text:
Comments:Senate Committee hears bailout proposal

Hell... No...
What are we going to teach our kids if the feds step in for 700 BILLION dollars. "Look kiddies, if you fuck up bad enough, the government will step in and save your ass. Never mind the fact that everyone knew those loans were a bad idea in the first fucking place". Oh, and then there is the fact that the treasury dept is getting way too much power. -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 04:01, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

When I was growing up credit cards were rare and the credit taken out by 'ordinary people' was to buy a house or car, and perhaps a payment scheme to get things out some catalogue. You never heard of people taking out loans to have two holidays a year. The view from this side of the pond is that being a homeowner was integrated into the American dream as well as the concept being sold as a sure-fire investment. I tend to think, "wasn't the Mac and Mae nationalisation enough? Doesn't the bailout of wealthy investors show that unfettered capitalism relies on misery for the common man?"

In 1966, Seven percent of the UK's population owned 84% of the wealth; the U.S. wasn't much better, and the statistics have got even worse. Is this bailout not just going to help keep this morally repugnant status-quo in place? --Brian McNeil / talk 14:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

It's amazing what this criminal administration wants from its people. I would have Congress pose this question to W. "Either Iraq or Wall St., not both!"

The Bushies do not care how deep in debt it has pushed the American people, even deeper if we allow this bailout. Bushies don't care if they have violated and/or revoked your Constitutional rights. Bushies don't care if they betrayed a CIA operative to create a civil war in another country and terrorize its populace. Bushies don't care how they have set up our service men and women to fail by sacrificing their lives in a war with no end. Bushies don't care if they win the war at all as long as the military industrial complex is profiting from it. Bushies DO care if their friends are on the hook for their losses due to the greed and corruption that has plagued this nation.

Now, Congress must act quickly to save the potential fall out and give the Treasury without any safeguards or oversight and don't question how things are done. My god is there no limit to the abuse this redneck inflicts on this country? The "Hurry up and get it done" attitude displayed by the administration has demonstrated once again the failure of Bush policy. This president will leave this office thinking he has done a good job. That is because he lacks a soul or conscience to guide him.

The only thing positive about this situation i s that the voters now must take an active part in their government or suffer the consequences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.76.128.217 (talk) 16:10, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I may be a simple American citizen, ignorant to the real facts and fallout issues if we don't bail these investment companies out.

My understanding is that the "everyday Joe and Jane citizen" will be paid back for the losses in their investments. I DON'T think the Government is thinking about saving the investment companies themselves- At least I would pray that isn't the case!!

I can say one thing for darn sure... If even ONE of these CEO's or investment managers are paid a flippin' dime from the tax payers bailout money, our country is heading toward a revolution and I will be on the front lines. Holy Mother!! Let me say that again!

If even One (1) plastic pocketed, stuffed shirt, pencil neck, Ivory tower, pencil pushing, desk jockey, money manipulating, non-contributing, xxxhole receives a thin dime of tax payers money, I would go out of my mind.

Please, someone with a background and complete understanding of this bailout reply with an explanation...

I may have to start organizing the troops —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.19.230.138 (talk) 16:16, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Organize the troops. This is a bad idea. Every single person I've talked to about this is against it. Not a peep in favor. An investment broker for a bank, a guy who puts together safe investment packages for nice old people, wants this to go away. The essence is this: morally and fiscally irresponsible. This devalues the hard work and good decisions of everyone else for a select few who are holding our economy hostage. This is not a partisan issue. $700 billion dollars is one TENTH of all currency currently in America. This isn't a bailout--it's a hijacking. 216.231.159.16 01:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad to see so many other people against this. Btw, if you live in the U.S., contact your friggin' representative. Fephisto (talk) 01:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Ehh..
We really need to reconsider our efforts in capitalism. If this is the payout after nearly 100 years of Fed Reserve control, it is time to try something new. Influxing cash into a broken system will only point out the leaks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaidennett (talk • contribs) 23:23, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

FDIC ain't broke
The FDIC says nothing is wrong : http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2008/pr08084.html meaning they're happy to keep handling troubled banks by taking control of them, paying off the depositors, selling off the functional components, etc. So what is the point of Paulson's bailout?

Paulson wants to buy only the bad debts, not the whole bank. FDIC bailouts needn't cost huge amounts of money, as you get the good with the bad, and you sell the assets off again at full value. However, buying only the bad debt is much more expensive, like 1-4 trillion dollars, and will cause inflation.

Also, we're not even looking at a total economic meltdown here. The Great Depression started when congress created, and maintained for 4 years, a liquidity crisis by deciding that margin trades were immoral and should pay much more interest. No one will be so stupid today. What can happen in modern economies is runaway inflation when foreign investors pull out.

Republicans throw this country into debt whenever they take power because no one calls inflation a tax, plus it doesn't react immediately, and it doesn't hurt their friends as much, but inflation is a tax on people's savings. Inflation is also more dangerous than normal taxes because foreign investors who can't be controlled can cause even worse runaway inflation by exiting the dollar.

To put it most simply, Paulson wants to save Wall St. *from* the FDIC by taxing savings. Only Wall St. bears the risks when the FDIC cleans up since the FDIC can't cause inflation, but everyone bears the risk of an inflationary disaster if congress saves them.

Democrats are trying to mitigate the damage caused by the bailout by installing poison pills, such as limiting the compensation of executives of firms that take the bailout, but honestly I just don't see any need for any bailout given that the FDIC has said they're doing fine. Nyarlathotep (talk) 15:50, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
Comments:President Bush: U.S. respects Pakistan's sovereignty

This is our problem
We get too involved with other countries. Selling them weapons, becoming allies, going to war with them... and we wonder why the world dislikes us (Americans)? -- Poe Joe (Talk) 04:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

But Terrorist can run freely in their county and lunch attack ageist us(totally not invading their sovereignty) But God forbid if the US react thou. --66.229.17.181 04:29, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Pakistan is our ally. Whether or not we believe it's just, we can't attack our allies without their permission. That will only serve to strengthen support for the Taliban. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.46.223.68 (talk) 05:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

the marriot hotel in islamabad incedent.
i think it was an act of cruelty

on the highest level. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.100.82.179 (talk) 00:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

hi president bush i love you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.158.160.4 (talk) 15:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Comments:Stressed plants produce aspirin-like chemical

Even if we know the function of methyl salicylate in plant, we cannot apply it to the pressing event as infaltion or economy depression.

Whoa
This is pretty cool! Nature never ceases to amaze me.--96.252.61.169 11:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
New study claims Stonehenge was a place of healing

September 25, 2008

Archaeologists Timothy Darvill of Bournemouth University and Geoff Wainwright, President of the Society of Antiquaries, claimed to have found evidence that Stonehenge was once a center of healing. In an excavation conducted at the site, a large number of human remains were found that display signs of physical injury or disease. Study of the teeth from the skeletons indicates that about half of them were from outside the area. A large number of bluestone or spotted Preseli dolerite chips found during the excavation led the researchers to conclude the stones were venerated for their healing properties. It is believed that about 80 of such bluestone blocks were transported from the Preseli Hills in Pembrokeshire, Wales to the Salisbury plains. The inner circle of bluestones are the earliest stone structures found in this site. Later bluestones were encircled by the imposing sandstone monoliths of sarsen stones. "It could be that people were flaking off pieces of bluestone, in order to create little bits to take away... as lucky amulets," said Professor Darvill.

Radiocarbon dating indicates that the original bluestone circle was built around 2300 BC. This date coincides with the burial of "Amesbury Archer", whose tomb was discovered near Stonehenge. The skeleton of this man reveals that he had serious knee injury and tooth problems. Researchers therefore conclude that the Archer came to Stonehenge to be healed.

Dating of charcoal fragments revealed that the site was inhabited as early as 7200 BC by groups of hunter-gatherers. This is more than 3500 years earlier than previously known.


text:
User:Vandalismterminator

Well my main aim is to fight vandalism as well as writing a few articles and after a few months join the admin team.

title: User:Vandalismterminator


text:
User talk:83.100.212.100

Welcome
Thanks for experimenting with Wikinews. Your test worked, and has now been reverted or removed. Please use Sandbox for any other tests you want to do, since testing in articles may disrupt the site's working and will be reverted quickly. , welcome to Wikinews! Please refrain from using content pages for testing. Here are a few good links for newcomers on how to edit Wikinews:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 10:48, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how an article should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:83.100.212.100


text:
User talk:82.110.125.82

Welcome
Thanks for experimenting with Wikinews. Your test worked, and has now been reverted or removed. Please use Sandbox for any other tests you want to do, since testing in articles may disrupt the site's working and will be reverted quickly. , welcome to Wikinews! Please refrain from using content pages for testing. Here are a few good links for newcomers on how to edit Wikinews:

Our key policies - if you read anything, read these! Here a few pointers to help you get to know Wikinews: There are always things to do on Wikinews: By the way, you can sign your name on Talk pages using four tildes ( ~~~~ ), which produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, you can ask them at the water cooler or to anyone on the Welcommittee, or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 10:50, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral point of view - tell every side to a story in a fair and balanced way
 * Cite sources - everything in a Wikinews article must be sourced
 * Introduction - overview of the site
 * Writing an article - how to write and publish a complete article
 * Content guide - what's suitable for Wikinews
 * Style guide - how an article should look before publishing
 * Contents - the contents page.
 * Existing articles need expanding and checking for spelling and mistakes
 * The front page lead articles often need updating
 * Developing stories need finishing and publishing
 * Discussions need your input
 * And of course, stories need writing!

title: User talk:82.110.125.82


text:
FBI begins widespread financial probe of 26 firms

September 25, 2008

The FBI is investigating 26 firms and 1,400 individuals involved in the US financial crisis for fraud and "sub-prime lending practices". Freddie Mac, Lehman Brothers, Fannie Mae and AIG are among the firms being scrutinized after recently receiving federal bailouts.

