Misplaced Pages

User talk:Roger Davies

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.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MiszaBot III (talk | contribs) at 18:32, 28 September 2011 (Archiving 1 thread(s) (older than 4d) to User talk:Roger Davies/Archive 24.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 18:32, 28 September 2011 by MiszaBot III (talk | contribs) (Archiving 1 thread(s) (older than 4d) to User talk:Roger Davies/Archive 24.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
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

ARCHIVES: 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 • 7 • 8 • 9 • 10 • 11 • 12 • 13 • 14 • 15 • 16 • 17 • 18 • 19 • 20 • 21 • 22 • 23 • 24 • 25 • 26 • 27 • 28 • 29 • 30 • 31


If you are here about an arbitration matter, please 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 (~~~~)


The Signpost: 26 September 2011


Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:16, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for writing something good

At Tenmei and disputes, thank you for writing "I am sure it is not intentional."

Perhaps you recall writing in 2009,

"I have noticed that, like many people, when you believe you are under attack you react by trying to explain your position. You make enormous efforts to do this ... but, unfortunately, as you delve deeper and deeper into the problem, the issue becomes so complicated that it becomes impossible to follow."

As a gesture of thanks, please let me point out something John Vandenberg wrote here -- which you may take for granted, but it's new to me. I do not believe that the underline sentences are made explicit in any other place.

"... the policies for talk page are not as strict in regards to original research and POV, as consensus comes from people providing their opinions on the talk page .... In this dispute, there were only a few parties involved in the process, and most of them prevented consensus using different methods ... he proposed discretionary sanctions will mean this topic will be subject to the organised complaint management system of Arbitration enforcement ...." John Vandenberg 11:52, 25 September 2011

This would have made a difference if I could have read it before today. This is the answer to questions I had not yet thought to ask.

As support for your belief, please consider this:

A. The references at Senkaku Islands and Senkaku Islands dispute were each added by me; and some of the articles about the linked authors were created by me to help our evaluation of the works as reliable sources.
References
  • Belcher, Edward and Arthur Adams. (1848). Narrative of the Voyage of H.M.S. Samarang, During the Years 1843–46: Employed Surveying the Islands of the Eastern Archipelago. London : Reeve, Benham, and Reeve. OCLC 192154
  • Charney, Jonathan I., David A. Colson, Robert W. Smith. (2005). International Maritime Boundaries, 5 vols. Hotei Publishing: Leiden. 10-ISBN 0792311876/13-ISBN 9780792311874; 10-ISBN 904111954X/13-ISBN 9789041119544; 10-ISBN 9041103457/13-ISBN 9789041103451; 10-ISBN 9004144617/13-ISBN 9789004144613; 10-ISBN 900414479X/13-ISBN 9789004144798; OCLC 23254092
  • Curtis, Gerald, Ryosei Kokubun and Wang Jisi. (2010). Getting the Triangle Straight: Managing China-Japan-US Relations. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press. 10-ISBN 488907080X/13-ISBN 9784889070804; OCLC 491904160
  • Findlay, Alexander George. (1889). A Directory for the Navigation of the Indian Archipelago and the Coast of China. London: R. H. Laurie. OCLC 55548028
  • Hagström, Linus. (2005). Japan's China Policy: A Relational Power Analysis. London: Routledge. ISBN 9780415346795; OCLC 475020946
  • Shaw, Han-yi. (1999). The Diaoyutai/Senkaku Islands Dispute: Its History and Analysis of the Ownership Claims of the P.R.C., R.O.C., and Japan. Baltimore, Maryland: University of Maryland School of Law. OCLC 608151745
  • Inoue, Kiyoshi. (1972) Senkaku Letto /Diaoyu Islands The Historical Treatise. Kyoto: Daisan Publisher (出版社: 第三書館) (1996/10)「尖閣」列島―釣魚諸島の史的解明 . ISBN 978-4807496129; also hosted in here for online reading (set to Shift-JIS character code), with English synopsis here. Chinese translation by Ying Hui, Published by Commercial Press Hong Kong (1973) 釣魚列島的歷史和主權問題 / 井上清著 ; 英慧譯, ISBN 9622574734.
  • Jarrad, Frederick W. (1873). The China Sea Directory, Vol. IV. Comprising the Coasts of Korea, Russian Tartary, the Japan Islands, Gulfs of Tartary and Amúr, and the Sea of Okhotsk. London: Hydrographic Office, Admiralty. OCLC 557221949
  • Lee, Seokwoo, Shelagh Furness and Clive Schofield. (2002). Territorial disputes among Japan, China and Taiwan concerning the Senkaku Islands. Durham: University of Durham, International Boundaries Research Unit (IBRU). 10-ISBN 1897643500/13-ISBN 9781897643501; OCLC 249501645
  • Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea. (2000). International Organizations and the Law of the Sea. London : Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff. OCLC 16852368
  • Pan, Junwu. (2009). Toward a New Framework for Peaceful Settlement of China's Territorial and Boundary Disputes. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff. 10-ISBN 9004174281/13-ISBN 9789004174283; OCLC 282968950
  • Suganuma, Unryu. (2000). Sovereign Rights and Territorial Space in Sino-Japanese Relations. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. 10-ISBN 0824821599/13-ISBN 9780824821593; 10-ISBN 0824824938/13-ISBN 9780824824938; OCLC 170955369
  • Valencia, Mark J. (2001). Maritime Regime Building: Lessons Learned and Their Relevance for Northeast Asia. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. 10-ISBN 9041115803/13-ISBN 9789041115805; OCLC 174100966
B. Qwyrxian, Bobthefish2, STSC, Lvhis added no references to scholarly works. In other words, there was a very clear difference in the lens through which we perceived the subject.
C. Even in the problematic contexts Qwyrxian and Magog presented in evidence and elsewhere, my research-based contributions are rejected only for "style" or procedure, not content. In this highly-controversial topic, your belief in my intentions are confirmed by the sourced material I added to these articles. What matters today is that no one else is complaining about it.
D. Please take a look at the graphic analysis of File:Criticismandpraise senkaku islands arb com case.png in this week's Signpost. Notice the green arrow from me to Lvhis. After months of arguments based on opinions only, Lvhis re-positioned inline citations to the lead paragraph from other parts of the article. This small green arrow stands out. It draws attention to a step back from the kind of opinion-based arguments which John Vandenberg now normalizes. This green arrow is emblematic of my serial attempts to highlight something verifiable as common ground for moving forward.
D-1. Please look at the first and last diffs here in a comments thread about the "criticismandpraise" graphic. According to Magog, the investment of time was misplaced, but my effort does show what I valued in my peers and what I was trying to encourage in others.
D-2. In the sea of red, my small green arrow is an argument for keeping me -- not banning me.
D-3 Perhaps most important, Lvhis' edit here suggests that my deprecated talk page investment was at last beginning to bear dividends.

In 2009, you observed,

"I believe that Tenmei was trying to create an appropriate backdrop for later helpful and meaningful discussions. However Wikipedians usually prefer simple direct methods and, in jarring contrast, Tenmei's approach was elaborate, complicated ...."

The Senkaku issues were not simple; but there you have it. --Tenmei (talk) 18:17, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I remember clearly the huge efforts you put in to find mentors and the equally huge efforts you made to improve your discussion style. I was both moved and impressed by them. However, it is pity that that you have set aside the lessons – and progress – of the past and that we are once again visiting the same old issues.  Roger Davies 12:17, 28 September 2011 (UTC)