| Revision as of 05:53, 23 December 2005 editPetral (talk | contribs)99 edits restore seperation between flame war and vote← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:54, 23 December 2005 edit undoPetral (talk | contribs)99 edits this is not an article, you can't add it to category:NPOV disputesNext edit → | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
| *'''Keep''' On 00:39, 23 December 2005 I started a new article: ] I was hoping to draw parallels between the Iraq, Philippine, and Vietnam wars. In all three wars Americans have been promised by their political leaders before an election of troop reductions. On 01:07, 23 December 2005, while I was still beginning to flesh out the article, Petral added on a <nowiki>{{POV}}</nowiki> tag. The POV tag explains this: | *'''Keep''' On 00:39, 23 December 2005 I started a new article: ] I was hoping to draw parallels between the Iraq, Philippine, and Vietnam wars. In all three wars Americans have been promised by their political leaders before an election of troop reductions. On 01:07, 23 December 2005, while I was still beginning to flesh out the article, Petral added on a <nowiki>{{POV}}</nowiki> tag. The POV tag explains this: | ||
| ---- | |||
| ⚫ | <center>{{POV}}</center> | ||
| ⚫ | <center><nowiki>{{POV}}</nowiki></center> | ||
| Since there was no "discussion on the talk page." I messaged Petral on his talk page, asking him "for maybe a better name, any suggestions" and asking him to discuss why he had put the <nowiki>{{POV}}</nowiki> tag. On 01:34, 23 December 2005 Petral responded by adding my article for deletion. | Since there was no "discussion on the talk page." I messaged Petral on his talk page, asking him "for maybe a better name, any suggestions" and asking him to discuss why he had put the <nowiki>{{POV}}</nowiki> tag. On 01:34, 23 December 2005 Petral responded by adding my article for deletion. | ||
Revision as of 05:54, 23 December 2005
Secret plan
Oh this is just too much, a POV fork, of a POV fork--Petral 02:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, but this one has a better chance of winning against deletion. It is a historical fact that their was a "secret plan" of Nixon, there is also no mention of the other two wars. Thanks you, made this article better, and less prone to other misguided POV warriors attacks in the future. Travb 02:29, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- You expect an article titled 'secret plan' to be considered NPOV?--Petral 02:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- This is the name that Nixon used in 1968. I am trying to detail this by referencing books and historical journals. Travb 02:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, Travb's attitude, and Travb's policies of revisionist history (see this AfD's page history). --Cyde Weys vote 02:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep On 00:39, 23 December 2005 I started a new article: Promises of troop withdraw by American presidents I was hoping to draw parallels between the Iraq, Philippine, and Vietnam wars. In all three wars Americans have been promised by their political leaders before an election of troop reductions. On 01:07, 23 December 2005, while I was still beginning to flesh out the article, Petral added on a {{POV}} tag. The POV tag explains this:
Since there was no "discussion on the talk page." I messaged Petral on his talk page, asking him "for maybe a better name, any suggestions" and asking him to discuss why he had put the {{POV}} tag. On 01:34, 23 December 2005 Petral responded by adding my article for deletion.
I then began to edit the page again, adding content, and trying to ignore Petral's heavy handed tactics against my brand new article, I then changed the name of the article to Campaign promises of troop withdraw by American presidents, and I added a link at the top of the deletion page, stating that I changed the name, with a link, which Petral deleted, and then reported me to Misplaced Pages:Vandalism in progress/RU Moderate. Petral then retracted his statement, stating: "nevermind, user is showing some restraint and is now cooperating with the AfD process." He then began to revert the redirect to Campaign promises of troop withdraw by American presidents back to the original article, 4 times, and I reported him for 3RR. He then stated on Misplaced Pages:Vandalism in progress/RU Moderate "continuously moving an article nominated for deletion, without redirecting the AfD link" Please, someone tell me how to redirect an Afd link! I don't know how, as I said on the Misplaced Pages:Vandalism in progress/RU Moderate page. Petral will not move it. I asked him how. Can someone please redirect the page?
People should determine if this is a good article based on its content, not on the other article. Thus far no one has talked about the content of this very scaled down article. What is POV in this article? What is not factual? No one has commented one bit about this.Travb 03:57, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Strong delete as blatant attempt to circumvent AfD. -- Antaeus Feldspar 03:19, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Delete- I find it odd that the person who has deleted 90% of the content of the article is against deleting the remaining 10%. Reyk 03:35, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- I attempted to delete the entire Promises of troop withdraw by American presidents throughout history because there was already several votes for deletion, and I figured there was no use fighting it. Instead I wanted to rewrite the article from scratch, and Petral stalked me to here. People should determine if this is a good article based on its content, not on the other article. Thus far no one has talked about the content of this very scaled down article. What is POV in this article? What is not factual? No one has commented one bit about this.Travb 03:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- you're the only one who has made any changes to this page in at least 10 edits, stop accusing me of changing your words, when you're the only one editing this page--Petral 04:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- I attempted to delete the entire Promises of troop withdraw by American presidents throughout history because there was already several votes for deletion, and I figured there was no use fighting it. Instead I wanted to rewrite the article from scratch, and Petral stalked me to here. People should determine if this is a good article based on its content, not on the other article. Thus far no one has talked about the content of this very scaled down article. What is POV in this article? What is not factual? No one has commented one bit about this.Travb 03:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
changing your words>>>I never said this. This is another fabrication.Here is my argument: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Travb#Dispute_with_Petral Travb 04:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)- you are literally flame/trolling yourself, you reverted your own change, and called me a pest--Petral 04:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- My aplogies, I was wrong.Travb 05:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- you are literally flame/trolling yourself, you reverted your own change, and called me a pest--Petral 04:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. This minor fact is already covered in Richard Nixon. Presidential candidates lie all the time about lots of topics. It's not a big deal. JoaoRicardo 04:48, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
- I'm having deja vu. Merge this article with Election_promise Endomion 05:49, 23 December 2005 (UTC)