Investigators, who are cooperating with the IRS, Postal Office, and other federal offices to complete their investigation, are concerned that major corporations may have also forced or bribed ratings agencies to favor them.

The probe, which is in early stages, began eight months ago when the FBI began taking a close look at the mortgage industry and widespread irresponsible loaning practices. At least one corporation has been raided, but so far no evidence of fraud has been found.

The FBI has questioned executives of each of the firms closely, and arrested two in June. An anonymous source told The Times that the firms had been ordered to "hold all papers and e-mails under lock and key" as the FBI scours the finances of each firm.

Many of the companies and individuals being investigated are at the center of the nationwide financial crisis and controversial bailout plans, and have been widely blamed for the country's financial crisis. The investigation has come at a time when the eyes of many in the US and around the world are turned towards the financial markets, as Congress and politicians scramble to fix the crisis while the election date looms closer.

Officials told CNN that it would be a long time before the investigations were finished, adding a warning: "Don't expect indictments tomorrow or next week or next month".

Related News

 * Bush addresses nation on economic crisis; Congress debates bailout
 * McCain delays campaign, Obama says continue the debates
 * Senate Committee hears bailout proposal


text:
User talk:Adambro/Archive 4

WN:TO-DO
I have started WN:TO-DO as a place to list what should be daily or weekly points to check for regular contributors. Some parts are admin-only (e.g. Archiving) but others are things that anyone can get involved with. Feel free to add additional points and spread the word about this shortcut to get people helping do Wikignome tasks. --Brian McNeil / talk 15:51, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

WN:A
Sorry about that, I archived a bunch of old stuff at once and archived the latest RfA with it, next time I'll leave the latest closed one up for a while first. Thanks for the note, Cirt - (talk) 16:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Archiving drive
Please see WN:AAA if you would like to help by arcivning just ten articles a day per admin as part of the latest archiving drive. Anonymous101  20:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Archiving
Please make sure you follow WN:ACHIVE when archiving. Anonymous101  20:54, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

 * If I've made a mistake then it would be helpful if you'd highlight what I actually did incorrectly. Adambro - (talk) 20:55, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

My RFA
I am, once again, putting myself up for Rfa. I would appriciate it if you could stop by My RFA and vote. Wheter support or oppose I would appriciate your vote to avoid another situation of having too few votes.-Ryan524 (talk) 23:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution
FYI, Brianmc has gone to WN:DISPUTE over the Mormon un-speedy-keeping issue. I suggest you comment there Anonymous101  18:53, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm aware of this. Adambro (talk) 18:54, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

 * OK. Anonymous101  18:55, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

 * You do not have the authority to assert that an OTRS volunteer has broken Wikimedia Foundation's confidentiality policy with regards to OTRS emails. I would suggest you revert and allow the Communications Committee, who do have the authority to make such decisions, to sort out the issue. As I have told you before, on Deletion requests, you should cease the public assertions of wrongdoing until they have been proven and accepted by those who control and handle issues with the system. Daniel (talk) 07:57, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * No I won't be reverting. The information has been obtained from an OTRS ticket which I'm pretty sure are meant to be kept confidential, as such it has been obtained against WMF rules, I don't need the Communications Committee to assist me there. I never intended in my nomination of the article for deletion to suggest that Brianmc had in any way broke OTRS rules and it is unfortunate that this was misinterpreted. However, it has since been highlighted that Brianmc did release the ticket to Cirt and he subsequently used information from it in writing the article. As such it is now clear that OTRS rules were broken here. Adambro (talk) 08:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Seriously, if you think content has been added improperly and based on a violation of OTRS rules, bring it up on the mailing list. You are hardly neutral enough to be making a decision on this. I'm struggling to understand why you persist in making an issue out of this on-wiki when it could be dealt with far more effectively through the appropriate channels. Could you please approach ComCom and have them decide if a breach has occured rather than continuing to assert that it has been? Daniel (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I "persist in making an issue out of this on-wiki" because it is here on Wikinews that the information has been pubkished. The evidence I've provided is clear, unless anyone is going to suggest otherwise I'm not going to sway from my position that OTRS rules have been broken. I'm not sure what makes me not "neutral enough to be making a decision on this". I will look into at raising this with ComCom since you insist. Adambro (talk) 08:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I've now sent an email to ComCom regarding this. Adambro (talk) 08:52, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

De-adminship
As per custom, I am formally letting you know there is now a discussion to remove your admin rights. TheCustomOfLife (talk) 11:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Blocked
Ive blocked you for a 3rr breach, for 12 hrs. If you want to comment on your de-admining then please post comments here, which i will copy over. --Mark Talk to me 13:17, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I request the removal of my admin rights on this Wiki. Adambro (talk) 21:57, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I wish you would reconsider and perhaps apply for reinstatement. Cheers, --SVTCobra 22:49, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Adminship
Will you please accept your nomination on WN:A. --Brian McNeil / talk 23:06, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

WN:DR
Thanks for updating the Deletion history box at the top of the article's talk page. Cirt (talk) 11:29, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

WN:DISPUTE
I realise you may no longer be interested in this, but nonetheless, you've stated: "I've also raised concerns about his blocking of a user for, if I recall, multiple instances of 1 minute which he justified with something along the lines of it making the user look bad by having a long block log." I have reviewed the block log and found these blocks, but I haven't found any reasons. Where did Brianmc say what you call "something along the lines of it making the user look bad by having a long block log"? Cheers, --SVTCobra 01:17, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

 * See here for the comments about this. If I recall, the "trolling" remark was in response to an image this user uploaded to WN which appeared to be having a little dig at WN. I think it was Alexa wkinews.png. Adambro (talk) 11:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikinews Bulletin
Here is the latest Wikinews bulletin. Enjoy!

Anonymous101  12:21, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Leila Monaghan attributions
Have added, many thanks! Leila Monaghan (talk) 16:16, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Usage note euro
Hi Adam. This is a usage note, which I hope you can help spread as there is still wide confusion about the euro. There is a natural tendency to capitalize the euro, probably because it is not preceded by a country name. It is just like the United States dollar. The dollar is not capitalized and styling the euro, the European euro, is rather redundant. However, what is even less commonly realized, is that the plural of euro is euro. Given the number of European languages there are some issues as noted at linguistic issues concerning the euro, but the official ruling is that it is "euro" both in singular and plural. Cheers, --SVTCobra 00:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

No prosecution for UK minor who called Scientology a 'cult'
Thank you very much for the kind words. I am not sure but I think that both Mark Bunker and Tory Christman may be attending the London protests in July, so that would certainly be quite an interesting event to cover firsthand. And yes I agree with you that after the recent Freedom of speech-related incidents that there could quite possibly be a higher turnout for the June protest, especially in London. As for Scientology articles, yes, I have been trying to only cover the really newsworthy stuff of late, and the way I have been measuring that is by analyzing coverage in secondary sources and press/news/media prior to writing an article on something - though OR is always good too. Thanks again, Cirt (talk) 09:45, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Police arrest two over Exeter bomb explosion
Thanks for getting the related news added to that story while I was away. Blood Red Sandman (Talk)   (Contribs) 19:00, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

there should be a sportswiki for the wikimedia foundation
tell immywales that. Sonicthehedgehog9000 (talk) 20:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I wonder if you understand the difference...
Between a discussion about a topic with a user, and a discussion about a topic within the community.

It's clear that, years after you and I first butted heads regarding editing history, you still seem to have no idea how this affects things. You still act as though you're on a campaign to give Commons control over all non-text content on WMF projects. And in my opinion you still have no clue as to what journalism is about. These are personal issues between us.

