Talk:VEISHEA

message: What this article needs is a balanced perspective.  This one sounds like it was written by a student participant who wants to exculpate him- or herself and lay 100% of the blame at the feet of the local police.  The students are described as "standing their ground" in the face of police who pepper sprayed "anyone who was present."  One wonders what kinds of evidence might be offered to support the claim that every single participant in the riot was pepper sprayed, but that is beside the point.   The author of this article seems to want to portray the police as jack-booted thugs and the student rioters as innocent victims; hardly a objective assessment of the riot.  Contra the commenter below, while I agree that the student rioter perspective should be included in the article, the police/city government perspective is entirely lacking and that, if nothing else, makes this article imbalanced.  The person who should be consulted in writing this article is David Schweingruber, a faculty member of Iowa State's Sociology department and a member of the Task Force that studied the 2004 Veishea riot.  I was lucky enough to attend a presentation he gave on the 2004 riot--it was thorough, accurate, and, best of all, objective. 
This article should be tagged as non-neutral.  It's clearly heavily biased in favor of students.  I'm not contesting its accuracy, but I've spoken with the Ames Chief of Police, who told me two independent studies he requested after the riots showed that the police acted appropriately.  That really should be added for balance.
It's been my understanding it wasn't the students themselves that were so much the problem, it was people from outside the school traveling to the area to drink and to party who caused a lot of the problems.
JesseG 14:28, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality

message: What do others think about removing the NPOV status? Personally, I am against it, because I think it could still be improve. Also, I think having the tag in the article indicates to the reader that this topic is controversial, and that they should be aware that not everyone agrees on its content. So, I guess that I vote keep the tag.  Stemperm 17:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NPOV Status

message: I don't understand why more time is spent talking about the relatively problems that have happened relative to the rich traditions that VEISHEA has. Even the new edits for VEISHEA 2007 focus on the lousy Mike Jones concert and the number of alcohol citations rather than things that actually define the celebrations, like the parade, ISU's 150th celebration, the international food fair, VEISHEA Scholars... etc. etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JayWilmont (talk • contribs) 21:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to add to the article. Unfortunately, I didn't make the parade but I was at the concert. --Ted 04:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

text: Okay --Ted 00:58, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much time spent on Alcohol and Problems 

message: I removed the POV tag in favor of a different one. I am not sure if the article is so much POV as it is more balanced towards the negatives regarding VEISHEA. If anyone has any *free* photos or images of the day-time festivities (i.e. parade, competitions, 5K race, lighting of the torch, etc.), then their inclusion could help offset the negatives presented in the article. --Ted 18:53, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unbalanced 

message: There's a lot of high emotions going on right now about the decision by the Iowa State administration to use wristbands for concert entries at VEISHEA.
However, someone is reverting the edits to a version that violates the NPOV. I suggest we protect the page until the tension dies down. SkittlzAnKomboz (talk) 23:12, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wristband Controversy 

message: I noticed the entry states that it was an off-campus party, but doesn't state that it was a non-VEISHEA event.  The majority of the rioting happened in campus-town, which is, if I am not mistaken, part of Ames and not part of the Iowa State campus.  While it was going on people weren't saying "VEISHEA Riot."  That was a name quickly slapped on it by the media, which basically forced Iowa State University to take action by canceling VEISHEA 2005, even though the riot wasn't during or started at any VEISHEA event, just during VEISHEA week.  That would be like there being a riot in Beijing this summer near the Olympics but not Olympic related... then being called the Olympic Riots.  Im not saying all of this should be included, just state that it wasn't a VEISHEA event where the riot started and that it wasn't during any VEISHEA events.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.45.29.115 (talk) 02:39, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  2004 Riot was sparked from a non-VEISHEA event 

message: The lede states that VEISHEA was a week long.  In the mid '80s there were no classes on Thursday and Friday before VEISHEA weekend.  After some riot, maybe in 1988 or 1992, that was reduced to Friday only.  Then what, was it reduced to the weekend only?  In what sense was it ever a week long?  Tracing the history of practical school policies regarding VEISHEA, namely the number of school days off, would bring some objectivity. The details could be found in the Iowa State Daily, the DM Register, Associated Press, etc.CountMacula (talk) 20:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of days off