|
Re Karate -- please don't move prominent pages to new titles without first discussing the change on the article talk page and getting consensus. Thanks, NawlinWiki ( talk) 11:20, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Please remember to mark your edits as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. Gimme danger ( talk) 18:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, 虞海, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on
my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Satu
Suro
09:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Please note we do not say an article is too large - WP:MOS might be well worth a good read Satu Suro 09:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:Asia topic. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Stifle ( talk) 10:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Shuǐshū, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shuǐshū. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? -- Mark Chovain 05:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
There was an alert for speedy deletion here. And it's with a personal attack accuse. However, later the author deleted it and admit:
“ | I hadn't intended to use the term "personal attack". | ” |
-- 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ( talk) 03:44, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Some remains undone in User:虞海/Sandbox/Talk:Human rights in Arunachal Pradesh or South Tibet and Tawang, as well as human rights of Tibetan people in India.
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
DLX Linux, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. TallNapoleon ( talk) 09:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Kham, as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. Gimme danger ( talk) 06:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
It's not generally a good idea to rename an article without moving it. You might want to suggest a move, or if you have good enough sources that you don't think anyone would challenge you, just move the article. But even if you do, we should keep alternate names. kwami ( talk) 07:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Xishuangbanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture to a different title - however your request is either incomplete or has been contested for being controversial, and has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete will be removed after five days.
Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:
If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR ( talk) 17:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Please don't delete content as you did at Ordos people; if you think that the redirect is inappropriate ask that it be deleted by adding the template: {{ rfd}} and following the directions that appear. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 16:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Before moving pages, I suggest that you should put the move up for discussion. That will avert situations where your moves are summarily reverted. It will also help people understand why you are making these moves. For instance, you have been moving the names of ethnic groups to "xxx people". Are these moves based on Wikipedia policy? Or are they simply based on your own personal preferences? It would be very useful if you could explain what you are doing.
Bathrobe ( talk) 02:48, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I just moved the article because I think this is a more common name. Maybe Γada meiren would be even more common, but apparently such gammas are not very popular on WP. I also removed your link to the Chinese article on the Duguilang movement because I think linking to foreign-language WP articles is so helpful for users of English WP. If you can wait some days, I might come up with a properly sourced article on that topic myself (but don't count too much on it). Regards, Yaan ( talk) 13:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Please don't make controversial moves without a discussion in the talk page of the articles. The new titles that you have used are not widely used and the way that you have moved the pages, makes it harder to to revert it. Alefbe ( talk) 16:30, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
P.S: I looked at the discussion on talk:Pamiris in China. No matter what's the consensus there, it's not enough for a controversial move for a much more important page like Tajik people. It's like making a drastic change on the article China or it's title, based on some talk in the talk page of Tashkurgan Town. Alefbe ( talk) 02:32, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I notice you tend to put large numbers of very verbose section headers into articles. In general, it's not necessary to put so many section headers. Section header titles should be brief and logically organised. Avoid empty sections. And making wikilinks from section headers could interfere with screen readers of users who are blind or have poor vision. See Wikipedia:Accessibility#Section structure for further information.
Also I have done some cleanup on Tashi delek in accordance with the above, and also to remove citations to self-published sources like Baidu Baike and blogs. These are against the policy on reliable sources and shouldn't be used as the basis for article content. Thanks, cab ( talk) 06:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Menksoft Slav Mongolian Input Method Disc.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY (TALK) 06:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Menk Mongolian Whole-Word Input method.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY (TALK) 06:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, the merge tags on Menksoft IMEs and Menksoft Mongolian IME had been there for weeks and you didn't consider it necessary to participate in the discussion about them. Now that I've actually merged them, you reverted me without comment. Can you please explain why there must be two articles to explain exactly the same thing? Please remember that Wikipedia is not a forum for advertizing (see WP:COI), and that Wikipedia is not a manual. You may also want to study WP:STYLE, because the two articles are structured in a way that makes them very difficult to read and understand. And lastly, WP:SINGULAR mandates that page titles should not be in plural form. This means that your original version and your revert violate quite a number of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. It would have been perfectly fine to add the new information to the merged version. -- Latebird ( talk) 22:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Someone has nominated Menksoft and the other related articles for deletion, because they don't document the notability of the company through reliable independent sources. You'll find the relevant discussion here. To prevent the article from being deleted, you'll have to do the following: Read Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) very carefully, to make sure you understand the requirements. Then find sources that are independent of Menksoft, have a good reputation, and explain what makes it stand out from other small software companies. Of course, add those sources to the article. And lastly, since most of those sources will probably not be in English, it's probably a good idea to explain them in the deletion debate. I can't help you find those sources (not fluent enough in the relevant languages), but if you have any questions, I'll try to point you in the right direction. Good luck! -- Latebird ( talk) 20:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, can you please explain how Uyghurjin script differs from Mongolian script? You created the article using exactly the same description, so obviously the reader must think they are the same thing. The other question (assuming they are different) is whether English language sources actually make that distinction, and if "Uyghurjin script" is the term they use for it. I have strong doubts on both accounts. First, "Uyghurjin script" is a Mongolian term not common in English (actually, in this mixed language form not even common in Mongolian). I also seem to remeember that Mongolian sources use "Mongolian script", "Old script", "Uyghur script", and possibly other terms largely as synonyms. I see no reason to create a seperate article for just an early variation of the same thing. -- Latebird ( talk) 09:04, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You recently renamed, on French Wikipedia, Xian de Dawu (Sichuan) to Xian de Dau Zong. I reverted to the previous name for the following reasons:
Do you happen to know some source for Dau instead of Dawu (an official one if possible)? If so, the article might be renamed to Xian de Dau. Croquant ( talk) 08:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Welocme to the page india. I will request you to please provide some nuteral refrence for your change-- Sandeep ( talk) 07:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Please don't edit wikipedia articles to make a point, as you did at India. If you disagree with the edit made at Mêdog County, discuss the issue on that article's talk page, instead of taking a tit-for-tat route. Abecedare ( talk) 08:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Friend i think u had posted in wrong talk page i had done nothing on medog country article please check it properly. -- Sandeep ( talk) 12:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
No problem my friend. This type of things happens in life.-- Sandeep ( talk) 07:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I do not understand clearly your complaint about Mêdog County. Are you telling me that, when I say in the legend of the map: "this map includes a territory under indian administration as a part of Arunachal Pradesh", it's not the truth? Croquant ( talk) 08:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, 虞海. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Pointy edits and/or trolling by User:虞海. Thank you. Abecedare ( talk) 09:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on India. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Dave1185 ( talk) 09:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to History of Mongolia, you will be blocked from editing. Dave1185 ( talk) 10:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
You made a citation but it's not in english so we can't even verify it. In the interest of not starting an edit war, I will not revert it without consensus but in the future, I recommend you post citations in English only so that they can be verified by an independent body. Posting a Chinese citation on the English Wikipedia is a great way to start a conflict. Vedant ( talk) 00:03, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Hujia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
Merlion
444
07:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I see you've moved the Shannan Prefecture article to " Lhoka Prefecture" again with no explanation on the talk page, and without changing the article to be in keeping with the new name. Nor, to my knowledge, have any other articles been changed to be in keeping with the prefecture's new name. I did specificly ask for clarification on the article last time you moved the article, and you have failed to provide any. This seems inappropriate to me. Please clarify the reason for the move on the article's talk page. Thank you. -- Keithonearth ( talk) 23:56, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
I added a proposal to move the article Tajiks of Xinjiang back to it's original name Tajiks in China. Since you were involved in many of the edits of this page, you may want to leave a comment. David Straub ( talk) 01:39, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, what's your source on the official name of Chifeng? Cheers, Yaan ( talk) 13:28, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tashi Delek.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — Bkell ( talk) 01:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Gutenberg's invention of movable type was by scholarly consensus a separate, independent one. Printing presses (see footnote 39), as in fact screw presses and even the screw itself were completely unknown in the Far East which only knew hand printing and which adopted Gutenberg-style printing in the 19th century (see Global spread of the printing press) so that today all movable type printing actually derives from Gutenberg's development line, not at all from that of Bi Sheng. Regards Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 10:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Template:Vietnamese has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:57, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
The article DLX Linux has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Miami33139 (
talk)
07:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
You may be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Mongolian)#Mongol script proposal. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 14:27, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on DtN requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
WackyWace
converse |
contribs
10:45, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
We had a discussion and we decided the best place was Gansu. Please do not move pages like this without discussing it first.-- Everyone Dies In the End ( talk) 23:52, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
If WP:BRD is your favorite policy, as you claim on your user page, please consider following it instead of edit warring (as you started to do here). rʨanaɢ ( talk) 05:40, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Almost all of your edits this month are conflating different topics (e.g., matrices of polynomials and polynomials of matrices), or separating two concepts which do not need separate articles (e.g., equivalence classes (set vs. class) or Euclidian space (finite-dimensional vs. infinite-dimensional). The different topics may be due to a literal translation of the Chinese name, as the zh: interwikis you have created are clearly different concepts, as looking at the displayed formulas clearly show.
