Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surveillance abuse
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep (no consensus). Mindspillage (spill yours?) 20:13, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
can i have a second opinion CoolGuy 07:03, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, I agree. delete CoolGuy 07:37, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, provides no proof such a thing ever happened. Also, POV makes it impossible to rewrite. Delete, but keep it open for a sourced rewrite. Mgm|(talk) 12:07, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
- Seems a bit racist, too. However, there was a report on the news this morning of the surveillance people at Caesar's Atlantic City being fined for ogling women with their surveillance equipment and apparently this is the second time this has happened at the same casino, so I can see something about similar things going into an article about this title, but as is, this is not the appropriate article. Delete. RickK 16:39, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, POV title. Whatever legitimate info is here should probably be merged with a more general article on surveillance. Firebug 18:39, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Keep and send to Cleanup. Encyclopedic topic, but needs to be rewritten to Wikipedia standards. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:55, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Agree with Firebug -- what there is here that's useful wants to be within a lead article; what's POV wants 'out'. I query whether anyone would type the title in on a search.--Simon Cursitor 06:55, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Merge into Surveillance. - Pioneer-12 10:20, 1 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep re-write if necessary. Comment made by SchmuckyTheCat.
- Merge into surveillance article. This news article is very close to the topic, so I believe it is real, though. [1] -Hapsiainen 14:42, May 2, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep But totally re-write, or merge with surveillance. The current text is almost incoherent. I wrote the encyclopedia entry for "Surveillance Abuse" in the Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment, David Levinson, ed., (Berkshire Reference Works), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2002. It is a legitimate entry title, but the issue is much broader than editing videotapes. However, recent court cases in several cities have shown that videos produced by police as evidence against demonstrators have been "creatively" edited; and other videos showed that the tape selections misrepresented the larger picture, resulting in dismissals of charges. I can create a decent stub with five book cites if folks decide to keep it.--Cberlet 20:21, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.