User talk:Argean

Hello! I just replied to your message on the Talk:List of contemporary ethnic groups. Rjrya395 (talk) 04:55, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! that was quick. A few things: the last column specifically says the majority (plurality) religion. Don't worry, I've made the mistake as well. Also, I've added a few things to your Afrikaners entry. It's mostly a note for those who question the Afrikaners not being a subgroup of the Dutch. Personally, I'm still not sure about the Afrikaners being elevated as their ethnic group, but then again their Dutch did eventually develop into its own language. Other than that, good job! Especially on adding the diaspora populations and the other two ethnic groups. (Re-reading the Galicians article... yeah they are a lot more than just a subgroup of Portuguese who got annex into Spain.Rjrya395 (talk) 06:57, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the warm welcome! Well, defining who are an ethnic group and who are not is always a difficult job. Personally, I see it as a 3-steps procedure. First, finding those groups of people that have a self-identified sense of unity, based on common ancestry, culture, language, etc. Then, seeing which groups are seeking to have more recognition, autonomy or even independence and there are active cultural, civil, or political associations supporting their rights. And finally if these groups manage to get acknowlegdement or even support from their national governments, neutral international organisations (such as the UNPO) and/or the community of scholars on ethnography. Afrikaners fulfill all the criteria, so I don't see any reason not to include them. On the issue of listing Christianity under the entry for Albanians, I still have strong objections against excluding it. Religion in Albania has a long history, and Christianity always had an established position in Albanian society. Even if we look in pure numbers, percentage of Christians vary among different sources, but always in the 15-30% range, or even higher. Latest census showed 57% Muslims and 17% Christians. If we look at diaspora, Kosovo and Macedonia Albanians, and the ones in Turkey are mainly Muslims, but the ones in Greece, Italy and the rest European countries and America, have either a Christian majority or equal numbers. My personal estimate is that the overall proportion for all Albanians is somewhere around 60% Muslims to 30% Christians (maybe smaller for both due to significant amount of irrelegious people). So I can't understand why not to list Christianity under Albanians, when we list 20% Hindus under Sindhis (and 1% Others!) and more than one religion in many other entries. Regards Argean (talk) 09:21, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well just to let you know, I deleted the 20% Hindus under Sindhis. Now, personally, part of me doesn't see why we have the religious column since the main idea of an ethnic group is that you can theoretically be of any religious affiliation and still be a part of that group (thanks to Enver Hoxha, that's now clearly the case for the Albanians), and large number of them used to have an unique religious belief system that originally played a huge role in their ethnicity (the Greeks, the Yoruba, the Persians) that due to majority/plurality cut-off can't be listed. Still, religion does play a part on what make an ethnic group an ethnic group, and since the main way to write that column is Religion A → Branch A, it becomes quite a headache trying to read it, so we should probably just stick with the majority religion of that group. Rjrya395 (talk) 00:58, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sashko1999

A WP:ANI case will be appropriate if he marks as WP:MINOR any further edits to articles that are not minor, on these points:

WP:CIR, unable to read and react to notices and information or engage on talk pages:
- Regarding WP:MINOR (add links to diffs)
- Regarding WP:INDENT (add links to diffs)
- Regarding generally ignoring what other people say and talking past them (links)
WP:POINT - disrupting all country pages to make a point about Macedonia (link to edit history)
WP:NPOV and WP:ADVOCACY - having some kind of agenda to make Wikipedia "correct" instead of following rules and customs (links)
Anything else you've noticed dealing with him (links)

I've started an RFC on demonyms at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries#RFC on changing demonym links from linking to the same word to linking to demographics information. —DIYeditor (talk) 21:41, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks DIYeditor. I'm wondering if we could add:

WP:PUSH for repeatedly posting the same things on Talk:Republic of Macedonia and opening new sections to push his opinion, without asking for consensus
WP:CON for failing to request consensus although prompted repeatedly to do so
WP:OR for claiming that his edits are justified without providing reliable sources
WP:PA for calling everybody that has a different opinion a hard nationalist

