Wikinews:Deletion requests/Archives/Deleted Archive 7

This archive is closed. If you wish to add a closed deletion request, go to Wikinews:Deletion requests/Archives and find the latest archive.

October 31

Template:Noncommercial

Consensus has been reached on this deletion request, and the result is keep. Do not add anymore votes or comments on this request. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 11:56, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Noncommercial images must meet Fair use whitelist requirements to be hosted on Wikinews, so template is "in excess of what is required or sufficient; useless." (from wiktionary) - Amgine / ^talk 03:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Ditto. Delete --Deprifry|+T+ 06:07, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
• Word. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 11:57, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
• You're drinking my cup of tea. --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 21:57, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- superfluous is a big word. --Chiacomo (talk) 22:08, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- Insert funny comment here. - Borofkin 23:15, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete -- I must remind you all that "shenanigans" and "funny business" are strictly prohibited on Wikinews. Please conduct yourselves in a stone-like, "stick up the bum" manner. --Wolfrider 23:49, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire receives PG-13 MPAA rating

Kind of abbandoned (last edit: 3 days ago was minnor, and next one was 6 days ago) and in my opinion not really notable. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:12, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd say delete. With a storyy like this you either have a hit or a miss. With a hit you're going to have editors defending it. With anything else, nobody is going to care. Brianmc 00:49, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Vote: 2-0, consensus to delete - Amgine / ^talk 19:57, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Archiving previously deleted files - Amgine / ^talk 19:49, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Earth

Read it, need i say more? Bawolff ☺☻ 00:20, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - waaaaaayyyy too ambiguous. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 11:42, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, that's what the main page is.....-- Flying Canuck 16:52, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
  • This deletion request is closed. The consensus reached is delete. Do not place anymore votes on this request. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 11:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

WICK MAKES FOUR-STAR LIST

Copyvio -- Flying Canuck 16:51, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

CAN THE BIG M HELP SAVE THE WEST COAST FISHERY? Senator Mahovlich On Fisheries

Copyvio -- Flying Canuck 17:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

ROUND TWO

Copyvio -- Flying Canuck 17:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

THIEVES TARGET VACTION HOMES

Copyvio -- Flying Canuck 17:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

WOMEN'S BUSINESS NETWORK SHOWCASES LOCAL TALENT

Copyvio -- Flying Canuck 17:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

INMATE DIES AFTER SUSPECTED OVERDOSE

Copyvio -- Flying Canuck 17:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

I WAS CANADIAN?

Copyvio -- Flying Canuck 17:00, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Satire

Not something Wikinews does/can do --Cspurrier 18:54, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

And why exactly is that??? Emphaticdrivel 18:55, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

See Wikinews:What Wikinews is and Wikinews:What Wikinews is not - Amgine / ^talk 19:11, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete not in the scope of Wikinews. - Amgine / ^talk 19:11, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

• I wanna du-du-dulete you from yo head to yo toes, and I wanna merge some parts down down down down to the Wackynews. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 23:40, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Would be cool as another project outside of wikinews, like wikipedia ↔ unencyclopedia. Bawolff ☺☻ 23:09, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Whoopes already exsists Uncyclopedia:UnNews Bawolff ☺☻ 23:11, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Jakarta Muslims attack Catholics

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Expenditures by U.S. relief agency questioned in wake of Katrina

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Apple releases professional upgrades

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

State of Guantánamo Hunger Strike: Force-Fed Via Nasal Canal

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

China not happy with Canada's potential Taiwan bill

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Alice Cooper in Calgary!

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Arrested persons' legal aid is delayed in Singapore

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Not enough awareness of needy in Singapore, says volunteer

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Slain woman's husband, Daniel Horowitz; "We're all animals"

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Birmingham (UK) Race Riots Continue - Second Death

Possible copyright vio, first version of the article matches the text at http://www.newscover.squarespace.com/law-order/ including a spelling mistake which was corrected in a later edit[1]. copyvio added to article by User:Edbrown05, but he didn't follow through here or include URL. Wangi 11:30, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Wangi
• Comment: The Website says on its the front page: "This website is freely available for syndication by any website provided content is attributed to Newscover Magazine." That licence is compatible with ours. --Deprifry|+T+ 12:02, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Though I suspected, I hadn't noticed the licensing stuff. I wouldn't want to read a copy and paste job from Voice of America here any more than Newscover Magazine. I want to read the contributor's take on the news, and pursue the sources if I chose to. -Edbrown05 15:39, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
• Comment I don't think we should encourage copy & paste jobs even if its compatible with our license. Also if it is a C&P we should note that by more visible means then just a source tag. Bawolff ☺☻ 00:29, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
  • The consensus is in favor of deletion. Do not place anymore votes for this request. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 21:24, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Category:Bush administration handling of pre-war intelligence

Not a news category. - Amgine / ^talk 00:01, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep Rename. Used in Template:Pre-war intelligence infobox for the DPLBawolff ☺☻ 01:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

  It is used, in that infobox, to create a strong bias in articles via guilt by association. The infobox is unbalanced and not NPOV. - Amgine / ^talk 01:08, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

