We still have a problem. I was hoping that people would offer constructive suggestions to help fix the situation. Ed Poor did, so did a couple of others. I am enthusiastic about using Ed's suggestions to improve these articles.
However, Danny responded with ad homenin comments to me on this list, and made an unfortunate comment on my user page that I am somehow in violation of Wikipedia policy for my recent letters. (A policy that can be used to ban people...)
My letters here, with diffs and sources, are not "hysterical" ad homenim attacks as he claims; they are sincere efforts to correct a problem. Further, if you check the history of these articles, you'll see many people work on those articles besides me. I get along fine with all the other people on the WikiProject for Judaism articles, which says a lot, as all religion articles have the potential for controversy! I can't understand why Danny would make such a clearly incorrect claim (he says I work on these articles alone) other than to get people to ignore my letters to this list. That is not working in good faith.
I came here with diffs and sources to support my views. If someone takes personal offense at me, that is fine, but send me such strictures by private e-mail. Otherwise, such people themselves are violation the no-personal-attacks policy.
My original point still stands (and so far, no one has disagred with me.): There are people who hate George W. Bush, and who think that he wants to kill all Muslims, and that George W. Bush deserves to die. (They are wrong, but whatever). The point is that we do not quote such people when we want to accurately represent George W. Bush's views. Rather, we quote and summarize George W. Bush and his official spokespeople. (And of course, we quote and summarize the views of groups that disagree with him.)
Our policy? We never quote the views of people who hate a group, and present them AS IF they were that group's own views! That is fraud, and that is the issue that we need to deal with. Not just for this article, but for all articles. It would set a terrible precedent if we ignored this issue.
However, that is precisely the problem with some of Jayjg's edits in recent days. This is unfortunate, because until recently Jayjg has been a valuble contributor. That is why I am asking for assistance. If you can help, please do so. If you dislike me, e-mail me privately.
Robert (RK)
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
On 12 Aug 2004, at 5:30 pm, Robert wrote:
There are people who hate George W. Bush, and who think that he wants to kill all Muslims, and that George W. Bush deserves to die. (They are wrong, but whatever).
Well no. Maybe they're right, who really knows? It's a point of view. Maybe he does want to kill all Muslims (Bush doesn't necessarily let on what he actually thinks) and maybe he does "deserve" to die. They're all point of views, and that you think such people who think such things are "wrong" is another point of view.
Jayjg may not be an angel to work with but to productively collaborate on a Wikipedia article an understanding of the above is crucial it seems to me.
Christiaan