Talk:Ohioville creek bones are not human

I'm kinda confused as to how this is news worthy. I'm a fan of local news on wikinews... but this article is hardly even that. It says animal bones were found... Yay? -- Shakata Ga Nai ^_^ 04:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

my opinion
--SpranglingGarter (talk) 04:36, 10 August 2008 (UTC)I believe this has some news aspect to it as i found it on yahoo! news.

if you read the entire article you might get a sense of news??? --SpranglingGarter (talk) 04:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok, well here is something to keep in mind. Alot of readers come here to read the article written here, not go digging about other news sites.  That is what I do.  So right now there is 3 sentences that says basically "kids found bones, not human".  So my question to you is: Why do I, the reader, care that animal bones were found?  Is this unusual?  Is this a big deal?  Were the kids traumatized?  Did the local police screw it up and claim they were human?  Is there a missing person that they thought they bones might be tied to?  -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 04:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

well....
the article was really short and didnt really say much but i might go back and read up on it... --SpranglingGarter (talk) 04:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * using == something == denotes a new section/conversation. If you are replying to something said, consider just adding your reply below theirs.  Using : for indentation. (Each : is one more tab)  -- Shakata Ga Nai  ^_^ 04:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

okay gotcha ya... i understand now... lol --SpranglingGarter (talk) 04:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)