User talk:Yuje

Archives: A

Page move

I'm not sure you should move pages like Shanghai dialect to Shanghainese. I think the logic of "Shanghai dialect" is that it is either a dialect of the Chinese language or a dialect of Wu language. Thus "Shanghai dialect" is correct because it is definitely a dialect of something. - Nat Krause^(Talk!) 20:06, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Official full name of Hong Kong

Per [1], could you please help at talk:District Council of Hong Kong? Thanks very much. The same trouble has been around with many articles already. — Insta ntnood 08:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Page Protection

Maybe try talking to him before asking for protection? It's always better to work things out. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 23:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think protection is still necessary? -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 23:49, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I'll leave the reverting to your discretion. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 01:58, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, I'll leave that to your discretion, since it's semi-protection. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 01:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I protected Shenyang and Dalian. His edits on Harbin I think was not as disruptive and is of a different nature than his other edits. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 02:18, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dongbei report on AIV

Let's see if I can get this message in before I get an orange bar :)

I removed that report from AIV because it needs more investigation than a quick glance and then a block. A similar report is on WP:RFI- I will probably be the admin to look at that, but it takes time... If you can provide a few selected diffs to prove that it is vandalism (as defined here and not a dispute resolution that will speed things up. Cheers, Petros471 19:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RRV

You're already in breach of the three revert rule on the Hoisin sauce article. If you continue with such edits, you're be immediately blocked. Please take your concerns to the article talk page and try and reach a consensus version. RevolverOcelotX

I suggest you do the same, since you violated the 3RR rule first. Shall we agree to no more reverts for the time being until we're agreed or until we hear other people's views, then? --Yuje 11:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't you violate the 3RR rule first? But lets hear other people's views before reverting. RevolverOcelotX

Vandalism

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. RevolverOcelotX

Very well. Please, by all means, point out which material I've deleted from Wikipedia. As I seem to notice, you're the one insisting on deleting Vietnamese cuisine references, while I've been trying to restore them. Or does the accused not get informed of the charges brought against him? --Yuje 11:58, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted the Mandarin translation, "Mandarin Pinyin: hǎixiānjiàng", on the Hoisin sauce without any explanation or reaching consensus. RevolverOcelotX

I deleted nothing on Manchuria. And I was unaware I needed concensus on undisputed changes, since you seemed to be arguing that only prominent translations were necessary, I deleted the non-prominent ones. --Yuje 12:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, I consider it quite curious, that you regard my single deletion as vandalism (which I haven't challenged), but yet you keep on trying to push through your deletion of an entire section, and reverting any attempts to restore it. Are only other people's deletions to be regarded as vandalism and your own the holy truth then? If you're going to accuse me of vandalism, at least do so cleanly without being a hypocrite. --Yuje 12:46, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong, China

Please be informed there's currently a non-binding straw poll on whether an article specifically focuses on the designation (in other words, terminology) should exist, at talk:Hong Kong. — Insta ntnood 17:03, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Korean Chinese

The history info about Korean Chinese you added is inaccurate. Also Korean Chinese are not illegal immigrants. Stop adding misleading info. Fuck you bitch.

User:Krnc

We seem to have a mutual "friend" in User:Krnc ... I have been trying to get this user to stop deleting information on Tumen, Jilin with no success. It would be nice if the personal attacks on user pages would stop too. I've posted the npa2 template on the user's talk page per Wikipedia:Personal attack intervention noticeboard and a comment on Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts. I just wanted to make you aware of what was going on and to see if you have any other ideas for what to do. Unfortunately in the case of Tumen there are no other editors involved so I can't go to Wikipedia:Requests for comment, I don't know about your situation. CES 22:10, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cantonese People

Cantonese people when migrate from Guangdong province to Hongkong, they face considerably social discrimination, because they are perceived as noncitizens originating from a poorer social backgrounds. Why don't you add this to the Cantonese people article. That's what you should be familar with. What do you care for Koreans? Discrimination by Americans against Cantonese is a different issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krnc (talk • contribs)

The article you use is written by a nobody. It is not a published article. Besides it doesn't mention the discrimination issue. There ain't statistic conflict though. You can see <<中国朝鲜族历史研究>>延边大学出版社 1994, for more detail. You need to distinguish Korean Chinese from North Korean refugees.

