Talk:Lisa Nowak/Archive 1

message: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gwen Gale (talk • contribs) 04:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: another pic

message: This isn't part of her career as a 'onaut?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.168.210.68 (talk) 10:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nowak was already notable as an astronaut, the article was on WP before the incident, I don't see any reason to break it apart but that's only my thought on it. Gwen Gale 13:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is her arrest history here?? 

message: The main Arrest section was already getting extremely muddled so I broke it up into a few sections. - Denny 17:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New sections 

message: She's a captain in the US Air Force (same as a Lieutenant in the US Navy). She's not a captain in the US Navy (same as a Colonel in the US Air Force). GoodDay 17:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My mistake, Shipman is the US Air Force captain, Nowak IS a US Navy captain. GoodDay 17:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Haha! Yeah, that trips up people not familiar with the ranks. USAF Captain = USN Lieutenant (O-3). USN Captain = USAF Colonel (O-6). Dialwon 00:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Rank

message: Arrest story should be marked as current event
-4AM 2/06 1:15PM EST —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 156.77.108.72 (talk) 18:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It has been for quite some time. Gwen Gale 18:25, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current Event 

message: 199.33.32.40 is indefinitely-banned  aka  aka  aka as various other titles. He is to be blocked on sight, and everything he does is to be reverted. Gwen Gale, since all you've written here is just short replies to his posts, I'm removing the entire thread. I hope you don't mind. If you feel that you've said anything of value that you want kept, without his posts, feel free to partially revert me. Musical Linguist 20:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, thanks, naw, I was only drawing him out to see if there was any good faith or helpful notions lurking about. Gwen Gale 20:19, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please remove excess speculation about bail 

message: I've semi-protected this page due to the extreme vandalism this subject is bringing out in many anonymous editors.--Alabamaboy 19:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've unprotected the page seeing the initial surge of interest should have died down. Evil Monkey - Hello 22:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: And something else has taken over the news cycle. Gwen Gale 22:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected page 

message: kirpitchom@hotmail.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 136.1.1.101 (talk) 19:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This talk page is for discussions on article content and how to improve it. Your input referred to an advocacy effort unrelated to this page's reason for being. Gwen Gale 19:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  why you are removing my info about her support page? 

message: The affidavit states that inside the black bag was found a hand written
list of the following items (along with the items themselves): 
brand new steel mallet, brand new folding knife with a 4-inch blade,
3-4 feet of rubber tubing, several large plastic garbage bags,
approx. $600 in cash. 161.44.46.225 22:50, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Truth be told, with all the other stuff she was carrying and the already stark evidence that she'd made thorough plans, most news reports seem to have left it out as rather superfluous. Gwen Gale 23:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Apologies for having deleted that. It seemed like nonsense at first glance (troll meter is on high right now). Sorry. - Denny 23:29, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It seemed canny on the edge to me, the bolding, use of the words important amd missing along with an anon IP didn't help did they. Gwen Gale 23:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Oh yes, it is, spot on. That's what the Orlando police think too, although I don't recall that they even mentioned it in the second charging affadavit. I was only responding to why it's not in the article. Gwen Gale 04:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Any indication of when she bought the stuff and made a list?  Lots of people have bags full of gear at home or in their cars, in case of some kind of breakdown, and a prepared-type person would have a list of the stuff.  If she had that bag of stuff in her car for several years that's much less incriminating than if she bought it the day before the incident.  Also I wonder if she's been tested for substance abuse.  The events and the mug shot give an impression of someone who went on a binge in a time of personal stress.  67.117.130.181 23:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Premeditation? Driving over 900 miles in 12 hours; speeding! Book her, Danno. Ronbo76 05:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important Point from Affidavit is Missing 