Please be more careful using mathematical concepts.
I recognize that your edits indicate confusion as to some of the concepts expressed on Wikipedia, and some of the confusion may be due to errors in the articles (but, apparently, not the ones you are editing.) I recognize that your edits are made in good faith, but they are disruptive. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:07, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
As for notification, I've nominated the redirect λ-matrix for deletion, nominated Equivalence class (disambiguation) for speedy deletion (as it's a disambiguation with one line), moved Finite dimensional Euclidean space back to Euclidean space (see discussion at WT:MATH#Undiscussed move of Euclidean space to Finite dimensional Euclidean space), and reverted most of your changes in regard modules and matrices of polynomials, which you read as polynomials of matrices. Please do not change these back without discussion. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
I thought you might be interested in this question, since you are the only person so far to voice a dissenting opinion about the current proposed naming conventions.— Nat Krause( Talk!· What have I done?) 01:36, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
As a general rule, talk pages such as Wavelenght are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Excellent question for the wp:Reference desk/Science. DVdm ( talk) 17:56, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Please note that your current signature is too long: as per WP:CUSTOMSIG a signature should not be over 255 characters and "signatures that take up more than two or three lines in the edit window clutter the page and make it harder to distinguish posts from signatures;". Yours is over 20 lines long. It seems to be cause by a template, and again from WP:CUSTOMSIG "The software will automatically truncate both plain and raw signatures to 255 characters of code in the signature box. If substitution of templates or another page is used, please be careful to verify that you are not violating the length limit, as the software will not do this automatically." Please take steps to remedy this as it makes replying to your comments very difficult.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 16:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
The quote again, with my emphasis:
The 255 is meant to be a hard limit that the software enforces, for the convenience of other editors. Subst can bypass it, but as there should be no exceptions to that limit users the above advice is offered.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 16:26, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on SL2(R). Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -- JohnBlackburne words deeds 14:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
(Title added)–– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ( talk) 15:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I notice you've removed over two dozen articles' wikilinks to Rosetta@home. Why? Emw ( talk) 17:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
There are a couple of problems with changes you have made to the Hmong language article.
First: You added a template that says "This article describes a work or element of fiction in a primarily in-universe style." This does not apply to the article. The template references "a work of fiction". Clearly, Hmong language is not a work of fiction. It is unclear to me what you are implying with this template. I will remove it again and you can discuss it further on the talk page if you want to re-add it.
Second: You added this heading: "This article introduce the Hmong language used in the United States. For the Hmong language used in China, see Chinese version of Miao language; for Hmong language used in Southeast Asia, see corresponding version." This is incorrect. "Hmong language", as described in the article, refers only to Western Hmongic, or what Chinese linguists have referred to as Chuanqiandian (although, it is unclear if all speakers of this dialect/sub-dialect of Miao identify as "Hmong".) That is to say, the Hmong language in the article is the same one that is spoken by people who identify as Hmong in China, SE Asia, and elsewhere. There might be some confusion due to the recent trend to identify all Miao nationality people as Hmong, but this is incorrect and is discussed in detail on the Hmong people article. It is problematic that the Hmong language article only discussed White and Green Hmong, but these are the most commonly spoken dialects of Hmong. Eventually, it would be best if these dialects had their own articles, but I see no immediate problem for the article. As for your suggestion that people read articles in Mandarin and SE Asian languages for more information, this is very problematic. Do you find there is better information there that should be added to the English language article? Again, I am removing this and invite you to discuss it further on the talk page if you would like to re-add it.
A good introduction to issues about differences about the terms Miao and Hmong can be found here. Nposs ( talk) 19:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect South Mongolian language. Since you had some involvement with the South Mongolian language redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). –– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 04:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
The article Daba script is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daba script until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Fences& Windows 18:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Let us discuss your edits on Template_talk:Table_Hanzi. Asoer ( talk) 16:34, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for the heads up. I'll definitely check other sources before correcting things in the future! — Stevey7788 ( talk) 06:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I saw you undid some of my recent edits without explanation, namely the removal of the Tibetan template from Bhutanese cuisine and Sharchop. I have reverted your unexplained reverts. When you don't put an explanation, you actually state that you were correcting vandalism. In fact, when you undid my edit, there was text at the top of your window advising: "If you are undoing an edit that is not vandalism, explain the reason in the edit summary. Do not use the default message only" – however you left no explanation. My edits were clearly not vandalism. I removed those templates because they requested Tibetan to be added in the first line of the article whose name refers to a concept originally in Tibetan script. To those articles, I have added not only the script but the transliteration, so the template requesting script is no longer needed. Again, please put explanations for when you undo edits unless they are vandalism. Thanks. JFHJr ( ㊟) 20:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Please avoiding adding text which is both Chinese and English, as you did here. OhanaUnited Talk page 06:21, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I have reverted your two changes with the comment "this was discussed at length in 2008 (Olympics days) - China encompasses everything Chinese, history, people and countries - "civilization" is the core orientation here". Also see the top of the talk page where people say this has been discussed so many times before.
This is one of those articles where each person has a different idea what it "should mean". China is obviously wrong. And that might be the only answer that everyone could agree about. 对不起。 ~~~~— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shenme ( talk • contribs) 16:32, 21 March 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Chinese language appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. Nlu ( talk) 03:07, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Regarding your move of the Xinjiang article: it is not necessary to move articles back and forth if you want to create redirects. Just go to the page where you want the redirect to be and edit it to say
#REDIRECT [[page name]]
rʨanaɢ ( talk) 12:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
You moved "Dörbet" article to "Dörbet (Choros clan)", but this name is unknown as "Dörbet" is a primary sense. If you think a new disambiguation page with a secondary sense would be created "Dörbet (disambiguation)" is a right name, see Wikipedia:Disambiguation.
And an other one question: why did you used Chinese name in disumbiguation page, but not English? Bogomolov.PL ( talk) 09:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Baekdu Mountain. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Also, please don't move without Consensus. Thank you.
你切勿题目边境. 这需要 共识. -- Idh0854 ( talk) 07:28, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Yu (or Hai, sorry, I don't know which is your given name). I saw that you've edited Mongolian script and its talk page quite a few times and I was wondering just how familiar you are with the language? My second son is going to be born soon, and I'd like to tattoo his name on my arm. My first son's name is tattooed in traditional Chinese around my wrist, but I'd like my second son's name to be tattooed vertically down my arm to "balance" it with my left arm, which also has a large pictoral tattoo. Mongolian is the only vertical language I can think of, and I think it's quite pretty, too.
If you do know the Mongolian language and alphabet (or any other elegant vertical scripts), would you be willing to write my son's name and upload it somewhere like Commons, Flickr or Image Bucket for me? Hand written is fine, as is a computer generated image from a Font. His name will be McKenzie Hunter, Hunter being his middle name, not his surname.
Please feel free to say no if you're uncomfortable or unwilling. Thank you in advance, Matthewedwards : Chat 07:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
There is currently a debate on whether International TLDs should or should not be included in the article of Singapore. Anyone is free to join the discussion. -- RaviC ( talk) 07:19, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
You recently nominated File:Yalu1.png for deletion, but apparently because of a Twinkle error, the nomination page and discussion was never created. I have removed the tag. If you would still like the file to be deleted, feel free to renominate. — Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 19:02, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Need your views and comments, on my personal page. One should also go through [ 'no consensus' discussion].
I would need to have clarity on naming standards for India page as of now. Any help would be very useful, thanks.
I just want to point out that the issue needs clarity for standards which I think is important. If some inconsistencies are introduced, the examle can be made as a reference for changing look of pages on other countries, and then further many related pages. let me also know if there are such issues in some pages with similar context ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 10:14, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Can you explain this ? Where does my bot made any vandalizm? Masti ( talk) 07:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Please note that Zhuang is not written using superscript characters - for example "Mwngz youq gizlawz?", which means where are you is written using the ordinary alphabete, not superscript characters. Johnkn63 ( talk) 09:33, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I can understand your reasoning, as it does make it easier to read. However, the result is not Zhuang orthography. Your opinion on what is or is not a "substantial" modification of the orthog. is a matter for discussion on an MOS or Wikiproject talk page. If you convince people that yours is the way to go, we should add it to the MOS somewhere; otherwise, we need to stick to actual Zhuang orthographic conventions.
