User talk:Jack4576: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Tag: Reverted |
←Blanked the page Tags: Blanking Manual revert |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Nomination of [[:Beatbox Kitchen]] for deletion == |
|||
<div class="afd-notice"> |
|||
<div class="floatleft" style="margin-bottom:0">[[File:Ambox warning orange.svg|48px|alt=|link=]]</div>A discussion is taking place as to whether the article [[:Beatbox Kitchen]] is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to [[Wikipedia:List of policies and guidelines|Wikipedia's policies and guidelines]] or whether it should be [[Wikipedia:Deletion policy|deleted]]. |
|||
The article will be discussed at '''[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beatbox Kitchen]]''' until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. |
|||
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.<!-- Template:Afd notice --></div> [[User:GMH Melbourne|GMH Melbourne]] ([[User talk:GMH Melbourne|talk]]) 01:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I pray that one day the rules and editorial culture on this site starts to recognize the value of things ephemeral, trivial, and unimportant. Sadly, this is not the case today. Whilst your actions are assumedly in good faith, and follow a fair interpretation of site policy; I believe our shared endeavour to build an valuable encyclopedia is left all the worse for it. [[User:Jack4576|Jack4576]] ([[User talk:Jack4576#top|talk]]) 01:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I get where you are coming from, but I do think the line needs to be drawn somewhere, otherwise every person, every local cafe, and every small business, would have their own wikipedia article containing only a couple sentences, adding very little value to the encyclopedia. I also think independence is important, and the sources supporting this article are certainly not independent. [[User:GMH Melbourne|GMH Melbourne]] ([[User talk:GMH Melbourne|talk]]) 01:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Broadsheet isn’t independent, (I think they do advertorials) however, the other sources are. |
|||
:::I think the ‘very little value’ such articles add, is still value worth keeping. Having small articles about subjects of relative unimportance provides an underrated value IMO. Here, for example, we have a subject that is one of Melbourne’s first food trucks. |
|||
:::I accept that this isn’t the prevailing view atm; I merely lament that this is not the case. [[User:Jack4576|Jack4576]] ([[User talk:Jack4576#top|talk]]) 02:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Your edit to Black War == |
|||
Hello there |
|||
I reverted your edit because it was not an accurate summary of the article. It you wish to change the lead please seek consensus for your changes on the talk page. [[WP:BRD]] |
|||
Thank you [[User:Aemilius Adolphin|Aemilius Adolphin]] ([[User talk:Aemilius Adolphin|talk]]) 11:39, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Classic example of Wikipedia’s editorial absurdities. There is no contemporaneously extant ‘debate’ that the black war constituted a genocide. Consensus was reached decades ago. Wikipedia continues to contain content that reflects Anglocentric biases. [[User:Jack4576|Jack4576]] ([[User talk:Jack4576#top|talk]]) 13:54, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Then it can be discussed on the talk page with sources and if a consensus is reached that your change should be made, it will be made. |
|||
::You've been warned about the above types of comments, regardless of how you phrase it, the above is still a personal attack on another editor you disagree with. Leaving you a polite note explaining the revert and requesting discussion based on WP:BRD is not absurd and a request for discussion is not contributing to "Anglocentric biases". <span style="font-family:Courier;"><b> // [[User:TimothyBlue|Timothy]] :: [[User talk:TimothyBlue|talk]] </b></span> 14:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::This is not a personal attack. My use of the word of the 'absurdities' was a comment on the '''''editorialised contents '''''of the article. To clarify, I object to this reversion, because the reversion has the effect of furthering Wikipedia's Anglocentric biases in a way that is problematic, a-historical, and contradicted by sources. |
|||
:::This is the second time you have accused me of 'personal attacks' regarding commentary on article content. My comment is not directed toward Aemilius Adolphin as a person, who is by all accounts a competent editor and acting in good faith; but who I happen to have a disagreement with regarding the editorial choices in the lede of this article. |
|||
:::Frankly Timothy, this is the second time in a month you have cast aspersions on me regarding the making of personal attacks; when I think most fair-minded editors would instead agree that my comment is regarding article '''''content''''', and is not directed at another editor personally. I'd ask that you take a moment to reflect and please stop making these kinds of comments. You might recall that another editor agreed with me at ANI last time that my comments did '''''not''''' constitute a personal attack. I recall that you didn't respond to their concerns even when we both asked you to articulate ''why'' what I said constituted a personal attack. |
|||
::: Fair minded, and politely expressed disagreement about article contents, is not personal. |
|||
:::As another editor stated at the time (to which you didn't respond): "In this diff, Jack calls Wikipedia racist - which isn't really controversial. He also said the poster was unintentionally adding to the sites currently known bias. Can you explain the personal attack?" |
|||
:::and then: "I'm not seeing it? Jack was very clear that he thought the action was unintentionally further skewing the Wikipedia focus further towards white men. Whether he is correct or not, it seems like a good faith concern and not an attack. Discussing race is difficult, but it isn't like Jack called someone a racist." [[User:Jack4576|Jack4576]] ([[User talk:Jack4576#top|talk]]) 01:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||