Korean Chinese doesn't need to live in Yanbian to be recognized as one of the China's ethnic minority. Many other ethnic minorities in China don't have automonous regions. Manchu's Qing didn't rule Joseon Korea directly, not mention enslavement. The Japanese didn't migrate Koreans in the beging years of Manchukou. There were no identification system in China before 1958. It is quite absurd for you to say those Koreans were granted citizenship in 1957. There are only less than 2 million Korean Chinese, vast majority of who live in China. They don't need a world wide population distribution in the article. Illegal immigration is a matter of different nature.

This article is about Korean Chinese who live in China. Not Korean refugees who returned to S Korea. As I said before you need to distinguish Korean Chinese from Korean refugees. For those who returned to S Korea and obtained S Korean citizenship, they are S Koreans not Korean Chinese. There is no double citizenship here.

Image:Jews of K'ai-Fung-Foo, China.jpg

Hi. You uploaded the Image:Jews of K'ai-Fung-Foo, China.jpg, and it very clearly has a copyright line in the image. If the place you got it from is really public domain, could you please remove that tag, and re-upload it as a new version, with a more descriptive PD tag? I'd do it myself, but I am not sure about the exact nature of the JewishEncyclopedia. And if you got it from some online version, I doubt that's in the public domain. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts. Thanks, Storkk 11:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your reply. As far as I understand, the Jewish Encylcopedia (JE) is in the public domain, however, JE.com (IANAL) I would think has a copyright on their scans of the original document. I think (but may be wrong) that my opinion is backed up by their Terms Of Service, especially the following section (I have bolded relevant clauses):

3. Rights in Service Content and the Service

3.1 All content provided by JE.com on the Service is protected by copyright, trademark, and other applicable intellectual property and proprietary rights laws and is owned, controlled, and/or licensed by JE.com. The Service is protected by copyright, patent, trademark, and other applicable intellectual property and proprietary rights laws and is owned, controlled, and/or licensed by the Kopelman Foundation. JewishEncyclopedia.com is a trademark of JE.com. All other trademarks appearing on the Service are the property of their respective owners.

3.2 You may search, retrieve, display, download, and print content from the Service solely for your personal, internal use, and shall make no other use of the content without the express written permission of JE.com and the copyright owner (or its authorized agent) of such content. You will not modify, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale, create derivative works, or in any way exploit, any of the content, in whole or in part, found on the Service. Further, you will not engage in any systematic downloading or other activity directed towards any of the content, in whole or in part, found on the Service that would create any electronic data base or archive containing such content. However, assuming your compliance with the terms of this Agreement, you may on an occasional, infrequent basis distribute in paper form or through electronic mail single copies of individual works of content contained in the Service in connection with the uses permitted by this Agreement. You will not make any changes to any content that you are permitted to download under this Agreement, and in particular you will not delete or alter any proprietary rights or attribution notices in any content. You also will not "frame" any of the content on the Service or the Service itself without the express written permission of JE.com and the copyright owner or its authorized agent. You agree that you do not acquire any ownership rights in any downloaded content. Your further agree that all rights in the Service and any of the content found on the Service not granted to you under this Agreement are expressly reserved to JE.com and/or its licensors.

3.3 Certain content found on the Service may be subject to additional terms and conditions as specified in Section 11 below.

What I take this to mean (and I might be wrong), is that yes, the original 1906 edition is public domain, but you can scan it yourself if you want a photo. JE.com spent time uploading it, etc, and the online content is entirely theirs. Again, I may be wrong. This is just my take on things. I'd appreciate your thoughts, please sign next time. Thanks. :-) --Storkk 00:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: move of Chinese Malaysian

You said: If you move a page, go through the proper procedures, not a cut and paste; incidently, it isn't Manglish, but the preferred form in many non-US forms of English). And then you moved the page to Malaysian Chinese. But please note the the page Chinese Malaysian was moved to Malaysian Chinese before debate or through proper channel. It's unfortunate that a move actually delete the earliest record at the page that was moved. See the talk page for more detail. __earth ^(Talk) 01:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Mandarin

Copied from my user talk page, which I think you'd be interested, too:

I've started a thread to try to build proper consensus about whether to move Standard Mandarin to a more intuitive and perhaps neutral title or not. I've left this message at your talkpage because you've participated in previous discussions about a possible title change. Please feel free to contribute with your thoughts and arguments at Talk:Standard Mandarin#The move.

