Talk:North American bee disappearance of 2007

Deletion proposal

To be blunt, this page is inappropriate for Wikipedia. The existence of this alleged disappearance has not been confirmed. Some beekeepers lost all their bees over the winter. Every year, some beekeepers lose all their bees for lots of factors, most of which are poorly understood. Others lose none and most lose some fraction of their bees. Actual controlled reports show this year's losses to be about the same as last year's after adjusting for the low stores that many colonies had going into the winter. (Low stores were based on the bad weather and low honey flows last summer and fall.) The reported colony losses in Florida in the BeeCulture report are running at 22% - nowhere near the claimed 50% in the article.

All we have to say so far is a regurgitation of the various news reports - most of which are considered deeply flawed by actual bee researchers. Until there is hard evidence that this "disappearance" actually happened, this page is speculation. It's appropriate to cover in WikiNews but not yet in Wikipedia. Rossami (talk) 13:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it does turn out to be cold fusion, the event (or non-event) has generated much press coverage and even scientific inquiry. The perspective you bring to the article is certainly interesting, but its just one perspective. We'll see how it plays out.Yeago 17:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not about giving room to ALL perspectives; it's about giving room to perspectives WHICH HAVE CREDIBILITY. I may believe I have invisible gnomes in my garden that are sucking the water out of the soil and killing my plants, and might even get my story into a local newspaper - but that doesn't mean I can submit a page to Wikipedia about it. The principle in question is objectivity, and this article you have submitted is not objective, while the page about Colony Collapse Disorder is - your article contributes nothing that is not already adequately dealt with there; I support Rossami's call for deletion. Dyanega 23:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And when scientific journals and dozens of articles across the country pay heed to your garden gnome story, you will be immortalized on Wikipedia as notable. =). Until then, I'm not really sure I agree with your correlation. Why don't you do a google news search and see how many outlets are talking about this recent bee thing, be it true or false?

As for it not being objective, please feel free to update it and remove any bias you see. I'm not sure what interest you think I have in this article that I've written up some propaganda. I simply heard about it from a friend and decided to poke around Google News, and found a slew of recent media attention.

As for it being adequately covered there, did you not read my comments at Talk:Colony Collapse Disorder? I agree the theory of CCD is covered there, but the stories about the recent spike isn't dealt with. You seem to be acting on the belief the spike doesn't it exist. It may not! But that's your opinion until some publication debunks it.Yeago 00:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The news stories have nothing to do with it. If you want to write news stories, go to WikiNews where this content would be completely appropriate. We are writing an encyclopedia. There is no verifiable content that is yet appropriate to an encyclopedia. There might be someday - and if there is, we should certainly write the article then. For now, this page is premature. Rossami (talk) 03:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable enough, except someone beat me to it =) [1]. I'll "merge" (redirect) for now and we can always rever it. A blurb about the media spike should appear in the other article, however.Yeago 03:44, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]