Talk:Lindsey German
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ] | ||
Contents |
[edit] Image
In what way is Image:Lindsey German Scotland.jpg vandalism?--JK the unwise 15:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
- I agree it is not vandalism. But it does seem a rather unflattering photo, especially as non-thumbnail. Given we have another photo, my personal preference would be not to use it as a second photo for such a short article. I think in general an encyclopedia should use flattering photos of individuals, unless there is a particular point to make from the photo. I won't be joining a revert war though! Rwendland 23:55, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think that its a nice photo, makes her look like she's just about to kick some capitalist arse. And it has George Monbiot in the back ground showing that she's up there with other popular lefties. To be honest I would be willing to leave the photo off if it is really objected to, I may not even have started edit warring over it if Fashion1 had made a case that the photo was unnessisary instead of just deleting it with a wholly unfair accuasation of vandalism! I even put a polite message on her/his user page only for it to be ignored and deleted[1]. My one argument for keeping the second image is that it is totally free as apposed to just fairuse.--JK the unwise 12:31, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- Good points. Have to admit I didn't notice George Monbiot was in the background - should have read the image text properly! Aesthetics is in the eye of the beholder. I really don't feel strongly about this, do what you think is right. Someone else's view would be useful. Rwendland 14:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- Fashion1 has succeeded in boring me with endless Rv'ing so I'll just leave it alone unless someone else makes a comment either way. Dito, the John Rees page (I have to admit that picture does make him look like he's got a bit of a beer belly, but I'm sure its revolutionary beer!). Fashion1 (if you are even bothering to read the talk page) have it your way for now but if you plan to become a regular contributor to Wikipiedia please learn to comunicate!!!.--JK the unwise 15:02, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- Good points. Have to admit I didn't notice George Monbiot was in the background - should have read the image text properly! Aesthetics is in the eye of the beholder. I really don't feel strongly about this, do what you think is right. Someone else's view would be useful. Rwendland 14:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think that its a nice photo, makes her look like she's just about to kick some capitalist arse. And it has George Monbiot in the back ground showing that she's up there with other popular lefties. To be honest I would be willing to leave the photo off if it is really objected to, I may not even have started edit warring over it if Fashion1 had made a case that the photo was unnessisary instead of just deleting it with a wholly unfair accuasation of vandalism! I even put a polite message on her/his user page only for it to be ignored and deleted[1]. My one argument for keeping the second image is that it is totally free as apposed to just fairuse.--JK the unwise 12:31, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- It is too bad editors feel the need the engage in an edit war, when they could be making much more constructive contributions to Wikipedia. Good luck, remember WP:POINT. Sincerely --
Nomen Nescio 16:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- It is too bad editors feel the need the engage in an edit war, when they could be making much more constructive contributions to Wikipedia. Good luck, remember WP:POINT. Sincerely --
-
-
-
The silly thing is I am actualy a supporter of Lindsey German!--JK the unwise 19:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've looked at it, I have no brief for German but I think it's a good picture and adds to the encyclopaedic content of the article. I can see more reason for including it than for removing. I note that Fashion1 has been temporarily blocked for edit warring over this, it would be helpful if that user would take the time to explain why it is so all-fired important that it be deleted. Just zis Guy you know? 11:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] SProtect
I have SPRotected the page, since it looks like an user tries to avoid the 3RR by operating as an anon user. -- Chris 73 | Talk 12:12, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
- Clearly unprotecting this page was a mistake. Can the honourable editor stop the sillyness? Nomen Nescio 21:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Children
For months editors are warring over a picture. Is it possible to stop this and try and find consensus? Nomen NescioGnothi seauton 10:26, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- While I feel that it does add something (namely it shows the subject at an important event with other well known activists), I do not think it would seriously effect the article not to have it. If the editor who keeps deleting it would enter into any kind of discusion at all as to why they think it is vandalism I would be more then willing to hear their point of view.--JK the unwise 11:12, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- I completely agree. Just zis Guy you know? 16:24, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Resolution of picture dispute
-
- Finnaly Fasion1 has given a reson as to why s/he thinks the picture should be removed. In an edit summery s/he wrote "This picture is unecessary. JK only wants to include it because it is unflattering, Like this one he tries to post of her parter John Rees here; http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Rees_%28".
- It is quite funny to be accused of anti-Linsey German and anti-John Rees sentiments since I am a member of the SWP and Respect and think that both of them are brilliant campaingers and speekers. Yes she looks a bit stern in the pic but why this is construed as unflatering I don't know?
- If you explain what about it you think puts her in a bad light I let it be removed.--JK the unwise 12:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
- The picture is just fine. Wikipedia is not Hello magazine. If Fasion1 repeats their edit-warring and incivil accusations of vandalism, I will block the account and semiprotect the article. I have had more than enough of this nonsense. Guy (Help!) 19:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
- Guy, thanks for this. --Duncan 20:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
Rosa Lichtenstein wrote:
This picture is fine; without doubt, Lindsey is at once one of the most pleasant and the most politically astute women I have ever met.
This picture captures her well.
Not that this matters anyway....
http://www.anti-dialectics.org
Apologies, I did not know how to 'sign' my comments. I do now!
RL 18/11/06
Rosa Lichtenstein 02:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry you have been dragged into this (again). I am happy to provide reasons for removing the picture. I have just not bothered to argue with JK because he is not interested in a reasonable discussion. He has only one agenda.
- JK is a member of the Communist Party of Great Britain, an extreme left wing sect that is obsessed with Lindsey German and the Socialist Workers Party. On 2 July 2005 JK travelled up to the Make Poverty History rally in Scotland and proceeded to take dozens of pictures of Lindsey German and her partner John Rees - so many that they thought he must be a police officer until I explained he was part of the CPGB. He then tried to upload the most unflattering pictures to Wikipedia. Here is an example of the picture JK has continually tried to upload to the John Rees page on Wikipedia;
- JK will try and present himself as a disinterested contributor. In reality he hates everything that Lindsey German and John Rees stand for. Hence his obsession with them and hence his obsessional behaviour on their Wikipedia pages for the past 18 months. No normal contributor behaves in this way. A single decent and uncontroversial picture is fine for short biographies like John and Lindsey’s and its probably a good rule of thumb to follow generally across Wikipedia so far as short biographies are concerned in order to avoid edit wars.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fashion1 (talk • contribs) 16 November 2006.
-
- I'm not a member of CPGB. I am not disinterested, if anything I am pro-Lindsey! I have admitted that the picture of John Rees wasn't great and have not replced it in the article (see Talk:John Rees (activist)#Image). I have no idea what the comments above about me taking loads of pics are about too my memory I took about 4 or 5 - I also took picture's of George Galloway (Image:George Galloway MPH Rally.jpg) and George Monbiot (Image:George Monbiot Scotland.jpg) and ones of the rest of the event (see G8 Alternatives pic). What can I say I fancied myself a bit of a photograther (I admit my not great!). If I have been obsessional over reverting the article it probally has more to do with my suborness and annoyance at being accused of vandalism then anything else. I wonder why if John Rees thinks I am CPGB/police/a nutter he has never confronted me as to what I have been doing at a SWP member's conferneces? If I am making you so paranoid I will leave off arguing over this picture. Sorry to have caused you so much pain--JK the unwise 19:50, 16 November 2006 (UTC) nerd=possibly cbgbee=never
