Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:14, 31 May 2006

I believe your editing of my entry for The Green Party of Canada is in error.

"Eco-Capitalist" may be a genuine stream of thought but it is an inaccurate tag to put on the Green Party of Canada.

Here are direct sections taken from the 2006 Platform which an "Eco-Capitalist"  Party would not say.  This is factual data.  The "Eco-Capitalist" label is a POV claim.  At the MINIMUM if there is an insistance on using that label in the Misplaced Pages then it has to be balanced with "Eco-Socialist"  and "Eco-Centrist"  or less awkwardly what I formerly wrote "Eco-Pragmatism".    

From our 2006 Platform - Trade Plank

Canadian corporations flock towards free trade zones to bypass environmental regulations and exploit cheap labour. In trade agreements such as NAFTA, a foreign investor has the right to seek compensation from our government if Canada enacts a law that results in the loss of revenue for the investor. These agreements essentially put a foreign company's rights over those of Canada. It limits our sovereignty and can paralyze our government's will to enact new environmental and human rights laws. Canada's interests have also been harmed by the United States' refusal to respect NAFTA and WTO trade rulings in favour of Canada over the softwood lumber dispute. It makes one wonder why the U.S. signs free trade agreements, if they don't believe in free trade?

To address some of these issues, citizens around the world have set up international networks to create their own brand of trade - fair trade. International fair trade networks build direct links between producers and consumers ensuring that labour standards and environmental laws are respected. The Green Party's vision of trade articulates itself around innovative policies like fair trade. We can make sure that when Canada trades with other countries it also shares its vision of a just and sustainable society instead of trading away our rights for foreign interests.

We must renegotiate these trade agreements and put Canada's interests and the environment first.

Green Party MPs will work to:

• Renegotiate our multilateral trade agreements, such as NAFTA and the upcoming FTAA, to include fair trade tariffs that work to protect human rights and our ecosystems, as well as terminate investor-state dispute mechanisms that erode Canada's sovereignty and environmental laws. • Propose a reform of the WTO, the IMF and the World Bank, placing these institutions under the authority of the UN general assembly, and shift the direction of international trade away from "free trade" to "fair trade" focusing on the global protection of human rights, labour standards, cultural diversity, and ecosystems.

From our 2006 Election Platform - Housing Plank:

Affordable housing and community services play a major role in social inclusion of otherwise stigmatized and marginalized social groups. The Green Party understands that in the long run, investment in affordable housing and community services provides us with healthier communities with less social inequalities. This in turn leads to greater independence, reduction in poverty and a reduction in crime. With its short-term vision, the Liberal government seems unable or unwilling to make such connections.

Image copyright problem with Image:Ashley1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ashley1.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Misplaced Pages because of copyright law (see Misplaced Pages's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Misplaced Pages are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 82.83.96.252 09:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:DavidOrchard.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:DavidOrchard.jpg. Misplaced Pages gets hundreds of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 01:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Jacrosse

This case has been closed. The final decision is in the case page at the link above.

For the Arbitration Committee. --Tony Sidaway 14:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Audra Williams

Since when, exactly, is hiding paragraphs that need citations acceptable process on Misplaced Pages? That's what the {{fact}} template is for; as far as I know, it's never been permissible to hide uncited paragraphs that are already tagged as needing citations. Bearcat 03:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

AfD Discussion

Please note that AfD discussions are discussions and not votes. As an administrator I'd figure you'd know that but you've referred to comments as votes twice in your edit commentary on AfD. It would serve as a good example for new users especially so that they know that they are not actually voting on the AfD if you observe your language more closely. Thanks. --Strothra 00:47, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: your comment on my talk: Actually, I appreciated that since it cleared up clutter but since it is relevant to the AfD you may wish to point out somehow that there's extra discussion there. --Strothra 00:50, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Ontario Treasurer

My guess would be that Arthur Hardy kept the position for himself -- I'll check later today, when I'm on-campus. CJCurrie 19:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

• I was mistaken; it was Richard Harcourt, who held the same position in the late-period Mowat administration. CJCurrie 21:18, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Adam Crooks

Hi, why did you remove the image from Adam Crooks without explanation? --Big_Iron 10:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Criticism of anti-Semitism

I'm sorry you missed the refernces in the cites I provided. Let me call them out for you. The Cohn refernce says this of Shahak: "Shahak follows an old anti-Semitic tradition". It is also chock full of characterizations of Shahal as someone who "travels the world to lecture on the evils of ... the Jewish religion." or who someone who "wants us ...to develop a positive attitude toward "popular anti-Jewish manifestations of the past." It really doesn't get any clearer than this that Cohn is calling Shahak an anti-semite. The Plaut reference calls Chomsky himself an anti-semite ('Noam Chomsky is ... is a vicious anti-Semite"), making redundant the need to indirectly claim he's an anti-semite for supporting other anti-semites. Isarig 01:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I've now added cites that describe Finklestein as an anti-semite (agian from Plaut) - not that thi swas really in contention - it is acknowledged that he's been describes as such by Finklestein himslef, on his web site's home page. I've also added one that describes Cockburn as one. Isarig 02:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Apartheid

Yes, this time, and every time you try to POV Misplaced Pages. Jayjg 03:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Your opinion is noted, but your edits bely your claims. Jayjg 03:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

