User talk:PerEdman

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:01, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

?! Must have missed a spot. PerEdman (talk) 11:03, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Signature

Hey, I stumbled upon your user page and just wanted to let you know that you can customize your signature in "my preferences" on the top of your screen. Enjoy! Kotiwalo (talk) 17:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I know, I just haven't wanted to. :) Thanks for the tip though, I'm off to color my signature red. / Per Edman 17:57, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Nicely done =) Kotiwalo (talk) 17:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

FG repository

I've started a repository of underused and potentially useful links for use in the Falun Gong articles. Please feel free to paste links there with a description of what they refer to, for easy relocation. Ohconfucius (talk) 04:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

(its's here: User:Ohconfucius/FG repository‎ /Seb az86556 (talk) 05:17, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

That'll be really useful, great! / PerEdman 05:38, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Seb az86556 (talk) 01:51, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the cookie. I didn't merge those two though, that was Ohconfucius. I merged the Human Rights Torch Relay into the Coalition to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong. :) / PerEdman 05:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Everyone got a cookie :) Seb az86556 (talk) 05:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

It still tastes just as sweet. :) / PerEdman 05:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

response

the BRD cycle states that then a bold edit is reverted it is to be discussed. It was Simonm223's bold change of "practitioners" to "worshippers" (which is a misnomer anyway, because that would effectively mean these people were worshipping Falun Gong, the practice itself) that was reverted. Anyway, as he correctly identified, this is a matter of standards in how practitioners of Falun Gong are to be referred to on wikipedia. There was no precedent for "worshipper." It saddens me, really, that so much of the time discussion on these pages becomes "he's wrong and I'm right" or something of the like.--Asdfg12345 16:59, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Someone pointed out that "worshipper" could mean that practitioners worship Li Hongzhi, but that's really beside the point. I still want the two of you to discuss what you've been reverting for each other instead of continuing the edit war which will just get the two of you banned for disrupting a probationary article. The entire SUBJECT of Falun Gong is under probation. / PerEdman 18:30, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for being such a levelheaded standup person, your sensible approach makes discussing on the Falun Gong pages enjoyable. ·Maunus·ƛ· 18:02, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

If I had thought of it first, I would have thanked you for the same. But thank you. :) I don't know why I care about Falun Gong, I certainly have no stake in it or against it, but it's... it's the first real topic I got involved with on wikipedia and that, like the first attraction, is special. / PerEdman 19:36, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

The Matrix

When the main FG article becomes editable again, be ready for the deluge of FalunGongDisciple look-a-likes. You can be "the one." Theleike (talk) 17:27, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

You mean I can pull them into my own body and absorb their essences, and also stop bullets in flight? No wait, I know - "when the time comes", I won't have to. :D / PerEdman 22:03, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll be ready. I'll be the tank that draws firepower while skilled editors with a lower WPM counts deal with the actual work. / PerEdman 22:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Do you think it would be relevant to file a request for review of the organ harvest to ArbCom to arrive at a decision? I do feel we're at an impasse.·Maunus·ƛ· 13:36, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Honestly, I think we have enough to go ahead with the merge already despite HappyInGeneral, Dilip rajeev and Asdfg12345 as they haven't added any new relevant arguments against the merge. They've repeated themselves and Asdfg12345 has posted and reposted links to articles that all refer back to Kilgour & Matas - nothing new. Since there are no good arguments AGAINST, what would a review result in except more time spent not actually being bold and improving Wikipedia.

Could we just call in one or two reviewers to give their outside opinion? But if we do, we don't we already respect the reviews made by you, Maunus, Vassanya our mediator and John Carter, all brand-new (to the subject) editors who believe the articles should be merged. How many MORE outside editors need to become involved before we can say "You know what, these articles should have been merged months ago"? / PerEdman 16:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I may be a new editor but I don't feel uninvolved - not because I have any opinion for or against FLG but because I have praticipated in the discussions and given arguments and opinions - I feel it would be like closing an AFD I'd voted in. I would clearly suggest that Arbenforcement is the way to go since the articles are on probation. I think that it is the only way to avoid the matter being stalled forever. Also although I know there is precedent I cannot say that I am 100% confident that our intepretation of WP:N being trumped by UNDUE will stand up in court, I would like an arbitrarots word for that.·Maunus·ƛ· 16:10, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

By uninvolved I meant that you recently came to the Falun Gong pages. I suppose Arb enforcement would result in a decision that would meet with less resistance than if we act on the current situation. OK. / PerEdman 16:31, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

