→the cartoons on Senkaku Islands: new section |
|||
Line 545: | Line 545: | ||
I also need the characters for the [http://books.google.com/books?id=PcELAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA217&dq=The+second+era+of+translators+A.+D.+400+was+that+of+Kumaradjiva+of+Cashmere.+There+can+be+no+doubt+that+he+made+use+of+SH+and+S+as+separate+letters+for+he+never+confounds+them+in+his+choice+of+Chinese+characters.+The+Chinese+words+already+introduced+by+his+predecessors+he+did+not+alter,+and+in+introducing+new+terms+required+in+the+translation+of+the+Mahayana+literature,+the+-fc+%5E%C2%A3+Tasheng+or+greater+development,+he+uses+SH+for+SH+and+usually+B+for+V.+Thus+the+city+Shravasti+was+in+Pali+Savatthi+and+in+Chinese+%3Cfe+*M+%5E+Sha-ba-ti.+Probably+Kumaradjiva+himself+speaking+in+the+Cashmere+dialect+of+Sanscrit+called+it+Shabati.&hl=en&ei=AI8rTrLRFem60AH1nt3sCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=The%20second%20era%20of%20translators%20A.%20D.%20400%20was%20that%20of%20Kumaradjiva%20of%20Cashmere.%20There%20can%20be%20no%20doubt%20that%20he%20made%20use%20of%20SH%20and%20S%20as%20separate%20letters%20for%20he%20never%20confounds%20them%20in%20his%20choice%20of%20Chinese%20characters.%20The%20Chinese%20words%20already%20introduced%20by%20his%20predecessors%20he%20did%20not%20alter%2C%20and%20in%20introducing%20new%20terms%20required%20in%20the%20translation%20of%20the%20Mahayana%20literature%2C%20the%20-fc%20%5E%C2%A3%20Tasheng%20or%20greater%20development%2C%20he%20uses%20SH%20for%20SH%20and%20usually%20B%20for%20V.%20Thus%20the%20city%20Shravasti%20was%20in%20Pali%20Savatthi%20and%20in%20Chinese%20%3Cfe%20*M%20%5E%20Sha-ba-ti.%20Probably%20Kumaradjiva%20himself%20speaking%20in%20the%20Cashmere%20dialect%20of%20Sanscrit%20called%20it%20Shabati.&f=false sha-ba-ti thing here, at the bottom left corner of the page] |
I also need the characters for the [http://books.google.com/books?id=PcELAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA217&dq=The+second+era+of+translators+A.+D.+400+was+that+of+Kumaradjiva+of+Cashmere.+There+can+be+no+doubt+that+he+made+use+of+SH+and+S+as+separate+letters+for+he+never+confounds+them+in+his+choice+of+Chinese+characters.+The+Chinese+words+already+introduced+by+his+predecessors+he+did+not+alter,+and+in+introducing+new+terms+required+in+the+translation+of+the+Mahayana+literature,+the+-fc+%5E%C2%A3+Tasheng+or+greater+development,+he+uses+SH+for+SH+and+usually+B+for+V.+Thus+the+city+Shravasti+was+in+Pali+Savatthi+and+in+Chinese+%3Cfe+*M+%5E+Sha-ba-ti.+Probably+Kumaradjiva+himself+speaking+in+the+Cashmere+dialect+of+Sanscrit+called+it+Shabati.&hl=en&ei=AI8rTrLRFem60AH1nt3sCg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCsQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=The%20second%20era%20of%20translators%20A.%20D.%20400%20was%20that%20of%20Kumaradjiva%20of%20Cashmere.%20There%20can%20be%20no%20doubt%20that%20he%20made%20use%20of%20SH%20and%20S%20as%20separate%20letters%20for%20he%20never%20confounds%20them%20in%20his%20choice%20of%20Chinese%20characters.%20The%20Chinese%20words%20already%20introduced%20by%20his%20predecessors%20he%20did%20not%20alter%2C%20and%20in%20introducing%20new%20terms%20required%20in%20the%20translation%20of%20the%20Mahayana%20literature%2C%20the%20-fc%20%5E%C2%A3%20Tasheng%20or%20greater%20development%2C%20he%20uses%20SH%20for%20SH%20and%20usually%20B%20for%20V.%20Thus%20the%20city%20Shravasti%20was%20in%20Pali%20Savatthi%20and%20in%20Chinese%20%3Cfe%20*M%20%5E%20Sha-ba-ti.%20Probably%20Kumaradjiva%20himself%20speaking%20in%20the%20Cashmere%20dialect%20of%20Sanscrit%20called%20it%20Shabati.&f=false sha-ba-ti thing here, at the bottom left corner of the page] |
