Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dennis Rader article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When editing this article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve it, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, use the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.
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 sourcedmust 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 article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kansas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Kansas on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KansasWikipedia:WikiProject KansasTemplate:WikiProject KansasKansas
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of crime and criminal biography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related
Dennis Rader is part of WikiProject Lutheranism, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Lutheranism on Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to Lutheran churches, Lutheran theology and worship, and biographies of notable Lutherans. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.LutheranismWikipedia:WikiProject LutheranismTemplate:WikiProject LutheranismLutheranism
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity
This article was copy edited by Satkara, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors,on November 19, 2014.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
Latest comment: 11 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I've posted polite objections to Wikipedia over the years, but this isn't one of them. If I sound well-mannered in this post, I have simply failed to convey my rage over the fraud that Wikipedia continues to be. You're just bad. I sometimes sound nice if I'm correcting a garble, typo, or goof, but this is not in that category. This is not a mistake. It's misconduct. There is no way this mistake could be the result of mere sloppiness. As of the time I'm typing this, the article contains
Even after his conviction for murder, Rader could have still qualified for a military funeral under the terms of a 1997 Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but the United States Senate subsequently passed a November 2005 resolution excluding all violent offenders from qualifying.
It is wrong, dead wrong, on so many levels. There is no such thing as a 1997 Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The last Amendment was in 1992, concerning Congress raising its own pay. (The pay-raise cannot go into effect until after the next House Of Representatives election, giving voters the chance to ditch any Representative who voted for the pay-raise.) FURTHERMORE, and this raises the level of awfulness of this mistake, WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND BELIEVES THAT A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT CAN BE CHANGED BY THE PASSING OF A FEDERAL LAW???? Who believes that? If something undesirable is in the Constitution, you can't change it by having both Houses of Congress vote and the President sign it. NO! And every U.S. sixth-grader KNOWS that! To change something that is in the Constitution requires some supermajority in both Houses. After that, I'm unsure whether the President must sign. Maybe. (How might I find out, one way or the other? Not by researching it on Wikipedia, that's for sure, because how can I trust anything I find on Wikipedia after today?) After THAT, 3/4 of the States must assent. Three-quarters of 100 States would be 75, so 3/4 of 50 States (which is 1/2 of 100) would be half of 75, or 37.5. That means that 38 States, in the present count of States, must agree to reverse something in the Constitution before the reversal takes effect. If you have 37 States assenting, that's less than 37.5, so the measure does not take effect. If 38 States assent, then that is over 37.5, so the 3/4 mark has been met and exceeded when 38 states assent. That is the process. FURTHERMORE, the footnotes posted to back up this nonsense don't mention anything in the U.S. Constitution. FURTHER furthermore, the sentence in the article doesn't even say that this is a Law. It states ONLY that it is a Resolution, passed by the Senate. What about the House Of Representatives? The Senate DID pass an actual bill (not a mere Resolution) that would deny military burials to certain criminals, but it would not have any effect until the House Of Representatives also passed it (and the second footnote's source says that the Representatives have not yet passed it), and the President signed it.
Wikipedia, I've had it. I will disparage you to the ends of the Earth until you have some system in place to prevent this kind of thing from getting out on your website. You could be such a wonderful thing. You could be one of the pieces of the internet that does Gutenberg raised to the power of Gutenberg to the worldwide distribution of knowledge. But, instead, you're garb@ge, because you don't care. There's no proofreading. There's no vetting. No article should get up until it has been read by people with no expertise in the field of discussion so that if there are just mistakes contrary to general knowledge or common sense it doesn't get out. Someone may be an expert in green billiard-balls but that shouldn't give them leave to say something contrary to knowledge outside the field of green billiard-balls, such as say, writing that the volume of a billiard-ball is its diameter cubed. That's why you should hold back any proposed change until it's reviewed by what is called "cold eyes" of both experts and non-experts.2600:1700:6759:B000:8DB8:7D54:AC45:ACB2 (talk) 18:44, 24 August 2025 (UTC)Christopher Lawrence SimpsonReply
Hi Christopher,
Thank you for pointing out this mistake. I have removed the content in question from the article. What was called a 1997 constitutional amendment (and linked to Congressional Apportionment Amendment, which is truly bizarre) was actually a 1997 law passed by Congress. I could find no evidence that the 2005 Senate bill was ever passed into law, so I have removed the entire passage as irrelevant.
Wikipedia is an online, crowdsourced (Wiki) encyclopedia (pedia) that anyone can edit. Unfortunately, this does mean that there will be inaccuracies from time to time. You are welcome to edit an article yourself when you find a mistake, or post a polite request on the article's talk page for another editor to review. Wikipedia talk pages are not a forum; please refrain from using them to express your grievances with Wikipedia as a whole. Thank you.
Latest comment: 2 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
"Rader obtained the keys to Davis' car and ransacked the kitchen, pretending to look for food. Davis begged for her life, prompting Rader to strangle her with pantyhose. He initially intended to stay and take photos with Davis' body but left sooner than planned when Davis falsely told him she was expecting company."
