Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Viriditas (talk | contribs) at 02:07, 2 December 2011 (→Talk:Demi Moore: ce). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Retired in many ways, but contributing in minor ways in the short term whilst considering my long term position moving forward. Previous account was User:Off2riorob - Youreallycan (talk) 01:59, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:Off2riorob / User:Youreallycan. Thank you. Jayjg 17:58, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hello,

Though we've sometimes disagreed, I think you have a lot to offer. I wish you well. Cullen Let's discuss it 21:39, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Cool - thanks Cullen - me to you too. - Youreallycan (talk) 22:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Welcome back! Collect (talk) 01:30, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Ed Miliband

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Could you explain your position on Ed Miliband regarding the ANI discussion? You recently said that someone cannot be British and Jewish, and I'm very confused by that statement and by your use of the lowercase "jew" as opposed to "Jew". Could you briefly explain your position here? Since Milliband has referred to himself as a Jew in reliable sources at least twice I am curious as to how you could possibly maintain your position in the face of such overwhelming evidence against you. Viriditas (talk) 07:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Lowercase uppercase - my typing is not perfect and neither is my English. Its a matter of weight to apply to isolated and somewhat vague comments in interviews. Is Miliband a British Jew or a British person of Jewish descent. - its the weight and for me, undue portrayal. There has been lengthy discussions about it and we are still today getting Religion added to the infofox etc and false portrayals added to the article. As you well know - who is a Jew is a well disputed position. Youreallycan (talk) 12:09, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I looked at the sources in question and see nothing "vague" about it:

"Obviously I'm Jewish, it is part of my identity, but not in a religious sense."
"My Jewish identity was such a substantial part of my upbringing that it informs what I am"
"And there’s a task for the community to get to know me.. I admire lots of things the Jewish community do: the philanthropy of the community, the generosity of the community, many of the great things that British Jews do for our country."

Are you using the same definition of vague as I am? Please check a dictionary if it helps:

vague: not clearly understood or expressed; not precisely limited, determined, or distinguished; lacking clarity or distinctness

What is vague about Miliband's statements on this subject? I would answer, nothing. In general, who is a Jew and who is not a Jew may be in dispute, but in this particular case it is not. Miliband has declared he is Jewish in numerous sources, and it is clear that he identifies as a British Jew. Unless you have a single source that discusses this dispute, it appears that you are editing from your own personal beliefs rather than from the sources. Your claim that this is "undue" doesn't follow from the evidence. I was under the impression that you were trying to uphold WP:BLP. How do your edits in this instance do that? Viriditas (talk) 12:40, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Um -- the last entry in your "evidence" evinces absolutely nothing about Miliband's ethnicity as a Jew - if anything, it would seem to indicate he does not identify as being a Jew. Collect (talk) 12:48, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I hope User:Youreallycan is paying attention to your comment, Collect, as this is a wonderful example of a vague response. What is the "last entry" in my evidence, Collect? And, how could you possibly misconstrue these simple statements where Miliband identifies as a Jew as instances where he does not identify as a Jew? It is reasonable to assume that adults with normal reading comprehension skills will understand that Miliband identifies as a Jew. I cannot conceive otherwise, nor can you show otherwise. There is no source which disputes the fact that Miliband is a British Jew. We have sources that support it. Therefore, nothing you nor User:Youreallycan says on this matter holds any weight. We go from the sources, not from poor reading comprehension skills colored by personal bias. You are free to misinterpret sources at your leisure. You are not, however, free to disrupt encyclopedia articles with your misinterpretations. Viriditas (talk) 12:56, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Clarification requested

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Can a person be British and Jewish? Viriditas (talk) 00:34, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

That all depends but in some situations, absolutely. Please, as I said earlier I feel your position in regard to me to be a bit attacking and I don't want to discuss this with you from this position. Youreallycan (talk) 00:38, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I will try to control myself. Can you at least explain to me why Miliband does not meet the potential criteria in your opinion? No long reply is necessary, just a few sentences. Viriditas (talk) 00:40, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Miliband after lengthy discussion with consensus, after hot dispute stabilized in the British people of Jewish descent category - and he has been in that cat for quite a while, which I have no objection to and in fact currently support. Youreallycan (talk) 00:44, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Demi Moore

I trust you're aware that the talk page header issue at Talk:Demi Moore is not one of vandalism, so WP:3RR applies here? —C.Fred (talk) 01:04, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

BLP applies in headers - presenting as if factual disputed details on the talkpage of living people seems to be not a good idea, but thanks for the note . Youreallycan (talk) 01:09, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, and thank you for the kind word about my (too long!) experience. That source, as I noted in my talk-page post, spells it Demitria, with an "i". --Tenebrae (talk) 01:22, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Full text: "His was a blue-collar upbringing, hers was an itinerant one. It was perfectly understandable that they should wish to flout their success as a family in the world's face. His father was a welder who divorced when Willis was 16. Her father was a man who later turned out not to be. A travelling adman, he committed suicide when Demi (nee Demitria) was 17, two years after he was...." --Tenebrae (talk) 01:23, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Such an edit warring disputed addition from an experienced editor to a WP:BLP is very disappointing. Youreallycan (talk) 01:27, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm genuinely sorry you believe so. I believe the likes of Time Inc., Reuters and The Independent, which are all major, venerable newsgathering organizations, are credible. I'm sure you must, too.

The compromise I proposed is that Misplaced Pages is not giving the name Demetria with the sort of undisputed proof that a birth certificate would entail, but simply saying, accurately, that these particular, reputable news organizations have given this as her name. That seems like a balanced way to present it to a reader. It would be slanted and to deliberately ignore the fact that places such as People and Reuters researched, edited and vetted "Demetria". --Tenebrae (talk) 01:34, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

People is a Time Inc. publication.

The print-publication cite for the Reuters news service is the one for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. It does not appear to be available for free online, but a pay version is here. Misplaced Pages citation guidelines do not necessitate that print sources be immediately accessible; only that they are reasonably accessible via libraries, etc. One cannot summarily remove a print citation simply because it does not appear on the web. --Tenebrae (talk) 01:51, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

You are edit warring to keep a silly, non educational , disputed first name when you have not accessed any of the sources. Youreallycan (talk) 01:53, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

I'd appreciate if you were to turn down the rhetoric. I am not reverting without discussion, which is at the heart of edit-warring; you, however, were making substantive, one-side changes summarily.

Do not say falsely that I "have not accessed these sources." I accessed and confirmed the two of the four sources that were online. I think if an admin were to examine your suggestion that the other two print sources are unuseable, he or she would disagree and would in fact point out the same policy, WP:SOURCEACCESS, that such a position violates. --Tenebrae (talk) 02:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Youreallycan is either mistaken or lying. The sources are perfectly accessible to anyone.Here is one:

Her father was a man who later turned out not to be. A travelling adman, he committed suicide when Demi (nee Demitria) was 17, two years after he was separated from Demi's alcoholic mother.

What is the objection here? I'm getting the sense that Youreallycan has created a dispute where none exists. Is this another instance of this user ignoring secondary sources? If so, we may need to make another trip back to ANI. Viriditas (talk) 02:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)