• Agree with Amgine's claims. Delete. --Mrmiscellanious 01:22, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. The category/dpl should be something like "2003 Iraq War Intelligence", or something similar. - Borofkin 01:26, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Delete or rename - against the npov, which is a necessity if we're going to defeat the corporate news. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 21:54, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

• Rename Category with a neutral title is usefull per Bawolff. --Deprifry|+T+ 12:05, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
• Rename. I found it useful to dig out Plame leak stories. "2003 Iraq pre-war intelligence" maybe. -Edbrown05 15:34, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

The consensus that has been adapted is in favor of renaming the category. Do not place anymore votes for this deletion request. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 23:22, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

The transfer was successful, and the new category is Category:2003 Iraq pre-war intelligence. I also request that this deletion request remain on the deletion request page until November 2, 2005. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 00:30, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

October 30

Template:2003 Iraq pre-war intelligence infobox

Consensus has been reached on this deletion request, and the result is delete. Do not add anymore votes or comments on this request. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 12:01, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Template's only purpose is to imply the USA administration egaged in misleading the public. NPOV states "one is very careful not to state (or imply or insinuate or subtly massage the reader into believing) that any particular view at all is correct." This template clearly violates this element of the NPOV policy. - Amgine / ^talk 03:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep- This info box has been here since June and has been quite useful. The assumption above that its purpose is to imply something is absurd nonsense as one can not apply motive to a Template. Furthermore, the nominator for deletion relies upon NPOV which states;

"We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by only a small minority of people deserved as much attention as a majority view. That may be misleading as to the shape of the dispute. If we are to represent the dispute fairly, we should present competing views in proportion to their representation among experts on the subject, or among the concerned parties."

Even if the contents of the info-box leave a reader with the feeling that pre-war intelligence was wrong and/or misused; I submit that such an overwhelming majority of the world's "experts on the subject" as well as "the concerned parties" are on the record as believing that "Iraq pre-war intelligence" was so wrong and so misused , that the info-box, if anything, is too mild in terms of identifying articles which in themselves are too mild in reporting the extent of the wrongness and misuse of that so called "intelligence". The argument for deletion,as stated above, is spurious and without merit. Neutralizer 03:55, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I thought it was a category to throw stories into so when the a need arose, there was a place to look for it. -Edbrown05 04:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Or it could be deleted, or rather renamed again, so that when you are desparate for the hard work that went into creating and sourcing a story you are hard out of luck. -Edbrown05 04:41, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I see this as having been a renamed template from last month. My understanding is that it may be controverial but it covers an important topic. As for the earlier discussion of this under it's previous incarnation I think archiving of this issue should be deferred. When it comes to the vote, I'm saying Keep. Brianmc 00:16, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. No need for an infobox on this category, which shouldn't even be here in the first place - not a news category. --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 00:59, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep and fix - I'm pretty sure this may serve as a useful category if it's cleaned up a bit. And by "a bit" I mean "a lot". —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 02:54, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - I consider this one to be different to Template:Immigration australia infobox and Template:Human rights united states infobox. Those two display the intersection of two legitimate categories, whereas this one displays a category which is POV, IMO. - Borofkin 07:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Unnecessary and very POV --Cspurrier 12:52, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• "2003 Iraq pre-war intelligence" <-- POV? Cspurrier, Borofkin, Amgine, you are going to have to explain this one to me in baby talk; I just don't get it. How is providing a pointer for readers to articles about an important news topic POV? Mrmiscellanious: "not a news category"? I'm on a planet called Earth where Iraq pre-war intelligence is a huge news topic. If this is not a news category where you live, I'm going to have to find out what planet you are on. --JWSchmidt 21:07, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

  Attempt at reply: The title is misleading; the category is used exclusively for articles about percieved administration mishandling or failures regarding "pre-war intelligence". This has two elements of POV in it: it strongly implies the administration mishandled or had failures regarding "pre-war intelligence" (violates the opinions and judgements of WN:NPOV). Second it is not an "event", but a perception - opinion - regarding a time frame. It is not even a broadly agreed upon perception, let alone a discrete news item. Under this rubric all articles regarding Iraq - including the Saddam trial and more - should be included, but they are not being included because the category is being used exclusively for pushing a POV. (similarly, Google finds 152 articles using "immigration", but only 15 articles in the category - the majority of which are critical or negative articles about Australia) So my third argument for deletion is the category on which it is based is being used in a POV fashion. - Amgine / ^talk 21:33, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Keep "Perceived administration mishandling"? Um. Amgine, the US government (including George Bush) has admitted to the failure of intelligence that lead to the war in Iraq. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, George Bush has made a public apology regarding it (although I could be thinking of another video). After looking around I can't find it, perhaps it was part of a wonderful dream I had. I did find this though: Report: Iraq intelligence 'dead wrong' --Wolfrider 01:41, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

"Percieved." Clearly not all the "intelligence" was mishandled. In fact, afaik, none of it was. The public relations campaign, on the other hand, is rather more dicey. - Amgine / ^talk 02:02, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Goodness Wolfrider! you cited an article about a political committee (appointed by President Bush) which exonerated the president! You really should choose more reliable sources. - Amgine / ^talk 02:07, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

That is why the White House launched an investigation to look into the failure of the CIA to report accurately on the existence of WMD's.... because there was no failure? I politely direct you to this BBC article and CBC story And looking at your second comment I have absolutely no idea what you're taking about. Your original rebuttal to my argument was that there was no mishandling of intelligence. I pointed to an article that clearly stated otherwise. --Wolfrider 02:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Allow me to catch my breath and then respond.

