I don't know about alot of admin type issues but figure since youre a veteran, you might. What to do about this kinda stuff(guangxi check history]])? I already reverted it because I assume this is vandalism by user:139.76.128.71 but am not sure if thats the correct response. Your wisdom and guidance on things wiki... especially Chinese, is appreciated. Mike 02:32, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Celestianpowerháblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
May I know why you found it necessary to make this edit regarding Samuel Luo's profession? -- МиборовскийU|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 01:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Because that's how he has presented himself in various instances. [1] Also, I think it was peculiar to find this out, because Samuel Luo was the speaker who was scheduled for the "academic conference on cults" (or whatever words Tomananda used) in Madrid. We see here a person with no professional education trying to take hold of the definitional power in different venues, who doesn't seem to know the essential things about quoting sources truthfully, yet frequently acts as if he had become the new owner of the FLG article. And he hasn't changed anything in his "True Nature of Falun Gong" in spite of conclusive arguments that prove certain allegations wrong. (Such as Master Li's personal intervention being the only way to remove any karma at all.) With all said and done, he is a massage therapist on a personal crusade. What is so questionable about pointing it out? ---Olaf Stephanos 10:45, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
I know that Wikipedia doesn't discriminate people based on their academic background. But you asked whether I have a degree. Actually, I am a Bachelor of Religious Studies with highest overall marks (titularly Comparative Religion, which in Europe is basically the same thing, including studies from sociology, psychology, anthropology, phenomenology and philosophy of religion). Now I'm doing my Master of Arts for cultural history, because I changed my major subject, thanks to the flexibility of the European university structure. You should understand that I sometimes get slightly frustrated when these crusaders seem to lack any professionality. I am mostly concerned about amateurish criticism of sources, improper quoting and inability to provide conclusive data to support debatable editions upon request. Besides, cultural and religious studies are also a branch of science, and serious articles shouldn't turn into a playground for little partisans to lay down their slapdash definitions. ---Olaf Stephanos 23:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Hiya, I don't have the book now. I have to get it through interlibrary loan again, and that's gonna take some weeks :(. I think you can submit it for FAC now because the detail is really too detailed, as most sources still refer to the league of nations conference rather than the nine-power treaty. So technically we can still have it in and it's not a big deal. I took a look at the reference section, and I think the better to also list the publisher, place, and date in MLA format, with ISBN number if possible. I did that here and it looks okay. BTW, I checked out the last external link on the Sihang page, where it has some photos of the warehouse today. I can't believe what I see. The warehouse looks like some sort of a shopping mall, with a much bigger sign of a bowling ball alley right above the sign of the warehouse. The warehouse should be a freakin' memorial. It's another prime example of the sad state of WWII remembrance in China. It's just sad. I wish China was more like America and Europe, where there's respect for the war dead. BlueShirts 00:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Greetings. I have blocked User:70.33.75.9 again for personal attacks, this time for 48 hrs. We'll have to keep an eye out for socks. --Fire Star 01:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, he'll get a week next time! You answered him well, and I could tolerate remarks about me, I mostly missed them at first, and when I did see them I was disposed to ignore him. Why assume good faith when he is blatantly declaring bad faith? I happened to be watching when he went after Tomananda, though, so I put my foot down. Cheers, --Fire Star 04:11, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
Hello again. Our friend came back from 71.106.174.113 for some more vandalism and attempts at intimidation, so I gave both IPs a month block. I don't like blocking anon IPs indefinitely, but I was tempted... --Fire Star 01:42, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your suggestion about usurping the usernameedit
I applied for it, but until now no feedback yet, perhaps the admin has not noticed it.^_* ——Nussknacker胡桃夹子^.^tell me... 16:28, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
While I appreciate your sentiment, I think you need to follow your own advice and "assume good faith" rather than post such comments to my page. You apparently didn't bother checking out the history or you would have seen that it was clearly a "warnable" offense. They guy was way out of line, and was only intent on posting blatantly POV material that was not acceptable in the least. Please be more cautious in the future when "warning" someone that you think they are out of line. Nothing I did in that instance was out of line. --日本穣 Nihonjoe 22:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Sigh. Typical. -- МиборовскийU|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 01:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