LOL! You're joking, right? Jayjg 03:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Apartheid ambiguation

I'm not denying that some critics use the term, however it is far from mainstream. It would be like including a disambiguation page for "empire" saying that "some critics of the United States assert that the US controls an evil empire strething across every continent". It is pure pov.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 05:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

If I was editing that article I probably would, but I have never seen or touched the article before.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 05:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

It is a loaded pov term, I wouldn't even support its inclusion if a majority of people believed it, but the fact that it is really just a fringe belief means it is even less justified. I really have trouble understanding your recalitrance on this matter. I hate it when people say stuff like "It has a million hits, it must be notable" probably every two words in the English language produces that many results on google.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 05:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Obviously you already have your mind made up despite all evidence and arguments to the contrary. I no longer see any reason to continue with this discussion.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 05:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

One more revert in Israeli Apartheid and you could be blocked for the 3RR.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 05:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Yea keep thinking that buddy.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 05:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay Homey, why don't you draw up an RFA against me right now, or at least make a thread about me on the incidents noticeboard, see the reaction you get.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 05:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Be careful

Don't let Moshe or other editors lead you into an edit war over the apartheid article or you'll be the one blamed and banned then you'll be unable to edit the article at all in order to save it. Please stay cool and let editors attempt to improve the article so that it may survive. It has been placed up for peer review. Let them AfD it if they want, it would probably survive that as is. --Strothra 05:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

My experience with dishonest people is that sooner or later they tie themselves in knots and get caught out. Hang in there. Keep up the good work. Mccready 11:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Israeli apartheid

No, unsigned articles or articles by a random writer from random websites cannot possibly be reliable sources on any matter. Pecher 13:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

3RR

Hi. Re the 3RR report... can I ask you to read WP:3RR carefully; accept that reverts to unrelated bits of the article all count towards your total revert number; accept that only blatant vandalism doesn't count towards 3RR (and this wasn't blatant); and promise to leave the article alone for 24h. Otherwise I'm going to have to block you. Regards, William M. Connolley 20:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I concede your point and promise to leave the article itself alone for 24hours. Is it safe to assume editing the Talk page is ok?Homey 20:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC) (pasted in by WMC)

I trust I can take that to mean "points" not "point". In which case, OK. Talk page... hmm... don't push it, be cautious, work towards agreement, then OK William M. Connolley 20:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

--PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 21:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Pinchas, it doesn't seem appropriate for you to list an alleged 3RR violation and then carry out the ban yourself. Homey 22:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I listed it to have discussion about it instead of just blocking. It does not state anywhere that 3rr violations need to be listed in the first place before a block is made. The other admin had warned you regarding the violation reported by Pecher. In this violation that I blocked you it was more obvious the addition of those paragraphs. You are an admin and should have known better. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 22:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

It certainly isn't accepted practice for someone to list an alleged 3RR violation and then implement a ban themselves. Homey 22:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure it is, as long as he wasn't involved in the original conflict, which he wasn't.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 04:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Please do not delete block notices and other people's comments from your talk page. This is considered poor form. Pecher 07:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

You are way out of line

How could you possibly justify blocking User:Zeq indefinetly. It would be bad enough if you were just in a conflict with him about something else, but it makes it infinitely worse that you actually thought you could block him for the very conflict you are engaged in. I would also like to point out that you attempted to dispute your current block because the blocker was the same person who reported you. I would never have thought you (or anyone for that matter) could become so unreasonable and irrational.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 09:31, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Homey, why are you intimidating Zeq? ←Humus sapiens 09:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Please read Fred Bauder's comment on Zeq's talk page and explain your actions. Pecher 12:37, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

What Fred said is exactly what happened. I wrote him before doing anything, got a response saying that any admin can ban Zeq for tendentious editing and, as there is no way I know of to technically ban someone from a single article, I implemented a ban on Zeq. I was going to leave a note on the ArbComm page, found that I couldn't, and thus lifted the ban for the time being. Fred has since clarified what he meant by ban/block. In any case, I have written the ArbComm and have asked them for an opinion on whether or not Zeq's edits violate his probation and on what action should be taken against him. Homey 16:11, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Apartheid (disambiguation)

If you revert this article one more time you will be in violation of 3RR.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 02:38, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

So your basically threatening to vote stack huh?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 02:41, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Thats ridiculous there are a few editors who supported you, and a few editors that supported me, it doesn't matter if there is a small majority on your side. It is obvious that there is no consensus, also I don't understand how you can basically argue that the guidelines are irrelevant just because they aren't policy, why do you think someone wrote the guidelines?.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 02:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I actually would support an afd, maybe I will make one in a little while but I have to go right now. The only reason I left global apartheid was because I would feel like I would be obligated to make one if I deleted it as well.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 02:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Zeq

Hi, I noticed your request for arbitrator opinion on Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Zeq. Actually it's an enforcement issue and is thus a decision for administrators. Sean Black has banned him from the article in question now.

I've moved your original request from the arbitration case to Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement (shortcut WP:AE). If you have any more arbitration enforcements matters (probation, parole, whatever) please take them there where they are more likely to be seen and acted on. --Tony Sidaway 03:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)