Talk:Closings and cancellations following the September 11, 2001 attacks
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Nice job on the reworking of this page. JamesDay 02:45, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Thanks James. I'm a big fan of lists. :) Martin 22:27, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Do you watch The West Wing? How about a nice List of anecdotes about US presidents:) JamesDay 23:32, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- I used to - not so much now. Don't we have that list at presidential trivia? Martin 23:45, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)
[edit] From Vfd
- Delete. wikipedia is not a newspaper; the article is hopelessly outdated: "Reagan airport (in Washington, D.C.) is still closed one week after the attack." --Jiang
- Delete, merge if information still interesting. Fuzheado
- Keep or merge and redirect. It is a valid collection of information about the response to a huge terrorist event. The closings and cancellations caused by 9/11 is unprecedented in US history. The article is also a daughter article of the 9/11 article. Thus it naturally is more focused. Do not delete! --mav 16:10, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Merge and delete. DJ Clayworth 16:17, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Keep; merging all of the sub-pages would make the main 9-11 article way too large. I've corrected the tense. JamesDay 18:09, 3 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- No you haven't! The sentence I quoted is still there. I'm not asking that all articles be merged. Some are just not worth keeping. Are we interested in every minute detail? "Disneyland and Walt Disney World were closed." Closed until when? For how long? The article doesn't contain much in fact. Sentences like these don't need to be merged. They can be deleted. --Jiang
- That edit was initially lost while connecting to the server and never posted. I redid it a few hours later. Looks as though you posted here between the time of my initial attempt to save the change and the time I redid it and it got through. Yes, I do think that there's merit in including quite a lot of detail of how the US shut down various systems and facilities in response to the attacks. Not as much as I'd like to see in this one yet and I'll probably add more once it's off VfD, if its still around. JamesDay 16:28, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Yes, there needs to be more detail, but this article lacks it. The current article just lists a whole bunch of stuff that was closed without saying how long they were closed, the effects of the closings, etc. The details (and significance) should be added for this article to stay. We don't need to know that the Sunnyvale Daycare Center shut down for a day either! So what if Disneyland shut down? How often do they shut down? How unprecedented is this? The flight cancellations could be merged with economic effects...we dont have to merge all into the main article. Another extremely outdated sentence: "As of November 2001, it has been rescheduled to March 2002 and moved to a holiday resort outside Brisbane involving a more restricted program" --Jiang
Delete. Anything of historical significance can be merged.-- Minesweeper 02:21, 5 Nov 2003 (UTC)- It is better to keep separate pages than to merge content. The entry title is a perfectly valid one under any reasonable criteria. --The Cunctator
- No, it is not always better. It is only better when the main article is too long and the subarticles will also have sufficient content.--Jiang
- Tidied up by MyRedDice so it's fine now. --Jiang
- Keep. -- Taku
- Keep, because people are going to start insisting there's too much detail on institutions being closed once we cram it into the main September 11 page, and then they'll start demanding we lessen the amount of information, which will result in us losing some of it . . . Whatever it takes to keep it on here. As Mav said, the aftermath of 9/11 was unparalleled in history in the number of closures and cancellations it caused. Wiwaxia 01:49, 8 Nov 2003 (UTC)
- Keep! This is useful, relevant, and is too detailed to be merged. -- Special-K
[edit] Union Station disambiguation/PoV
Can someone figure out which Union Station this article refers to? There are at least a dozen and a half in the page this article links to. I also removed "Most importantly, never ever again, can Americans take their safety for granted." That sentence reeks with PoV. It's like something ou of a Bush-Cheyney 2004 commercial! Why not just have "I'm George W. Bush, and I approved this message..." at the end?
[edit] Please stop the edit war in the 'Cancellations' section
Hello. I'd like to take a moment to justify my wording in the cancellations paragraph. My wording was intentional.
There was a widespread perception shortly after the attacks that recreational events and sport were not appropriate after... is a statement of fact. It could be bolstered by polls, or by the self evident statements of the officials cancelling events.
Recreational events and sport were not appropriate after... is a prescriptive statement of opinion, however correct it may be.
Similarly, removing 'Safety could never ever be taken for granted again' was removed by me for the same general reason; it is an opinion which is in fact contradicted by recent moves such as the TSA's relaxation of the ban of certain pointed objects in the cabins of passenger aircraft. It is my perception that however long it is taking, there is concrete evidence that certain parts of safety assumptions are beginning to be 'taken for granted' again.
Thank you, and I'll leave this be. User:SNIyer12, if you wish to, I encourage you to reply here with your concerns, so that others may correspond with you. Skybunny 03:54, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
