Talk:Jack the Ripper

Please read this before posting about DNA evidence or Kosminski

The purported DNA evidence is unreliable and universally dismissed by DNA fingerprinting experts and by most Ripperologists. The scientific journal that originally published the study has already printed a notice of concern after the authors were unable to produce any of the original data or rebut criticisms of the work. Consequently, the identity of the Ripper remains unknown. DrKay (talk) 03:43, Monday, June 8, 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2025

Change "Attacks ascribed to Jack the Ripper typically involved women working as prostitutes who lived in the slums of the East End of London." To "Attacks ascribed to Jack the Ripper involved poor women who lived in the slums of the East End of London. They have erroneously all been identified as prostitutes, despite evidence to the contrary.

• Cited source: "The Five" by Hallie Rubenhold ~2025-38776-92 (talk) 17:25, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

One soruce cannot overcome 100 years of other sources. Slatersteven (talk) 17:42, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Conflicting sources need to be dealt with according to WP:NOTOR. As noted by Slatersteven, one conflicting source cannot override other sources. Also, please provide a full citation of the book. Aston305 (complain/compliment) 18:37, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Citation templates

Hi, I'm planning on combining duplicate citations per WP:DUPREF (keeping the established style of named references). This article makes inconsistent use of citation templates, seeming to use them for everything except books (all but one). I'm thinking of putting all citations in templates, but I'm happy to conserve this somewhat inconsistent style provided it has consensus. Any feedback appreciated. Wh1pla5h99 (talk) 10:01, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I don't mind whether citation templates are used or the original is retained. (I agree consensus should be clear which to use before we make wholesale changes one way or the other to make them consistent.) DrKay (talk) 10:11, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

The FA version consistently used non-templated citations. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:14, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

If I'm reading the FA info in the talk header correctly, that was back in 2010. How commonly used were templated citations sixteen years ago? (I don't know the intricacies of the matter, just curious) cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 19:52, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

I believe the templates were mostly developed in 2005/06. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:08, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

Not all victims were prostitutes

There's a claim in the article that the victims were generally prostitutes. I disagree with this wording - expert historians generally consider the victims poor, marginalised women. Whilst it is highly likely a few engaged in occasional sex work, labelling them all prostitutes paints an oversimplified narrative. ~2026-40236-3 (talk) 09:52, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

"Whilst it is highly likely a few engaged in occasional sex work" Here we go again. Quoting my own reply to the exact same comment from last year: "Among the canonical five, Catherine Eddowes was likely the odd one out. She had a history of casual prostitution dating to the early 1880s, but otherwise she was mostly employed as a domestic worker and seasonal hop-picker. At the time of her death in 1888, she had a long-term romantic relationship which had lasted for 7 years and she had a reputation for monogamy. Per the main article: the "deputy of Cooney's Lodging-House... stated Eddowes was generally within the lodging-house "for the night" by 9 or 10 p.m. and that he had never seen her intimate with anyone aside from Kelly in the years she typically resided at the lodging-house." Also a bit of an oddity. She was working in Kent for most of the month in September 1888. She returned to London on 27 September, just three days before her death." Dimadick (talk) 12:14, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

We do not say they were. Slatersteven (talk) 13:26, 19 January 2026 (UTC)