If you think I'm incorrect here, please explain how. Did you look at the history? If you do, you'll see that this wasn't an isolated incident, but rather a string of consistent POV vandalism. Your comments here hardly "assume good faith" as you like to preach. Your comments were incorrect as far as I can tell, as the history on that article clearly shows the repeated POV vandalism by the anon IPs. --日本穣 Nihonjoe 03:02, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Why should I assume good faith when you are automatically assuming bad faith from me? When I reminded you (in all sincerity and out of WikiLove for a fellow editor) that it is wrong to label POV insertions as "vandalism", you and your friend bit back as if I am your mortal enemy. Well, I was not, and fortunately I have enough self-respect not to lower to your level to become one. If you would consider this closed, so be it. Your mind is made up on "POV vandalism" and I'd only be wasting my breath talking to you. -- МиборовскийU|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 04:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Hey, I have no control over what others post on my talk page. I didn't ask for him to comment, but I'm not about to prevent him from commenting however he sees fit. As for automatically assuming bad faith, that's the way I perceived your comments as well (including your comments just above that appear to show that you perceive yourself as being better than me (that whole "I have enough self-respect not to lower to your level" bit). While I agree that one POV edit is not vandalism, multiple POV edits (or reverts) IS considered vandalism, especially on an issue that's been extensively discussed and debated on the various related talk pages. This was explained to that editor, but s/he still insisted on inserting the blatantly POV material into a hotly debated topic, and continued until warned to stop. If you perceived my comments as painting you as my "mortal enemy", I apologize as that was not my intent. All I'm asking is that you show the same respect to me that you would want shown to you. --日本穣 Nihonjoe 05:09, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Would you not agree that my first message to you is of a decidely different tone than the others? There you have it. I respect everybody equally until something happens and takes away that respect. -- МиборовскийU|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 07:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm going to say that my reading of it was likely colored by the response Ned (I think it was Ned...) posted, so that's possible. It's hard to go back and read it in an unbiased manner now that all this excitement has happened. Either way, I'll apologize again for any perceived rudeness, as I didn't intend to be rude in my response. Hopefully we can just put this behind us and work together in the future. (^_^) If you're interested, feel free to join WikiProject Japan. You've made quite a few edits to various Japan-related articles, and we'd be glad to have your support for the project. (^_^) --日本穣 Nihonjoe 19:11, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
We'll be glad of the help regardless of where you are from as long as you're good at maintaining an NPOV. Feel free to join us if you wish. We don't have any restrictions based on nationality. (^_^) --日本穣 Nihonjoe 18:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
LOL I just came across your comments here in the Students Sketchpad. It's a small world, eh? The entire thing is hilarious, I'm glad we students seem to take it so lightly too. Just curious though, is familiarity with "Mao Zedong" thought in either the Chinese High School (or some other SAP school) common? Elle vécut heureuseà jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 06:33, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
The best thing is that it is creative commons and free for commercial use, but it's noderivs, though. I think we can use it to illustrate a few concepts?Elle vécut heureuseà jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 16:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
So the entire band conspired to play Soviet sheet music? Whose idea was it anyway? See, that would never happen in the other schools. :p Also, apparently I just found he advertised in Archive E of his talkpages. Image:Pagee.jpg is shown there. To think it slipped under my nose! Elle vécut heureuseà jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 22:18, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
LOL...Mmmm...I thought it'd probably be just another (probably) NN comic? =P Small world indeed, my fellow cartoonist and I just thought we just wanted to rant a bit about the education system in Singapore and have some fun in digital art. ;) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 18:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue IIedit
The April 2006 issue of the project newsletter is now out. You may read this issue or change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you by following the link. Thanks. Kirill Lokshin 18:49, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
Operation August Storm palyed a much bigger part for china then the droping of the atmoic bombs, and the Japanese left on chinese soil were either dead or caputred. You fail to understand that in less then 11 days the Soviets hade destroyed the whole Japanese army In china and Korea. And this ment that if they could lose 1.1 million men in less then 2 weeks then the 2.3 million they hade on the home islands had no chans in hell to win against the Soviets. And the loseing of Manchuria togheter with the atmoic bombs convinced the Japanese that surrender was the only option. You can read more about it here http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/glantz3/glantz3.asp it is an american military study of the Soviet campagin and when the Soviet army totally and absolutely crushed the whole Japanese army in China in less then 11 days (Deng 19:02, 3 May 2006 (UTC))
Hi, Miborovsky, I need your help. A discussion at talk page Chinese characters lead to nowhere. The contributor, Yau, seemingly in his early teens or less, does not stick to Wikipedia conventions - adding comments to the top of the page, not the bottom, axing lots of data from the lead page, ignoring my comments that his English is not good enough to rewrite extensively the article. Also, he simply deleted away my comments from his personal talk page. Seems like he's not interested. Can you: 1) tell him that I'm using Wikipedia conventions; 2) convince him that simply deleting everybody's input is not the way to do things here? As an admin, you have more authority to do that. Thanks in advance. Mandel 11:24, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
