This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is the original version [1]
That version was doing fine for six months until a CPOV editor made a controversial change without consensus [2]
So why are some editors keep making this controversial change with no discussion whatsoever, and prior to mediation? I say that we revert this to the original version prior to the controversial edit, and just deal it in mediation. Cydevil38 22:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
For consistency with the other Three Kingdoms templates, we should whether remove all of “Monarchs of Korea” titles from the Three Kingdoms Templates or add the title to the Goguryeo monarchs Template. In this case, even though this wording appears to be controversial, it would make more sense to respect the original version before reaching a consensus of making certain changes.
Thus, even if taking into consideration all kind of revisionists theories, before gaining certain recognition from the worldwide historians, the conventional views of historians have to be respected and even prioritized. Jagello ( talk) 03:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is the original version [1]
That version was doing fine for six months until a CPOV editor made a controversial change without consensus [2]
So why are some editors keep making this controversial change with no discussion whatsoever, and prior to mediation? I say that we revert this to the original version prior to the controversial edit, and just deal it in mediation. Cydevil38 22:13, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
For consistency with the other Three Kingdoms templates, we should whether remove all of “Monarchs of Korea” titles from the Three Kingdoms Templates or add the title to the Goguryeo monarchs Template. In this case, even though this wording appears to be controversial, it would make more sense to respect the original version before reaching a consensus of making certain changes.
Thus, even if taking into consideration all kind of revisionists theories, before gaining certain recognition from the worldwide historians, the conventional views of historians have to be respected and even prioritized. Jagello ( talk) 03:53, 28 February 2008 (UTC)