User talk:Rhobite/9/11 watchlist

Bold items

Thanks for creating this watchlist. While I don't think it makes much difference which list entries are bold, The Pentagon actually isn't subject of much vandalism. ---Aude 01:51, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

That's surprising.. I unbolded it. Thanks. Rhobite 21:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Additions?

I've had the Oklahoma City bombing article on my own watchlist for a couple weeks, and noticed it gets vandalized quite a lot, as well as conspiracies. It might be worth adding to your watchlist, even though it's not specifically about 9/11. Maybe also add 1993 World Trade Center bombing, as it periodically is vandalized too. --Aude (talk | contribs) 21:43, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Loose Change

You should consider including Loose Change (video) on your list. It would fall under what you consider a conspiracy theory. Bov 04:01, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Lots of others

I'm not sure I understand what your criteria for inclusion are, since there are quite a lot of ones you're missing, including but by no means limited to: 911 In Plane Site 9/11 Whitewash Commission A.J. Hammer Andreas von Bülow Charlie Sheen and Alex Jones interviews Crossing the Rubicon (Ruppert) Ed Asner Erica Jong Kevin Ryan Michael Berger Michael Ruppert Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed Nicole Rittenmeyer Official hijackers of the 2001 attacks People questioning the official American 9/11 account Pull it Robert M. Bowman Sander Hicks The Big Wedding: 9/11, The Whistleblowers, and the Cover-Up and on and on... Esquizombi 13:48, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to add directly to the list. It should include any articles which deal with theories of what happened on 9/11. Rhobite 21:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Create a response team?

Heh, thanks for doing this. Would you also consider setting up a response team to combat this? A coordinated response from several editors could be quite effective. Please add your name below if you're interested. Cheers. Morton devonshire 23:59, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

When I set this list up it was intended to be an informal list for people who want to counter conspiracy POV in 9/11 articles. Of course, people who doubt the official account can use the list in exactly the same way. In the past, partisan Wikiprojects (I'm thinking of Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency) have generated an amazing amount of argument. The community consensus is that Wikiprojects which exclude a certain POV are not helpful. My gut feeling is that this should not be a Wikiproject, but people are of course free to modify or fork the list and use it however they like. Rhobite 03:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)