![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The following is the archive of User talk:Rjanag for August to December 2009.
![]() |
Archives |
I added HARVEY W. BARNHILL to the list of PILOTS in ALASKA AVIATION HISTORY, then added a biography page for Barnhill linked from the list of PILOTS. You immediately deleted the bio page, but left his name listed in the list of PILOTS. The reason sighted is that it is an individual without indication of his importance.
I was beginning an extensive effort to add the names & biographies of the Alaska Bush Pilots from the pioneer era 1920 - 1940. I have researched & developed bios on over 100 pioneer Alaska bush pilot who contributed to Alaska aviation during this period. I also was going to add to the list of DEFUNCT AIRLINES in the ALASKA AVIATION HISTORY section.
HARVEY W. BARNHILL was one of the very early bush pilots. He & LINIOUS McGEE founded BARNHILL & McGEE AIRWAYS, which became McGEE AIRWAYS (one of the earliest airlines in Alaska). BARNHILL & McGEE AIRWAYS became McGEE AIRWAYS which sold to STAR AIR SERVICE, which became STAR AIRLINES which with mergers & acquisitions became ALASKA STAR AIRLINES, which became the ALASKA AIRLINES of today. I had planned to add HARVEY W. BARNHILL & LINIOUS McGEE bios, then BARNHILL & McGEE AIRWAYS, then McGEE AIRWAYS, all appropriately linked. This initial set of 4 pages would begin adding factual useful info on Alaska Aviation History not presently covered in Wikipedia.
How do you want me to proceed??
Signed - RoyDickson ( talk) 14:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
PS - I also added some birth & death years to several of the PILOTS in the list that were missing dates. These edits were not deleted.
Actually, having this information on the Wiki IS relevant, because many people are unaware that he is not involved with Green Hornet any longer, and a Wiki page is supposed to be INFORMATIVE AND FACTUAL. Glossing over this bit of history is cleansing his professional history and providing a disservice to fans/readers by omission of relevant history.
In fact, when I have the time I will add a paragraph talking about this sad chapter for Stephen Chow fans. Hollywood kicked Mr. Chow in the teeth. The wiki should document professional successes AND professional failures. It is his LIFE, after all.
75.140.110.87 ( talk) 20:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Every time I post my bio article on Harvey W. Barnhill - you (or someone else) deletes it. I have tried to explain to you that I am attempting to add bio information on the Alaska Bush Pilots of the pioneer 1920 -1940 era, as well as history articles on the airlines in Alaska during this period, all of which are now defunct. These pilots & airlines contributed much to the development of Alaska before statehood as supported by the Alaska Centennial Commission, The Alaska Aviation Heritage Museum, University of Alaska Press / Film Archives, etc. As far as I can tell you don't even give me an explanation other than your original cryptic criticism. I have rewritten the article & reposted it twice but it keeps disappearing. Besides the criticism do you have any constructive suggestions on how to accomplish this objective, or should I just quit wasting a considerable amount of time trying to develop the understanding to contribute? Plz do me the honor of replying. RoyDickson ( talk) 18:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
You are terrible!
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
Your deletion of the article on the 12th Lord Belhaven and Stenton was an outrage. Do the right thing and restore it.-- ChapmanHB ( talk) 19:07, 2 August 2009 (UTC)ChapmanHB
I'd like to request your comment regarding moving Bing (search engine) to Bing at Talk:Bing#Requested_move. Thanks! Smallman12q ( talk) 22:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Someone's trying to (once again) add the photo controversy story into the Rebiya Kadeer article and actually started a talkpage-string. Maybe you could comment as well. I know we greed to exclude it, but I don't completely recall the rationale. thanks Seb az86556 ( talk) 04:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
isn't chinahistorian our "special friend" from last month? seems like he dug up the Kadeer children's letter... Seb az86556 ( talk) 20:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Can you look at Wikipedia:Help_desk#GA_Sweeps_review_userbox.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 02:08, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll be sure to check those, as soon as I finish editing the spelling within the article. SilkRoadEdge ( talk) 03:59, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible to unfreeze
Fred Singer and keep discussion of the disputed section in the
Fred Singer talk page (as has been tried repeatedly in good faith by
GoRight and others, including myself) till the disputed section is resolved without requiring a freezing of the whole article?--there is a certain aspect of "tag teaming" which I think underlies the current reverting difficulties. The reverts are often accompanied by snide remarks/no or perfunctory justification and the
talk page gets much worse. An example: "Singer['s]...work during the last 30 years is a politically motivated crock of shit...." [strikethrough was in original and was meant as a sarcastic insult--see other similar insults directed at GoRight and others in the same section], so I think GoRight is getting a bad rap here--he has honestly been trying to add balance (whether I/others agree with him or not) and trying to get civil discussions going without much success. The current issue is how to deal with "sourced" ad hominem labels in a held-to-a-higher-standard
Biography of living persons. I'm not sure reverts attempting ensure consensus gathering should be viewed as being of the same form as those trying to avoid it, either.
Btw, the version frozen in place was the one reverted to by the editor holding the "Singer['s]...work during the last 30 years is a politically motivated crock of shit...." animus. --
John G. Miles (
talk)
05:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your wishes. :) -- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi talk! 06:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I have been trying to add a lot of important info on early Alaska aviation history. I have a lot of well researched info on the pioneer bush pilots of the 1920 - 1940 era, as well as info on the many airlines formed during this period, that through many mergers, ended up being Alaska Airlines and a part of Delta Airlines. I added some birth & death dates to your existing list of pilots, and added the names of about 90 additional bush pilots of the 1920 - 1940 era. These are all notable pioneers who contributed to the development of Alaska which was and continues to be so dependent on aviation. All of these pilots were honored by the ALASKA CENTENNIAL COMMISSION in 1967. YOU DELETED ALL MY ADDITIONS WITHOUT COMMENT! YOU EVEN DELETED SEVERAL OF THE PILOTS IN YOUR ORIGINAL LIST! You changed the "PILOT" heading to "NOTABLE PILOTS." You even deleted a pilot from the original list who was also a Territorial Senator from Alaska and one of the authors and signers of the Alaska State Constitution! YOU HAVE ALSO DELETED MOST OF THE ARTICLES I HAVE SUBMITTED EITHER WITHOUT COMMENT OR WITH SOME RUDE COMMENTS indicating that IN YOUR JUDGMENT these people or airlines were not NOTABLE enough! Perhaps the Alaska Centennial Commission and the Alaska Historians are much better judges of who & what is notable than you are! Wikipedia does not have much information on this important subject of Alaska Aviation History. For example, the article on ALASKA AIRLINES is a very short stub and the flag ASKS for contributions of more information. I am trying to add information on the 14 airlines that became Alaska Airlines and the 100 or so pioneer bush pilots who started it all. IS THERE SOMEONE AT WIKIPEDIA I CAN WORK WITH that is a lot MORE HELPFUL and a lot LESS RUDE? PLEASE ADVISE! RoyDickson ( talk) 19:02, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
No need for email as far as I'm concerned. I'm tired of wikipedia and don't like who I am here. I'm not just switching accounts; I'm gone for good. I think that's reason enough? Arxack ( talk) 20:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 20:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
After your initial (and only) message to me about removing the Barnhill article, I rewrote and resubmitted the article which you removed again without any message that I can locate. So, what is the answer to my question: "Is there someone I can work with that is a LOT MORE HELPFUL and A LOT LESS RUDE?" - answer YES or NO?? RoyDickson ( talk) 00:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
while we're at it, I need a legal opinion regarding the Griqualand East-article:
So that country printed its own money in 1867 and burnt/destroyed most of those banknotes shortly after that 'cause they realized the idea was total junk and wouldn't work. Only a handful of those notes remain, and the copyright has definitely expired (1867, US+100, SAfr.+70).
And then there's this guy who takes a picture of one of those rare pieces, posts it on the web, and claims he now has the copyright. Hm?
thanks Seb az86556 ( talk) 04:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Are you seriously of the opinion that 6x9=42 (base 13) requires a citation? -- RobertG ♬ talk 11:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. I have noticed your work on the Epoch Times and I think your objectivity and editing experience can also be used at other articles that deal with Falun Gong media and PR organizations such as NTDTV, Shen Yun Performing Arts etc. All of these articles desperately need to be checked for POV, with some of the articles being constantly abused by one particular user. Colipon+( T) 15:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
The user I mentioned above has engaged in serious content and policy violations with Falun Gong related content. He violates WP:OWN and often reverts changes intermittently with dubious reasoning and shows little respect to other peoples' views. He constantly throws out personal attacks and his blanking of content has become very methodical and often turns away good faith editors like OhConfucius and myself. He has been cautioned endlessly on his talk page and has been banned in the past. His abuse is immediately visible if you check his contributions. He needs to be topic-banned (or banned completely) as soon as possible, much like the pro-CCP anti-Uyghur "User:ChinaHistorian" on the Urumqi riots articles. I was wondering if you could help me through this process. Colipon+( T) 15:34, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk%3ADilip_rajeev&diff=288338716&oldid=288322046 (Bunch of sockpuppet allegations and attempts at defending himself). Also, his anti-Cult stance at Sathya Sai Baba is notable, as the organization wrote a blog against him detailing his "smears" of the article on Wikipedia. There is also his own website praising Falun Gong - indicating a clear conflict of interest. There's countless other cases of him insulting and attacking other users on talk pages. I just don't have time to dig thru them all. If you need them I'll keep digging though. Colipon+( T) 19:06, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
In one of your previous replies to my messages, you mentioned the name of the contributor who deleted the PILOTS category and replaced it with NOTABLE PILOTS and eliminated most of what had been listed both before my edits and after my edits. I do not seem to be able to find that contributors ID so I can contact him to discuss this list (in helpful positive ways.) Would you please resend me his contact ID? Thank you in advance. RoyDickson ( talk) 20:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
I would like to thankyou for your continued participation with me in helping Roy Dickson. I looked at his last edit at Talk:History_of_aviation_in_Alaska#Long_list_of_pilots and he raised the question as to what are the criteria for listing pilots. I've looked at Wikipedia:Notability, Wikipedia:Notability (people), and Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Notability and none list the criteria for listing notable pilots. Could you point me to somewhere it does, or give me some criteria that I can pass on?(I've also started a thread at WP:Village_pump_(policy)#Notability_of_pilots. Thanks. Smallman12q ( talk) 19:05, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for stepping in and assisting here. I'll agree with most of your comments, it could have been handled better. Inurhead has been, in the past, very difficult to bring to a discussion, any discussion. I'll try to do better. Would you be willing to talk to Inurhead about his accusations he's raising in various places? I don't really like being labeled (even by him) as something I'm not. Yup, I know I've called him a SPA, something that's very, very clear from his history. The sock thing, he's reacting to multiple editors disagreeing with him, not by any evidence. And no, for the record, I'm not a sock of anyone. Again, thanks! Ravensfire2002 ( talk) 05:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
I put The Universe of Myron Evans on AfD. Since you agreed w/ deletion but deletion was contested, you might be interested in commenting Seb az86556 ( talk) 13:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 19:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. See, there is still some policies I haven't read. Chevy Impala 2009 20:32, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey - great addition to the hangon template. Not sure if you knew this, but it actually went live already (because it was already in the hangon main template)... it still contained what looked like two links to example.com - one of which I've fixed - the other (purge) I'm still trying to figure out how to fix because the parser wants to add action=edit which is overriding action=purge. I've also requested protection on the page to match the hangon template. Hope I didn't mess you up. Regards 7 talk | Δ | 06:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
{{fullurl}}
for the other instance, I figured it would be more consistent. As for the includeonlys, I'm not sure what happened there....I thought by having subst statements in includeonly it would cause there to be a link when the template is transcluded, without having transcluded {{fullurl}}
s within the transcluded template, but when I tried it out in my sandbox it didn't work, so I just removed the subst's.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
11:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
So for the first time, I was being really bold on Sujiatun Thrombosis Hospital since ohconfucius brought the edit-war over this hospital to my attention... this has gotten out of hand... undue weight to all the allegations when there's already a main article with all the details. Isn't there at least some basic information on staff, year of founding, and such... anything before it jumps into these rumors? Seb az86556 ( talk) 17:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your teaching me something new on my talk page and for the revert, I see now that the article loads, which is odd. Perhaps the site was temporarily down. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 18:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Some editors continue on insisting that these FLG-related organizations are somehow "independent". Would like your expertise on Sound of hope. Thanks! Colipon+( Talk) 19:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello, When you have time, could you please leave a feedback on Talk:The_Epoch_Times#First_sentence. Thank You! -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 21:28, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I have a suspicion that User:Marc87 is an automated program rather than a human editor. His edits seem to follow a formula, he has made no effort to make his user page presentable (most users have a little pride), comments on his talk page are simply reverted rather than responded to, and when he is editing he is editing large numbers of articles at a regular pace (no need to take a potty break?). This seems wrong. Do you know if there is a policy that applies or a place to open an investigation? Readin ( talk) 23:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
[ [6]] <can't read Chinese, what's this about? Undo? Seb az86556 ( talk) 03:13, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
How's this?
(If you like it, I can make a template so it isn't so onerous to type.) kwami ( talk) 07:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
I would like to bring to your attention this picture, readily being used as circumstantial "evidence" that Chinese gov't is harvesting organs from Falun Gong practitioners (this and a few other "evidence" charts have been added to the article, citing Kilgour-Matas). What is your view about a chart like this on a heavily contested article? Colipon+( Talk) 19:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
An FYI (since you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarey Savy (Singer/Songwriter) as re-userfy, I've tagged User:OMGILOVEPEAS/Sarey Savy (Singer-Songwriter) for speedy deletion under Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy. My rationale is at User talk:OMGILOVEPEAS/Sarey Savy (Singer-Songwriter). I hope you agree with my reasoning. Best, Cunard ( talk) 02:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
^_^ Thanks. Until It Sleeps Wake me 12:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
I, Pericles of Athens, award Rjanag with this Barnstar of Diligence for extraordinary contributions made to Chinese classifier, which is a Good and soon-to-be Featured article. Well done! Pericles of Athens Talk 16:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC) |
So what are the chances of two people editing the same article at the same time like that then? I'll leave you to it - if you want to take anything from my version please do so, and I'll take a look at yours later on. ;-) Ghmyrtle ( talk) 19:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Chzz has given you
half a biscuit! May Mr. Moult bring you fair winds, your lenor always be discounted, your gargoyles never bear any resemblence to a comedian from Faversham, and your windows be free of condensation.
Spread the goodness of HMHB by adding {{ subst:HB}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message. Or don't.
Yes, I really am sad enough to download the pic, crop it, upload it, make a template, etc. Your work on restructuring my feeble article was sublime. Cheers, Chzz ► 07:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Have you seen my comment on the talk page? GeometryGirl ( talk) 22:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
I've started a repository of underused and potentially useful links for use in the Falun Gong articles. Please feel free to paste links there with a description of what they refer to, for easy relocation. Ohconfucius ( talk) 04:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
:(it's here: User:Ohconfucius/FG repository Seb az86556 ( talk) 05:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC))
rv good faith -- this makes it somewhat suggest that these languages got CL from Chinese, whereas it's actually ambiguous. "close to" refers to both geographically and typologically
A lot of East Asian languages have, indeed, borrowed/influenced from Chinese language. I don't see why it should not read "borrowed" or "influenced by". "Close to"? The only languages that borrowed from Chinese ARE located in Asia, which IS CLOSE to PRC. Explain? I feel like you're making quite an unnecessary edit, when I was clearly asked to copyedit this article (see my talk page). ★ Dasani★ 00:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! :) -- Josh Atkins ( talk - contribs) 10:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Need your output at Template talk:Infobox Korean name#Sizing in fonts and cells. Don't you think that the font size is becoming ridiculous? -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 13:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
There is an on-going article name dispute for the Taiwanese language here. There is also an on-going discussion at Talk:Wenzhou Chinese. Your help would be more than appreciated as there seems to be deadlock. Colipon+( Talk) 23:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
This article is up for deletion and I thought you migth be interested. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 17:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I was thinking about the page load issue a little bit, and I hit on something that could speed things up. Right now the credits are in an invisible div. This means that the Wikipedia servers, and your browser, render the credits, but make them invisible (try looking at the page source). If we comment out the credits, it does not act like a transcluded template, but some random text lying around. This would effectively cut the number of transcluded templates in half (we still have {{ *mp}}s) and might make a dent in the speed issue some people are seeing. Shubinator ( talk) 22:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Got it! Change to template, sandbox test. The random includeonly's break up the comment-out syntax on the template itself, so it doesn't act as a comment. But when the template gets substituted, the includeonly's go away, and what's left is comment-out syntax. Same strategy as meta:Help:Substitution#Includeonly. Shubinator ( talk) 16:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Point taken that I could have been a little more restrained in expressing my outrage at being accused of copyright infringement. Thank you for promptly restoring the article, as requested. ChapmanHB ( talk) 15:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)ChapmanHB
Bluefish35 has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
Haha, wow. I feel so cool! :D Enjoy your cookie! This is so incredibly pointless. --= BlueFish35! talk/ contribs 15:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
What's the deal? Eery time Roy does something, you seem to feel you need to announce it to as many other users as possible. If you have a problem with Roy's edits, could you just say what it is in a straight forward manner instead of putting out bulletins every time he makes an edit? Please? -- Beeblebrox ( talk) 05:19, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Kindly note that an Enforcement case has just been filed against Dilip rajeev here. You might like to comment. Please note that this is a permalink; any commenting should be done only after clicking on the 'Project page' tab. Ohconfucius ( talk) 03:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't see how I'm the one being accused of "edit warring" when I'm the ONLY one offering to discuss this issue in order to reach a consensus. I've started a discussion on the talk page, and provided reasons for my edits, yet no one has participated in the talk page, and no reasons have been provided for the undoing of my edits, including (as of this edit) by you.
I will continue to patiently wait until someone provides a reason to the contrary. Until then, I will continue to promote a maintenace of the original. Thank you, :) Sourside21 ( talk) 12:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:South_Korea#South_Korea.27s_orthographic_projection
Sourside21 ( talk) 12:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag, I know you're busy, but I was wondering if I could get your opinion/assistance on something. The ninja article is currently a poorly constructed mishmash, and very prone to vandalism. If you take a quick look at the history, you'll see that most of the edits during the last few months have been vandalism from IP editors. This includes childish insertions, trolling, and what appears to be copyright violations. There is also a persistent trend to add poorly written, unsourced, and somewhat dubious information to an already controversial article. I was wondering if it is perhaps appropriate to apply semi-protection to this page.
I will inform you that I am currently working on a total rewrite of the article here, and plan to put it up probably sometime this week. I will also try for a DYK nomination. Please let me know what you think about article protection. Cheers ~ AMorozov 〈talk〉 21:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag, sorry to bug you again. There seems to be several IP editors [9], [10], [11] bent on reverting the ninja article back to one revision, where some uncited and exaggerated nonsense was added. One, who is clearly a troll, has reverted to that version 4 times in a row [12]. Could you take a quick look? Thanks, ~ AMorozov 〈talk〉 21:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I've nominated McGee Airways, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Smallman12q ( talk) 02:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC) Thanks, Smallman12q ( talk) 02:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi m8
Sorry no reply, had a few problems here with failed hard drives and blown up graphics cards and then holiday - just got back on sunday and made a few posts announcing my return - surprise surprise I giot exploited and just finished reinstalling windows again
should be back on more at the end of the week once all my progs are back on the PC
thx for the reminder, I had a quick look and loos good - will get back to you later once I have more time - at the moment just have installed vista, teamspeak, firefox and putting FSX on now so maybe two or three days before all is back to basics...
Chaosdruid ( talk) 04:36, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Someone recently made some bold changes to the Xinjiang-article with regards to th meaning of the name, and an IP pointed it out as incorrect on the talkpage. I have no way of checking it. Here is the 3edits-diff. Seb az86556 ( talk) 04:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
The link from Turpan to Turpan water system is only present in article picture annotation, not in main text, hence I do believe a See also link would be appropriate. Cheers, -- Rayshade ( talk) 12:57, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, apparently it was reported in The New York Times if the comments are to be believed. Here under 16 August. -- can dle • wicke 23:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
The reason is political. Although Kokang is in Shan State, it is not ruled by Shan State. Many people do not know that Shan State is in Myanmar/Burma, and people know it well should also be aware of its uneasy relationship with the central government. So I was wondering that, if Laukkai is listed "only under" the category of Shan State, it will seem like something is being implied. Qrfqr ( talk) 18:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
I was going to add my support to the nomination but I saw you added it yourself. Even though it began a few weeks back it's getting a lot of attention now, so I think its worth it. Great work on the article though! :) It's coming along nicely. I'll try and find out more about the MNDAA and add over the next few days. Midway ( talk) 01:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Since you have encountered him before, so I'm bringing him to your attention. After checking out, I figure out the user comes from Chinese Wikipedia with the same disruption on similar subjects. If you see the history of Annals of the Joseon Dynasty [13], inter Wiki from Chinese Wikipedia has been changed three times, and that was due to Guangzhou 2010 ( talk · contribs)'s tendentious edit warring over there [14] and comes here to continue his edit warring.
The user insists on using the name for what Chinese call in China, not in English or in Korea. Would you warn him to use edit summary and refrain from pushing POV crossing over multiple Wikiprojects? Thanks.-- Caspian blue 13:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree that Uyghur people was an appropriate use of the template, but that was one of the very few recent examples that I could think of. Most of the time, the template is used inappropriately ("Hey, this topic is related to a current event, so I gotta add this template!"), and there are usually no more than 2 or 3 (or none at all, often enough) articles using it. I don't think that we need an extra template for those few cases. -- Conti| ✉ 16:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Although I agree that it is dictator claims are not a reliable source, it is the only source available to us. I suggest putting (official figures) or (government estimate) below it. Dictatorships also usually claim to kill large numbers of enemies at a minimal cost to themselves, but in this case, the govewrnment admitted to heavy losses. This suggestds casualties may be higher, but it is the only source we have so far, and should stay labelled (government claim) until an independent estimate can be verified. Reenem ( talk)
As it is an official figure from an involved party, it should be included. If it is tagged with "According to Junta Government", readers will understand this is not neccesarily true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reenem ( talk • contribs)
As the police were targeted and attacked, it makes them an involved party. However, if they did not operate except for that incident, than Khin Yi should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reenem ( talk • contribs) 20:18, 30 August 2009
thanks for blocking me for 10 seconds :P... I started an SPI on this guy... was getting sick of his fights @ South Korea. Seb az86556 ( talk) 23:06, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Your message regarding copyright of the 2 pics I added to McGee Airways article - those are my pictures, in my possession. My father took those pictures and I am in sole possession of his picture collection. I have the negatives - so the statement in the picture page is correct - these are my pictures. Plz advise. Old33 ( talk) 16:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Ah thanks. That might be true. I think this part of the article threw me:
"The fighting began between soldiers from the Kokang minority group and government troops, but it broadened to involve at least two more groups, the Wa and the Kachin. All three groups oppose the central government."
as if to imply it involved others, but it is not mentioned again in the article, nor have I seen it mentioned anywhere else. Of the news items I have seen, there seems to be tension, though it's still unclear as to how many groups were involved. Midway ( talk) 18:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
I am not in a war with you. I am new to wikipedia, so I have made some errors in setting up links, etc.
However, it is not possible for a "store" to "describe itself." Your writing warrants minor editing in this instance, and I have done nothing wrong.
You, on the other hand, have not edited, but deleted every entry I have made, and deleted links to relevant material. -- Summertoad ( talk) 04:03, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I guess anybody's writing style can be considered prescriptive, yours or mine included, when someone insists on it never being edited. As I am sure you know, neither the internet nor wikipedia is a reliable source of quality writing.
I did not write that you had not edited the article. What I pointed out was that you were not editing my entries, but simply deleting them. You did, however, leave the reference to Pete Earley. However, your use of the quotation changed the meaning somewhat, especially when you changed the chronology, which is an important part of the psycho-donuts story.
I don't mean to be rude, but I won't be replying to anymore talk. I simply don't have time for it. -- Summertoad ( talk) 04:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
There's something weird about User:Clockoon and his stuff on South Korea... He claims to be active on the Korean wiki but has no user page, no talkpage, no history there as far as I can tell... "없습니다" -- that's my limited knowledge of Korean. More socks? Seb az86556 ( talk) 05:44, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The Play of the Weather has been featured on DYK before. The nom wasn't deleted from T:TDYK, so it's up again now. Could you take it down or replace it? Shubinator ( talk) 06:32, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The cake was quite tasty, and it was nice of you to notice my "birthday." :-) Textorus ( talk) 21:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 00:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Re: this edit I think you meant to say "signature" not "username". I don't want to correct you on that page because the user is already confused enough - but would you take a look. Thanks. 7 02:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
You have moved this article to a lower case "van." What do you mean with "proper capitalization"? Where did you get the info that he used a lower case van, and not a capitalized "Van," like all sources state? Please add sources to the talk page. Kraxler ( talk) 16:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
This amn was neither Dutch nor Belgian, he was American. American usage is "Van", all the sources say "Van" referring to this person. I would appreciate it very much if you refrained from moving articles you admit you don't know anything about. Now I need some admin to move it back, maybe UpstateNYer can do that. 18:40, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I was trying to revert an old edit to [[[South Korea]] by User:Nikkul dated 25 august, where he claimed to have removed POV ( about innovation) but was well-sourcved. Hometech ( talk) 18:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
My mistake. Thanks, for improving my mistake [19]- [20] :) LUCPOL ( talk) 20:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
If you have some time please provide us with an input at this RFC on 2008 Summer Olympics torch relay article and this Merger Contest. Thank You! -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 23:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Look bro, thanks for your help with that fiasco. I just wish I would have known the issue was brought up in ANI. I commented on the accusations there and on his page. Again, thanks, his templates are normal now. Have a great day!! GnarlyLikeWhoa ( talk) 01:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
I responded to your comments at the FAC. As it stands there isn't much I can do with expanding those statements as they're a direct summary of what's being said on those three pages.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 03:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Dabomb87 ( talk) 12:40, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi how are you? I hope you are fine. I am writing to you because of the protection of the page Lower Silesia. There is a region in Germany that belongs to Lower Silesia, and this can be proven by the fact that on the official website of that region, there is the coat of arms of Lower Silesia shown. www.kreis-goerlitz.de Thats why i wanted to include three german cities of that region which lie in germany, into a city list of that page. But someone else keeps reverting my changes all the time, because those cities only belonged to Lower Silesia from 1815 on. But that is no reason not to include those cities because the page Lower Silesia is not about Lower Silesia prior to 1815. Now this page is protected and i can't change it anymore. There is mostly just one person who always reverts my changes, and i think that his opinion can't be seen as neutral. I also don't understand why i am in an edit war, because i just change obviously wrong things. But now the page is protected in the version without those cities and i can't add them anymore. I've been trying to discuss the topic on the discussion page, and everyone who has a look on it, can see that i explained the facts in detail, and that i was very engaged in the discussion. But all i get are very short unlogical answers, and a revert of my changes. A neutral person is needed to solve the problem. Or, why is the official usage of an coat of arms of a region not proof enough that this region belongs to the region of which it uses the coat of arms? it is always deleted with the annotation: del original research i thought official pages are a proof. The region belonged to lower silesia from 1815 on, and that is no reason to exclude it, just because other regions were longer part of lower silesia. Take care, Michał Jadran91 ( talk) 12:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
ok thank you but could you not just one time open the protection of the page very short so that i can revert the last changes, and then protect it again? because now it is wrong and it stays wrong until the protection is over Jadran91 ( talk) 14:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
ok sorry thank you take care Jadran91 ( talk) 15:43, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
You are terrible!
