|
'''Frank Peterson''' is a [[Germany|German]] music producer.
Airplanes go fly! whee! [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 04:57, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
As a child he taught himself how to play the piano and keyboard, going on to work in a music store. It was here that he met [[Michael Cretu]] and became lead keyboardist for [[Sandra]], appearing prominently on her hit single Maria Magdalena.
==comments moved from [[WP:RFPP]]==
**I would like to point out that the version with the two versions template is the version instantnood prefers, ie, the version which existed before the two pages were moved to a new title. This has been corrected quite some time ago, until Instantnood suddenly comes in and starts to revert them unilaterally and without warning. This resulted in the latest revert war, and instantnood took the opportunity to revert them all the way back to the version he prefered based on the old titles, plus adding a two version tag, an action which obviously endorses a version he prefers. I would therefore question the rational of protecting the two pages at their current versions.--[[User:Huaiwei|Huaiwei]] 12:12, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
***I did not choose a version arbitrarily or according to my preference, but rather, as explained in the edit summaries, I restored to the version before disputes take place, i.e. what was the article intended for when it was created, and what it was like immediately before the disputes. By saying "this has been corrected" [[User:Huaiwei]] is asserting her/his point of view, and attempting to implement her/his point of view while the discussions are in progress. As for the title I would suggest administrators to add a notice informing readers that there is a dispute over the title of the article, in the following suggested format, for instance: <div class=toc align=justify>There is currently a dispute over the title of this article, between <u><font color=navy>list of ''something'' of mainland China</font></u> and <font color=navy><u>list of ''something'' of the People's Republic of China</u></font>. The current title does not endorse, and should not be seen as an endorsement of, any of the two.</div> — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 13:08, July 27, 2005 (UTC)
****This conveniently ignores anyone else's changes to the articles besides one user, Instantnood. This is a request from a POV pusher to protect his version from the edits of at least three other people, and at least six have made smaller edits that are lost by this protection - because he makes no attempts to include subsequent change in his revert warring. Every other time Instantnood has come to this page the admins have seen through the fact that he is the one without consensus. This is a worthless protection and absolutely nothing will come from the discussion on the talk page because he - and only he - filibusters. [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 13:41, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
*****Indeed. when the dispute was sparked by Instantnood, several other editors have also contributed, and did come to a logical compromise in [[List of companies in the People's Republic of China]]. This is evident in the edit history and the talk page. Instantnood, however, decides to unilaterally revert all these edits back to an ancient version for no apparant reason other then to claim it was the point "before the dispute". Lets look at the history pages of each to prod this further:
*****'''[[List of companies in the People's Republic of China]]'''
*****A quick look at the edit history shows that the daily dispute was sparked when Instantnood made this edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_companies_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=19153954&oldid=19151992]. Prior to this, there was no obvious signs of any dispute by the said parties. SchmuckyTheCat first changed the reference of Mainland China to the PRC here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_companies_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=12589817&oldid=12490124], with no one else opposing it in terms of edits. Instantnood himself made just one edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_companies_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=15887309&oldid=15186855] which did not change the leading sentence, almost '''2 months''' after SchmuckyTheCat's edit. I made my first edit in the page, a small edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_companies_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=17813981&oldid=17813561], '''14 days''' after instantnood. It was another '''20 days later''' before Instantnood sparked the edit warring with the edit mentioned above. At''' no other time''' was there any evidence of edit warring '''at all'''.
*****'''[[List of airports in the People's Republic of China]]'''
*****The edit history shows that Instantnood sparked this latest dispute with this edit: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_airports_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=19491959&oldid=19212805]. The page was first changed to a reference of the PRC with SchmuckyTheCat's edit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_airports_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=11636936&oldid=11636923], with no signs of edit warring at all after that. Instead, various editors, including instantnood himself, have added content to it. In light of the page's reference to the PRC, I changed the format of the page to show airports in all of the PRC, a process I started 2 days after SchmuckyTheCat's edit, and which I did not finish until a good '''50 days''' later [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_airports_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=14878913&oldid=13970426], with no signs of any edits opposing my move throughout the entire period. An '''entire 2 months''' passed before I made a small edit to a single entry [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_airports_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=19212805&oldid=17285924], and 4 fateful days later, Instantnood decides he has nothing else in his hands to play with, and decided to spark a major edir war through the edit specified above.
