Talk:Franco-Thai War

message: this is where interested parties can discuss the infobox parameter "result" and what should be entered there; "Thai victory" or "inconclusive" (or something else?). Hopefully a consensus can be achieved. Remember to provide sources to support your arguments, and to focus on the content, not each other. In the meantime, the edit warring needs to stop, as it is disruptive. If you can't come to an agreement, then consider dispute resolution. Good luck - wolf 19:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no horse on this one, but after examining the resources I would agree that "Inconclusive" should be the result. SunDawn (talk) 23:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

text: That solves one problem. The other is the "result" entry in the infobox. When the infobox was first added in 2006, it stated "". But, it has flip-flopped back and forth, between that and "" ever since, often with the same ref attached (a book that not everyone has access to). When  protected the page a few days ago, they added the following edit summary;  The editors invested in this page should probably find a couple more sources, and come to agreement on the outcome of this war, so that the next time someone tries to arbitrarily change the infobox result, there will be a consensus on record, to help keep the page stable. (jmho) - wolf 07:57, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: The Tucker citation supported the "Indicisive" conclusion when it was originally added by User:Albrecht in 2008. If the edit warriors can't be bothered to provide better citations or even to remove the contradicting source, further changes otherwise should be reverted on sight. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

text: It's quite clear there is no content dispute here; only POV-pushing vandalism by a single editor, who should be warned and blocked following the applicable process. Asking editors to further comment here is a waste of time. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Encouraging editors to discuss issues and possibly come to a consensus, especially during a content dispute, is not a "waste of time". You've been around long to know that. - wolf 10:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

text: Your changes contradict the sources cited in the article. If you're going to make such claims, provide better sources. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox result  

message: froze this page to prevent further disruption from edit warring. However,  edited the infobox again, was reverted by , with more reverting after that. There was no attempt to discuss or seek consensus here on the talk page. This waiting out the protection is a just a form of WP:GAMING the system, as is this slow edit war. This is a violation of the admin's effort to prevent any further disruption. I would strongly encourage these editors, and any other involved/interested parties, to not edit the infobox any further until there is a consensus to due so. - wolf 06:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: It's quite clear there is no content dispute here; only POV-pushing vandalism by a single editor, who should be warned and blocked following the applicable process. Asking editors to further comment here is a waste of time. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Encouraging editors to discuss issues and possibly come to a consensus, especially during a content dispute, is not a "waste of time". You've been around long to know that. - wolf 10:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

text: Your changes contradict the sources cited in the article. If you're going to make such claims, provide better sources. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Edit warring cont'd