Peter ^Isotalo 12:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

— Insta ntnood 14:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics of mainland China

Guess you'd be interested with the discussion at talk:demographics of mainland China, on the proposal to change the title of the article. :-) — Insta ntnood 16:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Hong Kong tea culture milk tea.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hong Kong tea culture milk tea.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. Here are the reverts in question. WinHunter ^(talk) 00:21, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your block

I believe you maybe argue that this edit is not a revert. True, there is addition to the article but at the same time it is also a partial revert. (when comparing to your previous reverts)The 3RR rule specifically says: The policy states that an editor must not perform more than three reversions, in whole or in part, on a single Wikipedia article within a 24 hour period. --WinHunter ^(talk) 03:10, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the reverts were more than 24 hours ago when block was imposed, is this block preventative or punative? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.166.160.170 (talk • contribs)

Seems like it was punitive. Apparently, Huaiwei (talk · contribs) seems to have lobbied for with Winhunter (talk · contribs) by email for a punitive blocking, and was dissappointed that I didn't get blocked long enough.--Yuje 14:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

front page

I don't really like your attitude, after reading your userboxes. Its nice to be proud of your country and to be proud of your culture, but being nationalistic and being aggresive that certain lands should become part of China and that "colonizing North America" is good is not going to help you in Wikipedia. I want to remind you that having that attitude towards others is not the best thing. Good friend100 02:32, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You said that you have been accused of being a Chinese nationalist and a nationalist revisionist. Of course others would think that way. Nobody knows how you think about articles on Wikipedia an nobody knows whether you really wish to be neutral and NPOV. Well, by using those userboxes, you make others think about your intentions.

Also, people don't visit userpages all the time. Sure, they may visit it to check it out and see how its made, but what attracts people to your userpage are your edits. Of course people would try and see what kind of editor you are when you make edits that may be nationalistic or POV.

You are definitely correct that only "people who are interested in me would click my userpage". When you make eyebrow raising statements what do you think others do? They come and then comment on your front page.

You also said, accusations of Chinatown colonizing America was not be yourself. So what? That doesn't mean you can post controversial userboxes. And then you write that people shouldnt judge your comments and edits according to your frontpage. People will judge you. Even if they don't they will lean into that you are being nationalistic or opinionated.

Your points are perfectly fine and it is true that people shouldnt judge by the "cover of a book" but that happens and if you don't want people accusing you of being nationalistic, then take your userboxes off. Its not the best thing to do in the world to publicize your opinions about anything political, religous, or nationalistic elements around others. It can be a very sensitive subject. Good friend100 18:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Yuje. I kind of knew it was a joke, but wasn't sure until I read your message to Good friend100. Perhaps change the header from Political/cultural views to Political/cultural views I've been accused of representing, and it should be clear that it's all a joke. No need to delete them.--Endroit 19:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yuje. I really like your front page. Like you I am of Chinese descent but transplanted to the West. There is a view that as a Chinese immigrant, or even as a decendant of Chinese immigrants in the West, one is never fully accepted into the 'host' country. This is particularly frustrating as one works hard, achieve academic excellence, intellectually surpass what could be perceived as 'host' competition, and still one does not become top dog. But seen from the 'host's' POV, the Chinese is merely a reticent worker who is happy with what he/ she gets, no matter what his intellectual achievements are, and are citizens by accident. Why is this the case? The immigrant Chinese and their descendants have for too long focussed on schoolwork; as a community they have no organisational structure to connect with the rest of the greater society they live in, and have not developed debating skills in the greater society to sell themselves as a people. Without the organisation structure, the Chinese will continue to be a highly intelligent people without a political voice in the society they live in, be politically weak, and will remain a mystery to the 'host' because the 'host' simply do not understand them since the Chinese, as a people, have not communicated to the 'host'. The Chinese are seen as a people who don't ask for help and who don't contribute socially or politically (or if we did, then its all negative, such as bribery of politicians). Yes, currently the people of the West may see each and every one of us as a Fu Manchu character. Why? Because we have not demonstrated to them that this view is fictitious. If we, the Chinese, continue this way, we shall remain a weak and divided community without a political voice nor trust.