This would seem to apply to Hmong as well, and AFAIK no-one superscripts the tone marks there. We should probably discuss this in conjunction with the Hmong people. — kwami ( talk) 10:52, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
An abugida, like an abjad, is a subtype of alphabet. The reason I moved all the articles is that we had ended up with a system where funny Asiatic squiggles are called "scripts", while nice intelligible Western writing is called an "alphabet". I didn't think that was a good way of doing things. With the current MOS, abugidas and abjads are called "alphabets" too. See the difference between Latin script and Latin alphabet (the latter is used to write Latin, but not English), also Arabic script and Arabic alphabet (the latter is used to write Arabic, but not Persian). There's the Mongolian script, and then there's the Mongolian alphabet which uses the Mongolian script (as opposed to the Mongolian alphabet which uses the Cyrillic script). — kwami ( talk) 17:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Good luck! Pasindu Kavinda Talk 11:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC) |
I see you have some backround in thsi matter, why not build on that in the article. Thanks Kanatonian ( talk) 15:27, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Our convention with article titles of Chinese names is to follow the most commonly used English romanization of the name, which typically puts the surname first. It's often possible to gauge which ordering to use by looking at what name the subject of an article puts on their publications. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese). Happy editing, Sławomir Biały ( talk) 01:59, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
I have reverted your move (rename). In English usage, "Solid-state drive" is by far the more common term for these devices; furthermore it is the term used throughout the very article! Even if you still think the move is a good idea, a move of an article of this long standing, that has had NO dissension over its name in the past, should be discussed first. The requested move template ( {{Requested move}}) would be appropriate in this case to obtain wider community input. Jeh ( talk) 13:59, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Solid-state drive, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". (I noticed that you have done several page moves recently, all of which you marked minor. I am not qualified to comment on the merits of your other moves but since most of them have been reverted they obviously do not qualify as "could never be the subject of a dispute".) Jeh ( talk) 14:31, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for correcting the redirect, but removing "Mar" title from the Syriac clergy is just application of Wikipedia guidelines regarding Syriac names and Syriac bishops. This is different from naming conventions for Popes. Mar should only be used for disambiguation purposes as the guideline explains. See for Wikipedia guidelines on Syriac bishops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(clergy)#Syriac_bishops So Mar Dinkha IV should remain a redirect and the main article should be Dinkha IV Khanania. Kindly see the guideline and reverse the redirect if possible. werldwayd ( talk) 15:02, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Where did you get the idea that "Yü" is the correct spelling? In Tibetan, "Yü" [jy] is not pronounced the same as "Ü" [y].— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 09:27, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Yuhai,
English and Chinese speakers have trouble with [jy]. I'm not sure Tibetans do. Maybe they do, since it doesn't seem like a very common sequence. [y] is made by spellings like -us, etc. [j] is made by the initial y-. The only example I can think of is the Tibetan name of Yushu Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, which I think is a loanword from Chinese. It's written ཡུལ་ཤུལ་ or ཡུས་ཧྲུའུ་.— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 12:07, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply; I haven't allocated the time to properly think about your question. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 12:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Please bring suggestions for page moves to the talk page before making such edits. Generally the renaming of an article is an issue that requires a broad consensus before actually making the move. Thank you.-- Racerx11 ( talk) 00:36, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Yu Hai! I have placed a request to move Shishabangma to Shishapangma at WP:RM. We have 7 days to reach consensus on the title. When you are next on WP, could you kindly come to Talk:Shishabangma to discuss the correct title under the relevant article naming policy? Thanks a lot! — hike395 ( talk) 07:17, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Here's the reason why I recommend the native names:
Hello. You have a new message at Hike395's talk page.
If I understand things correctly, the Tibetan name for the mountain is ཤི་ཤ་སྦང་མ།. The "official Tibetan” transliteration into the Roman alphabet is Xixabangma. The Chinese language uses 希夏幫馬峰 which is officially transliterated as Xīxiàbāngmǎ Fēng. The English language uses Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma as its transliteration (though this may be in the process of changing). Yet you are insisting that the English language Wikipedia use Xixabangma. Why, if even the Chinese language does not use ཤི་ཤ་སྦང་མ། or Xixabangma, are you insisting that the English Language do so?-- Wikimedes ( talk) 19:32, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Yú Hǎi. I would like to ask you for a favor. Many of your recent mountain article renaming moves have been controversial. Given the long discussion at Talk:Xixabangma, would you be willing to discuss any additional moves on the respective article talk pages before moving them? I think that would promote harmonious editing. Thanks for considering this! — hike395 ( talk) 18:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi 虞海!
I don't think it is relevant to pursue our endless discussion in the Shishapangma talk page, so you will find my reply to your last comments (05:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC) here:
1.1 If you read carefully my summary, you will notice that I did only mention "spelling" and not "naming". Regarding the origin of the different spelling variations in Tibetan/English/Chinese ("naming", you have been the only one to claim that the etymology of Shishapangma might not be related to Tibetan language. Extraordinary claim require some kind of evidence. Some users have asked you to provide some references, which you didn't. This is the reason why I let this out of the summary, and I think this is fair.
"Billions of kids". Are you sure about your number, or is this another of your extraordinary claims? BTW, with billions of kids learning about Xixabangma in English at school, this would contradict your claim that this mountain is almost unknown and doesn't need to respect the naming policy. Isn't it?
Anglo-American bias? I am very concerned about this too. But in our case, I just "googled scholar" for "Xixabangma" (2005-2010) and out of the first 10 results all 10 were written by Chinese authors (1 shared with Germans as part of a Sino-German Expedition). So I think we don't have to worry too much in that particular case…
1.2 Which points did I omit?
1.3. Why?
2. Exonym/Endonym: see 1.1. Extraordinary claims require at least some kind or data to sustain them.
3. Please explain. As native English speakers have already explained you, the fact of separating or not the two words (Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma) makes no difference in English. There is no double standard.
4. I can only invite you to read WP:TITLECHANGES again. Some explanations are also contained in your own user talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pseudois ( talk • contribs) 15:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC) Sorry I forgot to sign my post. By chance there are some robots reminding us! :) -- Pseudois ( talk) 16:08, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi 虞海,
I just wanted to let you know that I have reverted your recent Kailash edits. Please go through the talk page before removing commonly used spelling forms in English (Gang Rinpoche). The Pinyin term Kangrinboqê is not very well known amongst English speakers, so should remain in third line behind Kailash (the most widely known) and Gang Rinpoche (the second most widely known). Thanks!-- Pseudois ( talk) 16:17, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Please read the Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Tibetan), in particular: "Use the conventional spelling most familiar to English-language readers. To the extent it can be established, this is the primary romanisation. A primary romanisation is normally the most common conventional spelling of whichever instance of the name is most widely known."
It would be nice also if you add a summary of your edits before saving them.-- Pseudois ( talk) 17:31, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Same comment for Gompa. Gompa is the common English name, not Goinpa. Please note that Pinyin is not known in most countries where Gompas can be found. The page should be reverted to its original name.-- Pseudois ( talk) 18:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
虞海 Given the recent controversy with some article name changes in which you participated, I think it would be useful for you to review and study two of our community's policies and guidelines-- WP:Title and WP:RM. Our titling Policy makes it clear that there can only be one title for any given article. The community has endeavored to create a set of criteria that helps editors chose the best title (not the most perfect title) for an article. Now when there is more than one logical title (or search term) for an article's subject, then that search is redirected to the correct article. In other words, it really doesn't matter what the article is entitled from a reader's perspective. There is no evidence that readers are being disappointed when they search for one thing and find an article has a different name as long as the content is there that they were searching for. Along those lines, it is really important to remember that we as editors are building the encyclopedia for our readers, not ourselves. Our WP:Requested moves procedure is designed to provide a disciplined and structured approach to changing article titles. Although not a mandatory procedure, it does ensure that potential moves get wider community scrutiny. Moving article titles has consequences, when they are not done right, or must be reverted because others don't agree, things like histories, talk pages and redirects get screwed up. It takes someones time (a volunteer like you or me) to sort it out and fix it. I'd much rather spend my time building WP rather than fixing mistakes.
I welcome the contributions of all editors and encourage you to continue to work on WP articles that you are passionate about. But sometimes its useful to slow down, reflect and learn more about how our community works before jumping head long into the fray. If you have any questions about these comments or other stuff, let me know on my talk page. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 18:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
#REDIRECT [[page name]]
Your may also consider reverting the Namcha Barwa article to its original traditional English spelling. Thanks.-- Pseudois ( talk) 09:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi! I just reverted your edit mentionning that "Co" is Tibetan while "Tso" is Ladakhi on the Pangong Tso page. Please check the Namtso and Yamdrok Yumtso pages before saying that "Tso" is Lhadakhi only. The most famous lakes in areas when Tibetan languages are spoken are often romanised as "Tso" or "Tsho" in English texts.-- Pseudois ( talk) 14:39, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at PhnomPencil's talk page.
虞海 - You are right to be concerned about WP:CANVASS but here's a couple of suggestions to help you decide how to provide notifications to interested editors.
WP is a big place, much like China and the Tibetan Alps. As editors, we have to learn to work collaboratively, and as individuals learn that we don't always get things our way. Find a way to work with these editors, who are all interested, along with you, in improving the encyclopedia. Good Luck (好運). -- Mike Cline ( talk) 11:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC).
Please check the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mountains/Assessment#Frequently_asked_questions before making unilateral changes in the WikiProject Mountains assessment.
