Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 01:59, 4 February 2008

Burma

Please get consensus before making any large changes. BJ 04:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopedias are based on facts, not "consensus." I am not aware of a single sourcebook or encyclopedia that has an entry on Burma as opposed to Myanmar. Myanmar is the name recognized by the UN and the majority of world states. Maglev Power (talk) 04:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

If you continue, since you've already been warned several times (3), you could be blocked from editing. If you are going to make a major change, please gain a consensus to do so. That is how we operate on Misplaced Pages. I am aware that you appear to be a new user here, and would like to help you out here, if you want. If you have any other questions, feel free to let me know. Meanwhile, please take a look at WP:CONSENSUS. Thank you. - Rjd0060 (talk) 04:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

You do not have the authority to threaten to block anyone. You are not an administrator. If you want to help improve this website, work toward writing a factually accurate encyclopedia, not playing keystone kop. Maglev Power (talk) 04:33, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

No, there is no consensus and we've been discussing this for months now. Any moves must be listed on WP:RM and follow the respective procedure. Thank you. Húsönd 05:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I seriously doubt this site can be so legalistic. Being factually accurate and encyclopedic must trump polls and legalisms here if this page is to be a serious encyclopedia article. Maglev Power (talk) 05:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually, moves are not required to be discussed at WP:RM. There was a consensus on the articles talk page, however, the moves were being attempted incorrectly. - Rjd0060 (talk) 05:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

There should be no controversy here. Myanamr is the UN-recognized name. Myanmar is the named recognized by the majority of the world's states. Even Misplaced Pages has used the name Myanmar for years. The timing of the move of the article to Burma makes it clear what's happening is that a handful of users have succeeded in masking a blatant political statement under the guise of "consensus." Maglev Power (talk) 05:51, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Project tags

Please stop stripping these from articles. The tag is simply a organisational topic, not a judgment on the subject of the article. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

No, the category implies that Misplaced Pages is classifying specific states, leaders, and governments as totalitarian. The term "totalitarian" is a subjectively applied pejorative term and can never be NPOV, and thus a violation of Misplaced Pages policy. As an organizational topic, the category can go in articles like "totalitarianism" and in articles pertaining to theorists who wrote about the subject; but Misplaced Pages has no business making these judgments given its own editorial policies. Maglev Power (talk) 02:53, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather recommend you bring the issue up for consideration by the wider community -- perhaps via the village pump or miscellany for deletion, or some other forum to propose a change of names. You do seem to have a point that's worth considering, but your current method of resolving that point invites edit warring and isn't any permanent fix (the tags you're removing now will very probably be replaced eventually, if they continue to exist; surely you can understand the futility of this). – Luna Santin (talk) 03:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

If somebody tagged Bush's article under a "war crimes" project, I'm sure that would be promptly rejected. This is no different. Controversial placement of project tags is just advancing POV by another means and Maglev was right to remove the tags, in my opinion. Everyking (talk) 04:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Luna Santin, Everyking hit the hail on the head. Removal of the tags was appropriate. Just like removing a factual error from the article, removing a categorization that violates encyclopedic editorial guidelines must be done. Maglev Power (talk) 00:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I do believe you have now violated WP:3RR on Talk:Saddam Hussein. WOuld you please revert yourself? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 00:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

No, I am one revert short of violating the rule. Would you please respond to the merit of the edit? Following encyclopedic guidelines like NPOV matter much more than bureaucratic trivalities here. Maglev Power (talk) 01:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

For violating the Misplaced Pages:Three-revert rule on Talk:Saddam Hussein, I have blocked you for a period of 24 hours. , , , and . You may contest this block by adding the code {{unblock|reason here}} below this message. Spebi 01:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I would not waste any time arguing with an editor using an account that is only four days old and whose edits are mainly minor deletions and long arguments on talk pages. This editor is clearly a troll.--Amban (talk) 01:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Shining Path

Hello! I reverted your edit on Talk:Shining Path. This has already been discussed at Talk:Shining_Path#Totalitarianism. Feel free to state your opinions there! --ElPeruano (talk) 01:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

That the Shining Path never took complete power of Peru is speficically mentioned at Talk:Shining_Path#Totalitarianism. Please contribute there. --ElPeruano (talk) 01:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stop removing Totalitarianism

You are removing the word Totalitarianism from many articles. Please get cosnesus first before proceeding. Igor Berger (talk) 01:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stop

