Content deleted Content added
MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) m Fixed Lint errors in signatures. (Task 2) |
m Maintain {{WPBS}}: 3 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Death}}. Keep 1 different rating in {{WikiProject Australia}}. Tag: |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|1=
{{WikiProject Death
{{WikiProject Australia|class=Stub|importance=low|nt=y|nt-importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Organizations}}
Line 21:
== Discussion opening ==
In my opinion several parts are not useful or even irrelevant for the article. I like to hear comments from others about this. Jabbsworth don't need to comment, I know he thinks it is relevant and important. [[User:Night of the Big Wind|<
=== Fiona Stewart ===
Line 34:
;Comments
# I prefer the present "Exit International, is a pro-euthanasia group founded by Dr. Philip Nitschke." Your proposal is too short, and lacks vital information. Jabbsworth proposal is too detailed, and stresses information of secondary importance. [[User:Debresser|Debresser]] ([[User talk:Debresser|talk]]) 16:36, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
#: Indeed, your proposal is better then mine. [[User:Night of the Big Wind|<
=== Staff number ===
Line 44:
=== Bilboard ===
Proposal to remove this picture as soon as possible. It is ugly and promotes the organisation. It adds nothing to the article. In my opinion the picture is a provocation which should be removed ASAP! [[User:Night of the Big Wind|<
;Comments
* Maybe it's because I'm not involved in this debate, but I don't see how the billboard image is provocative. The organization is pro-euthanasia, and it's a pro-euthanasia billboard. I imagine that the billboard is representative of the type of publicity made by the organization. --[[User:Enric Naval|Enric Naval]] ([[User talk:Enric Naval|talk]]) 05:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
::It was considered provocative due it was included in the middel of an ongoing discussion on the possible use of wikipedia as a mean of promotion serving the particlar interests of this organization. And the inclusion of this clearly promotional image was not discussed nor the result of a consensus at all, but it was unilaterally added despite the ongoing mentioned discussion. -- <span class="texhtml" style="font-family:Berlin Sans FB; font-size:small; text-shadow:orange 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em;">[[User:ClaudioSantos|<span style="color:black;"><b><i>C</i></b>laudio<b><i>S</i></b>antos</span>]][[User_talk:ClaudioSantos|<span style="color:black;">¿<b><i>?</i></b> </span>]]</span> 05:58, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
:::And it was added shortly before the involved editor request page protection without an editwar or other serious problem [[User:Night of the Big Wind|<
:::: As uninvolved editor, I must state two things. 1. I o not see that this article is unduly promoting this organisation. 2. Night of the Big Wind, please [[WP:AGF|assume good faith]] and do not insinuate all kinds of hidden motives behind other editor's actions. Also please notice that there ''was'' an edit war going on, and ''you'' started it. [[User:Debresser|Debresser]] ([[User talk:Debresser|talk]]) 11:28, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
:::::According to the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Exit_International&action=history history] there were 20 edits since 20 July 2011. 5 by DeltaQuad (protecting and unprotecting), 7 by Jabbsworth, 3 by me, 3 by ClaudioSantos and 2 by you. I had two edits on the 23th and one on the 26th. Did I really start an editwar? Claudio did some edits on the 13th, after that a week long nothing happened... [[User:Night of the Big Wind|<
::::::A picture, meant to illustrate an advocacy group, just might caputure some of their advocacy. This proposition to remove makes no sense. [[User:Jesanj|Jesanj]] ([[User talk:Jesanj|talk]]) 15:30, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Line 59:
It seems editors endorse the article in its present form. I call upon Night of the Big Wind to accept the fact that the article in its present form conforms with Wikipedia standards, and to relinquish edit-warring. After that, the article could be unprotected. [[User:Debresser|Debresser]] ([[User talk:Debresser|talk]]) 16:49, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
:Assume good faith that I will not start editwarring, Debresser. But the article in the present form is unacceptable for me. [[User:Night of the Big Wind|<
::What edits would you make to the article if it were unprotected? (It doesn't matter if you don't like something, but aren't going to do anything about it.) [[User:Jesanj|Jesanj]] ([[User talk:Jesanj|talk]]) 19:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
:::That is a better question! Looking at Fiona Steward, there is a acceptable proposal of Debresser. Looking at the staff numbers, I still think it is too much to put in in the infobox AND in the text. In my opinion, less relevant info can also be put in the infobox alone, as it is now.
:::The billboard is more tricky. I suggest complete removal. The picture tells nothing new, but is highly political in message. It changes the article from a neutral description into a platform of promoting the cause and the organisation. So the picture is POV and it makes the whole article POV. [[User:Night of the Big Wind|<
:::: The question wasn't what your opinions are. They are well know from the above discussions. The question was what edits would you make to the article if it were unprotected in its present form, and at the present state of the discussion(s). [[User:Debresser|Debresser]] ([[User talk:Debresser|talk]]) 01:01, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
:::::Sorry, I thought the question was what has to be changed to make it acceptable. And the return question is: what will you do about it to make the article acceptable. Because at the moment I only have to say no to keep the deadlock in place... [[User:Night of the Big Wind|<
::::::So that we can get a consensus on this issue, I started[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ANeutral_point_of_view%2FNoticeboard&action=historysubmit&diff=442943498&oldid=442933474] a thread at [[WP:NPOVN]]. [[User:Jesanj|Jesanj]] ([[User talk:Jesanj|talk]]) 02:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
::::::: Night of the Big Wind, before you ask return questions, perhaps you answer the question? Two editors have asked you for it. Your attitude isn't helping things here. My answer is that I would do nothing. In my opinion, this article is in accordance with Wikipedia's standards, e.g. acceptable as is. [[User:Debresser|Debresser]] ([[User talk:Debresser|talk]]) 22:15, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
| |||