Jump to content

User talk:B.Andersohn: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Good Olfactory (talk | contribs)
688,950 edits
Line 285: Line 285:
:::::::::OK, obviously you're not open to the help I was attempting to offer you. Frankly, after removing the CFD template, you weren't coming across as a user that was very well versed in Wikipedia guidelines, so I was trying to give you some assistance in recognizing that some of your actions will reflect poorly upon you. You've felt threatened by this, so I apologize. But I do need to ask you to stop posting non-neutral invites to the discussion on users' pages. You may not think they are non-neutral, but—well, you really should read [[WP:CANVASS]], despite your expressed non-interest in Wikipedia standards and guidelines. Non-neutral notifications to other users can be a form of disruption on Wikipedia, which can ultimately lead to a restriction of editing privileges. (And no, this is not a threat—I'm trying to help you dammit!) Finally, my comments to you have nothing to do with attempting to restrict anyone from expressing their views. If you read them carefully, I think you could interpret them in a way that would be consistent with this not being my intent. (In other words, my comments should be interpreted according to the way I'm saying they were intended, and not the way in which you have colored them.) [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 23:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
:::::::::OK, obviously you're not open to the help I was attempting to offer you. Frankly, after removing the CFD template, you weren't coming across as a user that was very well versed in Wikipedia guidelines, so I was trying to give you some assistance in recognizing that some of your actions will reflect poorly upon you. You've felt threatened by this, so I apologize. But I do need to ask you to stop posting non-neutral invites to the discussion on users' pages. You may not think they are non-neutral, but—well, you really should read [[WP:CANVASS]], despite your expressed non-interest in Wikipedia standards and guidelines. Non-neutral notifications to other users can be a form of disruption on Wikipedia, which can ultimately lead to a restriction of editing privileges. (And no, this is not a threat—I'm trying to help you dammit!) Finally, my comments to you have nothing to do with attempting to restrict anyone from expressing their views. If you read them carefully, I think you could interpret them in a way that would be consistent with this not being my intent. (In other words, my comments should be interpreted according to the way I'm saying they were intended, and not the way in which you have colored them.) [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 23:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)


:::::::::Dear GOF, as the tone of your comments seems to be less abrasive/more humane, I shall reciprocate and “give you the benefit of the [Cartesian] doubt” as we say in Gallic parlance! I honestly believe my OPENLY '''calling upon a small representative sample of seasoned editors/contributors from 4 different countries/diverse cultural backgrounds''' = 1 Greek, 1 US, 1 UK and 1 Benelux '''is not akin to “canvassing” in any shape or form'''. For the record, only one of them had expressed a (mildly) “opinionated” view in the previous CfD discussion two years ago… But, then again, so did you! And yet '''you didn’t “exclude” or recuse yourself'''! Also, the wordings of my publically available requests are rather cordial and transparent: e.g. “''Some Wikipedians have reopened an old CfD debate, aiming at removing the “People of Levantine-Greek Orthodox Christian descent” category. Can you please help us with your learned arguments & let us know if you’re in favor of keeping it? I, personally, think it shouldn’t be removed. My personal perspective is Positivist & thus mostly ethno-cultural''.” '''The said invitation is perfectly legitimate, entirely neutral and doesn’t infringe upon any WP regulation . . .''' [[User:B.Andersohn|B.Andersohn]] ([[User talk:B.Andersohn#top|talk]]) 23:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
::::::::::Dear GOF, as the tone of your comments seems to be less abrasive/more humane, I shall reciprocate and “give you the benefit of the [Cartesian] doubt” as we say in Gallic parlance! I honestly believe my OPENLY '''calling upon a small representative sample of seasoned editors/contributors from 4 different countries/diverse cultural backgrounds''' = 1 Greek, 1 US, 1 UK and 1 Benelux '''is not akin to “canvassing” in any shape or form'''. For the record, only one of them had expressed a (mildly) “opinionated” view in the previous CfD discussion two years ago… But, then again, so did you! And yet '''you didn’t “exclude” or recuse yourself'''! Also, the wordings of my publically available requests are rather cordial and transparent: e.g. “''Some Wikipedians have reopened an old CfD debate, aiming at removing the “People of Levantine-Greek Orthodox Christian descent” category. Can you please help us with your learned arguments & let us know if you’re in favor of keeping it? I, personally, think it shouldn’t be removed. My personal perspective is Positivist & thus mostly ethno-cultural''.” '''The said invitation is perfectly legitimate, entirely neutral and doesn’t infringe upon any WP regulation . . .''' [[User:B.Andersohn|B.Andersohn]] ([[User talk:B.Andersohn#top|talk]]) 23:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