There's some development on this matter, and I thought it would be best to refer it to you given that you have previous dealing with the article before. One of them requests for assistance in helping him to improve on his contributions and inclusion. See mine, Mandel's and Yau's user talkpage, and Talk:Chinese character for some context. Please accept my apologies for having to trouble you for this, whilst I have other backlogs to clear in the meantime and unable to assist further. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 18:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I better offer some background on this. User Yau is not a rogue editor, though he is not experienced enough in the English wiki. But I can't talk with him, both because I don't have the time, and because he is assuming bad faith on my part. Never mind. His input is a mixture of good and bad; i reverted them partly since he did not follow conventions to discuss before editing extensively. Good things: the chart maybe, and one or two spam links he removed. Bad things: English is not native-level enough. See what you can do about that. Mandel 18:52, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi Miborovsky, I'm working on revising the entry for chinese characters. I've finished the History, Lead, and Formation, and is planning to revise the rest later. But we're having a content dispute now. As you're familar with both Chinese and English, could you come and help us. To Mandel, I think i've made enough replies on the questions you raised in many different pages. Please check it in the talk page of Chinese characters. Thanks. --Yau 20:00, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Congratulations! Yet another featured article under your belt! (Maybe I'll get a chance to do some article writing too at some point soon; I've really been slacking off on actually adding new content. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 03:36, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
The Administrator Coaching program is a program aimed at preparing Wikipedians for Adminship or helping them understand the intricacies of Wikipedia better. Recently, changes have been made to the requirements of coachees. Please review them before requesting this service.
This would be something like the Welcoming Committee, but for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. Some might like suggestions about how to learn vandal patrol, or mentoring on taking an article to featured status, or guidance with a proposal they plan to make at the Village Pump, for example. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins.
The Stressbusters are a subset of Esperanza aiming to investigate the causes of stress. New eyes on the situation are always welcome!
Note from the editor
As always, MiszaBot handled this delivery. Thank you! Also, congratulations go to Pschemp, Titoxd and Freakofnurture for being elected in the last elections! An Esperanzial May to all of the readership!
Posting logs of the Esperanza IRC channel are explicitly banned anywhere. Violation of this rule results in deletion and a ban from the channel.
A disclaimer is going to be added to the Esperanza main page. We are humans and, as such, are imperfect.
Various revisions have been made to the Code of Conduct. Please see them, as the proposal is ready to be ratified by the community and enacted. All members will members to have to re-confirm their membership after accepting the Code of Conduct.
Referendums are to be held on whether terms of AC members should be lengthened and whether we should abolish votes full stop.
I'm concerned about an article that has a reference that is decidedly sexist, and was looking for someone to help mediate the dispute. Talk:.380_ACP This is the talk page in question.
The comment was not sexist. Pointing out that Women and Men are physically different and have different needs in a weapon is reality, not sexism.--Asams10 05:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
It is sexist when there is no need for the article to retain the word "women" when those of smaller frame are easily referenced by the rest of the sentence, some women fall into that category, and there the generalization needs to stop. Anything else is blatently sexist, whether there are specific markets or not. Making generalizations on size is not NPOV. You (Asams10) also did not mention men specifically, although many men are of smaller stature as well. GameJunkieJim 15:23, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
I would like to note that he has filed some sort of action against me. Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/GameJunkieJim I believe this was motivated by my asking for your moderation, as he seems to have latched onto something I said and taken it way out of context. Again I appreciate your stopping by. GameJunkieJim 19:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your participation in all the events. GameJunkieJim 15:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Hello, we have decided to notice all of you at the eleventh hour. Today its Chat Day and its where SGpedians' go to and have a casual off-topic chat. It is held at our very own Singapore IRC Channel from 2000 (SST) to late. Do come to the channel if you have the time and it is greatly appreciated that you turn up at the channel. --Terence Ong 11:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Just for kicks (that I've used off-Wikipedia already just once) I created Image:KMTCPC flag.PNG. It probably can be improved, because I used the original low resolution flag (since I liked that shade of blue better), and when I was copying over the hammer and sickle there were some things at the border that I removed crudely with the pencil tool, so it might look a bit rough.
Anyway, I wanted to combine both concepts since I liked the Kuomintang when Sun Yat-Sen was still alive , so it kind of reflects my sentiments. I probably could create a userbox out of it, or some kind of user page material, or it could be improved by combining other elements, but perhaps you have some ideas or your own uses too? ;-)
Anyway, interested to see your reaction!
