Talk:Aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

what were the names of the hijackers?

Contents 1 World Trade Centre Environmental Organisation 2 Market Activity Investigations 3 Emotional opening 4 Suggestion for effects on children 5 Reference 6 Add info 7 Fair use rationale for Image:Honoluluadvertiser11september2001.jpg 8 removal: Stereotypes

[edit] World Trade Centre Environmental Organisation

An organisation called the World Trade Centre Environmental Organisation has suggested through the help desk e-mail that we insert a link to their page see [1].

Capitalistroadster 06:34, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Market Activity Investigations

What's the significance of this section? There was a suspicion of coordinated trading with the September 11, 2001 attacks. The conclusion was nothing happened. patsw 15:08, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Emotional opening

The beginning of the article feels more suitable to a pulp novel than a reliable information source. Maybe this should be toned down?

"The news shocked the world. Men and women wept openly."

I am aware of men and women weeping openly at many occasions, e.g. shock results at sports events, death of famous celebrities, etc.

"The event left a lasting impression on many Americans. The question, "Where were you on September 11, 2001?" has become a common topic of discussion, and will be for years to come."

I feel this is emotional rather than informational. Do we need to add this sentence to death of JFK article, first landing on the moon, death of Princess Diana? .... I suggest these two sentences are removed.

 -- MarkG

I agree, I'll remove the sentences. /AB-me (chit-chat) 19:45, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm also against including this overly melodramatic opening. However we do need something.. many people have written about the sense of solidarity and the mourning in the weeks following the attacks. As long as we're citing sources it's OK. Rhobite 22:59, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suggestion for effects on children

68.32.116.227 23:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)I was browsing the Internet and found what I think is a very good blog post that shows how 9/11 affected the life of a kid who was 10 at the time. You can read it here:[2] I would add it myself, but it's not a very noteable blog, and the first 1/3 of the post is not very NPOV (I don't know if any of those things matter). I suggested this because I noticed there were no testimonials from children under the "Effects on children" section, I think this would be a good addition.

[edit] Reference

This just surfaced http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf and it is ideal for illustration of this: "Iraq had no role in the September 11 attacks and had no known history of a significant working relationship with Al Qaida.". Here is an excerpt: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5328592.stm. Lovelight 21:38, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you seen Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda? Tom Harrison ^Talk 22:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

The book After September 11 would be a natural related book for this entry. The book is from Reuters and published in 2003.

[edit] Add info

Someone should add this in the appropriate spots. Israel Reacts to Terrorist Attacks on the US - 11-Sep-2001 --Shamir1 06:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Honoluluadvertiser11september2001.jpg

Image:Honoluluadvertiser11september2001.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] removal: Stereotypes

07:15, 4 March 2007 Jagged 85 (Talk | contribs) (→See also:  added Stereotypes of Arabs and Muslims) (undo)

I just reverted that year-old edit, the article seems not so good to me.  — Xiutwel ♫☺♥♪ (speech has the power to bind the absolute) 14:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)