User talk:11 west

Welcome!
Hello, 11 west, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:


 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! El_C 01:20, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

"Seeking arbitration"
Arbitration is the last stage of Wikipedia's dispute resolution process. I assure you that it will not be accepted at such an early stage. Anyway, one thing to keep in mind when it comes to sourced content in articles is that it needs to adhere to a notion of due weight — that is, fairly represent the scholarly and mainstream consensus. As for reaching consensus among editors in Wikipedia articles: the onus is actually on the editor who wishes to include the edit to go to the article talk page toward that end, whenever their edit is challenged. Thanks and good luck. El_C 01:20, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, apologies I didn't see this message earlier (still struggling with notifications and the editing system) Thank you, I understand. It has become apparent to me, that the user in question jtfolden is steering the article towards a personal view he has been widely circulating on the internet. Please see my discussion below 11 west (talk) 08:38, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

"Punishable offense"
You're edit-warring for your preferred construction. Please stop, and please stop casting aspersions against other editors. Statements like "I expect you will be banned" have no place on the talkpage. Banham's account is a bit more nuanced than you're presenting - the term's derivation has roots in French, Swedish and English terminology. Banham certainly popularized the term, but that's not the same as originating it. You need independent sources that specifically credit Banham with originating the term, not quotes from Banham, and they need to stand up to sourcing that posits other origins. In these cases, there's rarely a clear-cut consensus,and the article doesn't have to come down unequivocally on one side or another. Above all, stop treating the article as a battleground, and other editors as opponents to be defeated.  Acroterion   (talk)   02:43, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * @Acroterion. Thank you for your comments. I am a bit upset that I am the only one that is chasticed in the main section, but that's ok. Please know that jtfolden's personal goal is to prove this phrase correct "the first brutalist building was made out of brick". It is what he widely circulates on the internet, and he has edited the original article with bias towards that personal theory.


 * My goal is to mention all of Banham's account, supported by reputably scholarly evidence and books/publications as sources rather than internet articles and sensational sources. I'd like to also ask you to understand this, step in, and be equivocal. Please note that jtfolden's reverse edit corrects ALL of my changes in the article, including for example errors such as Villa Goths date built 1949 (it is 1950). He can't continue undoing everything that I am doing without reading the changes closely and arguing the points as I obviously do in the talk page. Please be fair 11 west (talk) 08:14, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * It is you that is personalizing the discussion in a disruptive manner. Stop that. Please take that as a conduct warning from an administrator.  Acroterion   (talk)   13:57, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * 11 west, please do not speak for or twist my intentions. Many editors have contributed to the Brutalist page in good faith. I find it troubling that I find you speaking of me in a derogatory manner both here and on Facebook.


 * Banham's essay and book are not the last word on the origination of Brutalism. Indeed a number of the architects of the era disagreed with his opinions.


 * Do I have an opinion of my own? Yes, I do, and it's based on the citations available. I have asked if you can produce citations referencing Brutalism prior to Banham and the Smithsons that support your conjecture and you simply have not provided them. I'd be happy to read them if you can find them.


 * Also, note, I did not entirely remove your contribution in my most recent edit, I preserved the relevant quote (which I corrected based on the actual book itself) and moved it to a more appropriate spot given it was purely Banham's opinion. Jtfolden (talk) 09:36, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * @jtfolden The internet doesn't lie, and it wouldn't be prudent to mention Facebook, there are some equally inflammatory remarks there directed to me too. But I don't wish to continue with the personal issue. We hardly know each other, and its unfair to assume that we're anything but people with a deep interest in architecture, which explains why such passions arise. I have no personal issue with you or your views (or anyone's for that matter), and I hope we can continue this discourse in a more amicable tone. There's a lot of work and research to be done.


 * To aid us in the appropriate revision of the article, I have created sub-sections of the history page. I trust that this will aid everyone with chronology and terminology, and hopefully be the basis for a more gradual approach to revision.11 west (talk) 10:21, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I appreciate the moderated tone of the comments above. I am not sympathetic to the importation of off-wiki disputes or arguments citing Facebook communications. As for "the Internet doesn't lie" ... are you serious? Please reset the discussion as one between colleagues who disagree on a minor point of concept origination and popularization, not between two opponents, one of whom must defeat the other. From the point of view of how Wikipedia operates, statements concerning the origins of the term must be supported by recognized scholarship from sources other than Banham himself.  Acroterion   (talk)   14:04, 4 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I've left some comments on how to resolve the dispute on the article's talkpage. While I'm an architect myself, and have some Banham on my bookshelf, I have no profound views on the topic at hand, and am acting as an administrator with an understanding of the context of the article content to settle down a discussion that has grown more heated and personalized than is acceptable on Wikipedia. If I become involved as a contributor, then I'll leave administrative actions to others.  Acroterion   (talk)   14:53, 4 July 2019 (UTC)