Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:54, 18 July 2008

Welcome!

Hello, Anna Quist, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  NickelShoe (Talk) 03:00, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Please do not delete content or templates from pages on Misplaced Pages without explaining the valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you.

Please stop. Continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Misplaced Pages without resolving the problem that the template refers to may be considered vandalism. Further edits of this type may result in your being blocked from editing.

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
If you again remove maintenance templates from Misplaced Pages articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, you will be blocked from editing.

Anna, please listen

Deletion templates are not supposed to be removed. Discuss it on the talk page and wait for a decision is made. If the AI is as large as you say it is, there will be no problem. Zazaban (talk) 01:39, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Anna, I wanted to clarify. You are allowed to remove the WP:PROD notice as you did (but you shouldn't remove any other deletion templates). Misplaced Pages operates by consensus, so we try to make sure everyone agrees with an action. So with the maintenance templates, you should fix the problem they're bringing up or else explain why you don't think the article needs them (on its talk page). Unfortunately, if you don't work with others and instead just repeatedly undo their actions, you'll very likely be blocked under WP:3RR.

So you're an anarchist yourself? Cool, I've been involved in anarchist stuff for about 10 years myself (though mostly all I do is food not bombs and anti-war stuff nowadays :/ ). Let me know if you need any help or anything. Hit me back at my talk page, because I'm bad at watching other people's talk pages. Peace, delldot talk 01:58, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Hello delldot.

I have improved the Anarchist International page on[REDACTED] by adding the following text today:

"It must be said that a so called "Anorg-warning" based on quotes from two leftist-marxistoid persons from Denmark and Germany (no longer active), published by Jamal Hannah, a member of the mainly marxist Industrial Workers of the World, at flag.blackened.net is almost entirely false, see and and search for "Hannah". Nobody should pay attention to this false "warning".

For a discussion between the Industrial Workers of the World and the anarchist International Workers of the World see .

Some external links to the Anarchist International and associated organizations are found at the following link

I am not used to edit at Misplaced Pages, so I need help. If you can help me it would be fine.

Anarchist Greetings from Anna Quist

(84.215.147.184 (talk) 04:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC))

That's not an improvement, Misplaced Pages articles aren't supposed to have content like that. Zazaban (talk) 04:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

You are wrong, it is of course an improvement. Who are you to talk for Misplaced Pages? I know the rules at Misplaced Pages.

Hi! Replied to your note. delldot talk 01:48, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 23:28, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

SUPPORT THE ANARCHIST INTERNATIONAL PAGE ON WIKIPEDIA !!!!

From the "Deletion page" of Anarchist International:

Anarchist International

Anarchist International (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

De-prodded, posting on behalf of Zazaban. Prod summary was "Per WP:HOAX; http://flag.blackened.net/liberty/anorg-warning.html and WP:NOTABILITY, WP:OR" delldot talk 02:01, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Strong Delete Per above. There is strong reason to believe this organization consists of only User:Anna Quist and at most 2 or 3 others. No evidence has ever been offered up of otherwise. Zazaban (talk) 02:03, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

delete in favor or anarchy, lets delete it!Myheartinchile (talk) 04:25, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Strong Delete: No verifiable evidence of the existence, let alone notability of AI. Significant amounts of the material on the anarchy.no site have been shown to be plagiarized, and other material simply copied from Misplaced Pages itself. Libertatia (talk) 08:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Vanity/COI issues as well. History page shows that two primary editors are self-proclaimed members of the "International." Libertatia (talk) 08:11, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

---

I have followed the rules on Misplaced Pages and added the following to the Anarchist International Misplaced Pages page today:

It must be said that a so called "Anorg-warning" based on quotes from two leftist-marxistoid persons from Denmark and Germany (no longer active), published by Jamal Hannah, a member of the mainly marxist Industrial Workers of the World, at flag.blackened.net is almost entirely false, see and and search for "Hannah". Nobody should pay attention to this false "warning".