message: Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines, specifically the section 
Don't edit others' comments:  Refrain from editing others' comments without their permission (with the exception of prohibited material such as libel and personal details). It is not necessary to bring talk pages to publishing standards, so there is no need to correct typing errors, grammar, etc. It tends to irritate the users whose comments you are correcting. Never edit someone's words to change their meaning. 
Also, Wikipedia:No angry mastodons might be of interest. --Lincoln F. Stern 21:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Well, if you honestly think the talk page content that was removed is of such importance to this article in particular, or to Wikipedia in general, go ahead and restore it. I'm sure everybody will marvel at the high level of maturity on display. --Plek 22:14, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:No angry mastodons --Lincoln F. Stern 22:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:POINT Gwen Gale 22:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia:Wikistress --Lincoln F. Stern 23:30, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nettle :) Gwen Gale 23:38, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, nettle WP:TEA? --Plek 23:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ick! :) Gwen Gale 23:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: It's called IRC, and you can pretty much say what you want.  I don't bother with it because I've heard it's generally unpleasant.  Rklawton 04:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hahah. "IRC, where Wikipedians gather to gang up on other Wikipedians!" Gwen Gale 13:13, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, no, I mean a tab on each main page (such as 'action', 'edit this page'), perhaps one as simple as 'comment.' Could someone guide me to a forum on which I could suggest & request this format change? It might move most of the problematic discussions to a better spot....--Wikidelphia 03:35, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: erm... is the above username appropriate? Gwen Gale 03:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mine or Wikidelphia's username?  My username is not my real name.  See my userpage for an explanation. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lincoln F. Stern (talk • contribs) 22:29, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Talk page guidlines

message: This is a breaking story and the chronology is still an important aspect of context. Please discuss any input about changes (such as creating a reactions section) here first, thanks. Gwen Gale 02:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Factoring

message: Canadian TV news has photos of Colleen Shipman and say that Nowak had an affair with Oefelein at CFB Val-Cartier, when they were doing cold weather and isolation training.
CTV Nightly News - Tue, Feb 7, 2007
:Joy Malbon on the bizarre love triangle
* mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2007/02/06/ctvvideologger2_500kbps_2007_02_06_1170814789.wmv
* mms://ctvbroadcast.ctv.ca/video/2007/02/06/ctvvideologger2_218kbps_2007_02_06_1170813108.wmv
CBC News - Tue, Feb 7, 2007
:Neil Macdonald reports for CBC-TV
* http://www.cbc.ca/clips/rm-hi/macdonald-astronaut070206.rm
* http://www.cbc.ca/clips/mov/macdonald-astronaut070206.mov
70.51.11.102 06:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  video news 

message: The NPR article asserting Richard Nowak's job title refers to a Washington Post article. Apparently, NPR gets it wrong, because that multi-author WaPo article does not cite employment info on R. Nowak. See this link. AuntieMormom 15:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What makes you think that's the only Washington Post article ever written about Nowak? Gwen Gale 15:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Demonstrate otherwise. And please stop RVing a cited assertion. AuntieMormom 15:35, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The NPR article doesn't specify the one you linked to as their source. In any case, his employment is cited in the article to a reliable secondary source. Are you trying to stir things up? Gwen Gale 15:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: With three independent citations, I've altered the article accordingly. Parenthood.com is not an authority on NASA employment, which is complex and often involves contractors and they appear to have muddled something Nowak said during a 2006 interview. Gwen Gale 23:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Richard Nowak employment 

message: *http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2007/0206073astronut1.html
--68.207.206.69 19:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the link, but it seems that the article doesn't contain anything new compared to the ones that are already cited.--Plek 19:17, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. ;) Tuttt 06:38, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Smoking Gun dreams of stories and mugshots like this one. Since they just post law enforcement documents, they should probably be considered a reliable source.  Edison 21:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: That stuff has been cited and linked to more directly by this WP article for more than a day now, wholly apart from Smoking Gun. Gwen Gale 21:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: TheSmokingGun.com