||
[[User:DÜNGÁNÈ|DÜNGÁNÈ]] ([[User talk:DÜNGÁNÈ|talk]]) 02:59, 24 July 2011 (UTC) |
[[User:DÜNGÁNÈ|DÜNGÁNÈ]] ([[User talk:DÜNGÁNÈ|talk]]) 02:59, 24 July 2011 (UTC) |
||
== the cartoons on [[Senkaku Islands]] == |
|||
If you want to just delete this, feel free; I just didn't want to clutter up the article talk page by continuing there. |
|||
This form of "satire" is something I deal with on an academic level, and let me say, you and Bobthefish2 are neither the first to raise ''my'' anger, nor the first to get defensive about it. It's like when someone makes a joke about how terrible women drivers are, and then the defense is, "Hey, it's just a joke!" or "Hey, it's funny cuz it's true!" (even when statistically it's not). The perpetuation of stereotypes as comedy is harmful, no matter who perpetuates it, no matter whether its "true" or not...Do Japanese natives speak English with an [[Engrish]] accent? Sure some of them do; others have milder accents then people from the Midwest, from Barbados, from "native" English speaking countries. Would I ever go on a public forum, especially one with actual rules about [[WP:CIVIL|civility]], and post a joke about [[Engrish]]? Never. |
|||
Let me give another example: sometimes, celebrities in Japan put on [[Blackface]] and do tv commercials, skit comedy, what have you. Do they intend it to be offensive? No. Are they aware that the use of blackface is part of a nearly 200 year old tradition of demeaning the competence, intelligence, and attractiveness of African Americans? No, they don't. Does that mean that when they do it, I (as someone who ''does'' know) should be silent, and let it slide as cultural naivete? Absolutely not. The only way to make racism and sexism and homophobia go away is to challenge them when and where they occur. In the case of the Japanese blackface, its a teaching moment (hey, let me tell you a little about that...). In the case of allegedly smart, allegedly civil people posting on Wikipedia to lighten the mood, it's not a teachable moment, it's time for a scolding. I appreciate satire. I don't appreciate racial stereotyping dressed up and called satire. And you know what gets me ''most angry?'' Calling it [[political correctness]], which, is a term invented by the political right as a way of justifying prejudicial, discriminatory language. Almost all of the "extreme" pc that people rail against was never used by "liberals"; no reasonable person ever used the phrase "vertically challenged" for short; but by doing created these ridiculous fictions, the right attempted to justify continuing to use gendered pronouns as if they were generic, words like "retarded" and "female doctors"....I'm not taking a pc stance against those comics--I'm saying that I saw them, they offended me immediately, and I called Bob out on them, since this type of behavior is 100% in line with his standard operating procedure: make a trolling, offensive comment but defend himself by calling it a joke or by blaming the listener for misinterpreting him. |
|||
