Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 November 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Templates for deletion‎ | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Psivapalan (talk | contribs) at 16:34, 18 November 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< November 14 November 16 >

November 15

Template:Cold War

Template:Cold War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Del this monstrous and obtrusive template arbitrarily packed with events. It only waste of download bandwidth. A List of Cold War related articles (which may include much more and structured in a similar way) and Category:Cold War would do the navigational job even better and in a less obtrusive way. `'mikkanarxi 21:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Campaignbox State terrorism in Sri Lanka

Template:Campaignbox State terrorism in Sri Lanka (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This templates title has no supportive source. The template just tries to demonize the Sri Lankan Government. The list of people given on the template may actually have been victims of the on going civil war in Sri Lanka but it is no reason, to include baseless facts in a wikipedia article.  «₪Mÿš†íc₪»  (T) 13:01, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment:Please make an argument based on the follwing 1)The template is not helpful or noteworthy (encyclopaedic); T 2)the template is redundant to another better-designed template; 3)The template is not used (note that this cannot be concluded from the absence of backlinks, it may be used with "subst:");4) The template isn't NPOV (editors must demonstrate that the template cannot be modified to satisfy this requirement);. When nominating you have not made any reference to one of the above reasons. Thanks RaveenS 22:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The articles that the template links to have hundreds of sources linking each and every evidence. Indeed the list of victims were killed, with strong supporting evidence to point to Sri Lankan government involvement and complicity. Elalan 13:53, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"strong supporting evidence" is a vague term, we need facts, and not suspicions, only proven victims should be included, where either a local court or a independent judicial recognised body, or a international court of law has found the government guilty of the alleged crimes. If there was "strong supporting evidence", then any judicial body should have found the guilty parties but most of the links like Taraki, have never been proven, with people like Colonel Karuna alleging that the LTTE itself commited the murder.Kerr avon 09:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: "wide acceptance" is not a NPOV term and not a fact. There is a ongoing investigation with scotland yard involved and till it concludes no one can make any certain allegations.Kerr avon 09:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep Nadarajah Raviraj is just one article that shows user Lahiru's above "so called reason for deletion" to be false along with many humarights abuses and extrajudicial killings. The murder of this politician is widely attributed to be an example of state terrorism (please see the article with referenced sources) that is featured on the front page. Elalan 20:24, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Again "widely attributed" is vague, not a NPOV term and not a fact. Just because the eelamists and the LTTE sympathisers and a few extremists howl that it maybe state sponsered doesnt make it a fact or worthy of inclusion. There is a ongoing investigation with scotland yard involved and till it concludes no one can make any certain allegations.Kerr avon 09:56, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • Comment: Using the sham Sri Lankan judicial system ? Sri Lanka has the second greatest number of people missing behind that of Iraq and Sri Lanka has been widely accused of state terrorism by Asian Human Rights Commission and perpetrating numerous war crimes. Elalan 21:38, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well the UN just categorically said Sri Lanka after Burma is the only country that recruits children for war.[1] That is one aspect of its State terrorism. Number of disappeared people is second to Iraq as cited in the Human Rights in Sri Lanka article. If you read State terrorism article, it is clear we don’t need court cases to prove State terrorism. What we need is proper neutral citations from reputable sources such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, US state department reports and UN agency reports. If you couple it international neutral media reports such as BBC, CNN and ABC along with local Human Rights groups and media reports you can categorically list State terrorism by any country. RaveenS 15:45, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above commentator convinently forgets to mention that it is the LTTE which has ben accused by countless reputed international bodies of recruiting child Soldiers. The above report he highlighted is just one mans view, and his (Mr rock's) further statement like "Mr Rock said the fact that Sri Lankan troops were complicit in the recruitment of child soldiers meant that Tamil Tiger rebels would continue to do so, as it corroded the rule of law." shows that Mr Rock may have a hidden agenda trying to use this justify the LTTE's recruitment of child soldiers and questions his credibility. This is just one mans view and has not been justified by any international bodies findings. The SLMM were here for a long time and it is strange why they have not made these observations, which further questions the reliability of this mans reports. Please do not use this unsubstantiated allegation as a example of state terrorism it does not befit this encyclopadia. As the commentator said we need neutral sources not the sites run by the eelam lobby or single reports. Any person can go to a news agency and say anything, but that does not make it worthy of citation in a encyclopaedia like this.Kerr avon 12:05, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very Strong Keep -Many people consider these things acts of state terror,we should keep this. Also,Sri Lanka has lost the second highest number of people to state terror after Iraq.
  • comment that is because we have the most ruthles terrorist organization on the face of the earth. The way LTTEers acting now, i wouldnt be surprised even if we come first in the list.

