User talk:Alexnovo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I have a quick question, and having searched many wikipedia info pages cannot find an answer. So I am using the help me tag. Actually I have two questions, but they are related. They are" (1) It seems that if a controversial topic has four or five dedicated individuals who are keen on a particular point of view, they can violate the NPOV criteria of Wikipedia by claiming that the consensus agrees with them, when the consensus is four or five people who seem to care more about the page than countless others who disagree but have not the passion to join the discussion. What recourse is there for those who feel that an article is biased when a collective few say it is not? My second question is: How are "rules of a page and/or list created? And further who interprets them? There are lists on Wikipedia that seem to be enforced by a single user who fails to respond to inquiries regarding those rules, but removes edits with the notation, "as per rules of lists” Therefore I wish to know, who establishes the rules of any particular page, who can enforce the same, who can interpret the same and finally who can ask for an explanation of the same. Actually I realize that I asked more than two questions, but any help you can provide will be appreciated. Franklin Moore 03:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if your questions are still unanswered in your mind, but my opinion is that Wikipedia is in many regards a "right of the strongest" system. With the exception of Admins, everyone has exactly the same ability to change articles, and rules are only rules as long as they are accepted. Are there particular articles which are currently of concern to you? I'd be happy to take a look at them.--Bhuck 08:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. At least someone answered. Anyway, my problem was with the Cuba article, which seems to have gone to full war, and I decided I would play Switzerland and drop out. Franklin Moore 08:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Greetings![edit]

Hi, it seems we share a number of common interests. I noticed you on the WikiProject Anglicanism and made a few wikilink corrections to your (very good) expansion of Episcopal Diocese of New York. (I hope the history will be continued through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries!) I also see that you have edited articles on Gay rights in Cuba, Gay rights in Poland, etc. If you care to have a look at the articles Special rights and Homosexual agenda (and their respective talk pages), you will see that there are some editors on Wikipedia who believe that the term "gay rights" is itself POV!--Bhuck 08:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Greetings to you as well. As far as the history of the Diocese of New York, yes I intend on working on more. I just joined the Wiki Project on Anglicanism, and just submitted my work as of now; more will follow. As to the other articles you suggested, i shall look at them. As to the last point, Gay rights as POV, I am dumb-founded. Franklin Moore 08:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Here and here is some material you can use to be dumbfounded, if so moved. :-) --Bhuck 09:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
The Cuba article in its current form doesn't seem blatantly bad, except that criticism of the HIV sanatoriums is somewhat muted.--Bhuck 09:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I scanned the article and do not see a reference to the HIV sanatoriums, maybe I missed it. By the way here I was referring to the main article on Cuba, not the article on Gay Rights in Cuba. Anyway, the article has improved after mediation and the eventual blocking of a large number of users. When I was involved there was a group of several users who would immediately remove any suggestion that Cuba was less than the perfect Uropia. After that another group became involved who removed any statement which implied that Castro had produced any positive results. I became rather disgusted and merely monitered the site thereafter. Eventually mediation was requested. I believe it has calmed down. However, just take a look at the talk pages (I think there are 7 or 8 archived pages). Anyway that is in the past. By the way thanks for the help on the Diocese of New York page. I will be adding to it. I will also check out the pages you suggest. Franklin Moore 16:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Ah, the sanatoriums are in the Gay Rights in Cuba article, which I assumed you had meant.--Bhuck 19:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

that is what I assumed. In any event, per your suggestion I went to the Special Rights article and have been involved in a long back and forth on the talk page. Franklin Moore 02:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies[edit]

Hello! I noticed that your userpage mentions that you are interested in LGBT issues. Would you be interested in joining WikiProject LGBT studies? The WikiProject's been a bit inactive recently and some of us are trying to get it going again. We'd love to have you on board! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Anglicanism COTM[edit]

The Anglicanism Collaboration of the Month has been reactivated! Please consider going to the page to either vote for one of the nominated articles, or nominate one yourself. Thanks! Fishhead64 02:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Anglican collaboration of the month[edit]

Wassupwestcoast 02:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Christianity[edit]

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity

The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

Christian cross.svg

- Tinucherian (talk) 05:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Ruben Diaz Jr. -- New York State Assembly Publications[edit]

Dear Franklin,

I noted the thoughtfulness of your commentary regarding the Ruben Diaz Jr. article.

As a University Professor and reader of Reinaldo Arenas, you set a high standard of discourse!

I will address your points one at a time, though this will probably take a day or two. Hopefully by the end of that, we will have a foundation for a reasonable point of consensus.

In this note today, I will address the validity of New York State Assembly Publications (including newsletters) as a source of information regarding the New York State Legislature.

A few months ago, I sent a similar note to an editor named GeneralBelly...you can read this note in my talk page.

