Talk:Greek genocide/Academic quotes

message: WP:LEAD reads:
The lead should be capable of standing alone as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, summarizing the most important points, explaining why the subject is interesting or notable, and briefly describing its notable controversies, if there are any.
"Concise overview, establishing context, and summarizing the most important points" is met by listing all the terms used. "Explaining why the subject is interesting or notable", is through the variety of the terms used, and through the controversy that follows. "Notable controversies" are perfectly presented IMO in Levene's last quote about "concern".
Leads are supposed to be repetitive. Please do not delete on these grounds. NikoSilver 11:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead 

message: I would have no objection to merge it back, but there were many voices in the past supporting that it should be excluded from the main article so as to "de-clutter" it, and there was also a  tag on top of the section there. That's why I have changed my mind and now think that this article is needed. NikoSilver 12:59, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The meaning of quotefarm, was that these rather excessive number of quuotes are needed neither in the main article--nor here. DGG (talk) 14:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I do not think this is applicable. This article here serves more as a list of quotes, and I find it very helpful for both "sides" of the issue. In any case, I would have no problem in transferring this to Wikiquote if that would be appropriate. NikoSilver 19:32, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I haven't any idea of WQ practices. What I do know, is that article like this are not generally supportable at WP. Now you may think one way about what the practice ought to be and I another, but the thing which matters is what does turn out to happen by consensus at AfD--so I am just trying to advise you as best I can what I think is likely to be the result. My suggestion is to trim them and try to put a few in the article. Compromise often succeeds--or at the very least is worth a try.DGG (talk) 01:46, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see, thanks. Anyway, I'm glad the main article is de-cluttered at least with this move. I'll let our comments sink in a little bit until someone with full knowledge on WQ practices comes by for advice. Regarding your proposal for trimming, there was a huge debate on the interpretation of these specific quotes in the main article talk, which resulted in that they should be left untouched because nobody agreed on their actual meaning. I suppose if the matter was less controversial there wouldn't have been such a disagreement among WP editors (let alone among academics, as very well put by Levene -see last sentence in intro). NikoSilver 13:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Firstly, there is still an ongoing dispute as to whether the Pontian Greek Genocide article should even exist, given the complete absence from mainstream academic material outside of Greece. Second, knowing that the dispute over the title is still unresolved, I dont know why you would create yet another article with the same title. Thirdly, as DGG pointed out, quotefarming whether isolated in one article or as part of another article is still quotefarming. This article, like List of eyewitness accounts related to the Pontic Greek Genocide and List of press headlines relevant to the Pontic Greek Genocide  is being used to further a position, one that lacks any mainsrtream academic support. --A.Garnet (talk) 19:07, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Mainsrtream [sic] academic support" referring, of course, only to whomever is not in violation of Article 301. ·ΚέκρωΨ· (talk) 15:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

text: I agree with Niko and would not object to its being transfered to wikiquote provided a link is placed in the main article's relevant section. A.Garnet regarding your objections please see discussion on main article talk page.Xenovatis (talk) 10:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why this article is needed 

message: Rationale
*1. The NPOV tag is due to the title being Genocide. That is debated in the main article talk. If the decistion is against the use of the term the title will be changed here as well, if it is to keep the term the title stays here as well. In either event there is no point keeping the tag.
*2. Quote tag unchanged.Xenovatis (talk) 11:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: As I understand it the discussion has gone against using Pontic Greek Genocide as a title, although there is no agreement as yet as to what the descriptive name should be. Given that the introduction of this article should be altered to reflect that it is a descriptive title and not a common name. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 10:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed tags

message: Niall Ferguson is not quoted. What does he actually say? --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 10:11, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Niall Ferguson

message: Wiki policy is quite clear that Wikipedia is not a repository for quotations. The npov implications aside of creating a page to find quotes which match a particular pov, this page is an example of quotefarming and should be moved. --A.Garnet (talk) 08:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is this not on wikiquote? 

message: I propose to move this article to talk:Pontic_Greek genocide/Academic quotes because it is a useful resource for the article Pontic Greek genocide but it is not enough Wikipedia is not a quote farm and although some of these quotes may be of use in the Pontic Greek genocide this should not be a stand alone article. --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 10:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Archive under Pontic Greek genocide