message: "Canadian news sources have reported that Oefelein and Nowak's relationship was at one point of a romantic nature" is referenced to a CBC video. But all they say in the video is that Nowak "loved" Oefelein, not that they were in a romantic relationship. And from what Nowak has said (bearing in mind she drove 1400 km across the US to [allegedly] attack a woman) that it wasn't a romantic relationship, I don't think we should include this line in the article. Evil Monkey - Hello 00:10, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: His ex-wife's mother, I think, has blamed Nowak for the breakup of her son's marriage. Now, I loathe getting into the tabloid side of this, ick, it's enough to say I think it appears they had an affair whilst training in Canada, then he moved on, so to speak. Unanswered is how Nowak still had access to his computer but... astronauts truly are a tight-knit and presumably trusting bunch, especially when they've trained together and by all accounts Nowak's reputation and history were spanking bright until sometime in late January. Gwen Gale 03:40, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok so I look it up and find the opposite at Salon of what I read somewhere else.  His ex-wife's mum says Nowak had nothing to do with the breakup of her son's marriage. Truth be told, there is no support for a two way romantic relationship and even Nowak told Orlando police it was "less than." Gwen Gale 03:50, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Anyway I've added it, let the article reflect the possible ambiguity (or whatever) of the documented record so far then. Gwen Gale 04:08, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just removed the bit about there being a romantic relationship. At the moment, until more concrete evidence emerges, we are just crystal ball gazing. Plus, as I said earlier, the CBC item doesn't really back up the statement that was in the article. All they said was that Nowak loved Oefelein and not that there was any reciprocation. Evil Monkey - Hello 04:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Likely the thing to do and yeah, sounds like a WP editor may have misinterpreted the vid. Ever read microfiche newspapers from say, the 1930s tho? Bears only a passing resemblence to the world we learn about in history books. Part of that's institutional spin and botched simplification, which is indeed a scourge but I'd say half of it is because a typical news report gets the broad swath of a story basically, kind of, within reality, but gets lots of detail flat wrong (or lacks it altogether). So has it ever been. Gwen Gale 04:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Romantic"? 

message: Captain Nowak is a Naval Flight Officer and not a Naval Aviator (Pilot).  While she is a graduate of the US Naval Test Pilot School she is not a Test Pilot. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.162.0.44 (talk) 13:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Test Pilot Qualification 

message: Does it apply here? If so we need to be policing the page, someone wrote above, "She wasn't on her job, and she is completely mad". - Denny 16:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I did see it's getting a bit thick today. Gwen Gale 16:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BLP definately applies on talk pages.--Alabamaboy 17:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:BLP]], talk pages 

message: I'm removing reference to her (Ofelein's ex-mother-in-law) because she seems to have made conflicting statements to the media.  Gwen Gale 17:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Davis

message: When citing a source like this one: NASA to Review Screening Process, which publisher should be listed? Associated Press, the originator of the news item and the organization the reporter works for, or My Way News, the web site that actually publishes the story? Or, list both of them? Free drinks for the first to come up with the right answer... --Plek 19:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: AP. MyWay is a licensed aggregator. Gwen Gale 19:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Goes back changing all My Ways into Associated Presses. Mutter, grmbl. Thanks for the answer! :) --Plek 19:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *But before we go, would the same apply to Astronaut charged with attempted kidnap-murder, with Yahoo! News being replaced with Reuters, you think? Oh, and I forgot the drinks! How rude of me! Gwen, you've earned it: WP:DRINKS.--Plek 19:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha I was about to write... I hate to say this, but Yahoo is an aggregator too. :) I'm makin a coffee then. Gwen Gale 19:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: *Aye, I think this should do it for now. Looks like USA Today, Orlando Sentinel, and the New York Times are using their own staff writers, whereas the others are just copying the newswire. Lazy buggers. :-) --Plek 20:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: AP is docking big (which is both helpful and unhelpful, some say but that's another tale). Sometimes it's hard to do much beyond what comes off "the wire" without spending more than it's worth and anyway, the licensing fees are not cheap. Also, the Orlando Sentinel totally broke and developed this story entirely on the web (based on a "tip" from an airport employee about a "catfight" involving an astronaut), the world is changing once again. Gwen Gale 20:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which "publisher" to use? 