FYI, all 8000ers have been rated as "Top Importance", even the more remote and less prominent ones at the Pakistan-China border. Your change lowering the importance of Shishapangma seems to be related to the ongoing discussion regarding its naming, as you have repeatedly claimed that Shishapangma was not well-known, so that the existing naming conventions do not apply.-- Pseudois ( talk) 14:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
So, what are the sources that you're using for this article?— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 05:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Good! But have you realized that at the time you didn't realize Xerab Gyamco was Sherab Gyatso, USer:Dr. Blofeld didn't realize Sherab Gyatso was Xerab Gyamco either? Note that "Xerab Gyamco was Sherab Gyatso" and "Sherab Gyatso was Xerab Gyamco" was two different statement. –– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 06:25, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
You have been involved in the recent naming discussion at Talk:Xixabangma. There is a new poll to determine support for the move from Shishapangma to Xixabangma. If you are interested, please provide your opinion here.-- Wikimedes ( talk) 00:53, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I'm bringing this up here because I don't think it's too important and the Xixabangma poll is getting pretty long. There's no need to speculate, the link I provided shows that I used Google Books to search for Xixabangma in Merriam-Webster's and only got the one hit. Why do you think that pp. 1321-1323 were excluded from the search? If they were, and Xixabangma Feng was on one of those pages, that would explain why no entry showed up. BTW, looking something up in a dictionary is not original research.-- Wikimedes ( talk) 06:12, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:NetAnts.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 04:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
China Radio International uses Өрөмч here. Re. your other questions, I am afraid I can not really help you. Is it plausible that Mongolian/Oirat would make such a shift from l to r? Regards, Yaan ( talk) 22:28, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ideal gas equation ( talk) 14:04, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
你有我極其惱火。為什麼呢?- I was helping a group of editors, including you, come to a consensus on the name of an obscure mountain article which had suffered through weeks of contentious debate. I closed an RM discussion essentially in favor of your position. And up until sometime in the last 12 hours, appeared to be successfully mediating a poll to help come to a better consensus.
你覺得為什麼地球上的良好願望,使單邊行動?你刻意疏遠我和你的同胞編輯嗎?您已經創建更適合我們所有的工作,我並不感到高興! (Why on The Good Earth did you feel the desire to make the unilateral move? Are you intentionally trying to alienate me and your fellow editors? You have created more work for all of us, and I am not happy about that!) 不回答,我不想此刻處理它。-- Mike Cline ( talk) 14:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi!
Sorry but I don't understand your justification for reverting my edits on the Panchen Lama article.
You justified your first revert by asking me to source my edits. Fair enough, if you are not familiar with how to spell "Panchen" in English, I can understand that you ask me to mention sources.
I first wanted to give you a couple of literature references, but I thought that you might challenge these references as not conclusive for being representative of the English literature on the topic. So I gave you both google web search (2 million hits for "Panchen" versus 12,000 hits for "Bainqen") and google scholar search (109 hits for "Panchen Erdeni" and 2 hits for "Bainqen". Please read the summary of my edit here.
Then came your second revert, with the following edit summary adressing me (I guess): "You insisted use Google Web Search instead of Google Scholar, while this time why don't you use Google Web Search? Could I understand that as: your use of Google Web Search was just an excuse for your persoal preference"
I sincerely don't understand your point. First I don't have any personal affinity with google searches (both web and scholar), as a google search is not able to define the relevance of the different hits. Secondly I don't have other preferences than the commonly used spelling in ENGLISH. Third I gave you both google web and google scholar as reference, and both do show an overwhelming majority of hits in favor of "Panchen" versus "Bainqen". So, where is the problem?-- Pseudois ( talk) 17:04, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi again, That's fine that you are asking me to source my edits, but I would just like to make you realize that I basically reverted the Ngor article to its previous version after your own unsourced edits. Sounds quite contradictory, isnt't it? Anyway, now all my edits have been sourced, so I hope the current version is fine for you.-- Pseudois ( talk) 18:55, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI, there is currently a move request here regarding the universities category for the ROC. 61.18.170.89 ( talk) 06:19, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
A move request has been submited here. [5] 61.18.170.87 ( talk) 21:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Happy new year! | |
we wish you a merry christmas and a happy new year! Pass a Method talk 19:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC) |
As we are somewhat against the move for the Republic of China to Taiwan and the specific line "Taiwan is a sovereign state". I propose we create a new article. So let me explain while I was looking over other Wikipedia articles about the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China in other languages; I notice the Polish created a China article which state both the Republic of China and People's Republic of China which links the reader to the PRC page and ROC page. Shown here http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiny Now I need your opinion. Do you think we should do something similar as like the Polish did. Typhoonstorm95 ( talk) 14:47, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Here is one in Simplified Chinese Characters http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B. Typhoonstorm95 ( talk) 21:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Since Wikipedia treats the R.O.C as a legitimate state and violate the One-China-policy so saying "ROC is a legitimate state" and saying "Taiwan, officially ROC, is a legitimate state" is equally POV
Sorry about that I discover the Polish version first. I'm more towards the Chinese version and French version myself as well. Typhoonstorm95 ( talk) 16:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI, there is a consequential request here at CFD as a result to the previous move request on ROC universities. Regards. 116.48.183.128 ( talk) 15:42, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Please check my reply on User_talk:Mike_Cline#Yarlung_Tsangpo_River-- Pseudois ( talk) 16:25, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
You have placed a merged tage under Lhatse, without mentioning for which reasons you would like to merge the town of Lhatse with the county of Lhatse. This would be a bit like merging Bejing with China. Please give some thoughts for discussion, otherwise I think that you can simply remove the merge tag.-- Pseudois ( talk) 17:44, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
The article Gawa Baizêg has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. ArglebargleIV ( talk) 15:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Please check the Gawa Baizêg article.-- Pseudois ( talk) 07:24, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Got it! This article is about Kawa Paltsek. At first I did not know who you were meanng with Gawa Baizêg, as a google search gave me zero hit and I did not know with whom to associate this name. Apparently you have also created a page with the name Kawa Paltsek, so a move from Gawa Baizêg to Kawa Paltsek is not possible anymore. I'll try to fix it by simply moving the content of Gawa Baizêg to Kawa Paltsek. I hope this is fine so.--
Pseudois (
talk)
07:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that despite all previous advices given to you by several editors and administrators, you have again made a intempestive page move without giving a single explanation. I refer to the page Tibetan pinyin that you have moved to Official transcription of Tibetan.
This is a very poor title change as:
An alternative to "Tibetan pinyin" could be "Official Romanization of Standard Central Tibetan language in the People Republic of China", but in any case I would strongly suggest to propose such changes on the talk page before making another move. Meanwhile I have move back the page to its original title.-- Pseudois ( talk) 11:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
As a participant to previous discussions at the South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute talk page, you might be interested to participate to the following poll. Thanks, -- Pseudois ( talk) 04:46, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Since you have previously shared your view regarding a naming convention about the Republic of China, I guess you are interested to share your view at Talk:Republic of China#Requested Move (February 2012). Thanks for your attention. 61.18.170.216 ( talk) 10:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
The United Nations Barnstar of National Merit | ||
For your work on articles in East Asia PhnomPencil talk contribs 23:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC) |
No idea where you stand on the politics, but your additions to the East Asian articles have certainly helped the encyclopaedia overall... so thanks! PhnomPencil talk contribs 23:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
You have a problem with robots, or what's you problem? I'm talking about this message in particular regarding this action. The interwiki links are made to be shown in the page, and that's what a bot knows. It doesn't do vandalism. It just help us with the interconnection between Wikipedias. That {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Special|}} was completely inappropriate there and the bots made the correction needed. Next time think twice before adding such warnings. Thanks. Daniel Message 13:05, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Yuhai! I'm currently working with pdf files that were converted from mengsoft that contain both Mongolian and Latin characters. I could presumably, if necessary, obtain the source files. Most files I am working with are txt files in unicode. Now I am able to let my computer read the Latin text from the pdfs, but it cannot read the Mongolian text nor can it copy it. Do you know how the mengsoft text could be converted into unicode? Best, G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
User:虞海/Menksoft Mongolian IMEs, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:虞海/Menksoft Mongolian IMEs and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:虞海/Menksoft Mongolian IMEs during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Beeblebrox ( talk) 21:22, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Syllable structure. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 25#Syllable structure until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 08:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:AliasStudio.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Atho-Popu, from its old location at User:虞海/Atho-Popu. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. North America 1000 06:43, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Vietnamese people in China and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 9#Vietnamese people in China until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 15:45, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
|
Re Karate -- please don't move prominent pages to new titles without first discussing the change on the article talk page and getting consensus. Thanks, NawlinWiki ( talk) 11:20, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Please remember to mark your edits as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. Gimme danger ( talk) 18:47, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hello, 虞海, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a
Wikipedian! Please
sign your messages on
discussion pages using four
tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out
Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on
my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome!
Satu
Suro
09:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Please note we do not say an article is too large - WP:MOS might be well worth a good read Satu Suro 09:43, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Template:Asia topic. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Stifle ( talk) 10:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Shuǐshū, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shuǐshū. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? -- Mark Chovain 05:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
There was an alert for speedy deletion here. And it's with a personal attack accuse. However, later the author deleted it and admit:
“ | I hadn't intended to use the term "personal attack". | ” |
-- 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ( talk) 03:44, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
Some remains undone in User:虞海/Sandbox/Talk:Human rights in Arunachal Pradesh or South Tibet and Tawang, as well as human rights of Tibetan people in India.