The position of the Chinese in the West is where the position of women in the West were 50 years ago. So I agree that there is a lot of catching up to do.

Yes, it is time we stood up and say, 'Hey, we are a useful people and resource. We want to contribute to the society we live in. What can we do for this society?' We could say to the host, our youngsters have the skills and potentials to be top soldiers, civil servants, diplomats, police officers, administrators, whatever. Please help us. Yes, our community has its problems; we don't have too much problems with alcoholism, but we do have problems with addictive gambling, please help us.

Yuje, what you have done here is right. You shouted out that the immigrant Chinese is an intellectual and intelligent voice to be reckoned with, but on the other hand we have to remember that every people on earth is also a people and have the same feelings and aspirations. In terms of the 'host' thinking, it is that the immigrant is indebted to them, as without the 'host' society, the immigrant would not have had the opportunity to achieve the level of intellect or intelligence that they have achieved.

You have started something that has great potential.I hope you will build on what you have started.

Best wishes.

New article idea

Absolutely!! The idea was on the back of my head from the very moment I saw the brilliant US territorial evolution article. Of course, it will be super duper difficult to make, for several reasons:

China has a history that's .... one or two dozen times the length of the US. Are we going to do the entire thing?!
For anything before 1951, any and all maps will be the focus of NPOV disputes. (Was Tibet a part of China in 1949? If yes, was it a part of the PRC? Or part of the ROC? And what about Mongolia? Oh noez!)

For the above two reasons I think that if we are to get started on such a project, we should be focusing on the period from 1949 to present-day, first. Then we can work backwards to 1912, and then (if we're really intrepid) towards 1644, 1368 etc...

Of course, without maps the project would be infinitely easier, but then what's the point of doing it if it doesn't come with maps? =)

-- ran (talk) 00:58, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing, let's get this started. ~~We should sort out the chronology first before attempting to make any maps.~~ -- ran (talk) 02:47, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a base map from which we can work "backwards":

-- ran (talk) 06:06, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's start by getting the information organized in article form. -- ran (talk) 15:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the project, let's proceed like this:

Get the article skeleton done first;
Decide which changes should be reflected on maps;
Decide which stages merit maps
Get the maps done.

-- ran (talk) 17:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The temporary page is here:

User:Ran/Chinadivs

-- ran (talk) 17:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been looking at the China-Kyrgyzstan dispute actually.... isn't the disputed area very, very small? -- ran (talk) 12:32, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the China-Kyrgyzstan dispute, I still can't tell what you mean by the part originally disputed by China... are you talking about the blue portion on page 14/20 (labelled "page 108") of [2] ? -- ran (talk) 14:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the thing about the Tajikistani border: according to this source, the PRC government has drawn the Sino-Tajikistani border as the present border since the mid-1950's; that it was in fact the ROC which pushed the line forward on its maps in a vague, nebulous, arbitrary way throughout the 1930's - 1940's. I suppose it's because the border there has never been demarcated and the PRC had no real will to push the issue in its own favour at the time, so they simply drew it as the de facto line of control. So I'm thinking that perhaps we shouldn't mark out the region as "disputed". -- ran (talk) 17:50, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem exists for other boundaries as well.... not just the Tajikistani border, but also the Pakistani border, the Indian border, the Burmese border, the Korean border, the Diaoyutai & Spratlys, etc... old maps seem to draw the lines all over the place, in the absence of border agreements. How are we going to represent them? -- ran (talk) 20:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken the "plunge" (no pun intended? =P) and added the Paracel and Spratly Islands to the map. I realize that this may just have doubled our workload (we'll need to find out who occupied which island when, etc.), which is probably info that can be incorporated into the existing chart at Spratly Islands. I'll be starting research on that, in the meantime please help out if you have time and patience. =) -- ran (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm attempting to research the dates at which the various islands of the Spratlys were first claimed / occupied by various countries, and this is turning out to be nearly impossible. Not only are there an interminable number of tiny islands / reefs that may or may not be occupied by various neighbouring countries, it is also very difficult to determine the status of the various claims put forth by surrounding countries. I foresee that the Diaoyutai's and Paracels are going to be subject to the same problem. I'm wondering whether there's there some way to elegantly "leave out" these tiny islands from our historical series? -- ran (talk) 20:54, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if you have informative sources please email them to me through my User page. -- ran (talk) 05:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cellophane noodles