• The CNN article covered a report which found the intelligence provided the executive branch was wrong, not that the executive branch mishandled it.
• Military intelligence is mishandled when its use or failure to be used results in a failure to achieve military objectives.
• The articles in that category do not discuss the use or failure to use military intelligence, but rather the use of military intelligence in propaganda, for political objectives.

Hope I clarified my rebuttal (despite the interruptions.) - Amgine / ^talk 02:52, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Now I understand a little better. I have to contend though that "Military intelligence is mishandled when its use or failure to be used results in a failure to achieve military objectives." is a good description of what happened in Iraq. --Wolfrider 03:06, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, JWSchmidt, thank you for your comments. Now for mine. This category and it's infobox have both been hugely the subject of POV pushing. I don't understand how these items need their own category - itself is a little too liberal of posting stories into the category which have absolutely nothing to do with the "pre-war intellegence". And excuse me, but why does having links like this one: Why has 'Downing Street memo' story been a 'dud' in US? make any sense in the infobox on Wikinews? --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 21:53, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

So call me clueless. I never used the info box and having seen it on the side of Lewis "Scooter" Libby indicted on five charges I had assumed that it linked to previous Wikinews articles and maybe some useful Wikipedia pages. Now that I have looked at the external links, it seems like the practice of continually having people putting various external links into the info box and other people taking them out is not constructive. Maybe there should be a rule that almost all links in an info box are to past Wikinews articles and maybe there could be a few links to vitally important information at other wikimedia projects. Another rule could be that nothing is added to an information box until after it has been reviewed and used in a published Wikinews article. --JWSchmidt 01:31, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Amgine: Are you saing that Category:Immigration is not a legitimate news category? Or would the POV issue be resolved if I add all those other immigration articles to that category? The situation has arisen because myself and other Australian contributors have used Category:Immigration, and we have mostly been writing articles (which on their own are NPOV) about Australian government immigration policy, but contributors from other countries have not been using this category. Considering that it is not POV for a person to only write articles about a topic that interests them, I suppose my question is: from where does the POV problem arise? - Borofkin 23:04, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

I just added Category:Immigration to Canadian Immigration Minister outlines plan for application backlog, job vacancies. Any Canadians able to follow the minister's speech and fill it out a bit? Brianmc 23:14, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Borofkin: I'm saying that sub-categories (or deeper) will almost always fail to be used uniformly. On Wikinews, we should strive to use top-level categories only, these categories should be clearly understandable and the same as thosed used generally in journalism, and they should be value-neutral. Immigration as a concept is inherently biased as it is almost universally viewed negatively, induces confusion in the readers (is it about the process of immigration, the persons who immigrate, or the government's divisions dealing with immigration?) and is not even possible in many countries of the world. - Amgine / ^talk 01:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Amgine: Fair enough, I think I see your point, however I think such ambiguities and "value judgements" exist even with the top level categories. For example, is terrorism polictics or crime? - Borofkin 03:52, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

I would say both. It's not a question of ambiguities so much as a case of smaller categories by their nature tend to be used narrowly. It's my opinion that larger, more basic categories will be more easily understood by contributors, and will be more difficult to skew toward, or against, one or another POV. - 24.85.85.76 04:30, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

• Comment Not sure if this is directly related to some of the discussion's nuances, But today the US Senate had a major upheavel solely related to Iraq pre-war intelligence; so certainly the issue is alive and well and exceptionally newsworthy. Imo, this info box as well as the others being discussed are helpful to the readers of wikinews. In my opinion, a lot of this discussion is introspective navel gazing about abstract organizational preferences and the entire question of whether the info-boxes are pov to the point of warranting deletion seems to have been sidelined. The paramount issue should be; "are the boxes useful to the readers ?" and absolutely no argument has been made thus far to the effect that the boxes are not worthwhile for article readers. Neutralizer 23:59, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

  Actually, no. The NPOV policy has been listed by Mr. Wales as one of the only non-negotiable elements of the Wikimedia Foundation. - Amgine / ^talk 00:03, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

  NPOV when read in its entirety does not come into play at all with reference to any of the 4 deletion requests made on Oct. 30th. Certainly, the info boxes and category in question have not been proven to the satisfaction of the community to be POV. Neutralizer 00:18, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

  At least, this is your POV on the matter. - Amgine / ^talk 00:20, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

  No, that is my opinion. There is a differnce between a personal opinion and an infraction of a community guideline ("POV"). That's the core of most of the problems in the community; the misuse of the term, "POV", just as it was misused above. Neutralizer 00:45, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

  On this, I'm afraid, we will have to agree to disagree. - Amgine / ^talk 00:51, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

  Or not agree to agree :) Neutralizer 00:54, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete I agree with Borofkin (above). --Chiacomo (talk) 05:04, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Category:2003 Iraq pre-war intelligence

Consensus has been reached on this deletion request, and the result is delete. Do not add anymore votes or comments on this request. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 12:05, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

This is not a news category - it is an encyclopedia category (Wikinews is not an encyclopedia) - and is being used primarily to create a POV info box used to imply the Bush Administration has engaged in misleading the public. NPOV states "one is very careful not to state (or imply or insinuate or subtly massage the reader into believing) that any particular view at all is correct" - something the Template:2003 Iraq pre-war intelligence infobox clearly attempts to do. - Amgine / ^talk 03:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep-The nominator for deletion relies upon NPOV which states;

"We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by only a small minority of people deserved as much attention as a majority view. That may be misleading as to the shape of the dispute. If we are to represent the dispute fairly, we should present competing views in proportion to their representation among experts on the subject, or among the concerned parties."