Likewise, the water cooler discussion is about templates, licensure, etc. It's not about the way people use each other's talk pages, or communicate within the community. Those two words have the same root, you know, at least in English. -  Amgine | t 18:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Usersubpages
I suppose... I am going to move them to my own wiki... --Remi (talk) 20:47, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Now. All the links are to news or the sort of thing that could be considered news. I am not a big fan of summarizing or rewording (more power to those who are). I find news fascinating and informative and I would like to share with others somehow. --Remi (talk) 21:38, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

News links that were in subpages
How might it be appropriate to integrate such links into a more open namespace? --Remi (talk) 21:55, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

the whole image fair use and edp dispute
Dear Adambro, I sincerely feel that your concept of "acceptable free license" is so deeply rooted in practices at Commons/Wikipedia, that you are unable to see the differences as they pertain to Wikinews. I know that your deepest desire is for Wikinews to be so free that it can be copied by anyone for any reason, images and all. But since we already allow for fair-use images (pretty much like Wikipedia), those who copy and repost our articles already have to treat images differently than the cc-by license we use here. There should not be a "great leap" to include cc-by-nc-nd, cc-nc-sa, etc. As long as we can legally use them, I don't see why we shouldn't. As I have pointed out, the foundation policy affords us the opportunity to write a project-specific EDP to cover this. As I know you are sincere in your argument (lest I just convinced you), I do suggest that you raise the point at a foundation level. Are you on the foundation-l mailing list? This would be a good place to vet this and get opinions from people that are not Wikinewsies, but rather overall-Wikimedians. Cheers, --SVTCobra 00:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Avril Lavigne story
It's not a hoax. It's original reporting. --BruceKinnaird (talk) 12:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Blanking alt main pages
Please do not blank the main page proposals. They serve as interesting and occasionally useful historical pages. A number of them could easily be revived as new proposals. I fail to see the harm them showing as using the main page templates casues. If you think they should disappear, please file a DR or at least discuss it on the water cooler. Thanks.--Cspurrier (talk) 22:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Since I've only blanked them it is perfectly possible for people to link to old revisions to show what they look like and discuss them. I would doubt that in most cases that these will be useful and so don't consider it worth them including current templates and showing up as such. One problem is that whenever any of these templates are changed the server has to go through each page which includes it and update these when there isn't really any point. It also avoids these pages appearing in various inappropriate categories. Adambro (talk) 22:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * This is a highly unusal step to take. If they were showing up where they shouldn't, then I believe "noinclude" could have been used. This issue has been raised at WN:AAA, fyi. Sidenote: as your are no longer an admin, you should not be closing DRs, though I second your decision on the one that you did close. --SVTCobra 00:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Dear Adambro: I remember the issue of which you refer to -- the problem of template inclusion -- being raised on enwp many years ago, but I just wanted to let you know that your understanding of the problem is incorrect and the technical basis for the issue has since been fixed in MediaWiki. The concerns were raised about the behaviour of much older MediaWiki versions where changes in a template that was subsequently transcluded into many others would cause a whole chain of cache flushes, producing a potential avenue for a DDoS attack. In addition, this never referred to simple pages that had templates transcluded within them, and were not (widely) transcluded elsewhere. Regardless, however, these days it no longer causes a chain of cache flushes to occur, as MediaWiki has moved on a bit, so it now isn't anything to worry about. There isn't any need to go around blanking pages, nor worrying about what is listed under "What links here". If you would be so kind as to revert the userspace blanking you have undertaken, I should be most grateful, as although your intentions were clearly for the greatest good, they are based on a misunderstanding and amount to actions that are construed by the community as vandalism. Thank you, --NicholasTurnbull (talk) 00:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Note: I do not consider the edits constructive. --Brian McNeil / talk 06:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:AntiWarrally2Portland2006.jpg
Do you think it is appropriate to add a template saying that the file is "eligible for speedy deletion" when it has just been kept in a dr? Anonymous101  17:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Wasn't my intention and as you note the speedy deletion bit is obviously inappropriate but the issue of a lack of a rationale is valid. Adambro (talk) 17:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:3 Servicemen.jpg
I transferred to Commons, but missed the pesky little -nd, so it is eligble for speedy there. (I thought the bot would warn me). I trust you can handle it there. Cheers, --SVTCobra 22:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

 * No problem, I've deleted it now. Regards. Adambro (talk) 23:08, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: Recent image uploads
Moved to User talk:Blood Red Sandman

Which username?
Moved to User talk:Emesee

Image:Portal Football Banner.png
Moved to User talk:Celticfan383

Low resolution
Have you tagged the right page Image:A Swarm of Angels.png? This already is low-res. Is there a higher res version elsewhere? --Brian McNeil / talk 18:17, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Commentary template
I noticed you decided to use my TK talk icon for the commentary template. Thanks for finding it and using it! I've created a different image that might more suit Wikinews and it can be found here. If you like it, feel free to use it in the template. Thanks -- Tkgd2007 (talk) 23:31, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Spain defeat Germany to win Euro 2008
This is not the proper title. It should be Euro 2008: Germany vs. Spain. And there should be a template with math facts. Kingjeff (talk) 19:36, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

i dont like you for doing this
why? --OfficerLeRoy (talk) 21:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

 * The Water cooler is for discussing issues directly concerning the running of the Wikinews project not for debating current events. Adambro (talk) 21:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Just to step in before I go you can start that discussion on the comments page for the latest article on Mugabe. Blood Red Sandman  (Talk)   (Contribs) 21:34, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Talk page discussions
Moved to User talk:SVTCobra

WN:DR and WN:SD
Thanks for the comment about being able to speedy delete those empty categories. Cirt (talk) 23:14, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Concerned-mom
I am reluctant to speedily delete this userpage (though I agree that userpages should not be used for advertising/spam) in light of 's userpage which was deleted and then subsequently restored after discussion as a "corporate representative". What are your thoughts? Cirt (talk) 13:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Deleted by . Cirt (talk) 16:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

This is very famous person —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mohsingondal (talk • contribs) 05:43, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Oppose voting
Go check the talk page again; I've responded to one of your allegations. Mike Halterman (talk) 06:00, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Striking out/editing other users' comments
Please do not edit other users' comments, as you did at Deletion requests, here. Respectfully, it would be better instead to ask that user to adjust their particular comment if you feel that a change is needed, as opposed to editing someone else's comments yourself. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 19:02, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I think its a little bit of a stretch to say that striking "Delete as nom" constitutes editing of other users' comments to merit such a warning. Adambro (talk) 19:08, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
 * It is not a warning, it is a request/comment from me to you. My apologies if it came across as a warning, sorry about that, was not my intention. Cirt (talk) 19:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Image for speedy
I put this up as a speedy a few days ago but no one looked at it yet - would appreciate it if you would: Image:080713 let IraqiNationalList ProtectElections.jpg. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 02:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey!
I'm the Mind's Eye a relativly new editor here and noticed this prepared article, Story preparation/Guns N' Roses Releases Chinese Democracy; I wasn't sure if this really would classify as news. I did a wikinews search and there aren't really any articles like this. Just wondering, The Mind's Eye (talk) 20:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

FlaggedRevs
If you have not already seen this, please look, comment, and vote both here and on bugzilla. Further assistance such as contact information for Google would be a very useful detail to share and help in petitioning for a listing in their news index. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

One Question
Why do you bother? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.150.47 (talk) 09:24, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom
At WN:RfAR I left a comment, hope this is useful. --Kalspring (talk) 10:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Army of Islam - Al Jazeera.jpg
Hi Adam, could you please expound on the fair-use of this image that you uploaded a long time ago. I don't want break the archive. --SVTCobra 00:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Adambro/Archive 4


text:
Incomplete data may mislead doctors into overprescribing expensive medicines

September 25, 2008 Medical doctors have not been getting the full picture about newly FDA-approved drugs, concludes a research team from the University of California, San Francisco. This is because not all the studies required for FDA approval get published. New drug studies that do see publication tend to be ones where the medicine appears to perform well while poor and middling results are less likely to appear in medical journals. The result appears to be that doctors who read the available literature may get an inflated impression of new medications and may prescribe expensive new drugs in place of older medicines that perform as well or better. As Jordan Lite of Scientific American wonders, are drug companies cherry-picking the studies they publish to make their drugs look better than they actually are?

The University of California team reviewed trials that had supported new drugs approved from 1998 to 2000 and examined 909 trials of 90 medications. The search was conducted upon PubMed and other search tools that a typical medical doctor or patient could access. They concluded that less than half of the studies had been published five years after drug approval and a publication bias existed.

Erick Turner, who coauthored a similar study earlier this year, expressed concerns to Scientific American that the problem was not merely the raw percentage of studies published, but that a disproportionate share of the research that appeared in journals are examples where new medications appear to perform well:

 * When trials are selectively published … it will skew the efficacy of the drug and make it look like it works better than it does. It's going to create a lot more enthusiasm among consumers of that information or in the words of Alan Greenspan, 'irrational exuberance.'

Ken Johnson, senior vice president of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), defended the pharmaceutical industry by saying FDA review of new drug applications is more important than publishing the results of medication trials in medical journals. Approved medications come with labels that give patients and doctors enough information, assures Mr. Johnson.

Yet concerns about full and appropriate disclosure have been serious enough that a new law was enacted last year. FDA Amendments Act of 2007 (FDAAA) requires that all trials which support FDA-approved drugs be registered at the National Institutes of Health website. The requirement goes into effect this coming Saturday. Congress enacted the legislation in response to hearings that determined pharmaceutical companies were less likely to publish studies that indicated significant side effects. One shortcoming in the legislation, according to UCSF associate professor Ida Sim, is that the FDA is still not required to specify which trials it weighs when considering applications for drug approvals. Yet she praises the new law as a major improvement. It's critically important that we know trials exist and that we get the summary results, positive and negative, into the public domain—that's a huge step and more than any [other] country is doing now.


text:
McCain delays campaign, Obama says continue the debates

September 24, 2008

United States presidential candidate John McCain announced today that he is suspending his campaign and sought to postpone a scheduled debate with his opponent, Barack Obama, to focus on the country's financial crisis and says that Obama should also suspend his campaign.

McCain said he would be asking president George W. Bush to call a meeting for members of Congress in order to support Bush's controversial $700 billion bailout plan, but also said that there is no consensus for the proposal and it will not pass in its current form.

