Talk:Enumclaw, Washington
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
|
[edit] Also in Pierce County?
Apparently Enumclaw spills over into Pierce (page 2-5 of [1]) but I can't find much information on that. A city map seems to suggest that the bit of Enumclaw in Pierce is completely surrounded by unincorporated King county; is that really true? Could someone add info? Admittedly, it may not be as, um, exciting as horses, but that's what I was hoping to find here.
The town of Greenwater which is east of Enumclaw in the mountains on Highway 410 is in Pierce County. Greenwater and Enumclaw share the same zip code (98022). I assume this is why Enumclaw is reference in the Pierce County information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.123.171.66 (talk) 21:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Horse sex case
Is that really what we're known for here? I'm so proud. --Smell? 05:37, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Why was the horse sex taken off? It is a legitimate notable entry about the city. It pretty much has put Enumclaw on the map, so to speak. Can you mention anything more important? I didn't think so. 129.110.195.70 02:07, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
- I would tend to agree with the anon - I bet that over 2/3 of the people who look up Enumclaw in Wikipedia are doing it to find information on the horse sex case. Even if that weren't the only thing about Enumclaw that's notable, I don't think there's any reason to remove the links and reference. In fact, it seems like hiding facts, which is the antithesis of Wikipedia in the first place.
- I do agree that what was here before was a bit overkill-ish, but I could easily put in a more toned down note and a link or two, in the interest of factual accuracy. Suntiger 22:26, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
There are many more notable aspects of Enumclaw other than a single instance of beastiality. It should appear as mere blemish on the rich history of the town. I would hate if a sex scandal was the defining characterstic of my life so I beleive Enumclaw deserves due recognition beyond a case of horse sex. (NK)70.162.62.54 08:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
It's old news, didn't happen in the city, and like the previous user said, it's one incident. It's better suited for the external links section. Jslik 17:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
According to reports, this incident did not happen within the city limits of Enumclaw. The content is irrelevent and vile to say the least. If a person wants to read about Enumclaw because of the incident, it would not be to know about the incident (as they obviously already do), but it would be to find out more about the town. If for any other reason someone wants to know about Enumclaw, I can assure you that's the last thing they will care to read about. Wikipedia is meant for encyclopedic information, not for gossip and miscontrued information. Jubican 06:12, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- The Google results for "enumclaw horse" make it pretty clear that, while the incident may not have happened within the Enumclaw city limits, it's often referred to as "the Enumclaw horse incident", and is always referred to as having happened in the Enumclaw region. In fact, a Google search just for the word "enumclaw" helpfully offers to "See results for: enumclaw horse", right below links to the city web site, the school district site, and this article. While I'm sure this is embarrassing for the town (to say the least!), there's a preponderance of evidence which suggests that this is, for better or for worse, what the town's currently best known for. Zetawoof(ζ) 06:58, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Then it's best to leave it as it is: News. It's not encyclopedic, just news. It has not, and will not shape this town by any means. Indeed, a state law has been passed because of it, but it's merely a piece of news. It has had no impact on the demographic or economic situation of Enumclaw. There is just simply not enough relevance to include it in this wiki. In addition, you would not find that kind of information in a reputable, printed encyclopedia, nor should it be found in Wikipedia. Jubican 14:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
An encyclopedia has the history of a place. The "incident" is by FAR the most important thing that ever happened in that area. It definitely shapes the reputation of the city: as a native of Enumclaw living in Seattle, any mention of where I came from immediately brings about, at the very least, some strange looks. A tiny town gets mentioned in newspapers all around the world, and you would say it's not relevant? You're right in that it wouldn't be found in a printed encyclopedia, but that's due to space and research resources, not because it's not important. It's practically the ONLY thing that's important about it.
I have to weigh in on the side of inclusion. I was pretty surprised when I saw that the page did not include information regarding the incident with the horse. Do the defensive residents of Enumclaw really think that the vast, overwhelming majority of users reading their Wikipedia are doing so for any reason other than because of its connection with Pinyan and the horse? Do they really think anyone will "stumble upon the reference while looking for information about Enumclaw"?
Like it or not, and whether locals would like to deem it "gossip and miscontrued information," the fact is that it's a --or better, the-- defining feature of the town. - JC
[edit] RFC: Kenneth Pinyan issue
- RFC summary: Dispute whether the article on Enumclaw should include or exclude a reference to a disturbing incident that gained worldwide notoriety.
The case of Kenneth Pinyan (see that article) is causing some debate in this article.
Kenneth Pinyan died notoriously, with widespread news interest and long-standing state repercussions. His death lead to state law changes, was the #1 most read article of the year in the Seattle Times, and has had a film made related to it, to mention but three items. As one editor has commented above, it is for better or worse what Enumclaw is most known for, to the world at large.
The Enumclaw Courier Herald described that "The city of Enumclaw popped up on the national media radar in July 2005 ... The incident spurred a stampede of media attention on the city, including a national magazine article." [2]
- View for inclusion
An entry in the Enumclaw article read:
- "On July 2, 2005 Kenneth Pinyan, a Seattle resident, died from colonic rupture by an Arabian stallion at a farm near Enumclaw in unincorporated King County. His death led to the criminalization of bestiality in Washington." [3]
with the narrative "Stop censoring the Pinyan case. It's real. It happened in Enumclaw."
- View for exclusion
A contrary view is stated (by an Enumclaw resident judging by the text) that:
- "It has not, and will not shape this town by any means. Indeed, a state law has been passed because of it, but it's merely a piece of news. It has had no impact on the demographic or economic situation of Enumclaw. There is just simply not enough relevance to include it in this wiki. In addition, you would not find that kind of information in a reputable, printed encyclopedia, nor should it be found in Wikipedia." [4]
and that the link is "irrelevent and vile to say the least" and "did not happen within the city limits". [5] (same editor)
- Possible COI
Of the 4 editors who have supported removal, three appear to be self-declared Enumclaw residents or affiliated with the town [6][7][8], and the fourth is a single purpose account [9]. (Some aspects of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest may be relevant if this is the case.)
- Current state of debate
The above text has been inserted and removed by editors several times, until page protection halted the revert war.
RFC is sought. How notable is Kenneth Pinyan's case in the context of an article on Enumclaw (i.e., the town, it's notability, and it's history)? Should this item be included or excluded? FT2 (Talk | email) 18:14, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- As a resident of Seattle, I only had a vague recollection of Enumclaw until the horse incident. Since the incident, whenever anyone in Seattle talks about Enumclaw, it is generally related to some horse sex joke. I think that currently that is what the town is known for, and a brief mention of the incident would be appropriate -Todd(Talk-Contribs) 20:50, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think it's necessary for Wikipedia to feed anyone's prurient interests via a link from the town's article. Maybe the locals know Enumclaw as a place sort of like Catherine the Great's palace, but outsiders who don't know about it and who stumble on the reference while looking for information about Enumclaw might get an unnecessary bit of titillation. All this horsing around keeps the article from being stable. (OK, that was bad.) --Elkman (Elkspeak) 22:55, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
- The articles stability is a result of lack of editorial consensus. Hence RFC. FT2 (Talk | email) 23:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
- I was making a bad pun with the word "stable". --Elkman (Elkspeak) 23:13, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
- The articles stability is a result of lack of editorial consensus. Hence RFC. FT2 (Talk | email) 23:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
