Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Myanmar (Burma)/Members

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


 WikipediaWikiProject Myanmar (Burma)/Members is part of WikiProject Myanmar (Burma), a project to improve all Burma related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systemic bias group on Wikipedia aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Burmese-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
Myanmar (Burma) To-do:

Contents

[edit] Okkar's vandalism

This page has been done in the style of all other WikiProjects since the beginning of the project. New members put their names at the bottom of the list. Stop redoing it in your biased fashion. Chris 10:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Chris, stop changing this page to have your name on top. You are the vandal, who is using this project for self promotion. Stop it please! Okkar 11:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Seeing the topic of this discussion, I believe I have been a victim of personal attack and smear campaign by Chris. Okkar 11:47, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

If you would like to place your name at the top of the list of members on the page, as you have continually done a total of 6 times ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]), please discuss why, and how you would measure a person's activity on Wikipedia in Burmese-related articles. --Hintha 19:26, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Okkar, I point you out because you continually change this page to suit your vanity. All other WikiProjects either list their membership chronologically, as we do, or alphabetically. None does it random as you continue to force. I am not so vain that my name needs to be at the top, I am simply the guy who created the project, so I was the first one on the list. In truth, valuable users like Hintha and a couple of others (who are not members of the project though they were invited) have been editing and improving Burmese articles since long before I got here. If anyone gets top billing according to sheer value of work, Hintha should go on top, and I would be happy with that. But we're not going to do it any random way. Either alphabetical or chronological, no other. Chris 19:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Oh my, what a bully gang! why does the order necessary? why is it so important to have this project in either alphabetical or chronological order? why cant it just be simple member list? are some members more important than the others? If contribution and seniority is deciding factor, why dont you put that on the project page and see how many people would actually want to join.
If you guys claim not to see vanity and fame (especially you Chris), why do you care so much about in which order people put their name in the member list? isnt it more important for people to join the project? Members list is just an information page on who is in the project, not who started the project or who is leading the project. It should not be used as a place to showboat.
It is obivious that many of you are unhappy about having to change the project name, and your disappointments are rather evident in your lack of activity in making necessary changes to the project, for example: leaving the project name unchanged in the categories. In actual fact, neither of you have made any real effort of changing anything. But you both came out bashing when someone took initiative to change this project. It is rather pointless to discuss with you guys because you guys would not contribute nor support anything that does not suit your political taste. For example, neither of you have not made any real effort or contribution towards changing the project name according to the verdict of Wikipedia mediation.
It is also evident that this project is becoming more and more politically motivated, juding from your support to keep NLD flag in Myanmar article, even though no other countries articles have the flag or emblem of the opposition groups or parties. Please see US, UK and others. You both claimed to be free of political motivations, yet you did nothing to prevent Simon Billenness of US Campaign for Burma to vandalise the articles and using Wikipedia to paddle the views of US Campagin for Burma. Instead you both came out fighting whenever I made some changes, especially changes that doesnt support the view of NCGUB or opposition groups. If this is to carry on, why dont we just rename this project to "WikiProject NCGUB/ Propaganda"?
Please remember, wikipedia is not your own, it belongs to the public. It is not somewhere to gloat your achievement. Okkar 21:50, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
