Talk:Moscow, Idaho

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is supported by WikiProject Cities, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to cities, towns, and various other settlements on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.


WikiProject Idaho This article is part of WikiProject Idaho, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Idaho on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

Contents

[edit] Psychiana

Should phsychiana be "psychiana" or is this just an idiosyncracy? Dysprosia 08:48, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Shooting (May 19/20, 2007)

how come no one's added anything about the moscow shooting yet? 74.116.186.213 17:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Why don't you add something? That's kinda the idea of wikipedia. --209.234.111.114 03:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I put in a small news article (with citations) at the beginning of the article. I plan to move it from the front of the article in a few days. I will update it early this afternoon (unless someone beats me to it) after the 11:00 am press conference. Residents in the community are stunned at this time and saddened at the loss of life and injury to local residents. --Robbie Giles 13:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

This is funny; Moscow in Idaho! Never thought that was the name of a city in an American state! Lol! Randalph P. Williams 10:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] School list

In addition to reformatting the table for the school list, I removed the physical address of the schools. I would hate to see Wikipedia listed in a news story about "How I found a school to do horrible things there." Yup, paranoid in my old age. --Robbie Giles 02:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:NSA campus.jpg

Image:NSA campus.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 insure 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) 23:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I will try to get a new image this weekend of the Skattaboe block where NSA is located. That will fix the Fair use problem. --Robbie Giles (talk) 16:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reversion of edits removing shooting incident

I reverted the two edits which removed all information on the May 2007 shooting in Moscow. I have no real objection to removing it, however, I believe the removal should be discussed first. The news story links are still active and the one-year anniversary of the event is nearing. If editors want to remove it, please make an argument here. --Robbie Giles (talk) 16:46, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, I wrote before actually checking all three links to this section. Two are still valid, but the third is no longer found at that location. I have edited the citations appropriately. --Robbie Giles (talk) 16:54, 9 March 2008 (UTC)