--Iwazaki 11:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Comment:Also,we can find any act of state terror we need to refer easily on the template.Donnyt 02:10, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment and what if all these allegations are false,as i and others have pointed out here ?? Should we still keep it,so we can deceive the whole world ??

--Iwazaki 11:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • Comment:Are you saying the subject matter is POV or the template is POV. If it is the subject matter, then it has been resolved over 3 AFD’s and is similar in nature to Armenian Genocide. The subject mater might be controversial to all most all (but not all) Turkish historians and the government and its supporters in the Wikipedia but it is not to rest of us. If the Template itself is POV in your mind then can you help us with ideas to make it NPOV. As an encyclopedia, how do we guide our readers who might be casual readers, researchers, NGO or UN officials looking for information about these subject matters to related events such as massacres, rapes and murders, assassinations and forced disappearances which are all different aspects of State terrorism. If we can do that in a so called NPOV I am all for it RaveenS 13:08, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not for any other reason, its POV and not all the sources are independent, the sources themselves are questionable, I am not saying these people are not victims of war, the fact is the government never asked a soldier to rape a women or kill civilians, (without objection its the government duty to take action against them), in that case wikipedia servers wouldn't be enough to list all the people killed because of Khmer Rouge, Saddam Hussein, George W Bush (not to mention the LTTE massacre of Muslims in Baticloa and Jaffna Sri Lanka) etc.  «₪Mÿš†íc₪»  (T) 16:01, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the reason that Wikipedia will not have enough room about Khmer Rouge and Saddam Hussein is a very poor one because we have no such Wikipedia policies regarding server capacities and what can be and cannot be write based on such server capacities. Second State terrorism explains what is state terrorism and what is not. Rapes and murders done by soldiers not sanctioned by a state becomes State terrorist action only when impunity is assumed by the perpetrators because the judicial system is assumed to favor them. About your comments on citations, if you claim some citation are questionable why don’t you fix such citations. Thanks RaveenS
Also it should be pointed out you are voting again becuse you nominated this template, your delete comment should be a comment under your initial nomination. Note to admin: Please disregard the abouve delete coment from the total count. Thanks RaveenS