P.S. I have a concept in mind for writing an entry about the Chinese Civil War on Uncyclopedia (probably in game form if you've seen the entries), so I'm wondering if you have any ideas...?
Yes, unfortunately, I think it might be necessary. He's simply ignoring comments on this talk pages, and reverting 3/4 times a day, and keeps on using different sock puppets and ip addresses to do it with. --Yuje 01:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Do you mind protecting the non-POVed versions of the page? Unfortunately, the current protected version seems to the the ones saying "Manchuris ia Japanese lie". --Yuje 01:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Looks like there's a couple I missed: Shenyang, Harbin, and Dalian. He's deleted sections from two of them, and deleted the Russian from Harbin. --Yuje 02:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Ok, thanks again. Hopefully, he'll be willing to talk instead of revert now. --Yuje 02:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I can't seem to find too much information on the subject. In particular, I remember seeing a comment about how 50-60% of the Ming Army had firearms, but how large was the active deployment anyway? Were they irregular forces? Also, military recruitment is a rather amazing military science in my opinion — I am particular interested in the context of military history. The New Armies probably didn't have over a 100,000 troops before the Wuchang Uprising, but 26 years later one finds the resistance force against the Japanese includes 5 million troops. That's a 50-fold increase in strength over just about a quarter of a century! Now, what was the strength of the rest of the Qing armies though? Were they adapted in? Also, the state of equipment seems to be obscure, when I was educated in the US (where I lived for a few years mainly for elementary education), somehow my (rather bigoted, from a retrospective standpoint) teachers gave me the impression that the majority of the Qing forces fought without firearms during the Opium Wars, that this was the reason for defeat, etc. Anyhow, I opened up the scope at military recruitment, a bit of an OR addition there, but I thought it was needed to get the ball rolling. Perhaps the WikiProject could work on this? Elle vécut heureuseà jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 03:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
I would be glad to contribute to such a taskforce. I am thinking that this task force needs maybe 10 or more people to sustain itself. Chinese military history is also a huge topic, and dynastical organization is obviously needed. Olorin28 03:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I got your message, I dont know if I am really "good" enough to contrabute good quality... I mean after all... Wikipedia consider ALL Eurocentric views as Neutral point of view... I only know a bit and pieces about Chinese military... the modern army is already covered (from 1900-2006)... even though I still think these article still give a bit of unfair view about the Chinese army (for example, portrayed as either having their ass handed or being too inhuman). Anyways I still know a bit about ancient Chinese military... Thanks for contacting me (User:Hanchi)
Hiya, you can put my name down but from now to mid-summer I think I probably won't have time for much writing. And I'd say the Second Sino-Japanese War article at best is really an extended start class article. It needs more organization instead of tidbits here and there. That's why I've started and wrote some of the background information necessary to understand why the war was fought in the first place. BlueShirts 19:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
Okey then, I will do my best. Mind you most of it is usually "stories" I heard not exact "data" information like what type of weapons they used or tactics.
(User:Hanchi)
Thanks for your message. I would be glad to contribute, but I don't know so much to be an active participant....I'll try though, as there is much to be done. (For example, a few of articles on ancient Chinese battles have only one sentence, grr) deadkid_dk 04:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
My suggestion to begin this project is that we take a look into two articles I got in mind that give Chinese army a bit of unfair view in my opinion. They are Battle of Chosin Reservoir in which the article seems to focus more on the Allied side (While making the Chinese and North Korean army a group of cannon fodder, do any of you have relatives or someone you known who fought in this battle for the opposite side?). The other article that really need a cleaning up to meet the so called "Wikipedia Standard" is Chinese armies in the Second Sino-Japanese War if we can improve this article, at least we will give the National Chinese (well and Communist) a justice for at least showing that Chinese wasnt a punching bag and that they managed to defeat Japanese Army numerou times. (User:Hanchi)
So happy to receive your message. I'm in and I will try my best! I'm afraid I won't be active in Wikipedia until the summer vacation. But from then on, I will contribute whatever I can. Thanks again. Anthony Gao 14:52, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
I did a rough writing of Tunnel war still need more work to do it... Just making a first edition as a template. Got writers block at the moment.
However, I need to put in more detail work on what type of resistance used it.
Was it only Japanese and Kuomingtang they used against?
