[WikiEN-l] Re: I am very concerned by the arbcomm decision againstjguk
JAY JG
jayjg at hotmail.com
Sun Jun 19 15:29:09 UTC 2005
>From: Jon <thagudearbh at yahoo.co.uk>
>
>First all I (and others) were doing was reverting articles back to the
>state they were in before
>SouthernComfort got to them (except for one mistake when I inadvertently
>changed it on
>[[Elamite Empire]]).
That describes your more recent actions on a relatively narrow set of
articles. It does not describe your more lengthy campaign against BCE/CE
notation, including in the MOS and Common Era articles themselves.
>I should, as an aside, mention that I have in arguments and edit summaries
>to SouthernComfort
>referred to a "preferred notation". The context of that was not to misquote
>WP policy (which all
>participants are quite aware of), but to make the point that in practice
>almost all WP articles where there is a choice use BC/AD notation and that
>the overwhelming majority of English-writers in the
>world (90%+) choose BC/AD notation. It is in that sense that it is
>"preferred", and in that sense
>that I was using "preferred".
The term for what you are describing is "more common", not "preferred".
>I appreciate Fred would not, on a quick and possibly
>non-chronological, readthrough would not have picked up that context, but
>that's what it was.
>It's important ans Fred is saying that an important aspect in this is that
>I was arguing my
>preference was WP policy - let me assure everyone, that was not the case.
>Bearing this in mind
>does Fred accept that his comment is no longer appropriate (or at least,
>should not in particular
>be directed against me)?
You made it clear the you, personally, "preferred" this usage, and attempted
to enforce it on dozens of articles over a period of 8 months. I find your
current explanation of "preferred" to be difficult to reconcile with your
actions.
Jay.
More information about the WikiEN-l
mailing list