Did I overreact? Yes, probably. My apologies. Was I partially reacting not just to the comics but to the editor who posted them? Yes, I was, and that's not fair. Does that change the fact that the comics are offensive and have no business being passed off as a moment of lighthearted comedy on a Wikipedia talk page? No, it does not. I have no problem defending my actions at WQA, ANI, or wherever, because as someone said recently, [[WP:NPA]] doesn't prevent us from calling out racism when we see it. [[User:Qwyrxian|Qwyrxian]] ([[User talk:Qwyrxian|talk]]) 08:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 08:05, 27 July 2011
/Archive 1: August 2005 - May 2009 |
9 Dotted line
Recently you continuously deleted information added to the "9 dotted line" thread despite the the information is relevant and properly quoted. You also sent threaten messages to other editors for sanction because they revert your deletions. Please note that Wiki is an open community, anyone "assumes" himself to "own" the information here, is bias or unwilling to cooperate with others should be subjected to sanction and ban from contributing to the community. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Love4eveverymuch (talk • contribs) 12:24, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Second Sino-Japanese War
You say there was a discussion a few months back that excluded the USA and Soviet Union. Could you please give me a link to that discussion? Rin tin tin 1996 (talk) 20:09, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
H-6/H-6K merger
I sandbox'd my proposed merger of these pages for comment. - The Bushranger (talk) 23:17, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
你好
你应该不是中国人吧,怎么中文有点怪怪的。你还挺喜欢越南人的样子,我看澳洲很多越南人吧?大概都是越南难民吧,没办法,谁叫他们国家落后又肮脏。
干吗在东亚网页上更改越南文化部分,下次别在酱咯~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.199.112.113 (talk) 06:52, 12 April 2010
- 哈哈,二逼,老子他妈比你还因该算是中国人,你装什么鸟啊?没出息的粪粪,现在连tianya.cn都不接受你。-- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 08:01, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Whatever, block me all you want but it won't change anything. If you're Vietnamese, nothing can make you Chinese. It's just Wikipedia, do losers like you equate it to the whole world? Try blocking me from your shitass country Australia if you can! Wait, I'm not sure if I want to go there in the first place.. Anyway, I've heard only nerds go on Tianya, I don't even KNOW anyone who does. Speaking of trolls, YOU'RE the real troll. Have fun playing out your sad wannabe life! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.21.177 (talk) 21:52, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
LOL,你的IP是广东来的,我因该笑你才对,南方老。学会普通话了吗,粤粤同学?冰狗啊,嗨母嗨啊?小样,想跟爷比,是吗?
你知道吗,你这人很弱质。啰嗦那么多,何必呢?你不相信俺是天朝之子那就没办法了,我也管不了那么多,老子还要上大学呢,将来有好日子过,没那么多闲功夫陪你聊。
摆脱,中国有1.3 Billion,不可能所有人都是和你一样长得那么~漂亮~,小姐。不是所有人和你一样咪咪小眼睛,南方佬。章子怡长得不像你,那她就是越南人了吗?或者韩国人?
老子比你长得帅就是越南人?我喷,笑死人。
你因该算比较像越南人-正好广东是挨着越南。你好像认为你是啥标准中国人;以为你是谁啊?什么玩意儿?如果真的这样,中国人就没有好看的了,我国灭亡,俺晕死。
俺看出来了,你这人很奸。你因该是为日本人干活,替他们喊~哑咩爹~哑咩爹~,我没说错吧?他妈的,当年你还是液体的时候,你老爸因该把你打在墙上,看看有了你世界变得多莫悲惨。 With love, -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 07:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, 我忘记了,你是南方佬,对普通话不是很首席,我因该用粤粤语和你讲,你就会跟明白一些。 屌你老母,仆街。我祝你咸家鏟! -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 07:52, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
- Lol, I thoroughly enjoy this "playground fight" you two were in, hahahah :D (this comment is not meant to be a put-down or anything, just an LOL) Children of the dragon (talk) 01:09, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
DYK for Jin Feibao
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello Benlisquare, I hope you are well.
