Talk:Russ Nelson and Indira Point: Difference between pages

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:34, 11 October 2008

Indira Point (formerly known as Pygmalion Point and for a brief period of time as India Point^{[citation needed]}) is situated on the island of Great Nicobar in the Nicobar Islands, eastern Indian Ocean, and it represents the southernmost point of land in the territory of India. The point is located in the Union Territory of Andaman and Nicobar Islands and is named in honour of Indira Gandhi.

External links

This Andaman and Nicobar Islands location article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+'''Indira Point''' (formerly known as '''Pygmalion Point''' and for a brief period of time as '''India Point'''{{Fact|date=August 2008}}) is situated on the island of [[Great Nicobar]] in the [[Nicobar Islands]], eastern [[Indian Ocean]], and it represents the southernmost point of land in the territory of [[India]]. The point is located in the [[Union Territory]] of [[Andaman and Nicobar Islands]] and is named in honour of [[Indira Gandhi]].
-{{WPBiography|living=yes|class=|importance=}}
-{{Notable Wikipedian|RussNelson|Nelson, Russ}}
-== Nominated for Deletion. ==
-I nominated this for deletion. The article looks like self promotion. Much of the editing is done by the person the article is about. Doesn't this violate the POV? [[User:3D jonny|3D jonny]] 22:39, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
+==External links==
-:I started this article when Russ Nelson became president of the [[Open Source Initiative]], an influential organisation. I am in no way affiliated with him, so it's a stretch to call the article "self promotion". He has since edited the article himself, but those edits have been largely verified. I'm removing your deletion notice. Please nominate the article properly if you still consider that it should be deleted. —[[User talk:Pengo|Pengo]] 00:51, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
+*[http://photogallery.hosuronline.com/IndiraPoint/ Indira point Photo Gallery]
+*[http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/975380.cms Indira point falls off the map]
+*[http://cires.colorado.edu/~bilham/IndonesiAndaman2004_files/IndiraPointSubsidence.htm Photo of the submerged lighthouse in Indira point after the Tsunami]
+{{coord missing|India}}
-:Errrr, I also have added negative information about myself.  Would that be self demotion?  No policy against that! [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] 15:34, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
+[[Category:Headlands of India]]
-==Quaker?==
-The article says "<blockquote>His politics are both left and right of centre, as he is a pacifist Quaker[2] and a member of the Libertarian Party of the United States.</blockquote>" .  The WP article on [[Libertarian Party]] says it supports the right to bear arms. How Quaker is that, please? [[User:Vernon39|<font color="green">Vernon White</font>]] <b><sup><small><span style="color:#90F">[[User talk:Vernon39|. . . Talk ]]</span></small></sup></b> 23:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
-:How would the answer to this question be used to improve the article?  [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 16:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
-::If a reputable published source indicated that he rejected this plank (the "right" to bear arms") in the Libertarian Party platform, it might prevent the deletion of the claim that "he is a pacifist Quaker", for which no reputable evidence is given. The use of the Welsh word for "Quaker" as the name of his company doesn't seem to me any evidence. I have noted [http://russnelson.com/pacifist/ Pacifist writings] on your website but am not convinced. [[User:Vernon39|<font color="green">Vernon White</font>]] <b><sup><small><span style="color:#90F">[[User talk:Vernon39|. . . Talk ]]</span></small></sup></b> 18:46, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
-:::A person does not have to agree with every platform of a political party to identify with it or be a member. —[[User:Pengo|Pengo]] 00:45, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
-::::While most Quaker Yearly Meetings are "Broad Church" and no creed of beliefs are imposed, the sentiments outlined in [[Libertarian_Party_%28United_States%29#Platform]], as well as the support for the "right to bear arms", would appear to be contrary to the core beliefs of the [[Religious Society of Friends]], as expressed in its Testimonies. Has this person indicated dissent from other Libertarian tenets? [[User:Vernon39|<font color="green">Vernon White</font>]] <b><sup><small><span style="color:#90F">[[User talk:Vernon39|. . . Talk ]]</span></small></sup></b> 13:24, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
- <code>[nelson@desk nelson]$ whois quaker.org | grep Email
- Registrant Email:nelson@crynwr.com
- Admin Email:nelson@crynwr.com
- Tech Email:nelson@crynwr.com
- [nelson@desk nelson]$ </code>
-No doubt that Quakers would read me out of meeting if they felt my views were unacceptable.  That they haven't yet ought to be proof enough for everyone-1 that I'm a Quaker. [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 22:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
+{{AndamanNicobar-geo-stub}}
-== He has been making a living from Open Source support ever since then ==
+[[it:Punto Indira]]
-The article says about the subject "''He has been making a living from Open Source support ever since then...''", but it seems hard to find a source independent from Nelson himself that verified this information.
