179:
sorts of voters are completely discountable. Knowledge (XXG) is not a pure democracy; though consensus matters, the opinion of newcomers unfamiliar with policy is given very little weight. Your vote, that of Tim Shell, and that wjhonson were not discounted. The others supporting your view were. I promise you that it is almost always true that, within
Knowledge (XXG), any argument supported by a flood of new users will lose, no matter how many of the new users make their voices known. In the digital age, where sockpuppeting and meatpuppeting are as easy as posting to any message board, this is as it should be for the sake of encyclopedic integrity. It is a firm practice within Knowledge (XXG), and it is what every policy and guideline mean to imply, however vaguely they may be worded. (I do agree that our policies, written by laypeople mostly, could do with a once-over from an attorney such as myself; however, most laypeople hate lawyers, so efforts to tighten wording are typically met with dissent.)
87:, then reverting last changes. I am trying to alert other users who have edited the article to this dispute as I believe the detail should be included. Is it possible you can look and see if you agree that AIPAC's reaction should be included in the article? I dont believe its a content issue and is possible trolling. I previously highlighted the problems on wikipedian noticeboard
282:
172:
Within the argumentation of the debate, the most significant point raised by those who supported the article was that a new draft was available. The article is not protected, so this may be posted at any time and (assuming it is not substantially similiar to the older version) it will be judged anew
178:
The bad news for you is that it is well-established practice within
Knowledge (XXG) to ignore completely floods of newer, obviously "single-issue POV", contributors at all our deletion fora. I'm among the most "process-wonkish" of Wikipedians, believe me, and even process-wonks accept that these
428:
In response to your question, the article contains more information about military actions he was involved in and not the person himself which is the core focus of the article. It would be best for this article to be stubbed to encourage those who may know more about the person and his life to
225:
User:GregorB offered a very brief comment not supported by policy. User:Canon did take the time to offer analysis at DRV, but he had been among the first voters at the AfD to offer a mere "Keep" without explanation; therefore, I assumed he had been solicited by someone. Best wishes,
394:
I made a respons a few days ago asking if you could suggest an alternative. I was wondering if you could take a few moments tor espond to this on the article's FAC page, and also indicate whether you would able to either support or oppose the article's candidacy now please.
243:, and will reappear at some point, when (hopefully) some of the ill-feeling evidenced during the debate has cooled. I am very heartened by the article's continued development, and by the development of associated articles. Thanks for everyone's help!
142:
Single purpose users are frowned upon and were a frequent bone of contention during the AfD and DRV processes. So I urge you all to "establish" yourself as
Wikipedians: create, edit and even ... delete articles! There are plenty of articles that need
138:, as implemented by admins (who claim to be following the "spirit" of the law). Consequently there are lessons to be learnt from the experience, which will not be obvious from reading the guidelines. Here are some tips for future conduct:
34:
You're probably right that I took that a little too personally and snapped at you a bit, and I'm sorry. I see you're a fellow Wiki-gnome, so keep up the good work that most people will never notice -- I know how that feels. :) Best wishes,
376:
365:
184:
If your supporters were more familiar with
Knowledge (XXG), they would realize that, invariably, the most effective way to establish an article after it has been deleted in a close AfD is to rewrite it: make it
99:
73:
66:
265:
76:. The dispute is over inclusion of the AIPAC reaction to a US House of Representatives Resolution expressing support for Israel. Various accusations are being thrown around by
388:
It is at the hands of the Gallic Celts that Rome suffered a humiliating defeat that temporarily set back its advance and was to imprint itself upon the Roman consciousness.
105:
Hi. Thank you for your input on this article's FAC. I've reduced the number of fair use images significantly. Please let us know if these changes address your concerns.
150:
good idea to put something on your user page, (it doesn't matter what) to avoid showing up as redlinked users -- being redlinked will count against you in any debate.
55:
if you have time. This lists massacres and terrorist attacks on
Muslims and Sinhalese by the LTTE but LTTE sympathizers want to wipe teh record of these attacks off
130:
As you may have heard the Mega
Society article was deleted awhile ago, at the end of an acrimonious AfD/DRV process. There is a wide divergence between deletion
83:
Comrade438 has made few silly edits, and comments, along with what might be a threat. It degenerated to
Comrade438 blocking the page without consulting
199:
So the outcome was not entirely negative, although I was disappointed by the admin's rather cavalier approach evidenced by the response to my enquiry:
349:
article clearly belongs in the topic, but it still has to go through the nomination procedure first. This process has already started and you can
372:
52:
77:
157:
reasons which are grounded in policy (votes not backed by reasoning may be discounted; too much reasoning will be ignored).
