Diskuto:Liancourt-Rokoj

NO ALPHABETICAL ORDER

Alphabetical order is unnecessary in the Esperanto wikipedia, the rules are not incorporated yet. As for the English Wikipedia, even though the rule exists, it is only taken in consideration by the Japanese for the Dokdo article, but is not considered at all in the Zen article (both in the English Wikipedia). Please make things fair, or at least equilibrium. Dankas. Amphitere 14:11, 22. Sep 2007 (UTC)

ALPHABETIICAL ORDER is NPOV. Liancourt-Rokoj is disputed islands. And, Esperanto Wikipedia is international user's gathering. and English wikipedia, too. then we should follow the English wikipedia, the most active and sensitive on this issue. see en:Liancourt Rocks.

--Boldlyman 10:05, 23. Sep 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Boldlyman. Alphabetical order is a most neutralism and reasonable. Why is it unnecessary? I cannot see any reason. Also, What Zen??? I cannot understand what are you talking about.--Aljarreau 16:21, 28. Sep 2007 (UTC)

I am sick of JPOV. As a human being, extreme ethnocentrism is morally wrong. I do not think that Japan, in any reason what so ever, should be considered "more important" than Korea. It is obvious that the Japanese users, or their suporters are "Japan-ifing" East Asia related articles in the English Wikipedia. I do not want those kind of actions to carry over to the Esperanto Wikipedia, the international wikipedia. A good example of "Japan-ism" is shown here:

• en:Zen
• en:Liancourt Rocks

Take a look at the side bars for each of the two articles. The Liancourt Rocks uses the Alphabetical Order Rule (Japan comes before Korea). But, in the article Zen, the Alphabetical Order Rule is not used (Japan comes before China). This proves that the Japanese users are not actually working for NPOV, but for JPOV. I do not want the same mistake to happen in the Esperanto Wikipedia. All I am doing here is to make things truly NPOV. I have no intentions to make any article a POV for anything. Merci. Amphitere

I find it hard to understand your arugment. Let us know how revelant both english ZEN article and this article. Honestly, I don't care what order is used on those article. I suggest that you should go to claim on those article's talk page. Or do you argue that the alphabetical order is Japanese POV, don't you? Please don't be so ridiculous. Alphabet is used Only in Japan? Do you think that the entrance turn of an international game convention like the Olympic games, etc.etc.... is Japanese POV, right? Should be Korea come before Japan in order to NPOV? Why is it NPOV? It seems to carry out the opinion in favor of which just your POV.--Aljarreau 05:35, 9. Okt 2007 (UTC)

Sir, that is not my point. My point is that, if the Japanese users used alphabetical order (to make japan come first) in en:Liancourt Rocks, then they should also use alphabetical order in the en:Zen article. IF ONE ARTICLE USES ALPHABETICAL ORDER, THEN IT IS ONLY CORRECT TO USE ALPHABETICAL ORDER FOR ALL ARTICLES. It is not fair that only alphabetical order is used for the Liancourt Rocks article. If you want NPOV, then make it NPOV, from now on, ALL articles are to be in Alphabetical order when listing. Thank you. Amphitere 18:21, 10. Okt 2007 (UTC)

"IF ONE ARTICLE USES ALPHABETICAL ORDER, THEN IT IS ONLY CORRECT TO USE ALPHABETICAL ORDER FOR ALL ARTICLES"

If you really think so, Fine. You should be claim strongly that it make alphabetical order on the ZEN's talk page, right now.

Supposing you think that the alphabetical order is not NPOV, please assert an alternative plan with the reason for the ability to be convinced.

Don't bring up the other article's discussion. It is not compared cause a situation is difference each other. It seems you do bring up the ZEN case here because of you want to let your opinion pushing. --Aljarreau 13:24, 11. Okt 2007 (UTC)

Ĉu anglalingvanoj venis babili ĉi tien? Petro^@_disk^kont 16:55, 11. Okt 2007 (UTC)

Ili kolere anglalingve disputas ĉu ordigi laŭ aboco aŭ alimaniere. Laŭ Amphitere, la uzo de alfabeta ordigo estas malneŭtrala kaj malbezona pro la vorto "Japanio" antaŭigus "Koreio" kaj ni ne jam laŭalfabetigas ĉiujn artikolojn. La batalo estas konfuziganta al mi, malgraŭ mi denaske parolanta la lingvon! -- Yekrats 18:14, 11. Okt 2007 (UTC)

Mi dankas por via klarigo. Ŝajnas al mi strange, ke ili disputas angle, ĉu aliaj ne povas reagi? Petro^@_disk^kont 18:37, 11. Okt 2007 (UTC)

Administro

Currently the rocks are under control of South Korea (de facto); but this article says they're under Japanese control, am I right? It seems to me this infobox carries defective information.

Haha, oni angle diskutas, ĉu oni rajtas uzi la vorton Orienta maro en tiu ĉi artikolo. Narvalo 20:10, 7. Mar 2009 (UTC)