User talk:Normanby

ccccccccccccccccc

Papua New Guinea
Re your removal of my disambiguation link to the The Future Sound of London single on the Papua New Guinea article: I would like to inform you that the justification you provided, "future sound of london suxx", is in violation of the fundamental Wikipedia principle of neutral point of view (NPOV). The notability of both the music group and the single in particular are attested to by their popularity within the trance music scene. Assuming you acted in good faith, I have for now simply reverted your edit. Please refrain from repeating your action in the future. CounterFX 13:22, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Since you appear to be intent on repeating the reversion in spite of my earlier request not to, I shall be submitting a request for a third opinion. Please do not take this as a denunciation of your effort; in the end, it might be myself who is mistaken on the Wikipedia convention regarding disambiguation links. I am confident that an experienced editor will help us resolve the issue. CounterFX 20:10, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * I have acted fairly and in good faith, and submitted a request for a third opinion as stated. Grouse responded to my request; his confirmation for keeping the disambiguation link may be found at Talk:Papua New Guinea. Yet, even in spite of this, you remain adamant on removing the link. I am including the following excerpt from the official Wikipedia guideline on disambiguation for your convenience.


 * When there is a well known primary meaning for a term or phrase, much more used than any other (this may be indicated by a majority of links in existing articles or by consensus of the editors of those articles that it will be significantly more commonly searched for and read than other meanings), then that topic may be used for the title of the main article, with a disambiguation link at the top. Where there is no such clearly dominant usage there is no primary topic page.


 * As you rightly said, the primary meaning of the term Papua New Guinea is in reference to the nation, and it is precisely for that reason that I did not object to the article retaining its original title. However, the guideline also explicitly allows for the inclusion of a disambiguation link at the top. I am therefore asking you once again to kindly reconsider your position.


 * CounterFX 01:39, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Since you haven't replied to my posts, I am taking the initiative and reverting your edit myself for one last time. Do not remove the disambiguation link again without first discussing it either here or, more appropriately, on the article talk page under the Papua New Guinea (single) section.


 * Your repeated actions could be interpreted as an attempt at a reversion war, and your justifications are in ignorance of the Wikipedia disambiguation guidelines and in violation of the neutral point of view (NPOV) policy. If you persist, I will have to proceed along the dispute resolution process.


 * CounterFX 21:46, 18 February 2007 (UTC)