[WikiEN-l] Re: I am very concerned by the arbcomm decision againstjguk

Sun Jun 19 15:29:09 UTC 2005

>From: Jon <thagudearbh at yahoo.co.uk>
>
>First all I (and others) were doing was reverting articles back to the 
>state they were in before
>SouthernComfort got to them (except for one mistake when I inadvertently 
>changed it on
>[[Elamite Empire]]).

That describes your more recent actions on a relatively narrow set of 
articles.  It does not describe your more lengthy campaign against BCE/CE 
notation, including in the MOS and Common Era articles themselves.

>I should, as an aside, mention that I have in arguments and edit summaries 
>to SouthernComfort
>referred to a "preferred notation". The context of that was not to misquote 
>WP policy (which all
>participants are quite aware of), but to make the point that in practice 
>almost all WP articles where there is a choice use BC/AD notation and that 
>the overwhelming majority of English-writers in the
>world (90%+) choose BC/AD notation. It is in that sense that it is 
>"preferred", and in that sense
>that I was using "preferred".

The term for what you are describing is "more common", not "preferred".

>I appreciate Fred would not, on a quick and possibly
>non-chronological, readthrough would not have picked up that context, but 
>that's what it was.
>It's important ans Fred is saying that an important aspect in this is that 
>I was arguing my
>preference was WP policy - let me assure everyone, that was not the case. 
>Bearing this in mind
>does Fred accept that his comment is no longer appropriate (or at least, 
>should not in particular
>be directed against me)?

You made it clear the you, personally, "preferred" this usage, and attempted 
to enforce it on dozens of articles over a period of 8 months.  I find your 
current explanation of "preferred" to be difficult to reconcile with your 
actions.

Jay.