I submit that all polls show that such an overwhelming majority of the world's citizens beieve that "Iraq pre-war intelligence" was so wrong in fact and so misused , that the info-box, if anything, is too mild in terms of identifying articles which in themselves are too mild in reporting the extent of the wrongness and misuse of that so called "intelligence". The argument for deletion,as stated above, is without merit. Neutralizer 03:57, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I disagree with the way Neutralizer has tried to justify the continued existence of this infobox, that is inherently POV. So, in this case I'm going to abstain, but I think the infobox needs work to make it more NPOV. Tricky when you're just talking about a box that links together a set of stories, but I think Wikinewsies need to set themselves very high standards. Brianmc 00:22, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

This category needs several articles removed from it, such as Mother's plea to U.S. president gains widespread attention, this article suggests that Bush would brush off Cindy Sheehan with the idea that the Iraqi war was about removing Saddam or liberating the Iraqi people. There is nothing in it about Iraqi pre-war intelligence. Others that I think should be reviewed and possibly have the category removed are: Bush appoints John Bolton United States' ambassador to the United Nations, and Bush likely to appoint Bolton during congressional recess. I know some people are keeping score and waiting for the whole house of cards to fall down, but that category on these articles implies Wikinews has passed judgement on the man. Brianmc 21:39, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Unnecessary category. --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 00:58, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep and fix - I'm pretty sure this may serve as a useful category if it's cleaned up a bit. And by "a bit" I mean "a lot". —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 02:54, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - I consider this one to be different to Template:Immigration australia infobox and Template:Human rights united states infobox. Those two display the intersection of two legitimate categories, whereas this one displays a category which is POV, IMO. - Borofkin 07:36, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Unnecessary and very POV --Cspurrier 12:52, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep -- The failure of the Bush administration relating to the collection of accurate intelligence in Iraq is a fact, not a point of view. NPOV does not mean "give Bush a break." A few stories contained within need to be removed, but I fail to see how a collection of NPOV articles can create a POV category. --Wolfrider 01:58, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

• IMHO, it is POV in many ways. One of the strongest points could be that this category links to articles about many items NOT about pre-war intelligence. The Plame case is very vaguely linked to the Iraq war, and is not applicable in this category without someone trying to make a political point (one would have to follow through and start making claims that the Bush admin. was trying to get back at Wilson for his report and criticism about the administration, which would not be NPOV). I wouldn't mind if it was just one article, but MANY of the articles seem to be stepping into this category in which they do not belong (Sheehan articles, for example, also do not belong here - nor does the article about Ted Turner claiming FOX as whatever). It would have been better served to name this category "Downing Street Memo case" (or similar) during its infancy, however it's really unrecoverable right now (unless someone wants to weed through all the articles). --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 03:02, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

• I agree with the need to remove the stories, but I see no reason to delete the category. I'm sure we can get someone to do it, and if no one volunteers I can pick it up as a project, although it will have to wait for a few days before I can take a long look at it. --Wolfrider 03:18, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm seeing only 3 articles that ACTUALLY pertain to the category's title. Three. Who can explain the others? --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 00:06, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I count 10 or 11. Resolution of Inquiry into pre-Iraq war U.S.-U.K. correspondance fails by one vote, CIA gives up search and interrogation on Iraq WMDs, Rep. Barbara Lee calls for U.S. Congress probe into Iraq War planning, United States President George W. Bush makes speech to rally support for war in Iraq (Although this one is debatable), AP Probe suggests Bolton manipulated Iraq inspections to favor War, Citizen groups ask Congress to file formal "Resolution of Inquiry" against Bush, $1,000 reward offered for answer from US President, and the four downing street stories. (Including the John Kerry one) --Wolfrider 01:02, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

• Alright, maybe three was a little exaggerating. I've got five: Resolution of Inquiry into pre-Iraq war U.S.-U.K. correspondance fails by one vote (debatable), CIA gives up search and interrogation on Iraq WMDs, Rep. Barbara Lee calls for U.S. Congress probe into Iraq War planning, Associated Press publishes 6 new "secret and confidential" Downing Street memos, Secret Downing Street Memo leaked. All others do not apply to the topic, IMO. --MrMiscellanious (talk) (contribs) 03:06, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

