Talk:Clearing House (EU)

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article looks like bullshit... at least another source would be good. --Sterio 16:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added a similar source without need for sub. Thing is about obscure groups with names similar to 100 other orgs is that it is very hard to google. Oh and would you kindly not use language such as "bullshit". - J Logan ^t: 17:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed for deletion. Of the three sources used as references, one is now inactive, and the other two are articles that sound very much like conspiracy theory and which actually refer to each other. GetMKWearMKFly (talk) 16:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conspiracy theory? They're normal news articles and it is hardly something dramatic or shocking that it must be untrue. And they don't "refer to each other", they just contain similar material as one is more reliable news agency but when the article was put up it was locked so the other one was there for people to read.- _J.Logan`^t: 17:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The ARMA Int. article repeatedly cites the EUobserver article as a source, and the EUISS paper is a dead link. There is little to no evidence that the group actually exists, as there are no references to it that I can find beyond those two articles, which themselves provide little substantive evidence. GetMKWearMKFly (talk) 00:33, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've already stated, ARMA is there because EU observer was subscriber only before. What grounds do you doubt the EU Observer article? It is hard to find this through a normal google because a) its small b) its secretive c) it has a very very common name and d) it isn't used by that name in most places.- _J.Logan`^t: 09:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the group isn't referred to by that name, then perhaps this article is named incorrectly. In any event, lacking any actual evidence beyond a single poorly-sourced news article, I don't see how this article can be developed any further. Considering the lack of information available on this group, it's perfectly possible that the author just overheard someone referring in passing to "a clearing house for the terrorist blacklist".GetMKWearMKFly (talk) 12:42, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now who's guessing, how can you even judge if it is poorly sourced when you don't know the sources? And you never do with news articles. You've been making your own assumptions about this from the start, many articles don't even have one source supporting them but no one disputes them like this - fact is it is 1-0 so far and even if there is a problem with the name, its something which is more than nothing - something else might come to light and then it can be worked on - can't you leave it be?- _J.Logan`^t: 08:25, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clearing House (EU). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927023400/http://www.arma.org/news/policybrief/index.cfm?BriefID=1938 to http://www.arma.org/news/policybrief/index.cfm?BriefID=1938

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:53, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]