User talk:Jimmacintosh100

Welcome!

Hello, Jimmacintosh100, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Bility (talk) 21:19, 28 April 2011 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard - a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

article you want to work on

I saw your post at the help desk. I'm new here myself so someone else may give better advice, but it's ok to put notes or rough drafts on pages in your user space as well as bringing things up on the talk page. That way you can do some writing or some organizing of your thoughts outside of the actual article. (Just let people on the talk page know to take a look at it.) If you want a new user page to use for notes just click on this link to create the new page. Then you just need to put a note or sign at the top of the page saying that it's not an official article. There's some standardized signs (called templates) already made to do this. Here's one template and here's another template that you could use. Cloveapple (talk) 19:48, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Perseverance

Glad to see you're persevering in your editing of confidence-building measures. With the war crimes in the Tigray War (very likely a genocide) and now federal forces' war crimes against the Amharas, the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the new cycle of war crimes and very likely crimes against humanity in and around the Israeli-occupied territories, the knowledge that you've gained is incredibly important, despite those social media that promote hate speech and the mainstream media considering CBMs as off-topic.

If you look through User:Boud/Draft:WikiProject Peace and check the editing histories and styles of people who have said they're interested, you might find someone who can help you get through the tricky issue of how to present your own research without doing self-promotion. I won't choose any names - you can judge for yourself based on the different people's public editing histories.

You can also see at User:Boud/Draft:WikiProject Peace a big list of related articles that you might wish to contribute to, such as 1986 Stockholm Document, which is apparently extremely important, but is currently a "red" article (not created yet). We're clearly much below the threshold of an active group of users on the topic. Peace doesn't grab media headlines and social media interest like war and war crimes do. Boud (talk) 16:12, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

As noted earlier, I have found making changes/providing additions to the entry quite challenging, due to the fact that I was involved in developing the literature in the first place. The entry is satisfactory at this stage, largely due to someone else vouching for the credibility of the research by noting it was presented to the UN by Canada. However, if I could just wave a wand, I would jettison the entries on "mathematical model," "Embassies," and "validity of model in the internet era." I am aware, however, that that would further highlight my own work at the expense of others.

Not entirely clear what changes were introduced on 17 October 2023, other than removal of "fullest expression." Perhaps a better way to phrase the underlying thought would be "most comprehensive articulation." The point was that the various CSCE/OSCE "documents" are the most comprehensive collections of actual CSBMs. CSBMs are central to them.

On a more general note, I remain uncertain even today about whether or not the CSBM/CSCE experience was largely idiosyncratic to a specific time, place and history revolving around the dissolution of the Soviet Union. There may not be a lot of general insight to derive from that bit of history. It was grappling with this question that motivated the exploration of the "process approach" and the identification of the potential relevance of a CSBM epistemic community. I kept asking myself why and how using CSBMs could make a constructive difference?

In any event, there does not appear to have been much interest in confidence building (theoretically or practically) since the end of the 1990s. Jimmacintosh100 (talk) 18:32, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Your mention of the Stockholm Document encouraged me to amend the Cold War history mention of CSCE/OSCE CSBM efforts to include all major Documents. Not sure at this stage that I want to do more than that. I am an old fart now and really should leave this to newer generations of analysts. Jimmacintosh100 (talk) 16:21, 19 October 2023 (UTC)