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Are you sure a warning is sufficient, the guy is a repeat offender. Note he has clearly made his 3rd and 4th reverts after being asked not to delete whole sections of text. It is not the first time. -- Martintg ( talk) 02:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I realised that when I added the information, however, I've just looked and it is mentioned by Xinhua. What do you think? Midway ( talk) 19:05, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
[22]. This time he didn't even take a short break between his bouts of edit-warring, though now he is self-reverting in order to stay just within the 3RR restriction (fence hugging). This isn't about revenge or anything, it's just that this is a very disruptive edit warrior, on multiple articles, in disputes with multiple users which makes normal editing difficult. I think 3 cases of edit warring within 2 weeks merits more than just a warning, since these appear to be ineffective. radek ( talk) 19:50, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Wow! right on the heels of Rjanag's warning that he will block PasswordUsername if he continues to edit war, now he is edit warring on Monument of Lihula:
The guy is clearly out of control, he even mentions my name in the second revert even though I haven't edited that article since November 2007. Something needs to be done, I heeded your warning but PU seems to be blowing raspberries at you. Will you now block him as you said you would here? -- Martintg ( talk) 20:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
It has been long since I haven't edited this article, but I see out of the blue an edit war today on something I fought was happily at peace...
Firstly Rjanag, you can't say "you didn't have to come to me (...) there were 1,600 other administrators you could have talked to". You picked up this dirt, you have to clean it; don't put things on hold, or ask another "janitor" to be contacted, you are not a 1-800 teller. With the mop, expect to smell a lot of s%*t. :) I am really honestly sorry, I do understand how ingrate is this.
Secondly, IMHO, the first edit is not technically a revert; Rjanag is right. The second and third are. The forth edit shows confrontations at the same article, but is self-reverted by the fifth edit. So if we pretend, 4th and 5th didn't exist, there are 2 reverts. But, in regard to 4th and 5th, I agree with Rjanag that undoing oneself to avoid being blamed for policy braking is an attempt to game the system. IMHO it is Rjanag's sovereign call. He decided to warn PasswordUsername but take no further action if such behavior is not repeated; and I personally believe that was a smart thing to do. All in all, imho, Rjanag technical statements were correct, except that the 3rd edit should be also counted as revert. Allow me please to explain why:
The 3rd edit was to remove "who fought for Estonia" from "Monument of Lihula is a monument commemorating the Estonians who fought for Estonia in World War II", rendering "Monument of Lihula is a monument commemorating the Estonians in World War II". For everyone who read the article (which is expected from all editors), it is clear that this edit changes the sense 180 degrees. This was a clear sign of confrontation. 3rd edit just like the 2nd tried to change the same sentence to render its sense as opposite. It came only 15 minutes after the 2nd, and 4 minutes after the 2nd was reverted. Content-wise, one can just as well call 2nd a compromise for the 3rd: none of them is more moderate. What however seals my personal conclusion that the 3rd was a revert are the edit summaries:
These are typical "I challenge you".
I can't but notice after this also the comment to the forth edit: "Obviously some feel that commemoraitng collaborationists is dangerous" and that the main point of the 4th edit was not in the text but in the title of the section (adding "concerns of anti-Semitism"). Read "I challenge you." again.
So, from my understanding, there were 3 reverts with the 3rd immediately self-undone.
Thirdly, the people who reverted PasswordUsername did well to make only "dry" edit summaries. But you should have reported the case also in a "dry" manner, without trying to "get to" PasswordUsername. IMHO, you undermined your case by crying fault too laud, making the impression that you are after an editor and not after quality of WP content. Anyway, it was Rjanag's call. He will have to clean this up in the days to come if it re-emerges, hence he is sovereign to take decisions according to his best judgement. Dc76\ talk 23:39, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I've responded to yours on mine, hope it helps. Please let me know if you'd like future responses here instead. Thanks! VЄСRUМВА ♪ 19:57, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Need a neutral, third-party opinion over at Talk:Hong Kong, if you have time. Thanks :) Colipon+( Talk) 21:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, are you still offering your neutral, third-party opinion over at Talk:Hong Kong ? Perhaps you may want to take a look at Article 2 of the Hong Kong Basic Law before preceding. Da Vynci ( talk) 05:53, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
On September 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pheung Kya-shin, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page ( here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Could I ask you to please keep an eye on the above article? About once (sometimes twice) a day, an IP editor comes and posts a bunch of biased stuff which either does not correspond to the source, or is not supported by a reliable source. Occasionally, it is a WP:Coatrack about the CV of Mr Shek. I have reverted most of the edits, leaving edit summaries accordingly. It is becoming troublesome because there is a political battle going on in Hong Kong over this college, and I feel that what the IP editor is doing amounts to POV-pushing. Ohconfucius ( talk) 05:13, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, your input would be appreciated at WT:KOREA#What would be proper titles for eup, myeon, dong?. Thanks.-- Caspian blue 14:11, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
You are a great guy! Thanks for being so excellent. Chevy Impala 2009 14:58, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Please help move Suzhou, Jiangsu back to Suzhou. Someone moved earlier without discussion. Colipon+( Talk) 20:07, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
I have several reasons for this move:
I hope that is sufficient. Colipon+( Talk) 20:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
No, I don't know anything about a guideline for image placement in these situations. The placement of the image doesn't matter to me in this case. Graham 87 00:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Congrats on your new FA! Happy editing, -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 02:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
yepp... I have started revamping Wikiibíídiiya (Navajo) a bit and decided to transfer my signature:
Cho-[thematic prefix] (use/useful) -y-[obj] (it) -oo-[3rd person iterative] -ł-[ligature] -ʼįįh- (act/make/do) -í(nominalizer)
= "Makes use of it" (Cf. "Dances with Wolves" :P) > "user"
Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556
02:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I just saw that this made FA - congratulations! Very well-deserved. Best, Ricardiana ( talk) 16:49, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Plz authorize USER:ROYDICKSON/SANDBOX so I can use it for testing. Old33 ( talk) 17:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Im wondering when my account can be opened for semi-protect pages? Can you direct me to an admin that you know that I can ask? Thanks. Harut8 ( talk) 03:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Oh I noticed you are an admin. So when can i edit with semi-protect pages? Is it after 4 days? Harut8 ( talk) 03:42, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Well, I have an issue with another admin Dbachmann. You see, he has "permanent" locked certain pages that the reason is just to put the template which is linked with those pages. The pages are Nairi, Hayasa, and Urartu (as you see Armens has the template which is next to those, and they all had the template for atleast 2-3 years prior to keep removing them and perm locking). These links are in Template:History of Armenia, and this is not a reason to perm lock these pages which he has done for those reasons. He will probably tell you there is other edits done too for perm lock, but nothing much, we are only trying to add back the template linked to the pages. Can you help out now as an admin on this issue? Thank you I appreciate it. Harut8 ( talk) 16:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Believe me, one of my friends has tried that already in Talk pages, but this admin seems to be different. He seems to think that everything is nationalism. My friend even gave examples of Chinese history, and that Armenian history has evidence and facts that its almost as old as Chinese history as a modern people. This is very important, it seems to be a political issue, because there should be no reason to remove and "perm lock" pages just cause of simple template adding which was always there and linked with those pages on the template? Harut8 ( talk) 16:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible you can just add back those templates as they are linked with those pages I listed? I would really appriecate it thank you. Harut8 ( talk) 16:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
But I already told you my friends tried talking to him. He will not agree, his reasons are not good though, to "perm lock" just to add back the appropriate template links back? Harut8 ( talk) 16:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
I put the Talk:Nairi message in here. Now what should I do If he doesnt agree? He doesnt seem to have a good reason. He even would try to make me a sockpocket. But Im not a sockpocket of any older user. Im just trying to add back the template. A friends, friend,s, friend told me about this. Harut8 ( talk) 16:41, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Can you open for me semi-protect so I can add back the templates? Harut8 ( talk) 16:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
thanks for your note. This another sock (or self-described meatpuppet) of banned user Zvartnotz2 ( talk · contribs) -- suggest blocking on sight. -- dab (𒁳) 17:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 21:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Dabomb87 ( talk) 03:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough. I haven't seen this so I was just trying to expand the article, but since you submitted it for GA, then drama is at least half right. ;) I'm sure it's acceptable. Feel free to revert. Good job on working on the article too! I hope our nominations for the Chinese films we're submitting pass! Andrzejbanas ( talk) 14:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure I read that. Let's scout a bit. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
http://feraljundi.com/2009/07/20/funny-stuff-hair-of-death/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ring Cinema ( talk • contribs) 19:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
http://www.answers.com/topic/no-country-for-old-men-film gives Nathan, Ian (January 2008). "The Complete Coens". Empire. p. 173. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
It's a bit of a problem. The Guardian has the first part, but I'm not finding where the balance of the quote ("acts by itself" or whatever) originates. Is it possible that it came from Wikipedia and bounced around the net thereby? -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, well done. I'm looking. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, our posts were passing each other in cyberspaces. Thanks. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Guardian says the LA Times was the source of the quote. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:46, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I noticed your even-handedness with the dispute regarding J Milburn and VMAsNYC so I thought you should be aware of this discussion that mentions it. I will be producing a thorough WP:AN/I report when I have some time and I would appreciate any insight you could provide. Thanks. ~ Paul T +/ C 00:21, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Please lend your opinion over at Talk:Yue Chinese#Yue?. User:kwami recently made sweeping changes to Cantonese-related articles and moved "Cantonese" to "Yue Chinese". Colipon+( Talk) 14:37, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
my two reverts are up and the IP is socking Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 17:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I wanted to make this comment so that the admin who is going to take a look at the unblock request will see that Biophys has been edit warring elsewhere as well: [23]. But Biophys removed my comment from his talk page. Should I revert him or post it elsewhere? Offliner ( talk) 04:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Wang was born and raised in the US. There is no question that he is American. Given Taiwan's nationality rules, he is probably also a citizen of Taiwan ROC through his parents. Calling him American-born Taiwanese implies that he was only born in the US, perhaps while his parents were living here briefly or something. Look to Yo-Yo Ma's page. He is a French-born American. He was born in France, but is not a French citizen. Wang is an American and a Taiwanese (most probably). Therefore Taiwanese-American captures both of his dual nationality.
Penser ( talk) 01:35, 3 September 2009 (UTC)penser
Actually, this has been discussed for a while, going back to 2006, in fact. The consensus is pretty much that he is an American (this is documented and not really something that can be disputed). The real point of contention in the past was whether his ethnicity should be described as Taiwanese or Chinese. That's one of those contentious issues that probably should not appear in the lead sentence unless someone has a source where Wang describes a preference in describing his ethnicity. Cheers! Penser ( talk) 02:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)penser
Agreed. Wikipedia is not the place for unsourced speculation. Penser ( talk) 20:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)penser
No I didn't see this discussion.
I don't have a problem with the current wording "American of Chinese ancestry" as it is undoubtedly true (almost all Taiwanese have Chinese ancestry). I would not be surprised, however, if some see it as a slight to Taiwan. We can deal with that delicate subject when it comes up. Penser ( talk) 15:00, 5 September 2009 (UTC)penser
Hi there, just to let you know I sent an email to Kathleen Ahrens:
Along with other contributors, I have been working on the Wikipedia article Chinese classifier. The article is relatively developed, and cites one of your papers. May I ask you to review the page? Any comments you may have will be gratefully received.
And she replied:
Thanks for your e-mail. I'm in the middles of something else right now, but I will turn my attention to classifiers for some other projects before the end of the year and I will go over your article then. Does that sound alright?
And I replied back saying that was great. I might be busy after university starts so I'll refer to you all her comments. Is that OK?
GeometryGirl ( talk) 20:06, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
hi, a question. the source says its a VMA. why did you cross that out?-- Applegigs ( talk) 06:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
the page that i put in as a footnote calls it a vma. also i im reading that the real name of the award is the mtv vma best breakout nyc artist. the footnote calls it a vma and the entry form calls it a vma. thats big. mtv always has had some different awards that start on different years. this is like baseball having a rookie of the year award for the first time when they started. of course the rookie was not as famous as the mvp. but it was still major league baseball giving an award. here it is mtv giving out an award they call a mtv vma for a new band. but its a vma from what i am reading.-- Applegigs ( talk) 06:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
hi. did i miss something? i tried to say that it is clearly a mtv vma, that the mtv contest says it is, that the other material i gave you says it is, and that the mtv logo says it is. there is some official stuff there. i think that that information is pretty strong. i dont think mtv uses the mtv vma logo with something and calls it a vma and awards it at the vmas without it being an mtv vma. as to the website, who knows. maybe someone screwed up and will be fired. maybe they used last years template by accident. but that doesnt wipe out everything else. we have official statements that it is an mtv vma from mtv. isnt that enough?-- Applegigs ( talk) 06:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
But the VMA's are notable and all that official material shows that this is an VMA though i am guessing not your favorite one. and the press release and the competition rules are from very big offical companies including mtv which runs the vmas. once its a vma i think it is notable as a big award.-- Applegigs ( talk) 07:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag,
According to http://de.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:L%C3%B6schkandidaten/5._September_2009&diff=prev&oldid=64223788 there are to many faults in the lists in the de. Wikipedia. What should be done then? Kind regards, Sarcelles ( talk) 13:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for repairing my report, but please forgive me as I have been up for the past 26 hours. :) ArcAngel ( talk) 19:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
As to your deletion of the reference to an MTV VMA nomination at [26], I'm OK with it for the moment but not for the reason that you state. You refer to it as "a minor award." That is a mischaracterization. The MTV VMAs are in fact decidedly major awards. This is clearly an MTV VMA, as you can see at [27] and [28]. As such, it is a major award. And, as WP:BAND makes clear, for purposed of notability since the band placed (top 3, of 190 under consideration) it is treated the same for notablity puposes under that guidance as it would have been treated if it had won the VMA.-- VMAsNYC ( talk) 04:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Rjanag, in response to your question on my talk page, no, I wasn't at the conference where Duanmu read his paper. I linked to it simply because a Google search turned it up. It's great to know, though, that we have some professional linguists at the RD! I, unfortunately, am a mere amateur. Greetings! Marco polo ( talk) 17:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Hey Rjanag, as I made a category of reboots in television and video games I thought it be different like sequels and prequels. Reboot is all about starting over the story creating something new which is not a sequel or a remake or a prequel, it's just something what hollywood studios did with films like Batman Begins, Superman Returns and Casino Royale. Semi-prequel are serve as both a sequel and a prequel with flash backs and flash forwards that what they did with The Godfather, part 2 and Internal Affairs 3. -- Lg16spears ( talk) 18:17, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry solid. Gosh, you take the editing seriously. man just having some fun. chill out yoo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.147.93 ( talk • contribs) 15:44, 17 September 2009
I'm going to guess that this is a vandal? Colipon+( Talk) 21:04, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
On September 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Not One Less, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page ( here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
![]() |
What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
I award you this barnstar for replacing those 100 unnecessary Chinese language templates with {{ zh}} — DroEsperanto ( talk) 18:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC) |
Could you please have a look at User:RoyDickson/Sandbox and leave your opinion/revision of the current lead. The lead will be used for the Star Air Service article which is currently a GA nominee. I'd like to thank you in advance for your continued support and participation in welcoming(and explaining) RoyDickson to wikipedia. I hope you are noticing that your efforts are bearing some fruit ^.^. Smallman12q ( talk) 20:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thanks for the birthday wish, good to know some editors have soft hearts to go with their sharp intellects! Peace, Kbob -- — Kbob • Talk • 21:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Not sure what's happened here exactly, but a couple of multinoms I recently submitted to DYK suggestions didn't format properly, see here. The problem seems to be that the comment code (<!-- ... -->) doesn't nest properly. You might want to take a closer look at it. Gatoclass ( talk) 07:46, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
|article9=
or beyond they will disappear.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
13:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
can you take a look at User:Cccbut? Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) ( talk) 10:53, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks.
With compliments.
DAFMM ( talk), 20th September 2009.
You responded to a request on a different board that evidently would have involved blocking a different user. Let me take a moment to try and explain the situation in a place and way that is perhaps more appropriate?
I have been waiting for corroboration of a Request for Comment during the past 3 weeks! The instructions on the Request for Comment page say not to post to another noticeboard, and that if requirements are not met, the Request is deleted in approximately 48 hours. However, the page has not been deleted through 3 weeks, and is the main reason for my delay in seeking help elsewhere.
The user inquietudeofcharacter repeatedly erred when posting on my new talk page to allege vandalism. It was his or her response to good faith editing, which happened to be pursuant to 44 short-term revisions by the other party.
After the other user refused to follow through with mediation, the mediator did not make any contributions to this web site for 3 weeks or so. During all of this time, I have been seeking help from our former mediator. Two persons are needed for a request for comment, but there has been no activity from him, and I did not try to involve anyone else in this matter.
To summarize: the good faith edits I have made are still erased, and the only way to restore the information would be through "edit warring." Nothing has been done to warrant the allegations on my talk page, thus a direct dialogue with the other user is being avoided. Hopefully you can be helpful toward me with this matter, because the interactions thus far have not been worthwhile. WayGoneOr ( talk) 19:21, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I believe User:Alefbe does not deserve to get blocked. He was actually correcting vandalism by the other user, who was deleting sourced information, substituing reliable source by poor and unreliable sources, e.g Press TV, the propaganda machine of Islamic Republic of Iran. On the other hand, the other user in Qods Day article deserves a longer blocking for clear vandalism.-- WIMYV? ( talk) 21:49, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know, deleting sourced information is vandalism. Is n't? He insisted to delete sourced information from New York Times, reliable books, and Aljazira, despite several warning by different users. Is not it vandalism? That incident was not content dispute. One user deleted sourced information added, unsourced information or poorly sourced materials. The other one resorted those sourced information and had constructive edits. They should not be treated the same way.
Anyhow, if you do not mind. I am going to restore deleted sourced information.-- WIMYV? ( talk) 22:04, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Regarding your comment on article talk page. Perhaps you have not checked the article history. I have not reverted yet. As you see, I am discussing the issue with other users.--
WIMYV? (
talk)
22:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I do not understand why you wrote " another user is close" to get blocked when I am discussing the issue and have not reverted yet--
WIMYV? (
talk)
22:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps your logic to block Alefbe is the same as warning me and threatening me to block when I am discussing the issue and when I have not touched the article yet. I am really cond=fused about the way you handle the problem.-- WIMYV? ( talk) 23:22, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I have discussed the matter with the other party on both his talk page and the article talk page, and I have not reverted more than 3 times. Izzedine ( talk) 22:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. I will take your advice. Mysteryquest ( talk) 07:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for having spotted and corrected this nasty trick. I hadn't noticed. Cheers, DVdm ( talk) 07:56, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm fed up with reverting, again again, the strange version about the "internationally list".
P.S. I don't think his newly created accounts have to be blocked again and again; Semi-protecting the article - will be much more effective, as I realized in the case of the article: Emerging market (for more details, see his request on my talk page, here). Thank you in advance.
HOOTmag ( talk) 13:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the help with these IP SPAs. Can you watchlist Harry Benjamin's Syndrome? They have already reverted you. Thanks. Jokestress ( talk) 19:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Should I self-revert? I've had problems with edit warring in the past, and don't want to get into hot water again... Soxwon ( talk) 02:40, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Since you intervened last time I thought maybe you could help again. It seems that Arzel and Soxwon are still doing the same as before. I just undid an edit by Arzel that he deleted someone’s comments in the TALK page under the guise it was a personal attack yet it did not have anybody’s name in it and was a statement of replay to Soxwon. Both of them seem to be bent of editing out anything that goes against their beliefs and their bias shows up in many articles. They have even written to each other about removing negative items from conservative articles. They don’t try and work on a way to get things edited fairly they just keep deleting them and not offering any help on it. Then if added they say there is not agreement as they will not even try to form a agreement. Any help in this would be appreciated. -- Marlin1975 ( talk) 15:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
As you can see both of them have now deleted someone’s post in talk that made no single reference to single person. Yet they both call it a personal attack? Thanks for the advice. -- Marlin1975 ( talk) 19:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Arbitration needed for this article's dispute page and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks,-- CharlotteGoiar ( talk) 11:59, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello Rjanag. Since you handled a 3RR case about Flegelpuss ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) perhaps you could look at the report over at WT:WikiProject Physics#Poincaré-POV-pushing. I was thinking of blocking Cardinality and Iphegenia as socks of Flegelpuss, but that I would ask at least one other admin to look at the data and see if you agree. If you don't have time, I'll make another plan. Both accounts were created just after Flegelpuss's block expired and they have remarkably narrow interests, focused on F's usual topics. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 13:28, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Now user Paradoxic just come back with a long revert of the version which was the result of our discussions and the fragile consensus with the other party. Now, what we can do? I do not want to start editwarring with him? He is unwilling to discuss and just deleting sourced information and reliable sources, NY TImes,BBC, Christian Science Monitor, two books, Aljazeera... He just accept the mouthpiece of the Islamic regime of Iran a reliable source, delete other sources. -- WIMYV? ( talk) 18:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Here [31]. Nableezi (from the other camp) and ShamWOW and I agreed to keep the assertions of both parties: Press TV report (Islamic Regime source) and reports of independent media, i.e. NY Times, Christian Science Monitor and Aljaziree. There was only a discussion ongoing on the source that I provided on association of antisemitism and Quds day when the Pradoxic came back and reverted all of our edits and deleted our sources. We let the other camp to keep their source (Press TV), but Paradoxic unwilling to keep our independent sources. He also changing sourced information adding hi own claims and POVs that are not supported by the source. See these diffs: [32] , [33] , [34] , [35]-- WIMYV? ( talk) 18:52, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Rjanag! You participated in discussion on 2009 protest section. I should not remind you all we did. First, I said that Press Tv information should be deleted because Press TV is unreliable source. Nableezy disagreed. ShamWOW suggested both independent sources and Press TV should stay but it should be mentioned that Press TV is an state funded news media. Nableezy did not agreed, until you intervened and said that it is OK to mention that Press TV is funded by the regime. You forget that? We decided to keep both arguments, pro-government media and independent sources arguments.
The Paradoxic violated 3rr once again, because the last time you did not blocked him for the violation of 3rr, you give him more co0nfidence to violate the 3rr rule. Yu should punish him this time. He deleted information icluding the sentence " In recent years, only a marginal proportion of young Iranians have attended." 4 times. [36] , [37] , [38] , [39]-- WIMYV? ( talk) 21:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your message and the link to useful information about deletion tags. It will help with my patrolling. I notice that the article was deleted anyway. In your opinion, what SD tag should have been used? Thanks. Truthanado ( talk) 01:26, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
...you just deleted my article, without bothering to verify the fact that I typed, on the talk page, that I am a student of Ms. Love and did this WITH HER PERMISSION. Also she is featured in a list of Metropolitan Opera singers, but I can't add a page off that. Please offer help before deleting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Operagirlk ( talk • contribs)
I don't find it a conflict of interest, as all it is is her biography, and she is listed in this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_performers_at_the_Metropolitan_Opera without a wiki page. I would prefer to simply be allowed to post her unbiased biography. I'm sorry if the first message sounded short tempered. Operagirlk ( talk) 03:46, 23 September 2009 (UTC)operagirlk
I would agree, were I not the person who wrote the bio for her on her webpage in the first place. Hence, not plagiarism. However, since this seems to be a sticking point, I can rewrite the entire biography so it is not the same if this will satisfy ToS. Operagirlk ( talk) 03:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)Operagirlk
Fine, however I feel that since she has already been referred to on a Wikipedia article, she deserves to have her own page. I'm not sure exactly how one can go about writing an article without your conflict of interest policy kicking in - I merely saw the reference, mentione dit to her, and she said "well, just write who I am". Conflict of interest to me would be stating how I feel about her as a person and teacher, not how many roles she has performed and where. But I understand that you are simply following rules. Operagirlk ( talk) 03:58, 23 September 2009 (UTC)operagirlk
But it looks cool! ;) Rockfang ( talk) 07:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I've tried to start a discussion again at Talk:Borjigit, Empress Dowager Zhuang Wen to move this senseless name back to Empress Dowager Xiaozhuang. So far no one seems to be interested in participating. When it was moved to the current name, there was no attempts at consensus. "ED Xiaozhuang" is the name she is most commonly referred to, a Google-test for "Xiaozhuang" trumps all other alternative names, it is easy to find, and precise, as well as concise, fitting all the criteria of WP:TITLE. I therefore ask an administrator to help me move the article there over the re-direct. Thanks! Colipon+( Talk) 09:57, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, I really appreciate it. they did have some misinformation. Now once I figure out how to put a picture in, I'll be set. :) Operagirlk ( talk) 15:08, 23 September 2009 (UTC)Operagirlk
Sorry for the confusion about the deletion tagging. Thanks for your help! -- Tallen90 ( talk) 20:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
According to WP:PLURAL, the title for that article should be Regular expression. Similarly, although the article on Turing machines is not about any specific machine, the title is still Turing machine. We just always prefer singular titles. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 01:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Might want to scroll down to this section to see how Template:Zh- is now missing in red. Looks like something was changed? Benjwong ( talk) 06:29, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag, I was browsing my watchlist in the run and I accidentally rollback an edit in the Korea article, I'm not an expert in the subject so can you look into that?
I dont think Dalia is notable yet, at least that my quick impression by looking at the sources in the article. Take care, -- Jmundo ( talk) 13:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi! You must see Revision history of Template:Members of the Union for the Mediterranean for User:Izzedine's editing style. -- Turkish Flame ☎ 17:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't actually like to watch the insane panics when people get inordinately upset at changes that verge on politics, so I kinda want to ask "did you mean it?". Your change of templates had the (unintended?) effect of reordering the traditional/simplified presentations in Standard_Mandarin#Native_names. It was simp/trad, and now is trad/simp, and possibly because you explicitly said to put traditional first (I'm guessing at what "|first=t|" means).
I really wouldn't be surprised if someone starts saying "but it says mainland China first and you have traditional first - you have messed up things!"
I'm not going to check around where else something like this might've happened, because I'm already nervous. Just wondering if you've thought about the (political) side-effects of reorganization? :-( Shenme ( talk) 07:05, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
|first=t
to make sure they wouldn't get reorganized. It looks like this time I accidentally included |first=t
when I shouldn't; seems that {{zh-tspl}}, which I was replacing, is deceptive (it has t first in its name, but it actually shows simplified first). When I remember AWBing that last night, the pages that transcluded it were a mix of mainland and Taiwan-related topics (there were 50-some ROC baseball players in there, for example), and on several articles I was manually going in and removing the |first=t
before AWB put it in; must have just missed a few on this article. Thanks for the notice,
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
15:14, 24 September 2009 (UTC)Hi, Rjanag, since you're an active admin, please look into the disruptions carried by 95.25.237.61 ( talk · message · contribs · page moves · edit summaries · count · api · logs · block log · email)? The IP user has changed the names of Korean athletic players during the Japanese occupation period to Japanese name. [41] As if they were still holding Japanese name and citizenship after the liberation in 1945. The IP user has also added information without sources, but deleted something that he dislikes for his POV in the name of "no citation" and "NPOV". The anon's edits are of course neutral to himself/herself only. I think the person reminds me of some Russian POV pusher or open proxy editor disguising a third person. Your administrative actions or editor's input would be appreciated. Talk:List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_athletics_(men)#Koreans. Thanks.-- Caspian blue 15:24, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
You have deleted the page for Daryl Copeland citing copyright infringement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Copeland
There is no copyright infringement. Some of the text is the same as Mr. Copeland wrote it. As can be seen on the referenced web page, Mr. Copeland is part of that organization.
