User talk:Alexnovo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have a quick question, and having searched many wikipedia info pages cannot find an answer. So I am using the help me tag. Actually I have two questions, but they are related. They are" (1) It seems that if a controversial topic has four or five dedicated individuals who are keen on a particular point of view, they can violate the NPOV criteria of Wikipedia by claiming that the consensus agrees with them, when the consensus is four or five people who seem to care more about the page than countless others who disagree but have not the passion to join the discussion. What recourse is there for those who feel that an article is biased when a collective few say it is not? My second question is: How are "rules of a page and/or list created? And further who interprets them? There are lists on Wikipedia that seem to be enforced by a single user who fails to respond to inquiries regarding those rules, but removes edits with the notation, "as per rules of lists” Therefore I wish to know, who establishes the rules of any particular page, who can enforce the same, who can interpret the same and finally who can ask for an explanation of the same. Actually I realize that I asked more than two questions, but any help you can provide will be appreciated. Franklin Moore 03:10, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if your questions are still unanswered in your mind, but my opinion is that Wikipedia is in many regards a "right of the strongest" system. With the exception of Admins, everyone has exactly the same ability to change articles, and rules are only rules as long as they are accepted. Are there particular articles which are currently of concern to you? I'd be happy to take a look at them.--Bhuck 08:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your response. At least someone answered. Anyway, my problem was with the Cuba article, which seems to have gone to full war, and I decided I would play Switzerland and drop out. Franklin Moore 08:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Greetings!

Hi, it seems we share a number of common interests. I noticed you on the WikiProject Anglicanism and made a few wikilink corrections to your (very good) expansion of Episcopal Diocese of New York. (I hope the history will be continued through the nineteenth and twentieth centuries!) I also see that you have edited articles on Gay rights in Cuba, Gay rights in Poland, etc. If you care to have a look at the articles Special rights and Homosexual agenda (and their respective talk pages), you will see that there are some editors on Wikipedia who believe that the term "gay rights" is itself POV!--Bhuck 08:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Greetings to you as well. As far as the history of the Diocese of New York, yes I intend on working on more. I just joined the Wiki Project on Anglicanism, and just submitted my work as of now; more will follow. As to the other articles you suggested, i shall look at them. As to the last point, Gay rights as POV, I am dumb-founded. Franklin Moore 08:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Here and here is some material you can use to be dumbfounded, if so moved. :-) --Bhuck 09:43, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
The Cuba article in its current form doesn't seem blatantly bad, except that criticism of the HIV sanatoriums is somewhat muted.--Bhuck 09:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
I scanned the article and do not see a reference to the HIV sanatoriums, maybe I missed it. By the way here I was referring to the main article on Cuba, not the article on Gay Rights in Cuba. Anyway, the article has improved after mediation and the eventual blocking of a large number of users. When I was involved there was a group of several users who would immediately remove any suggestion that Cuba was less than the perfect Uropia. After that another group became involved who removed any statement which implied that Castro had produced any positive results. I became rather disgusted and merely monitered the site thereafter. Eventually mediation was requested. I believe it has calmed down. However, just take a look at the talk pages (I think there are 7 or 8 archived pages). Anyway that is in the past. By the way thanks for the help on the Diocese of New York page. I will be adding to it. I will also check out the pages you suggest. Franklin Moore 16:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Ah, the sanatoriums are in the Gay Rights in Cuba article, which I assumed you had meant.--Bhuck 19:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

that is what I assumed. In any event, per your suggestion I went to the Special Rights article and have been involved in a long back and forth on the talk page. Franklin Moore 02:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject LGBT studies

Hello! I noticed that your userpage mentions that you are interested in LGBT issues. Would you be interested in joining WikiProject LGBT studies? The WikiProject's been a bit inactive recently and some of us are trying to get it going again. We'd love to have you on board! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:35, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anglicanism COTM

The Anglicanism Collaboration of the Month has been reactivated! Please consider going to the page to either vote for one of the nominated articles, or nominate one yourself. Thanks! Fishhead64 02:45, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anglican collaboration of the month

The current Anglicanism Collaboration of the Month is
Essays and Reviews
The next collaboration will be selected on 30 April 2008. (Vote here)

Wassupwestcoast 02:32, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Christianity

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity

The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

- Tinucherian (talk) 05:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)