A
proposed deletion template has been added to the article
DLX Linux, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's
criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "
What Wikipedia is not" and
Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on
its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. TallNapoleon ( talk) 09:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Kham, as minor if (and only if) they genuinely are minor edits (see Help:Minor edit). Marking a major change as a minor one is considered poor etiquette. The rule of thumb is that only an edit that consists solely of spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearranging of text without modifying content should be flagged as a 'minor edit.' Thank you. Gimme danger ( talk) 06:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
It's not generally a good idea to rename an article without moving it. You might want to suggest a move, or if you have good enough sources that you don't think anyone would challenge you, just move the article. But even if you do, we should keep alternate names. kwami ( talk) 07:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
You recently filed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move the page Xishuangbanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture to a different title - however your request is either incomplete or has been contested for being controversial, and has been moved to the incomplete and contested proposals section. Requests that remain incomplete will be removed after five days.
Please make sure you have completed all three of the following:
If you need any further guidance, please leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Requested moves or contact me on my talk page. - JPG-GR ( talk) 17:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Please don't delete content as you did at Ordos people; if you think that the redirect is inappropriate ask that it be deleted by adding the template: {{ rfd}} and following the directions that appear. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 16:41, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Before moving pages, I suggest that you should put the move up for discussion. That will avert situations where your moves are summarily reverted. It will also help people understand why you are making these moves. For instance, you have been moving the names of ethnic groups to "xxx people". Are these moves based on Wikipedia policy? Or are they simply based on your own personal preferences? It would be very useful if you could explain what you are doing.
Bathrobe ( talk) 02:48, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
I just moved the article because I think this is a more common name. Maybe Γada meiren would be even more common, but apparently such gammas are not very popular on WP. I also removed your link to the Chinese article on the Duguilang movement because I think linking to foreign-language WP articles is so helpful for users of English WP. If you can wait some days, I might come up with a properly sourced article on that topic myself (but don't count too much on it). Regards, Yaan ( talk) 13:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Please don't make controversial moves without a discussion in the talk page of the articles. The new titles that you have used are not widely used and the way that you have moved the pages, makes it harder to to revert it. Alefbe ( talk) 16:30, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
P.S: I looked at the discussion on talk:Pamiris in China. No matter what's the consensus there, it's not enough for a controversial move for a much more important page like Tajik people. It's like making a drastic change on the article China or it's title, based on some talk in the talk page of Tashkurgan Town. Alefbe ( talk) 02:32, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
I notice you tend to put large numbers of very verbose section headers into articles. In general, it's not necessary to put so many section headers. Section header titles should be brief and logically organised. Avoid empty sections. And making wikilinks from section headers could interfere with screen readers of users who are blind or have poor vision. See Wikipedia:Accessibility#Section structure for further information.
Also I have done some cleanup on Tashi delek in accordance with the above, and also to remove citations to self-published sources like Baidu Baike and blogs. These are against the policy on reliable sources and shouldn't be used as the basis for article content. Thanks, cab ( talk) 06:37, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Menksoft Slav Mongolian Input Method Disc.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY (TALK) 06:47, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for uploading File:Menk Mongolian Whole-Word Input method.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.
If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.
If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. FASTILY (TALK) 06:48, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, the merge tags on Menksoft IMEs and Menksoft Mongolian IME had been there for weeks and you didn't consider it necessary to participate in the discussion about them. Now that I've actually merged them, you reverted me without comment. Can you please explain why there must be two articles to explain exactly the same thing? Please remember that Wikipedia is not a forum for advertizing (see WP:COI), and that Wikipedia is not a manual. You may also want to study WP:STYLE, because the two articles are structured in a way that makes them very difficult to read and understand. And lastly, WP:SINGULAR mandates that page titles should not be in plural form. This means that your original version and your revert violate quite a number of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. It would have been perfectly fine to add the new information to the merged version. -- Latebird ( talk) 22:25, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Someone has nominated Menksoft and the other related articles for deletion, because they don't document the notability of the company through reliable independent sources. You'll find the relevant discussion here. To prevent the article from being deleted, you'll have to do the following: Read Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) very carefully, to make sure you understand the requirements. Then find sources that are independent of Menksoft, have a good reputation, and explain what makes it stand out from other small software companies. Of course, add those sources to the article. And lastly, since most of those sources will probably not be in English, it's probably a good idea to explain them in the deletion debate. I can't help you find those sources (not fluent enough in the relevant languages), but if you have any questions, I'll try to point you in the right direction. Good luck! -- Latebird ( talk) 20:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, can you please explain how Uyghurjin script differs from Mongolian script? You created the article using exactly the same description, so obviously the reader must think they are the same thing. The other question (assuming they are different) is whether English language sources actually make that distinction, and if "Uyghurjin script" is the term they use for it. I have strong doubts on both accounts. First, "Uyghurjin script" is a Mongolian term not common in English (actually, in this mixed language form not even common in Mongolian). I also seem to remeember that Mongolian sources use "Mongolian script", "Old script", "Uyghur script", and possibly other terms largely as synonyms. I see no reason to create a seperate article for just an early variation of the same thing. -- Latebird ( talk) 09:04, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
You recently renamed, on French Wikipedia, Xian de Dawu (Sichuan) to Xian de Dau Zong. I reverted to the previous name for the following reasons:
Do you happen to know some source for Dau instead of Dawu (an official one if possible)? If so, the article might be renamed to Xian de Dau. Croquant ( talk) 08:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Welocme to the page india. I will request you to please provide some nuteral refrence for your change-- Sandeep ( talk) 07:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Please don't edit wikipedia articles to make a point, as you did at India. If you disagree with the edit made at Mêdog County, discuss the issue on that article's talk page, instead of taking a tit-for-tat route. Abecedare ( talk) 08:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Friend i think u had posted in wrong talk page i had done nothing on medog country article please check it properly. -- Sandeep ( talk) 12:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
No problem my friend. This type of things happens in life.-- Sandeep ( talk) 07:03, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I do not understand clearly your complaint about Mêdog County. Are you telling me that, when I say in the legend of the map: "this map includes a territory under indian administration as a part of Arunachal Pradesh", it's not the truth? Croquant ( talk) 08:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, 虞海. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Pointy edits and/or trolling by User:虞海. Thank you. Abecedare ( talk) 09:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
Please assume good faith in your dealings with other editors, which you did not on India. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. Dave1185 ( talk) 09:52, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did to History of Mongolia, you will be blocked from editing. Dave1185 ( talk) 10:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
You made a citation but it's not in english so we can't even verify it. In the interest of not starting an edit war, I will not revert it without consensus but in the future, I recommend you post citations in English only so that they can be verified by an independent body. Posting a Chinese citation on the English Wikipedia is a great way to start a conflict. Vedant ( talk) 00:03, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Hujia requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
Merlion
444
07:58, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I see you've moved the Shannan Prefecture article to " Lhoka Prefecture" again with no explanation on the talk page, and without changing the article to be in keeping with the new name. Nor, to my knowledge, have any other articles been changed to be in keeping with the prefecture's new name. I did specificly ask for clarification on the article last time you moved the article, and you have failed to provide any. This seems inappropriate to me. Please clarify the reason for the move on the article's talk page. Thank you. -- Keithonearth ( talk) 23:56, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
I added a proposal to move the article Tajiks of Xinjiang back to it's original name Tajiks in China. Since you were involved in many of the edits of this page, you may want to leave a comment. David Straub ( talk) 01:39, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, what's your source on the official name of Chifeng? Cheers, Yaan ( talk) 13:28, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Tashi Delek.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. — Bkell ( talk) 01:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Gutenberg's invention of movable type was by scholarly consensus a separate, independent one. Printing presses (see footnote 39), as in fact screw presses and even the screw itself were completely unknown in the Far East which only knew hand printing and which adopted Gutenberg-style printing in the 19th century (see Global spread of the printing press) so that today all movable type printing actually derives from Gutenberg's development line, not at all from that of Bi Sheng. Regards Gun Powder Ma ( talk) 10:16, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Template:Vietnamese has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 22:57, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
The article DLX Linux has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Miami33139 (
talk)
07:09, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
You may be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Mongolian)#Mongol script proposal. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 14:27, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on DtN requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}}
to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on
the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact
one of these admins to request that they
userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you.
WackyWace
converse |
contribs
10:45, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
We had a discussion and we decided the best place was Gansu. Please do not move pages like this without discussing it first.-- Everyone Dies In the End ( talk) 23:52, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
If WP:BRD is your favorite policy, as you claim on your user page, please consider following it instead of edit warring (as you started to do here). rʨanaɢ ( talk) 05:40, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Almost all of your edits this month are conflating different topics (e.g., matrices of polynomials and polynomials of matrices), or separating two concepts which do not need separate articles (e.g., equivalence classes (set vs. class) or Euclidian space (finite-dimensional vs. infinite-dimensional). The different topics may be due to a literal translation of the Chinese name, as the zh: interwikis you have created are clearly different concepts, as looking at the displayed formulas clearly show.
