Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/We believe in human dignity

We believe in human dignity

 * Delete Is there any point in this page? Seems to just be a reference to a non-notable George W Bush speech or alternatively just political campaigning. (And before anyone asks I'm British and don't care who wins the election.) Jongarrettuk 20:49, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete or merge, not worthy of its own article. &mdash; David Remahl 21:15, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Comment, no vote. Famous speeches certainly have a place in the Wikipedia, but I simply don't know if this speech is famous enough; it's too recent to judge its true impact. &bull; Benc &bull; 21:35, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I absolutely agree. However, as far as I can see, the title of the article was not the title of the speech, and it doesn't seem to be more notable than any other presidential / presidential candidate speech. &mdash; David Remahl 21:56, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable political propaganda. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (talk)]] 23:51, Sep 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Mikkalai 03:06, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Just because you yourselves think the speech is non-notable, does not make it unworthy of inclusion in Wikipedia. It was a speech by a top world leader about weighty issues affecting America, the Middle East, and the rest of the world. This is not a local businessman addressing the Rotary Club on litter in the park. Moreover, articles are not supposed to be deleted, merely because a "consensus" forms among "voters". We have standards for inclusion, and the only question is whether this artice meets the standards -- not whether you agree with the points the politician is making. --Uncle Ed 14:25, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Bush gives such speeches three times a week (hyperbole). Your taking this debate to the mailing list because you don't like how it's going isn't fair pool. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 14:42, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Cyrius, I read three daily New York papers, plus the Washington Times online, Drudge Report, and Wikipedia's Current events page. This is the FIRST speech I've heard about Bush making on ANY topic, that the media paid any more attention to other than to ignore it as a campaign stop. They never report the contents of stump speeches, but only mention some odd aspect of them, like a heckler gets arrested.
 * Please provide sources for the 3 speeches a week, because either I skim my favorite newspapers too quickly or they simply have NOT BEEN MENTIONING THE SPEECHES that you're talking about. --Uncle Ed 17:00, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * I didn't see much mention of this one either. Was my noting that it was hyperbole not blatant enough? However, as it turns out, it wasn't. He has given some sort of speech or press conference almost every day for the last month, according to the White House. They almost invariably start with "Thank you all for being here" or a slight variation thereof. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 02:17, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, it's just another speech where Bush says the same things. You could write dozens of these with near-identical content. -- Cyrius|&#9998; 14:42, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge into an article on the Bush administration's relationship with the UN in regards to the Iraq issue. As a speech I'm not sure it's really historically important, but it deserves a brief mention somewhere, perhaps also on the 2004 Presidential campaign page. --Delirium 14:49, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. A speech in which some action is announced and where that action is followed up is notable. Content of this speech was non-notable. A speech referred to again and again years later is notable. Only thing notable here is the "stony silence" though even that could be expected. Could be merged into some article on Bush and the UN or into an article on the compaign since it was really a campaign speech. Nothing in the article establishes notability of the speech itself. If enough ever gets written on this speech in some article, then it could be split off again. Jallan 17:26, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * *sighs* I'm a speech geek. I study it in College. but I can't help thinking this speech is not needed on Wikipedia. Why? Notability. It's 8 days old. In 6 months, will the world remember it as a piece of speechwriting? In a year? 10? If so, then we need to write an article about it then. Right now, the speech itself belongs on wikisource, and at most, but I really don't think it needs it, a mention on some George Bush/UN relations article. Delete, otherwise. Lyellin 19:05, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Couple things to add... I'm pretty involved in politics, speech watching etc. I remember hearing about this speech the day it happened. But a large impact on the populance? Not at all. Barely a blip. At the very, very, very least, as my last choice, this should be renamed to something like "George W. Bush speech to UN Sept 21, 2004" or whatever. Lyellin 03:16, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment/no vote: I think there is definitely precedent that famous speeches deserve a Wikipedia article, and a link to a Wikisource transcript. However, not being American, I have no idea how notable this speech was. My suggestion: put the transcript on Wikisource (I assume it's PD since it's on whitehouse.gov), and if the consensus is to delete this article, give it a paragraph and a link in the George W. Bush article and/or the U.S. presidential election, 2004 article. &mdash;Stormie 23:40, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not encyclopedic. Some speeches change the course of history, and this isn't one of them. Gazpacho 03:24, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ambi 03:31, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Politicians make lots of speeches, we can't and shouldn't document them all. Gamaliel [[Image:Watchmensmiley20.gif]] 20:03, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)