The text appears on several other sites by Mr. Copeland as well. This does not make it copyright infringement.
What was the rationale to take it down?
No message was sent indicating that the page was deleted due a copyright concern as is supposed to occur.
Please put the page back online right away.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Singularities ( talk • contribs)
Hello, I believe you will find the updated document allays any concerns you may have had. Thank you.
Hi The article on unima-usa was my first attempt at wikipedia article Unima is listed in wikepedia there is the standard wikipedia note saying that no article exists on unima-usa
It was my understanding that" Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name" is justification for creating an article
unima united kingdom and unima Pakistan have articles
I am new to this
how can i get an article on unima-usa added? Steve Abrams, Vice President unima-usa north american editor of the World Encyclopedia of Puppetry Arts
Thaaaank you. This has been going on for days with ~20 Portugal-based IPs finding 4 or 5 different sources for the same junk... tiresome & tedious Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 04:51, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. Could you please userfy Raptor Education Group Inc. for me? It's been blogged here and I'd like to see what's going on. But if it was all copyvio, never mind, about userfying, just let me know. Thanks in advance, Clayoquot ( talk | contribs) 05:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Clayoquot: this does not look like a copyvio, nor suitable for an A7 deletion. By volume of animals treated alone it is a significant animal rehabilitation center; and it was better sourced than many articles we choose to keep. When someone questions a speedy deletion, and an author or interested party is obviously distressed by said deletion, those are two reasons to take it to AfD. Having one's work deleted, whatever the cause, is often grounds to leave Wikipedia and not return; and we would like to attract contributors (who will become better contributors in time, and never start out perfectly) rather than animosity.
As you suggest above, I've recreated the article. +sj + 05:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the code
--
ᜊᜓᜅ ᜅ᜔ ᜑᜎᜋᜅ᜔ ᜋᜑᜒᜏᜄ
(
ᜂᜐᜉᜈ)
19:24, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 3, 2009. Shubinator ( talk) 20:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
You're right about that but is it bad to chat with friends while editing? 63.230.167.170 ( talk) 22:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Comments as to other editor's work are not suitable for edit summaries, but the associated article talk page can be the appropriate venue as long as the evaluation was constructive. Did you consider your recent commentary to be helpful or useful? (A disclaimer, The recent comments made are "water on a duck's back" in my case as my contributions to the article revolved around assisting the primary editor, whose work and effort was considerable to take an article from a moribund state to qualifying as GA candidate.) The edits that were instituted can be further characterized as simply "author's choice" edits and do not substantially change the thrust of the passages, as I showed in a further revision. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 13:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC).
Could you please help with renaming File:24042008354.jpg, File:24042008350.jpg and File:24042008391.jpg as per the rationale given in the "rename media" template requests? Thanks, -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 03:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I looked it up in _two_ dictionaries... :-) Shenme ( talk) 06:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
So on the terms that my picture isn't "qualified" for an encylopedia means it can't give my user page some flair? I feel then ALL pictures should be removed from user pages and all the userboxes. It doesn't make sence to me I'm sorry Spzmnky ( talk) 17:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
As you just have protected the article there, please have a look at the conduct of User:Jacurek, who is wikistalking me. He had never edited this article before, and now he is reverting my edits in an attempt to provoke me. Jacurek and other Polish editors are currently under scrutiny by Arbcom Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list for such disruptive behaviour. -- Matthead Discuß 20:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting the page. I have also received a friendly warning I will fully respect. Just to let you know since there is a lot more to it, the user User_talk:Matthead is currently under editing restrictions[ [42]] due to his controversial edits and reverts in the past. He cannot revert more than once etc, etc. Thanks.-- Jacurek ( talk) 23:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
That was quite helpful. Thanks!
Regards, Gaelen S. Talk • Contribs 22:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I will keep that in mind. I can take it from the usual vandals and other such people but when I hear it from administrators who I tend to see as being more mature and responsible, it just makes me a little more irritated. Particularly because their opinion of me is going to carry more weight and if they say that I am just power hungry than many people will actually believe them, seriously damaging my actual credibility. - Regards, Gaelen S. Talk • Contribs 23:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Why did you delete File talk:Western Europe map.svg? The page does exist, and the image is being used. I had just left a comment there before you deleted it. Hayden120 ( talk) 03:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
There was an Arbcom ruling not to mass de-link any dates for six months unless community consensus rule otherwise. Community consensus has. There are some 60,000 linked ISO dates, de-linking them is non-controversial, but I have only done a very small percentage. It needs to be handed to a bot - and there is one in preparation I understand. However I might be able to pick-up some of the workload on SmackBot's normal runs. Rich Farmbrough, 14:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC).
Hey thanks for the heads up on my talk page. I will make sure to note that and keep editing articles which I HAVE done in the past, thanks for the warning I appreciate it. Also could you please remove my name from your message on User:stephani21's talk page? Thanks Cjones132002 ( talk) 17:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, just a notification, I am considering fulfilling the unblock request by User:Matthead. There's merit in his unblock request: he could reasonably assume that the 1RR restriction on Eastern Europe does not apply to West Germany (there is in fact no possible sense West Germany is part of Eastern Europe, neither geographically nor politically, and the edit he was making was also not related to any political/historical issue related to Eastern Europe). So the situation needs to be judged independently of the restriction, with all participants on equal footing. And then I notice that User:Jacurek made three reverts and wasn't blocked, while Matthead was blocked for two. This makes the block essentially unjust. This is particularly important because we know Jacurek was part of the infamous EE Mailing List and Matthead was one of their declared "enemies" and victims, so we must avoid doing anything that would give the impression of "rewarding" any further provocations and attempts of getting opponents blocked from that side. (See Jacurek's edit [43] earlier on this page, where he was falsely claiming M. was under a general edit restriction in order to get you to block him – given what we know about the background, I would not assume good faith for this false information.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:59, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for welcoming me. As you are aware I am new to Wikipedia so if I should do anything wrong, please do not take it against me! All the best,
Friendly Ed 15:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
but you could be the "needle of the scale", if you want to be that is.-- Iwillremembermypassthistime ( talk) 21:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Ok.. what I meant was… why don't you decide which revision is better?-- Iwillremembermypassthistime ( talk) 21:45, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
just a quick suggestion on the riots article -- there is some info there (2.3 million people) that should have an as of date with it. Best, -- Epeefleche ( talk) 00:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 00:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
could you place the merger-proposal templates I placed on Talk:West Germany onto the page itself (you protected it)? Thx. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Bsr... DENIP n'est pas exactement une fête (holiday) puisque est un jour scolaire de travail et de refléxion... Si n'est pas admisible célebration il faut chercher un autre mot... En français et en espagnol nous usons bcp de fois activité pratique... Avec ma amitié... -- Ayounali ( talk) 20:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Non, ce n'est pas un jour férié, mais un jour de travail scolaire dédié a refléchir et faire des activités pour prendre conscience des valeurs de la fraternité universelle, de la non-violence et de la paix. Voilà un article en anglais que j'ai trouvé:School Day of Non-violence and Peace (DENIP)
By Harold J. Greenberg
(Majorca Daily Bulletin, Palma de Mallorca, January, 18, 1990)
The "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" is held on January 30 every year, on the anniversary of the martyrdom in 1948 of Mahatma Gandhi, the great apostle of non-violence.
It will be celebrated, as always, in Majorca. The intiative for this "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" originated in Spain.
In Majorca, it was Llorenç Vidal in 1964 who founded the School Day. He now lives in Cádiz. He was influenced by Lanza del Vasto, a direct disciple of Gandhi. Del Vasto visited Majorca about 15 years ago, and his book "Le Retour aux Origines" ("Return to the Sources"), had an inmediate influence.
The basic message of the "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" states: "Universal Love, Non-violence and Peace. Universal Love is better than egoism. Non-violence is better than violence. Peace is better than war". Non-violence is the attitude of renouncing killing and inflicting pain on all breings in thought, word and action.
The "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" is a non-governmental, international and pioneering initiative of Pacificatory Education in which educational centres of all standards and of all the countries are invited to participate.
It is a practical activity which has neither official programming nor structural lines of action, because the message is one which maintains a permanent nucleus of basic aspects, and permits the free application of each educational centre according to its particular manner.
Professor Eulogio Díaz del Corral has written: "The 'School Day of Non-violence and Peace' was founded in Spain in 1964, when neither in Spain nor abroad did a similar initiative exist. It was maintained through hell and high water in very difficult circumstances, and it is considered the most important pioneering experience of Pacificatory Education of our time, as well as a dynamic nocleus of its promotion at a national and international level".
The "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" is a seed which is planted and cultivated in the hearts of the students. It is a bright, new and positive way of looking at the word and preparing for the future.
Harold J. Greenberg
(Majorca Daily Bulletin, Palma de Mallorca, January, 18, 1990)
Merci de votre attention...
-- Ayounali ( talk) 21:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about that huge disruption that happened, I am not sure who was behind it, but I do hope it doesn't happen again. And for the personal messages they are all done. Thanks -- Cjones132002 ( talk) 02:43, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
You're right and I apologize for being sloppy about it. Typographical style at least has the virtue that we don't have to check if the source had punctuation. Thanks very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ring Cinema ( talk • contribs) 20:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello there, Can you reply my last question there. It will be much appreciated. Thank you.-- 119.30.36.34 ( talk) 21:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Because one of the users arbitrarily replaced the Template:Infobox Peri GR with the Template:Infobox settlement for no obvious reason. - Sthenel ( talk) 23:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
And happy Mid-Autumn Festival. Fitting. ^^ -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 00:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! The article really graces the front page. Ricardiana ( talk) 16:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey Rjanag, thanks for the help with the Beale article while I was out. The subject is on my talk page, and while I've tried explaining it to him, I think a note from the deleter would help out a bit. ;) Thanks \ Backslash Forwardslash / ( talk) 14:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
是啊,很好笑吧?说我的编辑是 mumbo-jumbo,你简直在耻笑中国人的智慧。我对於你这麽说感到遗憾,希望你下次撤回编辑时,不要抱着说笑的心态!-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 15:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I didn't find this kind of page(Notice:it'n not this wikipedia:article request).In Chinese wikipedia,they have it called 最多語言版本的待撰條目.But I didn't still get a right place,so where's article request which most foreign versions have and english don't?
I am a cantonese .I not sure if the example gave an accurate account of what the text is about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 小雨點 ( talk • contribs) 17:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I am sorry if i've made a mistake.in my opinion,if i want to say:There are clouds in the sky,I would say"天空上有一片雲"(in fact, the chinese version is meaning that there is a cloud in the sky at that moment.).the sentence ”天空一片雲” is not a complete sentence at all,in english,it is something just like "the sky(NOUN) clouds(NOUN)."verb and connectionis are absence in this case.moreover,the word"片"is describing the noun"cloud" but no sky.if we want to describe the word "sky".we could definitely use the word"片",but not in this case.that"s just my opinions —Preceding unsigned comment added by 小雨點 ( talk • contribs) 17:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia. You can still read pages, but you cannot edit, change, or create them. Editing from 222.166.160.129 has been disabled by Spellcast for the following reason(s):
"This IP address has been blocked because it is believed to be an open proxy or zombie computer. To prevent abuse, these proxies may be blocked from editing Wikipedia."
BUT WHY THEY SEND ME SUCH A MSG? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 小雨點 ( talk • contribs) 18:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
This is exactly one of the most confused part of chinese usage.The sentence 天空突然一片辽阔 is, in fact,should be wirite as 天空突然變得一片辽阔, but for better pronouncing reason or in informal case like lyric ,we can leave it out.of course,this is just exceptional case.no matter in daily life, or formal writing,it is better for us to write 天空突然變得一片辽阔. 小雨點 ( talk) 19:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I do not mean to challenge you. in fact,I am interested in discussing this topic BUT now is almost 3:30am...... maybe you or I mess up sth as i cannot totally agree with you.but you're right as that's not the main argument .perhaps we can continue in discussing this topic later on because i really doubt if the number+classifier (一片) phrase is being used after the noun and expressing "the entire" (整个). 小雨點 ( talk) 19:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I didn't pay attention to that blog,sorry.中文:我没注意到那个部落客,抱歉。-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 18:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
我英语是en-0,你相信吗?-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 19:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
You have recently systematically changed Turfan to Turpan in all Wikipedia pages. This kind of systematic change is quite inappropriate. First of all, Turfan is more common in English texts (you can search on Google Books to check it). Secondly, when 2 spellings are common in English texts, a systematic change of one spelling to the other one (without any prior consensus) is quite wrong. Alefbe ( talk) 20:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I originally thought you were wishing me a happy birthday birthday, but then I realized that it was October, not December. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 22:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm rather surprised you thought making this edit was appropriate, especially as an administrator. I think it was very poor form and reflects poorly on you, and I think you would do well to remove it. ÷ seresin 22:16, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
This one seems easier to rip/reproduce than the one you suggested. Is everything we need on it? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 23:05, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Picked some random landmarks. I'm assuming "Lu" means "Street"... I'll write that in English. Any other major landmarks needed? Also, I can't find the infamous "Grand Bazaar"...
So google-maps is quite a tool. Still no clue where Shanxi Alley is, but it mentions "a hospital" -- only hospital around is the Regional Hospital on the map; Nanmen area is right there, can't be far... Anything mentioned in article is in blue, other major roads are in lightgray... Legend uses 3 icons. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 03:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
What if, for this article, you cut off the top half of the map (since most of the events seem to have occurred in the lower right, at least according to the only sources we have available) and stick the legend on the lower left (below the railway station)? That might allow for a closer view of the relevant portion of the map, and prevent things from being so crammed in the thumbnail view.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
04:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Oh, also, the legend (or one of the corners) should probably include a scale, like the source map does.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
04:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
cropped it, makes sense...legend moved, 1km-scale added Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 05:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
I think w're done....it could get too crowded if more is added.... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 05:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
...and here's the generic map.
Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Aahh... This is quite the confusing section to navigate... I'm assuming that version up there with the flames and stars is the current version. There is one spelling error Remin --> Renmin on the road. "Lu" is often translated as "Road" while "Jie" is often translated as "Street". "Dadao" is "Avenue", but sometimes "Lu" is also translated as "Avenue". For the labels box, the "Urumqi" is too stretched... in my opinion, and looks a bit awkward... other than than I can't see anything else. Colipon+( Talk) 12:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag; I have requested a block of this account [47] for numerous spam-like and copyright violation edits. Cheers, JNW ( talk) 01:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- Ottava Rima ( talk) 02:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Please have a look at Corsican language. Could you help? Thank you!-- Ultimate Destiny ( talk) 15:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Were DYK credits given for this diff?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 07:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. Since we have established that the new article about Nicholas Beale that someone posted explicitly does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, I wonder if you could be kind enough to undelete it so that hopefull other editors can get it into a reasonable shape. many thanks. NBeale ( talk) 09:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Question: The notice that comes up when you try to create the page refers to User talk:Nicholas Beale. I assume that should be User talk:NBeale. Could one of you admin types correct it, for clarity and absolute correctness? Thanks! SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 07:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
I added -- LLTimes ( talk) 21:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the voting is by simple approval only, so no negative votes are going to get counted in any event. Regarding any conduct issues, there have been others who became coordinators of projects whose conduct was, well, unimpressive in some regards, who grew while coordinators and became editors that I think are now fairly universally regarded. Girolamo at the Films project comes to mind. And I've been known to be fairly criticized on more occasions than I really like thinking about as well, even as an admin. I think it might be best if you moved the comment onto the talk page. I'm not sure if any non-socks who got enough votes has ever been disqualified in an election, but I doubt it. (I think there was something like that in the Film project once though). Right now, personally, I'd probably take Charlie Manson if he didn't drool over the porn on the computer right now, because the group is big and it needs as much help as possible. But I did read your concerns and do appreciate them. John Carter ( talk) 22:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed you reverted my link to the Commons page for the Voynich Manuscript, noting that it was "already linked prominently". That is not correct. The Commons category at [48] is linked to (which contains the manuscript in arbitrary order, and some other files), not the Commons page at [49], which has the manuscript only, with all the pages in proper order. I'll leave it to you to decide how to link best, but IMO the article shouldn't link to the category at all but to the page instead. Sadly, we don't have template to do this, at least no to my knowledge. -- JovanCormac ( talk) 11:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the notice! It is interesting to remember when it all started for me editing here with a user name. -- Timeshifter ( talk) 15:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Can you play the video at User:RoyDickson/Sandbox? RoyDickson appears to be having some difficulty playing the video and I wanted to make sure that I'm not the only one who can play it. Thanks. Smallman12q ( talk) 19:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Dear Rjanag, would you mind looking into this, or give some advice?
The edit summaries are quite telling. In the fourth diff, neither rebutting nor bothering to compromise by taking into account my point (which his edit summary forthrightly acknowledges), Radeksz simply reverts me, of course leaving in the completely false claim that the Soviets "openly" supported the Nazi invasion. I can obviously take out "openly" but I think that the claim that the USSR supported the Nazi invasion of Poland is equivocation; the USSR simply went along with the invasion due to its own geopolitical interests.
This looks like a case of trigger-happy reverting. Radeksz may claim that the USSR supported the invasion, but providing a source would be nice. Actually taking out "openly" per his own concession edit summary 4 would have been a compromise.
I'd gladly do a third revert, but I find Radeksz's behavior inappropriate enough, you've warned me that even doing one or two reverts can be considered edit warring, and I'm currently watched by ArbCom due to Radeksz' edit warring and team-tagging with Martintg and friends (your contributions as a party in this case, WP:EEML, are welcome). I'd take this to talk, but it seems that Radeksz is willing to concede my point even as he trigger-happily reverts me, and it's patently obvious that Radeksz is reverting for the heck of it. I think Radeksz' work here clearly falls under edit warring without breaching 3RR. As a team member who follows around my edits with a team of friendly buddies all over Wiki, he constantly reverts me and I'm sick of it. In this case, he should at least be given a warning to attempt compromise sometime, instead of blindly reverting to a version he prefers but admits isn't properly written.
This is not only revert-warring; this falls under WP:GAME examples as "stonewalling" and "bad faith negotiating."
I'd very much appreciate seeing your thoughts on this tango.
Anti-Nationalist ( talk) 01:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Please have a careful look at the edits:
PU/AN first edit: I edit w/ this edit sum - [55]; this is actually a completely legit edit, aside from the edit summary, in that at some point somehow a block of text (including a quote) got removed from the article (making a sentence a fragment) and PU/AN is taking out the sentence which was introducing the quote.
My first edit: [56] Ok, PU/AN was right, so I went back, found the text that was removed and put it back in. What's wrong with this edit?
PU/AN second edit: [57]. PU/AN's edit summary: It can be said the USSR supported the German invasion due to the M-R secret protocol, but that ït supported the German invasion "openly" is WP:OR / false. They didn't announce "we approve." So. PU/AN says It can be said the USSR supported the German invasion, but that it cannot be said that it supported the German invasion "openly". Ok, I'm fine with that. Hence my last edit:
My second edit: [58] in which I completely agree with PU/AN - I remove the word "openly" since it doesn't seem to belong and restore the original quote per his statement that "It can be said the USSR supported the German invasion due to the M-R secret protocol".
So what the hey is PU/AN's problem with my edits here, since I'm agreeing with him??? Is it because my edits followed his edits? Speaking of "wiki-hounding" - I've had this article on my watchlist since like 2004, before PU was even on Wikipedia and especially before PU decided to become AN - more likely he looked up my past edits and decided to "send a message". This is really trying to make a big deal out of nothing just to make accusations against somebody. radek ( talk) 05:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Ugh, looking at it again I see that I did make a mistake - I meant to put in the text without the word "openly", which I did, but somehow I didn't remove the same text w/ the word "openly" in it. Then I left home for a few hours to run some errands. I see that you corrected my mistake - thanks! Still, PU/AN trying to milk this as some kind of "GAMEing" or "EDIT WARRING" or whatever is pretty freakin' pathetic - especially since I was trying to agree with him. radek ( talk) 05:26, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Please see my comments at User talk:Rjanag#Nicholas Beale. Cunard ( talk) 02:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
The article looks fine to me. It's a great improvement, since it is very hard to find about 1999 film; moreover a chinese film. World Cinema Writer ( talk • contributions) 08:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Idiot and maniac, what makes you think that I am the University of Missouri? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.59.156 ( talk) 15:44, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm considering opening an RFA, and wanted to know whether you think I'll be a viable admin candidate. I would appreciate any and all feedback! Smallman12q ( talk) 01:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag - you might be amused by this! SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 07:11, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
I award you this barnstar for cleaning up the non-neutral POV in the lead paragraph of Academic freedom. A More Perfect Onion ( talk) 14:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC) |
(The non-neutral commentary had been introduced more than 100 revisions ago, before May 2008.)
Hello, last time I made more than 3 changes to one page, you blocked me. Now there's this totally biased opinion going on at Arab people, wherein some users are deleting my sources and references, are adding sources and references that have nothing to do with the subject of the debate (aka. how many of the Egyptian people are considered Arabs), and are instead adding sources that are not scientific and that do not bear any credibility. I already discussed this on the talk page. I made 2 different changes to the page (different, not the same), but I do not want to make a 3rd change to avoid what happened last time. What do you suggest I should be doing in this case? Thank you. -- Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ [talk] 16:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Someone insists on inserting pictures of the July 2009 demonstrations (Berlin/Washington) into East Turkestan independence movement. Neither the English nor the German posters/flyers say anything about "independence." Is there any indication that the people in the pictures were actually demonstrating for "independence"? Is there proof?... I think it's very dubious and takes up too much space in that short section. But I'm sick of arguing... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 10:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag, A month ago you said on my talk page that if a particular user named Liam became trouble again to let you know. I said I would keep watch. Now he has definitely returned with a vengeance at Talk Meher Baba
An extensive section by user Hoverfish is there where he has been doing his own investigation of sockpuppetrty by the user. Here is just one small example:
See here. Now read below.
I'm on the Baba fringe too, but do check out this article a few times a year. Why not a bigger section on Sanskaras Im wondering? Johnathon --203.26.122.12 (talk)
The user has a confirmed (by admin) history of sockpuppetry and even admits to it proudly in the discussion. I left a post on the Discussion page that I would see if an admin could help. Dazedbythebell ( talk) 18:56, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi from me too Rjanag. Well, it is draining my energy all right, though I could simply disregard him, but I think then he would create more problems, so I try to keep him somewhat in check. I think he is using the talk page like social networking somehow, I am not sure how much is permissible or where there is a clear limit, but I keep feeling SOME rule should be there to put an end to it, hopefully. I know that's a lot of literature to offer you, but it gives an idea... Talk:Meher_Baba#The_Brendan132_incident Thanks for your time anyway. Hoverfish Talk 20:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I humbly ask you, if the user "softjuice" is a rightful and a credible on his contributions in the "Next Eleven." The Philippines is already a NIC, why should he/she degrade it into the Developing Country Level. Is that an offense already? "I have asked you because you're the only one I know that can help it through. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devoted Scientist ( talk • contribs) 12:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
This person ( Alefbe) is removing properly quoted statements from the 16th century historian Firishta and by known authors of books. [59] Alefbe doesn't believe the information because the information doesn't satisfy his POV. Thank you!-- 119.73.4.133 ( talk) 12:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
He/she has now started edit-war. [60] Can you please revert his last edit. Thanks-- 119.73.4.133 ( talk) 12:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you tell me how to delete this file? File:Psyren-char.jpg Thanks. DragonZero ( talk · contribs) 18:53, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Rjanag, normally I would agree that comments about Wikipedia editing belong in the manuals and not the articles. However, I refer you to Wikipedia:Help desk#More on IPA tone. In this case, I don't think a small comment in a list of resources in a section at the end of an article that is specifically about "Keyboard Input" would be harmful. On the contrary, it would be extremely helpful. If you disagree again, I will accept and won't argue further. I will also include a link from the IPA article to Wikipedia's IPA manual for similar reasons. I hope these resources in the appendices to the article will help others avoid the frustration I have had.-- seberle ( talk) 14:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the AfD notice on The Shells, even though our views are opposed. I appreciate that. - Draeco ( talk) 02:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your note on my page, Rjanag. Feel like asking for a review by an uninvolved admin or two? The page needs cooling down. Tony (talk) 02:00, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Great, thanks for the correction. I had simply grabbed to much of the text in my external editor (UltraEdit), glad you fixed the messed-up characters! Chevy1948 ( talk) 19:17, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Soigneusement, je me demande: Qu'est-ce qu'on peut faire ici? -- Tenmei ( talk) 07:51, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Why are you adding policy shortcuts (like this) to talkpage sections? They don't belong—those templates are for indicating when a given shortcut redirects to the page. rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 07:59, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for your work on the DYK. I just wanted to make a correction for a hook here. Template_talk:Did_you_know#Articles_created.2Fexpanded_on_October_17. I left specific comments there (currently 3rd hook down). Sorry for any confusion. Thank you. -- Omarcheeseboro ( talk) 01:14, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi there Rjanag. The DYK bot seems to believe it is on a 6 hour cycle after Gatoclass changed it to 8 hours and posted a warning to AN that the update is overdue and the template shows the same warning. Aforementioned Gatoclass suggested I should turn to you for help since you have programming skills. Do you think you can do something about those problems? :-) Regards So Why 12:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I am looking for advice first and foremost. I have done extensive start up pages in the past only to have them deleted simply because it is one persons viewpoint. All the people or companies that I write about I have spent quality time via face to face interaction. I don't sit at home and critique those from afar. So now I will start in stages with the page and build it up so to avoid being "red flagged" by guys like you. I have noticed hundreds of pages on this site that are not finished that have been up for quite some time. How about purging those pages from the system or correcting them? Understand, I am looking for advice, please help me not deter my situation. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by FashionModelEditor ( talk • contribs) 21:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for the advice. I am learning, please be patient. Thank you very much! FashionModelEditor ( talk) 22:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)FashionModelEditor
Sorry. My mistake. Please take a call with how you want to deal with Nevill's comments; I have nothing to say. Alinovic ( talk) 17:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, you are a random admin I am requesting assistance from. Could you please check article ' Khachkar' and see if it has a lock left on it - i can't edit it. The page is connected with the controversial Nagorno-Karabakh War family of articles. Thankyou for any help that you can give. -- maxrspct ping me 19:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
template at the top of the message.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
21:23, 20 October 2009 (UTC)Ok, thanks for your prompt help. Shouldn't there be a template at the top of the actual article page? -- maxrspct ping me 12:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Greetings, you removed a "misleading link' at
Jonathan Gleich I was trying to explain the word "Masticator" in the title.
Would it be more acceptable with you if I listed it as Chronic
Masticator ?
Thanks
Lscappel ( talk) 00:09, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Lscappel ( talk) 00:23, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Severely needs copyediting and referencing. May be of interest to you. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 00:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
I would like to offer you to collaborate with me in a project (literally a film article improvement in sub-page). I chose you since your Not One Less was damn perfect. I chose a film to be improved, Spirited Away. I looking for a good answer. Sincerely, World Cinema Writer ( talk • contributions) 07:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
In my opinion, it's time to ask for a bot trial run. There may be unknown issues, but the template has already been deprecated, and the bot isn't making substantive changes. -- 69.225.5.183 ( talk) 06:49, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
This dude is beginning to get on my neves. He's been at it since July and has only one talk page contribution. Does he ever come up with reasons for his reverts and pushing? Somewhere? Could someone at least reprimand him (again) for not marking these major changes as "minor"? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:04, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Can you please explain why Star Fox 64 wasn't named Starwing 64 in Europe and Australia please? As I've read on numerous occasions it was due to a request from George Lucas as Starwing sounded like Star Wars.
