| Revision as of 04:09, 30 April 2006 editJmabel (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators90,268 edits →Art Thiel, the sports columnist← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:24, 30 April 2006 edit undoJmabel (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators90,268 edits The Castro invitationNext edit → | ||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
| :::I could say the same for you and your "melon". But rather than remove material, why don't you cite something that backs up your point? ] (]) 04:01, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | :::I could say the same for you and your "melon". But rather than remove material, why don't you cite something that backs up your point? ] (]) 04:01, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | ||
| : Given that, by most accounts, half of the protestors were from Seattle or the immediate area (and most of the rest were housed by people from Seattle or the immediate area , the claim of universal support seems pretty bizarre. - ] | ] 04:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | : Given that, by most accounts, half of the protestors were from Seattle or the immediate area (and most of the rest were housed by people from Seattle or the immediate area , the claim of universal support seems pretty bizarre. - ] | ] 04:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ==The Castro invitation== | |||
| This may give an idea of the level of Seattle's ambivalence about the event: in August before the Ministerial, five (out of nine) Seattle City Council members (at the behest of a Seattle congressman) extended an invitation to Fidel Castro to attend. (; the latter portion of the article is unfortunately cut off. -- ] | ] 04:24, 30 April 2006 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 04:24, 30 April 2006
To discuss the article regarding the massive demonstrations in Seattle protesting this conference, see Talk:WTO Ministerial Conference of 1999 protest activity.
Art Thiel, the sports columnist
Was stating his opinion about the conference. He hardly represents the voice of Seattle opinion about the conference pre-event. Both the Times and PI reported universal support for the conference prior to its occurrence. To suggest that there was widespread, or any opposition, pre-event, is wishful thinking. All sorts of people found reasons after the riots occurred, of course, but that's typical Monday-morning-quarterbacking. Please stop adding your pro-Anarchist POV into these kinds of articles. Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox. Morton devonshire 03:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- Regardless of what his normal column is, I still consider it worthwhile to include. SchuminWeb (Talk) 03:41, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- When did your melon become the benchmark for what is or isn't notable? Go back and look at pre-conference reports in the PI and Times -- there wasn't any opposition to holding the conference. Morton devonshire 03:46, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- I could say the same for you and your "melon". But rather than remove material, why don't you cite something that backs up your point? SchuminWeb (Talk) 04:01, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- When did your melon become the benchmark for what is or isn't notable? Go back and look at pre-conference reports in the PI and Times -- there wasn't any opposition to holding the conference. Morton devonshire 03:46, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
- Given that, by most accounts, half of the protestors were from Seattle or the immediate area (and most of the rest were housed by people from Seattle or the immediate area , the claim of universal support seems pretty bizarre. - Jmabel | Talk 04:09, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
The Castro invitation
This may give an idea of the level of Seattle's ambivalence about the event: in August before the Ministerial, five (out of nine) Seattle City Council members (at the behest of a Seattle congressman) extended an invitation to Fidel Castro to attend. (; the latter portion of the article is unfortunately cut off. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:24, 30 April 2006 (UTC)