Thank you for your expertise -- well, my best guess is still that saifun is a corruption of si fen (although the normal Chinese name is fensi) that happened somewhere along the line, perhaps by Filipinos or some other non-Chinese-speaking place -- maybe in imitation of the Cantonese mai fun. I hope we get to the bottom of this eventually. Badagnani 23:34, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just as I'd suspected, a Google search shows many hits for "丝粉" -- thus these characters are the most likely explanation for the usage saifun (though we don't know from which dialect 丝 becomes pronounced or corrupted from "si" to "sai." Badagnani 23:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ROC Administrative and Claims.jpg

Thanks, man. I originally started the project because I got a big kick out of the size contrast in "territories claimed" and "territories administered." When I was done with it, I realized, "Hey, I could upload this thing" and did accordingly. However, as the ROC page is under lockdown, I haven't been able to link the image to that article as of yet. Pryaltonian 07:56, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yuje, I'll soon challenge you.

I pretty much angry at your Han Nationalist views. Let's meet up on the Gando Article soon, I'm preparing several stuff for it. Also, would you stop using search engines? Considering how most Han nationalist are using the Internet to advocate their POV, the use of search engines ,is to my thoughts, is biased enought.

On the side note, do not think of this as an insult: I want to sort things out in a fair way. -- General Tiger 14:09, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RM

For the "Chonji → Tianchi" request, I've added the {{rename}} tag and a "Requested move" section inside Talk:Chonji. Can you do likewise, for the "Baekdu Mountain → Changbai Mountain" request? And don't forget, you can vote there also. Thanks.--Endroit 17:57, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After reading your message

After reading your message, I apologize for the somewhat harsh words I have written. It’s been a hard September for me, with Chinese ultra-nationalist attacking me on all fronts here in Korea. With that in mind, reading your introduction as a Chinese who advocates the spread of territory, I blew up. I’m sorry for putting you in the same group as the irrational chauvinists. (Although I do have to say that your intro boxes does not put up a good image of you ^_^)

I’m also a person who advocates NPOV, and know that internet isn't immune to Korean nationalist views. I’m not going to follow these people, and I’m currently working on factual evidences for the argument on Gando. Please wait a while for my update.

As for Baekdusan and Cheonji, I think that there aren’t many arguments left for the both of us. Let’s get these two finished.

Also, why don’t we keep in touch? I think we can have a good relationship if we can talk directly with each other. My MSN is kangseungjae at hotmail dot com feel free to contact me.

Have a nice day, and let a new friendship bloom!

-- General Tiger 14:15, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

By the way, when are you usually online? I'm usually on the internet at 00:00~06:00 (UTC) --General Tiger 12:30, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Postal System Pinyin?

I saw your comment, could you please state your arguments in Talk:Postal System Pinyin?--Niohe 01:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can see what you mean, I didn't know how that Template worked, of course it should be there. I think that when and if we move the page, we can adjust the template without too much pain.--Niohe 01:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chonji

Quality over quantity. It seems to me that the only evidence you can come up with is that "Tianchi" comes up with more "hits." LmAO. Wow. Its nearly getting annoying hearing you talk. Everyone gives you the same response because you say the same stuff over, and over again. To me, your only intention is to try and impress on wikipedia users that Korea is China. I read your political opinion boxes, and they're purely imperialistic and outright aggresive towards East Asia. Stop it. You know that Baekdusan is Korea, and that Kim Jong Il has sold the Chinese side of it to China. You know that that is a fact. And you know I'm not going to tolerate any crap you hurl at other users in the Chonji article. Its just so easy to just admit it! I want to impress on you that I agree with you that China was a world power long ago, and is again becoming a power today! It doesn't matter whether I like it or not-its a fact! But that doesn't give you the right to put on mr. tough-guy and be aggressive on Korea-China relations! Be modest! Oyo321 04:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

