User talk:K.e.coffman/Archive/2023/February

Archives

Arbitration case notification[edit]

You are involved in a recently filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Holocaust in Poland and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. As threaded discussion is not permitted on most arbitration pages, please ensure that you make all comments in your own section only. Additionally, the guide to arbitration and the Arbitration Committee's procedures may be of use.

Thanks, GeneralNotability (talk) 20:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Genocide Denial & Support[edit]

Hello K.e.coffman. My mum linked me to the WIRED article, and to say I was impressed is an understatement. You have really entered the Wikipedia ecosystem and know what you are doing; it is beyond impressive!

I say this, and I post this on your talk page, because I have been facing significant difficulties trying to write and edit articles that honour realities when it comes to Indigenous communities as represented on here. The latest difficulty I am having is on the Nova Scotia page (mentioning it not to incite a brigade or directly ask for assistance there, but to use it to illustrate my point). There, as well as similar pages, I have been dealing with editors who consistently erase Indigenous histories and contemporary realities, even when I am citing modern scholars and modern governments.

In short, using the Nova Scotia example, the provincial, federal, and Mi'kmaw governments all affirm that Nova Scotia overlaps much of Mi'kma'ki. I say this because there is consistent effort to "euro-wash" the history and modern situations, using old justifications in the "might makes right" realm (aka "they lost, get over it") or "they are only [tiny]% of the population with no economic force, therefore treaties and their laws don't matter" etc.

There is, also and importantly, consistent pushback against using the term "genocide," despite Canadian commissions and our Prime Minister affirming that that indeed is the proper label. As you know, denial is step ten.

In many ways, I feel overwhelmed and defeated. The constant edit-wars and the vitriol I see, combined with my inexperience with the Wikipedia ecosystem, makes me want to give up.

Perhaps how I write, how I edit, and how I debate is unhelpful. It seems for sure I am doing something wrong.

I come here with a fool's hope that you could provide some wise counsel. Danachos (talk) 15:14, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Danachos: thank you for the kind words. The issue you describe seems difficult, especially considering that it's seems to be wrapped up in modern-day Canadian politics. I scanned: Talk:Nova_Scotia#Introduction_&_History_sections, and I indeed find some of the language you cite there to be problematic and dismissive, i.e. an "Indian tribe" (vs a First Nations people) that hasn't "built a railway or a university", so its role in the history of the province is allegedly insignificant, etc.

I've previously dealt with issues of entrenched local consensus, and what was helpful was to engage the outside community. That said, it was still quite difficult and protracted; compare to the 6-month's long discussion in 12 parts: Notability in Knight's Cross Holder Articles, and so on. There's also a matter of knowing the ins and outs of Wikipedia policies, and the issues can seem daunting. What I can suggest is this: saying that it's an issue of "genocide denial and support", as you did in this topic header, can put editors you interact with on the defensive, so you may want to moderate your own use of language, too. I wish you good luck and incremental success; it takes time to address these issues. --K.e.coffman (talk) 00:47, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and wow! Thank you!

You are absolutely correct about my language use. Learning to modulate my emotions when navigating these topics is an ongoing journey for me, and the use of such charged terms, you are correct, do put people on the defensive. Looking at my recent talk page addition there, I should heed your counsel and figure out a way to stick with sourced truth without getting people's heckles up. It is just frustrating, but I cannot let that frustration allow problematic framing to win out.

In the local, outside community here, I have taken steps to start the process of engagement. Hopefully, with outside support, these incremental steps can begin.

I guess my last(?) question to you is this: Have you dealt with such high emotions in your edits? Do you look back on your own earlier language use and feel ashamed or embarrassed? If so, how do you deal with it? Do you go back and edit, just simply forge ahead with those lessons, or something else? Danachos (talk) 22:28, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February stories[edit]

Thank you for improving articles in February! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:15, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My story on 24 February is about Artemy Vedel (TFA by Amitchell235), and I made a suggestion for more peace, - what do you think? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:22, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

today: two women whose birthday we celebrate today, 99 and 90! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:47, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]