Talk:List of lighthouses in Macau

Lists Redirect‑class

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Macau NA‑class

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Macau, an attempt to better organize and improve articles related to Macau.MacauWikipedia:WikiProject MacauTemplate:WikiProject MacauMacau
NA	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Lighthouses Redirect‑class Low‑importance

	This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Lighthouses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of lighthouses and other water navigational aids on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LighthousesWikipedia:WikiProject LighthousesTemplate:WikiProject LighthousesLighthouses
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists of lighthouses in Macau and in Hong Kong

REDIRECTING DISCUSSION

Please comment at Talk:List of lighthouses in China. —valereee (talk) 21:50, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

While lists of lighthouses exist for many territories including the Isle of Man, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, Christmas Island, Aruba, the Cayman Islands, Curaçao, the Åland Islands, Puerto Rico, and so on, and that lists in areas other than lighthouses exist for Macau, User:Atsme ignored the established convention on Wikipedia (and practically anywhere else) and unilaterally, without any discussion, blanked this list, which had existed for many years, and turned it into a redirect to the China list.[1] This happened similarly with the list of lighthouses in Hong Kong,[2] [3] which shares more or less the same position with regard to lists on Wikipedia. This runs against WP:NPOV and is blatantly enforcing the position of "50 Cent Party" which have long disrupted different language versions of Wikipedia with their agenda and expansionism and undermining the status of territories. RfC shall now be requested with inputs from WikiProjects Lighthouses, Lists, Countries, as well as Wikipedians from the two territories in question. 124.217.189.46 19:39, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vote and discussion

My vote goes to: Standalone lists for Macau and Hong Kong speedily. Merge the materials in any other list(s) regarding the two territories to these two lists. 124.217.189.46 19:39, 19 December 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.217.189.46 (talk) [reply]
Discussion is at Talk:List of lighthouses in China —valereee (talk) 19:42, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This is the TP of a redirect and not the proper venue. There is already an open discussion at Talk:List of lighthouses in China#Discussion to split Lighthouses of Hong Kong and Lighthouses of Macau into their own separate articles where the 2 relative subsections currently exist. Administrator Valereee is overseeing it, so please don't hesitate to direct your questions to her or at the proper TP venue. Atsme 💬 📧 20:05, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This Macau list has always been a list until you blanked it out. And you edited the China list to forum-shop.[4] 14.0.180.170 (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with standalone lists, which is, the case before Atsme's blatant disruptions. Each territory gets its list for all these topics, no matter it's Wikipedia or elsewhere. Atsme may style him/herself a patroller but apparently this is an unfortunate coincidence that what he/she did align with, as 124.217.189.46 pointed out above, the 50-cent party members. There's certainly nothing to do with separation as Atsme erroneously claimed.[5] 14.0.180.170 (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I am simply doing my work as a patroller at WP:NPP, and advise you to focus on content, not editors. I have done nothing but try to encourage discussion about this split and do not appreciate your WP:PA. Atsme 💬 📧 20:49, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently Atsme is the one who's committing PA.[6] I started this discussion here according to what the tags then led to, unaware of the fact that he/she edited the China list to change the venue[7] and also of the fact that he/she had already gone ahead to kick-start the discussion at the venue he/she picked. As the patroller it's his/her duty to study the subject matter and how similar things are done across and beyond Wikipedia. (WP:Commonsense please.) 124.217.189.46 21:14, 19 December 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.217.189.46 (talk) [reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

@Valeree: As you were among those who were involved in the recent edits of the lists concerned[8][9][10] I would, with all due respect, advise you to state clearly the reason why you sided with Atsme regarding his/her choice of discussion venue,[11] knowing that he/she edited the China list[12][13] for the sake of forum shopping, and, more desirably, to refrain from choosing one venue and closing the other. 124.217.189.46 22:08, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]