+[[te:ఇందిరా పాయింట్]]
-Making a living from Open Source makes you "cool" in some circles, and that's why I believe we need a non-trivial source for such a claim. For instance, self-provided bios are not well know for their accuracy.
-I any case, is it really important to mention this in the article, when apparently no reliable source seem to support this piece of trivia? --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 16:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
-:You asked for a citation, and I gave you two.  You don't like either one.  Tough on you.  Let somebody else revert it.  You'd think that the OSI board wouldn't stand for a falsehood on its board bio page, but maybe you know less about them that I do.  Time to get some other opinions here than yours and mine. [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 19:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
-::You haven't addressed my concerns above. The "OSI board" wouldn't care to fact-check the mini-bio you provided them. They don't really care if their page is used to promote you, since that would indirectly also promote them. But Wikipedia has a higher standard. Please, consider reading [[WP:COI]] before edit-warring on this page. Some other opinions would be good. --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 20:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
-::I agree, and I asked you to let someone else revert it.  You didn't, which gives me cause to accuse you of [[WP:COI]].  Note that I'm not editing the page -- just supplying a citation.  YOU are editing the page, and YOU have some strange interest in me.  Did I piss you off at some point in the past?  You are editing Wikipedia using a pseudonym, so nobody knows if you have a COI or not.  [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 21:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
-:::I never met you, Sir. And had never heard about you before interacting with you at this site. I do have an interest in keeping Wikipedia free of disguised advertisement and self-promotion. --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 23:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
-::::How do we know that?  You have no reputation for truth-telling to rely on, whereas I do.  Clearly if you had an interest in creating a less-accurate article by deleting information about me, you would deny having one (and so you did.), so any denial is worthless.  Now, you started this by asking for a citation.  Fine.  I supplied one.  You didn't like it, so you reverted it.  Fine.  I supplied a different one.  You didn't like THAT one either, so you reverted it.  I'm going to supply ''three'' citations this time, and if you are honestly interested in an accurate article, you will leave them there until and unless SOME ONE ELSE (whom you have not invited to do so) removes them.
-::::In light of your actions, I am starting to think that your interest is more than casual, but is more along the line of dislike.  The fact that you are also editing the [[Freemacs]] article says that you aren't choosing these articles at random, but are instead targetting articles related to me.  Your edits stink of [[WP:COI].  You could show me that I am wrong by moving along to some other set of articles which actually NEEDS editing, pleaseandthankyousoverymuch. [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 02:14, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
-:::::Nice try. But, no, I won't stopping editing the article about you just because you want so.
-:::::There's a link from this article to the freemacs one, and that's probably how I got there.
-:::::Providing a bad source is just as bad as providing none.
-:::::There's no such thing as a "''reputation for truth-telling''". There are, instead, [[WP:RS|Reliable Sources]].
-:::::If you so confident about your [[WP:COI]] theory, I invite you to post a complaint at [[Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard]]. I mean, really!
-:::::And stop redding the bad sources to the article. --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 12:41, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
-::::::Let someone else revert this.  You clearly have a COI. [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 16:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
-::::::Again, and again, I have asked you to stop removing material from this article, and to allow some other Wikipedia editor to express an opinion.  Clearly we are having an edit war here, and the final disposition of these changes should be decided here.  You edited boldly, and got reverted multiple times.  You should now stop trying to change the article, let it stay as it was, and we can talk about it here.  I simply will NOT accept some random person vandalizing my article.  And yes, I consider adding {{cite}} after every fact about me to be vandalizing it, and abusing Wikipedia policy to make a point (which is itself against wikipedia policy).  STOP MAKING THIS CHANGE, and talk about it here. [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 17:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
-::::::: Wouldn't it be much better taking this to the BLP noticeboard? The edits in question don't constitute the kind of "blatant vandalism" which [[WP:AUTO]] permits bio subjects to revert. [[user:thumperward|Chris Cunningham (not at work)]] - [[user talk:thumperward|talk]] 12:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
-::::::::Can the removal of unsourced/badly sourced content constitute a BLP issue? I thought BLP was more for the <u>addition</u> of unsourced (potentially defamatory) material. --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 13:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
-::::::::: See [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Help#Contacts]]. [[user:thumperward|Chris Cunningham (not at work)]] - [[user talk:thumperward|talk]] 13:21, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
-:::::::::: I think it's reasonable for me to ask that [[User:Damiens.rf]] stop making this edit and allow someone else to remove this material from my bio.  Anybody else agree?  If nobody chimes in, then I think the material should remain until somebody does. [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 20:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
