Archive 1 / Archive 2 / Archive 3 / Archive 5 /
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Uyghur_people&diff=635767398&oldid=635488688
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Uyghur_people&diff=636171698&oldid=636099772
Sino-Platonic papers publishes fringe theories, it explicitly seeks out unknown and "independent" authors to publish "controversial" material.
http://www.sino-platonic.org/complete/spp150_uyghurs.pdf
Rajmaan ( talk) 16:13, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
The academic rank of Sinoplatonic papers is authoritative. Even though I can see the trouble, and I think you are right. The phrasing was misleading. It would be better to accentuate the multiethnic ethnogenesis of the Uyghur people. I have to rephrase that part. But I am away for some days, so I have to leave you alone till Tuesday. See you next time, bye. 11:53, 5 December 2014 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uigur Cämiyät ( talk • contribs)
you don't seem to be familiar with the relevant scientific literature. There are many papers, in high quality journals, about using gel electrophoresis to separate, say, latex plastic particles or bacteria befor you revert my changes, why don't you learn - say go to pubmed and look up articles by p serwer, a prof at univ of texas if i sound arrogant and annoyed it is because this is like the 100th time someone like you, perhaps well meaning, has reverted factually correct info to incorrect info which is why i don't really bother to do wiki anymore; to many people like you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinnamon colbert ( talk • contribs) 16:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Hzh! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, — DerHexer (Talk) 19:48, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I have just finished re-ordering phrases in a list of names of foxtail millet in different languages to put the name before the language. (See discussion at User talk:Sminthopsis84#Foxtail millet.) I noticed that, before I changed the order, the word "usually" appeared before the Mandarin Chinese word. If I put the word "usually" before the word (right after the "bullet"), it will disrupt the uniform appearance of the list. I could put the word "usually" after the Chinese word, but I don't think that would look very good, either. I wonder if you could tell me whether you think the word "usually" is really necessary and ought to be there. Also, while you're there, perhaps you could check the Japanese and Korean words. (Do you think all that information about the connotations of the Korean word are necessary?) CorinneSD ( talk) 20:10, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I just started reading the article on Herbal tea, and I noticed that there are two "citation needed" tags in the second paragraph of the lede. I thought you might be able to find the references. CorinneSD ( talk) 00:52, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Also in the second paragraph in Herbal tea#Popularity. CorinneSD ( talk) 01:03, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Gweilo may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 00:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I just wanted to take a moment to say that I really appreciate your recent edits to this article. Thank you! Dowcet ( talk) 04:30, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
I thought you might be able to find a reliable source in Chinese that mentions the use of any part of the Cucurbita plant in traditional Chinese medicine. After the article had already been peer reviewed and, as of February 28, 2015, promoted to FA status, a discussion arose on content, wording, and sources in one section. See Talk:Cucurbita#Alternative medicine section. CorinneSD ( talk) 22:46, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey.
Hey. This is AustinAndAllyFan. There's been a huge mistake. Some of my edits have actually been true like the KCA one and the Hell's Kitchen one I did last night. I got the Hell's Kitchen edit from another page and put it on that one. Also the KCA one was true as well as I saw it on the guide on my TV. I'm sorry about all those edits I did. I didn't know I was vandalizing wikipedia. I promise i never do that on wikis. I was just adding information. Honestly if you knew me at all I don't vandalize ever. Also sorry if I put this message in the wrong place. I couldn't figure out where to put it. I hope you forgive me. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AustinAndAllyFan ( talk • contribs) 23:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Oh Ok. I Understand.
This edit you reverted an edit that effectively added rowspans back in. In the future, rowspans do not belong in filmographies per WP:FILMOGRAPHY and WP:ACCESSIBILITY. Thank you. LADY LOTUS • TALK 18:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Langkawi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malaya. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Do not comment on my talk page about edit disputes. Instead, discuss them on the articles' talk pages. You have not cited any Wikipedia guidelines/policies to bolster your positions, so you yourself have ironically violated them by default.-- PhiladelphiaInjustice ( talk) 12:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Andrew Lincoln shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.-- PhiladelphiaInjustice ( talk) 12:11, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Hzh -- I was just reading the article on Manchu, and I made a number of copy-edits. I tried to improve the prose, but perhaps you could check to be sure I didn't introduce any errors. There is one sentence where I re-arranged the sentence a bit, but I think it needs to be checked. It doesn't look right now. I don't know if "Wang Gao" is the same person as Cungšan. The sentence is toward the end of the fourth-to-last paragraph in the section Manchu#Origins and early history. The sentence begins:
Thank you. CorinneSD ( talk) 23:32, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
P.S. Some of the sentences still sound as if a non-native speaker of English wrote them, but since I don't know the history, I don't want to change too much. CorinneSD ( talk) 23:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
FYI, please note this. Thank you and have a nice day. --‖ Ebyabe talk - Opposites Attract ‖ 13:11, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I wonder if you can help me with this sentence. I just made a few copy-edits to the article (didn't get all the way through the article yet). Now, I'm looking at this sentence again:
Some sources report also a Chinese presence during the same period on the middle Amur, with a fort—a predecessor of later Aigun—existing for about 20 years during the Yongle era on the left (northwestern) shore of the Amur, downstream from the mouth of the Zeya (opposite to the location of the later, Qing Aigun).