May I inquire why you are so insistent on placing your name at the top of the list, as you have done 6 times? If you have content disputes with another user, please engage in a cooperative and civilized discussion on mediating changes, and seek help from others if you do need it, rather than making accusatory remarks that do not cease nor work. Thank you. By the way, instructions for renaming categories can be found here: Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion#How_to_use_this_page. I got quite confused by all the instructions. --Hintha 23:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Just making a point that it is not necessary for anyone to put their names at the bottom. I dont care where my names appear, infact, I am not bother if it does not appear in the memberlist at all. You did not answer my question - why is it so necessary to have the list in order? why must we put our names at the bottom? is there a written rule that state such a thing or was it simply just someone's (dont want to mention any names, but it is plainly obivious) way of showing who is in charge?
Thank you for the pointer to rename the categories, are you saying you do not know how to rename them or you simply do not want to rename? please answer the question directly instead of beating around the bush. Okkar 00:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
I have never vandalized an article. I edit primarily for accuracy, spelling and grammar. Okkar, if your edits were better written, I would not feel the need to edit them. Please improve your editing skills instead of falsely accusing others of vandalism. In addition, your continual accusations of bad motives are tiresome and very predictable. Please cut them out too.SimonBillenness 23:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
If you stop insisting to include NLD flag in our country's article, then I would not have to accuse any of you of anything. Simon, please remember Wikipedia is not USCB's billboard. I know you are all working for the good of my country, but please dont desecrate our country's article in the process. Sometimes you have to consider about the impact of your action. Like you, many democracy activists are inconsiderate and insensitive, as long as they achieve their ultimate goal of abusing the military regime, they dont care who or what they hurt in the process. This kind of neglegence will have long last effect on the new generation in years to come. I dont agree with most of what you guys are doing, but I tried to turn blind eye to it all, but keep including opposition party flag in the country's article is a bit OTT, it's not like NLD doesnt have it's own article. As for my edits, they are neutral and accurate, you are only reverting most of them because it doesnt support your's, USCB and NCGUB's view. As for spelling mistake, English is not my first language, and Wikipedia editor doesnt have a spell checker, but i can write 100 times better than Sein Win and other NCGUB ministers! so if you want to nitpick about spelling and grammar, I suggest you start with them before using that excuse on me. Simon, it is quite clear what your motives are, especially when everyone know your position in USCB. My suggestion to you would be to keep the politics out of wikipedia and please have some respect for our country. You are abusing our country's article simply to promote NCGUB and NLD, that is wrong and you know it is wrong, everyone know that it is wrong, yet no one would speak up because they are afraid being labelled as working for the regime and being ganged up like now. Okkar 00:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a venue where I practice politics since there are many more places where my actions are more productive. In Wikipedia, I strive to be a good editor with a NPOV. Assuming good faith, I can only conclude that you are probably not aware of the biased nature of some of your contributions. I will continue to edit Wikipedia for accuracy, neutrality, and good writing. If you edit to your usual standard, I will need to edit your contributions on that basis. (You should also note that I edit other's contributions that are favorable to Burma's democracy movement for the exact same reasons.) You are wrong in your assessment of my motives and my edits but I'm not going to have a political argument with you, or anyone else, in these pages.SimonBillenness 01:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
If that is to be true, why do you insist upon putting NLD flag in Myanmar article? can you show me which other country article have opposition flag in the article? If you truly strive to be a good editor with a NPOV, why did you insist upon paddling NLD and NCGUB propagandas in the article instead of being neurtal and unbiased. The fact that you work for USCB and your posting betray all the claims you are making here about being a good editor with NPOV. I am not making assessment of your motives, but it is plain to see what you are trying to achieve through wikipedia. "If you edit to your usual standard, I will need to edit your contributions on that basis." <== is that a threat? Okkar 15:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
I've explained several times why I consider the inclusion of the NLD flag/emblem to be appropriate. You are going to have to learn how to agree to differ. Once again I edit your submissions (and anyone else's submissions) where I find misspellings, bad grammar, vandalism, bias, or inaccurate statements. Okkar, please provide examples of where you claim I've exhibited bias in my edits. SimonBillenness 04:49, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Member placement on list

