Misplaced Pages

:Requests for comment/History and geography: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 07:00, 20 June 2006 editBohunk (talk | contribs)534 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 08:08, 20 June 2006 edit undoNescio (talk | contribs)11,956 editsNo edit summaryNext edit →
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
{{RFCheader|History and geography}} {{RFCheader|History and geography}}
<!--<nowiki>Add new items at the TOP. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>--> <!--<nowiki>Add new items at the TOP. Use ~~~~~ (five tildes) to sign </nowiki>-->

* For months a small group of people is trying to include the war in Iraq as ''part of the War on Terror''. Despite numerous editors telling them that using such a phrase is a statement of fact and a violation of NPOV which says that we should not be advocating one side of a debate. Therefore I started a proper RFC (]) to ask people to look at the situation, review the previous discussions and leave a comment as to what they think about the invasion of Iraq(]).08:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
*] - Current progress on this article is stalled due to extremely POV editing. 07:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC) *] - Current progress on this article is stalled due to extremely POV editing. 07:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
*] - Questions about verifiability and sourcing. Some information is derived from court documents not readily available. 02:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC) *] - Questions about verifiability and sourcing. Some information is derived from court documents not readily available. 02:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 08:08, 20 June 2006

Shortcut
  • ]

Template:RFCheader

  • For months a small group of people is trying to include the war in Iraq as part of the War on Terror. Despite numerous editors telling them that using such a phrase is a statement of fact and a violation of NPOV which says that we should not be advocating one side of a debate. Therefore I started a proper RFC (Talk:Iraq_War#Starting_a_proper_RFC_that_mentions_all_views) to ask people to look at the situation, review the previous discussions and leave a comment as to what they think about the invasion of Iraq(]).08:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Geostatistics - Current progress on this article is stalled due to extremely POV editing. 07:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Watergate first break-in - Questions about verifiability and sourcing. Some information is derived from court documents not readily available. 02:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Legio X - If the article is about Legio X Fretensis (how it was before the move) or about Legio X 22:33, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Wales - The phrase "Wales is popularly known as "the land of song", and is known as the home of many musicians and musical styles" is under dispute. The situation is currently deadlocked. 14:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:7 World Trade Center -there has been an ongoing push for inclusion of: mention of a poll conducted by a biased source, a link to a conspiracy website, and mention of a quote important to conspiracist circles, and the inclusion or exclusion of an NPOV tag over these issues.23:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Apartheid outside of South Africa - is it appropriate to cut and paste an entire article, Israeli apartheid, into Apartheid outside of South Africa rather than having a link to the Israeli aprtheid article? There was a discussion on merging but there is no consensus to do so, yet some editors have carried out the cut and paste job regardless. 13:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Paul Robeson Was Robeson a member of the Communist Party? Should the article be placed in Category:American communists? 16:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Tsushima Basin Whether to call this oceanic feature "ulleung basin" or "tsushima basin" 18:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:United States men's national soccer team Dispute between two users over whether or not to use verified sources from the world soccer governing body as ranking for world cup placing. Batman2005 14:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:China and Talk:People's Republic of China. Two proposals regarding whether the PRC article and the China should be merged, or whether China should be a disambiguation page. Heavily disputed, and needs more community input. 22:55, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Battle of the Lower Dnieper: ongoing NPOV dispute concerning using the word "liberate" in the context of the restoring of the Soviet control over the territory of the present-day Ukraine during the WWII.--AndriyK 15:10, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:San Roque, Cádiz: ongoing dispute over POV re: atrocities and invasion. Users keep reverting each other, and calling the others' contributions 'vandalism'. 15:32, 31 May 2006 (UTC) No edit war but reverting blanking by permanently banned user User:Gibraltarian. Please report any new incidents hereE Asterion 21:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk: Komárno: Content dispute about the use of the alternative name, Révkomárom in the head of the article. Please give your opinion and vote in the poll. Zello 16:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Thomas Jefferson: Content/NPOV dispute about Jefferson and slavery. 16:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Iraq War: Content/NPOV dispute regarding reason for the invasion. See this poll: -- 07:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Soviet partisans in Poland: NPOV issue: one side insist on adding NPOV tag but makes no other edits in the article. Debate on talk concerns whether any sources have been provided that support the NPOV tag.
  • Talk:Indian occupied Kashmir: Is the title of the article valid? Should it be redirected to Jammu and Kashmir? — 14:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Beersheba: Dispute over the name. Discussion effectively ended before it began, with a vote. Majority of editors claim the name is the most common: google says different. The official, phonetically-instructive name is not considered due to lower google hits. El_C 08:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Armenian Genocide — essentially to what extent minority opinions should be represented in view of the treatment of the topic. Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Amin al-Husayni I would welcome comments on the issues summarized here. --Ian Pitchford 11:19, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Ante Starčević There have been discussions and edit wars about Starčević's racism. --Asterion 05:00, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Cui Hao -- whether this disclaimer as to whom "Gao" and "Cui" referred to is necessary in the description of the incident leading to Cui Hao's death. 05:06, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:History of Northern Dynasties and Talk:History of Southern Dynasties -- whether the articles should include the names of the dynasties whose histories are covered by those two works. 04:44, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Champagne (beverage) - Should the white sparkling wine from the Champagne region of France be spelled with a capital letter — a glass of champagne, or a glass of Champagne? 13:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Tuyuhun - Whether Tuyuhun should be characterized as, in addition to occupying modern Qinghai, having also occupied parts of modern Gansu, modern Sichuan, neither, or both. 03:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:List of cities with trolleybuses - Ongoing dispute over whether city names in Ukraine and Belarus should be listed in Russian (e.g. Kiev), or Ukrainian / Belarusian (e.g. Kyiv). NPOV would seem to follow forms officially adopted by respective governments. Ukraine has adopted a list of "official" Latin-alphabet spellings, but Belarus has not - and several "Misplaced Pages" articles are internally inconsistent in this respect. 20:03, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Martin Luther - Debate about introduction. Should the intro include a mention of Luther's writing on the Jews, and any connection to the Holocaust. Ongoing dispute on the inclusion, and/or phrasing of such a statement. 19:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Free Zone (region) Debate over the extent that the SADR/Polisario has control over this area 18:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Greensboro Massacre - editors are in some dispute about whether or not an external link is an advertisement. 15:00, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Nazi extermination camp - One editor has stopped assuming good faith, another is making unsourced additions to the article which the first is removing. The bone of contention is the term Vernichtungslager. There is a discussion between them at the bottom of the talk page: Talk:Nazi_extermination_camp#Source_of_Term_.22Vernichtung.22. It would be good to have a few more editors with an interest in the subject. 21:02, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Place names considered unusual - The bulk of the page was deleted in February, several years' work of several people, based on the belief that the content is unencyclopaedic. They refer to a consensus which is far from obvious on talk page. More exact criteria could be applied to sort out the content and make it more encyclopaedic but mere deletion is nothing but throwing out the baby with the bath water. Talk page has a link to a more meaningful earlier version which was inserted into External links as a compromise but some found it POV fork and removed it. Please help with your comments. 23:04, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Sexuality of Adolf Hitler - dispute over merging this article with Adolf Hitler's medical health which already includes the information. Article has been up for WP:AFD three times already, each time resulting in no concensus. 23:10, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic - dispute over what or map to include, or whether to include a map, in the template of this article. 12:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:History of Russo-Turkish wars - two camps of editors, one of which thinks that the article is POV (though POV sections are not identified) and keeps redirecting it to a disambiguation page, and the other which thinks it should exist. 18:29, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
    • I do not know if this is the proper procedure to handle the issue. One side wants to blank the contents, in fact deleting it. The article should have been marked for AfD. -- Petri Krohn 02:56, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Nikolaj Berzarin -- Could use some more eyes here; one editor seems to be putting in some strongly POV material, including questionable translations from de:Misplaced Pages, here andin other articles. --04:26, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Gurunath - there is a long-standing content dispute over the reliability of a particular source used to create the "other meanings" section. The article was recently put up for AfD, in which the admin adjudicating the AfD said that it is a content dispute, and thus should be mediated on that level. Users Hanuman Das (talk · contribs) and Baba Louis (talk · contribs) have been reverting to their definition and deleting attempts from other editors to improve the article. One admin Bhadani (talk · contribs) has stated that the source they used is weak as a self-published source; another editor Hamsacharya dan (talk · contribs) quotes wp:v which states that self published sources belong on articles about the person who quoted them, and not on other articles, which should quote objective sources. This page desperately needs more objective opinions about direction of content. 05:04, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
  • On Talk:St. Louis, Missouri Dispute over inclusion of a quote by a Nobel laureate in the introduction. 18:10, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Sima Qian Edit war between admin Mel Etitis (talk · contribs) and anon 202.156.6.54 (talk · contribs), over Sima Qian's birth and death dates. Both parties have resulted to insults, accusations of lack of sources (even though both sides have actually cited sources), &c., and Mel Etitis has also accused me of bias. Intervention is badly needed. --Nlu (talk) 16:54, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Bosniaks#Catherine the Great???. A strong PoV-pushing by User:Damir Mišić led to a revert war between two of us. Maybe it belongs to WP:RFC/USER, but at this stage it's essentially a content issue. The bottom line is, he tries to retrofit all Bosnian (pre)medieval history as the sole heritage of Bosniaks ethnic group, and states he's unwilling to compromise and making insults . Duja 16:49, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Abraham Lincoln. Could we please get some fresh eyes? Though the article itself is stable, there's a disagreement over the verifiability of one particular image, and the language has gotten oddly heated. --16:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Franjo Tudjman, Talk:Franjo Tudjman. Edit war over whether a certain factual statement is important enough to be placed in the beginning of the article and whether the existence of certain quotes of disputed authenticity is to be mentioned in the end of the article. Both sides have kept reverting for ages, practically refusing to compromise, and a third party, which is indifferent to the dispute, is forced to incorporate his edits in both versions to make sure they stay on the page. Attempts at negotiations have been made by the different users involved, besides the talk page, in e.g. User talk:Mylan and User talk:Mir Harven. 09:14, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Democratic-Republican Party (United States). A disagreement over whether this party should be referred to as "Democratic-Republican" or "Republican" (the latter is the original name, and increasingly used by historians, but may lead fo to confusion with the modern Republican Party).
  • Talk:Hannibal A disagreement has arise which raises some fairly fundamental questions over the best approach to writing Misplaced Pages articles. Is it legitimate to condense a lengthy article if the content is duplicated elsewhere (in this case mostly the Second Punic War)? 11:58, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Shekhawati Heated edit war over the alleged oppression and revolt of Shekhawati's farming community. The conflict matter stems around the existence of taxes which were levied on the farmers. One editor may also be related to a prominent figure in their revolt. 06:52, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Mexico/Terminology There is a question regarding the use of "Spanish" vs. "Spaniard" in referring to those from Spain who conquered and ruled Latin America during the Spanish colonization of the Americas. 07:00, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Ra'anana. Edit war over a paragraph regarding policies of the Child welfare department of the city of Ra'anana towards divorced fathers. Several users have voiced the opinion that this is minor local news, not appropriate encyclopedic content: but one user is aggresively defending its inclusion. Additional voices would be appreciated. --Woggly 10:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Zita of Bourbon-Parma Resolve use of a title for the article's subject. This is a civil, minor dispute, but the two parties have been unable to reach agreement on use within the article of a title, Princess of Parma, that one party feels is appropriate and in keeping with the traditional use for persons in this historical category, while the other feels the title is an inadequately sourced alternative and as such is misleading. There are a number of other WP articles in which the same principle is involved. 05:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Nakhichevan, Talk:Kars There’s a dispute on the guidelines for adding foreign names in the lead of the articles about the region. 07:03, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Ottoman Empire - whether or not it should be quoted from sources that the Ottoman Empire was in fact a multi-ethnic state where religious faith was the determinant factor over ethnic origin. 00:54, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Britain:dispute over biblical reference to Isles of Elishah. One user claims this is reference to Britain or the British Isles, others can find no evidence. 20:29, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
The user making the claim has not posted a message to the talk page for a month, so the debate would seem to have ended. Kaid100 19:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

