Talk:High Plains Reader

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject North Dakota, a WikiProject which aims to improve all articles related to North Dakota.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article is on a subject of Low-importance within North Dakota articles.
This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Do we really need the following paragraph?

Calendar Editor Jana Tronier was elected president of the Independent Artist Collective in early 2005, an association of local artists, musicians, and other citizens working together on common goals, including securing a member-supported performance and practice building.

Let me know what you think. --MatthewUND June 30, 2005 20:05 (UTC)

[edit] Deleted Section: Cass County v. Strand

The editor of the High Plains Reader, John Strand, was sued by the Cass County Commission for his part in the "Save the Jail" group that opposed the destruction of the brownstone Cass County Jail and Sheriff's Residence, among the last of the original brownstone buildings in the United States. The group wanted to turn the buildings into a youth center or some similar project, but the county said the buildings were unfit for any use and that renovation would cost more than rebuilding. The group believed the destruction of the buildings and the building of new properties was a single project, the budget of which exceeded the county's funds and therefore had to be put to a vote under state law. New Paragraph The county insisted the demolition was a separate project and pointed to the fact that the architectural plans were not drawn up and the company hired to draw the blueprints was not retained. New Paragraph The Save the Jail group sought the injunction because the county refused to wait for an answer to the question of whether or not the project had to be put to a public vote. Their request was granted. New Paragraph Knowing the injunction was coming, the county instructed demolition crews to do as much damage as possible before the judge issued the order, thus destroying the historic site. Strand waited six days before dropping the injunction while surveying the damage and determining the rubble was not salvageable. New Paragraph The county sued for $39,000 in a bid to recover the money spent on the construction workers during the six days of delay. Speculation on the part of most Strand supporters is that the county's real goal is not to recover damages, but to punish Strand for his outspoken stance against the demolition project. This is known as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). New Paragraph Among those who testified at the trial were former governor Ed Schafer, former attorney general Heidi Heitkamp, and other notable North Dakotan political figures. New Paragraph The judge's ruling in the case was to award neither party any damages - an "anti-Solomon" decision of sorts. New Paragraph The court then ruled less than two weeks later the county's projects were separate, and therefore did not need to be put up for a vote. New Paragraph Both sides in the case, Strand and the county, say the lawsuit was unnecesary and blame the other for hampering the efforts of each other. The county said Strand should have dropped the injunction as soon as he knew the buildings were already half-destroyed. Strand said the county should have simply waited a few days for a decision to come about over whether the project needed a vote or not. New Paragraph No new building plans have been proposed for the now-empty lots by Cass County.

[edit] Discussion About Content Deletion

• This section has no relevance to the entry "High Plains Reader." If it can stand on its own, the article should be split. If it cannot, and it does not appear so, then this section should be entirely deleted. --Malecasta 17:43, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Update This content was deleted because it does not relate to the entry. Additionally, it could not be split to a Disambiguation page because "high plains reader" was not an appropriate entry for an article about the cass county / strand dispute. Finally, the section could not stand on its own as its own article because it violated No original research, it was not written in concordance with neutral point of view, and it did not relfect consensus or the debate about this issue's consensus. Discussion of Wikipedia policies and how they are enforced are at Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines. This action also conforms to Deletion policy. --Malecasta 00:32, 15 October 2005 (UTC)