Your note |
Gene Nygaard (talk | contribs) →Peace and consensus?: Reply to Tulkolahten |
||
Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
I must admit though I have'nt seen him vandalize any of my work as such but it is his unpleasantness and mistreatment of others that makes me dislike him [[User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld|Ernst Stavro Blofeld]] 18:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC) |
I must admit though I have'nt seen him vandalize any of my work as such but it is his unpleasantness and mistreatment of others that makes me dislike him [[User:Ernst Stavro Blofeld|Ernst Stavro Blofeld]] 18:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC) |
||
<copied from my talk page--GN>''Ok, Gene. Let's make a deal, edit war is meaningless.''<br/> |
|||
''I agree with you, that '''[[Hraničky]]''' cannot be found.<br/>But I disagree with topic's name '''Hranicky'''.<br/> I think that much more better is redirect [[Hranicky]] to [[Hraničky]]. As you mentioned german names in the cities and villages, it is because of far history, many czech cities had a german minority or majority and vice versa. So I propose this:''<br/> |
|||
''If topic's name contains national characters, create a plain text us-ascii redirect if none and leave topic's name as it is.''<br/> |
|||
''Deal ? '''[[User:Tulkolahten|<span style="background:#CCFFFF;color:#FF0033">≈Tulkolahten≈</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Tulkolahten|≈talk≈]]</sup>''' 11:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)'' |
|||
:'''[[Deal or No Deal|No deal]],''' Tulkolahten. You know better. |
|||
:That is '''not''' the rule. Start '''following the rules''' and we will get along better. BTW, I don't have the foggiest idea what your point is about [[Hraničky]]; it was [[User:Darwinek]] you were edit-warring with there, not me. (Plus, you edit-warring with him hasn't involved [[Gränzdorf]] either in the text or the missing redirect from that with or without diacritics, from what I've seen.) |
|||
:Under [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions]], the existence of a variant spelling with diacritics '''does not mean''' that this is the proper choice for the one slot available for an article's name. |
|||
:Our English Wikipedia article is at [[Romania]], for example, and '''not''' at [[România]] with the squiggles. The latter is, of course, a redirect. So you will never get a '''deal''' on your proposal as long as it remains contrary to Wikipedia policies and guidelines. |
|||
:Follow the rules about including '''variant spellings''' in the introduction, too, as the guidelines tell us to. You ''know'' how you can show ''good faith'' in this regard. You can probably guess the consequences, with respect to ever coming to any sort of agreement with me, if you do not do so. Remember, good faith is a rebuttable presumption. |
|||
:Curiously, while you have insisted that the '''English''' spelling variants of the '''spelling of the subject of the article''' should not even be included in the introduction of articles as the guidelines provide, you argue (in what you discussed on my talk page and in your edit summaries[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jiangyan_High_School&diff=102701673&oldid=102697851] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jiangyan_High_School&diff=102942129&oldid=102939686] there; note also that [[Talk:Jiangyan High School]] remains a redlink as I write this) that the '''Chinese variant''' spellings, even for things '''other than the subject of the article''', somehow belong on the ''English'' Wikipedia. The Chinese spellings related (even quite remotely) to the subject of the article remained, yet you put all the unrelated ones back in also. That seems so bizarre to me. Can you give any explanation to help me make sense of that clear and patent contradiction? |
|||
:In addition to naming conventions and citing sources, following the rules includes the details, such as not using the comma as a decimal point, not starting sentences with a numeral, proper date formats, capitalization of "German" and the like even as an adjective or in reference to the language in English, etc. Sure, I understand that if you are translating from another Wikipedia's entries or some other source, you might miss a few of them. Just show an awareness of the problem and make a good faith effort to catch things like that. |
|||
:Note that the [[burden of proof]] for making a change lies with those proposing the change. If you want to make changes, [[WP:CITE|cite]] your [[Wikipedia:reliable sources|reliable sources]] or discuss the changes and your reasons on the talk pages. The burden '''does not lie''' with someone reverting unsourced and undiscussed changes. So don't complain about it if they get reverted, just remedy it. |
|||
:Stopping false accusations of vandalism is, of course, another precondition to any deal. [[User:Gene Nygaard|Gene Nygaard]] 16:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Your note == |
== Your note == |
Revision as of 16:56, 26 January 2007
Archives |
---|
No.1. No.2. No.3. No.4. No.5. |
![]() |
---|
8 June 2024 |
Peace and consensus?