I had deleted a comma after "Qing" at the very end of the sentence, but now, looking at it, I see that it was a pair of commas, with "Qing" set off by the commas. But before I put that comma back in, I want to ask you about it. I guess it was to distinguish this Aigun from an earlier Aigun. However, earlier in the same sentence it says, "with a fort—a prececessor of later Aigun..." Now, is this "later" Aigun, the same Aigun mentioned at the end of the sentence? By adding "Qing" in the second instance, it suggests that it was even later than, and different from, the earlier mention of "later Aigun". If it is the same, perhaps "Qing" should be shifted to the first mention early in this sentence.
I don't know anyone else besides you who could help me with this. CorinneSD ( talk) 17:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
quote}}
.
Hzh (
talk)
11:50, 2 June 2015 (UTC)I'm reading the article on Khabarovsk Krai and I've come across something that is unclear to me. It's the first sentence in the third paragraph in the section Khabarovsk Krai#History. If you read the second paragraph, you'll see that the Russians lost the right to navigate on the Amur River to the Chinese. However, the first sentence in the third paragraph begins with "Although losing the rights to navigate the Amur River, the Chinese Qing Empire...", making it seem as if the Chinese had lost the rights. If you agree, how about changing the adverbial clause to:
Hello, Hzh -- I wonder if you could help me with some issues in the article Atayal people. As you'll see, I've made a few minor copy-edits. But then I saw some things that weren't quite right, but I'd like your advice or help.
1) In the section Atayal people#Traditional dress, the second paragraph isn't quite about dress. It mentions tattooing and teeth filing. However, tattooing is discussed in the previous section,"Lifestyle". I don't know if tattooing and teeth filing are considered part of "traditional dress" or not, but I don't think tattooing should be discussed in two different sections.
2) The section Atayal people#Lifestyle begins with the statement "The Atayal Tribe is a fairly advanced culture." I wonder if that statement is sufficiently supported, or even illustrated.
3) The last statement in the section Atayal people#Lifestyle, "Only those with tattoos...", follows statements about women, so it is unclear whether it applies only to women or to both women and men. If you think it applies to both, perhaps it should be moved. CorinneSD ( talk) 15:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm reading and copy-editing the article on Manchuria. In the section Manchuria#Etymology and names, do you think the section should start with such a long quote? I've never seen an Etymology section start with a quote, no less such a long one. CorinneSD ( talk) 00:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
If you have time, would you look at this edit to Shamanism in Siberia? [6] The editor may have had something specific in mind, but the link now leads to a disambiguation page. On that disambiguation page there are two articles, and I don't know which one the link should lead to. CorinneSD ( talk) 22:13, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Hzh. There is a discussion over at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language that you might be interested in. Regards. Martinevans123 ( talk) 09:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
The last sentences in the Tibet#History section of the article on Tibet are as follows:
I think "Songtsen Gampo" is the same person as Songtsän Gampo. Do you see any reason why the two should not be spelled the same? If not, should the first one be changed to the second spelling? The only thing I wonder about is that the second one contains an umlaut or diaeresis over the "a", and since that's not English spelling, perhaps the one without the umlaut/diaeresis ought to be used. What do you think? CorinneSD ( talk) 00:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I reference my numbers I dont see any reference of your, :) Julio Cesar Modesto ( talk) 22:51, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Hzh -- I was just reading the article on Cumans. I made a few minor copy-edits, but then realized that the entire article needs some work. If you look at it, you'll see that it has many huge paragraphs, some of them containing within them long quotes which should probably be block quotes and/or be pared down. I just thought I'd point it out in case you ever have nothing to do and feel like working on it. CorinneSD ( talk) 00:55, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Hzh -- I'm reading the article on China, and I have a question for you:
In the first paragraph in China#Etymology is the following sentence:
It's not clear what is meant by "the traditional theory". Traditional where? Traditional for whom? It's also not clear, considering the confident presentation of the etymology in the previous sentence, whether whoever wrote the sentence I've just copied meant to suggest that this theory is not only traditional but wrong. Then in the next sentence it goes back to early Hindu scripture, presumably (?) written in Sanskrit. Very puzzling. CorinneSD ( talk) 01:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I noticed a tag at the top of Ainu people suggesting that the organization of the sections could be improved. I looked at another article for a possible organizational structure – Indigenous Australians – and I wondered if you thought the organization and order of sections was a good model to follow for Ainu people. If so, I would attempt to re-arrange some sections in the latter article. If not, can you suggest a different order or a different article as a model to follow? CorinneSD ( talk) 16:10, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I sympathise with you – I have most of the Little Mix pages on my watchlist and they are the ones I spend most time correcting... fans who don't know the difference between selling enough copies to be certified platinum, and actually receiving a platinum certification. In any case, it's somewhat ambiguous: the platinum certification claims seem to be traced back to producer Duvall's comment on his Twitter feed which simply said "platinum" while holding a copy of the album... but as he was only responsible for producing one song ("Move"), it's not clear whether he is referring to the album or just the song, or whether he means UK sales, sales in another country, or combined. As you rightly say, unless the BPI says so, it doesn't count. Richard3120 ( talk) 21:19, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