• Comment Not sure if this is directly related to some of the discussion's nuances, But today the US Senate had a major upheavel solely related to Iraq pre-war intelligence; so certainly the issue is alive and well and exceptionally newsworthy. Imo, this category as well as the others being discussed are helpful to the readers of wikinews. In my opinion, a lot of this discussion is introspective navel gazing about abstract organizational preferences and the entire question of whether the categorizations are pov to the point of warranting deletion seems to have been sidelined. The paramount issue should be; "is this category useful to the readers ?" and absolutely no argument has been made thus far to the effect that it is not worthwhile for article readers. Neutralizer 00:03, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

  In addition,NPOV when read in its entirety does not come into play with reference to any of the 4 deletion requests made on Oct. 30th. Certainly, they have not been proven to the satisfaction of the community to be POV. Neutralizer 00:20, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

  At least, this is you POV on the matter. - Amgine / ^talk 00:22, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

  No, that is my opinion. There is a difference between a personal opinion and an infraction of a community guideline ("POV"). That's the core of most of the problems in the community; the misuse of the term, "POV", just as it was misused above. Neutralizer 00:48, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

• weak keep How is something being unnessary a grounds for deletion? I think this could be useful if it is fixed up. If the bush government did something good with intel then it would be listed there too. unfourtantly they havn't been paticurly good with intelligence so theres alot of bad things listed there. Isn't it more POV to not to link together all the articles about intelligance,for the specific reason that there has been very little good happening, thus if anything bad happens lets not tell anybody about it. If someone did a search about pre war intel they'd probaly come to the same conclusion as if they read the infobox. With that being said the category should not have anything but stuff about pre-war intell.

Didn't this just go through deletion request and the concensus was to keep? Bawolff ☺☻ 00:24, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, however that was mostly a naming dispute, and now that the name is fine, there are other things about the template to complain about. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 01:53, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete I agree with Borofkin (above) --Chiacomo (talk) 05:05, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

October 22

Wal-Mart to change health benefits plan

Copyvio. Bawolff ☺☻ 19:38, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

October 21

Renewable energy

Doesn't belong here possible copyvio, not news -- Flying Canuck 16:57, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Bantam Dell Pays Reported $7 Million for First-Ever Authorized Warren Buffett Biography

Copyvio -- Flying Canuck 05:35, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Bush named Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as among possible future targets

Abandoned -- Flying Canuck 05:28, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Abandoned. - Amgine / ^talk 03:44, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

British Columbia Teachers' Federation not allowed to fund strike

Abandoned -- Flying Canuck 05:15, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete abandoned - Amgine / ^talk 03:42, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

The InterAmerican Court on Children's Right to Nationality

Copyvio Note: original tag added by another user, added here for them by: -- Flying Canuck 04:53, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Article has good potential as a news story if NPOV balanced and additional sources in english. (Article never tagged for deletion - please add if listing here) - Amgine / ^talk 03:36, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I'd normally have to say no consensus, but it's a copyvio so I have to delete it. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 12:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Patti Smith performs at the H.P. Lovecraft Film Festival

Copyvio and abandoned -- Flying Canuck 04:50, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete abandoned copyvio - Amgine / ^talk 03:23, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Joe Crede of White Sox baseball team out for season

Abandoned and not sourced and kinda weird...--Flying Canuck 04:42, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete abandonded. - Amgine / ^talk 03:21, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Rob "Coach" Fulton wins Australian Who wants to be a Millionaire

Not news, people win game shows evrey day...--Flying Canuck 04:38, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• Comment: Strongly disagree with this as a reason for deleting an article. The story is likely of great interest to persons in the region, as well as those who are local to Mr. Fulton and may be interested in a local story. OTOH, the article appears likely to be considered abandoned shortly. - Amgine / ^talk 03:19, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Answers.com and Wikimedia Foundation to Form New Partnership

Copyvio, another article on same topic already exsists -- Flying Canuck 04:13, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

October 20

Inquiry after boy killed by train

Copyvio original tag added by another user, added here for them. | Remeber to wait till October 22 to delete. -- Flying Canuck 06:01, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

October 19

Student from Israel aims at 1 billion website visitors

I'm neutral on this, but somebody else listed it for deletion so here it is. Note: They used the wrong template: {{DR}} instead of {{Deletion request}} So i changed the template. Bawolff ☺☻ 22:57, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

• Opposed, defintly not an advertisment, it should not be deleted. -- Flying Canuck 05:55, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
• Inclining to delete For me it is seems to be very similar to advertisement, although I don't say it IS for now. The article says the website owner hopes a lots of access and doesn't show what kind of website it is ... this smells very advertise-like for me but it has no straight recommendation, so I would like not to determine at this moment. -Aphaia 06:13, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

To be deleted - 2 in favor, 1 oppose, 1 neutral. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 14:28, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Chicago wins American League Division Series title for 2005 season

Abandoned --Cspurrier 15:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Suspected maoist blast kills twelve Indian policemen

Abandoned --Cspurrier 15:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Level of New York subway security threat unknown

Abandoned --Cspurrier 15:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Thomas Schelling and Robert Aumann win Nobel Prize in Economics

Abandoned --Cspurrier 15:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

DeLay's lawyer claims that indictment was based on non-existent law

Abandoned --Cspurrier 15:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

2005 Ironman Triathlon

Abandoned --Cspurrier 15:15, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

October 15

Nashville Police accused in Taser death of Patrick Aaron Lee

Abandoned. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 02:21, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

