit' and put on coma inducing drugs," she said. These drugs included thorazine, sodium pentathol, chloral hydrate, demerol, and valium. Some of these people were used by Jones as sex slaves. "Others had a python wrapped around their neck. Children who cried about wanting to go back to the States were lowered into a dark well at night. One man was forced into 'the box' underground where he stayed for days/weeks." "The Box" was a punishment devised by Jones involving a 6-by-4-by-3-foot (1.83 m × 1.22 m × 0.91 m) plywood coffin-shaped box in which a person was confined and held underground while they were constantly berated and reprimanded for their perceived slights against the cult.

These claims are not found in Layton's affidavit, even though the passage has two footnotes pointing to them as a source (and cites no other sources). If anything, it is odd that she doesn't mention them there, since Layton is otherwise very critical in the affidavit and includes a lot of damning details, and yet the overall picture that emerges from her description seems noticeably milder than this. It's possible that she has made these claims somewhere else, so I googled part of the quote, but I only find it in four other pages on the web and they don't seem like authoritative sources - they look as if the information there might be copied from Wikipedia. I have moved the claims out of the article so hopefully someone can source them, if they are correct. (talk) 13:18, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]