All,
please take a look at
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Richard_Wagner&diff=0&ol...
I believe this edit speaks for itself. Notice that this edit was labeled as "restoring an URL and working toward a compromise on POV issues". A "compromise" (after his previous drastic POVification of the article) which includes the unexplained removal of plenty of significant information and obviously POV statements such as:
"Labelling Wagner as an anti-Semite is misleading; he never supported violence against Jews, nor did he hold them to be at fault for the cultural divide that he perceived existed between German Jews of his time, and mainstream German culture."
Once more, Clutch is trying to whitewash Wagner of any and all anti-Semitism (the "accusations" of which he believes are only made by Jews.) Frankly, I'm fed up by his edits. I can see absolutely no reason why Lir is banned and he is not. Enough is enough.
Regards,
Erik
On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 12:51:10AM +0100, Erik Moeller wrote:
http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Richard_Wagner&diff=0&ol...
I believe this edit speaks for itself. Notice that this edit was labeled as "restoring an URL and working toward a compromise on POV issues". A "compromise" (after his previous drastic POVification of the article) which includes the unexplained removal of plenty of significant information and obviously POV statements such as:
"Labelling Wagner as an anti-Semite is misleading; he never supported violence against Jews, nor did he hold them to be at fault for the cultural divide that he perceived existed between German Jews of his time, and mainstream German culture."
Yes. I encourage everyone to take a look at my edits. People with good historical backgrounds, who actually do the related research, will find my edits to be truthful and balanced. What is unbalanced are the edits that use phrases like "virulent anti-Semite".
Some of the things I took out were fabricated entirely, such as Erik's claim that Wagner "forced" a colleague to change his religion; that claim is a far cry from the truth that he asked a colleague to convert, colleague refused, and they continued as friends to the end of their lives.
What I am doing is not whitewashing, which involves plastering over and hiding someones faults. I am merely picking up and removing the POV trash that some have been throwing around, but which hasn't been sticking as much as they would like.
NPOV, in a collegial spirit of mutual respect is my main goal. I don't appreciate attacks like Erik's. If he disagrees with my edits, he is, and always has been, welcome to make his own edits. I can back my edits up with relevant research. I really wish that a particularly vocal few would do the same for their edits.
Jonathan
On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 12:51:10AM +0100, Erik Moeller wrote:
I believe this edit speaks for itself. Notice that this edit was labeled as "restoring an URL and working toward a compromise on POV issues". A
"Labelling Wagner as an anti-Semite is misleading; he never supported violence against Jews, nor did he hold them to be at fault for the cultural divide that he perceived existed between German Jews of his time, and mainstream German culture."
Your quote is a small part of my edits; I don't always get things right in the first edit. Were I to do it again, I would have written:
"Although labelled an anti-Semite today, Wagner never supported..."
If you took the time and effort to read the original source material that the accusations are based on, you would see why you have no basis for complaining about my recent edits to the Wagner article.
Erik, I encourage you to research your facts before criticizing me publicly. If you have questions about my edits, perhaps a more amiable forum for discussing them would be on the appropriate Talk page. I am always open to honest criticism.
Jonathan
Erik, I encourage you to research your facts before criticizing me publicly. If you have questions about my edits, perhaps a more amiable forum for discussing them would be on the appropriate Talk page. I am always open to honest criticism.
This is what I referred to on [[Talk:Richard Wagner]]: Always trying to weasel out, always returning any criticism, concentrating on one particular "enemy", trying to single him out as being biased (with wrong statements, once again, which I will not bother to refute), trying to portray a particular error as a "controversy" with a "few" other people, trying to portray yourself as the nice fellow who can work with everyone if given enough time. I enjoyed your following statement: "I will always be able to defend my edits". I have no doubt about that.
Sorry, Jon, but that strategy, while quite sophisticated, is not going to work forever.
Regards,
Erik