Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Information Clearing House
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] What is this about?
ICH is one of my primary sources of information and I go to it daily for my news. I do not watch television or purchase any major newspaper. I rely on the internet for my news and information.
I cannot think of any reason for wanting to diminish the appeal of ICH, except for political reasons, as its content is definitely not pro mainstream. It provides an alternate point of view to the MSM ( mainstream media ) and hence performs a public service. A service, it would seem that the MSM is not willing or is unable to provide due to corporate considerations.
I consider reading the content of ICH as forming part of my free speech rights. Anyone advocating the removal of this site from the public eye, and otherwise limiting its ability to reach the public cannot be acting in the public interest.
Carl Baydala,
E-Mail: qualityis@shaw.ca
Web site: Carl-baydala-wants-you-to-know.blogspot.com
- Carl, nobody is trying to shut down your favorite site. Have at it! This review is based solely on the issue of whether the site is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia per Wikpedia's policies. See WP:WEB and WP:NOT -- just click on the blue links. Cheers. Morton devonshire 06:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Keep
Please look at the facts, and not party lines or emotions. Close to 90% of the media in the USA, beit TV (Fox) or print, belongs to 1 person (Rupert Murdock). In life, you cannot get all your information from one single source. Diversity is what makes for a richer understanding for world events and ICH helps add to that diversity. I checked out the site and find that it has news articles that most regular news sources won't run, so what's the harm? Also, there is information on that site that comes from "mainstream media", it's not ALL "alternative". Each coin has 2 sides, if you want to appreciate the coin, look at both sides. The fact that most of us live in a democratic world gives us the right to check out what other people have to say. And to the naysayers, please add to the discussion rather than just say "me too" or "I agree". It really doesn't help your side. Shak68plus1 10:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)ShakShak68plus1 10:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Attention First Time Users
There is no point weighing in if this is your first edit. The discussion is about whether the ICH encyclopedia article should be kept in Wikipedia, not a discussion about whether ICH should be removed from the web. Consensus among established users is the criteria, not a vote of new users. --Tbeatty 16:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Clear delete = no consensus
Hmmmm. Disappointing.--Tbeatty 07:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
