Talk:The Three Types of Legitimate Rule

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 13:53, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Merge?

Yes this page should be merged with the other very similar page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.162.213 (talk • contribs) 10:43, May 17, 2009

Agreed, I'll carry out the merger soon. On the second thought, I am not sure if this is needed - one article is about the concept, other, about a book. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:57, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Merge indeed. This is not a book but a paper published posthumously; Weber has used his tripartite classification previously.Ael 2 (talk) 17:39, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

  Y Merger complete. Joyous! | Talk 20:15, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

POV or NPOV?

A mural in Teotihuacan, Mexico (ca. 200 C.E.) depicting what is believed to be the first attempt by a person to create a Wikipedia contribution emitting a speech scroll from his mouth, symbolizing speech, and a Wikipedia Administrator on the right staring.

At 20:12 (UTC), on the 31st January 2013 a contribution I have made adding a "See also" section with a link to * The three main principles that motivate citizen behaviour according to Montesquieu (1689-1755) has been undone by Arthur Rubin (talk) with the following motivation:

Reverted good faith edits by Maurice Carbonaro (talk): Badly formatted, and the only thing in common is "three" and "basis for rule" — it doesn't seem enough. ...

It looks Point of view to me and a violation to Neutral point of view that editors would normally expect from an Administrator.
Comments are welcome. Thanks.   M aurice   Carbonaro  07:37, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

As usual, you have no idea what what you are saying means in English. Furthermore, I don't see any possible way what I said could possibly represent an NPOV violation. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 08:43, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

As usual, you keep offending me. I understand very well what I am talking about: the article is about the "three legitimate rules" and the hyperlink I have attempted to add in the == See also == section was about the "* The three main principles that motivate citizen behaviour according to Montesquieu (1689-1755). You have rules and motivations. I guess there is some "connection". Anyway I will mark this as a minor edit as you wish. Cheers.   M aurice   Carbonaro  17:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't see a connection between "Three types of legitimate rule" and "Three principles that motivate citizen behaviour" other than the number "three" and that they are prinicples. There may be one, but I suspect rule of three is the only appropriate "see also" for either. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:27, 3 February 2013 (UTC)