User talk:Consult

From ICANNWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I have reinserted the information regarding the contention on .africa and the GAC warnings; this seems to be the most relevant information regarding current affairs in the ICANN processes regarding DCA and as such should be highlighted at the top of the page. Let me know if you have any comments, (andrew[at] Best, Andrew (talk)

I understand what you say, but what you posted is more relevant in my opinion in the ".africa wiki" that someone is writing on. This is about DCA. For eg. if this is what you posted, I had gone and seen the article of Uniforum Wiki, and you have not posted anything on DCA or mentioned DCA's name there. Therefore if you think you need to write about such, I also would think you need to update their page with similar info that it is not only Uniforum that has applied for .africa.......That is why I placed the paragraph at the GAC objection section. In my opinion, all sections are relevant since the string is in contention.
I also noticed now that other parts have been removed such as the No campaigns. because the no campaigns were not only targeted to two entities, there were more, on AU and ARC and others which were removed. I was just trying to show they seem to also have been very effective at the time.There were also other sections like the objections by DCA to Uniforum that were very relevant in the application process that were deleted. I am just trying to apply the principles of balance and fact when I am writing the articles. Unfortunately the .africa has many serious issues.
I would appreciate therefore that you give a second thought and repost them all, as al sections are relevant for the historical perspective. Regards Consult (talk)

Dear Consult, thank you for your contributions to this article. Unfortunately, I had to delete the image you inserted and some of the written content as it appeared promotional in nature. Thank you and let me know if you have any questions. (jackie [at]