Talk:An account of the Esperanza Fire from an animal rescuer

Direct copy
This article is a direct copy from the website and as such is in violation of copyright - Cartman02au (Talk)(AU Portal) 03:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I am Amanda St. John, the author of the above article. The article was published on the website MuttShack.org by myself.  I am the Founder of MuttShack Animal Rescue.  Please let me know what  releases are required by myself to myself... this is beginning to sound like it is all about me.


 * Thank you for your time with (yet another) newbie! Amanda St. John 22:13, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

NPOV
Hi Amanda. From one newbie to another I think one of the problems might be that you are the author. This isn't a problem from a copyright standpoint (although its possible that at this point MuttShack owns the copyright on the article, not you, but I don't know that), but form a Neutral Point of View standpoint. As the founder of the organization that is being written about in the article you can't be neutral and no one expects you to be! In this case it can be argued that you're not a reporter but a participant. As an example, you wouldn't expect Bill Gates to write a neutral news report about Microsoft. Here you're in a similar circumstance.

I think its a fine article. I think it deserves to be told. However, due to your position, you might not be the best person to tell it from a news perspective. It might be nice if someone else could write it and if other sources could be found for such data as the cost of the fire and the number of firefighters that lost their lives.

Just my 2 cents from another newbie! -Richard &#39;Doc&#39; Kinne 02:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Regardless of one's identity, anyone is allowed to write news articles. Or wasn't this a community effort? Towsonu2003 07:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I changed the title of the article to convey the message that this is a "first person account of the fire". A first (or third, thru word of mouth) person account is an important & invaluable news element. I don't think there is reason to unpublsh this further... Towsonu2003 07:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)