Please cease removing the tags you're stripping from dozens of talk pages. The speed you're doing these edits at is a concern, and your edit summary of "remove subjectively-applied pejorative term that can never be NPOV" suggests a point of view of your own. I would suggest discussing the removal of the tags at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Totalitarianism prior to continuing your edits. Tony Fox (arf!) 01:37, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The term “totalitarianism” is hotly contested by political scientists. It is a serious violation of NPOV and NOR for Misplaced Pages users to be randomly and arbitrarily inserting this tag in pages on specific regimes and individuals. The tag can go in articles that directly relate to the subject, such as totalitarianism and post-totalitarianism, books on the subject, and theorists who contributed to the concept such as Hannah Hannah Arendt. I am only removing the tag from where it does not belong. Maglev Power (talk) 01:42, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The tag, as noted below, is to identify articles that fall under hte auspices of the WikiProject Totalitarianism, and doesn't necessarily place it into the categories. I'd request that if you feel the group shouldn't be working on certain article,s that you go to their discussino pages and discuss such removals before you do them. Tony Fox (arf!) 01:47, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Many political scientists disagree that many of the subjects from which I was removing the tags are related to totalitarianism. Including the tag implies that Misplaced Pages is pushing a particular POV. I am not removing the tag from every page, just where the tag is a source of scholarly disagreement. Maglev Power (talk) 01:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Then discuss it with the WikiProject that placed the tags in the first place. And I suggest not changing the scope of a WIkiProject without discussion with the actual group involved. Tony Fox (arf!) 01:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

You should be aware that there is a discussion regarding your tag removals at the administrators' noticeboard. Tony Fox (arf!) 01:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Please stop removing articles from Wikiprojects

Hello,

I would like to ask you to stop removing articles from Wikiprojects. You are not, as you seem to believe, removing them from categories, which is a different thing altogether. A category is something that goes onto the article page (we call this the "Main" or "Article" namespace). Categories allow for the encyclopedia to be organized so that readers can more easily find information. There are policies governing whether an article can be included in categories, however: policies like WP:NPOV and WP:V. A Misplaced Pages:Wikiproject is a group of editors that have banded together, typically to edit a collection of related articles. They place a template typically at the top of an article talk page in order to mark that the article is within the scope of their Wikiproject. This is in the "talk" namespace, whose function is to improve the article, not to categorize pages in the same way that the article namespace does. Generally, there is no specific policy which applies to whether or not an article may be placed under the auspices of a Wikiproject: thus WP:NPOV and WP:V need not apply.

If you truly feel that Misplaced Pages:Wikiproject totalitarianism does not deserve a spot as a Wikiproject, then you can consider subjecting it to the deletion process. The village pump may also be a place to go if you wish to seek assistance. But deleting all of the articles from a Wikiproject by removing the template could be considered a form of disruption. As I see that you have been warned about this before, I suggest that you discuss this sort of thing in the future before implementing it. Thank you for your cooperation, Silly rabbit (talk) 01:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

"WP:NPOV and WP:V need not apply?" We are not playing lawyers here. Let's get real. A project that interfers with prompting NPOV and NOR on a particular page does not help and should be removed. The project is relevant in pages like Hannah Arendt, totalitarianism, post-totalitarianism, etc. It is not helpful to include the tag in pages where the description of the subject as "totalitarianism" is disupted. Maglev Power (talk) 01:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

It may not be helpful to you, but did you bother to ask the editors at the Wikiproject what they thought before undoing their additions wholesale? Silly rabbit (talk) 01:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

You may want to go read more about Wikiprojects here Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Council/Guide before you continue engaging in what several editors clearly think is destructive behavior. Wikiprojects are not what you seem to think they are: they are a group of editors who got together and agreed to edit articles on similar topics. They are not, and never have been, a means for categorizing article content. Silly rabbit (talk) 01:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I have read about Wikiprojects, thank you. The tags make an implicit categorization since they are displayed prominently on talk pages stating 'this article falls under a project on totalitarianism.' Whether or not they are actual Misplaced Pages category pages is a moot point. Maglev Power (talk) 01:59, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

FYI: This topic was reported on WP:AIV; the discussion has been moved to WP:ANI. — ERcheck (talk) 01:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Stop disrupting Misplaced Pages

Your contentious edits to many articles having to do with totalitarianism are against consensus and violate a number of Misplaced Pages behavioral policies. You have refused to discuss the matter seriously. Stop immediately or your account will likely be blocked. It may be too late at this point but if you promise to stop and not take this up again, perhaps it could be avoided or a block lifted. Your changes will likely all be reverted in any instance. Wikidemo (talk) 01:54, 4 February 2008 (UTC)