-I notice that this material has been removed with NO DISCUSSION on this page.  Must I revert it again?  What is the talk page for if not to resolve arguments? [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 02:15, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
-: Not having the last word does not mean that someone isn't responding. To be honest, I think the last comment posted to your thread on the COI board is the most important thing here - feeling hard done by because other editors have apparently more lee-way to edit articles on one's own person that one does oneself is tough, but things are that way for a reason, and you have to assume that the invisible hand will eventually remedy this by itself. Removing material which isn't verified by secondary sources isn't vandalism, it's deletionism - and deletionism, so long as it's carried out within the boundaries of policy, is an accepted philosophy on WP. [[user:thumperward|Chris Cunningham (not at work)]] - [[user talk:thumperward|talk]] 08:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
-== MacPaint clone called Painter's Apprentice ==
-Is this software something barely notable, that was used by someone or some distribution, or is this just something Mr. Nelson did someday? If it's just an obscure pet-project, I wonder why is it mentioned. Some source ever mention this software? --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 16:36, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
-: I know of no citations for this software.  It was written by myself and [[Patrick Naughton]], and published by [[Zenith Data Systems]] back in 1985.  You know ... pre-history.  I'm sure it was in their catalog, but I expect that none exist anymore.  David Gubbins also was selling it back in 1990 at computer swap meets, but again, no reliable sources would have mentioned that.  Feel free to delete it if deleting things that are true makes you happy. [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 20:19, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
-::Wikipedia is not concerned with the "truth"...Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources . [[Wikipedia:Simplified ruleset]] Since you have not provided one I think it can be safely deleted. [[User:Teapotgeorge|Teapotgeorge]] ([[User talk:Teapotgeorge|talk]]) 20:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
-:::I would think that the article should contain only material which is verifiable.  Painter's Apprentice is published on Google Code.  Anybody can look at [http://code.google.com/p/painters-apprentice/  painters-apprentice MS-DOS paint program] and verify that it's my work. [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 01:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
-::::I envision the day you will understand the difference between a third-party published source and self-published source. --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 04:04, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
-:::::Happy Thursday, Damiens, that day has come!  I already understand the difference.  If an article says "X did Y", and you go look at Y, and it has X's fingerprints all over it, then no third-party published source is needed.  So I must ask, do YOU understand that some things are their own verification?  [[User:RussNelson|RussNelson]] ([[User talk:RussNelson|talk]]) 19:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
-::::::Yes, I can easily verify that you '''claim''' to have authored an Mac Paint clone, that you claim to make a living from Open Source support for some time, that you identifies yourself as a "''pacifist Quaker''", and a lot more. But we're not writing [[Russ Nelson's views about himself]]. :) C'mon Russ, everybody writes pieces of software once and there, but unless someone somewhere takes sometime to write something about that software, this is not something we need to have on our biographies. Have this Paint-clone ever been talked about by [[WP:RS|someone]] not related to you? Like an independent software magazine or something like that? Does anyone other than you consider it a mac-paint-clone? --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 19:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
-:How do you know Russell is male? Has a third party verified that he has a cock? Better start referring to him as "it" until we have a third party check for a Y chromosome. Clearly "it" has written the software, and there's evidence of the announcement from 1991 and there's the source code available and it's mentioned in his biography which was accepted by various third parties. Considering these sources to be "self published" is being a little completely stupidly overly pedantic. Damiens.rf: Please stop [[WP:DICK|being a dick]]. —[[User:Pengo|Pengo]] 12:34, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
-::Incidentally, some of the news articles used as source implies he's a man. But we don't need to source such things. Having written a Mac Paint clone is a greater claim, and We would benefit from a citation from someone else (uninvolved with Mr. Nelson)  calling it a clone.
-::Also incidentally, the available source code does not compile. --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 13:17, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
-:::By your line of argument, those third parties could have been told by Russell himself that he is a man, so it's just self publishing.
-:::Also are you aware of why the strict BLP policy exists? It's because Jimmy Wales is afraid of being sued by the person in question because someone wrote something wrong about them. Clearly that's not an issue here, and the claims are not at all incredible. —[[User:Pengo|Pengo]] 21:44, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
-::::I don't think we may run in a BLP problem here, since Nelson himself is the one wanting to include unsourced information.
-::::By the way, I really liked the way you worked the Mac-clone thing in the article. --[[User:Damiens.rf|Damiens<small>.rf</small>]] 00:36, 29 August 2008 (UTC)