chonji

On a rather amusing note, if you do not intend others to interpret userboxes in a negative way, they shouldn't be up in the first place. The userboxes you have are of extreme aggression and belligerence towards America and the rest of East Asia as well. Its bound to get some comments.Oyo321 01:13, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

whoa

Yuje. my statement, accusation as it may be, was meant to be private. That means on our userpages. I am certainly embarassed that you would publicize such an argument. I am also ashamed that that was your shifty method of countering my attack. I am sure you would feel just the same as me if I had done so to your arguments. But I will apologize for my indecency. I hope that you willunderstand the extremely taught relations between the East Asian countries, and the passion of most Koreans. My apologies again.Oyo321 01:36, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi Yuje, I'm PingFeng, and I believe we haven't met. I was using the account PIgrappaNG several years ago, but I stopped using it after someone vandalized it. I've decided to create a new account to use. Now, I've decided it was time to start editing articles again. I've also monitered your argument between you and a friend named Oyo. I saw how he has vehemently reproached you, with some reasoning, which to me makes half-sense, and half-no sense. But that doesn't mean that you must act so disgraceful. I hope that you will resolve peacefully with Mr. Oyo. He has also apologized, as I can see. You will become an embaressment, not an embarressing statement. I must also say that, I being Chinese, too, was offended by the userboxes on your page. Please refrain from making provovative language, and I hope you understand the effect the userboxes have on not just other people, but me also. So please, accept Mr. Oyo's apology, and lets get to know more about each other! WRKPingFeng 16:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit at Baekdu Mountain

Man, that was a good edit. -- General Tiger

Not offended

Yuje, I am not really offended by Oyo321 argument, but by your response to him and me.First of all, I do not know how Hong Kong is related to this, and although I don't consider myself Manchu, some of my ancestry can be traced back to them. I don't want you smirking smug about that issue. You also released a very rude and obstinate word there also. Oyo321 may be acting like a smart-ass, but you shouldn't be swearing at him. And whata bout you? Imagine a larger, powerful country trying to change a name of something to represent itself more influential? I don't exactly know where you are from, but if it was like the U.S. trying to change the name of a Chinese natural feature, I would be very angry. If you did not know, Baekdu Mountain is a very important and meaningful thing to Korea. So, please, understand Oyo321 as I do. A little thing like that truly helps. WRKPingFeng 18:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nice update

I checked out your userpage since it changed a lot. I just wanna tell you its dripping with sarcasm. =\ Good friend100 00:12, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Skookum1

It looks like our friend User:Skookum1, who made all those colourful soapboxing remarks about Chinese people in Canada on various Talk pages, has been indefinitely blocked for making legal threats[3][4]. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like his block was only temporary. In any case, I see no harm in allowing to rant as he will. His continued spewing will only damage his own credibility and reputation further, the more colorful comments he keeps making on the various public talk pages, and he can't make any obviously POVed, untrue, or unreferenced edits without getting reverted, because of Wiki policies. Look at what a clown he made of himself on Talk:Chinatown for all to see, and how he still won't even touch it anymore. Just keep a cool head and rebut him logically on his points. A calm, logical, well-referenced response will decapitate any amount of emotional outbursts, and convince a lot more people. Personally, I respond to him primarily to convince third-party readers. Besides, if the guy really is in his 50's, he's probably too set in his views to change them, and in any case, I'll likely outlive him and his quaint views, considering the years he has on me. --Yuje 04:07, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canton

Justify your own claims, mate. It's you who isn't using the talk page. -- Lonewolf BC 11:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The arguments I could have made have already been sufficiently made by other users on that talk page. As I said, the CIA World Factbook, modern enclopedias, atlases, and newspaper articles all use Guangzhou. If you want to make the change, to a new name, then justify your claims first. If not, then back to pre-existing concensus. --Yuje 19:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map Gallery