He called the crisis "historic," stressing the need for legislation and warning of "devastating consequences".

"I am calling on the president to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Obama and myself. It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem. It has become clear that no consensus has developed to support the administration's proposal and I do not believe that the plan on the table will pass as it currently stands. We are running out of time," said McCain during a press conference.

Early this morning, Obama had called McCain and asked for the two to put aside partisanship and focus on the economic troubles. The two agreed to issue a joint statement supporting an economic fix, just minutes before McCain made his announcement. Bush is scheduled to speak to the people of the U.S. in a televised speech at 9:01 PM EDT tonight.

Obama responded to McCain's speech minutes later, confirming that he would still attend the debate. He expressed a desire for fairness to taxpayers and an objection to rewarding those responsible for the financial crisis. Both candidates have stated that they intend to put politics aside to work on the financial crisis. Obama said, a president "is going to have to deal with more than one thing at a time."

The proposal comes in the wake of Congressional hearings where US Federal Reserve chief Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson have urged support of the measures proposed by the administration. Despite such appeals, both McCain and Obama have expressed skepticism over the proposed bailout, and the U.S. Congress has shown a noted concern that the measure may not benefit ordinary home owners as well as those on Wall Street.


text:
Economic opportunities for women still lagging: World Bank and OECD

September 24, 2008

In a recent study released by the World Bank and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), economic opportunities for women are still lagging behind opportunities for men in the developing world. Improvements have been made in women health and education, according to the study. The study calls for investments totaling over US$13 billion a year to achieve gender equality and women empowerment.

Danny Leipziger, World Bank Vice President for Poverty Reduction and Economic Management, said, "gender equality is key for poverty reduction and growth. Progress on women’s education is essential but not enough if we don’t improve women’s access to good jobs and credit lines, to land ownership and to income-generating activities."

The study Equality for Women: Where Do We Stand on Millennium Development Goal 3? looks at the achievements made by the developing world as laid out by the Millennium Development Goals (MD). These goals are eight international development goals that 189 United Nations member states and at least 23 international organizations have agreed to achieve by the year 2015. They include halving extreme poverty, reducing child mortality rates, fighting disease epidemics such as AIDS, and developing a global partnership for development.

Education has improved in 82 countries out of 122 and are on track to meet their MD goals. However, 19 countries, 13 of which are in Sub- Saharan Africa, are seriously off track to meet their target.

The United Nations will hold a conference on Thursday at the annual session of the UN in New York to discuss the Millennium Development Goals.


text:
Wikinews interviews Frank McEnulty, New American Independent Party nominee for President of the United States

September 24, 2008

So far, the news on the U.S. presidential election has been dominated by Republican Party and Democratic Party nominees John McCain and Barack Obama. However, recently, some "third party" candidates have begun to gain notoriety, namely Libertarian Party nominee Bob Barr and independent Ralph Nader.

Unbeknownst to many, there are several other minor party candidates in the race. One of them is New American Independent Party nominee Frank McEnulty. McEnulty has been interviewed several times by Wikinews over the past few months, but in one held earlier this week with reporter Joseph Ford, he went into detail on why he'd be a good president, why its necessary to support a third party candidate this year, and most importantly, why you should give him your vote.

The interview can be read below.

Interview
Wikinews (Joseph Ford): Why are you running for president?

 * Frank McEnulty: I am running for President because, as the father of two daughters, I am completely and utterly disgusted with both political parties in this country and am very concerned about what type of country we will be leaving for our children and grandchildren.

'''Joseph Ford: You're the nominee of the New American Independent Party. What does your party stand for? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: The New American Independent Party believes in a smaller federal government that is not as wasteful of the people’s money and our country’s resources. It also believes in a federal government that works for the benefit of all Americans and not predominantly for those Americans who belong to the President’s political party.

'''Joseph Ford: If elected, how would you handle America's economical crisis? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: I would handle the current economic crisis by cutting out the cancer as soon as possible and getting the economy back on a sound footing so that Americans can do what they do best, move things forward once again.

 * Then, to ensure that this did not happen again, I would establish policies that would prevent this from recurring and I would instigate large criminal investigations into fraudulent lending and financial practices. People would go to jail.  People would lose their financial assets.  People would pay for what they did wrong and allowed to happen.

 * For example, I would also see to it that the ex-heads of Fannie and Freddie never saw a dime of their deferred compensation even if that meant a prepackaged bankruptcy filing by both entities to void their contracts.

 * This mess needs to be cleaned up, but someone besides the American people at large needs to help pay for it with their assets and freedom. This, in and of itself, would go a long way to restoring confidence in our financial system.  No one who almost brought our country to its knees financially should be rewarded when they are fired for doing so.

'''Joseph Ford: How would you handle illegal immigration? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: Enforce the laws on the books and cut out all federal aid to illegal immigrants. If there are no jobs and no benefits to being here illegally then they will go home and stay there.  This process is working in Arizona and will work nationwide.

 * I would also push for an amendment to the Constitution which would allow people born here to only be an automatic citizen of the US if their parents are already citizens.

'''Joseph Ford: How would you handle foreign relations with Europe, where there are growing anti-American feelings? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: I would first stop being so unilateral in our policies outside the United States. If we can’t make a strong enough argument to get the rest of the world on our side in a cause, then maybe we’d better think twice before we go off on our own.

 * I would also send ambassadors to Europe and the rest of the world that are truly qualified for the jobs and not political appointees who are being repaid for raising lots of money to get me elected.

'''Joseph Ford: How would you handle the War on Drugs? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: I think it is time we started putting more of our resources into drug rehab than prison time.

 * Until we start to do something concrete and real about the demand for drugs by our people the War on Drugs will never be won. As long as there is demand, someone will figure out a way to supply that demand.

 * Look at how successful we have been in cutting down on cigarette use. Surely an anti-drug program as pervasive as the anti-cigarette programs have been would be successful in cutting drug use.  Combined with a comprehensive program of rehabilitation and we will start to reduce drug use in this country.  Throwing everyone in prison is not the answer.

'''Joseph Ford: It has been over five years since the Iraq War began. As president, how would you handle it? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: The war in Iraq should have never happened. However, now that we made the mess, we need to see it through or we will create an even bigger mess going forward.  As it appears that the Iraqi government is becoming more and more able to handle its own security and problems every day we must continue to help them grow in the job and then get out of their way as soon as they ask us to.

'''Joseph Ford: For millions of Americans, health care is a major issue. How would you handle it? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: Health care is truly a big concern for a lot of Americans because it is probably the one thing that can ruin them financially quicker than anything else. However, I do not believe in a Nationalized Health Care system because I’ve never know the federal government to run a program more effectively and cost efficiently.  I also believe that to a certain extent the health care crisis is somewhat of a media and politically created crisis.  People are not dying in the streets due to lack of medical care and, although some people are destroyed by huge medical bills each year, the numbers are not staggering.

 * I’m big on personal responsibility and believe that if a person takes personal responsibility for the little things in life then there should be a program for dealing with the major problems that is the responsibility of the government. For that reason I have proposed a national, major medical insurance pool for major medical items.  Everyone who wishes to be covered would have to pay in a nominal amount for coverage, then, if a major medical event occurs, they would coverage for those expenses.  However, if you choose not to pay into the system then you have no coverage period and all major medical bills would be your personal problem.

'''Joseph Ford: Homosexual marriage is an extremely controversial subject among Americans. How would you handle it? '''
 * Frank McEnulty: Homosexual marriage will not impact the sanctity of mine nor anyone else’s marriage. This is truly a non-event in the grand scheme of things.  So I’ll keep it real simple, everyone should have the same rights in all things as everyone else – period.

'''Joseph Ford: How would you handle America's educational system? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: Education and how we educate our children should be a state and local issue. The best way in which to educate our children is best decided from the bottom up and not from the top down.

 * The role of the federal government in this issue is to provide the necessary funding to the states to ensure that there is adequate money for the education system to use. Beyond that, they should stay out of the process.

'''Joseph Ford: How would you handle abortion? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: Having spoken with people who have been faced with the decision of getting an abortion or not, I realize it is probably one of the most difficult decisions most women can ever make in their lives and one rarely forgotten. My preference would be that no one would ever feel that they have to get or contemplate an abortion for any reason.  However, I also believe that this is a moral issue that is best decided by a woman, her family, friends and religious beliefs.

 * Abortion should be a state issue decided on the state level although I firmly believe that partial birth abortion is wrong in any and all cases.

'''Joseph Ford: How would you handle the environment? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: I am an outdoorsman. There is nothing I enjoy more than hiking through open spaces, hunting and fishing. I also have children and am worried about what resources they will have as they, and hopefully someday, their children, grow older. Naturally, I am for protecting the environment. However, there is a give and take to everything. As the country continues to grow so will our demands for space and natural resources. I believe that the environment can be protected and nurtured while still being used for the greater good of all Americans. Sometimes that will require a set-aside of certain areas of the country as protected environments and sometimes that will require that we exploit the land and minerals to keep our country going. Will everyone be happy with my decisions? Probably not, but as a President that is independent of the influences of the major parties, I can always make my decisions based on the best information and the best interests of our country, both today and in the future.