message: Does anyone know if this is a maiden name, or a name change due divorced parents etc? Evil Monkey - Hello 20:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maiden name, her parents are still together. Gwen Gale 20:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lisa Caputo 

message: When will the authorities finally learn that using Adobe markup to redact documents is not in any way secure? There goes Shipman's privacy as well. *sigh* --Plek 00:44, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the authorities had no problem to give away the un-redact-ed document to reporters, since it is about a public proceeding, that could have been witnessed by everybody. The redacted document is obviously created by reporters of "Orlando Sentinel", who care a little more for Shipman's privacy than the authorities. --Homer Landskirty 11:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Lovely too; a signature. - Denny 17:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: She can change all that stuff. Sad she'll likely have to move though. Gwen Gale 00:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shipman's "redacted" restraining order 

message: regarding the latest thread with posted story from Fox news: "STAR-CROSSED SPACE CADET"...well Plek on your doubting the reliability of FOX news: their headline and then sub-headline states the ex-wifes mother stated Nowak tried to breakup the marriage, yet further reading of the story shows the ex-wifes mother (ex-mother in law) only "hinted" this and actually said "ill let you draw your own conclusions". First of all this clearly shows the true nature of FOX as what it always has been, its a tabloid (next lets go to the ex-wife's mother's ex-husband's latest girlfriend and see what she says). FOX happens to cater as a tabloid newsplatform to a right wing audience. Wendi Deng and Rupert Murdoch, the chinese-australian couple that run the show for FOX, have made their business & money through mainly UK & Aussie tabloids previously to FOX. Why would they change their game plan??? Anyways if I was the ex-mother in law, I'd sue FOX for that headline and grab some of wendis and ruperts cash (they have too much) Perhaps lisa will end up sueing the ex mother-in-law and that will force the ex mother in law to sue FOX...who knows?...and i think with that in mind comes the decision:  (1) that FOX news might be a bad source to base lisas page on if wikipedia wants to maintain tip-top resistance to getting sued over something...and (2) if wikipedia wants reliablity on articles it will avoid FOX news like the plague.......or if it uses them must write clearly that "a right wing chinese-australian owned tabloid, (FOX news) claims" .......(deng & murdoch may also have american citizenship now yet what does that go for??? im sure they can afford the cost of acquiring citizenship, how much does getting US citizenship cost these days anyways???)
you got to hand it to the tabloid people at FOX though..."star-crossed space cadet???!!!"...its hard to suppress a chuckle even though this is really a three-family tragedy at this point and there are a bunch of kids involved in this, twin 5 year old girls even.FOX doesnt care about that & wendi deng & rupert operate on a profit motive, not a "family values" motive. They dont care about blasting out headlines like that to the international airwaves & theyll recoup any losses from law suits just in extra sales & advertising prices...Benjiwolf 13:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you want anyone to read all that, I'd suggest using punctuation. Properly. As it stands, your text is incomprehensible—to me, at least. --Plek 13:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I count one citation of Fox news in the article, hardly enough for any worries about slanted PoV or whatever. Last I heard US citizenship "cost" around $200,000 (so to speak) but they may have raised the price since 9/11. Gwen Gale 17:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fox news and appropriateness of citations from them 

message: I wonder how such negligence could happen on a Mars mission. The only lesson NASA can pull out of this incident is, that they should provide a rich offer of potential candidates during that flight -- knowing that females are more endurable than males... Could somebody find some intelligence about this? --Homer Landskirty 15:46, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One can be fairly confident they're already rethinking some of this stuff. Where it takes them's another tale though. Gwen Gale 17:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mars mission? 

