Talk:The Holocaust/Sandbox

Sandbox for The Holocaust article's disputed content.

Disputed edits[edit]

Discussion of the old diff and edits has been scrapped. Starting from scratch, all major changes related to that diff need to be proposed and agreed upon. Silence of the disputing editors is not to be taken for agreement or consensus.

Consensus[edit]

But actually the only "disputing editor" is SV, and he/she flatly refuses to participate. Crum (supported by SV) was the one who belived in the imprtance of the Normandy stuff for whatever reason, and you can see the dispute on this on the main page, with the importance of supposed of the battle of Normandy vastly voted off as "not directly connected" even without my participation (actually - I say not connected at all, besides both being parts of the WWII). --HanzoHattori 08:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you propose as a next step? – Dreadstar † 16:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What now? I guess declare consensus archived (by walkover, as predicted). --HanzoHattori 13:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I asked what you would propose as next step, not to 'declare consensus'. I oppose reverting back to the diff and so does SlimVirgin. There is no consensus, do not start an edit war again. – Dreadstar † 16:37, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

New changes[edit]

[1] I may discuss anything if needed. --HanzoHattori 15:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Change made without consensus has been reverted and the article protected. – Dreadstar † 19:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, everyone will TOTALLY discuss. I see this already. Also, man, it's http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Holocaust&diff=148983308&oldid=148957353 - can't you even get it right? Andwhy this "scrapping"? So much about discussing with you! Do you want me to write AGAIN if needed? Heck no! I write once. (Not that anyone will come.) --HanzoHattori 14:19, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did my best to present the material for discussion and to get consensus for your proposed changes. I'm sorry that it failed. But this is no reason for you to 'declare consensus' and revert back to your disputed version. Perhaps other editors did not participate due to your obvious lack of civility. It certainly puts me off...."can't you even get it right?"... apparently, I cannot. – Dreadstar † 18:26, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted our discussion. There was no other, as the others all IGNORED your efforts (as I predicted). And you want me to say, "good work, let's do this again so you'll delete like before" or something? --HanzoHattori 18:55, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've provided a handy link at the top of this page to an archived page of the old discussion. I'm not looking for a pat on the back, just some civility from you. – Dreadstar † 19:03, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't notice. maybe now. Anyway, what are you going to with it now? Instead of the discussion of my proposals (some of them totally obvious), I've got the discussion where I actually defend the inclusion of the captured Soviet soldiers, mentally disabled Germans, etc. (Which is kind of pointless discussion just for the sake of argument, because I'm convinced something as radical as this has zero chances to change now.) --HanzoHattori 07:51, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend that you focus your efforts on your RfC: Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/HanzoHattori.

– Dreadstar † 18:43, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but no thanks. --HanzoHattori 22:52, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]