'''Joseph Ford: Why is it necessary that a third party candidate be voted into the White House this year? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: Because only a third party candidate can bring about the true change that is necessary to get our country back on the right path for all Americans. Does anyone truly believe that change will come from the two major party candidates when their parties have the greatest vested interests in keeping the status quo?  I don’t think so and never see it happening.

 * To have true change you need someone in charge who is not a product of the system, who will hire the best people for the job regardless of political affiliation and who is only interested in doing what is best for all Americans. That person will only come from an source independent of the political machines – from a third party.

'''Joseph Ford: We haven't seen many Frank McEnulty media appearances, billboards or commercials. Will we see these in the weeks ahead? Or are you trying to run more of a grassroots campaign? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: This time around it is a grassroots campaign, but we are building a strong base for the next election that will allow us to have more resources to expend on traditional media while continuing our grassroots appeal.

 * Every week the campaign gathers more and more notice and that will continue to grow.

Joseph Ford: How are you currently doing in the polls?

 * Frank McEnulty: I rarely am included in any polls.

'Joseph Ford: Why are you a better candidate than Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party), Bob Barr (Libertarian Party), John McCain (Republican Party), Cynthia McKinney (Green Party) or Barack Obama (Democratic Party)''? Why should the American people give you their vote? '''

 * Frank McEnulty: First, they should vote for me because I truly believe that where I stand on most issues is where the vast majority of Americans stand. We may not agree on everything all the time, but they will know that deep down I am fighting for the same things that they want to see happen.

 * Also, for the simple reason that I can and will do things differently than all of them would in the same position and below are a few examples of the ways in which my administration would be much different than those of any other President.

 * Partisan Politics and My Administration:

 * There will be no partisan politics allowed in my administration because I have seen first- hand how destructive they can be to getting the job done and helping people get back to their lives.

 * For the last three years I have been involved in developing a project in the New Orleans area. The project is now underway, but during that time I have had the opportunity to travel to New Orleans several times and have seen first-hand what has and hasn’t been happening in the area since the hurricane in 2005 (over 36 months ago now).  Not nearly enough is getting done.  In Louisiana, they spent way too long blaming the Republicans in Washington, DC for everything that happened to New Orleans and surrounding areas rather than just getting on with the rebuild.  Now, 24 months later, there are still whole neighborhoods where very little has been accomplished and I believe a great deal of the blame for that is because of the initial partisan finger-pointing that is still going on today.

 * By contrast, in Mississippi, they didn’t try and blame Washington, DC for their problems (the Governor is Republican so no partisan bickering) and they got right to work and have made much greater strides towards getting the state and people’s lives back together. Now, it will be argued for years as to why this has occurred and while the complete answer is very complex and involves many aspects, I believe a major reason for the lack of progress in Louisiana, and with many governmental initiatives,  can be blamed on the fall-out from partisan politics.

 * My Administration:

 * As an independent candidate for President my administration will not be burdened by the fact that we will need to make the proper political appointments or proper political decisions to try and help us keep and maintain power. My chances of reelection will depend solely on how the American people believe that I am doing as their President.

 * Every decision that I will make as President of the United States will be based on four very simple questions:

 * 1.      Is it Good for America?  By this I mean good for America as a whole, not for a special interest group, not for a specific industry, not for a specific political party, not for a specific politician’s reelection, but good for America as a whole.

 * 2.       Is this Federal law really necessary?  We have thousands and thousands of Federal laws and way too many people in Congress trying to pass new ones all the time to help themselves get reelected.  Unless a law is absolutely necessary for the American people as a whole, it should not be passed.

 * 3.       Is this a proper use of the citizen’s tax money?  The Republican administration that we have had in this country for the last several years has been on a spending spree unlike that seen in many, many years.  What happened to the theory of fiscal responsibility and smaller government?  We need to stop throwing money at every special project that people in Washington can dream up to buy votes and stop now.

 * I will not be afraid to veto new laws if I do not believe that they are in the best interest of all Americans. As an independent President, I will not be under any obligation to pass a law to help a political party or to help get a certain senator or congressman reelected.  I will have the freedom to do what is right for America rather than what is right for a special interest or political party.

 * Administration Personnel:

 * As an Independent candidate for President my administration will be free to hire the right people for the job, regardless of political affiliation. There will be Democrats in my administration; there will be Republicans in my administration; there will Independents, Greens and non-aligned people in my administration.  The key to someone obtaining a job in my administration will be simple; do they want what is best for America, can they leave partisan politics at the door and do they have the proper credentials for getting the job done?

 * If a person does not have the right qualifications for a job, they will not be hired regardless of what they did to help me win the election. I will hire as someone in the private sector will hire – hire the best person for the job who will give us, the American people, the best return on our investment.

'''Joseph Ford: There are thousands reading this right now. What could you say to convince them to give you their vote?'''
 * Frank McEnulty: Please visit my website and read up on where I stand. I believe you will find that I am the true moderate candidate who is looking to do what is best for all Americans and not just for a specific party or group.


text:
Talk:Wikinews interviews Frank McEnulty, New American Independent Party nominee for President of the United States

Here is an email transcript of the interview:

Subject: RE: Wikinews Interview Request From: "Frank McEnulty"  (Add as Preferred Sender) Date: Mon, Sep 22, 2008 3:15 pm To: joseph.ford@wikinewsie.org

Answers attached. Thanks Frank 310-230-2300 x-1 Original Message Subject: RE: Wikinews Interview Request From: joseph.ford@wikinewsie.org Date: Sun, September 21, 2008 1:47 pm To: "Frank McEnulty"

Here are the questions. Q: Why are you running for president? Q: You're the nominee of the New American Independent Party. What does your party stand for? Q: If elected, how would you handle America's economical crisis? Q: How would you handle illegal immigration? Q: How would you handle foreign relations with Europe, where there are growing anti-American feelings? Q: How would you handle the War on Drugs? Q: It has been over five years since the Iraq War began. As president, how would you handle it? Q: For millions of Americans, health care is a major issue. How would you handle it? Q: Homosexual marriage is an extremely controversial subject among Americans. How would you handle it? Q: How would you handle America's educational system? Q: How would you handle abortion? Q: How would you handle the environment? Q: Why is it necessary that a third party candidate be voted into the White House this year? Q: We haven't seen many Frank McEnulty media appearances, billboards or commercials. Will we see these in the weeks ahead? Or are you trying to run more of a grassroots campaign? Q: How are you currently doing in the polls? Q: Why are you a better candidate than Chuck Baldwin (Constitution Party), Bob Barr (Libertarian Party), John McCain (Republican Party), Cynthia McKinney (Green Party)or Barack Obama (Democratic Party)? Why should the American people give you their vote? Q: There are thousands reading this right now. What could you say to convince them to give you their vote? Thanks again for your time. Original Message Subject: RE: Wikinews Interview Request From: "Frank McEnulty"  Date: Sun, September 21, 2008 10:11 am To: joseph.ford@wikinewsie.org

Yes, I am interested. Frank 310-230-2300 x-1  Office Original Message Subject: Wikinews Interview Request From: joseph.ford@wikinewsie.org Date: Sat, September 20, 2008 8:39 am To: frank@frankforpresident.org

Mr. McEnulty, I am Joseph Ford, an accredited reporter for Wikinews, Wikipedia's news arm. I frequently interview third party politicians and was hoping to do an email interview with you on why you would be a good president if elected. I know that you've done several Wikinews interviews in the past, but this one would be longer and more comprehensive. Wikinews has a daily readership of 80,000, so this would be a great way to get the word of your campaign out. If you are interested, please send me an email within 24 hours. Thanks for your time, Joseph Ford, Accredited Reporter, Wikinews


text:
Comments:McCain delays campaign, Obama says continue the debates

=Is the financial crisis more important than the election? Has the crisis impacted you personally?=

Just an act
Here's my take: We've been in a crisis all week, and before this. This is nothing new. So why does he decide to cancel the debate and suspend his campaign all of a sudden? Why just after Obama agreed to the debates? My take: it's just his act to look good while getting out of a debate he knows he can't win. He's trying to act like he's putting aside politics and is working only for the people. But only 7% of Americans approve of the $700 mil bailout that he's trying to push. Is he really fighting for the people or putting politics aside? --Poisonous (talk) 19:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Totally agree with you. This is all about politics. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 19:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * It's 700 billion, not million. Chump change to a politician - they don't care that it comes out the taxpayers pocket. --Brian McNeil / talk 20:24, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * He's doing it because of what Obama will do. If Obama suspends his campaign his support base will weaken and it will sideline the already out of media face of Biden. If Obama doesn't he loses any and all credibility on the Economy and any claim on doing what is right for the people. The latter is especially damaging when coupled with the fact that his campaign has more of the "dysfunctional" and "greedy" minds that ran Freddie Mac and Frannie Mae.--141.157.60.103 20:30, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Regrettably, I think your analysis is absolutely correct. There is no substance whatsoever to McCains act, but to the American who don't care enough about politics to have picked sides yet, it will look like McCain is "going to work" and Obama is being a celebrity. The only way Obama's campaign can counter this sequence of events, I think, is by pointing out how weak McCain has traditionally been on the economy. When one hasn't bothered about the economy while Wall Street were slowly sinking into the gutter, it seems rather convenient that one's interest in the economy suddenly peak just as a series of potentially hurtful debates are about begin, doesn't it? --85.82.179.226 03:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

--GCinMe (talk) 16:14, 25 September 2008 (UTC)== Money, money, money (must be funny) ==

$700 billion works out as a little over $2000 per head for the entire U.S. population. Yes, children and other non-contributors included. --Brian McNeil / talk 21:20, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The Financial Crisis is important to Wall Street and those with financial investments. The Election is important to ALL Americans.