For a discussion between the Industrial Workers of the World and the anarchist International Workers of the World see .

There is no "discussion" at this link. The page appears to be an unsourced attempt to smear the Industrial Workers of the World and a few specific anarchists as marxist, or even fascist. Substantial searching has revealed no actual chapters of the International Workers of the World, which is pretty strange in an era where a small infoshop generally has significant web presence. Given Misplaced Pages standards, a possibly nonexistent union can hardly be used as support for the notability of a possibly nonexistent organization. Libertatia (talk) 18:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Some external links to the Anarchist International and associated organizations are found at the following link

The links on this note should prove without doubt that the Anarchist International is quite a large network.

The links all appear to have nothing more than contact information derived from the AI website. These is nothing that independently verifies the large claims made by the article. This is an open-and-shut case for deletion. Libertatia (talk) 18:51, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

If you have a reliable person in Norway (Oslo) he/she can come and see that the AI-network has about 2000 valid e-mailadresses, networkmembers/subscribers for anarchist groups and individuals.

Anarchist Greetings from Anna Quist

Those are all from your own website. I'm not sure if that counts as reliable. Zazaban (talk) 05:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

---

They are external links, not the link-site of www.anarchy.no ... You can check that the external links are valid - try them.

Anarchist Greetings from Anna Quist

I either vote for deletion, on the grounds that the page is nonsense or an objective article that reflects the nonsensical nature of the "Anarchist International".--58.165.233.113 (talk) 07:15, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

So you vote deletion? If so, put it up in bold, like this Zazaban (talk) 07:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

I officially vote for deletion.--58.165.233.113 (talk) 07:53, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

---

The homepage of the Anarchist Internatonal, www.anarchy.no , is not nonsensensial. Try to prove it and you will fail. The article Anarchist International on Misplaced Pages is objective and to the point.

The organizations/networks associated to the Anarchist International are found at the link-page of www.anarchy.no , and then there is a big network of networkmembers/subscribers related to the different organizations/networks.

Anarchist Greetings from Anna Quist —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna Quist (talk • contribs) 07:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Delete Blatant Hoax and Possible G11 --Numyht (talk) 08:02, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

The Anarchist International is no hoax. You are not matter of fact...

Anarchist Greetings Anna Quist

• Delete, and create another article on the Anarchist Federation in Norway, the sole component of the imaginary AI. --Soman (talk) 09:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

We have had a Norwegian page of the Anarchist Federation in/of Norway (AFIN) and the Northern Anarchist Confederation (NAC)/Anarkistenes Organisasjon i Norden (ANORG) for several years. We have had an English Misplaced Pages page for the Anarchist International for several months, and this is going to continue. The Anarchist International is probably the largest anarchist network in the world, and it would be a shame if some ochlarchists from Anarchism.net and a few leftist marxistoid persons should stop this. You know nothing about the Anarchist International...

As for Zazaban I have problems with taking him seriously. In a discussion on Anarchism.net he answered with the following "intelligent" and a bit ochlarchical statements: "You're one to talk. - And, just to see how you react; FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK. FUCK FUCK. FUCK." Source . I would not put too much weight on what he means. I don't think such comments are funny.

Anarchist Greetings Anna Quist —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anna Quist (talk • contribs) 10:35, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

That's mainly because sense hasn't worked with you, so I tried nonsense. But really, ad hominem attacks have no place here. Zazaban (talk) 18:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

• Delete This fails the usual test of notability, which is whether there is coverage from independent sources. Having an international organization of anarchists is like having Alcoholics Anonymous as a brand of beer. Mandsford (talk) 21:30, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

It is not true that there is no coverage from independent sources, se link to independent, external, sources, covering AI, at .