Please be more careful using mathematical concepts.
I recognize that your edits indicate confusion as to some of the concepts expressed on Wikipedia, and some of the confusion may be due to errors in the articles (but, apparently, not the ones you are editing.) I recognize that your edits are made in good faith, but they are disruptive. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:07, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
As for notification, I've nominated the redirect λ-matrix for deletion, nominated Equivalence class (disambiguation) for speedy deletion (as it's a disambiguation with one line), moved Finite dimensional Euclidean space back to Euclidean space (see discussion at WT:MATH#Undiscussed move of Euclidean space to Finite dimensional Euclidean space), and reverted most of your changes in regard modules and matrices of polynomials, which you read as polynomials of matrices. Please do not change these back without discussion. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
I thought you might be interested in this question, since you are the only person so far to voice a dissenting opinion about the current proposed naming conventions.— Nat Krause( Talk!· What have I done?) 01:36, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
As a general rule, talk pages such as Wavelenght are for discussion related to improving the article, not general discussion about the topic. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you. Excellent question for the wp:Reference desk/Science. DVdm ( talk) 17:56, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Please note that your current signature is too long: as per WP:CUSTOMSIG a signature should not be over 255 characters and "signatures that take up more than two or three lines in the edit window clutter the page and make it harder to distinguish posts from signatures;". Yours is over 20 lines long. It seems to be cause by a template, and again from WP:CUSTOMSIG "The software will automatically truncate both plain and raw signatures to 255 characters of code in the signature box. If substitution of templates or another page is used, please be careful to verify that you are not violating the length limit, as the software will not do this automatically." Please take steps to remedy this as it makes replying to your comments very difficult.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 16:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
The quote again, with my emphasis:
The 255 is meant to be a hard limit that the software enforces, for the convenience of other editors. Subst can bypass it, but as there should be no exceptions to that limit users the above advice is offered.-- JohnBlackburne words deeds 16:26, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on SL2(R). Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. -- JohnBlackburne words deeds 14:04, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
(Title added)–– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ( talk) 15:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
I notice you've removed over two dozen articles' wikilinks to Rosetta@home. Why? Emw ( talk) 17:41, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
There are a couple of problems with changes you have made to the Hmong language article.
First: You added a template that says "This article describes a work or element of fiction in a primarily in-universe style." This does not apply to the article. The template references "a work of fiction". Clearly, Hmong language is not a work of fiction. It is unclear to me what you are implying with this template. I will remove it again and you can discuss it further on the talk page if you want to re-add it.
Second: You added this heading: "This article introduce the Hmong language used in the United States. For the Hmong language used in China, see Chinese version of Miao language; for Hmong language used in Southeast Asia, see corresponding version." This is incorrect. "Hmong language", as described in the article, refers only to Western Hmongic, or what Chinese linguists have referred to as Chuanqiandian (although, it is unclear if all speakers of this dialect/sub-dialect of Miao identify as "Hmong".) That is to say, the Hmong language in the article is the same one that is spoken by people who identify as Hmong in China, SE Asia, and elsewhere. There might be some confusion due to the recent trend to identify all Miao nationality people as Hmong, but this is incorrect and is discussed in detail on the Hmong people article. It is problematic that the Hmong language article only discussed White and Green Hmong, but these are the most commonly spoken dialects of Hmong. Eventually, it would be best if these dialects had their own articles, but I see no immediate problem for the article. As for your suggestion that people read articles in Mandarin and SE Asian languages for more information, this is very problematic. Do you find there is better information there that should be added to the English language article? Again, I am removing this and invite you to discuss it further on the talk page if you would like to re-add it.
A good introduction to issues about differences about the terms Miao and Hmong can be found here. Nposs ( talk) 19:35, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect South Mongolian language. Since you had some involvement with the South Mongolian language redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). –– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 04:56, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
The article Daba script is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daba script until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Fences& Windows 18:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
Let us discuss your edits on Template_talk:Table_Hanzi. Asoer ( talk) 16:34, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for the heads up. I'll definitely check other sources before correcting things in the future! — Stevey7788 ( talk) 06:20, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I saw you undid some of my recent edits without explanation, namely the removal of the Tibetan template from Bhutanese cuisine and Sharchop. I have reverted your unexplained reverts. When you don't put an explanation, you actually state that you were correcting vandalism. In fact, when you undid my edit, there was text at the top of your window advising: "If you are undoing an edit that is not vandalism, explain the reason in the edit summary. Do not use the default message only" – however you left no explanation. My edits were clearly not vandalism. I removed those templates because they requested Tibetan to be added in the first line of the article whose name refers to a concept originally in Tibetan script. To those articles, I have added not only the script but the transliteration, so the template requesting script is no longer needed. Again, please put explanations for when you undo edits unless they are vandalism. Thanks. JFHJr ( ㊟) 20:57, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Please avoiding adding text which is both Chinese and English, as you did here. OhanaUnited Talk page 06:21, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I have reverted your two changes with the comment "this was discussed at length in 2008 (Olympics days) - China encompasses everything Chinese, history, people and countries - "civilization" is the core orientation here". Also see the top of the talk page where people say this has been discussed so many times before.
This is one of those articles where each person has a different idea what it "should mean". China is obviously wrong. And that might be the only answer that everyone could agree about. 对不起。 ~~~~— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shenme ( talk • contribs) 16:32, 21 March 2011
Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Chinese language appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe this important core policy. Thank you. Nlu ( talk) 03:07, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Regarding your move of the Xinjiang article: it is not necessary to move articles back and forth if you want to create redirects. Just go to the page where you want the redirect to be and edit it to say
#REDIRECT [[page name]]
rʨanaɢ ( talk) 12:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
You moved "Dörbet" article to "Dörbet (Choros clan)", but this name is unknown as "Dörbet" is a primary sense. If you think a new disambiguation page with a secondary sense would be created "Dörbet (disambiguation)" is a right name, see Wikipedia:Disambiguation.
And an other one question: why did you used Chinese name in disumbiguation page, but not English? Bogomolov.PL ( talk) 09:21, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Baekdu Mountain. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Also, please don't move without Consensus. Thank you.
你切勿题目边境. 这需要 共识. -- Idh0854 ( talk) 07:28, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Yu (or Hai, sorry, I don't know which is your given name). I saw that you've edited Mongolian script and its talk page quite a few times and I was wondering just how familiar you are with the language? My second son is going to be born soon, and I'd like to tattoo his name on my arm. My first son's name is tattooed in traditional Chinese around my wrist, but I'd like my second son's name to be tattooed vertically down my arm to "balance" it with my left arm, which also has a large pictoral tattoo. Mongolian is the only vertical language I can think of, and I think it's quite pretty, too.
If you do know the Mongolian language and alphabet (or any other elegant vertical scripts), would you be willing to write my son's name and upload it somewhere like Commons, Flickr or Image Bucket for me? Hand written is fine, as is a computer generated image from a Font. His name will be McKenzie Hunter, Hunter being his middle name, not his surname.
Please feel free to say no if you're uncomfortable or unwilling. Thank you in advance, Matthewedwards : Chat 07:01, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
There is currently a debate on whether International TLDs should or should not be included in the article of Singapore. Anyone is free to join the discussion. -- RaviC ( talk) 07:19, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
You recently nominated File:Yalu1.png for deletion, but apparently because of a Twinkle error, the nomination page and discussion was never created. I have removed the tag. If you would still like the file to be deleted, feel free to renominate. — Train2104 ( talk • contribs • count) 19:02, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Need your views and comments, on my personal page. One should also go through [ 'no consensus' discussion].
I would need to have clarity on naming standards for India page as of now. Any help would be very useful, thanks.
I just want to point out that the issue needs clarity for standards which I think is important. If some inconsistencies are introduced, the examle can be made as a reference for changing look of pages on other countries, and then further many related pages. let me also know if there are such issues in some pages with similar context ..असक्तः सततं कार्य कर्म समाचर | असक्तः हि आचरन् कर्म.. Humour Thisthat2011 10:14, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Can you explain this ? Where does my bot made any vandalizm? Masti ( talk) 07:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Please note that Zhuang is not written using superscript characters - for example "Mwngz youq gizlawz?", which means where are you is written using the ordinary alphabete, not superscript characters. Johnkn63 ( talk) 09:33, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
I can understand your reasoning, as it does make it easier to read. However, the result is not Zhuang orthography. Your opinion on what is or is not a "substantial" modification of the orthog. is a matter for discussion on an MOS or Wikiproject talk page. If you convince people that yours is the way to go, we should add it to the MOS somewhere; otherwise, we need to stick to actual Zhuang orthographic conventions.