45:
161:
Given the bias against soliciting (see judgement) I may not be able to contact you again, so I suggest you put the
302:
88:
189:, better, stronger." This is, in fact, what you claim to have done with your draft. Good show. Best wishes,
240:
298:
211:? They are not new users, nor did I solicit them. I presume by Tim Shell you mean Tim Smith? ...... --
90:
239:
Anyway, my grumpiness aside, the Mega
Society article, is presently under userfied open-development at
416:
400:
17:
430:
320:
247:
212:
356:
53:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Terrorist_attacks_carried_out_by_LTTE
261:
350:
84:
342:
313:
116:
106:
56:
433:
404:
359:
327:
272:
250:
230:
215:
204:
193:
162:
119:
109:
93:
59:
39:
377:
Knowledge (XXG):Featured article candidates/Campaign history of the Roman military
366:
Knowledge (XXG):Featured article candidates/Campaign history of the Roman military
269:
227:
208:
190:
36:
281:
80:
eg. im being accused of trying to paint a "zionist conspiracy".
414:
Just wanted to say thanks for the barnstar - much appreciated! -
379:. I believe that I have addressed the majority of your concerns.
134:(as defined by various policy guideline documents) and deletion
236:
which didn't fill me with confidence about Wiki-"due process".
346:
74:
International reactions to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict
67:
International reactions to the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict
276:
260:
Three fair use images have been removed from the article
382:
The only concern of yours remaining is that you stated:
268:. Thanks for taking the time to review this article.
371:Thank you for your comments on the FAC for article
168:The closing admin's comments on the Mega Society:
221:to which I received this rather off-hand reply:
203:.... why did you discount the votes of, say,
8:
390:reads a bit narrative and unnecessary imo."
173:on its merits. This is good news for you.
72:Hi and welcome, There is an dispute in
373:Campaign history of the Roman military
46:Terrorist_attacks_carried_out_by_LTTE
7:
429:contribute to it. Hope this helps.
115:Changes implemented. Thanks again.
24:
280:
341:Hey Sijo. Your change to the
1:
434:14:44, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
360:17:40, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
345:page has been reverted. The
328:14:09, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
295:for the following reason(s):
405:15:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
337:Featured topic: Solar System
289:Your request to be unblocked
420:20:19, 8 February 2007 (UT
273:15:57, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
450:
279:
251:14:38, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
126:FYI Mega Society Judgement
120:14:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
110:00:25, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
100:Shadow of the Colossus FAC
231:15:50, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
216:16:49, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
194:16:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
94:21:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
60:09:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
40:21:05, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
241:User:MichaelCPrice/mega
355:on its inclusion. --
165:in your watchlists.
153:When voting, include
264:per your request at
424:Yoshitsugu Tatekawa
309:Request handled by:
18:User talk:Sijo Ripa
334:
333:
326:
256:Padmé Amidala FAC
441:
419:
403:
325:
323:
317:
311:
305:lifted/expired.
284:
277:
248:Michael C. Price
213:Michael C. Price
449:
448:
444:
443:
442:
440:
439:
438:
426:
415:
412:
399:
369:
343:featured topics
339:
321:
315:
312:
258:
128:
103:
70:
65:revert dispute
51:Please vote at
49:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
447:
445:
425:
422:
417:PocklingtonDan
411:
408:
401:PocklingtonDan
398:Many Thanks -
392:
391:
368:
363:
338:
335:
332:
331:
303:134.58.253.130
297:
296:
285:
257:
254:
234:
233:
219:
218:
197:
196:
181:
180:
175:
174:
159:
158:
151:
144:
127:
124:
123:
122:
102:
97:
69:
63:
48:
43:
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
446:
437:
435:
432:
431:thewinchester
423:
421:
418:
409:
407:
406:
402:
396:
389:
385:
384:
383:
380:
378:
374:
367:
364:
362:
361:
358:
354:
353:
348:
344:
336:
330:
329:
324:
319:
318:
310:
306:
304:
300:
294:
290:
286:
283:
278:
275:
274:
271:
267:
263:
262:Padmé Amidala
255:
253:
252:
249:
244:
242:
237:
232:
229:
224:
223:
222:
217:
214:
210:
206:
202:
201:
200:
195:
192:
188:
183:
182:
177:
176:
171:
170:
169:
166:
164:
156:
152:
149:
145:
141:
140:
139:
137:
133:
125:
121:
118:
114:
113:
112:
111:
108:
101:
98:
96:
95:
92:
91:82.29.227.171
89:
86:
81:
79:
75:
68:
64:
62:
61:
58:
54:
47:
44:
42:
41:
38:
32:
26:
19:
427:
413:
397:
393:
387:
381:
370:
357:Arctic Gnome
351:
340:
314:
308:
307:
292:
288:
287:
259:
245:
238:
235:
220:
205:User:GregorB
198:
186:
167:
163:Mega Society
160:
154:
147:
135:
131:
129:
104:
82:
71:
50:
33:
30:
375:located at
410:Thank you!
209:User:Canon
143:attention.
78:Comrade438
316:Netsnipe
299:Autoblock
291:has been
146:It is a
136:practice
117:Ryu Kaze
107:Ryu Kaze
57:Ruchiraw
293:granted
27:Apology
270:Dmoon1
187:faster
132:policy
85:WP:RPP
228:Xoloz
191:Xoloz
155:brief
37:Xoloz
16:<
352:vote
148:very
31:Hi,
436:C)
347:sun
301:of
266:FAC
207:or
322:â–ş
246:--
386:"
185:"
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.