I noticed that you added a source to the page Japanese people in China giving the Japanese government's estimate of 127,000 or so Japanese citizens in China. I would like to incorporate the results of China's 2010 census into the article, which gives a much lower figure of 66,159 Japanese nationals in mainland China (see here). I assume that the discrepancy is because the Japanese government is counting Japanese citizens in Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan as well as on the Mainland, while the census is mainland-only. However, because I do not read Japanese, I cannot confirm this. Could you look at this source again and see if that is the case? If so, you can add the census as a source yourself, or I can do it. Thanks!--Danaman5 (talk) 16:11, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
P.S. Since you probably get a lot of visits to this page from people in mainland China, I thought I would let you know: something on this talk page is triggering the Great Firewall of China. You might want to look through and delete whatever it is.--Danaman5 (talk) 16:14, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up, I'll give it a look when I have the time. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 16:36, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
- The October 2009 report by the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs lists on page 8 of this document that the number of Japanese residents in the "People's Republic of China" is 127,282. The Japanese government considers "People's Republic of China" as Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau, but not Taiwan (I don't think), which it officially considers as part of the "Republic of China" (though the document in question does not state this, Japan's foreign policy with Taiwan has been recorded in other publications). Page 64 specifically lists "香港" (Hong Kong) as a city of "中華人民共和国" (the PRC), and page 18 shows the Hong Kong figure to be 21,210. However, this particular document does not refer directly to the "ROC" - it lists Taipei, for example, as "台北(台湾)" (Taipei (Taiwan)), with a figure of 11,458 on page 18. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 17:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
This talk page is no longer being blocked in mainland China, at least not for me, so it looks like you found the right keywords.--Danaman5 (talk) 02:51, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry for butting in. But I am curious why the discrepancy of the figure between Chinese census and Japanese exists. If anyone knows, please let me know. ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 12:03, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Well, this is WP:OR hell, so this can definitely cannot be put into the article, but I have a handful of theories that might explain:
- The Japanese MoFA includes Taiwan's figures within that of PRC. This is likely (in regards to explaining the figures), although I've no idea why the MoFA would sell out their ROC friends.
- The 2010 Chinese Census may have excluded certain categories of foreign national residents. Are we able to find out what the Japan MoFA and the PRC National Bureau of Statistics classifies "foreign nationals residing in X" as? The two might have differing definitions. Visa status (e.g. permanent resident)? Length of time stayed? Migration certificates? Perhaps one category of resident the MoFA classes as "resident", but the PRC NBoS does not. Until exact details are known, this is hard to explain.
- Either the mainland figures, or the Hong Kong figures, from either of the two sources, is over- or underrepresented. That is, there is either too few Hong Kong residents reported by the MoFA, or too few Mainland residents reported by the NBoS. Likelihood of this isn't as big though, as nothing can explain why this might be the case.
- Either the Japan MoFA or PRC NBoS, one or the other, didn't do a good job at keeping the figures. Whilst I don't think the likelihood of this is great either (I for one would assume good faith that both governments aren't that terrible at preventing mistakes), it can explain how there is a large discrepancy in numbers. Neither of the two make really far-fetched estimates - the 2010 Census should be based on a headcount, and the MoFA figure should take into account the number of visas filed, passports recorded to be overseas, etc.
- 2010 may have been a bad year for travel and settling in China, and 2009 might have been a better year. This might be due to financial reasons, social reasons, or even the flavour of the year.
- Unease of public opinion after the 2010 Senkaku herpaderp and the protests and sentiments that come afterwards, discouraging travel, leading to a reduction of resident numbers.
- There is a footnote in either the 2010 Census report, or the MoFA report, that we have missed.
Well, that was a good 3 minute job, and I'm out of ideas. Anyone else think of any possibilities? -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 12:32, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- Also, what is the latest foreign resident report by the Japanese MoFA? Is there a 2010 or 2011 report, by any chance, with more recent information? (2010 will be the most recent for China, since the census only occurs every 10 years). -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 12:49, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
- The discrepancy might be related to differences in time of stay. The note on the 2010 census report that I linked to above reads:
- Note: Referring to population of residents from Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan and foreigners who had stayed, by the reference time of the census, for more than 3 months, or planned to stay for more than 3 months in the territory of China, excluding residents from Hong Kong, Macao, Taiwan and foreigners who came to China for a short stay such as business trip or tourism. “Territory” here refers to the territory of customs, thus not including Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan.
