User talk:Dragfyre

dragfyre

Home | Talk | Sandbox
Drafts | Todo | Contrib

Caution: Geese crossing this talk page.

Wikipedia ads	file info – #205

Barnstars

		The Original Barnstar
		I feel honoured to present you with this Barnstar for you contributions to Vietnam-related articles. Although it only represents a small part of you effort, I hope you feel motivated to keep up your excellent work! Sp33dyphil (Talk) (Contributions)(I love Wikipedia!) 00:05, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! -129.49.72.78 (talk) 19:06, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

		The Modest Barnstar
		Thanks for your recent contributions! 208.54.4.231 (talk) 06:34, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Dragfyre. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

ANI Experiences survey

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Please be aware this survey will close Friday, Dec. 8 at 23:00 UTC.

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 21:15, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

HotArticlesBot

Category:WikiProject Vietnam articles only has 22 articles in it, so it's not going to give you the results you're expecting. Kaldari (talk) 21:46, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

No worries, that's because the WikiProject template was just modified to include the category, and most of the pages are still loading cached versions. The category will get filled up as more pages are updated. Thanks for pointing this out though! dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 21:50, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

advancing the Louhelen Bahá'í School article

I'd welcome advise on User:Smkolins/Sandbox6. Earlier parts are highly processed. Starting the 1940s I have more to polish and it needs more and more work towards the present. But I'd welcome input on style and other ideas about the content as well, if you have any. Smkolins (talk) 14:06, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Sure, I'll take a look at it when I have a chance. Gave it a quick glance just now—that's a lot of content :O I've been in touch with someone who has photos of the school too, so I may be able to contribute some to the article. dragfyre_ʞןɐʇc 15:52, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Warning

• User:Dragfyre (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) despite warning, user keeps deleting criticism of GNH contribution under pretext of copyright, but no copyright issue. Multiple sources and quotations marks used for supporting statements. kindly verify.5.148.42.186 (talk) 09:25, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Please specify which part you consider a copyright violation and why? Please be specific! quotation marks are used and multiple sources are provided.

GNH has been described by critics as a propaganda tool used by the Bhutanese government to distract from ethnic cleansing and human rights abuses it has committed.

According to the critics, the original GNH philosophy tenets were not compatible with modern, open and democratic societies. Two of the four main tenants, specifically, good governance and cultural preservation were linked to the suffering and unhappiness of many of Kingdom population. They claim that government propaganda has resulted in the corruption of historical truth about the original meaning of GNH and resulting government policies. For three decades since the coining of the phrase GNH, the kingdom was ruled as a monarchy and authoritarian rule. Bhutan became a democracy only after 2008. Before that time the country saw one of the largest ethno-religious cleansing against its non-Buddhist population of ethnic Nepalese of Hindu faith as a result of the GNH cultural preservation. The government denied ethnic cleansing charges but international organizations documented the events. According to Human Rights Watch, “Over 100,000 or 1/6 of the population of Bhutan of Nepalese origin and Hindu faith were expelled from the country because they would not integrate with Bhutan’s Buddhist culture.” Refugee Council of Australia called it "Gross National Hypocrisy". Referring to the government GNH propaganda, the council state that “It is extraordinary and shocking that a nation can get away with expelling one sixth of its people and somehow keep its international reputation largely intact. The Government of Bhutan should be known not for Gross National Happiness but for Gross National Hypocrisy."

This criticism has been countered by Bhutanese and some western promoters of Bhutan GNH philosophy, stating that GNH is a process of development and learning, rather than an objective norm or absolute end point. Bhutan aspires to enhance the happiness of its people and GNH serves as a measurement tool for realizing that aspiration. .

Scholars who defend Bhutan GNH history are seen as Bhutan apologetics and are criticized for presenting only a rosy picture of the GNH while failing to condemn or even mention the impact of the negative historical GNH policies of the Kingdom. According to the Economist Magazine, “the Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan is not in fact an idyll in a fairy tale. It is home to perhaps 900,000 people most of whom live in grinding poverty.” The headlines of the nations’ leading papers continue to document increasing levels of political corruption, the rapid spread of diseases such as aids and tuberculosis, gang violence, abuses against women and ethnic minorities, shortages in food/medicine, and economic woes that make Bhutan barely discernible from any other nation. Given the size of its population, Bhutan is actually in much worse shape than most of the GDP measuring nations that GNH advocates like to condemn.

The government linked Centre for Bhutan Studies that is credited with the creation of Bhutan's local GNH Index and assumed the lead role as the international promoter of Bhutan GNH history in western academic and political circles, failed to mention the earlier GNH policy mistakes and how western scholarly contributions and democratic values influenced and changed GNH policies to fit modern democratic governance values. Some western historical researchers state that Bhutan's GNH philosophy “has evolved over the last decade through the contribution of western and local scholars to a version that is more democratic and open. Therefore, probably, the more accurate historical reference is to mention the coining of the GNH phrase as a key event, but not the Bhutan GNH philosophy, because the philosophy as understood by western scholars is different from the philosophy used by the King at the time.”

Scholars who defend Bhutan GNH history are seen as Bhutan apologetics and are criticized for not reporting on the negative impact of historical GNH policies of the Kingdom. According to the Economist Magazine, “The Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan is not in fact an idyll in a fairy tale. It is home to perhaps 900,000 people most of whom live in grinding poverty. The headlines of the nations’ leading papers continue to document increasing levels of political corruption, the rapid spread of diseases such as aids and tuberculosis, gang violence, abuses against women and ethnic minorities, shortages in food/medicine, and economic woes that make Bhutan barely discernible from any other nation. Given the size of its population, Bhutan is actually in much worse shape than most of the GDP measuring nations that GNH advocates like to condemn”.