*****As anyone can clearly see, the evidence is all in the edit histories. There has never been any "edit disputes" in both pages until the two controversial edits by Instantnood in each page, both of which sparked frenzied multiple edits by multiple users on a daily basis not seen in both pages before. If he sees a need to revert the page to "prior the dispute has taken place", then may I know why he did not revert it to the version just before his edit in both instances? I would think he has alot to answer for his actions above.--[[User:Huaiwei|Huaiwei]] 15:13, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
******Here is not the right place to further the debate, but as [[User:Huaiwei]] has brought up some of his arguments which are not entirely true, I have to clarify. I do apologise for any inconvenience that this might have caused.<br>Huaiwei sees the disputes over the two lists as something I brought up recently. This is quite the opposite. If one take a look at the edit history, she/he will be able to tell there were disputes months ago. In the past two months or so, I was advised by my advocates not to engage in editing relating to the naming conventions while the previous ArbCom case was in progress. Therefore I did not actively object renaming of titles by SchmuckyTheCat, and edits by Huaiwei. <br>I added the notice to the [[list of companies in the People's Republic of China|list of companies]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=diff=19153954&oldid=19151992] because I did not consider it part of the disputed issue, as similar notices are already tagged at the top of many other mainland China-related articles. It was simply for clarification purposes. Nevertheless Huaiwei went further to change the coverage of the list [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_companies_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=19375394&oldid=19371208], that touched the firepoint of the disputed issue. As the [[list of airports in the People's Republic of China|list of airports]] shares the similar conflicts, I supposed the two lists should be considered together, and therefore made similar changes to both lists, and later, tagged with the {{tl|twoversions}} template.<br>Back to the requests for protection, I'd like to request administrators to consider adding the notice I suggested, in order to better clarify to readers what is disputed. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 15:46, July 27, 2005 (UTC)
He was a member of Sandra's band for a few more years, moving with the Cretus to [[Ibiza]] after a few years. It was here that he became involved with Cretu's new project, [[Enigma (musical project)|Enigma]], under the pseudonym of F. Gregorian.
:Does the russian special region Kaliningrad get it's own list? [[User:Tobias Conradi|Tobias Conradi]] [[User_talk:Tobias Conradi|(Talk)]] 10:08, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
Peterson left the group in 1991 and pursued work on [[Gregorian (music group)|Gregorian]], a musical project co-founded by Thomas Schwarz and Matthias Meissner.
::Kaliningrad is an [[Oblasts_of_Russia|oblast]]. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 11:32, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
Today, he is most known for being the producer and one-time boyfriend of [[Sarah Brightman]], collaborating with her on most of her solo albums since Dive.
==Unprotect the page==
This is an attempt to unprotect the page and start discussion of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_airports_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&diff=0&oldid=19494187 differences].
Other artists whom Peterson has worked with include [[Princessa]], [[Violet]], and [[Sinsual]] (the last two of which have CDs in the works).
The differences as I see them:
# Limit the scope of the article to only the mainland of China.
# Remove HK and Macau airport(s) from inline sections to see also lists.
# Alphabetize the category to conform to the mainland title.
*Issue 1: There is no reason to limit the scope of the article. We can be inclusive.
*Issue 2: HK and Macau still have their own lists. They also have few airports and won't have more. Their inclusion here does nothing to "diminish" their autonomy. Limiting them to "see also" doesn't help the reader.
*Issue 3: This just confuses readers of the category, as the alphabetizing makes no sense. This is a technical problem. (Note to Instantnood, the pipe text after a category is for alphabetizing only, it doesn't display that title in the category.) - [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 19:25, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
::Please kindly take a look at what this list was created for, and how it was like. The differences, as seen from another angle, would be: expand the scope to cover Hong Kong and Macao (in the inline section, instead of links at the see also section). I think the problem cannot be easily resolved, not until the ArbCom case is concluded. Afterall we have very different perceptions and understandings of the term "mainland China", and very different views over its usage on Wikipedia. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 17:51, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
:You haven't answered the question. There is one country, the People's Republic of China. What value, to a reader of Wikipedia, is gained in restricting this in the way it is currently presented. [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 19:27, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
::I guess there's little dispute that Hong Kong and Macao is part of the PRC as a sovereign State. The problem here lies with what should be done with such special status. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 19:38, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
:What does the special status have to do with a basic list to which they assuredly belong? The text at the airports individual articles already do a wonderful job of explaining jurisdictional issues and I doubt anyone would be opposed to some amount of text pointing interested readers to more articles (or several, the bureacratic agencies for civil air regulation of each region should be in the see also). [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 21:11, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
::They did not belong until the title was changed. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 21:33, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
:That was months ago. This is now. What is the nature of your opposition now? What is your proposal to move forward and unprotect the page? ~ [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 22:28, 3 August 2005 (UTC) ~
::The title change itself is disputed, and was done at the time I voluntarily refrained from editing the disputed issues. My proposal, as presented at [[WP:RFPP]], is to keep the {{tl|twoversions}} template, together with the notice stating that the current title does not endorse the position of any party. In fact the article did not have to be protected if Huaiwei and you did not remove the tag for several times. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 22:38, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
: Your solution is there is no solution? Twoversions is not a solution. You cannot have twoversions of a single article. The point of twoversions (if there is one at all) is to get discussion going on the talk page in order to work through the dispute between the differences. Either one version moves forward or some compromise is met. I've described the differences between the two versions as listed on the diffs of the template as it is right now. What is your proposal to move forward? [[User:SchmuckyTheCat|SchmuckyTheCat]] 22:44, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
::You asked for a proposal to unprotect the page, am I right? That's the answer. To take {{tl|twoversions}} off, we'd better wait until the ArbCom case is concluded. There's little foundation for us to work towards compromise and consensus before that. Your description of the differences was done from your angle, without acknowledging what the list was initially created for and the disputed title change. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 22:52, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
==Title disputed==
I would like to propose to add a notice, such as the following, to notify readers there is not only a content dispute, but also a dispute over the title.