- It is the same definition as the Japanese stats. See page 3, (2) 長期滞在者 ―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 23:53, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I have no difficulty viewing your userpage here in Nanjing, so it looks like there are no keywords that are triggering the Great Firewall.--Danaman5 (talk) 06:18, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Caonima
Ben, I must admit to being slightly tickled by this edit. The subject is a way of lampooning the CPC and their censorship, after all. SO I think we can give way to a little humour. Remember we had this infobox in an earlier guise of the article. ;-) --Ohconfucius ¡digame! 02:08, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- But I thought Wikipedia was srs buznses... ;_; -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 03:58, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
chiang wei-kuo
nothing in english has been published exclusively on him, you have to look at these chinese langauge books.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 19:04, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
You seem like a well informed and open minded and impartial person. There are these individuals who are trying to control what is directly accessible in the Dog meat article, by deleting my logical and relevant linking of the Horse meat article in its See Also section. I can understand their need to maintain a certain level of white pride and Asian cultural-secessionism by disassociating certain European(and their close-ally/favorite Asian) taboo meat cultures/nationsto make an outright disconnect in these taboo meat articles relative to dog meat, which most likely have their largest proportion of consumers in such places as China, Korea and Vietnam: whereas in cat and horse meat consumption, the partiality toward the eastern/central Asians to that of non-Asians is far less, and thus the "Wikipedia controllers" for white pride(and pride of their closest allies and "friendlies"), work to make such edits. But this really has nothing to do with proper presentation of white people's eating habits or how the eating habits of western democracy's closest ally nations should be seen. The inclusion of horse meat in the See Also section should constitute a consistent and simple American(not necessarily objective) reader-observation of relevant facts and comparative study to the culture of eating these animals to which American and other "democratized" people should objectively examine without feeling humiliated, like how the editors and Dog meat article-controllers here are doing here by omitting direct reader-access to these relevant articles for comparative examination. Of course, as difficult as it may be for them to accept, the link to horse meat and other relevant "taboo meats" will be included in the See Also section. 99.130.8.150 (talk) 03:17, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
Images
Hi! Will you please check this user's edits? The user replaced the images with an image s/he uploaded on an article at ja WP. [1]. I undid the user's edit on the en article. Please check other edits and see if they are appropriate. And this one's edits too. See also this. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 08:27, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- I don't see why they should remove a whole plethora of other images, and only allow one. I personally would also prefer photographs of an individual, rather than a painted artwork. I for one would revert the edit. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 11:36, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry if my message is confusing. I meant I wanted you to compare their image changes at here, en WP like these ([2] and [3]) and see if the changes are appropriate as a Chinese expert. I personally think the previous selection is better but not so sure. So I asked you to see their edits at en WP. As for ja WP, I rarely edit there, and asked an admin there via mail. Oda Mari (talk) 13:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- Nothing there seems to be immediately problematic from what I've skimmed through. I've reapplied an image that was removed without proper justification (user seems to prefer one artwork over another, however this kind of edit isn't justified), but that's about it. There's nothing that seems controversial in regards to article contents and information on first glance. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 14:01, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry if my message is confusing. I meant I wanted you to compare their image changes at here, en WP like these ([2] and [3]) and see if the changes are appropriate as a Chinese expert. I personally think the previous selection is better but not so sure. So I asked you to see their edits at en WP. As for ja WP, I rarely edit there, and asked an admin there via mail. Oda Mari (talk) 13:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011
|
arilang1234
I'm afraid Arilang1234 might be having another go at his twisted POV pushing on the boxer rebellion article.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 21:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
can you obtain links of all the times when Arilang1234 accused people of pushing "chinese communist propaganda", and accusing them of being 50 cents?ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 22:27, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
chinese langauge and arilang1234
actually you got it backward, Arilang1234 was busy claiming the inferiority of the chinese language-
ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 19:10, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Vandalism
I'm working at the moment. I left a brief message for you on my talkpage. Regards. Denisarona (talk) 15:14, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
I noticed on your userpage that you have the template "ko-1". Would you take a look at the Korean-language sources provided at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Stephen and see if they are neutral reliable sources? Any help you can provide will be deeply appreciated. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 18:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
- Replied on yours. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 04:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
- Thank you for your very helpful review of the sources. None of these partisan sources seem reliable. I have copied your commentary to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Stephen to allow the closing admin to see your analysis. Best, Cunard (talk) 23:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi
Please have a look:Qing Dynasty Royal Decree of declaration of war against foreign powers and give some suggestions on how to improve it. Thanks. Arilang talk 11:39, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
canvassing and inflamation
he appears to be intent on inflaming the situation, conducting WP:CANVASS and harping on about a closed ANI, not even over a dispute which was about edits to an article at all, rather, as you know, it was about mudslinging on the talk page, presenting his own POV to influence other users/admins to obtain a certain goal, in violation of the canvass policy.