REGARDING THE $100 LAPTOP

Abandoned, editorial. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 21:18, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

• Deletethis article. Fritsky 15:57, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
• $ sign is an illegal character for titles. Shouldn't this be speedy? Bawolff ☺☻ 23:09, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

October 13

Australian House Prices Fall

Article is copywritten text, link given on article. Brianmc 09:04, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

ACLU; investigations of contributions in corrupting a judicial society

Article originally tagged 28 September 2005 - Amgine/^talk 07:48, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Delete this incoherent editorial. Fritsky 15:54, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Brush fires in Southern California

Article originally tagged abandoned 7 October 2005 - Amgine/^talk 07:45, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Syrian interior minister commits suicide

Article originally tagged as speedy deletion, "Duplicate: Syrian Interior Minister Kills Himself has same and more content", but duplication is not a speedy justification. Retagged as deletion request, listed. - Amgine/^talk 07:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Duplicate article, but why not simply merge the article and dispense with the deletion process? --Chiacomo (talk) 14:27, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

  Mostly because I don't remember how to do history merges, and don't have the access time to figure it out. (Content-wise it appears there are no additional factual statements, both used the same original source) - Amgine/^talk 14:37, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Uzbekistan

Substub originally tagged for deletion 10 October 2005 - Amgine/^talk 07:17, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Category:Astronomy

Tagged for deletion 4 October 2005 - Amgine/^talk 07:14, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

• prior archived Concensus was to keep [2] Bawolff 22:57, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

October 12

Protesters storm Bali jail, demand death for bombers

Copyvio. --Deprifry|+T+ 09:55, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Lions Lose the City

Abandoned, no sources, incomplete, bleh. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 11:07, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

British pair awarded Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine

Abondoned.Flying Canuck 15:57, 12 October 2005 (UTC)Original tag added by another user, added to this list for them

October 11

Cleaner, Crisper Volumetric Images

Copyright infringment: Obvious cut and paste from press release in sources. Tag on article added by another user, added to this list for them by: Flying Canuck 23:04, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Police Investigate Mail and Guardian

Copyright infringment: Cut and paste from news story: http://www.mg.co.za/articlePage.aspx?articleid=251744&area=/oilgate/oil_from_mg/ Flying Canuck 02:05, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

October 9

ישראל

Hebrew story, for which there is no Hebrew Wikinews (yet). --Mrmiscellanious 18:47, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure this is even a news story. The title means "Israel" in Hebrew. --Deprifry|+T+ 05:04, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Whats wrong with having stories in other lnaguages? - Nyarlathotep 19:52, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Nothing wrong with them, just that you can only have English stories in English Wikinews. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 23:23, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Is there a misc. language wikinews?

Nope. If you want a Wikinews in a certain language, petition for a new edition. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 22:05, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Nominated for speedy deletion because it's a foriegn language for which a wikinews does not exist and does not appear to be a news story.Flying Canuck 23:05, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

October 5

Am I Raising An Abuser?

Not only does this have a terrible headline, but it is strongly POV, and seems nothing more than an infomercial/propoganda. --Munchkinguy 01:00, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Lindsay Lohan crashes her car

Most likely not news, only one senetence and one source. Already a day old, and used copyrighted pictures.... which turned out to be from another accident.... --TUFKAAP 17:23, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

• Extreme lesbian delete. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 03:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
• Should have been a real story.... Delete (unfortunately) - This should have been a real news story because it was not just this famous actress getting in a car crash, but the idiotic tabloid reporters who follow her around noting every scrap of food she eats and every time she takes a dump in the bathroom. In this case one of those "reporters" rear ended her vehicle, sending her to the hospital via ambulance. Very similar to how Lady Diana died. Obviously full of POV issues, but those could have been cleaned up. --Robert Horning 05:35, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Joe Blemhuber wins Texas Hold'em Poker Jacket Match

Doubtful to be news, has had false info added to it and very close to being nonsense --Cspurrier 12:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

• KEEP This news section is only just begining and has a strong following at Northern Michigan University. Yes, there have been some problems with people adding untruthful events but give it time and allow me to learn how to sniff out these traitors. shaggrugg _{anonymous user}
• Please dump it. Anthony DiPierro 23:46, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
• Delete I've researched as best I can and can find no source at all for this article. I'll gladly change my vote if someone can provide something (anything!) in the way of corroboration that this event actually exists as this is an excellent example of local coverage that is fun to read. --Chiacomo (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
• KEEP Why does there need to be a source for this article? We are the source, we post the news as it becomes available. There is such thing as news that occours outside of The AP or Gannett news service, or any big news conglomerate for that matter. Wikinews has provided us with a great forum to broadcast this news to the nation and planet. It's a shame that rules intended to weed out articles that are irrelvent, and deemed not news worthy have to weed out articles that have value to many people. Please reconsider your actions to delete this story. NBABUCKS1