'*Delete': per nom. Psivapalan 16:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very Strong Keep The article is important in detailing infomation that is NPOV and usually sourced to highly credible organisations such as Amnesty International. Deleting this article is falling into the systematic approach to clear Wikipedia of articles and infomation that highlight the attrocities that have been commited in the Sri Lankan ethnic conflict and falls into none of the conventions for deletion. --Sharz 04:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: not it isnt..most of the sources are not credible at all.WSW is a ambigous source and write fairy tales. And there is no proof that the government was involved in the jaffna library burning nor in the 1983 riots.Involvement of ministers in the library incident is a merely a tamil propaganda, which has been debunked by some tamil politicians,such as late Mr Amirthalingam.His wife clearly stated that, gamini dissanayake was not involved in that incident.Iwazaki 06:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment both the article and the template are POV.. template is POV,because GOSL did not involve in the following actions.
1 jaffna library
2 black july
further, this article has attributed every mishap/unfortunate mistakes happened during the war against LTTE as a act of terrorism. Mistakes happens in every war, even Americans with all their advance technology made terrible mistakes in war ,such as bombing the chinese embassy in former yugoslavia..Is this an act of state terrorism ??? !! So to point out every mishap,as an act of terrorism is totally POV..so you should remove those ambigous incidents from the template.Iwazaki 13:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • speedy Delete,in order to keep wikipedia standard this article is totally PVO.Not only that most of the data is based on some biased sites such as "WSW(world socialism web)" ,whose hidden agendas are clearly visible when you read the articles carefully..Also, what is most amazing to me is that, state terrosim is used as a tool by LTTE to justify their killings of innocent sinhalese/muslims/or even tamils(they called it representing (their)tamils).See the article about prabhakaran here. But so far, no has able to show any evidence about state terrorism before the inception of LTTE !!! LTTE was started in around 1974 and did their first murder in 1976, WHEN the so called state terrorism did not exist at all !! how can you say LTTE represent tamils against state terrorism ,when it was them who first started killing tamil politicians !!! so with simple logic,we can argue that all the government actions against ltte was due to the LTTE terrorism.
also, the this article does not qualify to be in the wikipedia.Simply because it is highly ambiguous..most of the articles,are based on some actions of SLA and they are very specious.cases such as mass graves were never proven, though GOSL had spent a lot of our tax money for the investigations.
if the actions by a single army personal can atribute to the state and hence call it state terriorism, we should name every country in the world as terrorist states !! And no army in the world can fight against terrorist or no police in the world can combat robbers.The world should be a free place to all the terrorists so they can send friendly suicide bombers every day, or thieves who can steal as they wish.May be thats what the editors of this article want to say.Iwazaki 06:12, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think you are confusing the article with the template. This is not a soapbox please tell us your reason why this template should be deleted or modified. Thanks RaveenS 13:14, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment nope. i think both should be thrown to the dustbin. reason?? i have given it already.Iwazaki 13:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You can say that these are 'slipups' and 'accidents' or can be attributed to particular people or units, however Amnesty and the U.S State Department, has described this as a 'systematic form of Terror based on the grounds of ethnicity'. I would rather believe the United States Government and Amnesty International over the GoSL and the Sri Lankan Army.
  • Very Strong Keep: The article should definitely stay as it projects a perfect NPOV of the Sri Lankan crisis. Leaving aside pointless trivial comments on space and other unrelated reasons, I definitely think that Wiki is not a place where people cannot raise concern against the government or internationally established bodies/institutions. Anything done in compliance with Wiki rules is absolutely fine. For example, this BBC article pointing to 'Sri Lankan govt recruiting children to fight against LTTE' very simply and aptly provides definitive evidence against State sponsored terrorism in Sri Lanka. Many other pages with international media coverage such as the Black July pogrom and a number of other massacres and most recently the FA on Nadarajah Raviraj all point to the simple and understandeable truth about State sponsored terrorism in Sri Lanka. As per Wiki's very own standards such as NPOV, Verifiability and other related concepts - this article/series is a must-stay and a very strong keep in Wikipedia. I honestly wonder why this article is even featured in this column. The effort to have such a perfect NPOV and verifiable page deserves encouragement than having a set of people criticizing it. Hats off to all editors who have taken efforts to compile info on the State sponsored terrorism and let this perfect Wiki page continue. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudharsansn (talk • contribs)
Comment should those war crimes be in this highly ambiguous template ?? And if those war crimes are actually mistakes happened during the war, when the GOSL was protecting its citizens against this brbaric LTTE , shouldnt we remove this ambiguous template ??Iwazaki 13:43, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
CommentWhat is Ambiguous about this template ?RaveenS
Comment: I was about to ask that too. What is ambiguous about this template? Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 16:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
comment scroll up and read what i've written already

--Iwazaki 06:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • Delete the template, keep the article Leotolstoy 16:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC). The article is definitely important and should not be removed. But template is useless as it links to various parts of the article and is not useful.[reply]
Comment:Various parts of the article ?. I dont understand, it links many different articles not within one article. I hope this clarifies your concern. ThanksRaveenS 17:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As pointed out earlier, this template is extremely useful to categorize all the articles under one banner. Otherwise it is a very tedious task to search for incidents, especially some old ones. The template serves primarily as a one-stop point for this article/category. Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 16:57, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above editors only edit is to vote here 216.95.23.95 05:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment how'bout this [2]

and this [3] Also,please sign in, without using your (anonymous) canadian IP,if you are sincere in making any proper arguments.

