![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Referred to post here by JFG: I have no intention to engage in any "edit war", JFG. As you must know, I have only just begun to contribute to Wikipedia. This initial experience has been very disappointing. Your editing actions - "unsourced" and "off topic" - are totally baffling, arbitrary and untransparent, especially for a Commons encyclopedia. I have some experience in writing and editing for top-class refereed journals. You (and all the purported unknown editors? who?) now decided to delete the entire "Reactions" section of the "2019 North Korea–United States Vietnam Summit" - why? What's left are just fluff and dry stuff. An encyclopedia should contain much more facts-based, credibly-sourced perspectives - just compare with the Encyclopedia Britannica (assuming you and other self-appointed editors, truly with due respects, would accept it as a gold standard). And you [JFG] threatened in a message to "ban" me? Sounds very China's and DPRK's intolerance of free speech and diverse thinking, eh? Why/what are you so afraid of in the "Reactions" contents? They provided interesting background information to inform Wikipedia users of the complex issues of the Summit. JFG, you could have simply pointed me to the proper formatting of the contributions instead of brushing it off as "unsourced" (which of course it is not but contained multiple sources) or "off topic" (which indicated that the 'editors' did not read and/or understand the contents and embedded links). And your "best way" to consider the NationalInterest and my materials is to censor/delete them off? Seriously, people? Your latest action WILL discourage other contributions who would have richly added to the Topic in the run-up to the Summit. myEndNote - Wikipedia processes are well-written and respected, but I think they are being abused and misused by "humans" who are knowingly or unknowingly arrogant in their self-importance and un-selfconsciousness of their own bias and prejudice. You DO NOT have to censor or delete multiple & credibly-sourced materials - however disagreeable they may be to you and then some. Just trust your readers' intelligence to form their own conclusions - isn't that's why the Commons and Wiki movements are about? written by: DrMikoWise ( talk) 10:54, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Please let me know whether the agenda below is valuable to update on the section of the current topic.
Goodtiming8871 ( talk) 09:41, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Please keep reactions- the sub-title as it could contain decent or compelling articles in the future.
Regarding the reaction parts,
I think that it would be advantageous to have articles from multiple countries (for examples, USA, Japan, Korea, China, the UK, and many other countries... ETC).
It would provide us with "360-degree-view" from all over the world; What’s happening now, and what's other people's thought.
Goodtiming8871 (
talk)
05:26, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
References
Can we add this photo below on this topic?
Goodtiming8871 ( talk) 06:26, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
RS Media and writing style; I will summarize or rephrase the reaction section again. Please update the writing or improve the article instead of removing it. I think it is fair to keep the part if it had the reference with a reliable source regarding the current topic. Goodtiming8871 ( talk) 23:05, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
References
This article has been renamed several times to match the supposed "official name" for the summit. As far as I know, there is no "official name." I have seen no reliable source providing an official name. Can we drop the pretense that there is an official name and stop arguing about what that name is? NPguy ( talk) 03:11, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Maybe the title should be changed to "2019 North Korea-United States Vietnam Summit", the current name sounds unprofessional, there is no need to include the city name, and Vietnam should not be spelled "Viet Nam". 78.108.56.35 ( talk) 23:02, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This discussion was listed at Wikipedia:Move review on 1 March 2019. The result of the move review was Closure endorsed per WP:NOTBURO, closer trouted for involved closure, nominator trouted for not discussing it on the closer's talk page.. |
The result of the move request was: page moved to unanimous agreed new name. Aviartm ( talk) 08:39, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