I noticed you added an image gallery on Dokdo, but I was thinking it would be better suited to create the gallery on the Wikimedia Commons and then where the external links are, you can add the commons template. Wikipedia:Commons explains what I mean, and an example is found on here. There are other images related to Dokdo/Takeshima on the commons as well, search results. Best regards, on camera^(t) 10:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think all you would need to do is sign up like you did here and just copy paste what you created so far and add more to it. It's pretty simple, and if you need to upload more images that are on here but not on the commons, you can copy paste what's in the image's description. I've never done much at the commons except upload one image, so I'm not experienced either. on camera^(t) 10:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DRV

[[5]] - Privacy 19:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ranks of the People's Liberation Army

Regardless of whether or not User:Botisaf was a sockpuppet, his edit on this page appears to be valid. I myself asked about PLA's marshal position, because I was aware that Lin Biao and Peng Dehuai were marshals, and I was suprised that the rank wasn't listed. --Yuje 07:18, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given this user's record of installing various "conjectured" ranks and supporting them with doctored images and contradictory links, I'd just assume that this is the case as well. That said, if you believe that this iformation is valid (checking with Uniform Insignia could be a good start), of course you are free to reinstate it under your own account. Still, I don't really think it's appropriate to mix two seemingly different insignia styles in one table and give no slightest explanation, so don't just revert to his version please. --Dmitry _{(talk •contibs )} 10:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I checked out the page you gave me, and it appears that those two marshal-equivalent ranks are in fact listed, so it appears legit. [6] I don't have a matching picture and insignia that fits in with the rest, but maybe the table can be restored, without the picture?--Yuje 10:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd propose that if only two people ever held thse ranks, they can be considered honorary and should be mentioned with a footnote below, especially given that there is no current insignia for them. If and when pre-1965 insignia and ranks are given a different section within this article, these ranks of course will belong there. --Dmitry _{(talk •contibs )} 10:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm don't know if anyone ever heard the very highest rank, but according to the Chinese Wikipedia, and Category:Marshals of China, a total of 10 people held the marshal-equivalent rank. --Yuje 10:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, why not create a section or article stub? (This discussion should probably move to that article's talk page). --Dmitry _{(talk •contibs )} 10:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please help me. I'm create same articles about Ranks of the Chinese People's Liberation Army.You wrote -Regardless of whether or not User:Botisaf was a sockpuppet, his edit on this page appears to be valid. I am agree with you. Becouse I create this article. I has copied pictures Uniform Insignia and create same articles about it. According to many sources two Chinese marshal-equivalent ranks are in fact created. --Dmitry does not wish to agree with article made by User:Botisaf, but I think that they are correct. --Dmitry now think that I am a sockpuppet of User:Botisaf,but it is wrong. Please Help me to keep the correct facts. As I was convinced from --Dmitry works-he does not know much about Chinese ranks. But it is not clear why he delete exact data.--Uroddmitri 12:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Yuje, sorry can't relaly help, I don't really know much about PLA structure. Blueshirts 16:45, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

translation of comic book description

I recently discovered a ten volume comic book about Zhou Tong called Zhou Tong Zhuan Qi (Chinese: 周侗传奇 – "The Legend of Zhou Tong"). Do you know of anyone who would be willing to translate the names and brief chinese descriptions of each volume into English and post it in a sub-article under the “Comic book” section?

(Ghostexorcist 20:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

For some reason, the ten links I provided do not want to work. Here is the main page that branches to those ten: http://lhh.vnet.cn/seeseries.php?sid=96&urlid=

Just click on each cover for the details. (Ghostexorcist 20:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Sino-Indian War

Does it occur to you that what we are doing here is creating a much better article? We are compromising and arguing but in the end forming a neutral perspective. We are sifting through sources for extra information and building more and more and more into the article. I just realized that. I see Sino-Indian War on the main page sometime in the future. Traing 22:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR

You broke it but I won't report you as a show of goodwill and thus your version will stand for the next day or so. Traing 06:59, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't and am careful not to. Traing 07:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram

Hello,

A request for arbitration has been filed regarding the conduct of Certified.Gangsta.

Can I trouble you to write a statement at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram recounting your interactions with him and your impressions of his conduct as an editor?

Thanks.