Hehehe, I'm surprised to hear that! There isn't really anyone specific when we drew the two characters (at least for me), just "generic" faces. For gssq, he's Gabriel Seah aka Agagooga (probably best known at one time for the Dawn Yang fisaco, and numberous times on The Straits Times), and it's someone from my fellow cartoonist (En's) side. :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 05:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
You'll be interested in this, then! :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 05:34, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Probably just a matter of time. But this is all fiction anyway. Btw, you spot the link between the three links I gave you? ;) - Mailer Diablo 07:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
The entry was indeed based on the movie. - Mailer Diablo 07:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
...for your birthday well-wishes! That was very much appreciated.
Mailer Diablo has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!
role of the private military in Chinese historyedit
This is mainly foscued in Republican China, but probably can be expanded in scope too...I notice "private military contractor" exists, but the greater concept of "private mlitary" does not. Most of the warlords claimed political legitimacy in some form (ie. they were president of this, governor of that) and thus claimed a right to provincial conscription, but I imagine the exceedingly wealthy could also purchase their own armies, effectively militarising their triads onto the political scene? I mean, would there be situations where secret society boss decides to move away from gangland turf wars and simply buy a massive private army instead? (Beiyang Army seems to have been privately trained but Qing-endorsed, so it's sort of semi-private). Of course, this may be a sentiment watching too many wuxia type dramas set in the 1930s, I don't recall but I remember watching when much younger a particular show about a mob boss who somehow seems to either be (from retrospect, I never thought that far at the time) a colloborationist with the Japanese, or whose "kill him!" orders were no longer carried out by clandestine drive-by shooting with the practice of Omerta, but an overt use of uniformed soldiers. Anyhow, I get the impression that many of the more famous warlords in China seems to have been remnants of the Qing administration, or the Tongmenghui, or whatever, or somehow holding political clout, but I notice some warlords' powers get passed on to their descendants, which would imply a more private relationship than a "appointed to a provincial post" type. Elle vécut heureuseà jamais (Be eudaimonic!) 20:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
"23:57, 24 May 2006 Yueyuen (anyone compares these two version can see that. You should talk with others before making big changes, I am not the only one complaining, check your mail box)"
My mail box then has a message from Samuel Luo.
"Please show some respect for other editors by discussing the changes you want to make before making them, thanks --Samuel Luo 00:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)"
I request you to do an investigation on this if you could check the IP address if we could assume Samuel Luo does not have two IPs. Thanks. Fnhddzs 00:34, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
You seem to have a habit of stepping in and following up on stuff I start on Falun Gong. Thank you :) CovenantD 01:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I understand anybody can see my mailbox. I smelled this person is suspicious since s/he always accompanies with somebody as a shadow. His name is very similar with some editor Yenchin. So he has an impression about that name. Fnhddzs 01:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
It may sound hard to believe but there are editors who want to conceal the truth of the terrible and inhumane atrocities happening in China.. Pls think about it...the more we delay bringing the truth to the world more families are devastated and more people die.. then, arent we responsible for all that heart-wrenching suffering ?... we must be true to our own conscience.. CCP and China are not the same thing.. when millions of Chinese are losing their lives, being tortured to death.. how could we, with a good conscience, keep holding back the truth from the public? if we do that, then arent we part of the crime?
Dilip rajeev 02:00, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
State clearly that is protected. Thanks. You should not protect the page before people request for it. You are warned to abuse your right as an admin. Fnhddzs 02:23, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I do think it is an etiquette to put a protected mark when you lock the page. Fnhddzs 02:45, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Exactly which right am I abusing? Oh shit, I forgot to put a {{protected}} tag on the article after stopping an edit war. I'm a sinner and must go to Falun Gong hell. Shoot me! -- МиборовскийU|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai! 04:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for putting the mark! Miborovsky. No, I definitely wish you are blessed. Wish all of us be blessed by earnest edits. Fnhddzs 07:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Military history WikiProject Newsletter - Issue III - May 2006edit
The various talk page banners used by the project have been consolidated into the main {{WPMILHIST}} template, which now adds extra notices based on various parameters. The older templates are currently in the process of being replaced.
The old manually-maintained worklist has been replaced with a new system that allows article ratings to be provided directly on the associated talk pages, feeding an automatically generated list. Nearly two thousand articles have already been assessed, and many more still need a rating!
A new structure for the list of project members has been introduced; to save space and improve legibility, any member with no edits for at least three months will be moved to a separate list of inactive members.
Current proposals and discussions
Discussions about categories for military people are ongoing, with a number of points regarding naming and structure still needing to be resolved. Additional input from all project members would be extremely welcome!