:::::::::::I agree that your notifications were not extremely non-neutral. But because of the ways in which bare writing can be interpreted (with its inherent lack of tone, etc. that usually comes with spoken language), they were somewhat non-neutral. This is what [[WP:CANVASS]] tries to get across: that a brief and highly generic notification is best, because it avoids these misinterpretations to the greatest extent possible. For instance: '''(1)''' ''Some Wikipedians have reopened an old CfD debate'': this could definitely be interpreted in multiple ways. Although you probably meant it as helpful background, it can also be read as being critical of the action of these "some Wikipedians". '''(2)''' ''let us know if you’re in favor of keeping it?'': it's best not to word an invite in this way. It would be equally problematic to say, "let us know if you're in favor of deleting it". Again, probably not your intent, but it can be interpreted as meaning "please vote in favor of keeping it". '''(3)''' ''I, personally, think it shouldn’t be removed.'' A neutral notification will not express an opinion on the matter, even one that is explicitly stated as a personal opinion. Also, if you notify ''any'' user from the previous discussion, it is usually considered good form to notify ''all'' of the users from the previous discussion—to be neutral, you notify all of them, or none of them. And emailing users to notify them—because the contents of such notifications are unknown and usually unknowable—they generally do cast a pall of non-neutrality over the discussion whether or not the contents were in fact completely neutral.
:::::::::::As for my own involvement—well, I'm not that wedded to a result. I have an opinion, but I don't care that much. My concerns here have been more targeted at ''process'' rather than ''results''. I'm certainly not going to be the administrator that ''closes'' the discussion. But I think it's OK for me to see processes that are problematic and to act. I would have acted the same had I not participated int he discussion initially ''or'' if I saw the same behavior by users that had results opinions that I agreed with. If you want me to refer this issue to another admin who is not involved in the discussion for him or her to assess whether you and/or I have been acting appropriately, I would be happy to do that. [[User:Good Olfactory|Good Ol’factory]] <sup>[[User talk:Good Olfactory|(talk)]]</sup> 00:18, 19 December 2014 (UTC)


== Hello ==
== Hello ==

Revision as of 00:18, 19 December 2014

Welcome to Wikipedia

Hello, B.Andersohn, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 09:09, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous

Spam

Please do not spam users' talk pages by making the same post to multiple locations. Those who have taken part in the discussion at WP:EAR#Possible abuse / spam citing "world pensions council?" will probably have watchlisted the page. If not, a simple link to the page is all that is needed. SpinningSpark 18:06, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Spinningspark,

I’m sorry: I didn’t mean to “spam” (?) your page: just wanted to be certain my message would effectively reach its intended recipient(s)

+ I’m not sure I know how to link internally to a WP page: your help is appreciated.

Have a nice weekend, 

BJA

--B.Andersohn (talk)

You write the page name between double square brackets. For instance, to link to my page you write [[User:Spinningspark]] and it looks like this: User:Spinningspark. You can specify a particular section of a page by using #, for example User:Spinningspark#Resources. SpinningSpark 23:23, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Gotya. many thanks BJA --B.Andersohn (talk)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your feedback

Hi B.Andersohn, and thank you for leaving feedback. I'm really glad that you're enjoying using and editing Wikipedia! If you haven't already, you may want to take the tutorial to learn the basics of editing. Should you need help at any point, please feel free to contact me on my talkpage or ask at the helpdesk.

