Misplaced Pages

User talk:Roger Davies: Difference between revisions

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.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 19:46, 3 September 2014 editDaveApter (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,808 edits →Could I ask your advice?: new section← Previous edit Revision as of 20:50, 3 September 2014 edit undoDaveApter (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,808 edits →Could I ask your advice?Next edit →
Line 49: Line 49:


I'd also appreciate your opinion on whether the article itself at ] does merit the NPOV tag, and if so what issues need to be addressed. It has been in a fairly stable state since your ] in August 2011 which topic-banned ] from this and other articles for extensive negative POV-pushing. Thank you. ] (]) 19:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC) I'd also appreciate your opinion on whether the article itself at ] does merit the NPOV tag, and if so what issues need to be addressed. It has been in a fairly stable state since your ] in August 2011 which topic-banned ] from this and other articles for extensive negative POV-pushing. Thank you. ] (]) 19:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Since writing the above, one of these editors ] has inserted a large block of controversial material into the article which he put in a year ago and was extensively debated, and a consensus reached, at that time. ] (]) 20:50, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:50, 3 September 2014

This user is lead coordinator of the Military history WikiProjectThis user is a coordinator emeritus of the Military history WikiProject
This user is lead coordinator of the Military history WikiProject
This user is an administratorThis user is an administrator
This user is an administrator
This user is a member of the Arbitration CommitteeThis user is a member of the Arbitration Committee
This user is a member of the Arbitration Committee

ANNUAL ARCHIVES: 2007 • 2008 • 2009 • 2010 • 2011 • 2012 • 2013 • 2014


If you are here about an arbitration matter, please - wherever possible - post instead on the appropriate arbitration page to keep discussion centralised.


If you post a message on this page, I'll reply here to avoid fragmenting the discussion. So add it to your watchlist.
If I leave you a message on your talk page, it will be added to my watchlist. So feel free to reply to it there instead of here.
Please sign and date your message by typing four tildes (~~~~)<br /


The Signpost: 27 August 2014

Could I ask your advice?

Hi Roger - Could I ask your advice about how to respond (if at all) to some intemperate discussions at Talk:Landmark Worldwide, which appear to me to be breaching the civility policy and the Talk page guidelines. On the one hand a group of editors have been asserting that the article is biased (and posted an Advert tag to it, then replacing that by a NPOV tag), but on the other hand they have refused to respond to my invitation that they make specific and constructive suggestions for improving the article. They have also made a number of remarks which read to me as questioning the good faith of editors who have worked on this article, yet refuse to indicate which specific editors they are accusing.

I'd also appreciate your opinion on whether the article itself at Landmark Worldwide does merit the NPOV tag, and if so what issues need to be addressed. It has been in a fairly stable state since your Arbcom decision in August 2011 which topic-banned Cirt from this and other articles for extensive negative POV-pushing. Thank you. DaveApter (talk) 19:46, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Since writing the above, one of these editors Astynax has inserted a large block of controversial material into the article which he put in a year ago and was extensively debated, and a consensus reached, at that time. DaveApter (talk) 20:50, 3 September 2014 (UTC)