![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Whoever coming over to make these one sided edits. Stop it at once. It very toxic. Centralist2021 ( talk) 18:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
The "even compromise" article plan were both sides of content would be trimmed to the lowest until a solid development. This can take month or years to see the solid result actually happening. All mentions of stats, unofficial nicknames "great walkway", lawmakers, mayor is no longer needed. All a reader need to know is the Great Highway opened to traffic right now or not open except for walking and biking . Simple fair compromise. Centralist2021 ( talk) 05:38, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
There are no citations provided for the assertion that there are “community concerns” or that reopening the roadway to cars is a “balanced compromise”. This is biased language (a classic example of WP:WEASEL) and my edit simply stating that the roadway has been partially reopened in spite of protests against it is neutral and accurate. It should not have been reverted. Furthermore, the sentence "The plan will also focus away to expand or improve Muni service on western side of San Francisco" is both grammatically incoherent and completely inaccurate (there is no such plan as of yet). Fullmetal2887 ( discuss me) 12:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
I've reverted part of a commit that inserts the claim "75% of Richmond district residents who actually use the Great Highway to transit across the city supported keeping the Great Highway open to cars" since I can't find it in the cited source. This edit was made by Disconnectcommunity (account temporarily blocked) but substantially similar edits were made on 7 Dec 2021 by Cyssf and on 18 & 19 October by 24.5.148.235. -- Drnugent ( talk) 05:34, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
We are not having pro closure spill into roadway Wikipedia page. Details about reopen closer to source and there no reason repeat the survey results. Centralist2021 ( talk) 14:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
a Wikipedia article must report both, not pick sides. Centralist2021 ( talk) 21:50, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
O.k. I give up. Since Centralist2021 is either incapable of communicating in comprehensible English at the level required to participate in this discussion, or is being intentionally obtuse, I can see no point in trying to discuss this with them further. I suggest that others, actually capable of engaging in a rational discussion, attempt to do so on this talk page, after doing more research on what other sources are available. I'd look myself, but being UK based, aren't best placed to find such sources since US media websites routinely block UK traffic, and since someone with local knowledge will probably be more familiar with the relevant media. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 22:13, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
As discovered one of article writer "Heather Knight" were heavily in support closing the road on social media platforms. So these related to San Francisco Chronicle sources best not to be used for Great Highway Wikipedia article only and content shall be removed. Especially when talking about statistics. Thank you. Centralist2021 ( talk) 03:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Protecting the page from vandalistic users is good of course, but it's also important to keep improving it. Glad to see people joining in to fix and add things instead of just fighting. Writ Keeper, Abyssinia H, GoingBatty, thank you. Let's keep it going. Jef ( talk) 04:58, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Whoever coming over to make these one sided edits. Stop it at once. It very toxic. Centralist2021 ( talk) 18:07, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
The "even compromise" article plan were both sides of content would be trimmed to the lowest until a solid development. This can take month or years to see the solid result actually happening. All mentions of stats, unofficial nicknames "great walkway", lawmakers, mayor is no longer needed. All a reader need to know is the Great Highway opened to traffic right now or not open except for walking and biking . Simple fair compromise. Centralist2021 ( talk) 05:38, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
There are no citations provided for the assertion that there are “community concerns” or that reopening the roadway to cars is a “balanced compromise”. This is biased language (a classic example of WP:WEASEL) and my edit simply stating that the roadway has been partially reopened in spite of protests against it is neutral and accurate. It should not have been reverted. Furthermore, the sentence "The plan will also focus away to expand or improve Muni service on western side of San Francisco" is both grammatically incoherent and completely inaccurate (there is no such plan as of yet). Fullmetal2887 ( discuss me) 12:34, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
I've reverted part of a commit that inserts the claim "75% of Richmond district residents who actually use the Great Highway to transit across the city supported keeping the Great Highway open to cars" since I can't find it in the cited source. This edit was made by Disconnectcommunity (account temporarily blocked) but substantially similar edits were made on 7 Dec 2021 by Cyssf and on 18 & 19 October by 24.5.148.235. -- Drnugent ( talk) 05:34, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
We are not having pro closure spill into roadway Wikipedia page. Details about reopen closer to source and there no reason repeat the survey results. Centralist2021 ( talk) 14:51, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
a Wikipedia article must report both, not pick sides. Centralist2021 ( talk) 21:50, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
O.k. I give up. Since Centralist2021 is either incapable of communicating in comprehensible English at the level required to participate in this discussion, or is being intentionally obtuse, I can see no point in trying to discuss this with them further. I suggest that others, actually capable of engaging in a rational discussion, attempt to do so on this talk page, after doing more research on what other sources are available. I'd look myself, but being UK based, aren't best placed to find such sources since US media websites routinely block UK traffic, and since someone with local knowledge will probably be more familiar with the relevant media. AndyTheGrump ( talk) 22:13, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
As discovered one of article writer "Heather Knight" were heavily in support closing the road on social media platforms. So these related to San Francisco Chronicle sources best not to be used for Great Highway Wikipedia article only and content shall be removed. Especially when talking about statistics. Thank you. Centralist2021 ( talk) 03:06, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Protecting the page from vandalistic users is good of course, but it's also important to keep improving it. Glad to see people joining in to fix and add things instead of just fighting. Writ Keeper, Abyssinia H, GoingBatty, thank you. Let's keep it going. Jef ( talk) 04:58, 22 August 2021 (UTC)