2019 North Korea–United States Hanoi Summit Viet Nam → 2019 North Korea–United States Hanoi Summit – The "Viet Nam" part is not needed per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRECISE. Also, the previous summit is under " 2018 North Korea–United States Singapore Summit", so that proposed name would be consistent with the previous summit. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:08, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Levalbert, please undo your moving of the page per the above discussion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 14:19, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Referred to post here by JFG: I have no intention to engage in any "edit war", JFG. As you must know, I have only just begun to contribute to Wikipedia. This initial experience has been very disappointing. Your editing actions - "unsourced" and "off topic" - are totally baffling, arbitrary and untransparent, especially for a Commons encyclopedia. I have some experience in writing and editing for top-class refereed journals. You (and all the purported unknown editors? who?) now decided to delete the entire "Reactions" section of the "2019 North Korea–United States Vietnam Summit" - why? What's left are just fluff and dry stuff. An encyclopedia should contain much more facts-based, credibly-sourced perspectives - just compare with the Encyclopedia Britannica (assuming you and other self-appointed editors, truly with due respects, would accept it as a gold standard). And you [JFG] threatened in a message to "ban" me? Sounds very China's and DPRK's intolerance of free speech and diverse thinking, eh? Why/what are you so afraid of in the "Reactions" contents? They provided interesting background information to inform Wikipedia users of the complex issues of the Summit. JFG, you could have simply pointed me to the proper formatting of the contributions instead of brushing it off as "unsourced" (which of course it is not but contained multiple sources) or "off topic" (which indicated that the 'editors' did not read and/or understand the contents and embedded links). And your "best way" to consider the NationalInterest and my materials is to censor/delete them off? Seriously, people? Your latest action WILL discourage other contributions who would have richly added to the Topic in the run-up to the Summit. myEndNote - Wikipedia processes are well-written and respected, but I think they are being abused and misused by "humans" who are knowingly or unknowingly arrogant in their self-importance and un-selfconsciousness of their own bias and prejudice. You DO NOT have to censor or delete multiple & credibly-sourced materials - however disagreeable they may be to you and then some. Just trust your readers' intelligence to form their own conclusions - isn't that's why the Commons and Wiki movements are about? written by: DrMikoWise ( talk) 10:54, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
Please let me know whether the agenda below is valuable to update on the section of the current topic.
Goodtiming8871 ( talk) 09:41, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Please keep reactions- the sub-title as it could contain decent or compelling articles in the future.
Regarding the reaction parts,
I think that it would be advantageous to have articles from multiple countries (for examples, USA, Japan, Korea, China, the UK, and many other countries... ETC).
It would provide us with "360-degree-view" from all over the world; What’s happening now, and what's other people's thought.
Goodtiming8871 (
talk)
05:26, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
References
Can we add this photo below on this topic?
Goodtiming8871 ( talk) 06:26, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
RS Media and writing style; I will summarize or rephrase the reaction section again. Please update the writing or improve the article instead of removing it. I think it is fair to keep the part if it had the reference with a reliable source regarding the current topic. Goodtiming8871 ( talk) 23:05, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
References
This article has been renamed several times to match the supposed "official name" for the summit. As far as I know, there is no "official name." I have seen no reliable source providing an official name. Can we drop the pretense that there is an official name and stop arguing about what that name is? NPguy ( talk) 03:11, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 04:25, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Maybe the title should be changed to "2019 North Korea-United States Vietnam Summit", the current name sounds unprofessional, there is no need to include the city name, and Vietnam should not be spelled "Viet Nam". 78.108.56.35 ( talk) 23:02, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This discussion was listed at Wikipedia:Move review on 1 March 2019. The result of the move review was Closure endorsed per WP:NOTBURO, closer trouted for involved closure, nominator trouted for not discussing it on the closer's talk page.. |
The result of the move request was: page moved to unanimous agreed new name. Aviartm ( talk) 08:39, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
2019 North Korea–United States Hanoi Summit Viet Nam → 2019 North Korea–United States Hanoi Summit – The "Viet Nam" part is not needed per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRECISE. Also, the previous summit is under " 2018 North Korea–United States Singapore Summit", so that proposed name would be consistent with the previous summit. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:08, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Levalbert, please undo your moving of the page per the above discussion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 14:19, 28 February 2019 (UTC)