Dilip and Fnhddzs have just attacked the Falun Gong Criticism pageedit
Miborovsky, I just discovered that while we have been discussing issues such as sources on the main Falun Gong discussion page, Dilip and Fnhddzs have engaged in a series of edits from 6:28 to 7:17 on 28 May, deleting material without any discussion or consensus. I request that you freeze this page. --Tomananda 20:45, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
hi, i noticed that in introducing 'water margin characters' template to the 108 heroes, the 'category:water margin' was deleted. i raise this because that category incorporates not only the 108 heroes but also other characters in the novel. if you will, let me know what you think about that on my user talk page. thanks Chensiyuan 03:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Are you familiar with Huyuan Zan? I've been looking for information on this subject for several months without much success. The closest I came was Hu Yan Zan. I've been trying to fix the red link in Huyuan Zhuo, but I have yet to make any progress... --Folajimi 03:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the timely reply; it is greatly appreciated. Any suggestions on who may be able to help me with translating the resource you sent me? --Folajimi 04:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Is there anything I can do about the symbols? I suspect it has something to do with my browser, but I am unable to ascertain that at this point. --Folajimi 04:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
The translation is absolutely brutal! :( There is no rush to translating the document; is this something you'd be willing to help with at some point in the near future? --Folajimi 04:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I'm using Linux. :P --Folajimi 10:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi, a fortnight has passed, and I was wondering if you are available to help with the document now. Please leave me a note at your convenience if this is the case. Cheers Folajimi 01:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Many thanks for making this happen. I really appreciate it. In fact, if there is anything you need me to help you with, let me know. I owe you one. Big. Cheers, --Folajimi 22:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I was meant to do this a while ago (pass around the smile) but I couldn't be bothered. Then I visited your userpage and read the Capitalist Party of China stuff and I found it quite interesting. I was thinking of doing something similar on my userpage (perhaps not as controversial though).
Nobleeagle (Talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk pages. Happy editing!
I started The Wikipedia Conspiracy although its nowhere near as controversial as the Indo-Pak conflict, I hope to make it a reasonable article in time. Although purely an advent of my own imagination. Nobleeagle (Talk) 00:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Dilip rajeev who has been editing on the Falun Gong article just violated the 3RR rule again. His 4th revert is at this time 19:47, 3 June 2006. If you are serious about enforcing the 3RR rule, you need to block him for 24 hours. Dilip has been warned many times and his recent edit was again done without a consensus. --Samuel Luo 20:47, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Hi thanks for the response, someone already blocked him for 12 hours. --Samuel Luo 01:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
When you reverted vandalism here [[3]], you also deleted some wikilinks that had been included after the vandalism occurred. I just thought I'd inform you. I have re-inserted a couple of the links you reverted.--الأهواز 10:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
Would you block this persistent vandal? He's been hitting user pages and the Falun Gong talk page. It has contributed nothing except insults and seems targeted against people who may be critical of Falun Gong. CovenantD 15:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
How do you do, Miborovsky Xian sheng. I'll get to business quickly and then speak of less interesting affairs. In all probability you are not aware of my existence, but there is a chance that you might have seen some of my ridiculously long and generally uncontributive posts on the Mao Zedong article, under the name Luthinya. All I wish to state is that, despite my general moronic attitude, I have a great and somewhat profound interest in this immensely convoluted character, with whose details I have only become recently acquainted with through more extensive research through the Western world. Although I am generally a rather muddled explainer, you might have some idea of my interests further in the posts I have made, even if it does tend to form the idea that they are written by someone whose IQ is falling every second.
Even so, I wonder if you would be able to favour me with a post concerning your own knowledge of Mao- the more the better (ho ho ho)- and any comments with which you are patient enough to inscribe. It shall be of the greatest aid to an essay which I am still labouring away upon concerning an analysis of the lives, politicial dedications and any such parallelity as I am able to discover upon famous modern "dictators" (if you can call them that...), and such as may be inferred from these analyses, which may still prove to be varied. The reason I ask you this- among 2 others beside- are mostly due to what I have read upon your posts and the information on your user page, before which I am bound to say that I am bowed over. Hopefully this opportunity may not be lost, and I may soon find what I sought to mutual advantage.
I am exceptionally impressed (patronising?) by the Wen Yan Wen text which you wrote on your user page. By G-d, the Chinese was absolutely superb! I doubt that I myself may do so much, even though I am a native, and the system of writing to which I have been introduced to was only Bai Hua Wen. Just so you are interested, although your Chinese was certainly far from modern, it was still not classical in the strictest sense as it takes for Chinese, but rather presented in a rather more interesting and formal way if anything else. True classical Chinese technically apply to writings in the style of Confucius and Lao Zi, though because of the printing press the linguistic developments have been dramatically slowed. They possess a certain elusive elegance for which it is very hard to be otherwise aware.