His general attitude has been very provocative in the last few days and it's obvious that he doesn't want to engage in discussion and comply to any rules. Argean (talk) 21:59, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I say now that he has been confronted, let him do it one more time and then we can say: see there is no way to work with him. He might still just get a warning depending on how he reacts. I am going to link all these on his talk page as one that warning. —DIYeditor (talk) 22:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm still expecting to see how he will react, because I'm not sure that he realized that he is being confronted with logical and justified arguments. I've tried very patiently to engage in discussion with him, but it's obviously impossible. I say let's be keeping an eye on his edits in the next few days, because I'm not expecting that he'll change attitude. Argean (talk) 22:12, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey DIYeditor! Can you please help with starting an WP:ANI for this guy. He is obviously not going to stop (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countries, Talk:Denmark). Do you think we can request a ban, based on WP:DISRUPT and WP:NOTHERE? Trying to deal with this guy in any other way seems hopeless... Argean (talk) 17:34, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah let me think about the best approach and research it a little. It would be best if he marked another article edit as minor but perhaps refusing to indent is enough when added to the rest? Incorrectly using minor on talk pages is less of a violation... —DIYeditor (talk) 20:19, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if we should wait for him to actually start doing edits in other articles, because for now he is just screwing up every single talk page that he gets involved into. Still his whole attitude clearly shows both WP:DISRUPT and WP:NOTHERE, and his problematic behavior has already expanded into too many talk pages... I will go on ignoring him, although he is now clearly attempting to do WP:PA to everybody that has different opinion. Argean (talk) 20:32, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I am ready to submit a report, I am working on it currently. We have enough to take it there. I am somewhat familiar with ANI reports, so I will do the basic layout then put it in my sandbox for you to add to or modify, sound good? —DIYeditor (talk) 20:35, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that sounds all good to me. Argean (talk) 20:37, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, User:DIYeditor/Sashko1999. Feel free to do whatever you like to it. —DIYeditor (talk) 21:02, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to start adding diffs to it. —DIYeditor (talk) 21:03, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, give me some time to add a few things and diffs Argean (talk) 21:05, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your summary at RfC draft page

Hi, you may have noticed I've boldly added my own proposals into your summary of the open issues to be decided before tomorrow. Do you mind? Feel free to revert if you prefer such additions to be listed separately below. Thanks – Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:30, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Future Perfect at Sunrise: No, actually thanks for doing that. I was ready to do the same, because the proposals were already made before I posted the summary. It's just impossible to keep track of everything because the talk page is such a mess right now. --Argean (talk) 20:36, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vote

Hello! I saw you close the sections and thx for the work. I voted at 16.10 UTC on prop #8 and you didn't include my vote. I understand. I just wanted to add that I was mistaken because Wizz wrote to me here that the draft were closing at 18.00. I wouldn't be insisting but it is just one vote down for this proposal and I do believe the Noth Macedonian Denonym should not be left out. best, --APG1984 (talk) 17:07, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi APG1984. The draft will indeed close at 18:00, but if you scroll up to the top of the voting Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Macedonia)/2019_RFC#Final_vote_for_proposals here you will read that the closing time for the vote was at 16:00 UTC. I'm really sorry that you missed that, but your vote cannot be counted, since it was casted after the closing time. The fact that the demonym will not be included for discussion in the topics of this RfC, as many other topics that have been proposed, doesn't mean that it will never be discussed. It will depend on what issues will be brought up by editors during the discussion of this RfC or any other requests that may come up. Please feel free to participate in the RfC and vote, when it starts, approximately in less than 1 hour. --Argean (talk) 17:22, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is a pity because as I said I was brought to think this way by one of the people involved. Also I the vote was very tight. But any I'm not the one who decides. Where does the vote take place? I don't see the link in the Next Steps section. Thanks!--APG1984 (talk) 00:29, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I know APG1984 and I'm really sorry about that. I felt very bad when I realized that I had to remove your vote, because I had already closed half of the questions when you voted, and I felt that it wasn't right to keep the vote, because then I should open the questions again and make things more confusing for those who already read the notice on top. I understand that many people want to discuss about the demonym and I'm sure that we will open the issue at some point. The page where you can take part in the discussion is here. Please, let me know if you have any questions on how to take part. --Argean (talk) 01:05, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Prespa Barnstar
		Thank you for your hard work on with the 2019 Macedonia Name RFC. We finally rewrote Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia), and I cannot understate how valuable your input was during this process. You always spoke your mind even if you knew it wasn't the popular thing to say, but it certainly was the thing that needed saying! Thank you, Argean. I am glad to have had the great pleasure to work with you! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 02:29, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]