My point exactly - I don't know how to file a request for Arb-review, do you?·Maunus·ƛ· 16:35, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Not by heart, but I could swear I saw it just this week... / PerEdman 16:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

What I had seen was the peer-review process for articles of Good status. For this specific issue, because WP:UNDUE is a part of WP:NPOV I believe a visit to the NPOV noticeboard would be the best course of action. Sadly it seems out mediator Vassyana has gone inactive[1]. I have put the question up on the noticeboard now, see here: Organ harvesting in China: Weight given to Falun Gong victims. / PerEdman 17:32, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Undue vs Notability

I think this could be an ideological conflict. I prefer merging over splitting or deleting, so I say merge. They're clearly the same issue with K&M being the one big attention given to the suffering of Falun Gong practitioners at the hands of organ harvesters. Others may believe that every little subject deserves its own article, perhaps even a new gategory for "groups the Chinese government has harvested organs from", others may think the content can just be deleted and let the general "organ harvesting in China" be the only article on the subject. Me, I think the information deserves to be on Wikipedia, but I do not believe in splitting each subject into small pieces, so I go with the mergist approach. / PerEdman 16:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Dilip rajeev enforcement case

Kindly note that an Enforcement case has just been filed against Dilip rajeev here. You might like to comment. Please note that this is a permalink; any commenting should be done only after clicking on the 'Project page' tab. Ohconfucius (talk) 03:03, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Peer review

I found your name on a list of users willing to copy edit articles. I would appreciate it if you could comment on the one I wrote about Napoleon and Tabitha D'umo. It is currently listed for peer review here. This article is short, only two pages long not including references, ext links, templates/categories. If you accept my invitation it shouldn't take up too much of your time. // Gbern3 (talk) 19:16, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Very well. I'll edit the article directly throughout the day, please see edit comments for details.  / Per Edman 07:49, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

That was a quick response. Thank you. Good eye on Apart vs. A part; I learned something new about grammar. // Gbern3 (talk)

I've edited the Napoleon and Tabitha D'umo article a lot since the last time you copy edited it. I think it's in need of a refresher. Would you mind reviewing it again? I would appreciate it. Let me know whether you want to or not because if you don't want to or don't have the time, I'll ask another editor. // Gbern3 (talk) 17:52, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind; I just saw that you haven't been on since February. I'll ask another editor. // Gbern3 (talk) 17:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

List of tallest residential buildings in the world

I have nominated this article for Feature list, "LIST OF TALLEST RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN THE WORLD" i need your help regarding, gramatical mistakes,and copy editing my purpose is to make this article perfect or close to perfection, so that it would for sure become a feature list.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 12:45, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The article of tallest residential buildings in the world doesnt passed this time for FL Status, but i am still working on it and will resubmit after making some improvements and corrections.I need your help regarding adding the alttext to the images in this article, as English is not my first language can you add it ? as i dont know how to elaborate the images and write its alttext so that it explains how the building looks like, you can see its example to the vary first image of this article. regards.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 12:20, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

New Arbitration Enforcement case: Dilip rajeev

Kindly note the WP:AE case above has just been filed. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 05:39, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Logos Page Peer Review

Hello PerEdman:

I am seeking a few active volunteers to assist with a peer review of the logos page and I am hoping that you will contribute. Please see Wikipedia:Peer_review/Logos/archive1 for details on this request.

Thanks!

Edunoramus (talk) 01:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Please comment at Ya Kun Kaya Toast's ongoing peer review!

Since you have listed yourself as a peer review volunteer interested in copyediting articles, would you like to support the quest to counter systemic bias on Wikipedia by giving a thorough review of the short, but interesting, article about Ya Kun Kaya Toast, a multinational kaya toast chain and Singaporean cultural icon? Thanks! 谢谢！Terima kasih! நன்றி! --J.L.W.S. The Special One (talk) 10:09, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Followup RFC to WP:RFC/AAT now in community feedback phase

Hello. As a participant in Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abortion article titles, you may wish to register an opinion on its followup RFC, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Abortion advocacy movement coverage, which is now in its community feedback phase. Please note that WP:RFC/AAMC is not simply a repeat of WP:RFC/AAT, and is attempting to achieve better results by asking a more narrowly-focused, policy-based question of the community. Assumptions based on the previous RFC should be discarded before participation, particularly the assumption that Wikipedia has or inherently needs to have articles covering generalized perspective on each side of abortion advocacy, and that what we are trying to do is come up with labels for that. Thanks! —chaos5023 20:31, 24 October 2012 (UTC)