I saw this edit to Ket people: [9]. I don't know if this is correct or not, but there is no mention of "Mongoloid" in the article, and upon reading the third paragraph in the section Ket people#Culture (after the images), one gets the impression that they were not Mongoloid. What do you think? CorinneSD ( talk) 17:00, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
I voted to move Songtsän Gampo to Songtsen Gampo; you should convert that into an official Move discussion for sure. Ogress smash! 01:32, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited A Record of Buddhist Practices Sent Home from the Southern Sea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Funan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:21, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Wat Phra Kaew may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 19:32, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wat Phra Kaew, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ayutthaya. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:55, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Archive 1 / Archive 2 / Archive 3 / Archive 5 /
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Uyghur_people&diff=635767398&oldid=635488688
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Uyghur_people&diff=636171698&oldid=636099772
Sino-Platonic papers publishes fringe theories, it explicitly seeks out unknown and "independent" authors to publish "controversial" material.
http://www.sino-platonic.org/complete/spp150_uyghurs.pdf
Rajmaan ( talk) 16:13, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
The academic rank of Sinoplatonic papers is authoritative. Even though I can see the trouble, and I think you are right. The phrasing was misleading. It would be better to accentuate the multiethnic ethnogenesis of the Uyghur people. I have to rephrase that part. But I am away for some days, so I have to leave you alone till Tuesday. See you next time, bye. 11:53, 5 December 2014 (UTC)~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uigur Cämiyät ( talk • contribs)
you don't seem to be familiar with the relevant scientific literature. There are many papers, in high quality journals, about using gel electrophoresis to separate, say, latex plastic particles or bacteria befor you revert my changes, why don't you learn - say go to pubmed and look up articles by p serwer, a prof at univ of texas if i sound arrogant and annoyed it is because this is like the 100th time someone like you, perhaps well meaning, has reverted factually correct info to incorrect info which is why i don't really bother to do wiki anymore; to many people like you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cinnamon colbert ( talk • contribs) 16:43, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Hi Hzh! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to ping me with {{ping|DerHexer}}. Cheers, — DerHexer (Talk) 19:48, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
I have just finished re-ordering phrases in a list of names of foxtail millet in different languages to put the name before the language. (See discussion at User talk:Sminthopsis84#Foxtail millet.) I noticed that, before I changed the order, the word "usually" appeared before the Mandarin Chinese word. If I put the word "usually" before the word (right after the "bullet"), it will disrupt the uniform appearance of the list. I could put the word "usually" after the Chinese word, but I don't think that would look very good, either. I wonder if you could tell me whether you think the word "usually" is really necessary and ought to be there. Also, while you're there, perhaps you could check the Japanese and Korean words. (Do you think all that information about the connotations of the Korean word are necessary?) CorinneSD ( talk) 20:10, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
I just started reading the article on Herbal tea, and I noticed that there are two "citation needed" tags in the second paragraph of the lede. I thought you might be able to find the references. CorinneSD ( talk) 00:52, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Also in the second paragraph in Herbal tea#Popularity. CorinneSD ( talk) 01:03, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Gweilo may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 00:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I just wanted to take a moment to say that I really appreciate your recent edits to this article. Thank you! Dowcet ( talk) 04:30, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
I thought you might be able to find a reliable source in Chinese that mentions the use of any part of the Cucurbita plant in traditional Chinese medicine. After the article had already been peer reviewed and, as of February 28, 2015, promoted to FA status, a discussion arose on content, wording, and sources in one section. See Talk:Cucurbita#Alternative medicine section. CorinneSD ( talk) 22:46, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey.
