Talk:The Parma Witch Hunt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Point?
Is there a point to having this article, as it's just taken word-for-word from the main Parma article. --Wizardman 13:03, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
- I honestly don't think so--all I know is that there's an anon out there on a dynamic IP who doesn't understand the meaning of "follow this link to a temporary subpage." Isn't bullet point #1, "please do not edit this page for a moment?" I don't understand what's so difficult about this, and I everytime I contact the anon I receive no reply. Half the article is a copyright infringement and half of it is jipped from other articles, so I have to think we'll probably see this entire article deleted eventually. AmiDaniel (talk) 22:11, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
- The point is to have a basis for an article that can be expanded later, so as not to have too much information on the regular Parma page. The suspected first paragraph that user Mycroft.Holmes originally posted on the Parma page that was copied here, temporarily I might add, has since been removed. There are NO copyright issues with the second existing paragraph and so repeatedly putting up the copyright page is just unnecessary and accomplishes nothing of value. No one is trying to restore the information that Mycroft originally posted elsewhere on Wikipedia. As for the copied information from wikipedia's article on Parma concerning the Witch Hunt, you can call this article a stub perhaps that needs expansion, but you're just not accomplishing anything constructive by keeping alive some copyright issue that isn't even an issue anyways. Happy Memorial Day!
- I fail to see what was so difficult about simply working on the temporary subpage until the article was deleted--given that the current text is blatantly biased text taken in whole from the article on Parma, Ohio, it wouldn't shock me if someone goes, "Oh, look, there's actually well-written text in the article's history" and restores the copyvio text. But, whatever, I'll try to calm down my process wonkishness. I do, however, still have to return to the question posed by Wizardman, "What is the point of this article?" I could almost see this as a POV fork, as its only purpose seems to be an attack page on a certain group of politicians in Ohio. A search for "Parma Witch Hunt" returns exactly 0 hits, so again I ask, is this topic really notable enough to warrant an article unto its own? Is it even notable enough to warrant inclusion in the Parma, Ohio article? AmiDaniel (talk) 18:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- I fail to see how the text is biased, considering that it is all based on verifiable facts. Check the Parma talk page for additional references that back up the information. Have a pleasant weekend! --172.129.24.191 22:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- I cleaned it up and added the references and link on both this article and on the Parma article. Best, --64.12.116.68 23:18, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- I fail to see how the text is biased, considering that it is all based on verifiable facts. Check the Parma talk page for additional references that back up the information. Have a pleasant weekend! --172.129.24.191 22:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- I fail to see what was so difficult about simply working on the temporary subpage until the article was deleted--given that the current text is blatantly biased text taken in whole from the article on Parma, Ohio, it wouldn't shock me if someone goes, "Oh, look, there's actually well-written text in the article's history" and restores the copyvio text. But, whatever, I'll try to calm down my process wonkishness. I do, however, still have to return to the question posed by Wizardman, "What is the point of this article?" I could almost see this as a POV fork, as its only purpose seems to be an attack page on a certain group of politicians in Ohio. A search for "Parma Witch Hunt" returns exactly 0 hits, so again I ask, is this topic really notable enough to warrant an article unto its own? Is it even notable enough to warrant inclusion in the Parma, Ohio article? AmiDaniel (talk) 18:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
- The point is to have a basis for an article that can be expanded later, so as not to have too much information on the regular Parma page. The suspected first paragraph that user Mycroft.Holmes originally posted on the Parma page that was copied here, temporarily I might add, has since been removed. There are NO copyright issues with the second existing paragraph and so repeatedly putting up the copyright page is just unnecessary and accomplishes nothing of value. No one is trying to restore the information that Mycroft originally posted elsewhere on Wikipedia. As for the copied information from wikipedia's article on Parma concerning the Witch Hunt, you can call this article a stub perhaps that needs expansion, but you're just not accomplishing anything constructive by keeping alive some copyright issue that isn't even an issue anyways. Happy Memorial Day!
I, as a relative outsider, still find the text quite remarkably biased--even the title implicitly states a bias. Note that even the article on Senator Joseph McCarthy no where states that "McCarthy went on a witch hunt," despite the fact that his Communist blacklisting is frequently refered to as a witch hunt. I might also add that simply sourcing bias does not eliminate bias, and using weasel words like "To many, Drabik was a great councilman!" does not make it any less biased either. I personally feel that this article is a POV fork and would like to suggest that it be deleted and/or converted into a redirect to Parma, Ohio, as even if the bias is removed, the topic is still not notable enough (based upon the sources you provided) to warrant an individual article. If we can't reach any agreement on the matter, then I'll list this at WP:AfD and try to gain some community consensus.
On another note, I would like to stress yet again that I find your lack of etiquette quite frustrating, beginning first with your repeated removal of copyvio notices despite the messages I left asking that you stop and despite the text of the notice that explicitly stated not to edit the page. Secondly, you have now removed the tags from the article indicating that the factual accuracy and neutrality of the article is disputed without first contacting me and although the matter is still disputed (and not only by myself I might add). While I'm not going to restore them myself, I strongly encourage you to return them to their original location, as there is obviously still a dispute. Lastly, I really wish that you would register for an account as contacting you is pretty much impossible since you're on a shared IP, and it's difficult for me to tell who is saying what. Registering takes only three seconds, all you have to provide is a username and a password, and it will conceal your IP address (which will actually provide you more anonymity, not less).
Again, I hope you'll take my suggestions into consideration, and I hope you at least recognize why I feel the article should simply be merged back into Parma, Ohio. Thanks. AmiDaniel (talk) 00:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
- I have no problems with merging it back into the Parma page and deleting this page. Mycroft.Holmes created this page to end the dispute on the Parma page, but if Mycroft is okay with the new, watered down and more sourced version of the Parma history, then I will be as well.--172.161.197.121 16:21, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