This was 3 days after I took a break from editing, it appears that he wants to pour gasoline on the fire. This doesn't quite appear to be Wikipedia:Harassment yet, but he seems intent on attempting to drive me out of wikipedia, and turning this into a personal dispute rather than intending on enforcing policy.
He asked another user to go to WP:Arbitration, I think he basically wants to kick me out of wikipedia.
Canvass says- "When notifying other editors of discussions, keep the number of notifications small, keep the message text neutral, and don't preselect recipients according to their established opinions."
the messages posted on the talkpages don't appear to follow that, especially the "keep the message text neutral"
I can think of four guidelines which this is about-
Wikipedia:Witchhunt Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not about winning Wikipedia:The Last Word Wikipedia:Just drop it
he should be given a indefinite ban... ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 18:42, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
informed of interaction ban
we've been advised now to stop interacting and to stop prolonging the dispute, i guess we'll just wait and see if any further inflamation comes up, if it doesn't, this dispute is over.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 00:36, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Heaven Worship
the second paragraph at Heaven worship is causing my BS meter to register 110%.
The third paragraph I actually know its true since I read several sources about it. The second paragraph just screams at historical revisionism aimed at asserting the ancient Chinese were pseudo christians.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 21:58, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi again
Please have a look:Qing Dynasty Royal Decree on events leading to the signing of Boxer Protocol and your comment is highly appreciated. Arilang talk 04:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Uyghur script help
Hello. You have a new message at Rjanag's talk page.
Talkback
Message added 02:28, 3 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
—HXL's Roundtable and Record 02:28, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Medicine!
Welcome to WikiProject Medicine!
I noticed you recently added yourself to our Participants' list, and I wanted to welcome you to our project. Our goal is to facilitate collaboration on medicine-related articles, and everyone is welcome to join (regardless of medical qualifications!). Here are some suggested activities: Read our Manual of Style for medical articles and guide to Reliable medical sources Join in editing our collaboration of the month (the current one is Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) Discuss with other members in the doctor's mess Have a look at some related WikiProjects Have a look at the collaboration dashboard Have a look at the Trusted Sources recommended by Wikiproject medicine Have a look at the most powerful citing tool Diberri's tool If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page, or please feel free to ask for help on my talk page. Again, welcome!. Happy editing, JFW | T@lk 08:57, 3 June 2011 (UTC) | ||
WikiProject Medicine, tasks you can do:
|
Re: Douglas et cetera
- The following archived discussion is now closed. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this section. Additional comments will be swiftly reverted, do not restore removed comments.
I am afraid it is the other way round - 'Macao' is English and 'Macau' is Portuguese. E.g. on the cover of a Macao SAR passport - the full name of the Macao SAR is written as 'Região Administrativa Especial de Macau' in Portuguese and 'Macao Special Administrative Region' in English. 'Macao' is the English name and 'Macau' is the Portuguese name - this is recognised by Macao and its sovereign state.
However, both are acceptable in English. It is just like using 'Munich' or 'München'. I am not trying to say that one of us is right and the other is wrong, I just want to draw your attention to the origin of 'Macao' and 'Macau'.
Douglas the Comeback Kid (talk) 11:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
You have claimed that Macao was under the 'jurisdiction' of the People's Republic of China. I guess you are talking about 'sovereignty'. Macao is under the sovereignty of the People's Republic of China by definition, but it is not within the latter's jurisdiction. Macao has its own laws different from Hong Kong's and the People's Republic of China's.
A place being under the sovereignty of a country does not necessarily mean that it is under the jurisdiction of that country. E.g. Gibraltar is under the sovereignty of the UK, but not the jurisdiction of the UK.