Chicago White Sox clinch playoff spot

abandoned --Cspurrier 12:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Soham murderer Huntley to serve 40 years

abandoned --Cspurrier 12:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Student revolt at Metropolitan University of the Cape

abandoned --Cspurrier 12:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Rihanna jams into GameCube

abandoned --Cspurrier 12:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Rare eclipse to appear over Eastern Hemisphere

abandoned --Cspurrier 12:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

HD-DVD delayed until early 2006

abandoned --Cspurrier 12:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

No debt cancellation for Hurricane Katrina victims

sources are old, no longer news --Cspurrier 12:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC) See thats not really true, itswould still be news. However, I'm reasoonably sure I put up a version of this story a while back, so its not news in the sence that we've already covered it.  :) - Nyarlathotep 03:41, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

18 poor nations will get debt cancellation.

sources are old, no longer news --Cspurrier 12:37, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Controversy over statements of first DeLay grand jury's foreman

Original source for the artcile does not exist -- Herda05 16:22, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

• I can't actually find evidence of the statements in question.
• There's only one statement that I can directly find reference to through newspaper accounts, and it has conflicting context provided that disagrees with the article's assertions.
• ""Delete"" - I can't find the source either. - Nyarlathotep 16:54, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

October 1

Threats...

for obvious reasons. proably should have been speedy, but wasn't sure—Bawolff 00:32, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

• It has met Speedy Deletion requirements, and has been deleted per them. --Mrmiscellanious 12:30, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

September 29

President Awards Medal of Honor to Korea War Vet, Tibor Rubin

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:57, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Pearl Harbor Hero Welch also First Mach Triple Ace

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Joran van der Sloot, suspect in Holloway case, target of death threats

Not news and getting old almost abandoned --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Rumors speculate Microsoft purchasing AOL from Time Warner

Older not news story --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Outraged Lebanese protest against attempted murder of journalist

poorly writen, npov --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Google celebrates 7th birthday, as indicated by front page

Notnews --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Rebuilding New Orleans and Southern Louisiana could be risky if drastically eroded Delta Region is not rebuilt

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Earthquake in Southern California

Abandoned --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Google enters 'The Big Five League'

No sources --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

New Facts Relevant to Supreme Court Nomination

No sources, doubtful it can become a story except maybe by merging it with some thing else --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Swiss Inventioneering Architecture Exhibit and Lecture Comes to San Francisco in October

No sources & press release . --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Investors ask: Should Microsoft Buy Google?

Notnews & no sources --Cspurrier 12:55, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

September 25

Disaster humor

Not really news. It's great and all, but it's not news. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

• delete AnyFile 11:53, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Image:Beach_Wreak_no_Dialogue.jpg

Image that cannot really be used on any article. —MESSEDROCKER (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

• delete AnyFile 11:53, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Unvollkommene Immunsysteme helfen Autoimmunkrankheiten zu vermeiden

Not english. I know this isn't the right place for trans-wiki's, but where am i suposed to put them.

• Transwiki to apropriate language, obviously. Bawolff 08:34, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
• Already there. So, delete. --Deprifry|*T* 09:03, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
• Source and other templates seem to work only within the English wiki... So Do not delete (until source templates are transferred to German section). --172.176.150.76 14:25, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
• Changed the "Sources" manually... Can be deleted now. If somebody knows how to introduce the appropriate templates to the German section of wikinews, please "complete" the section. --172.176.150.76 14:36, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

ISPs terminate credit card fraud Web sites

abandoned--Cspurrier 04:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Rumors speculate Microsoft purchasing AOL from Time Warner

abandoned--Cspurrier 04:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

• and a dupe — Microsoft, Time Warner talk on partnership. Delete Bawolff 04:25, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep the Rumors speculate Microsoft purchasing AOL from Time Warner as a PREPARED story (see tagging). Delete the other (Microsoft, Time Warner talk on partnership), this dupe should've been here earlier. --Mrmiscellanious 04:33, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

what's wrong with the other one (Microsoft, Time Warner talk on partnership)? It seem's perfectly publishable to me. Bawolff 08:37, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

• It was created after the article, and all the information from it was merged into the other one (which is also perfectly "publishable"), however - it is just a rumor right now. --Mrmiscellanious 20:19, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Mush, Manmohan meet trapped in a logjam

abandoned--Cspurrier 04:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Federer wins the US Open of tennis

abandoned--Cspurrier 04:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Former Australian opposition leader opposed US alliance

abandoned--Cspurrier 04:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Karl Rove placed in charge of Katrina reconstruction

abandoned--Cspurrier 04:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Rumors speculate Microsoft purchasing AOL from Time Warner

abandoned--Cspurrier 04:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC) This is up here twice. see above. Bawolff 08:38, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

The Lancet against the arms trade

abandoned--Cspurrier 04:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

September 23

category:Astronomy

More or less duplicate of category:Space with fewer articles.Neutral Bawolff 22:27, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

• Keep: I disagree that this category should be abandoned. Perhaps redefined and some new direction. There is quite a bit of activity with space exploration that involves technology and groups of people that are building spacecraft, doing robotic missions, and getting into political issues that can cost many billions of dollars every year. Astronomy is more a specific scientific disclipline that happens to be the observation of distant objects and information about the skies. That people are now going to places (like the Moon) that were previously only the study of astronomers is besides the point. Astronomers may be a part of some robotic missions to distant planets (like the Cassini mission to Saturn) but the X-Prize Cup in New Mexico will have almost no participation by astronomers except perhaps as strong fans for the event and some of the companies involved. That is clearly something for the "Space" category and not "Astronomy". A discovery of a supernova going off in the Magenellic Clouds would be a story for "Astronomy" and not "Space", except perhaps as a side note regarding the Hubble Telescope being used for observations of the object. --Robert Horning 22:44, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
• IMO A discovery of a supernova going off in the Magenellic Clouds would be a story for space because it happened in space. However It could easily be redefined as you said above, so I withdraw my delete vote to neutral. Bawolff 22:57, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

