Content deleted Content added
m →Adding neutrality tag to contraversial wording: copyedit |
m →Adding neutrality tag to contraversial wording: copyedit |
||
Line 200:
:This request should be denied: if anything, this is proof-positive of this editor's indiscriminate addition of tags and ongoing disruption. The term may be contentious among a clutch of Wikipedians, particularly the instigating editor, but this debate is an artificial one of the offending editor's making: [http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/dominion definitions for 'dominion' are readily available], and this [[Constitution Act, 1867|title was conferred onto Canada in the document which gave rise to it]]. A number of references as placed also confirm the validity of this assertion. In addition, the polls indicated yielded results that were not in the above editor's favour. As well, Canada is already noted as a '[[federation|federal state]]' in the next paragraph. I would support reversion to the prior, long-standing wording {'[[federal]] [[dominion|semi-autonomous polity]]' with link) or similar (federal colonial state). Throughout, this editor has been unable to compel through salient sourcing, and shouldn't be allowed to cut corners now. [[User:Quizimodo|Quizimodo]] ([[User talk:Quizimodo|talk]]) 00:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
:: ''"The term may be contentious among a clutch of Wikipedians"'' ... I'm glad you acknowledge that. If you know that, why would you persistently remove the tag? This request is not about adding or changing content, but about identifying the contentious issue on this page among editors of good faith. --[[User:Soulscanner|soulscanner]] ([[User talk:Soulscanner|talk]]) 01:07, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
:::Should I be surprised that you fixate on one notion in my commentary while glazing over others? The debate is an artificial one. And please spare me your insinuations of good faith, which you have demonstrated little of. [[User:Quizimodo|Quizimodo]] ([[User talk:Quizimodo|talk]]) 15:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
:::Is it possible for me to get a briefing (of few words) on what's being disputed? If not?, would it be possible to have a consensus review on what should be in the article? [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 02:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
:::: The inclusion of the {{dubious}} tag right now. The broader issue is whether domionion is an appropriate word to include in the lead. --[[User:Soulscanner|soulscanner]] ([[User talk:Soulscanner|talk]]) 03:44, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
| |||