User talk:Hunan201p/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello, Hunan201p, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• And feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Red Director (talk) 05:49, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

March 2019

Hello, I'm Andritolion. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions —specifically this edit to Date rape— because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. andritolion (talk) 05:51, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your revision! Do you believe my edit has merit with this quote from the study in the reference, instead?

Seven out of the total sample of 32 women (7/32; 22 % of participants) described situations where the anal intercourse occurred without the woman’s explicit consent. In some of these cases, the man simply initiated anal intercourse

If not, I will not bother trying to reinstate my contribution. However, I do think the date rape article needs some mentioning of the fact that rape CAN, and regrettably too often DOES evolve out of previously consensual sexual activity. Although I didn't read it with much scrutiny, it seems to resonate with the rapey cultural notion that consent to one act is consent to ALL acts.

Cheers! Hunan201p (talk) 15:00, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

WP:MEDHOW

Explains how to format references. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:36, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Crip

Thank you for your edit to the disambiguation page Crip. However, please note that disambiguation pages are not articles; rather, they are meant to help readers find a specific article quickly and easily. From the disambiguation dos and don'ts, you should:

• Only list articles that readers might reasonably be looking for
• Use short sentence fragment descriptions, with no punctuation at the end
• Use exactly one navigable link ("blue link") in each entry
  • Only add a "red link" if used in existing articles, and include a "blue link" to an appropriate article
• Do not pipe links (unless style requires it) – keep the full title of the article visible
• Do not insert external links or references

Thank you.

I couldn't find any mention of Crank reference index position or CRIP in Crankshaft position sensor. Leschnei (talk) 14:22, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

April 2019

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Jingiby (talk) 19:52, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

incel

Best wishes

I shouldn’t be delving into an article that seems to have had its major decisions made, yet increasing use of sources inappropriate for subject matter, and using them to say things they don’t say, affects quality on Wikipedia, a reference Google displays as authoritative. And it’s not just social issues coming to fore in the Trump era; a look at section “210Po content in the body of Litvinenko” in the article “Poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko” reveals a completely anonymous web page cited to estimate the lethal dose of this substance. I dunno. Wikipedia is valuable, offering enormous breadth of coverage and some excellent article series (e.g. historical presidential elections, planets in the solar system), but no crowdsourced encyclopedia written under screen names will ever be authoritative. Britannica names, pays and credentials its contributors; that’s why it’s pricey. Jessegalebaker (talk) 01:16, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Alpine race

Hi. I have reverted an edit of yours on this article, and would like to remind you about WP:BRD. When your Bold edit has been Reverted by another editor, the recommended next step, if you continue to think the edit is necessary, is to Discuss the dispute on the article talk page with other editors, but not to re-revert it, which is the first step to edit warring, a disruptive activity which is not allowed. Discussion on the talk page is the only way we have of reaching consensus, which is central to resolving editing disputes in an amicable and collegial manner, which is why communicating your concerns to your fellow editors is essential. While the discussion is going on, the article generally should remain in the status quo ante until the consensus as to what to do is reached (see WP:STATUSQUO). Beyond My Ken (talk) 06:19, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Subject 13 (musician)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Subject 13 (musician) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Cahk (talk) 09:00, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

Genetics

Hi Hunan201p. You're quite outspoken in your comments (which trigger responses by me), but your edits seem to be quite solid. So, forgive me if I respond to quickly; I do take notic eof your concerns and comments. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 08:09, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Explain to me on the talk page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Turkmens

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hazaras

I want to understand you real reason for removing their Y-DNA haplogroup data. Explain the reasons and we may have agreements with eachother.

September 2019

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Turkmens; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Wario-Man (talk) 12:15, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

ANI notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. 2601:188:180:B8E0:B92C:1498:D9F0:79A1 (talk) 02:20, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

WP:Dead link and WP:SOURCEACCESS

Hi, Hunan201p. I reverted you on this per what WP:Dead link and WP:SOURCEACCESS state. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:31, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

Also keep in mind that a URL is not needed to cite the Encyclopaedia of Islam source. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:35, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

I will go ahead and re-remove that warhistoryonline.com source, though. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 12:37, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

Hello, I'm Iryna Harpy. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus', but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. It's one thing to remove content with a citation query next to it, but to replace it with an unsourced assertion (i.e., add material not backed by any reliable sources) is another thing altogether.

If you have queries and reliable references to back up the material you're trying to insert, take it to the talk page of the article in question and begin a discussion. Thank you. Iryna Harpy (talk) 00:39, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

Ancient North Eurasian

The fringe guy is back. Note he uses a 1999 source claiming Haplogroup X and ignores the fact that Kennewick Man makes it clear that he didn't have X and that a 2015 source found that"Kennewick Man is closer to modern Native Americans than to any other population worldwide." And again unsourced material about blonde hair. Doug Weller talk 06:28, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Beshogur (talk) 10:31, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Descent from Genghis Khan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Haplogroup Q (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:15, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Beshogur (talk) 17:42, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Beshogur (talk) 21:02, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Genghis Khan

Hi--I am about to look into that edit and the sourcing: thank you for leaving detailed edit summaries. Drmies (talk) 16:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Beshogur (talk) 18:02, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Hunan201, you double standard edit

I've included your info and the info that have been edited for a long time. Don't just remove DNA research of family tree of Genghis Khan and cherry-pick only the data on 2017 Chinese research.

Please form a consensus among users before making drastic changes to an article

Instead of deleting information, it would be more helpful and less contentious to add more tags, like [citation needed], [clarification needed], or [better source needed] before deleting info. Please remember to use to the talk page before making contentious edits as well. --Leppaberry-123 (talk) 05:11, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. Questionable or faulty interpretations of controversial subjects (esp. with regards to race or human origins) should be deleted. Multiple consensus have been reached on this matter. - Hunan201p (talk) 10:43, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

You keep citing WP:SCIRS to justify your editing behavior, but as the article states (WP:SCIRS):

"This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors. This page is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints."

You cannot use (WP:SCIRS) to justify your recurring behavior of making contentious/bold edits before coming finding consensus on an article's talk page. This is in accordance to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

--Leppaberry-123 (talk) 21:00, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mongoloid; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
There's been a lot of back and forth on this page:

• Nov. 6
• Nov. 25
• Dec. 8
• Dec. 10
• Dec. 10
• Dec. 11
• Jan. 9
• Jan. 10
• Jan. 11
• Jan. 11
• Jan. 11

This needs to stop.

EvergreenFir (talk) 22:10, 11 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  User:Ymblanter (talk) 21:23, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

I blocked you and your opponent for a week from editing Turkmens for persistent edit-warring at that article. You may edit other Wikipedia pages.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:40, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you.---Hunan201p (talk) 19:41, 26 January 2020 (UTC)