NEW YORK STATE ASSEMBLY PUBLICATIONS

For information (not conjecture) about New York State legislation, the official publications of the New York State Legislature are a primary resource.

New York State Assembly Newsletters are edited, vetted, typeset, printed, and mailed by the government of the State of New York.

Every time a State Assembly Newsletter is cited in the Ruben Diaz Jr. article, it is to reference a fact – not a viewpoint or opinion.

For example, with respect to a New York State Assembly Newsletter which GeneralBelly quoted:

In the area of Brownfield Cleanup Legislation the Assembly Newsletter provides the bill number (A. 11768) and this bill summary: “will provide more than double the current tax incentives for actual site cleanup – up to 50 percent of the costs of remediation; limit the redevelopment credits on non-manufacturing sites to $35 million or three times the cost of site cleanup, whichever is less; limit the redevelopment credits on manufacturing sites to $45 million or six times the cost of site cleanup, whichever is less; allow any project application that has been received and approved by the DEC to continue to be eligible for current-law tax credits; and increase by 2 percent the redevelopment credit for sites developed in conformance with the Brownfield Opportunity Area Plan.”

In the area of Green Roof Property Tax Abatement, that same Assembly Newsletter provides the bill numbers (A.10234 and A.11226) and the following bill summary: “This tax abatement will offset 35% of the costs of installing a green roof on a standard roof.”

This level of detail and precision, applies to every instance in which a New York State Assembly Newsletter is cited (as a footnote) for the purpose of supplying a legislative fact, and a credible source for that fact.

Precedent exists in Wikipedia, for using a government publication in this manner. You don’t need to look very far.

Please review Reference #87 in the Wikipedia article of David Paterson, the current Governor of New York State. Here is a direct link to the text of this Reference: http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/press_0729081.html

If you have time, please review Reference #106 in that same Wikipedia article. Here is the direct link to its content: http://www.patersonforny.com/main.cfm?s=dap

The Ruben Diaz Jr. citations are specifically selected. They supply the direct facts, regarding legislation as it appears, in the body of the Wikipedia article. This use was more carefully and narrowly drawn, than Reference #106 as shown above, for the Governor of New York State.

Again I must affirm, that for information (not conjecture) about New York State legislation, the official publications of the New York State Legislature are a primary resource.

Thanks again for your attention to the Ruben Diaz Jr. article.

Regards,

MBernal615 (talk) 07:47, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Response to Franklin Moore re: Rainbow Coalition / Rainbow Rebels[edit]

Franklin,

Herein is the additional context you requested, with respect to the Rainbow Coalition.

1) RAINBOW COALITION vs. RAINBOW REBELLION

The New York Times designated them as the Rainbow Coalition. See:

http://search.aol.com/aol/search?&query=Bronx+Democrats+Split+on+Judicial+Race%2C&invocationType=tb50aoldesktopab

The New York Sun also referred to them as a Rainbow Coalition. See:

http://search.aol.com/aol/search?&query=Bronx+Democrats+In+Post-Primary+Disarray%2C&invocationType=tb50aoldesktopab

2) FACTS REGARDING THE BATTLE FOR CONTROL OF BRONX COUNTY

Franklin, this battle was fascinating and often surreal.

It included:

a) the stealing of a P.A. system in order to prevent a mandated vote

b) senior citizens bussed in for a "free show and a chicken dinner"

c) the seniors forced to vote (they didn't know what for) then sent home...without any chicken

d) all of this orchestrated by Bronx County Leader José Rivera, trying to retain his power

3) SOURCES FOR THIS CIRCUS-LIKE BEHAVIOR

Naturally, this astounding spectacle did not escape the notice of the New York press. Here are some sources, all of which are listed in the current Ruben Diaz, Jr. article:

Kappstatter, Bob, (12/6/08), New Dem Boss Carl Heastie Ushers in Calm After Disruptive Storm Over Power, New York Daily News

Benjamin, Elizabeth, (9/29/08), Seeing Double In The Bronx, New York Daily News

Giove, Candice, (9/29/08), Rivera, Rebels, Each Claim Bronx Victory, The Village Voice

Giove, Candice, (9/29/08), Bronx Dem Boss Storms Meeting, The Village Voice

4) PRIOR INCLUSION OF THIS MATERIAL IN THE RUBEN DIAZ JR. ARTICLE

The above-cited events were previously included in the Ruben Diaz, Jr. article, but were deleted by the editor named GeneralBelly.

In order to avoid any NPOV controversy, I did not dispute GeneralBelly's deletion.

BUT PLEASE NOTE:

Given the above history, as documented by the New York press, the Ruben Diaz Jr. article has been more than conservative in maintaining its NPOV.