You don't seem to understand. True anarchism is a.o.t an accumulated updated research front of libertarian research, that is just what www.anarchy.no is. If the Anarchist International Misplaced Pages page is deleted, it is a severe attack on free research and publication of free research. I ask everybody that are for free research to support our claim that the AI-page should not be deleted.

Anarchist Greetings from Anna Quist --Anna Quist talk

Hi again Anna, replied delldot talk 18:01, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Anarchist International

A tag has been placed on Anarchist International requesting that it be speedily deleted from Misplaced Pages, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, place the template {{hangon}} underneath the other template on the article and put a note on the page's discussion page saying why this article should stay. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please use deletion review instead of continuing to recreate the page. Thank you. Zazaban (talk) 20:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Please do not recreate this article again. If you have an issue with the closing decision of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Anarchist International then you will need to take it up at deletion review. Kevin (talk) 22:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I have explained why the deletion of the Anarchist International is not fair above, with sound matter of fact arguments, without positive response. The content is verified at external links, see , a link that was also added to the AI-Misplaced Pages page 14.07.2008, but it was deleted again. The conclusion is that the present editing group with the power to delete at Misplaced Pages consists of ochlarchists, and enemies of anarchism. (Anna Quist (talk) 23:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC))

You're the only one who thinks it's unfair. Zazaban (talk) 00:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I am not the only one that think it is unfair, remember your "deleting discussion" with another AI-member that you have linked at Anarchism.net. , i.e. . Anyway the Misplaced Pages editors can vote with consensus that the world is flat, and put up an article about that. The deletion of the AI-Misplaced Pages page is a similar case. The deletion does not have scientific standard. The conclusion is that Misplaced Pages does not hold scientific standard in this matter. (Anna Quist (talk) 07:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC))

That user is a vandal, not a good example. Zazaban (talk) 18:29, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The only significant vandalism in this context is the deletion of the AI-Misplaced Pages page, and that is done by you and some other ochlarchists/vandals. (Anna Quist (talk) 19:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC))

Like I said, take it to deletion review. Zazaban (talk) 20:11, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

No, in fact, I insist you take it to deletion review. There's a link in Kevin's post. Zazaban (talk) 20:22, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I am not going to discuss this with you on a deletion review. I discuss as little as possible with ochlarchists/vandals as you Zazaban. (Anna Quist (talk) 00:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC))

It won't involve me. Zazaban (talk) 17:15, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Thoughts

Hey Anna, I feel like I maybe did a bad job of explaining my perspective before. I think I understand your feelings on the matter, you think the subject deserves an article and that it's not fair for Wikipedians to decide it doesn't, right? My perspective is this: This is Misplaced Pages, a project with very specific goals. We need those goals to remain narrow in order to have a cohesive project, so we can't just be a free speech venue (although there are sites that do offer similar opportunities, like indymedia and social networking sites). To us Wikipedians, the question is about whether the article is good for Misplaced Pages, not the world at large. As far as I can see, that's the only way the project will work. Similarly, Wikipedians have to decide by consensus what stays and what doesn't--again, I can't see any other way to work it. I can certainly understand how you'd want to resist and fight back, but please see my point: Misplaced Pages isn't The Power, we're a community project to provide a free, valuable resource indiscriminately. If we're successful, it'll help take back control over information from media conglomerates. This is why I'm strongly urging you to work with the project rather than against it. Besides, we get tons and tons of people trying to disrupt the project every day, we deal with them very efficiently, by blocking them. I don't want that to happen to you because I can see you're trying to do the right thing.

I think the sources you're pointing to as resources for the AI article aren't reliable enough; I assume that's why it was agreed to delete the article in the AfD discussion. If you want an article on AI to be kept, I suggest creating a new one in your userspace (that is, any page beginning with User:Anna Quist/Anarchist International... such as User:Anna Quist/Sandbox); you'll need to cite reliable sources like mainstream media, journal articles, and books. Sources can't be forums, blogs, or self-published because there's not enough editorial review to ensure accuracy. For an article to be verifiable, every fact in it must be attributable to a reliable source. If you create a verifiable article with reliable sources, I can't see any reason why it shouldn't be included. If the subject's not mentioned in reliable sources, we simply can't have an article on it. Definitely let me know if I've misunderstood your perspective. I'm glad to continue discussing it.