I'll try and dig out a notable article.-- Guru Larry ( talk) 02:18, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
What does oil spill really mean? It must be caused by ships-sinking? and...does the oil mean Petroleum(really does?) here? Please answer in English and Chinese,thanks. I planed to create this article in Chinese.
-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 15:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I had just realized it myself not too long before you mentioned it. It looks like you just celebrated your first year about two months ago, so belated congratulations to you, too. Here's to many more, for both of us! -- Transity( talk • contribs) 19:21, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Rjanag, I have reported you at the ANI here based on what I believe was grossly uncivil behavior during the Epeefleche/Shells affair. This is not a personal attack, and I deeply respect your other prolific contributions. But I also detested your behavior in this case, and I'm compelled to act. Regards - Draeco ( talk) 06:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the WikiBirthday greeting. — ERcheck ( talk) 06:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
A little insignificant has given you a
LOL
ipop! This horrible pun and delicious candy promotes
WikiLove and tells the world how low you will stoop for the sake of humor. Spread WikiLove by giving someone else a lollipop, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the unrelenting joy of lollipops by adding {{ subst:Lollipop}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
^_^ A little insignificant Talk to me! (I have candy!) 11:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I'll grant you credit for giving an authentic reply, but you gave no indication of the literal translation (which I added, having checked my French/English dictionary) of the OP's phrase. If your translation is idiomatic, in which part/s of the francophone world is it used? Your answer would be helpful on the RD thread. -- Deborahjay ( talk) 09:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Dabomb87 ( talk) 22:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
我是看過那部電影,不過你說的 en:Not One Less#Themes這東西。我不明白你的意思,什麼地方有問題呢?-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 08:34, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Haven't felt this stupid in a long time now. DGG ( talk ) 02:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, just replied to you over at my talkpage (in case you miss it and think I am ignoring you!) - Dumelow ( talk) 00:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! Autarch ( talk) 13:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
It was my understanding that a sub-page in my user space was only for private editing before it was released to the public. Because of that, rather than try to learn all of the formatting requirements, I copied the text of a book I knew of (Da Vinci Code), so that I could replace the text with text appropriate for my book. The only other images were a photo of the Catacombs of Paris that I submitted as my work and was free to use according to Wiki rules. The other image was the book cover image for which the copyright owner emailed the license to "permissions" earlier today.
Can you tell me which images you are refferring to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsonsol ( talk • contribs) 23:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
That AfD is a pretty clear snowball keep that's due to be closed in a few hours anyway. Why not just close the AfD? Tim Song ( talk) 23:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Nice bot. Benjwong ( talk) 01:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
First of all, I'm extremely suprised that you can promote July 2009 Ürümqi riots into GA status given the controversial nature of the topic, but since you did it, and you are more familiar with the bureaucracy of Wikipedia, I would like some personal opinions on the future prospects of the articles I'm working on. The articles in question are:
Given that none of the articles above are suffering from edit wars, I have been pondering for months on whether to promote these three articles to higher status, but I'm concerned about the nature of the topic since they are Korean War topics involving battles between US and China.
My main concerns are:
I was thinking on consulting the US, Korean and Chinese military history task forces, but given the sensitive nature of the topic, I would perfer a neutral outsider opinion first. Thanks in advance for your feedbacks. Jim101 ( talk) 03:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
One more thing, how to resolve conflicts involving the WP:RS propaganda clause on Chinese sources? Jim101 ( talk) 13:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I see now that John Anstis' portrait fitted this. However, I use Twinkle, and its wording for F8 is "bit-for-bit identical", which misled me somewhat (I was thinking it might be for people who'd uploaded it to both, for example). I also not that F8 itself just says identical - which I agree is relevant here (clearly the same painting). I don't quite know why I'm telling you this, but hey. - Jarry1250 Humorous? Discuss. 10:09, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I remain somewhat confused about your message. You continue to suggest that THB300K.jpg is a non-free image. I would agree it was when I first posted it. But as soon as you sent your fist message, I contacted the copyright owner who did submit to license using your own language template to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Now you claim it doesn't exist. The site suggests that if the license is not received within 7 days, it will be deleted. Yet, if it is not in the commons, that would mean it was deleted on the same day it was posted... even though the license was emailed on the same day.
Re: the article being written by me. I am no longer the owner of the book. I was the author, but I am not the owner, so suggesting it as that is not accurate. But I do see validity to the point about writing an article about a book I authored could be taken the wrong way, I will ask someone else to write the article.
You did not respond to my other question. Is a sub-page open for scrutiny by people such as yourself? I mentioned that I thought it was a practice page that was not visible to anyone else (The reason I cut and paste another article to easer the pain of my formatting ignorance. Is it my area or must I be concerned that you are looking at every step I take.
Please answer this question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsonsol ( talk • contribs) 15:04, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Rjanag and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, -- Epeefleche ( talk) 21:59, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. It seems that you have been helpfully reflecting on the appropriateness of some of your behaviour and been willing to apologise. I would suggest that you consider apologising to others to whom you have been un-civil, and specifically undertaking that you will not use your powers as an Admin either:
Best wishes NBeale ( talk) 08:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
我看了文章後,开始乱掉了。"I want a soup(×)" 以及 "There are a lot of shoe(×)."这些句子都是错误的。那正确的说法是什麽?English:I confused after reading this article.I want a soup and There are a lot of shoe are both wrong.So what's the correct sentense?-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 18:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
The discussion I meant to link to just now (and failed to) is here: Template talk:Citation/core#We should never render invalid HTML -- JN 466 21:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
|ref=harv
though in addition to its own system. --
Tothwolf (
talk)
22:34, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Ok I have a question. Here is a list of articles that use template:Chinese. I updated the template font size, but it is not changing the page contents until the next purge. Can your bot do auto purge? Such as running...
and just go down the list. I suppose it can be done outside wiki. But I don't know if your bot can do something like this. If not, is no problem. Just let me know. Benjwong ( talk) 06:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. I just noticed that the note about Chinese characters at the top of Kowloon Walled City, the article I'm working on, are having weird formatting issues. Just looking at recent edits to related templates, it seems like this edit of yours might be the cause. If that is indeed the case, could you please fix that as soon as possible? Thanks. — tk tk tk 08:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I am unsure what to make of this, and would like to know how you think about this. On East Asian age reckoning there are many "unsourced statements", however a particular user seems keen on eliminating all unsourced statements, turning a page of about 5,000 bytes into one of 1,000, to the point where there is minimal information left. The page has transformed from this to this. This said user argues here that such material is not permitted at all without sources per WP:BURDEN, full stop. I am under the belief that it was acceptable to temporarily allow an unreferenced statement provided that it can be referenced eventually, and that it doesn't violate BLP; am I mistaken? Regards, -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 13:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Can you make the edit summary a bit shorter please?-- Tznkai ( talk) 02:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Rjanag. As you know, a number of arbitrators suggested at the Rjanag RfA that an RfC be brought with regard to your conduct discussed at that RfA. Please be aware that in accordance with the arbitrators' suggestion a request for comments has been filed concerning your conduct on Wikipedia by your name in this list.
The RfC can be found here.
If a second user certifies the dispute within 48 hours, it will be moved from the "Candidate pages" section to the "Approved pages" section.
Once it has been certified and opened, editors (including those who certified the RfC) can offer comments, either by:
I invite you to respond in the Response section. You may endorse as many views as you wish. Anyone can endorse any views, regardless of whether they are outside parties, inside parties, or the subject of the RfC.
Information on the RfC process can be found at:
-- Epeefleche ( talk) 08:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Actually I was agreeing with you, rather than the other way around. I was planning to start a talk page thread if he did it again. As for the rollback/Twinkle thing, sorry, I didn't know. I just assumed it would be the best/easiest way to say I was assuming good faith. -- Thejadefalcon Sing your song The bird's seeds 19:03, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. I hope all is well with you. I haven't had occasion to work with you much of late, although I always think to ask your opinion on linguistic and language related subjects (as I recall that's an area of interest and expertise for you?). Anyway, I just wanted to come by and offer some support and encouragement. Wikipedia definitely has its frustrations, but I hope everything is going well for you and that you enjoy yourself on and off-line. Take care. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 22:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Since your online right now was hoping you could move Queue 4 to Queue 3, since its been recently moved to the front page. If its a lag of the bot then nevermind. Thanks in advance Calmer Waters 15:45, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Uhmm... What's [ this]? I didn't to any work on the HMS Indomitable (1907) article at all. 88.90.88.107 ( talk) 03:56, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
You thought this was more fun than this? Haha. Grsz 11 04:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks. A lesser editor would have reverted my whole change instead of moving it forward. You're one of the good ones. Thanks. Hope you can get that article featured. -- Horkana ( talk) 05:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
I was looking at one of the bot's edit on the Martin Lee article. When it converted zh-tspj without saying first=t, this is going to cause issues. Now Martin Lee has simplified chars first. It becomes difficult maybe even impossible to go back. That goes for any other article that used {{zh-tspj}}. Benjwong ( talk) 08:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
|first=t
manually; the bot only did replacements on templates that were already simplified-first. (Note that the name of a template doesn't necessarily tell you the order of its constituents: templates like {{
zh-tspj}}
and {{
zh-ts}}
actually had simplified characters first
[63]
[64].) I figured people watching the articles can fix the ordering manually if needed.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
00:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
|first=s
to templates that you think should explicitly be simplified first (such as PRC-related articles) but I won't alter the defaults without a wider community consensus. You'd probably be better off starting a discussion instead of making any changes with AWB yet, because you would have to do something like 15,000 edits (even with AWB, that takes a very long time), whereas if a community consensus is reached then I can have ZhBot add the |first=s
automatically to templates that don't have it, or to templates that are in certain articles (for example, if the community came up with a list of categories for which all the member articles should be simp-first or trad-first, the bot could use those).
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
05:07, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for the WikiBirthday message! Wow... three years and counting... I am so proud to be part of Wikipedia. Thanks again. κaτaʟaveno T C 14:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
我不能使用 这张图用在中文维基,为什麽会这样?要如何才能在中文版使用呢? -- 俠刀行 ( talk) 14:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
All these complaints and puffery give me a creepy feeling. Try reading this recent NYT-article ... Seems distantly related (at least in my mind) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 19:40, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
The project now has a more defined idea of what we plan to do. Basically, we're calling for individual proposals on how to improve Wikipedia. Please help by posting your new ideas! – Juliancolton | Talk 21:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC) (Cross-posting)
ZhBot is currently replacing {{ lang-zh}} with {{ zh}} and the edit summary says to check the userpage. However, the userpage mentions only merging all "zh-" style templates into zh. Where was it decided to start using zh|c= across the board instead of lang-zh? Kolindigo ( talk) 04:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
zh}}
is simply better than {{
lang-zh}}
, it has all the functionality of the latter and much more.{{
zh}}
is shorter to type out.{{zh | c={{{1}}} }}
so that it still works if people use it. I also intend to make the same replacements for {{
lang-gb}}
. But if you think this is serious, I can file a second request for bot approval before doing this task. Personally, the only benefit I see in keeping the current templates is consistency with the others in
Category:Multilingual support templates, but that benefit is outweighed by the others (I think), and besides that category is not exhaustive anyway, so I see no harm in having just one more language that has slightly different format.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
06:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)Congratulations on FA for a fine article. Hope there is more to come! (You are an original writer. I appreciate that. I don't mean that you make up facts, but that you put together subject matter in a wonderfully clear way. ) Regards, — mattisse ( Talk) 23:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the Eva Peron article, we do not need accents over the "o" in the words "Peronism" and "Peronato." Please stop inserting accents over the "o" in image titles because that disables the images. Thank you. Andrew Olivo Parodi ( talk) 02:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks for your birthday wishes. Davshul ( talk) 21:56, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
My apology regarding your bot adding the simplified title to the article. -- WikiCantona ( talk) 22:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
First, I'd like to thank you for your work on July 2009 Ürümqi riots. It seems I'm late to the party (good job on the GA) but that article looks positively superb for such a contested topic. It is for this reason that I would like to request your help on User:NocturneNoir/Sandbox/Chongqing corruption scandal (yes, when mainspaced, it will reside at 2009 Chongqing corrupting scandal instead of its current stated target). I've listed sources at User talk:NocturneNoir/Sandbox/Chongqing corruption scandal, but I'm having trouble with both the formatting of the article and the decision of what information should be included. Your help would be greatly appreciated, if you have the time to spare. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR talk // contribs 22:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. My query here is regarding Template:Quote. I just noticed this issue then, but previously when using Template:Quote, if you left a line between two paragraphs it, naturally, would recognise that line and leave a space separating the paragraphs. However, for some reason it is not doing this now and the text, even if split into paragraphs, merges into the one block. As you were the most recent to edit the template, I thought it would be logical to ask you if you knew how to fix this? It may not have been your edit, but I didn't notice this until now and you were the most recent to edit the template. Thanks, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 07:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
quote}}
template caused the archiving to be messed up. Basically, the archiving works by applying a <div style="background: [some color]"> tag to the beginning of the discussion, and a </div> tag to the end... but the quote template also has a tag, so when the browser sees it it thinks that's the end of the background-color thing and ends the archiving. I have also noticed this problem with embedded div tags on other pages; it's kind of annoying, so I'll leave a note at WP:VP/T to see if anything can be done about it. Anyway, in this case I thought the div tags in the template were doing nothing so I removed them to fix the AfD page, but didn't realize that would create other problems. For now I've just converted the quote template in the AfD to a <blockquote></blockquote>, which will work as a quick fix for most cases, but the better solution will be to figure out how to prevent div tags from interfering with one another, so I will look into that. rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 01:11, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Thx, and happy Friday 13th to you too. - Altenmann >t 16:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up on editing the source in an external editor. Is there some way to do this, however, as it's pretty difficult to find your way through pages and pages of mark-up without a search function? BarryNorton ( talk) 19:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
[65] - Ottava Rima ( talk) 23:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your birthday greeting.
Hi, Rjanag, if you're active, could you look into this blatant violation of WP:Talk, WP:SOAPBOX and WP:NPA by new editors named Monkh Naran ( talk · contribs) and Pertook15 ( talk · contribs) as well as GenuineMongol ( talk · contribs)'s gross incivility. I deleted some rant [66] that have nothing to do with the ongoing disputes on a map and content regarding 13th century Korean and Mongol relation. However, Monkh Naran ( talk · contribs) reverted to include such offensive attacks including mocking ethnicity, and false labeling of "vandalism" with threats. I've been attacked by the users like this [67] [68] [69]. I warned them and tried to calm down [70], but well...I got this treatment. User_talk:Caspian_blue#Materials_from_User_talk:Gantuya_eng. Would you look into the situation? Thanks.-- Caspian blue 17:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Rjanag. This user is constantly removing the sourced information from the articles Samad Behrangi and Turko-Persian tradition without any discussion. If you check the talk pages of these articles in which i contributed the most, you'll see that there is no comment from this user. However, he/she's blindly removing information and also stalking. Regards, E104421 ( talk) 22:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Nope nothing is automated with the Wiki Cleaner edits. Just my mistake. Thanks for catching it. Wiki Cleaner just gives a fast list of what needs to be disammed. It's more of an assistance tool than an editing tool. -- User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 22:25, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag,
I do a fair amount of writing/editing on WP but I don't know of any page that has such a constant stream of vandals as the One-Child Policy page. Virtually all of the vandals are unregistered users, and judging by the childishness of the entries, the vast majority are juveniles.
Would it be possible to restrict editing of that article to Registered Users? Of course many of us monitor those entries now, but it's a PITA to have to deal with those edits. If it is possible to place a restriction on editing, and you know how to request or create such a restriction, then I encourage you to do so.
Thanks a lot.
--Mack2 ( talk) 20:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
What do you think? I have a feeling you're going to go with delete. But I wonder if including an author/scholar of specialized work in this field doesn't make the encyclopedia just a little bit better? I actually like that it's very short and stubby without and fluff. I don't see how it can be merged to a broader topic. And it seems like a good way to have his books be included in some fashion in our comprehensive resource. Have I lost it completely? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 20:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Rjanag, I hope my message to you is not ignored this time. :-) (my feeling was a little hurt). However, I can really not come up with any suitable admin for the matter because you know both GraYoshi2 and Badagnani, and your are an active member of WP:CHINA with experiences in editing food/Chinese culture-related articles. This tendentious edit warring between them has been going on for about 7 months. Regardless of the formed consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_China/Archive/May_2009#Naming_convention_for_Chinese_foods_and_usages_of_Wikitionary, GraYoshi2x has been reverting to exclude the Wiktionary links even though he is the only one against the consensus. I think this long-term revert campaign is indeed spooky and disruptive. [72] (most of them are mere reverts of Badagnani's edit). I have agreed and disagreed with each of the both, but to me, GraYoshi2x wants to pick a fight, so Badagnani who has many block records to be blocked for a longer time. Would you take appropriate action; block or warning anything to stop this silliness. Thanks.-- Caspian blue 22:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm bringing another problem to your attention since your specialty is in linguistic study. User named Laws dr ( talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log · edit summaries) has been inserting WP:Original research to Hardest language over and over and even distorted contents from used books (he claimed he merely re-added somebody's edit). This was pointed out at here on Oct.31, but he recently added his personal opinion referenced with a chatting forum, insisting that his edit is justified. He sporadically edits Wikipedia, but as soon as his added content was deleted today, he appears. I think Law dr is a single purpose account, or alternative account with another account. Would you warn him for his repeated disruption and violations of WP:NOR and WP:SYNTHESIS, and WP:RS and if possible look into the account? Thanks.-- Caspian blue 15:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi there, thanks for the helpful info on my discussion page. I didn't know the zh-cp was deprecated. I'll make use of the new Chinese: s....
-- Visik ( talk) 05:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I am a native Russian speaker and linguist. What we have originally in the article is transliteration with mere elements of transcription (e.g. no vowel reduction is indicated). There is the pronouncing norm of standard Russian in Russia which roughly corresponds to Moscow speech. In this norm there are rules for vowel reduction which are in no way respected in the article. Voiced consanants always become devoiced (with few situational exceptions) at word ending. -- Zumrasha ( talk) 16:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
我不懂。我只是发牢骚一下,他就马上删除了。你可以告诉我原因吗?被删除的内容: [73]-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 15:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
If you can't win the argument, the next best thing is to be able to "hang up the phone", yes? :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Here is an archive search box for your talk page. You can modify it and place it according to your preferences.
Hello. I saw your post here and I was wondering if there is a list of StarCraft articles that need archive urls added? I wouldn't mind doing some manually.-- Rockfang ( talk) 06:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
http://web.archive.org/web/20040810213217/
to the front and not worrying about looking them up specifically. I could do this pretty easily on AWB, I think, once I sit down and work out the search terms.Thank you for the kind birthday wish J04n( talk page) 15:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Are you aware <date> is for some reason a deprecated field? Rich Farmbrough, 21:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC).
|date=
and not |date2=
were broken; the easier fix by far seemed to be to add date to the template, rather than making text changes to however many articles have the template transcluded.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
00:04, 4 December 2009 (UTC)I don't quite understand what you are referring to. Which user is this? Why is there no further discussion on #linguistics? ...some questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alinovic ( talk • contribs) 12:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much for fixing {{ mountain index row}} !! — hike395 ( talk) 16:26, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for not stating that two other individuals and myself are adding to the Viral Video page for a class project @ UNC-CH. We ask that before any changes or extreme alterations are made to our edits or additions can anyone please contact us before. Thanks for acknowledging! ( Mfantroy ( talk) 23:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC))
Yes, many articles that are being improved are for a class project. Instead of a final exam, we are required to improve or create a new page for a topic relevant to our class. Mjohnston13 ( talk) 03:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Yes, me and two other members are working on a class project. We are taking an information science course and one of the assignments was to create or help improve an existing Wiki page on a topic in the information science field.
Ebenj05 ( talk) 14:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC) Ebenj05
OK. Lapsed Pacifist ( talk) 05:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Hmm... -- I agree that the wording of this addition was completely POV and you were certainly right in reverting; on the other hand, I find it somewhat odd that for a geographical area that is (maybe only currently) such a hot-spot of ethnic tensions, there isn't a single word of it mentioned in the intro. Am I making sense? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 05:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
You are a great guy! Thanks for being so excellent and telling me it was my WikiBirthday. I had absolutely no idea. ^_^ Clem ( talk) 04:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Actually, glottal stops can occur at the end of words as well; so we're looking for
IF <(not apostrophe)+'> OR <'+(not apostrophe)> THEN ʼ
(that's to avoid replacing italics and bold-markings. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 02:37, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to consult you on the romanization of minority (i.e. Tibetan, Uyghur, Mongolian) place names in China. Is there a system in place sanctioned by the PRC government on how to correctly name these places? The most obvious examples are Urumqi, Hohhot, and Lhasa, but I also refer to county names which are not romanized according to pinyin. Colipon+( Talk) 15:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
"Native" name/spelling | Pinyin of Chinese name | Other romanizations |
---|---|---|
Ürümchi ( Ürümqi) | Wulumuqi | Urumqi |
Qaramay (K̡aramay) | Karamay | |
Aqsu (Ak̡su) | Akesu | Aksu |
Qumul (K̡umul) | Hami | Kumul |
Xoten (Hotən) | Hetian | Hotan |
Qeshqer (K̡əxk̡ər) | Kashi | Kashgar |
Turpan | Tulufan | Turfan |
Altay | Aletai | Altai? |
Let me get back to you on this. I'm quite busy writing final papers now and I have some Ph.d applications I need to send off. I don't think the article needs a complete rewrite, but adding more information on what the Chinese government's views are would help. I'll write more about this over the holiday break. Take care. David Straub ( talk) 03:18, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to point out that we can also put it under the main intro. I guess you have some valid points too regarding that as well. No problems. Alohahell ( talk) 18:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey. You asked whether I have any connection to ASDFGH, or some user like that. Nah, I don't know who that is or anything. Sorry. I'm back on wiki now, will be editing regularly. Along with the Falun Gong pages, I think I have some good contributions to make to pages on China and its governance generally.-- Asdfg 12345 23:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
J04n(
talk page) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Xmas,
Eid,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hannukah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec09}} to your friends' talk pages.
Hey Rjanag... I just wanted to wish you a very good... "day" (now, I wouldn't really want to reveal any sensitive details here...) ;) Have a good one! -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 22:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
File:18th Birthday.jpg | Hey, Rjanag. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the
Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!-- MisterWiki talk contribs 00:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC) |
![]() |
Thanks for the wikibirthday wishes. -- Kevlar ( talk • contribs) 00:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello Rjanag,
I am new to editing and decided to add some information to the entry on my home town. I deleted a reference to the estimated depth of the springs because the source I have (and the only published source as far as I know) did not mention who did that depth estimate.
You then changed it back faster than I could blink.
I then put in the missing documentation and left in the shaky claim, which appears to be local legend.
So, beginner that I am, please tell me how I should have handled that. Should I have just noted my reasoning in the notes for the changes, or should I have added a questionable reference with a caveat as I did? BotManPA ( talk) 01:58, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
No, I don't. I uploaded them thinking the intentions that the copyright was correct. I have no qualms with them being deleted. Thanks, -- Jimbo [online] 15:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
That picture is back again if you hadn't noticed. -- Thejadefalcon Sing your song The bird's seeds 00:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
...because your signature appears as gibberish in blue and red on my browser as well. What kind of browser do you use? -- Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ [talk] 08:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about that, it appeared that it was transcluded, but that's my fault. Doc Quintana ( talk) 19:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello rjanag, I received your message and hereby acknowledge it. Moreover, I checked out your claims and went over several articles you listed in your "good" list. I agree, they are good. You seem to be able to do an article right. I'm impressed. As for the several other admins on the page you say have similar records, I didn't go hunting and don't plan to, so I cannot verify that. However, there is no reason not to take your word for it. You have quite an interesting list of good articles there; I think you can be justly proud of them. I note your interest in the military. I'm interested somewhat in it myself.
In my experience, however, not all sysadmins have the same emphasis on quality. My skepticism derives from a considerable number of negative experiences, where a sysadm (who should have known better) pulled rank to insist on lower-quality material, some totally inaccurate. Some sysadmins have insisted even on doing things in a way inconsistent with WP policy. Basically I was told to shut up with the hinted threat of being blocked. That is the source of my cynicism. You know, I've considered requesting adm status to give me some clout - I think I'm probably qualified at this point - but, actually working on articles appeals to me rather than police work. I suspect, once you get started with administration work, it probably takes a lot of your time. I notice you have had to spend a lot of time doing blocks and deletions and whatnot.
I think I trust your article judgement all right, even though I may have a slightly different view. You don't seem to be exercising it much on the linguistics articles; there are quite a number of bad ones, many of them tagged. I presume that is not your main interest. I think that is how you managed to encounter me. I'm interested in getting some good linguistics articles, so that means I concentrate on the ones of interest that need the most work.
I understand your tone with me, which seems a little high-handed. However, I suppose I could be more civil. Whether I can work on the linguistics article with you - well, I'm not sure now. I note that in your articles you are quite detailed and so am I so I have no doubt we would be disagreeing on many details. The problem is, since you are the sysadm, I would always be losing, always be being reverted, without recourse. That is what I meant about power. I do my best work with a freer hand. Once in a while I get a suggestion from a peer, which I usually take. If I hear from a sysadm it is because I am not setting things up in the accepted way. I'm still learning even though I have thousands of edits now. You aren't presenting yourself to me as a peer. I do not know if that statement qualifies as something good or something bad so I'm choosing to put this under "other."
Well, I'm going on with my edits now. I do not yet know if I will take on helping to clean up the locked article. Let's see how it goes. If you were to take an interest in helping to fix the linguistics artcles that need the most work I think we would advance the cause of good articles in that area much faster. I you disagree with any of my edits be sure and speak up. I'm not going to edit war with you but I can let you know if I disagree. I think I trust your judgement - thanks for bringing it to my attention - but whether I can work in your proximity I think we will have to see. Ciao, and merry Christmas. Dave ( talk) 18:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't even see it there (more bad results from late-night editing). It's removed now. Otebig ( talk) 05:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I just copied this from our recent discussions. If you can point any errors and be able to provide the reasons, please try. And i am interested only in errors and their grammatical reasons, nothing else. Also, if you want, please delete this post onecs you read. Thank you.
Thanks for getting the WP:100 listing. [74] I meant to do it along with my other closure stuff, but it slipped my mind (as I was also processing a WP:NOTNOW RfA). EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:01, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't feel strongly either way, but it's a pretty common practice on movies and other fiction articles to include a section where references to the work are mentioned. Is that what you're objecting to? -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 18:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
The following is the archive of User talk:Rjanag for August to December 2009.
![]() |
Archives |
I added HARVEY W. BARNHILL to the list of PILOTS in ALASKA AVIATION HISTORY, then added a biography page for Barnhill linked from the list of PILOTS. You immediately deleted the bio page, but left his name listed in the list of PILOTS. The reason sighted is that it is an individual without indication of his importance.
I was beginning an extensive effort to add the names & biographies of the Alaska Bush Pilots from the pioneer era 1920 - 1940. I have researched & developed bios on over 100 pioneer Alaska bush pilot who contributed to Alaska aviation during this period. I also was going to add to the list of DEFUNCT AIRLINES in the ALASKA AVIATION HISTORY section.