It avoided any inflammatory events, accepted GeneralBelly's deletion, and adhered to the documented facts.

Regards,

MBernal615 (talk) 09:09, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks MBernal for your quick and thoughtful response. I think we can work together to improve this article. Let me address some of your issues.

  • Rainbow Coalition vs Rainbow Rebels. I read the NY Times article using the term Rainbow Coalition and I would agree that this provides some support for using that name in this article. I would still note that the majority of the other sources, use the term Rainbow Rebels. Therefore at the very least, I think this needs a bit more research, and I will do some later today. I will say that my major concern here is the possible confusion that the term has with Jesse Jackson's former National Rainbow Coalition, now called Rainbow/PUSH Coalition. As far as I know there is no formal connection between the Bronx Group and Jesse Jackson's group, so I think the article should avoid any confusion. I would also note that because of the positions taken by Jesse Jackson's organization, the term "Rainbow Coalition" has become a form of "Dog-whistle Politics" such that when a person says he/she is identified with the "Rainbow Coalition" that person is fully supportive of a long list of progressive policies supported by Jesse Jackson. Thus the term has become a "code word" to many constituencies. For example in the LGBT community often when they hear that a person is a member of the "Rainbow Coalition", the immediate reaction is that the politician is supportive of the LGBT Community's quest for full equality including Marriage Equality. For better or worse, the term has taken on this type of Code usage. For that reason, it should be carefully used. Perhaps what should be done here is to add a qualifier, so that the article reads something like, "Diaz was a founder member of the Rainbow Coalition (aka Rainbow Rebels), not to be confused with Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, ....." If you wish we can try to work on some language for this.
  • Conflict in the Bronx Democratic Party. With regard to the substance of the section on the Rainbow Rebels, let me add a couple of points. From what I have read, this appears to be a fascinating episode and I think should be expanded with facts. As an aside, I will note that I am personally delighted with the results. I happen to personally know Elizabeth Taylor and am so delighted at her success. These are my personal biases, and I suspect that you and I agree on this. However, when writing for Wikipedia we must make great efforts to keep that bias out of the article. There is a Wikipedia mantra which basically says let the facts speak for themselves and let the readers draw the conclusion from those facts. The section as it reads now contains language that (1) does not set the events in their context (these issues predate the Taylor run for judgeship) and (2) uses adjectives that practically gush over the victory of the rebels. I will try to work on some language that I think might be more balanced and which I will also hope demonstrate the importance of what has happened. However as I am in Argentina, I will have to rely only on Internet available information. I hope that we can work together on this.
  • Use of Press releases as sources. I am not saying that Assemblyman Diaz' Press Releases are false, what I am saying is that they are biased. While the State does publish them, great deference is given to the member's wishes in what they include and they are written so as to make the Assemblyman look as good as possible (while being truthful). This is true of all such Press Releases, so I am not singling out Diaz in particular. For Example, I am certain that I could go through all of the White House Press Releases published by the US Government during the Bush administration. They were published by the government; they were fact checked and can be said to represent one version of the truth. They also are biased. A statement like, "The fact that the US has not been attacked since 9/11 demonstrates that George W. Bush tireless efforts to stop terrorism have kept America safe." This is the type of language that gets into such press releases; such statements are not demonstrably false, but they are clearly biased. It is for this reason that reliance on such materials for an encyclopedia should be minimized. They lead to statements that are either biased or are meaningless. From the Diaz article I note language like "Diaz is a supporter of higher education." I do not doubt this to be true, but i doubt there is a single politician in the world that could not say the exact same thing. The question is not does a person support higher education, but what has that person done in this regard. We should let the facts speak for themselves and then the reader can determine whether the person is, or is not a "supporter of higher education." i would also note that on this statement, the cited material appears to refer only to primary and secondary education, not higher education. --Franklin Moore (talk) 17:52, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Franklin, you have a response...[edit]

Franklin,

I sent you a response regarding the Ruben Diaz Jr. NPOV issues.

You can read it on the Ruben Diaz Jr. Discussion Page.

Please review when you are able, and best wishes for the Easter season.

MBernal615 (talk) 01:41, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Nice work, Franklin[edit]

Franklin,

The Ruben Diaz Jr. edit worked very well. Thoughtfully and artfully done.

I followed up on some small things (typos, minor syntax) and voila! It was a nice addition to the piece.

Thanks, Franklin.

MBernal615 (talk) 03:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Rainbow Rebels -- word choice/syntax[edit]

Franklin,

I pared down the first sentence of the Rainbow Rebels section.

I also read some of your Discussion page, and noted some controversy surrounding the Cuba article.

My friend, you put it mildly...it's like WWIII in there!