It's not an "either/or" situation. Both issues are important and I beleive it is appropriate for the candidates to demonstrate their capacity to deal with both issues simultaneously. I beleive that whichever candidate wins this election will be required to deal with multiple issues simultaneously including  economic, military, and other challenges both at home and abroad.

---Don Talley —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.181.204.21 (talk) 21:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect to the author of the above comment, we ALL need to be concerned by this financial crisis. If there is no money for banks to loan, people can not buy cars, or houses or get loans for school, thus affecting those who sell cars for a living, the manufactures, teachers, students, not to mention banks closing their doors, ect ect. This has huge repercussions, and to continue have the blasé' attitude about this crisis is only a continuation of Americans being disconnected to what is going on in our government. We are in this position NOT ONLY because of the politicians in government, but in part because we as voting Americans remain disinterested in what our government is doing. We should all have been contacting our Senators and representatives regarding the actions of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae regarding their criteria for mortgage applications and their issuing loans to unqualified home buyers, as blatant examples of irresponsible behavior of our elected officials. I think McCain is right in addressing this as a priority, and now would be a good time for Obama to walk the talk of being the "uniter", join in trying to find a solution, that would show true unity on his part. His comment that a president needs to be able to multi task does not address the need for a candidate to also act presidential, and prioritize in a time

I believe that both should go on. McCain should not suspend his campaign. Let the bailout plan go on, and at the same time let the election go on. Sean gorter (talk) 03:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

FYI
This debate is only on foreign policy. Noting about the US economy will be ask, and i think foreign affairs is in McCain's hands. But jib that McCain dos not want to be in the debate.And the President called both Obama and McCain too the white house and a few other lawmakers. --66.229.17.181 02:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

That's...
...just ridiculous. Why does he have to be physically in Congress to work on the bill? Is it because he don't know how to use e-mail? --85.82.179.226 03:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * He Physically can't use a keyboard from his stay in Vietnam that why Obama stop using that attack add about how McCain can't use computers. And sending a email too congress on the second worse event on US economy history!?!? are you crazy?--66.229.17.181 04:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * What injuries prevent him from moving his fingers? His fingers seem to be in different positions in some pictures, so he's probably able to use them. How hard is it to just type? I agree that he shouldn't be doing it over email though. I'm just tired of him/other people using the POW excuse about everything.
 * You use your upper arms when you type more than you realize. Thanks to elbow injuries and a shoulder injury his upper arm movement is limited so swift downward direction is hard to control. Even though he could always dictate what he wants sent, that has in the past proved untrustworthy.--141.157.60.103 11:46, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * This doesn't make any sense. He has a huge staff, anyone can type or talk for him. It's 2008 computers have accessibility features and as a Senator, he has had time to master them all. Lastly, if he can't get physical or automated help than how can he execute on presidential responsibilities. It's a slap in the face to veterans every time the POW card is abused. This specific line of argument is worse as it offends disabled peoples as well. Ozten (talk) 22:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Scarry
It's scary. What if the bill it doesn't even work, what if It's going to make things worse. 700 B is terribly huge. --69.157.187.91 03:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll tell you what's scary. It's scary that a president who knows how the inside of this mess looks thinks that this crisis is so pressing that he feel he can't wait until his Republican friend's presidential campaign is over to request a $700 bn bailout. You have to be into some pretty deep shit if you would rather taint a fellow Republicans campaign like this than wait 40 days until the campaign is over. The bailout probably will not make things worse in the short run, but if you are at a point where you need to bailout, you havent really havent been paying attention to the nation you were elected to oversee. --85.82.179.226 03:43, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

OK...now put Palin out there
You don't suspend your campaign, you hand the reins over to your VP for a while. Joe Biden can campaign on his own, but why is it that Sarah Palin still has training wheels and won't have the press get NEAR her nearly a month after she was chosen? Shouldn't she gain experience and campaign on her own? OOPS, am I sexist in saying all of this? There's a reason as to why your poll numbers are dropping, Senator McCain. It's because people have found out that you are trying to feed us bull____ and try to distract us to make it look like you're a hero. You tried to delay the RNC because of a hurricane, but I DIDN'T SEE YOU OUT THERE HELPING TO CLEAN UP. Even after Ike, Galveston was drowning, but you were out there saying the economy was all Barack Obama's fault. You respond to criticism about your houses with "oh, well I was a prisoner of war." We know you're a great man, Senator, and you're a war hero, but you are in no way the same man from eight years ago. Here's to the end of your political career! CHEERS

$700 Billion Bailout is a "Section 8" Trojan horse, written by those who should be "Section 8"-ed!
Bush (in his speech to the nation) said "It should make certain that failed executives do not receive a windfall from your tax dollars." But Section 8 of the "Bailout Bill" reads:

- Sec. 8. Review. Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

-

Isn't that like Bush, say one thing, makes sure his true intent is in writing... Paulson & Bush could have a "Golden Parachute" secret cash stash, and the law couldn't touch them. What is Paulson, God? No oversight? Congress is putting on a show (Patriot Act deja vu), hoping that no one notices "Section 8".

Politicians that vote for this Bailout without deleting "Section 8" aren't working for you and me. Corporate Welfare, plain and simple.

Dumb decision
This is a dumb decision on McCain's part. The fact is that he does not hold a position in Senate that really matters for a committee on the bailout proposal and is turning this into a political stunt. If this was a natural disaster I might understand then, however it is not and going back to Washington will not boost the moral of the people, nor does it indicate any change from old ways of Washington. And why does the whole campaign need to be suspended? Palin has nothing to do with this issue, and if need be McCain should have tried to find way to swap the Presidential debate with the VP one, but even that is unacceptable.

The fact is McCain is afraid and Palin has no foreign policy background. That is why this is really happening. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.87.132.142 (talk) 05:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

The debate is on foreign policy which Obama lacks and McCain recommended Palin and Baden debate go ahead of schedule.--66.229.17.181 14:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

1964-1968-1972
The article could have done well to explore which modern elections in the past lacked general election presidential debates. Perhaps the topic could even become an article of its own.

President Johnson avoided any risk to losing his poll lead to Goldwater by avoiding debates, and Nixon, resenting his depiction after the famous 1960 televised debate, refused to engage in any for '68 and '72, giving the US three consecutive election cycles without any general election debates at all. Gerald Ford broke the mold with Carter, and we've had a streak going ever sense, but a presidential debate is by no means an ancient rite.

As for the contemporary strategic sense, I've no idea if the public will perceive McCain as ducking a debate, but if I were him, I'd find a seated coffee-table style venue, perhaps one last 'Larry King Live' debate. Obama squirms just a little bit seated in front of a camera. He looks more boyish than presidential in that setting. In turn, his disabilities render McCain unsuited for the traditional ambiance.

-The Typewriter King —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.33.92.7 (talk) 08:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I think this is an opportunity for the candidates to show the American people what THEIR priorities are, actions speak louder than words. I think the debate should be postponed till Congress comes to a decision, (I am not at all sure it should be a bail out) and then I think the debate should be change to discuss the crisis at hand. I for one would like to hear from each candidate how they believe we got into this mess, how they would deal with it, why, and how to avoid it AGAIN. This is NOT the first time we have gotten the banking industry out of a mess. As tax payers I for one would really like to stop paying for these bail outs --GCinMe (talk) 16:28, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I do not think the presidential elections are more important than the current economic crisis, but I do not think that suspending the campaigns is necessary either. It seems to me that someone at the McCain campaign thought it to be a good "marketing" idea for the republican candidate to state that he decided to suspend his campaign in order to focus more on the current financial crisis. I think that Mr. McCain's (and Obama as well) presence in Washington for the bailout debate will be a more a distraction than something useful. I think that both candidates should handle this matter as they did with Hurricane Gustav, by stating that they would not be present at the disaster site in order to not obstruct the rescue efforts. And yes, both Washington and Wall Street are a disaster site right now. If both candidates want to show the Country that they have the insight, leadership and knoledge necessary to overcome the current financial situation, a debate is the most suitable way to do this at this time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.96.227.221 (talk) 17:05, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

These debates are our democratic process! What will individuals choose to do away with next? I thought this is a democracy! What will individuals and not we the people choose to do away with next? What gives him or their party the right to decide what we the people have the right to hear? How can we be expected to make informed decisions if we are being denied the right to be informed about our candidate's? What on Earth is really going on here? We the People need to stand up and start making demands and decisions instead of letting whoever else take control! WAKE UP AMERICA!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.254.143.206 (talk) 17:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Nothing is more important than our voice! Without our voice, we have no freedom! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.254.143.206 (talk) 17:29, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Russia and NATO?
Am I missing something or couldn't some of the foreign affairs issues be solved by inviting, or attempting to invite russia into NATO? They're almost as close to the atlantic as turkey. Deffinately closer to Brussels than turkey, and one of the main reasons I feel they lashed out into georgia is because they are backed into a corner by NATO.--Nyimen (talk) 13:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The election is more important than the crisis. The candidate should join the debates. Because the new President of USA can solve the problem/crisis. This is not only for USA, it is also for the world.