This would seem to apply to Hmong as well, and AFAIK no-one superscripts the tone marks there. We should probably discuss this in conjunction with the Hmong people. — kwami ( talk) 10:52, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
An abugida, like an abjad, is a subtype of alphabet. The reason I moved all the articles is that we had ended up with a system where funny Asiatic squiggles are called "scripts", while nice intelligible Western writing is called an "alphabet". I didn't think that was a good way of doing things. With the current MOS, abugidas and abjads are called "alphabets" too. See the difference between Latin script and Latin alphabet (the latter is used to write Latin, but not English), also Arabic script and Arabic alphabet (the latter is used to write Arabic, but not Persian). There's the Mongolian script, and then there's the Mongolian alphabet which uses the Mongolian script (as opposed to the Mongolian alphabet which uses the Cyrillic script). — kwami ( talk) 17:38, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
Good luck! Pasindu Kavinda Talk 11:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC) |
I see you have some backround in thsi matter, why not build on that in the article. Thanks Kanatonian ( talk) 15:27, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Our convention with article titles of Chinese names is to follow the most commonly used English romanization of the name, which typically puts the surname first. It's often possible to gauge which ordering to use by looking at what name the subject of an article puts on their publications. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese). Happy editing, Sławomir Biały ( talk) 01:59, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
I have reverted your move (rename). In English usage, "Solid-state drive" is by far the more common term for these devices; furthermore it is the term used throughout the very article! Even if you still think the move is a good idea, a move of an article of this long standing, that has had NO dissension over its name in the past, should be discussed first. The requested move template ( {{Requested move}}) would be appropriate in this case to obtain wider community input. Jeh ( talk) 13:59, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Solid-state drive, as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". (I noticed that you have done several page moves recently, all of which you marked minor. I am not qualified to comment on the merits of your other moves but since most of them have been reverted they obviously do not qualify as "could never be the subject of a dispute".) Jeh ( talk) 14:31, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for correcting the redirect, but removing "Mar" title from the Syriac clergy is just application of Wikipedia guidelines regarding Syriac names and Syriac bishops. This is different from naming conventions for Popes. Mar should only be used for disambiguation purposes as the guideline explains. See for Wikipedia guidelines on Syriac bishops: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(clergy)#Syriac_bishops So Mar Dinkha IV should remain a redirect and the main article should be Dinkha IV Khanania. Kindly see the guideline and reverse the redirect if possible. werldwayd ( talk) 15:02, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Where did you get the idea that "Yü" is the correct spelling? In Tibetan, "Yü" [jy] is not pronounced the same as "Ü" [y].— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 09:27, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
Yuhai,
English and Chinese speakers have trouble with [jy]. I'm not sure Tibetans do. Maybe they do, since it doesn't seem like a very common sequence. [y] is made by spellings like -us, etc. [j] is made by the initial y-. The only example I can think of is the Tibetan name of Yushu Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, which I think is a loanword from Chinese. It's written ཡུལ་ཤུལ་ or ཡུས་ཧྲུའུ་.— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 12:07, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Sorry for the late reply; I haven't allocated the time to properly think about your question. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 12:48, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Please bring suggestions for page moves to the talk page before making such edits. Generally the renaming of an article is an issue that requires a broad consensus before actually making the move. Thank you.-- Racerx11 ( talk) 00:36, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Yu Hai! I have placed a request to move Shishabangma to Shishapangma at WP:RM. We have 7 days to reach consensus on the title. When you are next on WP, could you kindly come to Talk:Shishabangma to discuss the correct title under the relevant article naming policy? Thanks a lot! — hike395 ( talk) 07:17, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Here's the reason why I recommend the native names:
Hello. You have a new message at Hike395's talk page.
If I understand things correctly, the Tibetan name for the mountain is ཤི་ཤ་སྦང་མ།. The "official Tibetan” transliteration into the Roman alphabet is Xixabangma. The Chinese language uses 希夏幫馬峰 which is officially transliterated as Xīxiàbāngmǎ Fēng. The English language uses Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma as its transliteration (though this may be in the process of changing). Yet you are insisting that the English language Wikipedia use Xixabangma. Why, if even the Chinese language does not use ཤི་ཤ་སྦང་མ། or Xixabangma, are you insisting that the English Language do so?-- Wikimedes ( talk) 19:32, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Yú Hǎi. I would like to ask you for a favor. Many of your recent mountain article renaming moves have been controversial. Given the long discussion at Talk:Xixabangma, would you be willing to discuss any additional moves on the respective article talk pages before moving them? I think that would promote harmonious editing. Thanks for considering this! — hike395 ( talk) 18:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi 虞海!
I don't think it is relevant to pursue our endless discussion in the Shishapangma talk page, so you will find my reply to your last comments (05:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC) here:
1.1 If you read carefully my summary, you will notice that I did only mention "spelling" and not "naming". Regarding the origin of the different spelling variations in Tibetan/English/Chinese ("naming", you have been the only one to claim that the etymology of Shishapangma might not be related to Tibetan language. Extraordinary claim require some kind of evidence. Some users have asked you to provide some references, which you didn't. This is the reason why I let this out of the summary, and I think this is fair.
"Billions of kids". Are you sure about your number, or is this another of your extraordinary claims? BTW, with billions of kids learning about Xixabangma in English at school, this would contradict your claim that this mountain is almost unknown and doesn't need to respect the naming policy. Isn't it?
Anglo-American bias? I am very concerned about this too. But in our case, I just "googled scholar" for "Xixabangma" (2005-2010) and out of the first 10 results all 10 were written by Chinese authors (1 shared with Germans as part of a Sino-German Expedition). So I think we don't have to worry too much in that particular case…
1.2 Which points did I omit?
1.3. Why?
2. Exonym/Endonym: see 1.1. Extraordinary claims require at least some kind or data to sustain them.
3. Please explain. As native English speakers have already explained you, the fact of separating or not the two words (Shishapangma or Shisha Pangma) makes no difference in English. There is no double standard.
4. I can only invite you to read WP:TITLECHANGES again. Some explanations are also contained in your own user talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pseudois ( talk • contribs) 15:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC) Sorry I forgot to sign my post. By chance there are some robots reminding us! :) -- Pseudois ( talk) 16:08, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi 虞海,
I just wanted to let you know that I have reverted your recent Kailash edits. Please go through the talk page before removing commonly used spelling forms in English (Gang Rinpoche). The Pinyin term Kangrinboqê is not very well known amongst English speakers, so should remain in third line behind Kailash (the most widely known) and Gang Rinpoche (the second most widely known). Thanks!-- Pseudois ( talk) 16:17, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Please read the Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(Tibetan), in particular: "Use the conventional spelling most familiar to English-language readers. To the extent it can be established, this is the primary romanisation. A primary romanisation is normally the most common conventional spelling of whichever instance of the name is most widely known."
It would be nice also if you add a summary of your edits before saving them.-- Pseudois ( talk) 17:31, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
Same comment for Gompa. Gompa is the common English name, not Goinpa. Please note that Pinyin is not known in most countries where Gompas can be found. The page should be reverted to its original name.-- Pseudois ( talk) 18:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
虞海 Given the recent controversy with some article name changes in which you participated, I think it would be useful for you to review and study two of our community's policies and guidelines-- WP:Title and WP:RM. Our titling Policy makes it clear that there can only be one title for any given article. The community has endeavored to create a set of criteria that helps editors chose the best title (not the most perfect title) for an article. Now when there is more than one logical title (or search term) for an article's subject, then that search is redirected to the correct article. In other words, it really doesn't matter what the article is entitled from a reader's perspective. There is no evidence that readers are being disappointed when they search for one thing and find an article has a different name as long as the content is there that they were searching for. Along those lines, it is really important to remember that we as editors are building the encyclopedia for our readers, not ourselves. Our WP:Requested moves procedure is designed to provide a disciplined and structured approach to changing article titles. Although not a mandatory procedure, it does ensure that potential moves get wider community scrutiny. Moving article titles has consequences, when they are not done right, or must be reverted because others don't agree, things like histories, talk pages and redirects get screwed up. It takes someones time (a volunteer like you or me) to sort it out and fix it. I'd much rather spend my time building WP rather than fixing mistakes.
I welcome the contributions of all editors and encourage you to continue to work on WP articles that you are passionate about. But sometimes its useful to slow down, reflect and learn more about how our community works before jumping head long into the fray. If you have any questions about these comments or other stuff, let me know on my talk page. -- Mike Cline ( talk) 18:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
#REDIRECT [[page name]]
Your may also consider reverting the Namcha Barwa article to its original traditional English spelling. Thanks.-- Pseudois ( talk) 09:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
Hi! I just reverted your edit mentionning that "Co" is Tibetan while "Tso" is Ladakhi on the Pangong Tso page. Please check the Namtso and Yamdrok Yumtso pages before saying that "Tso" is Lhadakhi only. The most famous lakes in areas when Tibetan languages are spoken are often romanised as "Tso" or "Tsho" in English texts.-- Pseudois ( talk) 14:39, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello. You have a new message at PhnomPencil's talk page.
虞海 - You are right to be concerned about WP:CANVASS but here's a couple of suggestions to help you decide how to provide notifications to interested editors.
WP is a big place, much like China and the Tibetan Alps. As editors, we have to learn to work collaboratively, and as individuals learn that we don't always get things our way. Find a way to work with these editors, who are all interested, along with you, in improving the encyclopedia. Good Luck (好運). -- Mike Cline ( talk) 11:51, 22 November 2011 (UTC).