--Iwazaki 10:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • comment I had merely asked users to come and look at this page. I didn't even ask a vote nor expect one from them. The way it was done by pro Government supporters, it was transparent means of lobbying for delete votes. Elalan 15:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Looks like people are using internet kiosks/browsing centres to just leave in one-line comments and increase their POV further. Please engage in discussions here and state reasons why this should be removed than really trivial and unformatted 'delete' and 'keep'. That's the whole essence of Wiki and it is strange that WP is being quoted by anon IPs to delete this article. This is a place to verify and correct our reasoning and not bogus out each other with numbers. I see that same users have left multiple comments only to make it appear larger in number. Engage in discussions and get the best out of it. Thanks Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 07:26, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete: The template is completely NPOV and potentially libellous so it should be deleted. This is a encyclopaedia and is meant to represent facts and not conjectures and unproven allegations. We are talking about a legitimate people appointed body which is the government of sri lanka, hence we should be carefull about unsubstantiated allegations especially if we want to continue to maintain the quality of the wiki. One weakness is this template contains numourous links to yet unwritten articles, which degrades its quality. Take Raviraj, it has not been proven by any legitimate investigating team that it was state sponsered terrorism. Its just a conjecture by the eelamists and others, and such controversial points cannot be used unless they are proven facts. So by adding that to a template it is implying that the government of sri lanka sponsered the assasination which is completely libellous and not NPOV at all. We need facts and not theoretisations for a encyclopaedia. Most of the links in that template like kumar ponnambalam(no article yet exists), Joseph pararjasingham (nothing was proven to implicate the state), Taraki Sivaram(again nothing at all exists to prove that the state was involved, on the contrary the former LTTE commander Colonel Karuna categorically stated that the LTTE intelligence wing chief Pottu Amman was behind the assaination[4]) are completely libellous and NPOV. The template with its many links to unwritten articles, and unsubstantiated, disputed and libellous allegations against a legitimate goverment of a country does not fit the critieria of a responsible encyclopaedia and should be speedily deleted. A article can instead exist which can be edited to a NPOV, but this template is completely POV of the eeelam lobby and LTTE sympathisers,and has no place in the wikipedia which is heavily referenced and is a very popular resource. I would kindly request the authorities to make a speedy deletion of the template in question in the best interests of maintining the quality of the encyclopaedia.Kerr avon 09:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It is pretty sad to note that an entire template which has been created based on completely verifiable information from the International media is being called as a piece of joke by claiming that people are operating against the govt of Sri Lanka. It seems like some kind of big-time inferiority complex by the opposition when it comes to reading cited information on everything being quoted in the pages. The Black July pogrom, the numerous massacres and almost everything else. Aren't there cited pages in Wikipedia against established governments including USA, India, United Kingdom and literally every other nation? Is Wiki some kind of a United Nations information wing in which people cannot write about established bodies/governments/institutions? Do note that the article has also been appended and edited by so many Non-South-Asian editors also, which clearly means that there are no vested interests and that they are only citing information and not manipulating it? Considering that Wiki strongly follows WP:5P and that it is not some governmental agency trying to put forth diplomatic information, all free-minded Wiki editors would definitely agree that this article/template should stay as it is to maintain the perfect NPOV of the Sri Lankan crisis. Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 10:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