HARVEY W. BARNHILL was one of the very early bush pilots. He & LINIOUS McGEE founded BARNHILL & McGEE AIRWAYS, which became McGEE AIRWAYS (one of the earliest airlines in Alaska). BARNHILL & McGEE AIRWAYS became McGEE AIRWAYS which sold to STAR AIR SERVICE, which became STAR AIRLINES which with mergers & acquisitions became ALASKA STAR AIRLINES, which became the ALASKA AIRLINES of today. I had planned to add HARVEY W. BARNHILL & LINIOUS McGEE bios, then BARNHILL & McGEE AIRWAYS, then McGEE AIRWAYS, all appropriately linked. This initial set of 4 pages would begin adding factual useful info on Alaska Aviation History not presently covered in Wikipedia.
How do you want me to proceed??
Signed - RoyDickson ( talk) 14:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
PS - I also added some birth & death years to several of the PILOTS in the list that were missing dates. These edits were not deleted.
Actually, having this information on the Wiki IS relevant, because many people are unaware that he is not involved with Green Hornet any longer, and a Wiki page is supposed to be INFORMATIVE AND FACTUAL. Glossing over this bit of history is cleansing his professional history and providing a disservice to fans/readers by omission of relevant history.
In fact, when I have the time I will add a paragraph talking about this sad chapter for Stephen Chow fans. Hollywood kicked Mr. Chow in the teeth. The wiki should document professional successes AND professional failures. It is his LIFE, after all.
75.140.110.87 ( talk) 20:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Every time I post my bio article on Harvey W. Barnhill - you (or someone else) deletes it. I have tried to explain to you that I am attempting to add bio information on the Alaska Bush Pilots of the pioneer 1920 -1940 era, as well as history articles on the airlines in Alaska during this period, all of which are now defunct. These pilots & airlines contributed much to the development of Alaska before statehood as supported by the Alaska Centennial Commission, The Alaska Aviation Heritage Museum, University of Alaska Press / Film Archives, etc. As far as I can tell you don't even give me an explanation other than your original cryptic criticism. I have rewritten the article & reposted it twice but it keeps disappearing. Besides the criticism do you have any constructive suggestions on how to accomplish this objective, or should I just quit wasting a considerable amount of time trying to develop the understanding to contribute? Plz do me the honor of replying. RoyDickson ( talk) 18:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
You are terrible!
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
Your deletion of the article on the 12th Lord Belhaven and Stenton was an outrage. Do the right thing and restore it.-- ChapmanHB ( talk) 19:07, 2 August 2009 (UTC)ChapmanHB
I'd like to request your comment regarding moving Bing (search engine) to Bing at Talk:Bing#Requested_move. Thanks! Smallman12q ( talk) 22:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
Someone's trying to (once again) add the photo controversy story into the Rebiya Kadeer article and actually started a talkpage-string. Maybe you could comment as well. I know we greed to exclude it, but I don't completely recall the rationale. thanks Seb az86556 ( talk) 04:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
isn't chinahistorian our "special friend" from last month? seems like he dug up the Kadeer children's letter... Seb az86556 ( talk) 20:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Can you look at Wikipedia:Help_desk#GA_Sweeps_review_userbox.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 02:08, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll be sure to check those, as soon as I finish editing the spelling within the article. SilkRoadEdge ( talk) 03:59, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible to unfreeze
Fred Singer and keep discussion of the disputed section in the
Fred Singer talk page (as has been tried repeatedly in good faith by
GoRight and others, including myself) till the disputed section is resolved without requiring a freezing of the whole article?--there is a certain aspect of "tag teaming" which I think underlies the current reverting difficulties. The reverts are often accompanied by snide remarks/no or perfunctory justification and the
talk page gets much worse. An example: "Singer['s]...work during the last 30 years is a politically motivated crock of shit...." [strikethrough was in original and was meant as a sarcastic insult--see other similar insults directed at GoRight and others in the same section], so I think GoRight is getting a bad rap here--he has honestly been trying to add balance (whether I/others agree with him or not) and trying to get civil discussions going without much success. The current issue is how to deal with "sourced" ad hominem labels in a held-to-a-higher-standard
Biography of living persons. I'm not sure reverts attempting ensure consensus gathering should be viewed as being of the same form as those trying to avoid it, either.
Btw, the version frozen in place was the one reverted to by the editor holding the "Singer['s]...work during the last 30 years is a politically motivated crock of shit...." animus. --
John G. Miles (
talk)
05:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your wishes. :) -- Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi talk! 06:28, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I have been trying to add a lot of important info on early Alaska aviation history. I have a lot of well researched info on the pioneer bush pilots of the 1920 - 1940 era, as well as info on the many airlines formed during this period, that through many mergers, ended up being Alaska Airlines and a part of Delta Airlines. I added some birth & death dates to your existing list of pilots, and added the names of about 90 additional bush pilots of the 1920 - 1940 era. These are all notable pioneers who contributed to the development of Alaska which was and continues to be so dependent on aviation. All of these pilots were honored by the ALASKA CENTENNIAL COMMISSION in 1967. YOU DELETED ALL MY ADDITIONS WITHOUT COMMENT! YOU EVEN DELETED SEVERAL OF THE PILOTS IN YOUR ORIGINAL LIST! You changed the "PILOT" heading to "NOTABLE PILOTS." You even deleted a pilot from the original list who was also a Territorial Senator from Alaska and one of the authors and signers of the Alaska State Constitution! YOU HAVE ALSO DELETED MOST OF THE ARTICLES I HAVE SUBMITTED EITHER WITHOUT COMMENT OR WITH SOME RUDE COMMENTS indicating that IN YOUR JUDGMENT these people or airlines were not NOTABLE enough! Perhaps the Alaska Centennial Commission and the Alaska Historians are much better judges of who & what is notable than you are! Wikipedia does not have much information on this important subject of Alaska Aviation History. For example, the article on ALASKA AIRLINES is a very short stub and the flag ASKS for contributions of more information. I am trying to add information on the 14 airlines that became Alaska Airlines and the 100 or so pioneer bush pilots who started it all. IS THERE SOMEONE AT WIKIPEDIA I CAN WORK WITH that is a lot MORE HELPFUL and a lot LESS RUDE? PLEASE ADVISE! RoyDickson ( talk) 19:02, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
No need for email as far as I'm concerned. I'm tired of wikipedia and don't like who I am here. I'm not just switching accounts; I'm gone for good. I think that's reason enough? Arxack ( talk) 20:20, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 20:49, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
After your initial (and only) message to me about removing the Barnhill article, I rewrote and resubmitted the article which you removed again without any message that I can locate. So, what is the answer to my question: "Is there someone I can work with that is a LOT MORE HELPFUL and A LOT LESS RUDE?" - answer YES or NO?? RoyDickson ( talk) 00:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
while we're at it, I need a legal opinion regarding the Griqualand East-article:
So that country printed its own money in 1867 and burnt/destroyed most of those banknotes shortly after that 'cause they realized the idea was total junk and wouldn't work. Only a handful of those notes remain, and the copyright has definitely expired (1867, US+100, SAfr.+70).
And then there's this guy who takes a picture of one of those rare pieces, posts it on the web, and claims he now has the copyright. Hm?
thanks Seb az86556 ( talk) 04:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Are you seriously of the opinion that 6x9=42 (base 13) requires a citation? -- RobertG ♬ talk 11:45, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. I have noticed your work on the Epoch Times and I think your objectivity and editing experience can also be used at other articles that deal with Falun Gong media and PR organizations such as NTDTV, Shen Yun Performing Arts etc. All of these articles desperately need to be checked for POV, with some of the articles being constantly abused by one particular user. Colipon+( T) 15:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
The user I mentioned above has engaged in serious content and policy violations with Falun Gong related content. He violates WP:OWN and often reverts changes intermittently with dubious reasoning and shows little respect to other peoples' views. He constantly throws out personal attacks and his blanking of content has become very methodical and often turns away good faith editors like OhConfucius and myself. He has been cautioned endlessly on his talk page and has been banned in the past. His abuse is immediately visible if you check his contributions. He needs to be topic-banned (or banned completely) as soon as possible, much like the pro-CCP anti-Uyghur "User:ChinaHistorian" on the Urumqi riots articles. I was wondering if you could help me through this process. Colipon+( T) 15:34, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk%3ADilip_rajeev&diff=288338716&oldid=288322046 (Bunch of sockpuppet allegations and attempts at defending himself). Also, his anti-Cult stance at Sathya Sai Baba is notable, as the organization wrote a blog against him detailing his "smears" of the article on Wikipedia. There is also his own website praising Falun Gong - indicating a clear conflict of interest. There's countless other cases of him insulting and attacking other users on talk pages. I just don't have time to dig thru them all. If you need them I'll keep digging though. Colipon+( T) 19:06, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
In one of your previous replies to my messages, you mentioned the name of the contributor who deleted the PILOTS category and replaced it with NOTABLE PILOTS and eliminated most of what had been listed both before my edits and after my edits. I do not seem to be able to find that contributors ID so I can contact him to discuss this list (in helpful positive ways.) Would you please resend me his contact ID? Thank you in advance. RoyDickson ( talk) 20:11, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
I would like to thankyou for your continued participation with me in helping Roy Dickson. I looked at his last edit at Talk:History_of_aviation_in_Alaska#Long_list_of_pilots and he raised the question as to what are the criteria for listing pilots. I've looked at Wikipedia:Notability, Wikipedia:Notability (people), and Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Notability and none list the criteria for listing notable pilots. Could you point me to somewhere it does, or give me some criteria that I can pass on?(I've also started a thread at WP:Village_pump_(policy)#Notability_of_pilots. Thanks. Smallman12q ( talk) 19:05, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for stepping in and assisting here. I'll agree with most of your comments, it could have been handled better. Inurhead has been, in the past, very difficult to bring to a discussion, any discussion. I'll try to do better. Would you be willing to talk to Inurhead about his accusations he's raising in various places? I don't really like being labeled (even by him) as something I'm not. Yup, I know I've called him a SPA, something that's very, very clear from his history. The sock thing, he's reacting to multiple editors disagreeing with him, not by any evidence. And no, for the record, I'm not a sock of anyone. Again, thanks! Ravensfire2002 ( talk) 05:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
I put The Universe of Myron Evans on AfD. Since you agreed w/ deletion but deletion was contested, you might be interested in commenting Seb az86556 ( talk) 13:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 19:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. See, there is still some policies I haven't read. Chevy Impala 2009 20:32, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Hey - great addition to the hangon template. Not sure if you knew this, but it actually went live already (because it was already in the hangon main template)... it still contained what looked like two links to example.com - one of which I've fixed - the other (purge) I'm still trying to figure out how to fix because the parser wants to add action=edit which is overriding action=purge. I've also requested protection on the page to match the hangon template. Hope I didn't mess you up. Regards 7 talk | Δ | 06:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
{{fullurl}}
for the other instance, I figured it would be more consistent. As for the includeonlys, I'm not sure what happened there....I thought by having subst statements in includeonly it would cause there to be a link when the template is transcluded, without having transcluded {{fullurl}}
s within the transcluded template, but when I tried it out in my sandbox it didn't work, so I just removed the subst's.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
11:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
So for the first time, I was being really bold on Sujiatun Thrombosis Hospital since ohconfucius brought the edit-war over this hospital to my attention... this has gotten out of hand... undue weight to all the allegations when there's already a main article with all the details. Isn't there at least some basic information on staff, year of founding, and such... anything before it jumps into these rumors? Seb az86556 ( talk) 17:49, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your teaching me something new on my talk page and for the revert, I see now that the article loads, which is odd. Perhaps the site was temporarily down. Sorry for the inconvenience. -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 18:47, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Some editors continue on insisting that these FLG-related organizations are somehow "independent". Would like your expertise on Sound of hope. Thanks! Colipon+( Talk) 19:00, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello, When you have time, could you please leave a feedback on Talk:The_Epoch_Times#First_sentence. Thank You! -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 21:28, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
I have a suspicion that User:Marc87 is an automated program rather than a human editor. His edits seem to follow a formula, he has made no effort to make his user page presentable (most users have a little pride), comments on his talk page are simply reverted rather than responded to, and when he is editing he is editing large numbers of articles at a regular pace (no need to take a potty break?). This seems wrong. Do you know if there is a policy that applies or a place to open an investigation? Readin ( talk) 23:16, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
[ [6]] <can't read Chinese, what's this about? Undo? Seb az86556 ( talk) 03:13, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
How's this?
(If you like it, I can make a template so it isn't so onerous to type.) kwami ( talk) 07:16, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
I would like to bring to your attention this picture, readily being used as circumstantial "evidence" that Chinese gov't is harvesting organs from Falun Gong practitioners (this and a few other "evidence" charts have been added to the article, citing Kilgour-Matas). What is your view about a chart like this on a heavily contested article? Colipon+( Talk) 19:40, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
An FYI (since you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarey Savy (Singer/Songwriter) as re-userfy, I've tagged User:OMGILOVEPEAS/Sarey Savy (Singer-Songwriter) for speedy deletion under Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy. My rationale is at User talk:OMGILOVEPEAS/Sarey Savy (Singer-Songwriter). I hope you agree with my reasoning. Best, Cunard ( talk) 02:12, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
^_^ Thanks. Until It Sleeps Wake me 12:07, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
I, Pericles of Athens, award Rjanag with this Barnstar of Diligence for extraordinary contributions made to Chinese classifier, which is a Good and soon-to-be Featured article. Well done! Pericles of Athens Talk 16:30, 10 August 2009 (UTC) |
So what are the chances of two people editing the same article at the same time like that then? I'll leave you to it - if you want to take anything from my version please do so, and I'll take a look at yours later on. ;-) Ghmyrtle ( talk) 19:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
Chzz has given you
half a biscuit! May Mr. Moult bring you fair winds, your lenor always be discounted, your gargoyles never bear any resemblence to a comedian from Faversham, and your windows be free of condensation.
Spread the goodness of HMHB by adding {{ subst:HB}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message. Or don't.
Yes, I really am sad enough to download the pic, crop it, upload it, make a template, etc. Your work on restructuring my feeble article was sublime. Cheers, Chzz ► 07:43, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Have you seen my comment on the talk page? GeometryGirl ( talk) 22:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
I've started a repository of underused and potentially useful links for use in the Falun Gong articles. Please feel free to paste links there with a description of what they refer to, for easy relocation. Ohconfucius ( talk) 04:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
:(it's here: User:Ohconfucius/FG repository Seb az86556 ( talk) 05:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC))
rv good faith -- this makes it somewhat suggest that these languages got CL from Chinese, whereas it's actually ambiguous. "close to" refers to both geographically and typologically
A lot of East Asian languages have, indeed, borrowed/influenced from Chinese language. I don't see why it should not read "borrowed" or "influenced by". "Close to"? The only languages that borrowed from Chinese ARE located in Asia, which IS CLOSE to PRC. Explain? I feel like you're making quite an unnecessary edit, when I was clearly asked to copyedit this article (see my talk page). ★ Dasani★ 00:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! :) -- Josh Atkins ( talk - contribs) 10:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Need your output at Template talk:Infobox Korean name#Sizing in fonts and cells. Don't you think that the font size is becoming ridiculous? -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 13:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
There is an on-going article name dispute for the Taiwanese language here. There is also an on-going discussion at Talk:Wenzhou Chinese. Your help would be more than appreciated as there seems to be deadlock. Colipon+( Talk) 23:41, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
This article is up for deletion and I thought you migth be interested. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 17:33, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I was thinking about the page load issue a little bit, and I hit on something that could speed things up. Right now the credits are in an invisible div. This means that the Wikipedia servers, and your browser, render the credits, but make them invisible (try looking at the page source). If we comment out the credits, it does not act like a transcluded template, but some random text lying around. This would effectively cut the number of transcluded templates in half (we still have {{ *mp}}s) and might make a dent in the speed issue some people are seeing. Shubinator ( talk) 22:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Got it! Change to template, sandbox test. The random includeonly's break up the comment-out syntax on the template itself, so it doesn't act as a comment. But when the template gets substituted, the includeonly's go away, and what's left is comment-out syntax. Same strategy as meta:Help:Substitution#Includeonly. Shubinator ( talk) 16:11, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Point taken that I could have been a little more restrained in expressing my outrage at being accused of copyright infringement. Thank you for promptly restoring the article, as requested. ChapmanHB ( talk) 15:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)ChapmanHB
Bluefish35 has given you a
cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}!
Haha, wow. I feel so cool! :D Enjoy your cookie! This is so incredibly pointless. --= BlueFish35! talk/ contribs 15:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
What's the deal? Eery time Roy does something, you seem to feel you need to announce it to as many other users as possible. If you have a problem with Roy's edits, could you just say what it is in a straight forward manner instead of putting out bulletins every time he makes an edit? Please? -- Beeblebrox ( talk) 05:19, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Kindly note that an Enforcement case has just been filed against Dilip rajeev here. You might like to comment. Please note that this is a permalink; any commenting should be done only after clicking on the 'Project page' tab. Ohconfucius ( talk) 03:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
I don't see how I'm the one being accused of "edit warring" when I'm the ONLY one offering to discuss this issue in order to reach a consensus. I've started a discussion on the talk page, and provided reasons for my edits, yet no one has participated in the talk page, and no reasons have been provided for the undoing of my edits, including (as of this edit) by you.
I will continue to patiently wait until someone provides a reason to the contrary. Until then, I will continue to promote a maintenace of the original. Thank you, :) Sourside21 ( talk) 12:35, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:South_Korea#South_Korea.27s_orthographic_projection
Sourside21 ( talk) 12:39, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag, I know you're busy, but I was wondering if I could get your opinion/assistance on something. The ninja article is currently a poorly constructed mishmash, and very prone to vandalism. If you take a quick look at the history, you'll see that most of the edits during the last few months have been vandalism from IP editors. This includes childish insertions, trolling, and what appears to be copyright violations. There is also a persistent trend to add poorly written, unsourced, and somewhat dubious information to an already controversial article. I was wondering if it is perhaps appropriate to apply semi-protection to this page.
I will inform you that I am currently working on a total rewrite of the article here, and plan to put it up probably sometime this week. I will also try for a DYK nomination. Please let me know what you think about article protection. Cheers ~ AMorozov 〈talk〉 21:04, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag, sorry to bug you again. There seems to be several IP editors [9], [10], [11] bent on reverting the ninja article back to one revision, where some uncited and exaggerated nonsense was added. One, who is clearly a troll, has reverted to that version 4 times in a row [12]. Could you take a quick look? Thanks, ~ AMorozov 〈talk〉 21:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I've nominated McGee Airways, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. Smallman12q ( talk) 02:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC) Thanks, Smallman12q ( talk) 02:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi m8
Sorry no reply, had a few problems here with failed hard drives and blown up graphics cards and then holiday - just got back on sunday and made a few posts announcing my return - surprise surprise I giot exploited and just finished reinstalling windows again
should be back on more at the end of the week once all my progs are back on the PC
thx for the reminder, I had a quick look and loos good - will get back to you later once I have more time - at the moment just have installed vista, teamspeak, firefox and putting FSX on now so maybe two or three days before all is back to basics...
Chaosdruid ( talk) 04:36, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Someone recently made some bold changes to the Xinjiang-article with regards to th meaning of the name, and an IP pointed it out as incorrect on the talkpage. I have no way of checking it. Here is the 3edits-diff. Seb az86556 ( talk) 04:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
The link from Turpan to Turpan water system is only present in article picture annotation, not in main text, hence I do believe a See also link would be appropriate. Cheers, -- Rayshade ( talk) 12:57, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Yes, apparently it was reported in The New York Times if the comments are to be believed. Here under 16 August. -- can dle • wicke 23:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
The reason is political. Although Kokang is in Shan State, it is not ruled by Shan State. Many people do not know that Shan State is in Myanmar/Burma, and people know it well should also be aware of its uneasy relationship with the central government. So I was wondering that, if Laukkai is listed "only under" the category of Shan State, it will seem like something is being implied. Qrfqr ( talk) 18:49, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
I was going to add my support to the nomination but I saw you added it yourself. Even though it began a few weeks back it's getting a lot of attention now, so I think its worth it. Great work on the article though! :) It's coming along nicely. I'll try and find out more about the MNDAA and add over the next few days. Midway ( talk) 01:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Since you have encountered him before, so I'm bringing him to your attention. After checking out, I figure out the user comes from Chinese Wikipedia with the same disruption on similar subjects. If you see the history of Annals of the Joseon Dynasty [13], inter Wiki from Chinese Wikipedia has been changed three times, and that was due to Guangzhou 2010 ( talk · contribs)'s tendentious edit warring over there [14] and comes here to continue his edit warring.
The user insists on using the name for what Chinese call in China, not in English or in Korea. Would you warn him to use edit summary and refrain from pushing POV crossing over multiple Wikiprojects? Thanks.-- Caspian blue 13:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
I agree that Uyghur people was an appropriate use of the template, but that was one of the very few recent examples that I could think of. Most of the time, the template is used inappropriately ("Hey, this topic is related to a current event, so I gotta add this template!"), and there are usually no more than 2 or 3 (or none at all, often enough) articles using it. I don't think that we need an extra template for those few cases. -- Conti| ✉ 16:40, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Although I agree that it is dictator claims are not a reliable source, it is the only source available to us. I suggest putting (official figures) or (government estimate) below it. Dictatorships also usually claim to kill large numbers of enemies at a minimal cost to themselves, but in this case, the govewrnment admitted to heavy losses. This suggestds casualties may be higher, but it is the only source we have so far, and should stay labelled (government claim) until an independent estimate can be verified. Reenem ( talk)
As it is an official figure from an involved party, it should be included. If it is tagged with "According to Junta Government", readers will understand this is not neccesarily true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reenem ( talk • contribs)
As the police were targeted and attacked, it makes them an involved party. However, if they did not operate except for that incident, than Khin Yi should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reenem ( talk • contribs) 20:18, 30 August 2009
thanks for blocking me for 10 seconds :P... I started an SPI on this guy... was getting sick of his fights @ South Korea. Seb az86556 ( talk) 23:06, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Your message regarding copyright of the 2 pics I added to McGee Airways article - those are my pictures, in my possession. My father took those pictures and I am in sole possession of his picture collection. I have the negatives - so the statement in the picture page is correct - these are my pictures. Plz advise. Old33 ( talk) 16:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Ah thanks. That might be true. I think this part of the article threw me:
"The fighting began between soldiers from the Kokang minority group and government troops, but it broadened to involve at least two more groups, the Wa and the Kachin. All three groups oppose the central government."
as if to imply it involved others, but it is not mentioned again in the article, nor have I seen it mentioned anywhere else. Of the news items I have seen, there seems to be tension, though it's still unclear as to how many groups were involved. Midway ( talk) 18:31, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
I am not in a war with you. I am new to wikipedia, so I have made some errors in setting up links, etc.
However, it is not possible for a "store" to "describe itself." Your writing warrants minor editing in this instance, and I have done nothing wrong.
You, on the other hand, have not edited, but deleted every entry I have made, and deleted links to relevant material. -- Summertoad ( talk) 04:03, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
I guess anybody's writing style can be considered prescriptive, yours or mine included, when someone insists on it never being edited. As I am sure you know, neither the internet nor wikipedia is a reliable source of quality writing.
I did not write that you had not edited the article. What I pointed out was that you were not editing my entries, but simply deleting them. You did, however, leave the reference to Pete Earley. However, your use of the quotation changed the meaning somewhat, especially when you changed the chronology, which is an important part of the psycho-donuts story.
I don't mean to be rude, but I won't be replying to anymore talk. I simply don't have time for it. -- Summertoad ( talk) 04:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
There's something weird about User:Clockoon and his stuff on South Korea... He claims to be active on the Korean wiki but has no user page, no talkpage, no history there as far as I can tell... "없습니다" -- that's my limited knowledge of Korean. More socks? Seb az86556 ( talk) 05:44, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The Play of the Weather has been featured on DYK before. The nom wasn't deleted from T:TDYK, so it's up again now. Could you take it down or replace it? Shubinator ( talk) 06:32, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
The cake was quite tasty, and it was nice of you to notice my "birthday." :-) Textorus ( talk) 21:05, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 00:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Re: this edit I think you meant to say "signature" not "username". I don't want to correct you on that page because the user is already confused enough - but would you take a look. Thanks. 7 02:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
You have moved this article to a lower case "van." What do you mean with "proper capitalization"? Where did you get the info that he used a lower case van, and not a capitalized "Van," like all sources state? Please add sources to the talk page. Kraxler ( talk) 16:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
This amn was neither Dutch nor Belgian, he was American. American usage is "Van", all the sources say "Van" referring to this person. I would appreciate it very much if you refrained from moving articles you admit you don't know anything about. Now I need some admin to move it back, maybe UpstateNYer can do that. 18:40, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
I was trying to revert an old edit to [[[South Korea]] by User:Nikkul dated 25 august, where he claimed to have removed POV ( about innovation) but was well-sourcved. Hometech ( talk) 18:47, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
My mistake. Thanks, for improving my mistake [19]- [20] :) LUCPOL ( talk) 20:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
If you have some time please provide us with an input at this RFC on 2008 Summer Olympics torch relay article and this Merger Contest. Thank You! -- HappyInGeneral ( talk) 23:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Look bro, thanks for your help with that fiasco. I just wish I would have known the issue was brought up in ANI. I commented on the accusations there and on his page. Again, thanks, his templates are normal now. Have a great day!! GnarlyLikeWhoa ( talk) 01:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
I responded to your comments at the FAC. As it stands there isn't much I can do with expanding those statements as they're a direct summary of what's being said on those three pages.-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 03:24, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Dabomb87 ( talk) 12:40, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi how are you? I hope you are fine. I am writing to you because of the protection of the page Lower Silesia. There is a region in Germany that belongs to Lower Silesia, and this can be proven by the fact that on the official website of that region, there is the coat of arms of Lower Silesia shown. www.kreis-goerlitz.de Thats why i wanted to include three german cities of that region which lie in germany, into a city list of that page. But someone else keeps reverting my changes all the time, because those cities only belonged to Lower Silesia from 1815 on. But that is no reason not to include those cities because the page Lower Silesia is not about Lower Silesia prior to 1815. Now this page is protected and i can't change it anymore. There is mostly just one person who always reverts my changes, and i think that his opinion can't be seen as neutral. I also don't understand why i am in an edit war, because i just change obviously wrong things. But now the page is protected in the version without those cities and i can't add them anymore. I've been trying to discuss the topic on the discussion page, and everyone who has a look on it, can see that i explained the facts in detail, and that i was very engaged in the discussion. But all i get are very short unlogical answers, and a revert of my changes. A neutral person is needed to solve the problem. Or, why is the official usage of an coat of arms of a region not proof enough that this region belongs to the region of which it uses the coat of arms? it is always deleted with the annotation: del original research i thought official pages are a proof. The region belonged to lower silesia from 1815 on, and that is no reason to exclude it, just because other regions were longer part of lower silesia. Take care, Michał Jadran91 ( talk) 12:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
ok thank you but could you not just one time open the protection of the page very short so that i can revert the last changes, and then protect it again? because now it is wrong and it stays wrong until the protection is over Jadran91 ( talk) 14:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
ok sorry thank you take care Jadran91 ( talk) 15:43, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
You are terrible!
