User talk:Dronkle/Archives/2011/May

AfD
If I had seen that ""Jewish control of the media" was up for deletion I would have !voted to "keep". But I have to say that ''"I am not calling for salting as there is a possibility of a good article being created on a related topic. But this article is not such a good article and its history makes it a poor starting point for achieving such a good article''" was one of the best comments opening an AfD that I have ever seen and I do agree to a certain extent. Nice work.Cptnono (talk) 03:56, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the message. My review remains as expressed in the afd that an article on the World Jewish Conspiracy should come before one on Jewish control of the media. Then, of course, there is the Noleander business. It would have been good if someone had subjected his work on other religions to the same scrutiny as his work on Jewish stuff before the Arbcom case as I have my suspicions about his whole output. I've tried prodding WP:Islam a couple of times but they don't seem to have that many active editors. Creating an article with the title Islam and violence has the same whiff of POV-forking that went on in Noleander's anti-Jewish stuff. My other issue is that the more modern material in the Jews and the media articles were very US-centric. It always used to be said that more Jews were in New York than Israel in which case it is not that surprising that the NYT has a history of Jewish ownership. But Wikipedia should be dealing with a global perspective in which case Newscorp, AFP, Al-Jazeera are of similar importance to CNN or the NYT and Bollywood should be considered in conjunction with Hollywood etc.--Peter cohen (talk) 22:29, 9 May 2011 (UTC)