  • Comment: How can you justify inclusion of the Raviraj link in the template when bodies like the Colombo-based International Center for Strategic Defense (ICSD) in there detailed analyis conclude that prime source for the assasination was the LTTE [5]. It shows that there is dispute and disputed links or templates which are not factual should not be allowed. Scotland yard is investigating the murder, I am sure that even the most die hard eelamist's will not question Scotland yards unbiasedness, so lets wait for the investigation to finish before making POV allegations.Editing by Non south asian editors does not make a article valid, and neither does it make that there are no vested interests. Once again this template is in no way NPOV, it has disputed claims which are completely unsubstantiated by reliable sourcers, and potentially libellous.Kerr avon 10:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: You keep mentioning Scotland Yard is investigating the matter, but I don't see any citations from a reliable source. This argument is meant to show the government idea of being responsible but with empty claims. Numerous sources have pointed the murder took place opposite Military Police HQ. The Sri Lankan govt. doesn't recognize international treaties according to judgement paseed by its so called sham supreme court. The country by no means is yardstick to measure democracy,human rights or pluralism. It has utterely failed in all three. It ranks 25th among what are considered "failed states." [6], beside Rwanda, where there was genocide resulting in loss of more than 1 million people and Ethiopia which lost many more millions due to starvation, war and ethnic cleansing. In such a situation where the country is considered close to being ungovernable, Sri Lankan justice, law, police investigation is all largely unreliable. In addition, through sri lanka's supreme court and govt. action, it appears it doesn't even recognize the International Criminal Court. It is well know the justice or what left of it is highly politicized and has become a tool to settle scores between politicians. Sri Lanka doesn't fare well in the corruption index [7]. None of what you have said are libellous at all, since no new claim is made. These are merely claims made reliable/respactable news sources that just happens to be against your POV. We are not creative enough to make this up, this is what is published in world's leading new sources. Elalan 15:07, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Colombo-based International Center for Strategic Defense (ICSD) is hardly a credible source. It is well known to be a Sri Lankan govt. think tank. Can you show supporting evidence of its International merit, other than its work showing on the dubious Asian Tribune. Surely something respectable from a think tank would get published in a peer reviewed journal, why was it only published in Asian Tribune blog site ? Elalan 15:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Every time you use the terms Colombo-based, Govt-sources to support your side of the story, it is quite a joke. I don't think any govt in this world including that of my own country is ready to claim that their activities are tagged as 'State Terrorism'. Not a shred of evidence in support of the Sri Lankan govt in all articles coming under the template. Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 15:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete POV template which refers to an entirely unsourced use of the term "state terrorism". Contravenes WP:V, WP:NOR and is wholly unhelpful to readers, rather it is leads readers towards a particular point of view by its very title and selection of articles. Delete without question.--Zleitzen 15:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment:Contrary what has mentioned, the articles within the series clearly establish, "Sri Lankan govt sponsored state terrorism" is not original research. The title merely categories a whole series of events, that under wikipedia categorization fits "state terrorism" among other things. Elalan 15:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The article categories a whole series of events - indeed it does. It categorises them as "state terrorism". Clearly a non-neutral opinion, as others appear to have a different view on these events. Therefore the template cannot remain and stay neutral in accordance with NPOV policy. See also, comments below.--Zleitzen 15:48, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Are notable sources provided that describe each event as state terrorism? And if so where are they on the template? For such a claim should be sourced wherever it is found. Otherwise it is a breach of WP:V and WP:NOR. The problems inherent in this template are surely obvious. --Zleitzen 15:48, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Incorp

Template:Incorp (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This template a single line of text with no special formatting. Maybe it was created to save its creator a tiny amount of typing (in 2004). A simple copy-paste of the text into all 17 of the linked articles will eliminate the need for this template. Delete. -- CobraWiki (jabber|stuff) 07:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:GT

Template:GT (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Deprecated in favor of {{sockpuppet}}. Only incoming links are a redirect, an AV/I archive, and an offhand mention of it on Talk:Cancer. ^demon[yell at me] 06:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Tojo

Template:Tojo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Deprecated in favor of {{sockpuppet}}. No incoming links. ^demon[yell at me] 06:54, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the template below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Speedily deleted as entirely inappropriate for an encyclopedia, violation of WP:NOT a soapbox, unsourced negative allegations about a contemporary business, and attack template. (Radiant) 10:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Fake News Alert

