yeah, 108 references, and so what do they do? Says the references to NYTimes, Reuters, CNN, Chomsky, ABC etc. etc. are original research. riiiight.
Honestly though, it is the good and natural instinct of editors/admins (I make admins distinct from editors bc their perspectives are different on deletions) to want to delete articles that aren't written very well or seem to be POV at first glance. And this article certainly fits that bill, and it may need a total rewrite in some sections. But that is no justification for arguing that accusations (carried by book publishers and news organizations no less) of state terror are just some nutty fringe idea that isn't worth having an article on.
On 6/26/07, jayjg jayjg99@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/26/07, Anthony wikimail@inbox.org wrote:
On 6/25/07, Slowking Man slowkingman@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/State_terrorism...
I have no comment.
I have one.
Wow, 108 references.
This "State Terrorism" article had almost 80 references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_acts_labelled_as_state_ter...
However only a tiny number of them actually referred to "State terrorism". Go figure.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l