All the same I will say it again: I am bowed over. Never since a long age have I been so impressed, not since I did Calculus, and modern physics, I think. I present here a great deal of respect, and am inclined to change your username to Yan Zi. Luthinya 11:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
PS I'll be interested in anything you might know about the Chinese Capitalist Party as well. Surely the CCP only acknowledges one-party rule and would prevent any other form of political emergence to appear, least of all a capitalist party? Maybe I've been brainwashed, and trust me I know what it's like, but I have frankly never heard of the Party at all! -[Luthinya]
I was wondering if you might please adjust your signature to conform to the guidelines laid out at WP:SIG. Your signature is too long (in Wiki source) and overwhelms actual comments in edit mode, making it hard to respond to other comments. For instance, you have a link in your signature to an article – there's simply no need for this. Also, "E-mail this user" is done rarely enough that the link on your userpage should be sufficient and it shouldn't need a link in every signature you leave. Thanks for understanding. --Cyde↔Weys 15:20, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Need any help with "New 6th Army"? --Folajimi 22:58, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Very well. I'm on it then. I'll leave you a note as soon as I can produce a draft. At the moment, I am working on cleaning up a nasty AfD... --Folajimi 23:46, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
It's up. Let me know what you think. --Folajimi 01:48, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. However, there might be need for disambiguation in the future; it turns out that there was a German version as well... --Folajimi 12:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
P.S. What are "WikiProject Propaganda" and "WikiProject Zhonghua" supposed to be about? --Folajimi 12:23, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Does the phrase "Landmine War" ring a bell? Something I read a while ago seems to suggest that it was a movie. I was wondering if it was "based on a true story..." --Folajimi 17:59, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
When you get a chance, could you please blank my user page? Cheers. --Folajimi 18:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Miborovsky can you block this user 164.67.46.33? He has been vandalizing the FG article and even leaving hateful remarks in my mail box. --Samuel Luo 05:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
I would like to understand why my section
is constantly deleted.
I gave you a summary of a court case that
is currently pending that directly relates to the
Falun Gong cult. While I am not able to pull
the case directly, you can clearly see the
court calendar with my name. If you want, I
can fax you the court papers. After all, they
are also a matter of public record.
I even left the section open for their
respective cases since they have also filed
court cases. After all, that is only fair.
If this is not the definition of truth,
then I don't know what is.
Aditionally, I find myself unable to edit
the talk page.
Dude, I support a website with tens of
thousands of users in a 24x7x365 environment.
While I am not familiar with "wiki", I know
what I am doing. There should be no "tricks"
to editing an html page.
Lastly, I use my name just like Sam Lou.
Who the hell is f???? ?
Thanks
Chris
PS When the case does go to court in a few weeks,
the falun gong will be toasted in a completely
legal manner. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cj cawley (talk • contribs)
Falun Gong, again... but a suggestion for a solutionedit
Hi Miborovsky,
Since i could not figure out how to edit the Falun Gong Talk page, i wanted to ask if you could put the following in there for me.
(I assure you that even though i just recantly created an account on wikipedia.com i have no interest in voicing my personal opinion regarding Falun Gong, and that I just want to do what the founder of Wikipedia once suggested to me).
Here is my suggestion, please put it in the talk page for me and ignore the bad spelling... (english is not my native language) :
"Falun Gong practitioners as well as Communist Party supporters, each have there own websites on which they each have allready extensivly stated their point of view. So why is there so much conflict, and discussion and no consent?
Because each party wants to see the content of their websites in the wikipedia article.
And why is that so important to them even though it allready is on their respective sites?
Because they think if they are able to get their stuff in the wikipedia article, people will be more likely to belive them if they see their point of view in an "independent encyclopedia entry". So this is the actuall cause of the entire despute. But I think it's pretty stupid, because there is one very simple way to solve this, and make it less interesting for both parties to vandalize the article. I suggest that the first thing we do is to remind the viewers at the top of the article that everbody can edit wikipedia, and that there is no independent staff or team of experts, and that supporters of Falun Gong as well as supporters of the Communist Party are frequently changing the article, and therefore on this subject wikipedia might very likely not be NPOV, and is as credible as something writen with chalk on the sidewalk.
(Actually as i understand it Wikipeda being like Chalk on the side walk is basicly the reason why Larry Sanger left it :-)
Okay, putting it that way might be putting Wikipedia down a bit, but the comparison is not all that wrong, and many people don't realize this.
But most importantly it will end those sensless debattes and endless edit-wars.