Upon Okkar's insistence to remove Chris from the head of the list, and thus end the chronological system of adding users to the Members list, we will have a vote on which system is preferred:

  • Chronological - in which users add their names by date of joining
  • Alphabetical - in which users' names are alphabetically listed
  • None of the above - please explain which systematic method you want.

[edit] Votes

  • Support Alphabetical. Is easier to maintain and keep track of than chronological or random order. --Hintha 22:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
It's a member list, just a list of name - whats there to maintain? do we get membership discount in Walmart or something? Okkar 23:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
  • support alphabetical, and thanks for codifying this, Hintha! Chris 22:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
Hintha may as well be your sockpuppet! I already know this gang mentality "back me up dude, nudge nudge, wink wink", for some reason Chris wants vanity and popularity from this project...and Hintha is going along with it just to keep him sweet..awwww, what a pair!... :-) Okkar 23:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
The reason I support and encourage Hintha and Simon and Andrew, as well as new members like Kaung Myat and other productive, positive members of the project, as well as non-members Kanbawsa and Wagaung, are that one can actually work with them. There have been times each of us has had to say "you shouldn't make this edit because..." or "this would be better..." and there are no hard feelings, that is how a community works. There's no nudging, no winking, I never heard of Simon until he joined, that is your paranoia at work, Okkar. You continually work to sow strife and work outside that community, and I am inclined not to be supportive of any of your ideas until you can work with the community like every other member of this project already does. I am not going to banter with you, you waste too much of my time as it is. Chris 06:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
In other words, "Dont stand up to me, Do as I tell you and I'll support you", sorry dude, I aint a sheep! I dont need your support or blessing to be in this project. You do not own this project. As long as you use this project to make a name for yourself, I will make sure that it doesnt happen. Community works means working together, not bullying and "newbie" biting with your little poesse. You got sore feelings towards me because I stand up to you, you went out of your way to get me block simply to make an example, you failed miserably and instead you were giving warning for "newbie" biting. Productivity of a member is not based on how well he gets along with you or how he follows you, it is based on how he contributed to the articles, the project and wikipedia. Getting along with you or following your orders are not a measure for "Productivity"!! As long as your NPOV guidelines and politically biased views exist, I will work outside that little poesse you described as community, simply because I dont want my contribution tainted by political agendas. As for you claiming you only met Simon when he joined this group, it was you who actually invited him to join this goup on 12th of Jan after mediation request for the project was filed, you can see that evidently on his talk pages, so please stop with the lies and "Holier than thou" speech - you are not fooling anyone. Okkar 08:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
  • NO SYSTEM, it doesnt really matter in what order the names appears, what matter is the contributions to the project. People should have freedom to put their name in memberlist without stupid restrictions. We dont want to nanny the new members - do this, dont do that, put your name at the bottom, dont change without my permission, ask my friend he'll back me up, bla bla,. Thats bullying and gang mentality and it has no place in this project. Okkar 22:55, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
What has no place in this Wikiproject is your incessant whining and bickering to change little things that do not benefit Wikipedia as a whole; it is your unfounded paranoia that Chris is trying to propagate himself as the "leader" that you continue to make meaningless attempts to reform this Wikiproject. By your mentality, all those times you placed your name on top of the list, you did so to "suit your vanity" (your words, not mine). --Hintha 02:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Sorry if truth bruised your ego! Why are you jumping up and down complaining for Chris? can he not do this himself? Neither you nor Chris are happy about me being in the project, you both see me as a threat to your little playground. Ever since I first joined, you both have been very territorial and hostile towards me. Chris even went to a degree to have me block (not to mention that he got his wrist slapped for newbie biting). It is the mentality of you guys that what you set up cannot and should not be changed simply because you see this project and wikipedia as your own, but you should remember Wikipedia is not your own, and neither you nor Chris own this Project. You dont want any changes to the project, yet neither your nor chris has made any real effort to make this project neutral in the slightest apart from claiming to be NPOV every time you got questioned for your motives. Evidently, Chris even ran and invited SimonBillennes of USCB in an apperent attempt to bolster his support base and thwart any dissident who might stand up to his one sided support for opposition groups. At the sametime, you both turned blind eye on Simon turning Myanmar into propaganda page for NLD and NCGUB, no obivious attempt were made to contain him or warn him not to include opposition flag in the country's article even though no other country articles have flag of opposition parties. You can claim to be neutral as much as you want, your actions and inactions betrays your claim very clearly. It is pointless to ask people to join this project, if you only want members who support your political views and who would be happy to follow you and chris as subordonates. You may as well rename this project to WikiProject USCB/NCGUB, at least that would stop everyone from having to beat the admission out of you guys. If you want everyone to truly participate and contribute to this project, the first thing you all should be doing is stop with this gang attitude, vote rigging and bullying. It seems you all vote to support your buddies instead of voting for project on the ground of neutrality. It is such a shame to see this kind of mentality and attitude from those who claims to represent democractic values.
By the way, how come you have not reverted Simon's edit for member list? The voting has yet to be finished! You see, this is the perfect proof of "gang" mentality I have been talking about. If it suits you and chris, you wear it, if it doesnt, you'd make a big fuss about it. point proven! Okkar 02:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps I didn't because his edits were not targeted towards specific individuals and done to antagonize others (supposedly so by placing them on the bottom of the list), which you have done again and again, based on your comments and edits. --Hintha 02:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Why dont you just say the real reason? because he is Director of USCB and you are afraid to disappoint USCB and NCGUB leadership. It is plain, simple and blatently obivious. Okkar 08:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Alphabetical. It's the simplest. That way we can spend our time actually editing instead of pointlessly rearranging a list of names.SimonBillenness 00:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I agree, alphabetical, and then let's start doing the project and stop arguing.QuizzicalBee 05:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I will not vote. This is a waste of time. Andrew Dalby 13:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
This has reached the point of insanity. I'm leaving this project. —Preceding unsigned comment added by QuizzicalBee (talk • contribs)

[edit] Proposal to close voting

It's time to close this up, no one has voted for days. So that anyone who still wants to vote has a chance, I vote that we close voting 24 hours from now (02:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)), that is sufficient time. Then we can put our energies to more important things. Chris 02:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Since the voting has now closed and the voters favored an alphabetical list, I'll change the members' list to that effect. SimonBillenness 21:30, 27 February 2007 (UTC)