Ed Poor wrote
I beg to differ. It's one of the 3 most significant
speeches of George
W. Bush's career, and if it's propaganda then we SHOULD
have an article
in which some political expert SAYS it's propaganda.
I suspect the motive to "delete" is really
censorship, i.e., the desire
to make it harder for Wikipedians to find out what Bush
is saying about
world affairs. Part of this dovetails with the Kerry campaign's POV, the
constant refrain that Bush has nothing of substance to say about Iraq or
anything else for that matter.
A major service Wikipedia provides is to bring hidden
facts to light. If
one politician says "My opponent A has NEVER spoken about
X", then it
can make a big difference to our readers whether a quick Wikipedia
search turns up:
* nothing by A about X, or
* an obscure reference
by A about X, or
* a public speech by A to a major world body about X
Not my country, not my politics. There is a prima facie case that anything
a President of the USA says or does might be significant.
BUT - Ed, your argument is really that WP should be in a state so that it
can be used as a rebuttal machine, by party-political Americans. I see no
reason that it should be. I don't think that that is the project I'm
working on; and it looks to me that it would just make matters worse, from
the point of view of partisan people trying to get 'their' points in.
I would have thought that major speeches on foreign policy find their
natural home in narratives of international events.