message: Can someone review the fair use I put on it? It seems right. Also, isn't the 9th court Federal? If so this needs to be retagged as public domain. - Denny 21:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think we should make a fair use claim for this image b/c it's an Associated Press photo, not a photo from the court itself. As such it is copyrighted.--Alabamaboy 21:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Where did you see it's an AP photo? It's tagged by the official Ninth Court watermark at http://www.ninja9.org/. - Denny 21:14, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The image that replaced this image in the article you referenced has the "AP Photo" tag on it. The two images were obviously taken within seconds of each other and by the same photographer. In addition, if you go to  you will see that this is one of a number of similar photos, all credited to the AP or other news sources using pool coverage (i.e., using AP's images). As for , I'm not seeing the photo at that link. While its possible the photo did come from the court, I've seen nothing to support that view. Best, --Alabamaboy 21:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: You are confused with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which doesn't include Florida. Evil Monkey - Hello 21:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find any support that it did not travel through a copyrighted source between the court and WP. Gwen Gale 21:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Doesn't matter. Unless someone can present absolute evidence that the image was taken by the court itself and is in the public domain, then its fair use will be questioned by people here at Wikipedia. Personally, I believe fair use allows places like WP to use images like this. However, I'm in the minority in this around WP and given up trying to fight on the issue. While I won't delete the image, don't be surprised if others try to do so--unless someone finds proof of it being in the public domain. Best, --Alabamaboy 21:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You misunderstood me, sorry I wasn't clear. I can't find support that the image is ok under fair use, it looks like a copyvio to me. Gwen Gale 21:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Random question - even if it was taken by the court, does that make it PD? Since it would be a Florida state employee, does Florida state have copyright? Evil Monkey - Hello 21:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It depends on the policy of the government entity involved (in the US, the states, counties and towns are quite separate in this regard from the federal government). Some let things go as PD, some assert a copyright. Moreover, there are sometimes privacy and other use restrictions. In this example, it would depend on the policy of that Florida court and I couldn't even find any terms of use on their website, though I might have missed it. Gwen Gale 21:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: It looks to me like the stamp was put there by CNN, citing their source. If the file is PD but came from CNN, provenance is dodgy, maybe a technical copyvio. If ninja9 has non-free use-restrictions or requires some sort of a media permit, fee or license, it's outright copyvio. Either way, I see no free path supported by this file's upload info. I wouldn't have uploaded it. Gwen Gale 22:22, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. I was trying to see if it was OK after that original uploader did it. Tag it for copyvio delete? - Denny 22:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've never been a wiki image grass but aye, that's the pith of it (I mean, if you don't, someone else will). I've seen images with much stronger/safer fair use assertions get deleted without so much as a comment. Gwen Gale 22:29, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll pull it from the article and tag it. Thanks! - Denny 22:32, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey was there a copyright issue with the mugshot or what? Gwen Gale 22:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Don't lend yourself to copyright paranoia. Fair use of those images seems to be entirely appropriate (at least to me). They are being used to illustrate a notable aspect of the subject's life, of which no free alternatives are available. Also, they are shown in a reduced resolution, not thought to be detrimental to the copyright owner's financial benefits, yadda, yadda, yadda. --Plek 22:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah but that's not WP's current image policy. The notion, anyway, is to ensure that WP is freely copyable anwhere by anyone, no worries, no tears. Hence, fair use for WP servers in Florida USA is not enough. Gwen Gale 22:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I know the mugshot's been over-used on the American media put that'll fade. Gwen Gale 22:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly... long term probably best, and the juxtaposition between the NASA profile image and that is compelling for the article. - Denny 23:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for giving me an opening to say... I do like where you put them. Gwen Gale 23:07, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Booking image 

