User talk:Nunh-huh: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
move conversation to article's talk page |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[User:Nunh-huh/sandbox]] |
[[User:Nunh-huh/sandbox]] |
||
==Cyrus Griffin== |
|||
You're being far too dogmatic about the silly template. Putting "position abolished" in large bold letters, with Washington's name and title in small letters below it, meets with precedent (see [[George Washington]]), is a handy compromise in this very silly conflict, and accurately reflects the realities: the position was abolished, but it was also replaced. The new title certainly didn't have the same responsibilities, but the position of POTUS did in a sense replece the position of POTUSICA. Besides, what happened to consensus building and discussion? Reversion is seldom a good action. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] ([[User talk:Fishal|talk]]) 02:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:You want to change the template, so demonstrate consensus! It's not a silly conflict; it's prevention of misinformation. The position of President of the United States in Congress Assembled (i.e., president of Congress) has nothing to do with the position of President of the United States. In no sense whatsoever did the latter replace the former. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 02:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::The positions are not at all the same, which the old Washington template (just changed by you) reflected with the words "position created". However, the names appearing in smaller type demonstrate continuity: the position was abolished, but there was still a United States, and its greatly-altered government had a person at the head of its government. The sort of job held by that person was different, but there was a true continuity that your version leaves out. For similar situations, look at the templates at the bottom of [[Augustus]] ("preceded by" Julius Caesar), [[Oliver Cromwell]] ("preceded by" the [[Commonwealth of England]], which was "preceded by" [[Charles I of England]]), [[Louis XVI of France]] ("succeeded by National Convention, eventually Napoleon I), and State President [[Frederik Willem de Klerk]] ("succeeded by [[Nelson Mandela]] (as President of South Africa)". All of these transitions involved a change in the name of the title and of the duties and powers thereof, but they reflect the continuity of the states involved. Finally, I could demonstrate consensus by pointing out that Washington's article is, I daresay, scrutinized more carefully and frequently than Griffin's, and no one had any problem with the old template. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] ([[User talk:Fishal|talk]]) 02:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::Cyrus Griffin was not head of state; George Washington was. There's no continuity of position, which is why your counterexamples are not pertinent. We're not here to purvey misinformation. Your confusion on this issue illustrates why we should be extremely careful on this point. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 03:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::There is no need to be patronizing. The POTUS is Head of Government as well as Head of State. That's what I mentioned in my last post. Furthermore, there was continuity between the positions, as much as several of the above counterexamples that you brushed aside, simply because the USA existed both before and after the implementation of the US Constitution. I fail to see how a link to Washington's name conveys misinformation if it is clear that the position was abolished and replaced with a new one. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] ([[User talk:Fishal|talk]]) 03:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::All over the internet, silly websites list Cyrus Vance as a President of the United States. Where there is so much misinformation available, it is for us to be perfectly clear that this is an error. I don't see why you want to add to the confusion. Quite simply, there's nothing to be gained from cramming George Washington's name where it doesn't belong, and much to be lost. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 03:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::::It reflects the basic continuity of the system. Both the article and the template are quite clear that Griffin was not POTUS, so someone else's website shouldn't influence what goes on here. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] ([[User talk:Fishal|talk]]) 03:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::So far, you're alone in your assertion of this ''continuity''. There was no continuity between the position of president of congress and president of the U.S. We're here to convey accurate information rather than to confuse the facts, and that's particularly important where others have been misinformative. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 03:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
No, there was no actual continuity between the positions, but they were analogous as one position replaced the other as head of government-- which is exactly what the template said! Honestly I cannot understand the supposed harm you are convinced it would do when both the article and the template are quite clear what the relationship was between the two "presidencies". [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] ([[User talk:Fishal|talk]]) 03:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:One might as justifiably say that Cyrus Griffin, as president of congress, was ''succeeded'' by John Adams as president pro tempore of the Senate. There's no continuity between someone who presides over congress and the executive head of state, and a template that suggests there is is clearly harmful. - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 04:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::Head of Government, like I said. The President of the US is both. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] ([[User talk:Fishal|talk]]) 04:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::It's a sort of meaningless term in non-parliamentary systems. People won't be able to infer from your template that the sense in which George Washington "succeeded" Cyrus Griffin was as "head of government". Your insistence on this point is perplexing. I've pointed out that it's misleading, and yet you still insist it must be added. The article is better off without it. Save "succession" templates for instances in which there clearly ''was'' a succession. This is a template for "President of the United States in Congress Assembled", not for "Head of Government". - <span style="font-family: cursive">[[User:Nunh-huh|Nunh-huh]]</span> 04:12, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
I'll move this to the article's talk page. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] ([[User talk:Fishal|talk]]) 17:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||