The following is an anonymous note dated 4/11/09:


  • No, it's not dictatorial. Maybe slightly oppressive because of non-stop U.S. efforts to invade, assassinate its government members, bomb airliners, or embargo its people. Stop lying.


When people argue so vehemently, after the article has been locked, even Switzerland isn't safe.

Regards,

MBernal615 (talk) 08:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Franklin[edit]

Franklin,

Thank you for removing the NPOV tag from Ruben Diaz Jr. and yes, I look forward to working with you on this.

You have a strong editor's eye and a good way of working with people.

Both are really appreciated.

On another note, I have a more prosaic equivalent to your Cuba editing experience. I live in Washington Heights where there is a lively "economy." Cops eye me as if I'm up to no good, and clockers think I'm a cop. After twenty parking tickets and eggs on my car, I gave up driving in NYC.

All best,

MBernal615 (talk) 00:04, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies Newsletter (June 2009)[edit]

  • Newsletter delivery by xenobot 17:09, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Homophobia at The Hardy Boys[edit]

Hi, I found your name through the LGBT project page. There's a massive amount of homophobia going on at Talk:The Hardy Boys - the article has been purged of all sources that discuss the issue b/c homophobe-editors say the issue is "fringe". I am way outnumbered, so I am trying to raise awareness of the problem. Any help would be appreciated! Ricardiana (talk) 17:14, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

Welcome to the Novels WikiProject[edit]

Book collection.jpg

Hello and welcome to the Novels WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to fiction books, often referred to as "novels".

A few features that you might find helpful:

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the coordinators or an experienced member of the project; we will be happy to assist in any way we can. Again, welcome, and we look forward to seeing you around! —Ed (talkmajestic titan) 05:17, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Nelson Antonio Denis[edit]

Franklin,

Feliz Navidad y prospero año nuevo en Argentina. I hope all is well.

I remember we edited together on an article named Ruben Diaz Jr. and came away with a nice result.

I'm writing to ask your assistance with Nelson Antonio Denis. Under the guise of "good faith editing," the page has been savaged and butchered by two editors who are teaming up. They eliminated entire sections and over 20 newspaper citations, all of which were carefully sourced.

If you look at the page as it existed on December 12, 2010 you will see a balanced, well-researched article that had educational value -- with citations and newspaper references for every major point.

The editor Off2RioRob has had problems with administrators before, so he is teaming up with someone to destroy this page. The page has been up for over a year, with no major problems. Now in two or three hours, they came by and destroyed it.

If you have a chance, please take a look and provide some assistance (if you believe it deserves it). I cannot win an editing war against these people.

The article was fair and beautiful on December 12, 2010. Now it is a mess. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.57.39.35 (talk) 00:47, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

  • All changes were discussed and agreed to on the talk page, and were urgently needed to restore neutrality and remove the most egregious COI edits. It was revealed in a sockpuppet investigation that this article was principally authored by the sockpuppet of an indefinitely blocked editor with an obvious connection, per user name, with the subject of the article. See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Nelsondenis248. The article was a mess, with multiple issues including peacock terminology and unsubstantiated text. (P.S. the claim by this IP that I'm a "teammate" of this editor is laughable. My only previous contacts with him were in the climate change articles, and I believe we were on opposite sides of that as I recall.) ScottyBerg (talk) 01:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)


Not quite sure why all of this is on my user page. Franklin Moore (talk) 20:40, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels Collaboration for February[edit]

Thank you everyone who participated in the January Collaboration, it was quite a success with 5 new C class articles, 3 stub kills and several articles were removed from our backlogs. In support of the Great Backlog Drive, the WikiProject Novels Collaboration for February is going to help remove backlog candidates in the backlogs related to WikiProject Novels. Please join us, and help us wikify, reference, clean up plot sections and generally improve Novels content, Sadads (talk) 22:31, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

You are recieving this message because you are a member of WikiProject Novels according to Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Members

Ichthus: January 2012[edit]

Ichthus dark yellow.png

ICHTHUS

January 2012

Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions and subscriptions contact the Newsroom

WP:Anglican navbox colour discussion[edit]

Hullo, fellow WikiProject-er. We're having a discussion about the colours of Anglicanism navboxes. Please do come along and weigh in. DBD 17:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride 2014[edit]

Hi Alexnovo. In case you are not aware, there is an upcoming campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related topics on Wikipedia, culminating with an international edit-a-thon on June 21. See Wiki Loves Pride 2014 for more information. If you are interested, you might consider creating a page for a major city (or cities!) near you, with a list of LGBT-related articles that need to be created or improved. This would be a tremendous help to Wikipedia and coverage of LGBT culture and history. Thanks for your consideration, and please let me know if you have any questions! --Another Believer (Talk) 16:42, 9 May 2014 (UTC)