Please check the Wikipedia:WikiProject_Mountains/Assessment#Frequently_asked_questions before making unilateral changes in the WikiProject Mountains assessment.
FYI, all 8000ers have been rated as "Top Importance", even the more remote and less prominent ones at the Pakistan-China border. Your change lowering the importance of Shishapangma seems to be related to the ongoing discussion regarding its naming, as you have repeatedly claimed that Shishapangma was not well-known, so that the existing naming conventions do not apply.-- Pseudois ( talk) 14:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
So, what are the sources that you're using for this article?— Greg Pandatshang ( talk) 05:24, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
Good! But have you realized that at the time you didn't realize Xerab Gyamco was Sherab Gyatso, USer:Dr. Blofeld didn't realize Sherab Gyatso was Xerab Gyamco either? Note that "Xerab Gyamco was Sherab Gyatso" and "Sherab Gyatso was Xerab Gyamco" was two different statement. –– 虞海 (Yú Hǎi) ✍ 06:25, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
You have been involved in the recent naming discussion at Talk:Xixabangma. There is a new poll to determine support for the move from Shishapangma to Xixabangma. If you are interested, please provide your opinion here.-- Wikimedes ( talk) 00:53, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I'm bringing this up here because I don't think it's too important and the Xixabangma poll is getting pretty long. There's no need to speculate, the link I provided shows that I used Google Books to search for Xixabangma in Merriam-Webster's and only got the one hit. Why do you think that pp. 1321-1323 were excluded from the search? If they were, and Xixabangma Feng was on one of those pages, that would explain why no entry showed up. BTW, looking something up in a dictionary is not original research.-- Wikimedes ( talk) 06:12, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:NetAnts.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk) 04:01, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
China Radio International uses Өрөмч here. Re. your other questions, I am afraid I can not really help you. Is it plausible that Mongolian/Oirat would make such a shift from l to r? Regards, Yaan ( talk) 22:28, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Ideal gas equation ( talk) 14:04, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
你有我極其惱火。為什麼呢?- I was helping a group of editors, including you, come to a consensus on the name of an obscure mountain article which had suffered through weeks of contentious debate. I closed an RM discussion essentially in favor of your position. And up until sometime in the last 12 hours, appeared to be successfully mediating a poll to help come to a better consensus.
你覺得為什麼地球上的良好願望,使單邊行動?你刻意疏遠我和你的同胞編輯嗎?您已經創建更適合我們所有的工作,我並不感到高興! (Why on The Good Earth did you feel the desire to make the unilateral move? Are you intentionally trying to alienate me and your fellow editors? You have created more work for all of us, and I am not happy about that!) 不回答,我不想此刻處理它。-- Mike Cline ( talk) 14:29, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi!
Sorry but I don't understand your justification for reverting my edits on the Panchen Lama article.
You justified your first revert by asking me to source my edits. Fair enough, if you are not familiar with how to spell "Panchen" in English, I can understand that you ask me to mention sources.
I first wanted to give you a couple of literature references, but I thought that you might challenge these references as not conclusive for being representative of the English literature on the topic. So I gave you both google web search (2 million hits for "Panchen" versus 12,000 hits for "Bainqen") and google scholar search (109 hits for "Panchen Erdeni" and 2 hits for "Bainqen". Please read the summary of my edit here.
Then came your second revert, with the following edit summary adressing me (I guess): "You insisted use Google Web Search instead of Google Scholar, while this time why don't you use Google Web Search? Could I understand that as: your use of Google Web Search was just an excuse for your persoal preference"
I sincerely don't understand your point. First I don't have any personal affinity with google searches (both web and scholar), as a google search is not able to define the relevance of the different hits. Secondly I don't have other preferences than the commonly used spelling in ENGLISH. Third I gave you both google web and google scholar as reference, and both do show an overwhelming majority of hits in favor of "Panchen" versus "Bainqen". So, where is the problem?-- Pseudois ( talk) 17:04, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi again, That's fine that you are asking me to source my edits, but I would just like to make you realize that I basically reverted the Ngor article to its previous version after your own unsourced edits. Sounds quite contradictory, isnt't it? Anyway, now all my edits have been sourced, so I hope the current version is fine for you.-- Pseudois ( talk) 18:55, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI, there is currently a move request here regarding the universities category for the ROC. 61.18.170.89 ( talk) 06:19, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
A move request has been submited here. [5] 61.18.170.87 ( talk) 21:30, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Happy new year! | |
we wish you a merry christmas and a happy new year! Pass a Method talk 19:51, 25 December 2011 (UTC) |
As we are somewhat against the move for the Republic of China to Taiwan and the specific line "Taiwan is a sovereign state". I propose we create a new article. So let me explain while I was looking over other Wikipedia articles about the Republic of China and the People's Republic of China in other languages; I notice the Polish created a China article which state both the Republic of China and People's Republic of China which links the reader to the PRC page and ROC page. Shown here http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiny Now I need your opinion. Do you think we should do something similar as like the Polish did. Typhoonstorm95 ( talk) 14:47, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Here is one in Simplified Chinese Characters http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E4%B8%AD%E5%9C%8B. Typhoonstorm95 ( talk) 21:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Since Wikipedia treats the R.O.C as a legitimate state and violate the One-China-policy so saying "ROC is a legitimate state" and saying "Taiwan, officially ROC, is a legitimate state" is equally POV
Sorry about that I discover the Polish version first. I'm more towards the Chinese version and French version myself as well. Typhoonstorm95 ( talk) 16:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
FYI, there is a consequential request here at CFD as a result to the previous move request on ROC universities. Regards. 116.48.183.128 ( talk) 15:42, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Please check my reply on User_talk:Mike_Cline#Yarlung_Tsangpo_River-- Pseudois ( talk) 16:25, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
You have placed a merged tage under Lhatse, without mentioning for which reasons you would like to merge the town of Lhatse with the county of Lhatse. This would be a bit like merging Bejing with China. Please give some thoughts for discussion, otherwise I think that you can simply remove the merge tag.-- Pseudois ( talk) 17:44, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
The article Gawa Baizêg has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. ArglebargleIV ( talk) 15:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
Please check the Gawa Baizêg article.-- Pseudois ( talk) 07:24, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Got it! This article is about Kawa Paltsek. At first I did not know who you were meanng with Gawa Baizêg, as a google search gave me zero hit and I did not know with whom to associate this name. Apparently you have also created a page with the name Kawa Paltsek, so a move from Gawa Baizêg to Kawa Paltsek is not possible anymore. I'll try to fix it by simply moving the content of Gawa Baizêg to Kawa Paltsek. I hope this is fine so.--
Pseudois (
talk)
07:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that despite all previous advices given to you by several editors and administrators, you have again made a intempestive page move without giving a single explanation. I refer to the page Tibetan pinyin that you have moved to Official transcription of Tibetan.
This is a very poor title change as:
An alternative to "Tibetan pinyin" could be "Official Romanization of Standard Central Tibetan language in the People Republic of China", but in any case I would strongly suggest to propose such changes on the talk page before making another move. Meanwhile I have move back the page to its original title.-- Pseudois ( talk) 11:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
As a participant to previous discussions at the South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute talk page, you might be interested to participate to the following poll. Thanks, -- Pseudois ( talk) 04:46, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Since you have previously shared your view regarding a naming convention about the Republic of China, I guess you are interested to share your view at Talk:Republic of China#Requested Move (February 2012). Thanks for your attention. 61.18.170.216 ( talk) 10:38, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
The United Nations Barnstar of National Merit | ||
For your work on articles in East Asia PhnomPencil talk contribs 23:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC) |
No idea where you stand on the politics, but your additions to the East Asian articles have certainly helped the encyclopaedia overall... so thanks! PhnomPencil talk contribs 23:53, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
You have a problem with robots, or what's you problem? I'm talking about this message in particular regarding this action. The interwiki links are made to be shown in the page, and that's what a bot knows. It doesn't do vandalism. It just help us with the interconnection between Wikipedias. That {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Special|}} was completely inappropriate there and the bots made the correction needed. Next time think twice before adding such warnings. Thanks. Daniel Message 13:05, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Yuhai! I'm currently working with pdf files that were converted from mengsoft that contain both Mongolian and Latin characters. I could presumably, if necessary, obtain the source files. Most files I am working with are txt files in unicode. Now I am able to let my computer read the Latin text from the pdfs, but it cannot read the Mongolian text nor can it copy it. Do you know how the mengsoft text could be converted into unicode? Best, G Purevdorj ( talk) 09:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
User:虞海/Menksoft Mongolian IMEs, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:虞海/Menksoft Mongolian IMEs and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:虞海/Menksoft Mongolian IMEs during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Beeblebrox ( talk) 21:22, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Syllable structure. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 25#Syllable structure until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 08:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:AliasStudio.PNG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 18:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Atho-Popu, from its old location at User:虞海/Atho-Popu. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. North America 1000 06:43, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Vietnamese people in China and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 9#Vietnamese people in China until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 15:45, 9 July 2022 (UTC)