♛♚★Vaibhav Jain★♚♛ Talk Email 07:44, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 

Hi VibhiJain Thanks for your kind words & encouragements Best, BJA --B.Andersohn (talk)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Liikanen report (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Capital, Proprietary, Allocation, Alignment, Compartmentalization and Third-party

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Munib Younan (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Native and Convert
Paul Anka (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Lebanese
Rûm (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to European
World Pensions & Investments Forum (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Quantitative

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:09, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

October 2012

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Frank Zappa. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - DVdm (talk) 10:14, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Competitiveness, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Neoclassical (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Infrastructure-based development (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Scandinavian, Colbert, Pragmatist and Singaporean
Country attractiveness (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Qualitative and Quantitative
Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Roman and Macedonian
Abraham Mitrie Rihbany (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Lebanese
Washington Consensus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Pragmatist

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Pension fund investment in infrastructure (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Diversification and Equity
Hananiah (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Ananias

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:58, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Infrastructure-based development, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Roosevelt (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:24, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Frank Zappa, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Greek and Levantine (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, B.Andersohn. You have new messages at Malik Shabazz's talk page.
Message added 16:47, 29 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Categories for discussion

You have placed some material about a current WP:CFD on my talk page. Your comments belong on the CFD page, where the admin who closes the discussion will see them. He is the person that you need to persaude not me. Yes, certain regular CFD contributors do not have much clue on individual ethnicities. It is an issue that I periodically have to address in comments on the Middle East and eastern Europe where ethnicity and nationality do not always match. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:55, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Christianity in Syria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Greek and Macedonian
Orthodox Christianity in Syria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Macedonian and Hatay

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:20, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Infrastructure (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Chinese and Singaporean
Economic development (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Housing
Hellenistic Judaism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Ancient Macedonian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:12, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Democratic Party (United States) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Roosevelt
Fiscal policy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Roosevelt
United States debt-ceiling crisis 2013 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Stimulus

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:49, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

George Antonius

The British civil service in Egypt employed non-citizens, though they tended to be excluded from senior positions. Page 29 of this thesis has references. Do you have any direct evidence that GA was a British citizen? Zerotalk 11:59, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Infrastructure-based development (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Roosevelt
Washington Consensus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Roosevelt

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hellenistic Judaism, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tarsus (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:54, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Antiochian Orthodox Christian Archdiocese of North America, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ottoman (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:11, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Greek Orthodox Church of Antioch (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Greek, Roman and Macedonian
Hellenistic Judaism (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Greek, Roman and Macedonian
Jewish Christian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Greek, Roman and Macedonian

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:16, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited James Abourezk, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lebanese (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:59, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

February 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Bilad al-Sham may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • region had been inhabited mainly by local Aramaic-speaking [[Monophysite]] Christian peasants (like the [[Mardaites]] who constitued the bulk of the native population, [[Ghassanid]] and [[

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:56, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brevan Howard Page Update

Hi B.Andersohn,

I see you have an interest in financial based Wikipedia pages and I'm getting in touch as I was wondering if you could help me out with the Brevan Howard article? They're one of the largest hedge funds in the world, but their Wikipedia page has a number of factual inaccuracies in it. The talk page clearly identifies all of the inaccuracies, backed them all up with sources. The user page of the previous editor who was helping out says he is taking a long break from Wiki, and the page hasn't attracted any new editors since October 2013.

It would be very much appreciated if you could lend a hand on this. --Jenny.barrett (talk) 12:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jenny , I’m sorry: read your mesg. 5 weeks after you sent it! as my Wikipedia account is linked to an antiquated email address I rarely check.... Will fix this later this month/by early May, which hopefully should allow me reply faster next time around
BJA

--B.Andersohn (talk)

Requesting Guidance

Hello. I'm new to the wiki community and would like to start working on editing the Property Insurance page with the help and collaboration of more experienced contributors from Project Finance Participants. There is a recommendation that the Chartis article be merged with AIG's page. I think the Property Insurance page could be strengthened with parts of AIG's page since it shows how current events and emerging trends effect it's regulation by the government. Hurricane Sandy and updated payouts of the WTC are not on the Property Insurance page either - which to me seem to be relevant. Do you think adding more information would be beneficial to the Property Insurance page? If so would you be interested in collaborating what facts should be included? Any response would be kindly appreciated. Thank you.Lgkkitkat (talk) 03:37, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pension Investment in Private Equity, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages SME and Fiscal. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:17, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pension investment in private equity

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Pension investment in private equity, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Pension Investment in Private Equity. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:49, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I’ve created an identical page with the proper title = non-capitalized first letters, but I can't move/redirect the old one...
Can you please help?
Thanks in advance