![]() |
Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly. |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Are you sure a warning is sufficient, the guy is a repeat offender. Note he has clearly made his 3rd and 4th reverts after being asked not to delete whole sections of text. It is not the first time. -- Martintg ( talk) 02:06, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I realised that when I added the information, however, I've just looked and it is mentioned by Xinhua. What do you think? Midway ( talk) 19:05, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
[22]. This time he didn't even take a short break between his bouts of edit-warring, though now he is self-reverting in order to stay just within the 3RR restriction (fence hugging). This isn't about revenge or anything, it's just that this is a very disruptive edit warrior, on multiple articles, in disputes with multiple users which makes normal editing difficult. I think 3 cases of edit warring within 2 weeks merits more than just a warning, since these appear to be ineffective. radek ( talk) 19:50, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Wow! right on the heels of Rjanag's warning that he will block PasswordUsername if he continues to edit war, now he is edit warring on Monument of Lihula:
The guy is clearly out of control, he even mentions my name in the second revert even though I haven't edited that article since November 2007. Something needs to be done, I heeded your warning but PU seems to be blowing raspberries at you. Will you now block him as you said you would here? -- Martintg ( talk) 20:36, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
It has been long since I haven't edited this article, but I see out of the blue an edit war today on something I fought was happily at peace...
Firstly Rjanag, you can't say "you didn't have to come to me (...) there were 1,600 other administrators you could have talked to". You picked up this dirt, you have to clean it; don't put things on hold, or ask another "janitor" to be contacted, you are not a 1-800 teller. With the mop, expect to smell a lot of s%*t. :) I am really honestly sorry, I do understand how ingrate is this.
Secondly, IMHO, the first edit is not technically a revert; Rjanag is right. The second and third are. The forth edit shows confrontations at the same article, but is self-reverted by the fifth edit. So if we pretend, 4th and 5th didn't exist, there are 2 reverts. But, in regard to 4th and 5th, I agree with Rjanag that undoing oneself to avoid being blamed for policy braking is an attempt to game the system. IMHO it is Rjanag's sovereign call. He decided to warn PasswordUsername but take no further action if such behavior is not repeated; and I personally believe that was a smart thing to do. All in all, imho, Rjanag technical statements were correct, except that the 3rd edit should be also counted as revert. Allow me please to explain why:
The 3rd edit was to remove "who fought for Estonia" from "Monument of Lihula is a monument commemorating the Estonians who fought for Estonia in World War II", rendering "Monument of Lihula is a monument commemorating the Estonians in World War II". For everyone who read the article (which is expected from all editors), it is clear that this edit changes the sense 180 degrees. This was a clear sign of confrontation. 3rd edit just like the 2nd tried to change the same sentence to render its sense as opposite. It came only 15 minutes after the 2nd, and 4 minutes after the 2nd was reverted. Content-wise, one can just as well call 2nd a compromise for the 3rd: none of them is more moderate. What however seals my personal conclusion that the 3rd was a revert are the edit summaries:
These are typical "I challenge you".
I can't but notice after this also the comment to the forth edit: "Obviously some feel that commemoraitng collaborationists is dangerous" and that the main point of the 4th edit was not in the text but in the title of the section (adding "concerns of anti-Semitism"). Read "I challenge you." again.
So, from my understanding, there were 3 reverts with the 3rd immediately self-undone.
Thirdly, the people who reverted PasswordUsername did well to make only "dry" edit summaries. But you should have reported the case also in a "dry" manner, without trying to "get to" PasswordUsername. IMHO, you undermined your case by crying fault too laud, making the impression that you are after an editor and not after quality of WP content. Anyway, it was Rjanag's call. He will have to clean this up in the days to come if it re-emerges, hence he is sovereign to take decisions according to his best judgement. Dc76\ talk 23:39, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I've responded to yours on mine, hope it helps. Please let me know if you'd like future responses here instead. Thanks! VЄСRUМВА ♪ 19:57, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Need a neutral, third-party opinion over at Talk:Hong Kong, if you have time. Thanks :) Colipon+( Talk) 21:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, are you still offering your neutral, third-party opinion over at Talk:Hong Kong ? Perhaps you may want to take a look at Article 2 of the Hong Kong Basic Law before preceding. Da Vynci ( talk) 05:53, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
On September 5, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Pheung Kya-shin, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page ( here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Could I ask you to please keep an eye on the above article? About once (sometimes twice) a day, an IP editor comes and posts a bunch of biased stuff which either does not correspond to the source, or is not supported by a reliable source. Occasionally, it is a WP:Coatrack about the CV of Mr Shek. I have reverted most of the edits, leaving edit summaries accordingly. It is becoming troublesome because there is a political battle going on in Hong Kong over this college, and I feel that what the IP editor is doing amounts to POV-pushing. Ohconfucius ( talk) 05:13, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, your input would be appreciated at WT:KOREA#What would be proper titles for eup, myeon, dong?. Thanks.-- Caspian blue 14:11, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
You are a great guy! Thanks for being so excellent. Chevy Impala 2009 14:58, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
Please help move Suzhou, Jiangsu back to Suzhou. Someone moved earlier without discussion. Colipon+( Talk) 20:07, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
I have several reasons for this move:
I hope that is sufficient. Colipon+( Talk) 20:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
No, I don't know anything about a guideline for image placement in these situations. The placement of the image doesn't matter to me in this case. Graham 87 00:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Congrats on your new FA! Happy editing, -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 02:10, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
yepp... I have started revamping Wikiibíídiiya (Navajo) a bit and decided to transfer my signature:
Cho-[thematic prefix] (use/useful) -y-[obj] (it) -oo-[3rd person iterative] -ł-[ligature] -ʼįįh- (act/make/do) -í(nominalizer)
= "Makes use of it" (Cf. "Dances with Wolves" :P) > "user"
Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556
02:57, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I just saw that this made FA - congratulations! Very well-deserved. Best, Ricardiana ( talk) 16:49, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Plz authorize USER:ROYDICKSON/SANDBOX so I can use it for testing. Old33 ( talk) 17:12, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Im wondering when my account can be opened for semi-protect pages? Can you direct me to an admin that you know that I can ask? Thanks. Harut8 ( talk) 03:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Oh I noticed you are an admin. So when can i edit with semi-protect pages? Is it after 4 days? Harut8 ( talk) 03:42, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Well, I have an issue with another admin Dbachmann. You see, he has "permanent" locked certain pages that the reason is just to put the template which is linked with those pages. The pages are Nairi, Hayasa, and Urartu (as you see Armens has the template which is next to those, and they all had the template for atleast 2-3 years prior to keep removing them and perm locking). These links are in Template:History of Armenia, and this is not a reason to perm lock these pages which he has done for those reasons. He will probably tell you there is other edits done too for perm lock, but nothing much, we are only trying to add back the template linked to the pages. Can you help out now as an admin on this issue? Thank you I appreciate it. Harut8 ( talk) 16:06, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Believe me, one of my friends has tried that already in Talk pages, but this admin seems to be different. He seems to think that everything is nationalism. My friend even gave examples of Chinese history, and that Armenian history has evidence and facts that its almost as old as Chinese history as a modern people. This is very important, it seems to be a political issue, because there should be no reason to remove and "perm lock" pages just cause of simple template adding which was always there and linked with those pages on the template? Harut8 ( talk) 16:14, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Is it possible you can just add back those templates as they are linked with those pages I listed? I would really appriecate it thank you. Harut8 ( talk) 16:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
But I already told you my friends tried talking to him. He will not agree, his reasons are not good though, to "perm lock" just to add back the appropriate template links back? Harut8 ( talk) 16:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
I put the Talk:Nairi message in here. Now what should I do If he doesnt agree? He doesnt seem to have a good reason. He even would try to make me a sockpocket. But Im not a sockpocket of any older user. Im just trying to add back the template. A friends, friend,s, friend told me about this. Harut8 ( talk) 16:41, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Can you open for me semi-protect so I can add back the templates? Harut8 ( talk) 16:47, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
thanks for your note. This another sock (or self-described meatpuppet) of banned user Zvartnotz2 ( talk · contribs) -- suggest blocking on sight. -- dab (𒁳) 17:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 21:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
Dabomb87 ( talk) 03:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Fair enough. I haven't seen this so I was just trying to expand the article, but since you submitted it for GA, then drama is at least half right. ;) I'm sure it's acceptable. Feel free to revert. Good job on working on the article too! I hope our nominations for the Chinese films we're submitting pass! Andrzejbanas ( talk) 14:33, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure I read that. Let's scout a bit. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:19, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
http://feraljundi.com/2009/07/20/funny-stuff-hair-of-death/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ring Cinema ( talk • contribs) 19:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
http://www.answers.com/topic/no-country-for-old-men-film gives Nathan, Ian (January 2008). "The Complete Coens". Empire. p. 173. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:28, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
It's a bit of a problem. The Guardian has the first part, but I'm not finding where the balance of the quote ("acts by itself" or whatever) originates. Is it possible that it came from Wikipedia and bounced around the net thereby? -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:34, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes, well done. I'm looking. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, our posts were passing each other in cyberspaces. Thanks. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Guardian says the LA Times was the source of the quote. -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 19:46, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
I noticed your even-handedness with the dispute regarding J Milburn and VMAsNYC so I thought you should be aware of this discussion that mentions it. I will be producing a thorough WP:AN/I report when I have some time and I would appreciate any insight you could provide. Thanks. ~ Paul T +/ C 00:21, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Please lend your opinion over at Talk:Yue Chinese#Yue?. User:kwami recently made sweeping changes to Cantonese-related articles and moved "Cantonese" to "Yue Chinese". Colipon+( Talk) 14:37, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
my two reverts are up and the IP is socking Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 17:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I wanted to make this comment so that the admin who is going to take a look at the unblock request will see that Biophys has been edit warring elsewhere as well: [23]. But Biophys removed my comment from his talk page. Should I revert him or post it elsewhere? Offliner ( talk) 04:47, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Wang was born and raised in the US. There is no question that he is American. Given Taiwan's nationality rules, he is probably also a citizen of Taiwan ROC through his parents. Calling him American-born Taiwanese implies that he was only born in the US, perhaps while his parents were living here briefly or something. Look to Yo-Yo Ma's page. He is a French-born American. He was born in France, but is not a French citizen. Wang is an American and a Taiwanese (most probably). Therefore Taiwanese-American captures both of his dual nationality.
Penser ( talk) 01:35, 3 September 2009 (UTC)penser
Actually, this has been discussed for a while, going back to 2006, in fact. The consensus is pretty much that he is an American (this is documented and not really something that can be disputed). The real point of contention in the past was whether his ethnicity should be described as Taiwanese or Chinese. That's one of those contentious issues that probably should not appear in the lead sentence unless someone has a source where Wang describes a preference in describing his ethnicity. Cheers! Penser ( talk) 02:57, 3 September 2009 (UTC)penser
Agreed. Wikipedia is not the place for unsourced speculation. Penser ( talk) 20:27, 3 September 2009 (UTC)penser
No I didn't see this discussion.
I don't have a problem with the current wording "American of Chinese ancestry" as it is undoubtedly true (almost all Taiwanese have Chinese ancestry). I would not be surprised, however, if some see it as a slight to Taiwan. We can deal with that delicate subject when it comes up. Penser ( talk) 15:00, 5 September 2009 (UTC)penser
Hi there, just to let you know I sent an email to Kathleen Ahrens:
Along with other contributors, I have been working on the Wikipedia article Chinese classifier. The article is relatively developed, and cites one of your papers. May I ask you to review the page? Any comments you may have will be gratefully received.
And she replied:
Thanks for your e-mail. I'm in the middles of something else right now, but I will turn my attention to classifiers for some other projects before the end of the year and I will go over your article then. Does that sound alright?
And I replied back saying that was great. I might be busy after university starts so I'll refer to you all her comments. Is that OK?
GeometryGirl ( talk) 20:06, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
hi, a question. the source says its a VMA. why did you cross that out?-- Applegigs ( talk) 06:05, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
the page that i put in as a footnote calls it a vma. also i im reading that the real name of the award is the mtv vma best breakout nyc artist. the footnote calls it a vma and the entry form calls it a vma. thats big. mtv always has had some different awards that start on different years. this is like baseball having a rookie of the year award for the first time when they started. of course the rookie was not as famous as the mvp. but it was still major league baseball giving an award. here it is mtv giving out an award they call a mtv vma for a new band. but its a vma from what i am reading.-- Applegigs ( talk) 06:20, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
hi. did i miss something? i tried to say that it is clearly a mtv vma, that the mtv contest says it is, that the other material i gave you says it is, and that the mtv logo says it is. there is some official stuff there. i think that that information is pretty strong. i dont think mtv uses the mtv vma logo with something and calls it a vma and awards it at the vmas without it being an mtv vma. as to the website, who knows. maybe someone screwed up and will be fired. maybe they used last years template by accident. but that doesnt wipe out everything else. we have official statements that it is an mtv vma from mtv. isnt that enough?-- Applegigs ( talk) 06:52, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
But the VMA's are notable and all that official material shows that this is an VMA though i am guessing not your favorite one. and the press release and the competition rules are from very big offical companies including mtv which runs the vmas. once its a vma i think it is notable as a big award.-- Applegigs ( talk) 07:17, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag,
According to http://de.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:L%C3%B6schkandidaten/5._September_2009&diff=prev&oldid=64223788 there are to many faults in the lists in the de. Wikipedia. What should be done then? Kind regards, Sarcelles ( talk) 13:23, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for repairing my report, but please forgive me as I have been up for the past 26 hours. :) ArcAngel ( talk) 19:12, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
As to your deletion of the reference to an MTV VMA nomination at [26], I'm OK with it for the moment but not for the reason that you state. You refer to it as "a minor award." That is a mischaracterization. The MTV VMAs are in fact decidedly major awards. This is clearly an MTV VMA, as you can see at [27] and [28]. As such, it is a major award. And, as WP:BAND makes clear, for purposed of notability since the band placed (top 3, of 190 under consideration) it is treated the same for notablity puposes under that guidance as it would have been treated if it had won the VMA.-- VMAsNYC ( talk) 04:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Rjanag, in response to your question on my talk page, no, I wasn't at the conference where Duanmu read his paper. I linked to it simply because a Google search turned it up. It's great to know, though, that we have some professional linguists at the RD! I, unfortunately, am a mere amateur. Greetings! Marco polo ( talk) 17:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Hey Rjanag, as I made a category of reboots in television and video games I thought it be different like sequels and prequels. Reboot is all about starting over the story creating something new which is not a sequel or a remake or a prequel, it's just something what hollywood studios did with films like Batman Begins, Superman Returns and Casino Royale. Semi-prequel are serve as both a sequel and a prequel with flash backs and flash forwards that what they did with The Godfather, part 2 and Internal Affairs 3. -- Lg16spears ( talk) 18:17, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry solid. Gosh, you take the editing seriously. man just having some fun. chill out yoo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.147.93 ( talk • contribs) 15:44, 17 September 2009
I'm going to guess that this is a vandal? Colipon+( Talk) 21:04, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
On September 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Not One Less, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page ( here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
![]() |
What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar | |
I award you this barnstar for replacing those 100 unnecessary Chinese language templates with {{ zh}} — DroEsperanto ( talk) 18:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC) |
Could you please have a look at User:RoyDickson/Sandbox and leave your opinion/revision of the current lead. The lead will be used for the Star Air Service article which is currently a GA nominee. I'd like to thank you in advance for your continued support and participation in welcoming(and explaining) RoyDickson to wikipedia. I hope you are noticing that your efforts are bearing some fruit ^.^. Smallman12q ( talk) 20:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
thanks for the birthday wish, good to know some editors have soft hearts to go with their sharp intellects! Peace, Kbob -- — Kbob • Talk • 21:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Not sure what's happened here exactly, but a couple of multinoms I recently submitted to DYK suggestions didn't format properly, see here. The problem seems to be that the comment code (<!-- ... -->) doesn't nest properly. You might want to take a closer look at it. Gatoclass ( talk) 07:46, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
|article9=
or beyond they will disappear.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
13:58, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
can you take a look at User:Cccbut? Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) ( talk) 10:53, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks.
With compliments.
DAFMM ( talk), 20th September 2009.
You responded to a request on a different board that evidently would have involved blocking a different user. Let me take a moment to try and explain the situation in a place and way that is perhaps more appropriate?
I have been waiting for corroboration of a Request for Comment during the past 3 weeks! The instructions on the Request for Comment page say not to post to another noticeboard, and that if requirements are not met, the Request is deleted in approximately 48 hours. However, the page has not been deleted through 3 weeks, and is the main reason for my delay in seeking help elsewhere.
The user inquietudeofcharacter repeatedly erred when posting on my new talk page to allege vandalism. It was his or her response to good faith editing, which happened to be pursuant to 44 short-term revisions by the other party.
After the other user refused to follow through with mediation, the mediator did not make any contributions to this web site for 3 weeks or so. During all of this time, I have been seeking help from our former mediator. Two persons are needed for a request for comment, but there has been no activity from him, and I did not try to involve anyone else in this matter.
To summarize: the good faith edits I have made are still erased, and the only way to restore the information would be through "edit warring." Nothing has been done to warrant the allegations on my talk page, thus a direct dialogue with the other user is being avoided. Hopefully you can be helpful toward me with this matter, because the interactions thus far have not been worthwhile. WayGoneOr ( talk) 19:21, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I believe User:Alefbe does not deserve to get blocked. He was actually correcting vandalism by the other user, who was deleting sourced information, substituing reliable source by poor and unreliable sources, e.g Press TV, the propaganda machine of Islamic Republic of Iran. On the other hand, the other user in Qods Day article deserves a longer blocking for clear vandalism.-- WIMYV? ( talk) 21:49, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
As far as I know, deleting sourced information is vandalism. Is n't? He insisted to delete sourced information from New York Times, reliable books, and Aljazira, despite several warning by different users. Is not it vandalism? That incident was not content dispute. One user deleted sourced information added, unsourced information or poorly sourced materials. The other one resorted those sourced information and had constructive edits. They should not be treated the same way.
Anyhow, if you do not mind. I am going to restore deleted sourced information.-- WIMYV? ( talk) 22:04, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Regarding your comment on article talk page. Perhaps you have not checked the article history. I have not reverted yet. As you see, I am discussing the issue with other users.--
WIMYV? (
talk)
22:35, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I do not understand why you wrote " another user is close" to get blocked when I am discussing the issue and have not reverted yet--
WIMYV? (
talk)
22:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps your logic to block Alefbe is the same as warning me and threatening me to block when I am discussing the issue and when I have not touched the article yet. I am really cond=fused about the way you handle the problem.-- WIMYV? ( talk) 23:22, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I have discussed the matter with the other party on both his talk page and the article talk page, and I have not reverted more than 3 times. Izzedine ( talk) 22:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. I will take your advice. Mysteryquest ( talk) 07:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for having spotted and corrected this nasty trick. I hadn't noticed. Cheers, DVdm ( talk) 07:56, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm fed up with reverting, again again, the strange version about the "internationally list".
P.S. I don't think his newly created accounts have to be blocked again and again; Semi-protecting the article - will be much more effective, as I realized in the case of the article: Emerging market (for more details, see his request on my talk page, here). Thank you in advance.
HOOTmag ( talk) 13:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the help with these IP SPAs. Can you watchlist Harry Benjamin's Syndrome? They have already reverted you. Thanks. Jokestress ( talk) 19:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Should I self-revert? I've had problems with edit warring in the past, and don't want to get into hot water again... Soxwon ( talk) 02:40, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Since you intervened last time I thought maybe you could help again. It seems that Arzel and Soxwon are still doing the same as before. I just undid an edit by Arzel that he deleted someone’s comments in the TALK page under the guise it was a personal attack yet it did not have anybody’s name in it and was a statement of replay to Soxwon. Both of them seem to be bent of editing out anything that goes against their beliefs and their bias shows up in many articles. They have even written to each other about removing negative items from conservative articles. They don’t try and work on a way to get things edited fairly they just keep deleting them and not offering any help on it. Then if added they say there is not agreement as they will not even try to form a agreement. Any help in this would be appreciated. -- Marlin1975 ( talk) 15:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
As you can see both of them have now deleted someone’s post in talk that made no single reference to single person. Yet they both call it a personal attack? Thanks for the advice. -- Marlin1975 ( talk) 19:07, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Arbitration needed for this article's dispute page and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks,-- CharlotteGoiar ( talk) 11:59, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello Rjanag. Since you handled a 3RR case about Flegelpuss ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) perhaps you could look at the report over at WT:WikiProject Physics#Poincaré-POV-pushing. I was thinking of blocking Cardinality and Iphegenia as socks of Flegelpuss, but that I would ask at least one other admin to look at the data and see if you agree. If you don't have time, I'll make another plan. Both accounts were created just after Flegelpuss's block expired and they have remarkably narrow interests, focused on F's usual topics. Thanks, EdJohnston ( talk) 13:28, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Now user Paradoxic just come back with a long revert of the version which was the result of our discussions and the fragile consensus with the other party. Now, what we can do? I do not want to start editwarring with him? He is unwilling to discuss and just deleting sourced information and reliable sources, NY TImes,BBC, Christian Science Monitor, two books, Aljazeera... He just accept the mouthpiece of the Islamic regime of Iran a reliable source, delete other sources. -- WIMYV? ( talk) 18:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Here [31]. Nableezi (from the other camp) and ShamWOW and I agreed to keep the assertions of both parties: Press TV report (Islamic Regime source) and reports of independent media, i.e. NY Times, Christian Science Monitor and Aljaziree. There was only a discussion ongoing on the source that I provided on association of antisemitism and Quds day when the Pradoxic came back and reverted all of our edits and deleted our sources. We let the other camp to keep their source (Press TV), but Paradoxic unwilling to keep our independent sources. He also changing sourced information adding hi own claims and POVs that are not supported by the source. See these diffs: [32] , [33] , [34] , [35]-- WIMYV? ( talk) 18:52, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Rjanag! You participated in discussion on 2009 protest section. I should not remind you all we did. First, I said that Press Tv information should be deleted because Press TV is unreliable source. Nableezy disagreed. ShamWOW suggested both independent sources and Press TV should stay but it should be mentioned that Press TV is an state funded news media. Nableezy did not agreed, until you intervened and said that it is OK to mention that Press TV is funded by the regime. You forget that? We decided to keep both arguments, pro-government media and independent sources arguments.
The Paradoxic violated 3rr once again, because the last time you did not blocked him for the violation of 3rr, you give him more co0nfidence to violate the 3rr rule. Yu should punish him this time. He deleted information icluding the sentence " In recent years, only a marginal proportion of young Iranians have attended." 4 times. [36] , [37] , [38] , [39]-- WIMYV? ( talk) 21:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your message and the link to useful information about deletion tags. It will help with my patrolling. I notice that the article was deleted anyway. In your opinion, what SD tag should have been used? Thanks. Truthanado ( talk) 01:26, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
...you just deleted my article, without bothering to verify the fact that I typed, on the talk page, that I am a student of Ms. Love and did this WITH HER PERMISSION. Also she is featured in a list of Metropolitan Opera singers, but I can't add a page off that. Please offer help before deleting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Operagirlk ( talk • contribs)
I don't find it a conflict of interest, as all it is is her biography, and she is listed in this article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_performers_at_the_Metropolitan_Opera without a wiki page. I would prefer to simply be allowed to post her unbiased biography. I'm sorry if the first message sounded short tempered. Operagirlk ( talk) 03:46, 23 September 2009 (UTC)operagirlk
I would agree, were I not the person who wrote the bio for her on her webpage in the first place. Hence, not plagiarism. However, since this seems to be a sticking point, I can rewrite the entire biography so it is not the same if this will satisfy ToS. Operagirlk ( talk) 03:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)Operagirlk
Fine, however I feel that since she has already been referred to on a Wikipedia article, she deserves to have her own page. I'm not sure exactly how one can go about writing an article without your conflict of interest policy kicking in - I merely saw the reference, mentione dit to her, and she said "well, just write who I am". Conflict of interest to me would be stating how I feel about her as a person and teacher, not how many roles she has performed and where. But I understand that you are simply following rules. Operagirlk ( talk) 03:58, 23 September 2009 (UTC)operagirlk
But it looks cool! ;) Rockfang ( talk) 07:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I've tried to start a discussion again at Talk:Borjigit, Empress Dowager Zhuang Wen to move this senseless name back to Empress Dowager Xiaozhuang. So far no one seems to be interested in participating. When it was moved to the current name, there was no attempts at consensus. "ED Xiaozhuang" is the name she is most commonly referred to, a Google-test for "Xiaozhuang" trumps all other alternative names, it is easy to find, and precise, as well as concise, fitting all the criteria of WP:TITLE. I therefore ask an administrator to help me move the article there over the re-direct. Thanks! Colipon+( Talk) 09:57, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
Thank you, I really appreciate it. they did have some misinformation. Now once I figure out how to put a picture in, I'll be set. :) Operagirlk ( talk) 15:08, 23 September 2009 (UTC)Operagirlk
Sorry for the confusion about the deletion tagging. Thanks for your help! -- Tallen90 ( talk) 20:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
According to WP:PLURAL, the title for that article should be Regular expression. Similarly, although the article on Turing machines is not about any specific machine, the title is still Turing machine. We just always prefer singular titles. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 01:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Might want to scroll down to this section to see how Template:Zh- is now missing in red. Looks like something was changed? Benjwong ( talk) 06:29, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag, I was browsing my watchlist in the run and I accidentally rollback an edit in the Korea article, I'm not an expert in the subject so can you look into that?
I dont think Dalia is notable yet, at least that my quick impression by looking at the sources in the article. Take care, -- Jmundo ( talk) 13:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi! You must see Revision history of Template:Members of the Union for the Mediterranean for User:Izzedine's editing style. -- Turkish Flame ☎ 17:46, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I don't actually like to watch the insane panics when people get inordinately upset at changes that verge on politics, so I kinda want to ask "did you mean it?". Your change of templates had the (unintended?) effect of reordering the traditional/simplified presentations in Standard_Mandarin#Native_names. It was simp/trad, and now is trad/simp, and possibly because you explicitly said to put traditional first (I'm guessing at what "|first=t|" means).
I really wouldn't be surprised if someone starts saying "but it says mainland China first and you have traditional first - you have messed up things!"
I'm not going to check around where else something like this might've happened, because I'm already nervous. Just wondering if you've thought about the (political) side-effects of reorganization? :-( Shenme ( talk) 07:05, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
|first=t
to make sure they wouldn't get reorganized. It looks like this time I accidentally included |first=t
when I shouldn't; seems that {{zh-tspl}}, which I was replacing, is deceptive (it has t first in its name, but it actually shows simplified first). When I remember AWBing that last night, the pages that transcluded it were a mix of mainland and Taiwan-related topics (there were 50-some ROC baseball players in there, for example), and on several articles I was manually going in and removing the |first=t
before AWB put it in; must have just missed a few on this article. Thanks for the notice,
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
15:14, 24 September 2009 (UTC)Hi, Rjanag, since you're an active admin, please look into the disruptions carried by 95.25.237.61 ( talk · message · contribs · page moves · edit summaries · count · api · logs · block log · email)? The IP user has changed the names of Korean athletic players during the Japanese occupation period to Japanese name. [41] As if they were still holding Japanese name and citizenship after the liberation in 1945. The IP user has also added information without sources, but deleted something that he dislikes for his POV in the name of "no citation" and "NPOV". The anon's edits are of course neutral to himself/herself only. I think the person reminds me of some Russian POV pusher or open proxy editor disguising a third person. Your administrative actions or editor's input would be appreciated. Talk:List_of_Olympic_medalists_in_athletics_(men)#Koreans. Thanks.-- Caspian blue 15:24, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
You have deleted the page for Daryl Copeland citing copyright infringement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daryl_Copeland
There is no copyright infringement. Some of the text is the same as Mr. Copeland wrote it. As can be seen on the referenced web page, Mr. Copeland is part of that organization.