Hey. This is AustinAndAllyFan. There's been a huge mistake. Some of my edits have actually been true like the KCA one and the Hell's Kitchen one I did last night. I got the Hell's Kitchen edit from another page and put it on that one. Also the KCA one was true as well as I saw it on the guide on my TV. I'm sorry about all those edits I did. I didn't know I was vandalizing wikipedia. I promise i never do that on wikis. I was just adding information. Honestly if you knew me at all I don't vandalize ever. Also sorry if I put this message in the wrong place. I couldn't figure out where to put it. I hope you forgive me. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AustinAndAllyFan ( talk • contribs) 23:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Oh Ok. I Understand.
This edit you reverted an edit that effectively added rowspans back in. In the future, rowspans do not belong in filmographies per WP:FILMOGRAPHY and WP:ACCESSIBILITY. Thank you. LADY LOTUS • TALK 18:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Langkawi, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malaya. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:01, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Do not comment on my talk page about edit disputes. Instead, discuss them on the articles' talk pages. You have not cited any Wikipedia guidelines/policies to bolster your positions, so you yourself have ironically violated them by default.-- PhiladelphiaInjustice ( talk) 12:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Your recent editing history at Andrew Lincoln shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.-- PhiladelphiaInjustice ( talk) 12:11, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Hzh -- I was just reading the article on Manchu, and I made a number of copy-edits. I tried to improve the prose, but perhaps you could check to be sure I didn't introduce any errors. There is one sentence where I re-arranged the sentence a bit, but I think it needs to be checked. It doesn't look right now. I don't know if "Wang Gao" is the same person as Cungšan. The sentence is toward the end of the fourth-to-last paragraph in the section Manchu#Origins and early history. The sentence begins:
Thank you. CorinneSD ( talk) 23:32, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
P.S. Some of the sentences still sound as if a non-native speaker of English wrote them, but since I don't know the history, I don't want to change too much. CorinneSD ( talk) 23:34, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
FYI, please note this. Thank you and have a nice day. --‖ Ebyabe talk - Opposites Attract ‖ 13:11, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
I wonder if you can help me with this sentence. I just made a few copy-edits to the article (didn't get all the way through the article yet). Now, I'm looking at this sentence again:
Some sources report also a Chinese presence during the same period on the middle Amur, with a fort—a predecessor of later Aigun—existing for about 20 years during the Yongle era on the left (northwestern) shore of the Amur, downstream from the mouth of the Zeya (opposite to the location of the later, Qing Aigun).
I had deleted a comma after "Qing" at the very end of the sentence, but now, looking at it, I see that it was a pair of commas, with "Qing" set off by the commas. But before I put that comma back in, I want to ask you about it. I guess it was to distinguish this Aigun from an earlier Aigun. However, earlier in the same sentence it says, "with a fort—a prececessor of later Aigun..." Now, is this "later" Aigun, the same Aigun mentioned at the end of the sentence? By adding "Qing" in the second instance, it suggests that it was even later than, and different from, the earlier mention of "later Aigun". If it is the same, perhaps "Qing" should be shifted to the first mention early in this sentence.
I don't know anyone else besides you who could help me with this. CorinneSD ( talk) 17:45, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
{{
quote}}
.
Hzh (
talk)
11:50, 2 June 2015 (UTC)I'm reading the article on Khabarovsk Krai and I've come across something that is unclear to me. It's the first sentence in the third paragraph in the section Khabarovsk Krai#History. If you read the second paragraph, you'll see that the Russians lost the right to navigate on the Amur River to the Chinese. However, the first sentence in the third paragraph begins with "Although losing the rights to navigate the Amur River, the Chinese Qing Empire...", making it seem as if the Chinese had lost the rights. If you agree, how about changing the adverbial clause to:
Hello, Hzh -- I wonder if you could help me with some issues in the article Atayal people. As you'll see, I've made a few minor copy-edits. But then I saw some things that weren't quite right, but I'd like your advice or help.