BJA

--B.Andersohn (talk

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pension investment in private equity, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages SME and Fiscal. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:11, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove CFD templates

Please, do not remove CFD templates from categories being discussed, as you did here. The template explicitly states, "Please do not remove or change this Template:Cfd message until the survey and discussion at WP:Cfd is closed". The nominator is aware that the category has been discussed two years ago. That does not preclude a re-nomination two years later. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:13, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure the “nominator [was] aware that the category [had] been discussed two years ago” when I removed the CfD in question, nor that he has any serious qualification re: the matter he chose to discuss! … But I agree that this “does not preclude a re-nomination two years later.” B.Andersohn (talk) 22:22, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ultimately, it's irrelevant whether or not he was aware of it, and it's also irrelevant what his "qualifications" were. You don't remove the template from a category that has been nominated until the nomination has been closed. Doing so is regarded by many as disruptive editing. I don't know how the instructions on the template itself could be any clearer. Good Ol’factory (talk)
I think you might also want to be aware of Wikipedia standards regarding canvassing of other users. This and this do not look good in that regard. Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear GO’F, I’m v. busy & thus won’t have much time to engage in vain polemics… I’ve just read your menacing message (“I think you may also want to be aware”!) worthy of the Ministerium für Staatssicherheit circa 1965: frankly, I don’t see how calling upon the learned contributions of Wikipedians who actually took part in the original CfD discussions two years ago can be construed as “canvassing” (??), except of course if one has some malevolent intent- considering his shallow views were dismissed back then… B.Andersohn (talk) 10:02, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Spare me: these are Wikipedia guidelines, not ones I've made up on my own. How else am I supposed to let you know about them when it's unclear if you've ever heard of them before? But if you've nothing to hide, then per full transparency, you'll have no problem revealing the content of the message that was sent. Have you read the page WP:CANVASS? This appears to fall within the section on "Stealth canvassing". Also, I would note that while you did make an effort to notify two users who agreed with your position from the previous discussion, you did not notify any of the participants who disagreed with you. That's also discussed in the guideline and may fall into what is called "votestacking". Good Ol’factory (talk) 10:12, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, I have a v. busy day and more importantly, I’m not in the habit of yielding to censorship masquerading in the guise of bureaucratic enforcement (“Have you really read chapter XX, section 675, paragraph 7854 of Party Golden Rule N°347-898-Kbis, really?”) 1) For the record: you took part in the original CfD discussion two years ago and your views were clearly in the minority back then: you then joined the current discussion yesterday… Fair enough: it may (or may not) be judicious to reopen the said debate, but it’s certainly conceivable in case people can bring sensible arguments and discuss things politely and agreeably 2) BUT then why not let others express their views freely, without bullying them? And why ask other Wikipedians to open their mail “in public” and self-flagellate before you? These encroachments on intellectual liberty are simply appalling B.Andersohn (talk) 10:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, obviously you're not open to the help I was attempting to offer you. Frankly, after removing the CFD template, you weren't coming across as a user that was very well versed in Wikipedia guidelines, so I was trying to give you some assistance in recognizing that some of your actions will reflect poorly upon you. You've felt threatened by this, so I apologize. But I do need to ask you to stop posting non-neutral invites to the discussion on users' pages. You may not think they are non-neutral, but—well, you really should read WP:CANVASS, despite your expressed non-interest in Wikipedia standards and guidelines. Non-neutral notifications to other users can be a form of disruption on Wikipedia, which can ultimately lead to a restriction of editing privileges. (And no, this is not a threat—I'm trying to help you dammit!) Finally, my comments to you have nothing to do with attempting to restrict anyone from expressing their views. If you read them carefully, I think you could interpret them in a way that would be consistent with this not being my intent. (In other words, my comments should be interpreted according to the way I'm saying they were intended, and not the way in which you have colored them.) Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear GOF, as the tone of your comments seems to be less abrasive/more humane, I shall reciprocate and “give you the benefit of the [Cartesian] doubt” as we say in Gallic parlance! I honestly believe my OPENLY calling upon a small representative sample of seasoned editors/contributors from 4 different countries/diverse cultural backgrounds = 1 Greek, 1 US, 1 UK and 1 Benelux is not akin to “canvassing” in any shape or form. For the record, only one of them had expressed a (mildly) “opinionated” view in the previous CfD discussion two years ago… But, then again, so did you! And yet you didn’t “exclude” or recuse yourself! Also, the wordings of my publically available requests are rather cordial and transparent: e.g. “Some Wikipedians have reopened an old CfD debate, aiming at removing the “People of Levantine-Greek Orthodox Christian descent” category. Can you please help us with your learned arguments & let us know if you’re in favor of keeping it? I, personally, think it shouldn’t be removed. My personal perspective is Positivist & thus mostly ethno-cultural.” The said invitation is perfectly legitimate, entirely neutral and doesn’t infringe upon any WP regulation . . . B.Andersohn (talk) 23:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that your notifications were not extremely non-neutral. But because of the ways in which bare writing can be interpreted (with its inherent lack of tone, etc. that usually comes with spoken language), they were somewhat non-neutral. This is what WP:CANVASS tries to get across: that a brief and highly generic notification is best, because it avoids these misinterpretations to the greatest extent possible. For instance: (1) Some Wikipedians have reopened an old CfD debate: this could definitely be interpreted in multiple ways. Although you probably meant it as helpful background, it can also be read as being critical of the action of these "some Wikipedians". (2) let us know if you’re in favor of keeping it?: it's best not to word an invite in this way. It would be equally problematic to say, "let us know if you're in favor of deleting it". Again, probably not your intent, but it can be interpreted as meaning "please vote in favor of keeping it". (3) I, personally, think it shouldn’t be removed. A neutral notification will not express an opinion on the matter, even one that is explicitly stated as a personal opinion. Also, if you notify any user from the previous discussion, it is usually considered good form to notify all of the users from the previous discussion—to be neutral, you notify all of them, or none of them. And emailing users to notify them—because the contents of such notifications are unknown and usually unknowable—they generally do cast a pall of non-neutrality over the discussion whether or not the contents were in fact completely neutral.
As for my own involvement—well, I'm not that wedded to a result. I have an opinion, but I don't care that much. My concerns here have been more targeted at process rather than results. I'm certainly not going to be the administrator that closes the discussion. But I think it's OK for me to see processes that are problematic and to act. I would have acted the same had I not participated int he discussion initially or if I saw the same behavior by users that had results opinions that I agreed with. If you want me to refer this issue to another admin who is not involved in the discussion for him or her to assess whether you and/or I have been acting appropriately, I would be happy to do that. Good Ol’factory (talk) 00:18, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello dear thank you and I added my opinion and i'm in favor of keeping it. It's an ethnoreligious group called Antiochian Greeks with 2000 year of history. communities make up a significant proportion of the Middle Eastern diaspora, with sizeable population concentrations across the diaspora. This ethnoreligious identity is not only based on religion, but also on national and cultural identity. Have a nice day --Jobas (talk) 16:03, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks J. A lot of that stuff is under-researched & poorly understood: it’s refreshing to meet real experts!

