User talk:AndrewW2

Centralized discussion/Macedonia
I reverted your edits on the Macedonia discussion pages once more.

First, you have no edits to this project besides the ones you made to those discussion pages. This in and of itself is not enough for your edits to be reverted. However, your opinions did not give a solid basis in Wikipedia policy for your position, nor did they simply agree with the reasons given for each proposal. Your comments stated, essentially, that you think that Wikipedia should follow the conventions of the United Nations and other international organizations.

Wikipedia does not necessarily use the conventions of the UN or any other entity in making its determinations of what to call an entity whose name is contested. Wikipedia uses whatever term is used most often in common English speech, as evidenced by references in reliable third-party sources such as the news media and scholarly work. Often, this turns out to be the name used by most international and national governments and organizations, but if there is a discrepancy in usage, Wikipedia will not override demonstrated common English usage.

If necessary, disambiguation will be used to distinguish between similar terms, but if disambiguation is used, the simplest logical designation that provides sufficient distinction will be used.

However, the above is not the main reason I reverted your edits. The primary reason I did so is because, in your opinions, you copy/pasted almost identical comments to each page. This shows very clearly that: Neither of these are helpful. If you wish to leave a strictly policy-based, well-thought out opinion, you are welcome do so.
 * 1) You did not look at any of the relevant policies or discussion surrounding this issue
 * 2) You are not here to discuss this issue rationally. Rather, you only wish to push your particular point of view.

If you choose to comment, do not simply re-instate your previous comments. If you do, I may take further action rather than simply leaving you another note. J.delanoy gabs adds 23:58, 2 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Stop trying to impose your political opinions on others. I am perfectly entitled to edit any page I wish and express any opinion I want. The fact that I endorsed the UN position on all pages does not give you the right to remove it, especially when that position was deliberately left out of the rationales. The common English usage of the term Macedonia is to refer to the ancient Greek kingdom and the present Greek province which is its historical and geographical continuation. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Macedonia http://www.yourdictionary.com/Macedonia http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Macedonia http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Macedonia


 * The FYROM has nothing to do either historically or geographically with Macedonia, and is not its continuation but an artificial state created by General Tito in 1944 from Vardarska Banovinia and is subject to an international dispute over its name. Not one single international organisation, university or historian recognises FYROM by the name Macedonia and they never will, and this includes the United Nations, the European Union, FIFA, UEFA, the IOC and NATO. http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/refpages/search.aspx?q=Macedonia


 * You and Wikipedia have no credibility whatsoever. You should be banned from editing and banned from holding any position as moderator.--AndrewW2 (talk) 00:10, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is a private website. You are not entitled to anything, and neither am I. The Wikimedia Foundation, which owns Wikipedia, has delegated all authority for making decisions relating to all behavioral and editorial policies. Specifically relevant to this, is the Wikipedia Arbitration Committee, who has appointed me and two other administrators to oversee this discussion. They have also given us full authority to oversee this discussion.
 * So I do have the right to remove your comments.
 * Also, since the administrator who blocked you did not let you know, if you wish to appeal your block from editing, read WP:GAB, and then use . J.delanoy gabs adds  00:56, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Your response just proves my point that Wikipedia is a complete and utter joke and has been hijacked to promote the political views of FYROM and prevent the views of everyone else including academics and members of international organisations who support the position of Greece which represents the majority view from being heard. Stalin, Tito and Mow couldn't have done a better job in political censorship and spreading biased propaganda.--AndrewW2 (talk) 07:22, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
 * His name is spelt "Mao". Heimstern Läufer (talk) 11:48, 3 July 2009 (UTC)