Talk:Cuba asks to re-open negotiations with United States

Breaking
This is breaking news...this just happened and its benn over 30 years since the US or Cuba have talked...how is it not breaking news? DragonFire1024 21:00, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The breaking template is not necessarily for news that has "just happened", in my opinion. It is not breaking news because it is not:
 * A major event (national or international) - such as a terrorist attack, war, etc.
 * Lacking information / sources - the #1 thing for breaking news is getting information out quickly, thus lacking information. I can't forsee the information in this article "changing rapidly" because the information is already there.
 * We don't have a set of clear guidelines for what is / isn't appropriate for the breaking tag, but I honestly do not believe that this article can be classified as breaking news. --Skenmy(t•c•w•i) 21:06, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Can change rapidly...for instance...the US could say yes...or reply. It does NOT haver to be a war or a terror attack...thats just total POV. If we did that with every article, then there would not be any breaking news. This is national...to Cuba and the US and will have International impacts. With that said, I think this is BIG news and does qualify as Breaking. Anyone else please reply. DragonFire1024 21:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Please, let's not start on POV. Surely the whole breaking template is POV - to some people it is a breaking story and to others it is not. I ask that other editors join this discussion. We need a solid set of guidelines for a breaking news story established. --Skenmy(t•c•w•i) 21:18, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Any story can be breaking news depending on who sees the importance of it. Im not starting on POV I just said that if we were to add breaking opnly to those articles you mentioned, then there would be no breaking news at all...other than blood and bombs. DragonFire1024 21:39, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * One of the sources is from yesterday, so I don't think it merits breaking tag. Many stories that are just out should not be tagged with it, it looks unprofessional to have it on a completed story that is unlikely to change.  In this case were the US to agree to dialogue with Cuba that would be a new story that might merit the breaking tag because there would likely be significant reaction that would require worked into the report. --Brian McNeil / talk 22:15, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I was always of the opinion that breaking was for stuff where its in the middle of being written. Anything that is complete no matter how important or interesting should not be considered breaking. Bawolff ☺☻ 03:12, 12 September 2007 (UTC)