1) In the section Atayal people#Traditional dress, the second paragraph isn't quite about dress. It mentions tattooing and teeth filing. However, tattooing is discussed in the previous section,"Lifestyle". I don't know if tattooing and teeth filing are considered part of "traditional dress" or not, but I don't think tattooing should be discussed in two different sections.
2) The section Atayal people#Lifestyle begins with the statement "The Atayal Tribe is a fairly advanced culture." I wonder if that statement is sufficiently supported, or even illustrated.
3) The last statement in the section Atayal people#Lifestyle, "Only those with tattoos...", follows statements about women, so it is unclear whether it applies only to women or to both women and men. If you think it applies to both, perhaps it should be moved. CorinneSD ( talk) 15:16, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
I'm reading and copy-editing the article on Manchuria. In the section Manchuria#Etymology and names, do you think the section should start with such a long quote? I've never seen an Etymology section start with a quote, no less such a long one. CorinneSD ( talk) 00:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
If you have time, would you look at this edit to Shamanism in Siberia? [6] The editor may have had something specific in mind, but the link now leads to a disambiguation page. On that disambiguation page there are two articles, and I don't know which one the link should lead to. CorinneSD ( talk) 22:13, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Hzh. There is a discussion over at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language that you might be interested in. Regards. Martinevans123 ( talk) 09:58, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
The last sentences in the Tibet#History section of the article on Tibet are as follows:
I think "Songtsen Gampo" is the same person as Songtsän Gampo. Do you see any reason why the two should not be spelled the same? If not, should the first one be changed to the second spelling? The only thing I wonder about is that the second one contains an umlaut or diaeresis over the "a", and since that's not English spelling, perhaps the one without the umlaut/diaeresis ought to be used. What do you think? CorinneSD ( talk) 00:46, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
I reference my numbers I dont see any reference of your, :) Julio Cesar Modesto ( talk) 22:51, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Hzh -- I was just reading the article on Cumans. I made a few minor copy-edits, but then realized that the entire article needs some work. If you look at it, you'll see that it has many huge paragraphs, some of them containing within them long quotes which should probably be block quotes and/or be pared down. I just thought I'd point it out in case you ever have nothing to do and feel like working on it. CorinneSD ( talk) 00:55, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Hzh -- I'm reading the article on China, and I have a question for you:
In the first paragraph in China#Etymology is the following sentence:
It's not clear what is meant by "the traditional theory". Traditional where? Traditional for whom? It's also not clear, considering the confident presentation of the etymology in the previous sentence, whether whoever wrote the sentence I've just copied meant to suggest that this theory is not only traditional but wrong. Then in the next sentence it goes back to early Hindu scripture, presumably (?) written in Sanskrit. Very puzzling. CorinneSD ( talk) 01:12, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I noticed a tag at the top of Ainu people suggesting that the organization of the sections could be improved. I looked at another article for a possible organizational structure – Indigenous Australians – and I wondered if you thought the organization and order of sections was a good model to follow for Ainu people. If so, I would attempt to re-arrange some sections in the latter article. If not, can you suggest a different order or a different article as a model to follow? CorinneSD ( talk) 16:10, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
I sympathise with you – I have most of the Little Mix pages on my watchlist and they are the ones I spend most time correcting... fans who don't know the difference between selling enough copies to be certified platinum, and actually receiving a platinum certification. In any case, it's somewhat ambiguous: the platinum certification claims seem to be traced back to producer Duvall's comment on his Twitter feed which simply said "platinum" while holding a copy of the album... but as he was only responsible for producing one song ("Move"), it's not clear whether he is referring to the album or just the song, or whether he means UK sales, sales in another country, or combined. As you rightly say, unless the BPI says so, it doesn't count. Richard3120 ( talk) 21:19, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
I saw this edit to Ket people: [9]. I don't know if this is correct or not, but there is no mention of "Mongoloid" in the article, and upon reading the third paragraph in the section Ket people#Culture (after the images), one gets the impression that they were not Mongoloid. What do you think? CorinneSD ( talk) 17:00, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
I voted to move Songtsän Gampo to Songtsen Gampo; you should convert that into an official Move discussion for sure. Ogress smash! 01:32, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited A Record of Buddhist Practices Sent Home from the Southern Sea, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Funan. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:21, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
BracketBot. I have automatically detected that
your edit to
Wat Phra Kaew may have broken the
syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just
edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on
my operator's talk page.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 19:32, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wat Phra Kaew, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ayutthaya. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 08:55, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I'm
ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)