message: Now that the initial news storm has abated for a bit, it might be a good time to discuss how to shape this article as events unfold. Given the media's record in such matters, my guess is (*wild speculation alert*) that this will be a huge spectacle, with reporters tripping over each other in essentially reporting the same thing, times one hundred. My crystal ball reveals things progressing along these lines:
# "Stuff" happens.
# Media report on "stuff."
# Media editorialize on "stuff", citing each other in the process.
# Those involved in the case react to "stuff" and to the media's reporting.
# Media report on the involved's reaction.
# Media editorialize on the reported reaction.
# Goto 1.
Regarding all this, a couple of potential issues come to mind:
* On-line media tend to update their web reports without creating a new page; what once was a good reference could therefore change underneath us.
* Reporters using other published reports as their sources, distorting the facts along the way.
* Reporters' opinions being mixed with the facts, leading to a hodgepodge of half-truths.
* On-line reports disappearing behind a paywall.
To avoid these issues, we might take some time to figure out which on-line sources would be preferred, and which ones better be avoided. I've noticed, for instance, that L.A. Times articles are paywalled after only a week, while articles from The Houston Chronicle remain freely accessible (seemingly indefinitely). Maybe someone more familiar with the U.S. media could share some insights on all of this.
Oh, and I think it will be very hard to maintain a separate "Reactions" section. As events occur, both "stuff" and "reaction" will be closely related. Chronicling those in separate sections might lead to a disjointed article, in which the same event needs to be discussed in two separate places.
Okay, that's my incoherent ramble for today. Please share your views. --Plek 22:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your crystal ball missed one, I think. The Apollo moon hoax, rabid PoV warrior who will inevitably show up here and demand at least some mention that "researchers believe" Nowak was "set up" by NASA and the CIA because she threatened to "blow the whistle" on all those fake shuttle flights. There are at least a few conspiracy books (fiction marketed as non-fiction) lurking in this tale. Gwen Gale 22:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Do not forget that she obviously rode hell bent to Florida as part of the 9/11 horrors, which happened to cover up the lone gunman that did Kennedy. - Denny 22:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it canny fits, dunnit :) Gwen Gale 22:24, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But there are too many "allegedly" statements in there.  It should be said differently such as "according to the arresting affidavit she___________________ and leave out the allegedly. stuff.  Looks like we are bending over backwards so hard to be politically correct that we become annoying to read. --Blue Tie 14:37, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I've reworded three allegedlies. There are still a few but the word is needed now and then as a reminder to readers and so on. At least it doesn't seem to repeat so much without end now. Gwen Gale 10:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: A paywall is a website that restricts access to certain content only to paid subscribers. I mentioned the term in my list of issues because articles cited from such sources will become inaccessible to the general public after some time. Many "paywalled" news sites make their articles freely available for a limited time period, but then move the content to the restricted, pay-to-read part of the site. If possible, we should use sources that keep their articles available for free. See also: List of online newspaper archives (incomplete). --Plek 00:24, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Yeah. Also, some of the outcome will depend (no, I will not drop that pun) on her subsequent behaviour in many sundry ways, along with all kinds of stuff we'll never hear about. NASA will try to quiet this down fast, it's a public relations... upchuck. The tabloid aspects alone could canny thwart their hopes. Ick. As wonted, the true botches could be overshadowed by the stuff that sells. Gwen Gale 00:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Musings on where to take this article from here 

message: CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. —  The star-crossed space cadet who allegedly made it her mission to murder the woman dating her Cape Canaveral crush helped break up his 17-year marriage, his former mother-in-law said yesterday. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,250851,00.html Crocoite 00:39, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: She's been making conflicting statements but yes, seems to be sticking now to the notion LN and WO made excursions into the suburbs of tabloid bliss. Oefelein's still rather the big unknown in this tale. Gwen Gale 00:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like we've now definitely reached stages #5 and #6 of Plek's Media Hype Cycle™. So she's a "crazed moonbat" now? *sigh again* Somehow I doubt FOXNews qualifies as a reliable source. --Plek 00:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha Fox is calling her a moonbat. If they only knew. As I say (and you do so starkly imply)... tabloid bliss. Gwen Gale 00:54, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The suburbs of tabloid bliss, otherwise known as Sleazeville? :-) --Plek 01:09, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes! By Tattletown, between Grass Grove and Hurling Heights. Gwen Gale 01:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Hmm... As I understand it, Nowak and Stephanie Wilson were called the "Robochicks" by their peers because they operated the robotic arms on the shuttle and station. It would make sense to use the nickname in the context of their mission activities. To use it on Nowak in the context of the assault, however, reeks of editorializing. It imposes an (not too flattering) image on the person that cannot be supported by verifiable facts, and it thus seems somewhat gratuitous. I'd vote against it (now where's my ballot?) As for Mr. Billy-O... no idea. I'd say a similar rationale against it could be made, but I haven't done too much reading into the life and times of Mr. Oefelein, so your guess is as good as mine. --Plek 01:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. On the one hand, it would be helpful to readers to spill these nicknames cuz they in themselves, on sight, tell skeins about NASA astronaut culture (as a cited shrink in the article says, they're human, after all) but... these nicknames are also fodder for more or less endless sniggering, on sight. I mean, if an editor (it won't be me) came along with a supporting citation (there are many and sundry), I couldn't argue against their smooth integration into the narrative. Yeah, I know, WP:BEANS. Gwen Gale 01:59, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, to add more beans to the fire, it appears that listing "kidnapping" and "driving around in diapers" to her list of hobbies is now so last week, and that we're long overdue for a newly inspired round of vandalism. Let's see where and when "Robochick" will rear its ugly head. Thank the Wikigods for sprotect. --Plek 02:32, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's more creative nicknames now, oh and photoshopped pictures. I mean, it's not like these pranksters are original thinkers or anything, I've read that comedians on north American television have been joking about her endlessly. begin irony Meanwhile for all I know she'll be enhancing the family college fund a few years hence, appearing as a spokesperson for a specialised paper products company, such is American pop-culture (I cite the fast food flog by Britney's x along with pharmaceutical endorsements made by certain retired US politicians). end irony Gwen Gale 03:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Davis (the mother in law) 