Template:Fake News Alert (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The template asks readers to email the FCC to challenge the license of a TV station that has presumably been airing fake news; that presumption is not even brought up in the articles where it's currently used, e.g. WPIX, WCBS-TV, WJBK, although Google suggests these allegations are from SourceWatch. I'm against fake news as much as the next guy, but asking readers to file a complaint with the FCC certainly isn't NPOV. A link to the allegations would suffice, and Template:SourceWatch would seem to perform that job well. — stickguy (:^›)— || talk || 05:05, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, only to be informative, but it serves the broadcasters right. They use our airwaves and pollute them with "corporate propaganda" (or unnecessary advertisements for news) -- in other words, they can air the ads some time else, just not during the newscast!!! But unfortunately, even then not all of the advertisements are accurate. For example, "Sinclair Terrorizes with I-Porn" [8] -- Pittsburgh's WPGH mentions something about "I-Porn", but what the reporter doesn't tell you is that she's on their payroll of the companies whose products she may or may not be pushing. Another example, "Huey Lewis and the Fake News" [9] -- Los Angeles' KCOP brought in Huey Lewis to fool its viewers into buying a hardly known hearing aid from a rarely known company. The real problem with this is that all identification of the medical firm has been removed by way of VNR. The worst example came Meridian's WTOK in a piece called "Hot Air from WTOK-11" [10] -- In this piece, the VNR from an oil company here is an assault on Katrina victims in Mississippi. Sources such as Free Press, Center for Media & Democracy and of course as stickguy mentioned, SourceWatch and Google all call it "Local Television's Dirty Little Secret" for a reason!!! There are at least 111 stations reaching well over a third of the country airing fake news -- Sinclair, Disney, CBS and News Corporation are among the worst violators. This is part of the result of a corporate empire that values profit over the public interest!!! It is just ridiculous and cruel how they can take advantage of our airwaves this way. They should be ashamed of themselves!!! We need to do whatever it takes to come up with new ways to get the point across... Wouldn't you agree??? It is after all, only the right thing to do!!! Now I have a great deal of enthusiasm for The E.W. Scripps Company and especially their lighthouse logo -- but I was upset to find out that Cincinnati's WCPO had also engaged in such activity. This is an absolute disgrace!!! But there's more -- many stations have aired fake news on more than one occasions and unfortunately some more than others according to Free Press and the CMD [11] and on November 14 they filed a formal complaint to the Federal Communications Commission. If nothing else, perhaps we can come up with a way to merge the two templates and convert it into a "super-template" -- all this so we can monitor the activity of our stations and at the same time, file our own complaints to the FCC and (if we wish) asked that the stations' licenses are challenged. Now personally I think they should just have their licenses revoked!!! I hope you consider something reasonable or at least notify me if and when you do delete the template. This is a very important issue. I was just trying to help out in the situation... Please consider my statements!!! --WIKISCRIPPS 07 WED NOV 15 2006 11:22 AM EST
  • Now wait a minute, before you do that -- let's try to compromise!!! This is after all a very serious issue and I believe everybody at Wikipedia should know!!! Let's just talk this through!!! --WIKISCRIPPS 07 WED NOV 15 2006 8:08 PM EST
If you can find verifiable information that these stations have been airing fake news, then include it in the article as part of the text. --tjstrf talk 01:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's against NPOV for us to advocate anything, including emailing the FCC. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 04:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Of course. To clarify, I meant that if you can cite it properly, you can include information about their broadcasting fake news in the article, not that you can advocate whining to the FCC. Sorry about that. --tjstrf talk 04:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's easy! Free Press and the CMD have on display a map of stations that have been documented and by clicking on a "dot" will open up another page with videos you can watch. The videos are in QuickTime format. Click here to go there... In addition, I already enclosed three links to WTOK, WPGH and KCOP. I hope I'm getting your attention... Meanwhile I will look into the matters on SourceWatch and will add them to the articles in the immediate future... --WIKISCRIPPS 07 WED NOV 15 2006 11:50 PM EST
Using their newscasts as a source for their being fake news directly will violate our policy against including original research in articles. Be careful with that. --tjstrf talk 05:03, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

Template:LetsSingIt

Template:LetsSingIt (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

The entire purpose for this template is to create links to copy-vio material. WP:C and WP:EL both prohibit such links. ---J.S (t|c) 03:42, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Disclaimer: I've orphaned this template... it had 54 translations before I did so. ---J.S (t|c) 03:45, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_November_15&oldid=88637430"