Jump to content

Talk:The Three Types of Legitimate Rule

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject class rating

[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 13:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge?

[edit]

Yes this page should be merged with the other very similar page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.162.213 (talkcontribs) 10:43, May 17, 2009

Agreed, I'll carry out the merger soon. On the second thought, I am not sure if this is needed - one article is about the concept, other, about a book. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:57, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge indeed. This is not a book but a paper published posthumously; Weber has used his tripartite classification previously.Ael 2 (talk) 17:39, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  checkY Merger complete. Joyous! | Talk 20:15, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A mural in Teotihuacan, Mexico (ca. 200 C.E.) depicting what is believed to be the first attempt by a person to create a Wikipedia contribution emitting a speech scroll from his mouth, symbolizing speech, and a Wikipedia Administrator on the right staring.

At 20:12 (UTC), on the 31st January 2013 a contribution I have made adding a "See also" section with a link to * The three main principles that motivate citizen behaviour according to Montesquieu (1689-1755) has been undone by Arthur Rubin (talk) with the following motivation:

Reverted good faith edits by Maurice Carbonaro (talk): Badly formatted, and the only thing in common is "three" and "basis for rule" — it doesn't seem enough. ...

It looks Point of view to me and a violation to Neutral point of view that editors would normally expect from an Administrator.
Comments are welcome. Thanks.   M aurice   Carbonaro  07:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As usual, you have no idea what what you are saying means in English. Furthermore, I don't see any possible way what I said could possibly represent an NPOV violation. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 08:43, 1 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
As usual, you keep offending me. I understand very well what I am talking about: the article is about the "three legitimate rules" and the hyperlink I have attempted to add in the == See also == section was about the "* The three main principles that motivate citizen behaviour according to Montesquieu (1689-1755). You have rules and motivations. I guess there is some "connection". Anyway I will mark this as a minor edit as you wish. Cheers.   M aurice   Carbonaro  17:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see a connection between "Three types of legitimate rule" and "Three principles that motivate citizen behaviour" other than the number "three" and that they are prinicples. There may be one, but I suspect rule of three is the only appropriate "see also" for either. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:27, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]