I'll talk to Zazaban and ask them to step back from this matter because I think it's not doing either of you any good. Don't hesitate to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions or need anything, I'm always glad to help. Peace, delldot talk 22:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey Delldot. If you take a serious look at you will find a lot of reliable external sources confirming the content of the Anarchist International, including listing of International Journal of Anarchism at a well known New York university. By the way the original AI-Misplaced Pages article was posted by H. Fagerhus, the editor of International Journal of Anarchism, in itself a reliable source, and not by me. (Anna Quist (talk) 00:33, 16 July 2008 (UTC))

Out of the english language websites, most were either generic lists, or about the IWW or other organizations that you claim to be affiliated with but have never proven to be. Zazaban (talk) 02:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The International Workers of the World, affiliated to the Anarchist International must not be mixed up with the mainly marxian Industrial Workers of the World, that is not affiliated to AI. It is proven from the homepage of the International Workers of the World that it is affiliated to the Anarchist International, see http://www.anarchy.no/iwwai.html .

There are several independent newspaper and other articles about the Anarchist International and affiliated organizations, quoting from :

"Articles about the Anarchist International etc. are a.o.t. published in the paper-editions of the largest newspaper in Norway, Verdens Gang 06.11.2001, p 39, "Anarki er demokrati", Universitas 23.10.2002, p 1, "Akademiske anarkister", pp 14-15, "Anonyme anarkister" and 13.11.2002, p 17, "Replikk fra Anarkistisk Universitetslag", and the two largest economic newspapers in Norway, Dagens Nærlingsliv 2/3 June 2007, p 3, "Lest siden sist", and Finansavisen 17.10.2007, p. 64, "Norges Anarkistråd avviser skattetrussel". The articles in Universitas are also available online, see updated.

We will also mention the articles about the first and second IFA-IAF congresses in Oslo etc. in the IFA-IAF organ CRIFA-bulletin, documented at http://www.anarchy.no/ifadok.html and http://www.anarchy.no/mandate.html . There is also a chapter (pp 395-406) in Norwegian and English about the Anarchist Federation of/in Norway (AFIN) and the Anarchist International in the anarchist historian H. Fagerhus' book "Anarkismen og syndikalismen i Norge ca 1850-2000", q330.16 Fag (2005), a.o.t. available at Arbeiderbevegelsens Arkiv og Bibliotek in Norway , see http://www.arbark.no/mikromarc/default.asp and search for "Fagerhus"."

If you read the updated you will see that there are not only "generic lists" but several quotes and articles of the Anarchist International and affiliated organizations/organs. You should read all of it before you make (wrong) judgements.

About lists it is important to notice that the International Journal of Anarchism is listed together with all the other main economic journals on the web, by several universities, etc., and that proves that it is a highly reliable journal. (Anna Quist (talk) 15:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC))

I think it's great that you're working on it in your sandbox Anna, I sure appreciate you listening to my advice. I don't have time to look at the sources now, but I will when I get the chance. Journals sound like a good source, I'm not as sure about the website anarchy.no itself--what kind of editorial review does it have? You can certainly cite the sources it links to, if you can get them, those sound good. My only problem with the article so far is that it only has one inline citation--remember, we need to be able to back up every claim in the article (although sources that affirm that the group exists are a start, they're not enough). If you want, I can mark the sentences in your sandbox that I think need citations. Thanks for working so hard on this and for taking my concerns seriously. Peace, delldot talk 02:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Oops!!!

My bad! I undid your blanking of YOUR sandbox... My apologies. I obviously wasnt thinking. Lucifer (talk) 22:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)