Syed Ershadul Hoque Milon Founder Director Kavitassrom kavitassrom@bangladesh.com www.kavitassrom.50megs.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kavitassrom (talk • contribs) 12:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)


text: Talk:McCain delays campaign, Obama says continue the debates


text:
Comments:School shooting in Kauhajoki, Finland kills eleven

Comments from feedback form - "omfg"
omfg —194.239.103.25 (talk) 11:38, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


text:
Bush addresses nation on economic crisis; Congress debates bailout

September 25, 2008

United States President George W. Bush addressed the nation on the economic financial crisis from inside the White House saying the economic situation is "serious" and is "in danger" of becoming "a long and painful recession." "We are in the midst of a serious financial crisis and the federal government is responding with decisive action," Bush said in his televised speech.

Bush called for the United States Congress to pass a US$700 billion bill intended to keep struggling companies afloat. He asked the two presidential candidates along with leaders from both parties of Congress to join him for a conference on Thursday.

Last Friday, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson called for a bailout plan that would allow for the United States government to purchase devalued mortgage backed securities, resulting from the subprime mortgage crisis, from troubled financial institutions. Paulson has said that the plan could cost up to $700 billion. Congressional leaders have said that some form of the plan will pass; however, there is considerable debate over several key issues.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said that Bush "believes it is important for the American people to fully understand the depth of the crisis in our financial markets, how that crisis affects them, and the urgent need to agree on a solution." Bush has been criticized for waiting too long to speak in prime time.

John McCain suspended his campaign to return to Washington and work on the bailout bill. Barack Obama has called for another form of the bill to pass and said that Congress should not package the bailout bill with any other bills — such as an economic stimulus plan.

Meanwhile, Congress has held a second round of hearings on the proposed bailout bill. Paulson and Chairman of the Federal Reserve Ben Bernanke testified in front of the House Financial Services Committee. They felt it was a serious problem in need of an immediate solution.

Rep. Barney Frank, Chairman of House Financial Services Committee, says it is "clear" that the financial bailout bill will pass.

Director of the Congressional Budget Office Peter R. Orsza said while testifying before Congress that "ironically, the intervention could even trigger additional failures of large institutions, because some institutions may be carrying troubled assets on their books at inflated values."

The bailout plan has been called a "blank check" by many, with members of both parties divided on the issue.


text:
Talk:First play after retirement a success for former Czech president

"saw a great success"
Needs more copyediting please. Cirt (talk) 02:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry, just saw some of the things I missed. I occasionally have a problem with reading things like this and having my mind making the corrections and I don't realize that the sentence is actually wrong. This probably a result of spending most of my life outside of the English speaking world and dealing with non-native speakers. --PatrickFlaherty (talk) 19:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Headline
It's awkwardly phrased and Not Every Word Needs to Be Capitalized. Mike Halterman (talk) 07:51, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Renamed, hopefully this will make more sense, and has less caps. -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 08:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

I thank all, who edited the article. English is not my native language, so although I try to do my best, the articles I write in English have to be controlled.

Just one note to the headline - it seems to me now, that "Leaving" is the first play Havel has written at all - but it is his first play written after he left the presidency (He had written some twenty plays before he became the president). Please, control the meaning and possibly change the title once more, please. Thank you. Okino (talk) 13:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
Talk:AMBER alert issued in Maryland for missing teenaged boys

editprotected Should remove instruction to call 911, because article is outdated. 69.140.152.55 23:35, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
Template:Stock markets/core/color

es:Plantilla:Indicadores económicos/core/color

title: Template:Stock markets/core/color


title: File:25September2008.pdf


text: Talk:Incomplete data may mislead doctors into overprescribing expensive medicines


text:
Comments:Incomplete data may mislead doctors into overprescribing expensive medicines

Oh, lovely
More examples of the medical industries screwing over the health of the public to make a quick buck. Fun! --Poisonous (talk) 02:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Seems like faulty logic
Isn't it rather common in science, in general, for major public publications to publish less than half of the studies available on a topic? 74.229.182.73 13:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Published does not mean that it can be read or will be read
When a publication is published, it does not mean that it is available to doctors. The reason for this is that a majority of doctors are not subscribed to all the publications where these papers are published. When salesman make them available, it can be understood to be self serving ie critical papers will not be available in this way.

When papers are available under Open Access, it does not mean that these publications are available either. An Open Access document may not be available for general publication for a period of up to a year. One of the consequences is that the paper is unlikely to be read at the end of the embargoed period; many doctors think that they know what there is to know. Also they do not have the time to read everything there is to read anyway. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 19:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


text: Talk:Bush addresses nation on economic crisis; Congress debates bailout


text:
UN inspectors banned from North Korean nuclear facility

September 25, 2008 North Korea has banned nuclear inspectors from the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from inspecting its nuclear facility, the. This comes after N. Korean officials said the facility would begin to reprocess plutonium which could begin in as little as a week.

"From here on, the IAEA inspectors will have no further access to the reprocessing plant," said the U.N. in a statement on its website.

"The DPRK has also informed the IAEA inspectors that they plan to introduce nuclear material to the reprocessing plant in one week's time," added the statement. The U.N. finished removing their security seals and surveillance equipment from the plant on Thursday.

, the U.S. Secretary of State, has urged N. Korea to dismantle their facility and return to six-party talks, but has refused and no new talks are scheduled to take place.

"We strongly urge the North to reconsider these steps and come back immediately into compliance with its obligations," said Rice, referring to an agreement reached during the last round of six-party talks.

N. Korea restarted its nuclear program when the U.S. failed to follow through with its agreement to take North Korea off the national list of state-sponsored terrorism supporters.


text:
Comments:Bush addresses nation on economic crisis; Congress debates bailout

Ladies and Gentlemen, Republican and Democrat, we are officially fuck when a Capitalist is using Socialism to save the economy.--66.229.17.181 04:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

If the government wasn't in such a state of complete DENIAL they would've realized that we've been in a recession ever since '03 or so and would've done something to fix this BEFORE it became a problem --199.190.223.190 11:40, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

For me this is just going to become an unending cycle. Today, our American economy seems to me like a huge pyramid scheme. The emphasis is all about credit. During Bush's speech he said that the 700 bil will be used to remove the toxic assets from these failing companies so that they can provide us with more credit... What?! So his solution to bad credit problems is to allow us to get more credit??? We the regular citizens are the true foundation of our economy. Instead of giving billions to these big corps so they can loan it out to us, why not help the citizens? Put the 700 billion into things that end up being the greatest expenses for us. Things like health, energy, and necessary commodities. Use the money to create jobs, increase wages, discourage outsourcing, and give people relief from debt. My business prof said many times, the first road to financial stability is to get rid of debt. I propose we stop using credit as a foundation to our economy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.108.15.11 (talk) 13:16, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

This bill, if passed, would cost around $300 each for every single American adult. So get ready to fork over those hundreds to the credit card companies, folks; doesn't matter if you've kept good credit—this money's coming over on a silver (federal) platter. Jade Knight (talk) 14:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Get with it! $300 per adult? Not a patch on what this will cost. The real figure is over $2,000 for every man, woman, and child in the country - taxpayer or not. --Brian McNeil / talk 14:15, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Last time I checked $700 billion divided into the population of the United States comes out to quite a bit more than $300. Though Brianmc's $2,000 is accurate with respect to every man, woman and child, it's pretty far off in the real world, considering there's a significant portion of the population that doesn't actually pay taxes.  The "rich" that everyone is so mad at 'cause they don't pay 50% or more in taxes like they do in socialist countries pay the majority of the taxes in this country.  It'll be them and their businesses that foot the bill.  And in a communist country this would make perfect sense -- let's take money from people that make it and give it to the ones that spend it.  So, I guess we're going to be screwed for a while 'cause I can't see this being a sustainable way to run the country unless we're trying to run it into the ground.  The business owners and employers (the ones that actually pay taxes) aren't going to support this sort of redistribution of wealth for long -- they'll either go out of business in the process or cut their costs (i.e. jobs).—Lutskovp (talk) 16:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Bailout
I really think this bailout is very irresponsible. We're the ones who have to pay for this and we did nothing wrong. Yet we pay for it not them! Incredible. I read this recently concerning the bailout:

"What we need now is a return to individual financial independence. We need to instill within working America the belief and the ability to take care of ourselves. We don’t need Big Government to securitize our future. Small businesses make up 50% of GDP. This country was founded by entrepreneurs and it may well be that entrepreneurs have to save her, 200 years later.  We can surely weather this storm and obtain our freedom through perseverance and hard work.

The more security is thrust upon us, the greater the reduction of freedom. Our Federal government is putting us all at risk, because she (our government) is shielding us from natural consequences that she herself created. We will pay for the sins of our elected either way.

Personally, I’d rather get rid of bureaucrats who continually grow the government footprint under the guise of security, and forge a path to freedom.

Remember the Boston Tea Party had nothing to do with security!"