I am sure that if we don't put something like that in the article, we can continue to debate for another 5 years and still won't be able to get to any consent.
Well, it is kind of hard to pin down, because all I can really give you is my personal theory on the subject, even though it is based on what I was taught. IME, each school has its own "proprietary" approach, based on a combination of cultural metaphors as well as individual experience more than agreement on one coherent system. Some schools look at the energy body and physical body each as having two separate triple burners, some qualify the dantian as the seat of the triple burner, others qualify the dantian as just one ingredient of the triple burner. Some people say it is the three sections of the torso, others that it is a certain meridian associated with the third eye, or the liver, the lungs, you name it. There are thousands and thousands of different theories...
The pericardium actually is a physical structure, the network of collateral circulatory vessels that surround the heart. Internal medicine doctors spend a lot of time monitoring and studying the balance of fluid pressures, electrolyte charges and dissolved gas concentrations, for example, in the tissues ansd fluids circulating between the heart, pericardium and respiratory structures. Where my experience of it as a part of zang-fu is that it and the heart balance each other out energetically, one encloses and supports the other.
The heart beating, like breathing and to a lesser extent peristalsis, is an involuntary function. The wiring to keep them both constantly working is very powerful relative to other functions. They are always "on" in other words. The theory is, that if things are working well, this powerful wiring also contributes to other functions. Martial artists work to coordinate physical motions and leverages to work as closely in harmony with those relentless cycles of respiration and circulation as possible, thereby being able to use some of the energy from these primal circuits for other purposes, too (not as easy as it sounds). For most people, due to unrepaired stress damage (whatever the cause of stress may be, everyone experiences some stress every day) some systems get weakened, or their ability to coordinate with the primary systems is lessened. When someone is healthy, either due to youth or good training, all of the systems, yin and yang organs, muscles, blood, bones, spirit (shen), qi, etc. work as one system, not an assemblage of discrete entities. The "uncarved block" of Laozi.
I see the triple burner as a metaphor for this homeostasis, when it is said to be strong that means the metabolic processes of breathed oxygen getting to and burning food in the cells producing raw heat energy that is refined into jing and qi (and jing into qi) and distributed from the kidneys to the rest of the body and in turn this distribution allows the efficient refining and distribution of our physical structures (protein, minerals) from the food being digested into the blood stream to the tissues where they are needed.
I hope this helps, it is sort of a shotgun approach. I don't completely understand it myself, and most of the above qualifies as "original research" to be sure, but I'm working on it. Feel free to ask any more questions, I may be able to craft a more coherent answer. Cheers! --Fire Star 火星 04:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, there is just no way to have a concise description, the entire thing is so subjective. This link [4] may be helpful.
As for the FLG page, there is a religious agenda to some of the editors, IMO, and they will do anything to promote their agenda: multiple reversions to the point of violating 3RR, misleading edit summaries, you name it. They aren't realistically discussing ther article because where they are at, they possess the sole truth of the universe and everyone else is a demonic heretic whose opinion can be ignored if they can't be converted to the "Fa". It is unfortunate, but I'm afraid all we can do is stick to it and block and ban them when enough policies are violated to justify it (which is why I'bve pulled way back in the editing of the article myself, just in case). In the past I've made requests for comment on the article for just this reason with no response. The mediation step is stalling, not through lack of good will from our mediator, but from obstinance on the part of the editors. The next step is arbitration, if we can interest an arbitrator... --Fire Star 火星 01:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Right... and because i was right that you have no bias against Falun Gong based on what the CCP says, but only on your personal observation of Falun Gong and are just a neutral administrator I was asking you to put my suggestion on the talk page. I changed it to CCP supporters. This way I don't think it will offend anyone.
Both Samuel and Fnhddzs have now reverted at least 4 times each. I'm requesting that an admin give both of them a short block. CovenantD 20:02, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
I would like to request that only registered users be hit with the 3RR rule. I don't know who Fnhddsz or CovenantD are. They could just be bots for all I know. I am going to keep reinserting my edits back in. Also, I can fax you the court papers if you like. Not everything is available on-line.
Cj cawley 18:44, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
And this user Cj cawley(talk·contribs·deleted contribs·nuke contribs·logs·filter log·block user·block log) just reverted for the fourth time, using the same IP address they used to first introduce the material on June 9. [5] They even put in the edit summary that they shouldn't get a 3RR vio because they're not using a registered account. This editor has been reverted by many different users, asked to provide evidence of the notability of their edits, and generally been invited to participate, all without any productive response. Please block them from the Falun Gong main page. CovenantD 20:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