Deliberate, false accusations of vandalism pretty much put the lie to your claims of seeking Peace and consensus, You sure don't seem to be seeking it.
Nonetheless, I will respond to your points in that message in due course. Gene Nygaard 18:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
As you may know I have made many valuable contributions to wikipedia I had nearly added every municipality in Slovakia to the prject when he started barking at me back in November to the point I almost left enirely. He was acting as if one or two foreign characters in the index of a category was going to delete the whole project or something. Any minor errors (beleive me the smallest ever) were blown up by him into a serious argument! Very unreasonable and spiteful - I offered him a chance to be cool twice - luckily he gave up -I can't be bothered with him people like that never change. Sad isn't it. A shame you speak to so many nice people on here then you get the opossite who love to confront everyone Ernst Stavro Blofeld 18:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
I must admit though I have'nt seen him vandalize any of my work as such but it is his unpleasantness and mistreatment of others that makes me dislike him Ernst Stavro Blofeld 18:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
<copied from my talk page--GN>Ok, Gene. Let's make a deal, edit war is meaningless.
I agree with you, that Hraničky cannot be found.
But I disagree with topic's name Hranicky.
I think that much more better is redirect Hranicky to Hraničky. As you mentioned german names in the cities and villages, it is because of far history, many czech cities had a german minority or majority and vice versa. So I propose this:
If topic's name contains national characters, create a plain text us-ascii redirect if none and leave topic's name as it is.
Deal ? ≈Tulkolahten≈≈talk≈ 11:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- No deal, Tulkolahten. You know better.
- That is not the rule. Start following the rules and we will get along better. BTW, I don't have the foggiest idea what your point is about Hraničky; it was User:Darwinek you were edit-warring with there, not me. (Plus, you edit-warring with him hasn't involved Gränzdorf either in the text or the missing redirect from that with or without diacritics, from what I've seen.)
- Under Wikipedia:Naming conventions, the existence of a variant spelling with diacritics does not mean that this is the proper choice for the one slot available for an article's name.
- Our English Wikipedia article is at Romania, for example, and not at România with the squiggles. The latter is, of course, a redirect. So you will never get a deal on your proposal as long as it remains contrary to Wikipedia policies and guidelines.
- Follow the rules about including variant spellings in the introduction, too, as the guidelines tell us to. You know how you can show good faith in this regard. You can probably guess the consequences, with respect to ever coming to any sort of agreement with me, if you do not do so. Remember, good faith is a rebuttable presumption.
- Curiously, while you have insisted that the English spelling variants of the spelling of the subject of the article should not even be included in the introduction of articles as the guidelines provide, you argue (in what you discussed on my talk page and in your edit summaries[1] [2] there; note also that Talk:Jiangyan High School remains a redlink as I write this) that the Chinese variant spellings, even for things other than the subject of the article, somehow belong on the English Wikipedia. The Chinese spellings related (even quite remotely) to the subject of the article remained, yet you put all the unrelated ones back in also. That seems so bizarre to me. Can you give any explanation to help me make sense of that clear and patent contradiction?
- In addition to naming conventions and citing sources, following the rules includes the details, such as not using the comma as a decimal point, not starting sentences with a numeral, proper date formats, capitalization of "German" and the like even as an adjective or in reference to the language in English, etc. Sure, I understand that if you are translating from another Wikipedia's entries or some other source, you might miss a few of them. Just show an awareness of the problem and make a good faith effort to catch things like that.
- Note that the burden of proof for making a change lies with those proposing the change. If you want to make changes, cite your reliable sources or discuss the changes and your reasons on the talk pages. The burden does not lie with someone reverting unsourced and undiscussed changes. So don't complain about it if they get reverted, just remedy it.
- Stopping false accusations of vandalism is, of course, another precondition to any deal. Gene Nygaard 16:56, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Your note
Thanks - it's never too late on WP. Let me know when you have a version ready - I can work on polishing it when it's done. Crum375 12:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)