Talk:Missing sun myth

click this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Missing_Sun_myth

this page should be deleted, it seems to be a double.


 * I agree. --AI 00:46, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Concensus was ignored by Dreamguy in his move, he suppressed opposition in the request for move. The reason given in the Vfd was misleading, given these circumstances. --AI 00:46, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 * 1) Look at the article's original talk page (Talk:Missing Sun myth), there was a general concensus that S should be capitalized because it is believed by the contributors to be a Name. DreamGuy was the only one who insisted that the s should not be capitalized, based on his opinion that the capitalization of S is an error.
 * 2) Instead of conceding to consensus, Dreamguy files a request for move on 29 June.
 * 3) Elvenscout and I opposed the move and posted our votes on July 3, but DreamGuy violated Wikipedia policy and removed our votes on 8 July and wrote in the edit summary: "Removed comments by editors who are just plain wrong and should put comments on the actual talk page".
 * 4) On July 10, 09:50, DreamGuy went ahead and moved the article from Missing Sun myth to Missing sun motif.
 * 5) On July 10, 10:01, DreamGuy deleted the Request for move and wrote in the edit summary: "removed request, as it is no longer needed since article name was changed to remove other error as well"
 * 6) On 12 July, Ril files a VfD on Missing Sun myth. The reason given: "Article is a copy+paste duplicate of Missing sun motif, created by a user to suit their side of an edit war."

User:AI ignores the fact that the original move was simply for capitalization purposes and needed to file a move request because the original editor had already screwed things up by making what should have been the real name into a redirect, making the standard move impossible. After a few days I noticed that the name of the article as did not match other articles of its type and was inaccurate because the article was not talking about a myth but a theme in myths, so the title was changed to "motif" instead. The other editors who looked at the VfD agree to this, so AI's complaints are mimsplaced.... and tiresome. I had thought that all the editors involved in reverting the article due to a personal conflict with me had given up now that their complaints had been aired to others and ignored as petty and pointless. DreamGuy 14:39, July 17, 2005 (UTC)