Because I found myself having to state my arguments concerning the matter over and over again, I decided to put up my argumentation here, so I can re-use them.
Please note: I am not a very active editor on wikipedia. I might get policies wrong sometimes. If you find me doing so, on this argumentation page in particular, please tell me so I can improve.
Disccussions (such as this one) have ended up in wrecks in the past. Extracting the information, there is a larger number of people endorsing line breaks, but an immensive larger collection of valid arguments promoting commas. Also, the base of editors promoting commas seems to contain more established editors and administrators. Here is a summary of what the discussion has brought up.
Info: If you think an argument is missing or misjudged, please let me know on my talk page and we'll discuss it.
Whereas:
Note: Some of the following arguments have been copied & pasted 1:1 from a discussion. (Marked with "(Q)")
Navnløs ( talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · checkuser)
While I in no way want to devalue this users opinion, I do want administrators and other people who are acquiring a view into the topic take a number of things into consideration. I feel this is necessary, as Navnløs has repeatedly accused me of things, brought those things to the administrators' noticeboard, and is likely to keep doing so in the future.
The conflict with this user has, until now, mostly, been limited to a small number of articles, namely Amon Amarth, Dissection (band) and Bathory (band), some of a few articles which he seems to be very protective about.
As I just noticed, Navnløs decided to reply to this "accusation page" (as he apparently understands it) with an own user page, which you can find
here. His argumentation is, unfortunately for me, absolutely devastating.
While I, as mentioned before, can be wrong on policy, and obviously can have no definite telling about whether I am biased or not, I am in believe, that while the whole thing is a child's play I participate in instead of staying out, I am not the intruder here. Make an opinion for yourself. What I have written here might help you doing so, and Navnløs is sure to have information on the matter too, so you can hear both sides.
twsX (
user ·
talk ·
contribs ·
count ·
ESU ·
logs ·
subpages) ~ |
twsx |
talk
cont | 11:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Because I found myself having to state my arguments concerning the matter over and over again, I decided to put up my argumentation here, so I can re-use them.
Please note: I am not a very active editor on wikipedia. I might get policies wrong sometimes. If you find me doing so, on this argumentation page in particular, please tell me so I can improve.
Disccussions (such as this one) have ended up in wrecks in the past. Extracting the information, there is a larger number of people endorsing line breaks, but an immensive larger collection of valid arguments promoting commas. Also, the base of editors promoting commas seems to contain more established editors and administrators. Here is a summary of what the discussion has brought up.
Info: If you think an argument is missing or misjudged, please let me know on my talk page and we'll discuss it.
Whereas:
Note: Some of the following arguments have been copied & pasted 1:1 from a discussion. (Marked with "(Q)")
Navnløs ( talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · checkuser)
While I in no way want to devalue this users opinion, I do want administrators and other people who are acquiring a view into the topic take a number of things into consideration. I feel this is necessary, as Navnløs has repeatedly accused me of things, brought those things to the administrators' noticeboard, and is likely to keep doing so in the future.
The conflict with this user has, until now, mostly, been limited to a small number of articles, namely Amon Amarth, Dissection (band) and Bathory (band), some of a few articles which he seems to be very protective about.
As I just noticed, Navnløs decided to reply to this "accusation page" (as he apparently understands it) with an own user page, which you can find
here. His argumentation is, unfortunately for me, absolutely devastating.
While I, as mentioned before, can be wrong on policy, and obviously can have no definite telling about whether I am biased or not, I am in believe, that while the whole thing is a child's play I participate in instead of staying out, I am not the intruder here. Make an opinion for yourself. What I have written here might help you doing so, and Navnløs is sure to have information on the matter too, so you can hear both sides.
twsX (
user ·
talk ·
contribs ·
count ·
ESU ·
logs ·
subpages) ~ |
twsx |
talk
cont | 11:26, 13 December 2007 (UTC)