The text appears on several other sites by Mr. Copeland as well. This does not make it copyright infringement.
What was the rationale to take it down?
No message was sent indicating that the page was deleted due a copyright concern as is supposed to occur.
Please put the page back online right away.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Singularities ( talk • contribs)
Hello, I believe you will find the updated document allays any concerns you may have had. Thank you.
Hi The article on unima-usa was my first attempt at wikipedia article Unima is listed in wikepedia there is the standard wikipedia note saying that no article exists on unima-usa
It was my understanding that" Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name" is justification for creating an article
unima united kingdom and unima Pakistan have articles
I am new to this
how can i get an article on unima-usa added? Steve Abrams, Vice President unima-usa north american editor of the World Encyclopedia of Puppetry Arts
Thaaaank you. This has been going on for days with ~20 Portugal-based IPs finding 4 or 5 different sources for the same junk... tiresome & tedious Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 04:51, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. Could you please userfy Raptor Education Group Inc. for me? It's been blogged here and I'd like to see what's going on. But if it was all copyvio, never mind, about userfying, just let me know. Thanks in advance, Clayoquot ( talk | contribs) 05:02, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I agree with Clayoquot: this does not look like a copyvio, nor suitable for an A7 deletion. By volume of animals treated alone it is a significant animal rehabilitation center; and it was better sourced than many articles we choose to keep. When someone questions a speedy deletion, and an author or interested party is obviously distressed by said deletion, those are two reasons to take it to AfD. Having one's work deleted, whatever the cause, is often grounds to leave Wikipedia and not return; and we would like to attract contributors (who will become better contributors in time, and never start out perfectly) rather than animosity.
As you suggest above, I've recreated the article. +sj + 05:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the code
--
ᜊᜓᜅ ᜅ᜔ ᜑᜎᜋᜅ᜔ ᜋᜑᜒᜏᜄ
(
ᜂᜐᜉᜈ)
19:24, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 3, 2009. Shubinator ( talk) 20:34, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
You're right about that but is it bad to chat with friends while editing? 63.230.167.170 ( talk) 22:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Comments as to other editor's work are not suitable for edit summaries, but the associated article talk page can be the appropriate venue as long as the evaluation was constructive. Did you consider your recent commentary to be helpful or useful? (A disclaimer, The recent comments made are "water on a duck's back" in my case as my contributions to the article revolved around assisting the primary editor, whose work and effort was considerable to take an article from a moribund state to qualifying as GA candidate.) The edits that were instituted can be further characterized as simply "author's choice" edits and do not substantially change the thrust of the passages, as I showed in a further revision. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 13:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC).
Could you please help with renaming File:24042008354.jpg, File:24042008350.jpg and File:24042008391.jpg as per the rationale given in the "rename media" template requests? Thanks, -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 03:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I looked it up in _two_ dictionaries... :-) Shenme ( talk) 06:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
So on the terms that my picture isn't "qualified" for an encylopedia means it can't give my user page some flair? I feel then ALL pictures should be removed from user pages and all the userboxes. It doesn't make sence to me I'm sorry Spzmnky ( talk) 17:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
As you just have protected the article there, please have a look at the conduct of User:Jacurek, who is wikistalking me. He had never edited this article before, and now he is reverting my edits in an attempt to provoke me. Jacurek and other Polish editors are currently under scrutiny by Arbcom Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Eastern European mailing list for such disruptive behaviour. -- Matthead Discuß 20:56, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for protecting the page. I have also received a friendly warning I will fully respect. Just to let you know since there is a lot more to it, the user User_talk:Matthead is currently under editing restrictions[ [42]] due to his controversial edits and reverts in the past. He cannot revert more than once etc, etc. Thanks.-- Jacurek ( talk) 23:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
That was quite helpful. Thanks!
Regards, Gaelen S. Talk • Contribs 22:23, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
I will keep that in mind. I can take it from the usual vandals and other such people but when I hear it from administrators who I tend to see as being more mature and responsible, it just makes me a little more irritated. Particularly because their opinion of me is going to carry more weight and if they say that I am just power hungry than many people will actually believe them, seriously damaging my actual credibility. - Regards, Gaelen S. Talk • Contribs 23:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Why did you delete File talk:Western Europe map.svg? The page does exist, and the image is being used. I had just left a comment there before you deleted it. Hayden120 ( talk) 03:22, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
There was an Arbcom ruling not to mass de-link any dates for six months unless community consensus rule otherwise. Community consensus has. There are some 60,000 linked ISO dates, de-linking them is non-controversial, but I have only done a very small percentage. It needs to be handed to a bot - and there is one in preparation I understand. However I might be able to pick-up some of the workload on SmackBot's normal runs. Rich Farmbrough, 14:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC).
Hey thanks for the heads up on my talk page. I will make sure to note that and keep editing articles which I HAVE done in the past, thanks for the warning I appreciate it. Also could you please remove my name from your message on User:stephani21's talk page? Thanks Cjones132002 ( talk) 17:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, just a notification, I am considering fulfilling the unblock request by User:Matthead. There's merit in his unblock request: he could reasonably assume that the 1RR restriction on Eastern Europe does not apply to West Germany (there is in fact no possible sense West Germany is part of Eastern Europe, neither geographically nor politically, and the edit he was making was also not related to any political/historical issue related to Eastern Europe). So the situation needs to be judged independently of the restriction, with all participants on equal footing. And then I notice that User:Jacurek made three reverts and wasn't blocked, while Matthead was blocked for two. This makes the block essentially unjust. This is particularly important because we know Jacurek was part of the infamous EE Mailing List and Matthead was one of their declared "enemies" and victims, so we must avoid doing anything that would give the impression of "rewarding" any further provocations and attempts of getting opponents blocked from that side. (See Jacurek's edit [43] earlier on this page, where he was falsely claiming M. was under a general edit restriction in order to get you to block him – given what we know about the background, I would not assume good faith for this false information.) Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:59, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for welcoming me. As you are aware I am new to Wikipedia so if I should do anything wrong, please do not take it against me! All the best,
Friendly Ed 15:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
but you could be the "needle of the scale", if you want to be that is.-- Iwillremembermypassthistime ( talk) 21:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Ok.. what I meant was… why don't you decide which revision is better?-- Iwillremembermypassthistime ( talk) 21:45, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
just a quick suggestion on the riots article -- there is some info there (2.3 million people) that should have an as of date with it. Best, -- Epeefleche ( talk) 00:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Smallman12q ( talk) 00:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
could you place the merger-proposal templates I placed on Talk:West Germany onto the page itself (you protected it)? Thx. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Bsr... DENIP n'est pas exactement une fête (holiday) puisque est un jour scolaire de travail et de refléxion... Si n'est pas admisible célebration il faut chercher un autre mot... En français et en espagnol nous usons bcp de fois activité pratique... Avec ma amitié... -- Ayounali ( talk) 20:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Non, ce n'est pas un jour férié, mais un jour de travail scolaire dédié a refléchir et faire des activités pour prendre conscience des valeurs de la fraternité universelle, de la non-violence et de la paix. Voilà un article en anglais que j'ai trouvé:School Day of Non-violence and Peace (DENIP)
By Harold J. Greenberg
(Majorca Daily Bulletin, Palma de Mallorca, January, 18, 1990)
The "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" is held on January 30 every year, on the anniversary of the martyrdom in 1948 of Mahatma Gandhi, the great apostle of non-violence.
It will be celebrated, as always, in Majorca. The intiative for this "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" originated in Spain.
In Majorca, it was Llorenç Vidal in 1964 who founded the School Day. He now lives in Cádiz. He was influenced by Lanza del Vasto, a direct disciple of Gandhi. Del Vasto visited Majorca about 15 years ago, and his book "Le Retour aux Origines" ("Return to the Sources"), had an inmediate influence.
The basic message of the "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" states: "Universal Love, Non-violence and Peace. Universal Love is better than egoism. Non-violence is better than violence. Peace is better than war". Non-violence is the attitude of renouncing killing and inflicting pain on all breings in thought, word and action.
The "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" is a non-governmental, international and pioneering initiative of Pacificatory Education in which educational centres of all standards and of all the countries are invited to participate.
It is a practical activity which has neither official programming nor structural lines of action, because the message is one which maintains a permanent nucleus of basic aspects, and permits the free application of each educational centre according to its particular manner.
Professor Eulogio Díaz del Corral has written: "The 'School Day of Non-violence and Peace' was founded in Spain in 1964, when neither in Spain nor abroad did a similar initiative exist. It was maintained through hell and high water in very difficult circumstances, and it is considered the most important pioneering experience of Pacificatory Education of our time, as well as a dynamic nocleus of its promotion at a national and international level".
The "School Day of Non-violence and Peace" is a seed which is planted and cultivated in the hearts of the students. It is a bright, new and positive way of looking at the word and preparing for the future.
Harold J. Greenberg
(Majorca Daily Bulletin, Palma de Mallorca, January, 18, 1990)
Merci de votre attention...
-- Ayounali ( talk) 21:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about that huge disruption that happened, I am not sure who was behind it, but I do hope it doesn't happen again. And for the personal messages they are all done. Thanks -- Cjones132002 ( talk) 02:43, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
You're right and I apologize for being sloppy about it. Typographical style at least has the virtue that we don't have to check if the source had punctuation. Thanks very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ring Cinema ( talk • contribs) 20:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello there, Can you reply my last question there. It will be much appreciated. Thank you.-- 119.30.36.34 ( talk) 21:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
Because one of the users arbitrarily replaced the Template:Infobox Peri GR with the Template:Infobox settlement for no obvious reason. - Sthenel ( talk) 23:16, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
And happy Mid-Autumn Festival. Fitting. ^^ -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 00:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Congratulations! The article really graces the front page. Ricardiana ( talk) 16:17, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey Rjanag, thanks for the help with the Beale article while I was out. The subject is on my talk page, and while I've tried explaining it to him, I think a note from the deleter would help out a bit. ;) Thanks \ Backslash Forwardslash / ( talk) 14:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
是啊,很好笑吧?说我的编辑是 mumbo-jumbo,你简直在耻笑中国人的智慧。我对於你这麽说感到遗憾,希望你下次撤回编辑时,不要抱着说笑的心态!-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 15:48, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I didn't find this kind of page(Notice:it'n not this wikipedia:article request).In Chinese wikipedia,they have it called 最多語言版本的待撰條目.But I didn't still get a right place,so where's article request which most foreign versions have and english don't?
I am a cantonese .I not sure if the example gave an accurate account of what the text is about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 小雨點 ( talk • contribs) 17:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I am sorry if i've made a mistake.in my opinion,if i want to say:There are clouds in the sky,I would say"天空上有一片雲"(in fact, the chinese version is meaning that there is a cloud in the sky at that moment.).the sentence ”天空一片雲” is not a complete sentence at all,in english,it is something just like "the sky(NOUN) clouds(NOUN)."verb and connectionis are absence in this case.moreover,the word"片"is describing the noun"cloud" but no sky.if we want to describe the word "sky".we could definitely use the word"片",but not in this case.that"s just my opinions —Preceding unsigned comment added by 小雨點 ( talk • contribs) 17:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
You are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia. You can still read pages, but you cannot edit, change, or create them. Editing from 222.166.160.129 has been disabled by Spellcast for the following reason(s):
"This IP address has been blocked because it is believed to be an open proxy or zombie computer. To prevent abuse, these proxies may be blocked from editing Wikipedia."
BUT WHY THEY SEND ME SUCH A MSG? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 小雨點 ( talk • contribs) 18:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
This is exactly one of the most confused part of chinese usage.The sentence 天空突然一片辽阔 is, in fact,should be wirite as 天空突然變得一片辽阔, but for better pronouncing reason or in informal case like lyric ,we can leave it out.of course,this is just exceptional case.no matter in daily life, or formal writing,it is better for us to write 天空突然變得一片辽阔. 小雨點 ( talk) 19:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I do not mean to challenge you. in fact,I am interested in discussing this topic BUT now is almost 3:30am...... maybe you or I mess up sth as i cannot totally agree with you.but you're right as that's not the main argument .perhaps we can continue in discussing this topic later on because i really doubt if the number+classifier (一片) phrase is being used after the noun and expressing "the entire" (整个). 小雨點 ( talk) 19:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I didn't pay attention to that blog,sorry.中文:我没注意到那个部落客,抱歉。-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 18:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
我英语是en-0,你相信吗?-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 19:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
You have recently systematically changed Turfan to Turpan in all Wikipedia pages. This kind of systematic change is quite inappropriate. First of all, Turfan is more common in English texts (you can search on Google Books to check it). Secondly, when 2 spellings are common in English texts, a systematic change of one spelling to the other one (without any prior consensus) is quite wrong. Alefbe ( talk) 20:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! I originally thought you were wishing me a happy birthday birthday, but then I realized that it was October, not December. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 22:06, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm rather surprised you thought making this edit was appropriate, especially as an administrator. I think it was very poor form and reflects poorly on you, and I think you would do well to remove it. ÷ seresin 22:16, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
This one seems easier to rip/reproduce than the one you suggested. Is everything we need on it? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 23:05, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Picked some random landmarks. I'm assuming "Lu" means "Street"... I'll write that in English. Any other major landmarks needed? Also, I can't find the infamous "Grand Bazaar"...
So google-maps is quite a tool. Still no clue where Shanxi Alley is, but it mentions "a hospital" -- only hospital around is the Regional Hospital on the map; Nanmen area is right there, can't be far... Anything mentioned in article is in blue, other major roads are in lightgray... Legend uses 3 icons. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 03:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
What if, for this article, you cut off the top half of the map (since most of the events seem to have occurred in the lower right, at least according to the only sources we have available) and stick the legend on the lower left (below the railway station)? That might allow for a closer view of the relevant portion of the map, and prevent things from being so crammed in the thumbnail view.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
04:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Oh, also, the legend (or one of the corners) should probably include a scale, like the source map does.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
04:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
cropped it, makes sense...legend moved, 1km-scale added Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 05:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
I think w're done....it could get too crowded if more is added.... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 05:58, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
...and here's the generic map.
Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:36, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Aahh... This is quite the confusing section to navigate... I'm assuming that version up there with the flames and stars is the current version. There is one spelling error Remin --> Renmin on the road. "Lu" is often translated as "Road" while "Jie" is often translated as "Street". "Dadao" is "Avenue", but sometimes "Lu" is also translated as "Avenue". For the labels box, the "Urumqi" is too stretched... in my opinion, and looks a bit awkward... other than than I can't see anything else. Colipon+( Talk) 12:13, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag; I have requested a block of this account [47] for numerous spam-like and copyright violation edits. Cheers, JNW ( talk) 01:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
- Ottava Rima ( talk) 02:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Please have a look at Corsican language. Could you help? Thank you!-- Ultimate Destiny ( talk) 15:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
Were DYK credits given for this diff?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 07:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. Since we have established that the new article about Nicholas Beale that someone posted explicitly does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, I wonder if you could be kind enough to undelete it so that hopefull other editors can get it into a reasonable shape. many thanks. NBeale ( talk) 09:48, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Question: The notice that comes up when you try to create the page refers to User talk:Nicholas Beale. I assume that should be User talk:NBeale. Could one of you admin types correct it, for clarity and absolute correctness? Thanks! SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 07:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
I added -- LLTimes ( talk) 21:53, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the voting is by simple approval only, so no negative votes are going to get counted in any event. Regarding any conduct issues, there have been others who became coordinators of projects whose conduct was, well, unimpressive in some regards, who grew while coordinators and became editors that I think are now fairly universally regarded. Girolamo at the Films project comes to mind. And I've been known to be fairly criticized on more occasions than I really like thinking about as well, even as an admin. I think it might be best if you moved the comment onto the talk page. I'm not sure if any non-socks who got enough votes has ever been disqualified in an election, but I doubt it. (I think there was something like that in the Film project once though). Right now, personally, I'd probably take Charlie Manson if he didn't drool over the porn on the computer right now, because the group is big and it needs as much help as possible. But I did read your concerns and do appreciate them. John Carter ( talk) 22:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! I noticed you reverted my link to the Commons page for the Voynich Manuscript, noting that it was "already linked prominently". That is not correct. The Commons category at [48] is linked to (which contains the manuscript in arbitrary order, and some other files), not the Commons page at [49], which has the manuscript only, with all the pages in proper order. I'll leave it to you to decide how to link best, but IMO the article shouldn't link to the category at all but to the page instead. Sadly, we don't have template to do this, at least no to my knowledge. -- JovanCormac ( talk) 11:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the notice! It is interesting to remember when it all started for me editing here with a user name. -- Timeshifter ( talk) 15:24, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Can you play the video at User:RoyDickson/Sandbox? RoyDickson appears to be having some difficulty playing the video and I wanted to make sure that I'm not the only one who can play it. Thanks. Smallman12q ( talk) 19:43, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Dear Rjanag, would you mind looking into this, or give some advice?
The edit summaries are quite telling. In the fourth diff, neither rebutting nor bothering to compromise by taking into account my point (which his edit summary forthrightly acknowledges), Radeksz simply reverts me, of course leaving in the completely false claim that the Soviets "openly" supported the Nazi invasion. I can obviously take out "openly" but I think that the claim that the USSR supported the Nazi invasion of Poland is equivocation; the USSR simply went along with the invasion due to its own geopolitical interests.
This looks like a case of trigger-happy reverting. Radeksz may claim that the USSR supported the invasion, but providing a source would be nice. Actually taking out "openly" per his own concession edit summary 4 would have been a compromise.
I'd gladly do a third revert, but I find Radeksz's behavior inappropriate enough, you've warned me that even doing one or two reverts can be considered edit warring, and I'm currently watched by ArbCom due to Radeksz' edit warring and team-tagging with Martintg and friends (your contributions as a party in this case, WP:EEML, are welcome). I'd take this to talk, but it seems that Radeksz is willing to concede my point even as he trigger-happily reverts me, and it's patently obvious that Radeksz is reverting for the heck of it. I think Radeksz' work here clearly falls under edit warring without breaching 3RR. As a team member who follows around my edits with a team of friendly buddies all over Wiki, he constantly reverts me and I'm sick of it. In this case, he should at least be given a warning to attempt compromise sometime, instead of blindly reverting to a version he prefers but admits isn't properly written.
This is not only revert-warring; this falls under WP:GAME examples as "stonewalling" and "bad faith negotiating."
I'd very much appreciate seeing your thoughts on this tango.
Anti-Nationalist ( talk) 01:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Please have a careful look at the edits:
PU/AN first edit: I edit w/ this edit sum - [55]; this is actually a completely legit edit, aside from the edit summary, in that at some point somehow a block of text (including a quote) got removed from the article (making a sentence a fragment) and PU/AN is taking out the sentence which was introducing the quote.
My first edit: [56] Ok, PU/AN was right, so I went back, found the text that was removed and put it back in. What's wrong with this edit?
PU/AN second edit: [57]. PU/AN's edit summary: It can be said the USSR supported the German invasion due to the M-R secret protocol, but that ït supported the German invasion "openly" is WP:OR / false. They didn't announce "we approve." So. PU/AN says It can be said the USSR supported the German invasion, but that it cannot be said that it supported the German invasion "openly". Ok, I'm fine with that. Hence my last edit:
My second edit: [58] in which I completely agree with PU/AN - I remove the word "openly" since it doesn't seem to belong and restore the original quote per his statement that "It can be said the USSR supported the German invasion due to the M-R secret protocol".
So what the hey is PU/AN's problem with my edits here, since I'm agreeing with him??? Is it because my edits followed his edits? Speaking of "wiki-hounding" - I've had this article on my watchlist since like 2004, before PU was even on Wikipedia and especially before PU decided to become AN - more likely he looked up my past edits and decided to "send a message". This is really trying to make a big deal out of nothing just to make accusations against somebody. radek ( talk) 05:19, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Ugh, looking at it again I see that I did make a mistake - I meant to put in the text without the word "openly", which I did, but somehow I didn't remove the same text w/ the word "openly" in it. Then I left home for a few hours to run some errands. I see that you corrected my mistake - thanks! Still, PU/AN trying to milk this as some kind of "GAMEing" or "EDIT WARRING" or whatever is pretty freakin' pathetic - especially since I was trying to agree with him. radek ( talk) 05:26, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Please see my comments at User talk:Rjanag#Nicholas Beale. Cunard ( talk) 02:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
The article looks fine to me. It's a great improvement, since it is very hard to find about 1999 film; moreover a chinese film. World Cinema Writer ( talk • contributions) 08:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Idiot and maniac, what makes you think that I am the University of Missouri? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.59.156 ( talk) 15:44, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm considering opening an RFA, and wanted to know whether you think I'll be a viable admin candidate. I would appreciate any and all feedback! Smallman12q ( talk) 01:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag - you might be amused by this! SNALWIBMA ( talk - contribs ) 07:11, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar | |
I award you this barnstar for cleaning up the non-neutral POV in the lead paragraph of Academic freedom. A More Perfect Onion ( talk) 14:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC) |
(The non-neutral commentary had been introduced more than 100 revisions ago, before May 2008.)
Hello, last time I made more than 3 changes to one page, you blocked me. Now there's this totally biased opinion going on at Arab people, wherein some users are deleting my sources and references, are adding sources and references that have nothing to do with the subject of the debate (aka. how many of the Egyptian people are considered Arabs), and are instead adding sources that are not scientific and that do not bear any credibility. I already discussed this on the talk page. I made 2 different changes to the page (different, not the same), but I do not want to make a 3rd change to avoid what happened last time. What do you suggest I should be doing in this case? Thank you. -- Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ [talk] 16:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Someone insists on inserting pictures of the July 2009 demonstrations (Berlin/Washington) into East Turkestan independence movement. Neither the English nor the German posters/flyers say anything about "independence." Is there any indication that the people in the pictures were actually demonstrating for "independence"? Is there proof?... I think it's very dubious and takes up too much space in that short section. But I'm sick of arguing... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 10:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag, A month ago you said on my talk page that if a particular user named Liam became trouble again to let you know. I said I would keep watch. Now he has definitely returned with a vengeance at Talk Meher Baba
An extensive section by user Hoverfish is there where he has been doing his own investigation of sockpuppetrty by the user. Here is just one small example:
See here. Now read below.
I'm on the Baba fringe too, but do check out this article a few times a year. Why not a bigger section on Sanskaras Im wondering? Johnathon --203.26.122.12 (talk)
The user has a confirmed (by admin) history of sockpuppetry and even admits to it proudly in the discussion. I left a post on the Discussion page that I would see if an admin could help. Dazedbythebell ( talk) 18:56, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi from me too Rjanag. Well, it is draining my energy all right, though I could simply disregard him, but I think then he would create more problems, so I try to keep him somewhat in check. I think he is using the talk page like social networking somehow, I am not sure how much is permissible or where there is a clear limit, but I keep feeling SOME rule should be there to put an end to it, hopefully. I know that's a lot of literature to offer you, but it gives an idea... Talk:Meher_Baba#The_Brendan132_incident Thanks for your time anyway. Hoverfish Talk 20:25, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I humbly ask you, if the user "softjuice" is a rightful and a credible on his contributions in the "Next Eleven." The Philippines is already a NIC, why should he/she degrade it into the Developing Country Level. Is that an offense already? "I have asked you because you're the only one I know that can help it through. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devoted Scientist ( talk • contribs) 12:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
This person ( Alefbe) is removing properly quoted statements from the 16th century historian Firishta and by known authors of books. [59] Alefbe doesn't believe the information because the information doesn't satisfy his POV. Thank you!-- 119.73.4.133 ( talk) 12:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
He/she has now started edit-war. [60] Can you please revert his last edit. Thanks-- 119.73.4.133 ( talk) 12:40, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you tell me how to delete this file? File:Psyren-char.jpg Thanks. DragonZero ( talk · contribs) 18:53, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Rjanag, normally I would agree that comments about Wikipedia editing belong in the manuals and not the articles. However, I refer you to Wikipedia:Help desk#More on IPA tone. In this case, I don't think a small comment in a list of resources in a section at the end of an article that is specifically about "Keyboard Input" would be harmful. On the contrary, it would be extremely helpful. If you disagree again, I will accept and won't argue further. I will also include a link from the IPA article to Wikipedia's IPA manual for similar reasons. I hope these resources in the appendices to the article will help others avoid the frustration I have had.-- seberle ( talk) 14:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the AfD notice on The Shells, even though our views are opposed. I appreciate that. - Draeco ( talk) 02:17, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your note on my page, Rjanag. Feel like asking for a review by an uninvolved admin or two? The page needs cooling down. Tony (talk) 02:00, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Great, thanks for the correction. I had simply grabbed to much of the text in my external editor (UltraEdit), glad you fixed the messed-up characters! Chevy1948 ( talk) 19:17, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Soigneusement, je me demande: Qu'est-ce qu'on peut faire ici? -- Tenmei ( talk) 07:51, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Why are you adding policy shortcuts (like this) to talkpage sections? They don't belong—those templates are for indicating when a given shortcut redirects to the page. rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 07:59, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for your work on the DYK. I just wanted to make a correction for a hook here. Template_talk:Did_you_know#Articles_created.2Fexpanded_on_October_17. I left specific comments there (currently 3rd hook down). Sorry for any confusion. Thank you. -- Omarcheeseboro ( talk) 01:14, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi there Rjanag. The DYK bot seems to believe it is on a 6 hour cycle after Gatoclass changed it to 8 hours and posted a warning to AN that the update is overdue and the template shows the same warning. Aforementioned Gatoclass suggested I should turn to you for help since you have programming skills. Do you think you can do something about those problems? :-) Regards So Why 12:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I am looking for advice first and foremost. I have done extensive start up pages in the past only to have them deleted simply because it is one persons viewpoint. All the people or companies that I write about I have spent quality time via face to face interaction. I don't sit at home and critique those from afar. So now I will start in stages with the page and build it up so to avoid being "red flagged" by guys like you. I have noticed hundreds of pages on this site that are not finished that have been up for quite some time. How about purging those pages from the system or correcting them? Understand, I am looking for advice, please help me not deter my situation. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by FashionModelEditor ( talk • contribs) 21:40, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for the advice. I am learning, please be patient. Thank you very much! FashionModelEditor ( talk) 22:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)FashionModelEditor
Sorry. My mistake. Please take a call with how you want to deal with Nevill's comments; I have nothing to say. Alinovic ( talk) 17:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, you are a random admin I am requesting assistance from. Could you please check article ' Khachkar' and see if it has a lock left on it - i can't edit it. The page is connected with the controversial Nagorno-Karabakh War family of articles. Thankyou for any help that you can give. -- maxrspct ping me 19:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
{{
editprotected}}
template at the top of the message.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
21:23, 20 October 2009 (UTC)Ok, thanks for your prompt help. Shouldn't there be a template at the top of the actual article page? -- maxrspct ping me 12:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Greetings, you removed a "misleading link' at
Jonathan Gleich I was trying to explain the word "Masticator" in the title.
Would it be more acceptable with you if I listed it as Chronic
Masticator ?
Thanks
Lscappel ( talk) 00:09, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! -- Lscappel ( talk) 00:23, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Severely needs copyediting and referencing. May be of interest to you. -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 00:25, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
I would like to offer you to collaborate with me in a project (literally a film article improvement in sub-page). I chose you since your Not One Less was damn perfect. I chose a film to be improved, Spirited Away. I looking for a good answer. Sincerely, World Cinema Writer ( talk • contributions) 07:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
In my opinion, it's time to ask for a bot trial run. There may be unknown issues, but the template has already been deprecated, and the bot isn't making substantive changes. -- 69.225.5.183 ( talk) 06:49, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
This dude is beginning to get on my neves. He's been at it since July and has only one talk page contribution. Does he ever come up with reasons for his reverts and pushing? Somewhere? Could someone at least reprimand him (again) for not marking these major changes as "minor"? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:04, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Can you please explain why Star Fox 64 wasn't named Starwing 64 in Europe and Australia please? As I've read on numerous occasions it was due to a request from George Lucas as Starwing sounded like Star Wars.
I'll try and dig out a notable article.-- Guru Larry ( talk) 02:18, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
What does oil spill really mean? It must be caused by ships-sinking? and...does the oil mean Petroleum(really does?) here? Please answer in English and Chinese,thanks. I planed to create this article in Chinese.
-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 15:24, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I had just realized it myself not too long before you mentioned it. It looks like you just celebrated your first year about two months ago, so belated congratulations to you, too. Here's to many more, for both of us! -- Transity( talk • contribs) 19:21, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Rjanag, I have reported you at the ANI here based on what I believe was grossly uncivil behavior during the Epeefleche/Shells affair. This is not a personal attack, and I deeply respect your other prolific contributions. But I also detested your behavior in this case, and I'm compelled to act. Regards - Draeco ( talk) 06:13, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the WikiBirthday greeting. — ERcheck ( talk) 06:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
A little insignificant has given you a
LOL
ipop! This horrible pun and delicious candy promotes
WikiLove and tells the world how low you will stoop for the sake of humor. Spread WikiLove by giving someone else a lollipop, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the unrelenting joy of lollipops by adding {{ subst:Lollipop}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!
^_^ A little insignificant Talk to me! (I have candy!) 11:48, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I'll grant you credit for giving an authentic reply, but you gave no indication of the literal translation (which I added, having checked my French/English dictionary) of the OP's phrase. If your translation is idiomatic, in which part/s of the francophone world is it used? Your answer would be helpful on the RD thread. -- Deborahjay ( talk) 09:43, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Dabomb87 ( talk) 22:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
我是看過那部電影,不過你說的 en:Not One Less#Themes這東西。我不明白你的意思,什麼地方有問題呢?-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 08:34, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Haven't felt this stupid in a long time now. DGG ( talk ) 02:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, just replied to you over at my talkpage (in case you miss it and think I am ignoring you!) - Dumelow ( talk) 00:40, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! Autarch ( talk) 13:14, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
It was my understanding that a sub-page in my user space was only for private editing before it was released to the public. Because of that, rather than try to learn all of the formatting requirements, I copied the text of a book I knew of (Da Vinci Code), so that I could replace the text with text appropriate for my book. The only other images were a photo of the Catacombs of Paris that I submitted as my work and was free to use according to Wiki rules. The other image was the book cover image for which the copyright owner emailed the license to "permissions" earlier today.
Can you tell me which images you are refferring to? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsonsol ( talk • contribs) 23:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
That AfD is a pretty clear snowball keep that's due to be closed in a few hours anyway. Why not just close the AfD? Tim Song ( talk) 23:48, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Nice bot. Benjwong ( talk) 01:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
First of all, I'm extremely suprised that you can promote July 2009 Ürümqi riots into GA status given the controversial nature of the topic, but since you did it, and you are more familiar with the bureaucracy of Wikipedia, I would like some personal opinions on the future prospects of the articles I'm working on. The articles in question are:
Given that none of the articles above are suffering from edit wars, I have been pondering for months on whether to promote these three articles to higher status, but I'm concerned about the nature of the topic since they are Korean War topics involving battles between US and China.
My main concerns are:
I was thinking on consulting the US, Korean and Chinese military history task forces, but given the sensitive nature of the topic, I would perfer a neutral outsider opinion first. Thanks in advance for your feedbacks. Jim101 ( talk) 03:42, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
One more thing, how to resolve conflicts involving the WP:RS propaganda clause on Chinese sources? Jim101 ( talk) 13:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I see now that John Anstis' portrait fitted this. However, I use Twinkle, and its wording for F8 is "bit-for-bit identical", which misled me somewhat (I was thinking it might be for people who'd uploaded it to both, for example). I also not that F8 itself just says identical - which I agree is relevant here (clearly the same painting). I don't quite know why I'm telling you this, but hey. - Jarry1250 Humorous? Discuss. 10:09, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I remain somewhat confused about your message. You continue to suggest that THB300K.jpg is a non-free image. I would agree it was when I first posted it. But as soon as you sent your fist message, I contacted the copyright owner who did submit to license using your own language template to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Now you claim it doesn't exist. The site suggests that if the license is not received within 7 days, it will be deleted. Yet, if it is not in the commons, that would mean it was deleted on the same day it was posted... even though the license was emailed on the same day.
Re: the article being written by me. I am no longer the owner of the book. I was the author, but I am not the owner, so suggesting it as that is not accurate. But I do see validity to the point about writing an article about a book I authored could be taken the wrong way, I will ask someone else to write the article.
You did not respond to my other question. Is a sub-page open for scrutiny by people such as yourself? I mentioned that I thought it was a practice page that was not visible to anyone else (The reason I cut and paste another article to easer the pain of my formatting ignorance. Is it my area or must I be concerned that you are looking at every step I take.
Please answer this question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsonsol ( talk • contribs) 15:04, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Rjanag and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
Thanks, -- Epeefleche ( talk) 21:59, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. It seems that you have been helpfully reflecting on the appropriateness of some of your behaviour and been willing to apologise. I would suggest that you consider apologising to others to whom you have been un-civil, and specifically undertaking that you will not use your powers as an Admin either:
Best wishes NBeale ( talk) 08:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
我看了文章後,开始乱掉了。"I want a soup(×)" 以及 "There are a lot of shoe(×)."这些句子都是错误的。那正确的说法是什麽?English:I confused after reading this article.I want a soup and There are a lot of shoe are both wrong.So what's the correct sentense?-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 18:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
The discussion I meant to link to just now (and failed to) is here: Template talk:Citation/core#We should never render invalid HTML -- JN 466 21:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
|ref=harv
though in addition to its own system. --
Tothwolf (
talk)
22:34, 2 November 2009 (UTC)Ok I have a question. Here is a list of articles that use template:Chinese. I updated the template font size, but it is not changing the page contents until the next purge. Can your bot do auto purge? Such as running...
and just go down the list. I suppose it can be done outside wiki. But I don't know if your bot can do something like this. If not, is no problem. Just let me know. Benjwong ( talk) 06:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. I just noticed that the note about Chinese characters at the top of Kowloon Walled City, the article I'm working on, are having weird formatting issues. Just looking at recent edits to related templates, it seems like this edit of yours might be the cause. If that is indeed the case, could you please fix that as soon as possible? Thanks. — tk tk tk 08:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I am unsure what to make of this, and would like to know how you think about this. On East Asian age reckoning there are many "unsourced statements", however a particular user seems keen on eliminating all unsourced statements, turning a page of about 5,000 bytes into one of 1,000, to the point where there is minimal information left. The page has transformed from this to this. This said user argues here that such material is not permitted at all without sources per WP:BURDEN, full stop. I am under the belief that it was acceptable to temporarily allow an unreferenced statement provided that it can be referenced eventually, and that it doesn't violate BLP; am I mistaken? Regards, -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 13:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Can you make the edit summary a bit shorter please?-- Tznkai ( talk) 02:21, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Rjanag. As you know, a number of arbitrators suggested at the Rjanag RfA that an RfC be brought with regard to your conduct discussed at that RfA. Please be aware that in accordance with the arbitrators' suggestion a request for comments has been filed concerning your conduct on Wikipedia by your name in this list.
The RfC can be found here.
If a second user certifies the dispute within 48 hours, it will be moved from the "Candidate pages" section to the "Approved pages" section.
Once it has been certified and opened, editors (including those who certified the RfC) can offer comments, either by:
I invite you to respond in the Response section. You may endorse as many views as you wish. Anyone can endorse any views, regardless of whether they are outside parties, inside parties, or the subject of the RfC.
Information on the RfC process can be found at:
-- Epeefleche ( talk) 08:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Actually I was agreeing with you, rather than the other way around. I was planning to start a talk page thread if he did it again. As for the rollback/Twinkle thing, sorry, I didn't know. I just assumed it would be the best/easiest way to say I was assuming good faith. -- Thejadefalcon Sing your song The bird's seeds 19:03, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. I hope all is well with you. I haven't had occasion to work with you much of late, although I always think to ask your opinion on linguistic and language related subjects (as I recall that's an area of interest and expertise for you?). Anyway, I just wanted to come by and offer some support and encouragement. Wikipedia definitely has its frustrations, but I hope everything is going well for you and that you enjoy yourself on and off-line. Take care. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 22:47, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Since your online right now was hoping you could move Queue 4 to Queue 3, since its been recently moved to the front page. If its a lag of the bot then nevermind. Thanks in advance Calmer Waters 15:45, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Uhmm... What's [ this]? I didn't to any work on the HMS Indomitable (1907) article at all. 88.90.88.107 ( talk) 03:56, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
You thought this was more fun than this? Haha. Grsz 11 04:24, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks. A lesser editor would have reverted my whole change instead of moving it forward. You're one of the good ones. Thanks. Hope you can get that article featured. -- Horkana ( talk) 05:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
I was looking at one of the bot's edit on the Martin Lee article. When it converted zh-tspj without saying first=t, this is going to cause issues. Now Martin Lee has simplified chars first. It becomes difficult maybe even impossible to go back. That goes for any other article that used {{zh-tspj}}. Benjwong ( talk) 08:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
|first=t
manually; the bot only did replacements on templates that were already simplified-first. (Note that the name of a template doesn't necessarily tell you the order of its constituents: templates like {{
zh-tspj}}
and {{
zh-ts}}
actually had simplified characters first
[63]
[64].) I figured people watching the articles can fix the ordering manually if needed.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
00:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
|first=s
to templates that you think should explicitly be simplified first (such as PRC-related articles) but I won't alter the defaults without a wider community consensus. You'd probably be better off starting a discussion instead of making any changes with AWB yet, because you would have to do something like 15,000 edits (even with AWB, that takes a very long time), whereas if a community consensus is reached then I can have ZhBot add the |first=s
automatically to templates that don't have it, or to templates that are in certain articles (for example, if the community came up with a list of categories for which all the member articles should be simp-first or trad-first, the bot could use those).
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
05:07, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for the WikiBirthday message! Wow... three years and counting... I am so proud to be part of Wikipedia. Thanks again. κaτaʟaveno T C 14:28, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
我不能使用 这张图用在中文维基,为什麽会这样?要如何才能在中文版使用呢? -- 俠刀行 ( talk) 14:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
All these complaints and puffery give me a creepy feeling. Try reading this recent NYT-article ... Seems distantly related (at least in my mind) Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 19:40, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
The project now has a more defined idea of what we plan to do. Basically, we're calling for individual proposals on how to improve Wikipedia. Please help by posting your new ideas! – Juliancolton | Talk 21:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC) (Cross-posting)
ZhBot is currently replacing {{ lang-zh}} with {{ zh}} and the edit summary says to check the userpage. However, the userpage mentions only merging all "zh-" style templates into zh. Where was it decided to start using zh|c= across the board instead of lang-zh? Kolindigo ( talk) 04:37, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
zh}}
is simply better than {{
lang-zh}}
, it has all the functionality of the latter and much more.{{
zh}}
is shorter to type out.{{zh | c={{{1}}} }}
so that it still works if people use it. I also intend to make the same replacements for {{
lang-gb}}
. But if you think this is serious, I can file a second request for bot approval before doing this task. Personally, the only benefit I see in keeping the current templates is consistency with the others in
Category:Multilingual support templates, but that benefit is outweighed by the others (I think), and besides that category is not exhaustive anyway, so I see no harm in having just one more language that has slightly different format.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
06:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)Congratulations on FA for a fine article. Hope there is more to come! (You are an original writer. I appreciate that. I don't mean that you make up facts, but that you put together subject matter in a wonderfully clear way. ) Regards, — mattisse ( Talk) 23:49, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the Eva Peron article, we do not need accents over the "o" in the words "Peronism" and "Peronato." Please stop inserting accents over the "o" in image titles because that disables the images. Thank you. Andrew Olivo Parodi ( talk) 02:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks for your birthday wishes. Davshul ( talk) 21:56, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
My apology regarding your bot adding the simplified title to the article. -- WikiCantona ( talk) 22:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
First, I'd like to thank you for your work on July 2009 Ürümqi riots. It seems I'm late to the party (good job on the GA) but that article looks positively superb for such a contested topic. It is for this reason that I would like to request your help on User:NocturneNoir/Sandbox/Chongqing corruption scandal (yes, when mainspaced, it will reside at 2009 Chongqing corrupting scandal instead of its current stated target). I've listed sources at User talk:NocturneNoir/Sandbox/Chongqing corruption scandal, but I'm having trouble with both the formatting of the article and the decision of what information should be included. Your help would be greatly appreciated, if you have the time to spare. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR talk // contribs 22:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag. My query here is regarding Template:Quote. I just noticed this issue then, but previously when using Template:Quote, if you left a line between two paragraphs it, naturally, would recognise that line and leave a space separating the paragraphs. However, for some reason it is not doing this now and the text, even if split into paragraphs, merges into the one block. As you were the most recent to edit the template, I thought it would be logical to ask you if you knew how to fix this? It may not have been your edit, but I didn't notice this until now and you were the most recent to edit the template. Thanks, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 07:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
{{
quote}}
template caused the archiving to be messed up. Basically, the archiving works by applying a <div style="background: [some color]"> tag to the beginning of the discussion, and a </div> tag to the end... but the quote template also has a tag, so when the browser sees it it thinks that's the end of the background-color thing and ends the archiving. I have also noticed this problem with embedded div tags on other pages; it's kind of annoying, so I'll leave a note at WP:VP/T to see if anything can be done about it. Anyway, in this case I thought the div tags in the template were doing nothing so I removed them to fix the AfD page, but didn't realize that would create other problems. For now I've just converted the quote template in the AfD to a <blockquote></blockquote>, which will work as a quick fix for most cases, but the better solution will be to figure out how to prevent div tags from interfering with one another, so I will look into that. rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 01:11, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Thx, and happy Friday 13th to you too. - Altenmann >t 16:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the heads-up on editing the source in an external editor. Is there some way to do this, however, as it's pretty difficult to find your way through pages and pages of mark-up without a search function? BarryNorton ( talk) 19:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
[65] - Ottava Rima ( talk) 23:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your birthday greeting.
Hi, Rjanag, if you're active, could you look into this blatant violation of WP:Talk, WP:SOAPBOX and WP:NPA by new editors named Monkh Naran ( talk · contribs) and Pertook15 ( talk · contribs) as well as GenuineMongol ( talk · contribs)'s gross incivility. I deleted some rant [66] that have nothing to do with the ongoing disputes on a map and content regarding 13th century Korean and Mongol relation. However, Monkh Naran ( talk · contribs) reverted to include such offensive attacks including mocking ethnicity, and false labeling of "vandalism" with threats. I've been attacked by the users like this [67] [68] [69]. I warned them and tried to calm down [70], but well...I got this treatment. User_talk:Caspian_blue#Materials_from_User_talk:Gantuya_eng. Would you look into the situation? Thanks.-- Caspian blue 17:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Rjanag. This user is constantly removing the sourced information from the articles Samad Behrangi and Turko-Persian tradition without any discussion. If you check the talk pages of these articles in which i contributed the most, you'll see that there is no comment from this user. However, he/she's blindly removing information and also stalking. Regards, E104421 ( talk) 22:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Nope nothing is automated with the Wiki Cleaner edits. Just my mistake. Thanks for catching it. Wiki Cleaner just gives a fast list of what needs to be disammed. It's more of an assistance tool than an editing tool. -- User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 22:25, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rjanag,
I do a fair amount of writing/editing on WP but I don't know of any page that has such a constant stream of vandals as the One-Child Policy page. Virtually all of the vandals are unregistered users, and judging by the childishness of the entries, the vast majority are juveniles.
Would it be possible to restrict editing of that article to Registered Users? Of course many of us monitor those entries now, but it's a PITA to have to deal with those edits. If it is possible to place a restriction on editing, and you know how to request or create such a restriction, then I encourage you to do so.
Thanks a lot.
--Mack2 ( talk) 20:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
What do you think? I have a feeling you're going to go with delete. But I wonder if including an author/scholar of specialized work in this field doesn't make the encyclopedia just a little bit better? I actually like that it's very short and stubby without and fluff. I don't see how it can be merged to a broader topic. And it seems like a good way to have his books be included in some fashion in our comprehensive resource. Have I lost it completely? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 20:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Rjanag, I hope my message to you is not ignored this time. :-) (my feeling was a little hurt). However, I can really not come up with any suitable admin for the matter because you know both GraYoshi2 and Badagnani, and your are an active member of WP:CHINA with experiences in editing food/Chinese culture-related articles. This tendentious edit warring between them has been going on for about 7 months. Regardless of the formed consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_China/Archive/May_2009#Naming_convention_for_Chinese_foods_and_usages_of_Wikitionary, GraYoshi2x has been reverting to exclude the Wiktionary links even though he is the only one against the consensus. I think this long-term revert campaign is indeed spooky and disruptive. [72] (most of them are mere reverts of Badagnani's edit). I have agreed and disagreed with each of the both, but to me, GraYoshi2x wants to pick a fight, so Badagnani who has many block records to be blocked for a longer time. Would you take appropriate action; block or warning anything to stop this silliness. Thanks.-- Caspian blue 22:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I'm bringing another problem to your attention since your specialty is in linguistic study. User named Laws dr ( talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log · edit summaries) has been inserting WP:Original research to Hardest language over and over and even distorted contents from used books (he claimed he merely re-added somebody's edit). This was pointed out at here on Oct.31, but he recently added his personal opinion referenced with a chatting forum, insisting that his edit is justified. He sporadically edits Wikipedia, but as soon as his added content was deleted today, he appears. I think Law dr is a single purpose account, or alternative account with another account. Would you warn him for his repeated disruption and violations of WP:NOR and WP:SYNTHESIS, and WP:RS and if possible look into the account? Thanks.-- Caspian blue 15:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi there, thanks for the helpful info on my discussion page. I didn't know the zh-cp was deprecated. I'll make use of the new Chinese: s....
-- Visik ( talk) 05:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I am a native Russian speaker and linguist. What we have originally in the article is transliteration with mere elements of transcription (e.g. no vowel reduction is indicated). There is the pronouncing norm of standard Russian in Russia which roughly corresponds to Moscow speech. In this norm there are rules for vowel reduction which are in no way respected in the article. Voiced consanants always become devoiced (with few situational exceptions) at word ending. -- Zumrasha ( talk) 16:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
我不懂。我只是发牢骚一下,他就马上删除了。你可以告诉我原因吗?被删除的内容: [73]-- 俠刀行 ( talk) 15:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
If you can't win the argument, the next best thing is to be able to "hang up the phone", yes? :) ← Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Here is an archive search box for your talk page. You can modify it and place it according to your preferences.
Hello. I saw your post here and I was wondering if there is a list of StarCraft articles that need archive urls added? I wouldn't mind doing some manually.-- Rockfang ( talk) 06:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
http://web.archive.org/web/20040810213217/
to the front and not worrying about looking them up specifically. I could do this pretty easily on AWB, I think, once I sit down and work out the search terms.Thank you for the kind birthday wish J04n( talk page) 15:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Are you aware <date> is for some reason a deprecated field? Rich Farmbrough, 21:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC).
|date=
and not |date2=
were broken; the easier fix by far seemed to be to add date to the template, rather than making text changes to however many articles have the template transcluded.
rʨanaɢ
talk/
contribs
00:04, 4 December 2009 (UTC)I don't quite understand what you are referring to. Which user is this? Why is there no further discussion on #linguistics? ...some questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alinovic ( talk • contribs) 12:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much for fixing {{ mountain index row}} !! — hike395 ( talk) 16:26, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry for not stating that two other individuals and myself are adding to the Viral Video page for a class project @ UNC-CH. We ask that before any changes or extreme alterations are made to our edits or additions can anyone please contact us before. Thanks for acknowledging! ( Mfantroy ( talk) 23:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC))
Yes, many articles that are being improved are for a class project. Instead of a final exam, we are required to improve or create a new page for a topic relevant to our class. Mjohnston13 ( talk) 03:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Yes, me and two other members are working on a class project. We are taking an information science course and one of the assignments was to create or help improve an existing Wiki page on a topic in the information science field.
Ebenj05 ( talk) 14:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC) Ebenj05
OK. Lapsed Pacifist ( talk) 05:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Hmm... -- I agree that the wording of this addition was completely POV and you were certainly right in reverting; on the other hand, I find it somewhat odd that for a geographical area that is (maybe only currently) such a hot-spot of ethnic tensions, there isn't a single word of it mentioned in the intro. Am I making sense? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 05:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
You are a great guy! Thanks for being so excellent and telling me it was my WikiBirthday. I had absolutely no idea. ^_^ Clem ( talk) 04:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Actually, glottal stops can occur at the end of words as well; so we're looking for
IF <(not apostrophe)+'> OR <'+(not apostrophe)> THEN ʼ
(that's to avoid replacing italics and bold-markings. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 02:37, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to consult you on the romanization of minority (i.e. Tibetan, Uyghur, Mongolian) place names in China. Is there a system in place sanctioned by the PRC government on how to correctly name these places? The most obvious examples are Urumqi, Hohhot, and Lhasa, but I also refer to county names which are not romanized according to pinyin. Colipon+( Talk) 15:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
"Native" name/spelling | Pinyin of Chinese name | Other romanizations |
---|---|---|
Ürümchi ( Ürümqi) | Wulumuqi | Urumqi |
Qaramay (K̡aramay) | Karamay | |
Aqsu (Ak̡su) | Akesu | Aksu |
Qumul (K̡umul) | Hami | Kumul |
Xoten (Hotən) | Hetian | Hotan |
Qeshqer (K̡əxk̡ər) | Kashi | Kashgar |
Turpan | Tulufan | Turfan |
Altay | Aletai | Altai? |
Let me get back to you on this. I'm quite busy writing final papers now and I have some Ph.d applications I need to send off. I don't think the article needs a complete rewrite, but adding more information on what the Chinese government's views are would help. I'll write more about this over the holiday break. Take care. David Straub ( talk) 03:18, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to point out that we can also put it under the main intro. I guess you have some valid points too regarding that as well. No problems. Alohahell ( talk) 18:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey. You asked whether I have any connection to ASDFGH, or some user like that. Nah, I don't know who that is or anything. Sorry. I'm back on wiki now, will be editing regularly. Along with the Falun Gong pages, I think I have some good contributions to make to pages on China and its governance generally.-- Asdfg 12345 23:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
J04n(
talk page) is wishing you
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Xmas,
Eid,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hannukah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec09}} to your friends' talk pages.
Hey Rjanag... I just wanted to wish you a very good... "day" (now, I wouldn't really want to reveal any sensitive details here...) ;) Have a good one! -- 李博杰 | — Talk contribs email 22:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
File:18th Birthday.jpg | Hey, Rjanag. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the
Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day!-- MisterWiki talk contribs 00:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC) |
![]() |
Thanks for the wikibirthday wishes. -- Kevlar ( talk • contribs) 00:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello Rjanag,
I am new to editing and decided to add some information to the entry on my home town. I deleted a reference to the estimated depth of the springs because the source I have (and the only published source as far as I know) did not mention who did that depth estimate.
You then changed it back faster than I could blink.
I then put in the missing documentation and left in the shaky claim, which appears to be local legend.
So, beginner that I am, please tell me how I should have handled that. Should I have just noted my reasoning in the notes for the changes, or should I have added a questionable reference with a caveat as I did? BotManPA ( talk) 01:58, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
No, I don't. I uploaded them thinking the intentions that the copyright was correct. I have no qualms with them being deleted. Thanks, -- Jimbo [online] 15:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
That picture is back again if you hadn't noticed. -- Thejadefalcon Sing your song The bird's seeds 00:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
...because your signature appears as gibberish in blue and red on my browser as well. What kind of browser do you use? -- Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ [talk] 08:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about that, it appeared that it was transcluded, but that's my fault. Doc Quintana ( talk) 19:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello rjanag, I received your message and hereby acknowledge it. Moreover, I checked out your claims and went over several articles you listed in your "good" list. I agree, they are good. You seem to be able to do an article right. I'm impressed. As for the several other admins on the page you say have similar records, I didn't go hunting and don't plan to, so I cannot verify that. However, there is no reason not to take your word for it. You have quite an interesting list of good articles there; I think you can be justly proud of them. I note your interest in the military. I'm interested somewhat in it myself.
In my experience, however, not all sysadmins have the same emphasis on quality. My skepticism derives from a considerable number of negative experiences, where a sysadm (who should have known better) pulled rank to insist on lower-quality material, some totally inaccurate. Some sysadmins have insisted even on doing things in a way inconsistent with WP policy. Basically I was told to shut up with the hinted threat of being blocked. That is the source of my cynicism. You know, I've considered requesting adm status to give me some clout - I think I'm probably qualified at this point - but, actually working on articles appeals to me rather than police work. I suspect, once you get started with administration work, it probably takes a lot of your time. I notice you have had to spend a lot of time doing blocks and deletions and whatnot.
I think I trust your article judgement all right, even though I may have a slightly different view. You don't seem to be exercising it much on the linguistics articles; there are quite a number of bad ones, many of them tagged. I presume that is not your main interest. I think that is how you managed to encounter me. I'm interested in getting some good linguistics articles, so that means I concentrate on the ones of interest that need the most work.
I understand your tone with me, which seems a little high-handed. However, I suppose I could be more civil. Whether I can work on the linguistics article with you - well, I'm not sure now. I note that in your articles you are quite detailed and so am I so I have no doubt we would be disagreeing on many details. The problem is, since you are the sysadm, I would always be losing, always be being reverted, without recourse. That is what I meant about power. I do my best work with a freer hand. Once in a while I get a suggestion from a peer, which I usually take. If I hear from a sysadm it is because I am not setting things up in the accepted way. I'm still learning even though I have thousands of edits now. You aren't presenting yourself to me as a peer. I do not know if that statement qualifies as something good or something bad so I'm choosing to put this under "other."
Well, I'm going on with my edits now. I do not yet know if I will take on helping to clean up the locked article. Let's see how it goes. If you were to take an interest in helping to fix the linguistics artcles that need the most work I think we would advance the cause of good articles in that area much faster. I you disagree with any of my edits be sure and speak up. I'm not going to edit war with you but I can let you know if I disagree. I think I trust your judgement - thanks for bringing it to my attention - but whether I can work in your proximity I think we will have to see. Ciao, and merry Christmas. Dave ( talk) 18:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't even see it there (more bad results from late-night editing). It's removed now. Otebig ( talk) 05:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I just copied this from our recent discussions. If you can point any errors and be able to provide the reasons, please try. And i am interested only in errors and their grammatical reasons, nothing else. Also, if you want, please delete this post onecs you read. Thank you.
Thanks for getting the WP:100 listing. [74] I meant to do it along with my other closure stuff, but it slipped my mind (as I was also processing a WP:NOTNOW RfA). EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:01, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't feel strongly either way, but it's a pretty common practice on movies and other fiction articles to include a section where references to the work are mentioned. Is that what you're objecting to? -- Ring Cinema ( talk) 18:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)