message: A Florida criminal attorney's notions  Gwen Gale 07:46, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So is Florida law from what I gather and in that state apparently, attempts at these crimes are comparable to the crimes themselves. There is plenty of evidence Nowak planned or at least prepared for a murder (never mind what she truly had in mind, she had a murder kit in her bag). She certainly seems to have attempted a carjackiing and a kidnapping (the way Florida law defines those things). Note however, he doesn't say she'll go to prison for life, but will wind up in a mental health facility followed by years of probation. Gwen Gale 18:12, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Attempts are not exactly comparable to the acts.  The law recognizes this in two ways: 1. Specifically declaring attempts, not just the acts themselves, subject to penalties and 2). Declaring that the penalties for attempts are automatically less than the penalties for the acts.   It is clear that Nowak planned something.  But it is not clear that she planned murder.  It does not seem certain that she attempted a carjacking. Carjacking requires the separation of the owner of the car from the car.  There is no evidence she planned to do that and it is clear that she did not do it. It is possible she was planning a kidnapping.  It can be argued that she confessed to that.  Attempted kidnapping would carry a maximum sentence of 15 years as I read the law.  Sentencing guidelines would probably put that closer to 4 years.   On the other hand, successful kidnapping would be likely to result in more than twice that sentence. This does not seem all that extreme to me.  However, the lawyer you quote, I think, is sort of extreme and goes way too far.  --Blue Tie 03:32, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sundry jurisdictions legally define carjacking in sundry ways. Florida law has a reputation for being singularly severe (like, no parole). This said, yeah, lots of folks will be surprised if she gets a stiff custodial sentence. One can be sure negotiations have already begun. I do get the feeling though, if a waitress or office worker had attacked Capt S the same way, with the same stuff in her bag and car, she might still be in nick with no bail at all. I'm only throwin my thoughts out though. Gwen Gale 03:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, different jurisdictions do that, but I was focused on Florida.  Im not sure that Florida is tougher than other places.  Having no parole does not matter or is less significant if there is no time to serve or it is less than in other states.  Some people may be surprised at almost anything.  I would not be surprised if she had to do some time, and I would not be surprised if she did not.  The basic acts, connected to her prior crimes do not support time, really.  But the attempts would.  I disagree with you about a waitress or office worker.  They would probably also get out on reasonable bail if they had substantial supporting characters testify and vouchsave their reliablity as she did.  They would also probably get bail because the actual act, pepper spray, would not support a high bail.  --Blue Tie 03:39, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Florida is widely known for its aggressive criminal justice system as compared to other US states. This is an observation, not a criticism. Gwen Gale 09:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: How will she fare

message: It was already public information before the incident. Hardly an invasion of privacy since the only way the call sign would help anyone reach her would be if she was sitting by a radio waiting to hear her call sign spoken by other licensed amateur radio operators and she's the only person authorized to use that call sign. Gwen Gale 19:34, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Nowak's amateur radio license