“Melkite” is probably too old-fashioned and lost (part of its original) meaning anyway circa 1730 CE with the emergence of “Uniat-ism” in Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria.

You’re using “Antiochian Greeks” in the modern sense = as quasi-synonymous to “People of Levantine-Greek Orthodox Christian Descent”, which is fine with me. In the old days = say pre-1918 or before 1936, “Antiochian Greeks” sometimes had a much narrower sense = only the “purely” European and Ionian and Karaman and Pontian “Greek-speaking Greeks” living in Alexandretta, Aleppo and Latakiah, excluding the autochthonous Greek-Orthodox and Greek-Catholic Christians who could only speak Turkish and Levantine Arabic (‘Syro-Lebanese dialect’).

That definition of “Antiochian Greeks” was v. silly and only came to be after the 16th century when small “fresh” waves of Greek “immigrants” came to Cilicia and Syria from Greece itself and from Central and Western Anatolia – some of them choosing not to merge/intermarry with the existing Greco-Levantine communities of Antioch, Alexandretta, Aleppo, Beirut, Damascus, Nazareth… etc. Bottom line, even the “original” definition is not that old. The modern, broadened definition you use makes perfect sense. But I still prefer “People of Levantine-Greek Orthodox Descent”!  ;)) Keep up the good work BA B.Andersohn (talk) 16:29, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:B.Andersohn&oldid=638712366"