<div class=toc align=justify>There is currently a dispute over the title of this article, between <u><font color=navy>list of airports in mainland China</font></u> and <font color=navy><u>list of airports in the People's Republic of China</u></font>. The current title does not endorse, and should not be seen as an endorsement of, any of the two.</div>
— [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 09:06, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
:I have added this notice to the article (above the {{tl|twoversions}} notice). — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 10:21, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
==Which version to be displayed==
I have explained [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_airports_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&dir=prev&offset=20050725101000&limit=5&action=history] why the current version was chosen in the edit summaries before, that is, according to what the list was like and was intended for at the time of creation, prior to the disputes and point of view-pushing edits and renaming. The {{tl|twoversions}} tag states precisely the version displayed is not, and should not be seen as an endorsement of any of the two versions. Further, I've added a notice telling that the title is also disputed. Nevertheless, [[user:Huaiwei]] and [[user:SchmuckyTheCat]] has tried to swap to the other version [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_airports_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China&dir=prev&offset=20050827234500&limit=5&action=history]. I would like to request for <u>third party opinion </u>to decide on which version should be displayed, with acknowledgement of the political arrangements and situations, and adhere to [[Wikipedia:naming conventions (Chinese)#Political NPOV|Wikipedia:naming conventions (Chinese)]]. Third party opinion will also be requested if there's a similar disagreement over other articles on which version should be displayed. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 10:04, August 28, 2005 (UTC) (modified 13:25, August 28, 2005 (UTC))
:From the above, are you expecting only third party opinion to have any say in this affair, while in the meantime, your version stays? You gave your reasons for keeping this version, but the reasons for keeping the alternative version has already been voiced out time and again. Restoring your version purely based on the fact that you gave your reasons is clearly not enough. I am restoring it to the other version until you can come up with a more valid means of demonstrating your disagreement with a verion others have developed.--[[User:Huaiwei|Huaiwei]] 11:10, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
::To repeat, it is not "your [my] version". If you request me to come up with a "more valid means", please provide valid reasons too to justify your restoration to the other version. Thank you very much. It wouldn't help by continuing to claim returning to what the list was intended for to be an invalid reason, while assuming your reasons to be valid; and based on that assumption, edit according to your point of view. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 11:40, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
:::Actually, it has indeed become a "my/your" version because you appear to be exagerating a dispute more because of personal vendettas against said personalities than using a rational mind when making decisions here. This in itself is already one more reason for using the current version. Your abuse of this site by turning it into a self-advocacy exercise and massively reverting articles on impulse is clearly disruptive and no longer based on logical reasoning. You insist there is a "title dispute". But is that merely the only reason, or are you simply showing your displeasure against others whom you think made changes without your consent? Are you showing so much concern for just these two articles, because you felt others are "taking advantage of the situation" while you are being scrutinised during the arbcom?
==External links==
:::Be honest. Anyone familiar with basic psychology can tell when someone is puching a POV beyond the logical. The rationality in your arguments for keeping one version over the other simply do not tally with the zeal in your furious edit wars. If you continue to expect others to "come out of the closet" while you think you can continue to hide in yours, then no, I dont think a resolution is going to come about that quickly.--[[User:Huaiwei|Huaiwei]] 11:56, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
* [http://www.nemo-studio.de Nemo Studios]
* [http://www.gregorian-music.com/gregorian/en/a-peterson.php Gregorian Music - bio of Frank Peterson]
{{Germany-bio-stub}}
::Mind elaborating a bit on personal vendettas, and providing evidence of self-advocacy? (These accusations equally fit if I were to comment you.) If I were showing my displeasure as you may think, are you having the same displeasure that this article was created with a title and scope that you don't like? (Note: the title of this list was 'list of airports in Mainland China'.) And if I were to be pushing a POV beyond the logics, what are you doing here? Please also verify what the ArbCom case is aimed at, before saying that it's a scrutiny of me. — [[User:Instantnood|Insta]][[User_talk:Instantnood|ntnood]] 12:16, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
{{music-stub}}
:::And so we have managed to come one step further. You now say you can use my above comments to comment on me. I suppose this means you are accepting those comments on yourself? Thats good, because that is probably a positive first step. You dont really have to ask me what I have been doing, because quite unlike you, I am pretty much open about my intentions, and I do explain at length the philosphies I abide by, which dictate the POV I adopt. And quite unlike you, I am very willing to accept the fact that I DO have a POV as well. I dont deny that I break wikipedia conventions, nor do I dare claim that I do not ruffle feathers in this site. A sharp contrast to your conduct, which bears all the hallmarks of an evasive and irresponsible member who prefers to throw back comments at others instead of reflecting and accepting them. Meanwhile, perhaps you might save some effort constantly asking me for evidence for this and that. They will come forth at the right time.
:::As I said, it takes much more than merely saying "I want to reconcile" to truly come to the settlement table. Its been almost 8 months, and we have yet to understand you better as a person, other than being an obnoxious individual who hides behind a webname and continues to wreak havoc here.--[[User:Huaiwei|Huaiwei]] 12:33, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
| 