• What do you think of how the changes to the pages went?Bawolff 23:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

September 19

Australian leader planned end of US alliance

The content of this article is duplicated at Former Australian opposition leader opposed US alliance. The article name is also wildly misleading. Um, I'm not sure if I should merge and redirect... in my opinion the article name is just plain wrong and should cease to exist. -- Borofkin 03:44, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree. The article title is very misleading. It should be deleted a.s.a.p. --Wm 21:26, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

September 18

Many nations offer, Bush accepts, material aid to hurricane victims

Abandoned, regretfully. --Chiacomo (talk) 20:15, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

ISPs terminate credit card fraud Web sites

Abandoned. --Chiacomo (talk) 20:15, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Did some work, removed tag for now. Thanx 69.142.2.68 04:47, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

September 17

India, Pakistan to exchange prisoners today

Abandoned. -- user:zanimum

Maine on standby for refugees of Hurricane Katrina

Abandoned. --Chiacomo (talk) 03:09, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as above. -- user:zanimum

Tropical storm could reflood New Orleans: Hurricane Center Director =

Abandoned, not an article as it stands. --Chiacomo (talk) 03:12, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as above. -- user:zanimum
• Delete. Content merged with Florida Keys evacuated. -Edbrown05 19:27, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

September 16

Who took George Bush to the woodshed

Simple editorial, which is not permitted on Wikinews. —Brent Dax (talk) 22:25, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, should have been speedy. -- user:zanimum

Category:Entertainers

{{Dr}} added 14 June by NGerda "" - Amgine/^talk 05:40, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, if anything it should be the broader term of celebrities. -- user:zanimum

Category:Crime

{{Dr}} added 9 May by DouglasGreene "Deletion request" - Amgine/^talk 05:35, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, surprised it exists when Crime and law also does. -- user:zanimum

Category:Civil War

{{Dr}} added 9 May by DouglasGreene "Deletion request" - Amgine/^talk 05:30, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, if a Civil War in some country gains enough articles, the category should be specific to the exact name of the specific Civil War. -- user:zanimum

Dogs being shot by law enforcement in New Orleans

{{Dr}} added 14 Sept. by Cmwhite "am going to incorporate this into another article" - Amgine/^talk 05:22, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

There is already a DR for that article a few paragraphs below, just under its old title. --Deprifry 05:27, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Category:Askar Akayev

{{Dr}} added 9 May by DouglasGreene "Requesting deletion" - Amgine/^talk 05:27, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

September 14

First Nestorian search engine goes online

Copyvio --Deprifry 14:51, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Contributor has indicated that he is the Original author. --Deprifry 17:56, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

• I agree that it's a copyright vio, but think we should give the author time to fix that before deleting. StuRat 15:22, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Law Enforcement Shooting Dogs in New Orleans, LA

Doesn't need to be a story in its own right: have incorporated the story and source into Katrina survivor searchers prepare for the worst as part of the background on the aftermath. ClareWhite 09:03, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. StuRat 15:14, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Good move StuRat. -Edbrown05 16:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC) Pardon me, ClareWhite, good move. -Edbrown05 17:33, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Do Not Delete.. I feel the article is shocking enough to warant its own piece, and will likely be ignored/missed in a larger/older article.
  • Has this person not heard of the word "Keep"? -- user:zanimum
• Delete. Not much to say about this story. —Brent Dax (talk) 08:20, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, too short. -- user:zanimum

September 12

Eyewitness account of Katrina aftermath

Editorial not in a user space, as well as a copyvio. --Mrmiscellanious 10:40, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

This is an eyewitness account, not an editorial. It is not a copy violation, as it is not a copyright protected text published elsewhere. Okay, I concede - you have provided proof of Copyvio I was ignorant of. Sorry. Delete it.

I got this as a forward and it had been made freely available for use anywhere. I would call it an {{Eyewitness}} rather than an editorial and move it. See watercooler. ClareWhite 09:12, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I've moved the body of it to Portal:Disasters_and_accidents/Eyewitness_accounts/Katrina_aftermath_Bradshaw_and_Slonsky and will move others there too. They can be used as sources there and the page can be given a link on the new orleans disaster box, i guess. ClareWhite 09:50, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

OK, as long as it's used as a source. I was sure I read that account somewhere and was suspicious... <shifty eyes> --Mrmiscellanious 10:42, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Yeh, I had too, but it was fairly clearly released for general use by anyone so that makes it OK doesn't it? Anyway, you could delete the original story now if you wanted? ClareWhite 12:50, 15 September 2005 (UTC) Do not delete this, Using something like a headline about katrina survivors prepare for the worse necessarily renders this story too second page news. I clicked to see the video because I thought that it was newsworthy and interesting. It deserves to be a news article in its own right and not fall under the rubric of "the day after."