--04:59, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Talk:Haydar Dispute on whether this should be an article or a disambig page (see also Haider and its history), and whether it is a WP:POVFORK of Ali (see also Haydar-e-l-Karrar). 01:16, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:History of the Ecuadorian-Peruvian territorial dispute:There has been a serious edit war over the accuracy and neutrality of information added to the article, with personal attacks and accussations. One of the involved editors asked for Full Protection (granted) and put the case before the Mediation Committee, which was not accepted by the other editor, who seems to prefer instead to have other fellow countrymen as mediators.15:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Paris: Months-long edit war over the validity of a view that Paris' commuter belt should seem as the city itself; predjudiced (and constant) reverts and other bad editing habits. 09:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:I-95 exit list: There already exist more accurate exit lists on several articles such as Interstate 95 in New Jersey, and thus the page was edited to link to those to avoid a content fork. Several editors are reverting this for no apparent reason. 07:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Historical revisionism (negationism) Dispute whether to include the Rwandan genocide and the Srebrenica massacre, both targets of revisionism, in the article. 18:13, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:al-Khwarizmi Dispute over whether al-Khwarimzi was an Arab or a Persian. 14:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Eastern Front (World War II) Dispute over what should and what should not be in the article. 10:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/Freemasonry Dispute over inclusion of disputed material. 04:23, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Queen's Road and Talk:Queensway, Hong Kong: There are four sections of one road, Queen's Road East, Queensway, Queen's Road Central, Queen's Road West. Should the stub article Queensway, be merged into the article Queen's Road? 22:27, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Talk:Hoisin sauceNarrowly averted edit war over whether or not Vietnamese usage of this sauce should be included. User:RevolverOcelotX claims that since the sauce is a Chinese one, mentionm of its use in Vietnamese cuisine is non-prominent and should be excluded from article. I disagree. Comments requested.--Yuje 01:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Categories: