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.

Hello Ka,

I just noticed your uploads on commons, for several ancient Chinese character. Just some advices :

• names your files according to the naming conventions, such *-oracle.svg , *-bronze.svg , *-bigseal.svg , *-seal.svg . That's a convention widely used by about 2.000 on commons from the Ancient Chinese character project and from the CJK Stroke order project. Your files will be soon [one by one and by a voluteer admin] rename according to this conventions.
• use square svg files... of 300px/300px and without white background, the convention follow by previous users, that will ease the work of the users who use/download the full set of images ;)
• since you can write Chinese, may you make a call on the Chinese wiki, and try to set up a new team ? that's would be greet to have a new set of users there.

Thanks for your previous involment : that's already great ! Yug (talk) 16:24, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello Yug,

Thanks for your advice. I've just been doing trial-and-error experimenting with uploads, and I appreciate your detailed instructions. Is there already a FAQ with this information about converting characters to SVG? Sorry, but I don't know much about the Chinese Wikipedia. Best wishes, Keahapana ( talk) 20:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi! I saw your recent edit on Himiko. History of Japan and almost all of other Japanese history-related articles adopt BC/AD. So, IMHO, considering the consistency, it would be appropriate to use it to the Himiko article. As far as I know, there's no rule that we have to use BCE/CE. Could you please explain yourself? Thank you. Oda Mari ( talk) 09:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Not a topic that I really care about, but for reference, the guideline is WP:ERA. Relevant portion: "It is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is a substantive reason; the Manual of Style favors neither system over the other." In other words, use the convention originally used on the page. Bendono ( talk) 10:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Bendono. I see. It depends on the first appearance of BC/AD or BCE/CE in the article, doesn't it? I didn't know that. Thank you for the clarification. Oda Mari ( talk) 13:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi Mari and Bendono, my respective apologies and thanks. I should have better explained the reason for reverting back to BCE/CE. The Common Era article reviews the advantages of "Common/Current Era" and "Christian Era". This is a ongoing controversy among WP editors, as seen in the Talk:Common Era and Wikipedia Talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) archives. In my opinion, BC/AD is more suitable for articles like History of Christianity than ones like History of Japan. I also apologize for being slow to reply (I'm on Hawaiian time, so to speak). Best wishes. Keahapana ( talk) 19:11, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Aloha, Keahapana! I'd like to know more of your opinion on the suitability of BC/AD. Why do you think that way? Please explain when you are not busy. I've been too busy to read the talk page links above. But I will as soon as possible. Cheers! Oda Mari ( talk) 06:45, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Aloha Mari. Using CE Common Era instead of AD Anno Domini ("in the year of our lord") is a widespread international practice with a well-established rationale. IMHO, "CE" better translates seireki 西暦 ("western calendar") than "AD". Perhaps the year numbering system in every article about Japanese history should consistently be changed to BCE/CE. What do you think? Keahapana ( talk) 01:19, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. As you noticed, I prefer BC/AD with several reasons. Is it really a well-established rationale? How worldwidely BCE/CE is used? I have to admit it was Wiki when I first saw/knew the notation. About two years ago. I could guess what they were, but had to look up a dictionary. This is en Wiki but that does not mean en Wiki is only for native English speakers. I think many people whose first language is not English come here and not a few people would be surprised, or wonder, to see BCE/CE as I did. At least in Japan, BCE/CE is not widelyknown nor widelyused at all. It seems to me that your opinion is very American. BTW, both of my English dictionaries, Webster's 3rd New Internatinal Dictionary and Longman's Dic. of en Language and Culture , use BC/AD. Oda Mari ( talk) 16:52, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you for your fine editing. I have recently offered to mediate the discussion regarding Donghu, as listed on WP:MEDCAB by User:John Hill. I would appreciate your opinions if you have the time, as it is a subject you are obviously well-versed in. — Matheuler 17:29, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

There is a tutorial there (part of the project Commons:Ancient Chinese characters project), with a detailled picture on the bottom. The picture explain everythings, I think. I participated to this project 2 years ago, using Inkscape. That' s far away for me. The tutorial is thus the best help for you. One advice : just make peacefully some pics, some users will come later and continue, etc. In short : have fun, and then leave for an other place where to have fun ;)

Good luck ~ -- Yug (talk) 11:54, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the tutorial and Inkscape, which are both outstanding. I just uploaded Wu巫seal.svg, Wu巫bigseal.svg, and Wu巫oracle.svg. When you have time, would you please take a look at them? Thanks also for your wise advice to have fun. Best wishes, Keahapana ( talk) 22:57, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi again! Thanks for your congratulations on my new book. The publishers (BookSurge) say it should be listed on Amazon.com and a variety of other on-line bookstores within 2 weeks (however, I will believe it when I actually see it listed there). The full title is: Through the Jade Gate to Rome: A Study of the Silk Routes during the Later Han Dynasty 1st to 2nd centuries CE. An Annotated Translation of the Chronicle on the 'Western Regions' in the Hou Hanshu. It is a large paperback, 714 pages long, and almost all text (just two maps at the end). I have had the longest battle with the publishers to get it right - and, of course, it still isn't - but I have finally decided to go ahead with it anyway and not delay publication any longer. I will send you a flier with a description and details of pricing, etc., as soon as I get more details - and later, a short insert listing any mistakes I find in it (there is at least one incorrect date and a mistake in a conversion to Pinyin from Wade-Giles). Anyway, I hope you will find it of some interest. Cheers, John Hill ( talk) 22:45, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello there! I wanted to apologize for the problems that have developed at the Donghu people mediation. User:Alexjhu has started to behave in a counterproductive manner. He has been blocked from editing Wikipedia for legal threats and general incivilities. If he returns, hopefully he will stop acting in such a confrontational manner. I appreciate your contributions to the article, and hope you don't give up on it! Thanks! — Finn Casey  *  *  * 02:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you VERY much for all your help dealing with this problem. No, I won't give up contributing to Wikipedia. Rather than regretting how much time I've wasted arguing over Donghu, I think about how much I've learned about dispute resolution procedures. Thanks again, and if I can ever help you with mediating future disagreements involving Chinese or Japanese language, please let me know. Best wishes, Keahapana ( talk) 20:48, 31 October 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.