Quoted from the Pyrblu blog: http://blog.pyrblu.com/2008/09/23/the-erosion-of-freedom/

--HimmerAndras (talk) 14:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Might be out of place
But like in the American Revolutionary war when we pay France, Spain, and The Dutch Republic for helping us win Independences from England. I think Afghanistan and Iraq (specially since it has oil) should pay the US since help put Democratic governments and fight their enemy's.--KDP3 (talk) 16:25, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Stock and stuff
My great-grandfather (who is very old) has been following the stock market for more than 15 years. What he says is that if people don't panic, then they won't sell their stock in such a hurry and we won't have a day of death like we did in 1929.

As for the bailout, it does look a bit unfair to pay more than $2,000 for every man woman and child but we are the ones who elected Bush into office and he probably knows a lot more about the economy than we do even though 80% of the world wants to ride bullets up his skull.

- minor

What's...
What's robbing a bank, compared to owning one? --Brian McNeil / talk 17:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Not only is it a blank check, but it is a check with no oversight from congress or the legal system. This is directly copied from the Paulson plan that has been sent to congress to approve. I am just fine with the bailout of the financial system it is needed, however having no oversight on 700 Billion dollars is absolutely ridiculous.

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.19.15.203 (talk) 17:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

It is not a blank check, it is an economic slaughter with the taxpayers on the block.
Quite simply, there is an unspoken issue here - the cost of the bureaucracy needed to handle this.

The president himself mentioned that certain commissions and departments would have to be made to manage the bought lands, houses, and whatnot. And beyond that there will be realtors to pay, home owner's association dues, and all the other civil costs. Then you have to factor in that this is a government wherein a 49¢ ballpoint pen has been known to cost $40 or more once it manages to be appropriated through the bureaucratic machine. After that comes inflation, real and forced by the fed, to further bloat the costs.

In the end, this is just giving our country an enormous debt that will carry over to our children's children's children's children's children's children's children's children – something quite possibly to the tune of 56,000,000,000,000 dollars from what I can just estimate on a sheet of paper based on the average rates of government bloating. Will this save us from depression? Yes. But so would doing nothing as the relative loss in the current market is something like 1/50th that of the great depression and 1/3 of the depression of the late 70's. But, if we go ahead with this bailout, in any form, we curse ourselves and our descendants down the line to a far, far worse situation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.144.241 (talk) 07:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Website Plug
Since it's related to this article very much, I thought it'd be worthwhile to shuffle it in here: http://www.nocashfortrash.org  Fephisto (talk) 12:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)


text: Talk:FBI begins widespread financial probe of 26 firms


text: Talk:UN inspectors banned from North Korean nuclear facility


text:
Libricide plans on ice at University of Oslo

September 27, 2008

The plan to incinerate over 200 years' worth of archived newspapers at the University of Oslo was paused this week, following an article by the Norwegian newspaper Aftenposten publicising the intended destruction.

The unwanted archives take up 3 kilometres of shelf space, and neither the University nor the National Library are interested in retaining and storing the years of history any more.

The collection consists of both Nordic and non-Nordic newspapers, including Manchester Guardian, New York Times, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and Le Figaro.

A planned incineration of them in 2002 was avoided by moving them into a warehouse owned by Nils Christian Bang at Follum Grend, near Ringerike. Edgar Learn Borg, retired supervisor of the collection, continues to be involved in the preservation of the collection which hasn't been accessed by researchers since its move.

The order came again to clean up the store. Frode Meinich, technical director of the University, says that the collection is not unique, and indicated that the University needs temporary storage for some antiquarian furniture during renovation of a music facility of the University.

In 2007, Frode Meinich told Aftenposten that a national program of infrastructure modernization was desperately needed. "For the time being we are managing to keep the ship afloat, but if something serious isn't done in the next few years we have a major problem".


text:
User talk:89.207.233.158

You have been temporarily blocked from editing for vandalism of Wikinews. Please note that page blanking, addition of random text or spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, and repeated and blatant violation of WN:NPOV are considered vandalism. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may come back after the block expires. -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 06:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC) -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 06:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:89.207.233.158


text:
Talk:Libricide plans on ice at University of Oslo

research
We need to translate Follum to English. More information about it here

Grend needs more explanation: Grend and gård

More stories about Frode Meinich

Quoting this Nils Christian Bang, who owns R / S Storebrand and is chairman of the Norwegian Veteran Redningsskøyta Association, decided in 1989 to rebuild Norway's first redningsskøyte.

I am told that redningsskøyte is search and rescue life boat.

I am not sure what Storebrand is; it might be this.

Accoprding to this (and other news results), Nils Christian Bang is the Chairman of Landsrådet (Land council) Norsk Selskab til Skibbrudnes Redning.

He is also known as Niels Christian Bang. John Vandenberg (talk) 06:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Follum has been created. John Vandenberg (talk) 08:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

"3 kilometres of storage space"
The phrase "the unwanted archives take up 3 kilometres of storage space" needs to be revised, as the kilometre is not a valid measure of storage space. 205.156.136.229 13:47, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Correct. The storage should be expressed as a volume - i.e. cubic measurement. --Brian McNeil / talk 13:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Disagree. The length of storage shelving used at archives is a common method of indicating the size of the collection, for example the size of the British Library's newspaper collection: "over 693,000 bound volumes and parcels, occupying some 32 kilometres (or 20 miles) of shelves; over 370,000 reels of microfilm, on 13 kilometres (or 8 miles) of shelf space; holdings altogether occupying some 45 kilometres (or 28 miles) of shelving in total." -- Arwel (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Then it should say shelf space. I have made the correction. Mike R (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Title
Is "libricide" an appropriate term here? I haven't heard it before, and it could come across as being somewhat partial (IE. "Killing" books makes it sound slanted). Thanx, 68.39.174.238 02:56, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, for two reasons: 1.  Libricide puts this on par with homicide, fratricide, patricide, and genocide, and this does not seem warranted.  2.  These are newspapers, not books, so "libricide" may not even be accurate.  Jade Knight (talk) 08:05, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
 * See libricide; and destruction of historical/cultural writings, sanctioned by University, warrants a dramatic title (in my book). I wont mind if it is renamed by someone more familiar with the standards here, provided the redirect left as I have given this page name to a number of people when asking for help. John Vandenberg (talk) 04:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

It also sorta sounds like some kind of icecapade performance "Libricide plans on ice!" with your favorite figure skaters. Cirt (talk) 08:40, 28 September 2008 (UTC)


text:
Hawthorn wins 2008 AFL Grand Final

September 27, 2008 The Hawthorn Hawks have won the 2008 Australian Football League Grand Final in front of a packed Melbourne Cricket Ground. The game was being played after a week of excitement. The Australian Football League is the major Australian Football competition in Australia.

The Grand Final week was full of action, with Adam Cooney winning the Brownlow Medal, and Geelong having to stand David Wojcinski down from their team, to make way for Paul Chapman.

The game was preceded with a motorcade of those who have retired from Australian Football during 2008, as well as a presentation showing the heroes of Australian Football in the last 150 years. A performance by rock band Powerfinger followed. Glenn Archer then received the premiership cup from a box traveling down from the roof of the stadium, and gave it to greats of the competing clubs.

Both teams started the game unchanged from what was originally named. Alastair Clarkson, coach of Hawthorn said that his team was ready to run out, with strategies to try and curb the 29°C heat in Melbourne.

The coin toss was won by Geelong. The game commenced with a large amount of push and shove in the center square, resulting in a ball up and, eventually, a free kick to Geelong. Tom Lonegan, after 1min35 had been played, kicked the opening goal. Hawthorn then kicked three goals in quick succession. Gary Ablett then kicked a goal, thanks to two 50m penalties. A free kick was then given to Max Rooke, resulting in a goal. Rooke then followed up with another goal. Hawthorn then rushed through two rushed behinds to level the scores. Cameron Mooney then kicked a spectacular goal to put Geelong in front by 7 points. However, Hawthorn made this goal up, and at quarter time Geelong lead by one point.

Geelong opened the second quarter with a goal to Paul Chapman. Hawthorn responded with a goal to Cyril Rioli. Hawthorn rallied to go ahead and lead at the change. The players were described by 3AW commentators as "out on their feet".

Hawthorn tied the scores a 45 points each at about the twenty minute mark before scoring a behind. They led from there on in out scoring Geelong three goals one behind (nineteen) to one goal nine behinds (thirteen) for the quarter.

Geelong opened the third quarter with a behind. Jarryd Roughead responded with a behind for Hawthorn. Teams went goal for goal, before Geelong scored two points to even the score up. However, Hawthorn then kicked three goals to take the lead. However, just before Three Quarter Time, Geelong kicked two goals. At Three-Quarter-Time, Hawthorn were leading by 23 points.

Both sides traded behinds at the start the last quarter. After twelve minutes, Lance Franklin kicked a goal around his body, the first for the quarter. Sam Mitchell kicked another goal one minute later, to take the score sixteen goals seven behinds to nine goals twenty two behinds. Rick Ladson closed out the game with a goal four minutes later. Max Rooke scored a consolation goal for Geelong two minutes later.

''NB - Australian Football scores are written Goals.Behinds.Total, where a Goal is worth 6 points, and a Behind is worth 1 point. For example, a score of 1.5.11 would be correct, as (1X6=6)+(5X1=5)=11

Outside Links

 * 2008 AFL Grand Final teams

title: Hawthorn wins 2008 AFL Grand Final