Jump to content

User talk:Blue Tie: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
Andypandy.UK (talk | contribs)
see WP:SOCK
Line 31: Line 31:


If google sent you here... click here [[Almah]]
If google sent you here... click here [[Almah]]

== One account please ==
Using more than one account is against Wikipedia policy, see [[WP:SOCK]]. You should request [[User:Anon 64|Anon 64]] to be blocked and only use this account in the future.--<font style="background:white">[[User:Andypandy.UK|Andeh]]</font> 19:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:36, 28 June 2006

User Page Creation

(moved from user page)

(To Blue Tie: I'd normally put this on your talkpage - i don't usually edit other people's userpages, but since you asked for it - the table above may help you in editing wikipedia -- (James McNally)  (talkpage)  14:36, 12 June 2006 (UTC)).[reply]

DPT

Hi, Thanks for your message re Democratic peace theory, yes it would be nice to get a pear review, however go cautiously. This has been a very heated debate with lots of discussion in the archive, various related AfD's RfC's etc. For example see the latest Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Possible wars between liberal democracies 2. Its worth reading some of these before hand. This is very much a content dispute and reading the supporting litrature is highly vital. Currently a truce has been arrived at, and I feel the ballance of the article is about right although the wording is tricky. --Salix alba (talk) 09:32, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your request, if you think it would be helpful, I am willing to try; however, the amount of reading and the care needed to see whether Ultramarine is using his sources accurately is a burden. You should be aware that Ultramarine considers me a co-conspirator with Septentrionalis, and so my participation is likely to provoke him.
Our acquaintance began in a rather unfortunate way -- while I was still learning the ropes here. The article was a featured candidate, but basically presented Rummel's view alone. Septentrionalis and I each criticized Rummel's statistics and methods what I consider grounds obvious to any sophomore, citing only textbooks on method. When Ultramarine insisted on interpreting WP:V strictly -- don't find a statistics book that lets you make the critique, find someone who made it in context -- the search began.
In the process, I have been accused of a various set of perfidities, including speculations as to real-world identity, institutional affiliation and so on. I am, however, perfectly willing to try, if you still want me. A lot of electrons have given their all for DPT, and it would benefit Wikipedia for it to be a good, or even featured article. Robert A.West (Talk) 13:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Mediation is always welcome to most of those concerned with this article. Ultramarine has already rejected mediation by Kelly Martin and Kim Bruning; if you are willing to go ahead under those conditions, please do. The present text of the article is largely his; I have not edited the text for some months.
My chief concerns at the moment are these:
  • Ultramarine has included the entire text of the article Possible wars between liberal democracies into DPT. This is a PoV argument in favor of an extreme view, held by three authors of the many who have written on the subject. It has been deleted four times.
  • Ultramarine (and therefore the present text) relies disproportionately on three authors: Rummel, Ray, and Weart. (There are many authors who support some theory of the democratic peace; there are some authors who hold it to be an illusion.)
  • Ultramarine practices selective quotation, to an extent which has led some of us to believe that he has real difficulties reading English.
  • Ultramarine does not understand what plagiarism is; for an example, now fixed, see Talk:Liberal democracy#Plagiarism.
  • Ultramarine has spent the last couple months reverting contributions to the article by third parties and anons, on various specious grounds. Some of these were improvements; some should be salvaged and sourced, rather than removed.
I see you wrote Scaife, who has been largely away from Wikipedia, on real-world concerns. He edited yesterday, so he may turn up; if so, he will be most helpful. Septentrionalis 14:15, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No; I've simply been taking a break; if there is going to be a genuine effort to straighten it out, I'd be glad to help. Septentrionalis 02:57, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture

As for the picture, it's Image:Lake mapourika NZ.jpeg. Of course you can use it; I found it on somebody else's user page myself. Septentrionalis 15:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Almah Article

If google sent you here... click here Almah

One account please

Using more than one account is against Wikipedia policy, see WP:SOCK. You should request Anon 64 to be blocked and only use this account in the future.--Andeh 19:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]