LionheartX 22:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Certified.Gangsta-Ideogram/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, David Mestel^(Talk) 11:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sino-Indian War

Hi. For the 1967 Cho La incident, if you know Chinese, can you please attempt to look at the original source and glean knowledge. The Google translator can do only so much. The original page does have paragraphs.

http://military.china.com/zh_cn/history2/06/11027560/20050712/12475305.html

Mikeslackenerny 03:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You undid my indian casualties work! :( If you are reworking, please put the 'work in progress tag' and please inform when done coz a lot of decent work was undone....

Mikeslackenerny 06:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:SimlaConvention1914MapWest.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:SimlaConvention1914MapWest.JPG. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 04:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Warnings

June 2007

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Sino-Indian War. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content which gains a consensus among editors. Vectro 07:18, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sino-Indian War discussion

Hello again. While we may be feuding on that page, I have no intention of carrying this feud onto any other page. Anyway...there are many concerns that I have laid out and you have not commented to, do you think we should strike those out. Can you please split the remaining points of contention into separate headings. I was trying to reply but it got unbearable confusing so I think I'll reply after these changes have been made. On another note, you said you'll summarize the post-war events but you never did, instead blanking out five paragraphs. Now, your version has become the protected version and while I'm not happy with that it would be unfair for me to get an admin to revert to my version. But do you agree if those five paragraphs are readded for the sake of the reader? Traing 06:13, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you have been editing but you have not answered this message above. Please organize them when you get time. I am going to preparing another comparison version soon. Until then, regards. Traing 07:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good

I like the way the discussion has began to go today. Let's try and maintain this calm and collaborative atmosphere for the greater good of the article. Traing 06:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

FreeGoa

Yuje, can you tell me: Do the Indian vermin own Wikipedia? Why does these vermin delude themself that they do?

Right now, the Hindu Vietnamese Nguyen, a student in Australia, and a voluntary cooptee into the Brotherhood of Indian Vermin, has come in, as usual, to back up his vile biradaari, by 'reverting' my edit to the Sino-Indian War talk page.

Regards,

FreeGoan http://www.freegoa & http://www.goancauses.com

Smile!

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 06:41, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Hong Kong tea culture stamp - Hong Kong milk tea.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hong Kong tea culture stamp - Hong Kong milk tea.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 23:33, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arilang say Hi

Hi, I saw your name on talk Sinocentrism, and sort of understand your political stand. Please visit my user page and give me your opinions on article created by me, and if you read my talk page(recent one) you shall find out that at the moment there are concerted attacks on some of the articles I created. For example Differences between Huaxia and barbarians and Chinese Holocaust. Could you care to join the discussion and voice your opinions? Arilang ^talk 20:50, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You might have heard of Charter 08. A voting process is underway now at http://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:%E6%8A%95%E7%A5%A8#.E8.A8.8E.E8.AB.96, could you go over there and have a look, and may be cast your vote there? Arilang ^talk 09:53, 2 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mausoleum of Princess Jeonghyo

Please see Gwanggaeto Stele and Balhae. Thanks. adidas (talk) 14:35, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

zhenxiao?

Princess Jeonghyo cannot be zhenxiao. I think you disagree that Balhae was korean history. That is your POV problem. -- Shyoon1 (talk) 18:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Australasia tundra

Template:Australasia tundra has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 18:22, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Buyeo/Fuyu, Balhae/Bohai should be listed as wiki china

I have read through the pages of Buyeo and Balhae is a highly nationalistic, edited by koreans.

Why are these kingdoms, whoom are in China today should be listed as Wiki China project?

I think its best if someone can monitor these pages. What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lumber111 (talk • contribs) 13:20, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request Lock on Balhae/Bohai page

I saw recent vandalism by Ecthelion on the Balhae page. I think its best to lock the page immidiately until further notice.

What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lumber111 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Shuǐ diào gē tóu for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Shuǐ diào gē tóu is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shuǐ diào gē tóu until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --Gh87 (talk) 04:27, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:Dongding oolong tea.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dongding oolong tea.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Paleartic temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands

Template:Paleartic temperate grasslands, savannas, and shrublands has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:IndianSurvey1950map.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:IndianSurvey1950map.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:03, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:IndianSurvey1954map.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:IndianSurvey1954map.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 23:03, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Min Nan

Category:Min Nan, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:51, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:Australasia montane grasslands and shrublands

Template:Australasia montane grasslands and shrublands has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 22:48, 17 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]