Talk:First OOXML ISO Standardization Ballot Results

message: I was specifically told "make a new page" if I was interested in putting ballot results into the OOXML page - since the ballot results per country are published in a number of outside news sources and at the ISO site, and several editors have tried in good faith to place the results per country into the OOXML article I say this article should be allowed to stand.  There is interest by many parties as to which countries national standards bodies voted which way.  This is not a vanity article nor a promotional article - it is the results of a hotly contested ISO fast track procedure which is unprecedented in history and has long term far reaching implications for people around the world. Jonathan888 (talk) 23:42, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I really need this list. Mostly I want the real list of which "countries who voted what" but it is not possible to get it from iso.org as they keeping the list secret. (Chlor 15:07, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Speedy Deletion Contested

message: I think it would be good to use the URL 
http://www.jtc1sc34.org/repository/0950.htm
to point to the individual comments per country (for those countries that posted comments). From there, we point to the specific ZIP file with the comments.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simosx (talk • contribs) 20:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  URL to comment documents 

message: The ZIP file does not have references as to which comment document corresponds to which country. Here is a cheatsheet,
   1. AR-J1N8726-24.doc
   2. AT-J1N8726-33.doc
   3. AU-J1N8726-35.doc
   4. BE-J1N8726-31.doc
   5. BG-J1N8726-05.doc
   6. BR-J1N8726-01.doc
   7. CA-J1N8726-38.doc
   8. CH-J1N8726-42.doc
   9. CL-J1N8726-21.doc
  10. CN-J1N8726-37.doc
  11. CO-J1N8726-18.doc
  12. CZ-J1N8726-09.doc
  13. DE-J1N8726-11.doc
  14. DK-J1N8726-12.doc
  15. EC-J1N8726-20.doc
  16. ES-J1N8726-02.doc
  17. FI-J1N8726-39.doc
  18. FR-J1N8726-03.doc
  19. GB-J1N8726-08.doc
  20. GH-J1N8726-17.doc
  21. GR-J1N8726-15.doc
  22. IE-J1N8726-32.doc
  23. IL-J1N8726-40.doc
  24. PH-J1N8726-07.doc
  25. ECMA-J1N8726-14.doc
  26. IN-J1N8726-06.doc
  27. IR-J1N8726-25.doc
  28. IT-J1N8726-47.doc
  29. JO-J1N8726-27.doc
  30. JP-J1N8726-26.doc
  31. KE-J1N8726-29.doc
  32. KR-J1N8726-28.doc
  33. MT-J1N8726-30.doc
  34. MX-J1N8726-10.doc
  35. MY-J1N8726-13.doc
  36. NO-J1N8726-41.doc
  37. NZ-J1N8726-43.doc
  38. PE-J1N8726-19.doc
  39. PL-J1N8726-34.doc
  40. PT-J1N8726-23.doc
  41. SG-J1N8726-44.doc
  42. TH-J1N8726-45.doc
  43. TN-J1N8726-22.doc
  44. TR-J1N8726-46.doc
  45. US-J1N8726-04.doc
  46. UY-J1N8726-48.doc
  47. VE-J1N8726-16.doc
  48. ZA-J1N8726-36.doc 
If you are looking for Argentina's (AR) comments, open J1N8726-24.doc. (AR-J1N8726-24.doc) Simosx 20:17, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is who 

message: Jonathan888 removed request for citation without providing a reliable source for this info. 
The ISO has not listed the voting per coutry so the list is purely conjecture especially for countries that have not provided any indication of there vote themselves. 
I suggest listing only countries with a reference link to the direct info provided by their national bodies and remove all non-vetted results with either the national body or the ISO from the list !!!
This info is highly suggestive but not based on factual info. It looks like a list on nooxml where also they cannot provide a source so I presume that Jonathan888 taken taken the some unverified and unsourced results from there. 
This is evidently not reliable info worthy of an encyclopedic article !!!! hAl 07:46, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you actually checked out the references listed on the article itself? The very last linked in the reference section is a link to a zip file provided by the "official home for the Secretariat for ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34", I'll call that a reliable source. KTC 09:14, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is indeed a reliable source of info. However I do not see any individual results on that reference. So why is that reliable for the info in this this table ? How can I distinguish between approvals with comments or disapproval with comment ? How can I distinguish betwee approval without comments and abstaining members ? The total ballot result is well referenced from the ISO site but the individual votes are not because they are actually kept secret by ISO. This table is pure conjecture. Only a limited number of countries have publicly informed the people of their intent to vote. Only those public materials of those national bodies seem valid references. The rest is just guesswork as it appears. hAl 10:11, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (Copied from talk page) Huh? Have you actually checked out the reference? The zip files contain one .pdf file, and 48 .doc files. The pdf file list in alphabetic order by country name the information listed in the table in the article, namely the country, its standard body, its participation level and its vote. The doc files contains the comments submitted by the standard body. What more are you looking for in terms of source??? KTC 10:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

text: The individual body vote intent might well have been a secret, but it's not a secret once the vote have been cast and the voting period is over, as one can easily find the vote, including any comments from the reference provided. (see above) KTC 10:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I stand corrected. I seem missed that the that zipfile on the sc34 site contained a full vote PDF inside PDF inside. That PDf would actuallt constitute enoug of a reference in itself. This article does have much purpose with that publication already being out there. hAl 11:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removeal of fact tag  

message: I found it rather ironic that Arebenti  added the 'notability' importance tag since all but one of that user's edits are to OOXML related articles, nevertheless, I took the opportunity to provide some 'backstory' in the header explaining why this vote is significant.  Any useful information and references are welcomed.Jonathan888 (talk) 18:50, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed importance tag

message: The reference in the newly added section speaks of "OXML (Open eXtended Markup Language)"  I'm not aware of any name change, and Google doesn't bring up many results for that - and none that I'd call particularly solid.
How can we trust a source of information that doesn't get the name correct?  We should find a different source.  Thanks, WalterGR (talk | contributions) 19:55, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Newly added section 

message: I would like to point out that user:HAl after conceeding above  This  source remained on the page since. He later deleted all the votes in this edit, claiming . He also made this edit, also after ceding the above. (His FUD about a "secret" ballot has already been debunked above, and I won't rehash it.) Scientus (talk) 03:38, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[user:HAl|HAl]] vandalism