Douglas the Comeback Kid (talk) 11:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- That doesn't justify removing every instance of "X, China" and replacing it with "X". Your edits implied that Macau was a country of its own - note how you placed Macau within the "nation" parameter every time there was an infobox. This is unacceptable and a POV violation. As for your first point, "jurisdiction" and "sovereignty" are fluid words. Say Macau one day is invaded by the Palauan Red Army. Who comes to the rescue? The People's Liberation Army or the Macau Self-Defense Forces? What do Macanese sing as a national anthem? Sure, HK and Macau both have relative degrees of self-autonomy; however they are still de jure territories of the PRC, and of China. They are not part of mainland China, however mainland China does not equate to either of those two terms. Focusing on the three definitions:
- China: People's Republic of China, Republic of China
- Republic of China: Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu, Pratas, Taiping Island
- People's Republic of China: mainland China, Hong Kong SAR, Macau SAR
- Mainland China: 22 Provinces, 5 Autonomous regions, 4 Municipalities
- This is the standard form of distinguishment between the various "Chinas". Note how Macau is still PRC, despite that it is not part of the mainland. You are still confusing mainland China with the PRC - HK's laws differ to that of the mainland area, as guaranteed by the Basic Law of Hong Kong. That does not make it a separate country, so that everytime there is an infobox, you write "Hong Kong" for the country and "Victoria" for the city. Hong Kong still remains as a de jure city of the PRC. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 11:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hong Kong still remains as a de jure city of the PRC. - This is wrong indeed. The administrative division hierarchy provided by Article 30 of the 1982 Constitution does not apply in any special administrative region. HK is in no way defined, officially nor statutorily (or your term de jure), as a city of the People's Republic. 218.250.143.16 (talk) 21:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- With all due respect, the 1982 constitution was formulated how many years before 1997? In which case, you should be referring to the Basic Law, and not the constitution. What you have said makes just as much logic as citing Roman Law to discuss the legality of Hitler's leadership in Germany. Also, a word of warning to Douglas - if I even get the slightest feeling that you are either forum shopping, canvassing off-wiki or meatpuppeting, I won't hesitate to immediately take you to ANI; in many cases they are blockable offenses. May this be a clear warning to you. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 04:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hong Kong still remains as a de jure city of the PRC. - This is wrong indeed. The administrative division hierarchy provided by Article 30 of the 1982 Constitution does not apply in any special administrative region. HK is in no way defined, officially nor statutorily (or your term de jure), as a city of the People's Republic. 218.250.143.16 (talk) 21:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- With all due respect, your remarks revealed and highlighted your level of understanding of the PRC and its constitution. The 1982 Constitution isn't "Roman law". It has been amended a number of times and is still in force. And Article 31 was tailormade for the offer to the ROC, and for the then ongoing Sino-British dialogues over the sovereignty of HK. 218.250.143.16 (talk) 05:30, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- You were the one who referred to the 1982 Constitution. Any other person would have said "2004 Revision of the PRC Constitution". I am subjective, not objective; I don't like spend time daydreaming about what people might have wanted to say, I just read what I see. The clarity of your words is your issue and not mine. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 05:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- This again highlighted your level of understanding of the PRC. There are several constitutions since the PRC was established in 1949. The current one is the forth one, replacing the older ones. These aren't merely amendments, but new constitutions. The Article 31 that we've talking about has been in place since the current constitution, aka 1982 Constitution, was first promulgated. It has never been amended. 218.250.143.16 (talk) 06:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- >There are several constitutions since the PRC was established in 1949
No shit.
>It has never been amended
Normal people would still refer to the constitution by the year of modification. It was revised in 2004. Again, playing with semantics doesn't prove you to be any smarter - it's like the kid in 4th grade who fixes your spelling - it's a pain in the ass. You're not helping with anything by being a smartass. Also, don't even reply; until you can prove to act a bit more mature, you can stay off this very page. Before you say "lol I'm 36 years old and have a degree in rocketro-financiatics" like lots of people have done in the past, I don't care about your current biological state; if you give me the impression of underage behaviour, that will be how I will percieve you to be. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 06:56, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- >There are several constitutions since the PRC was established in 1949
- This again highlighted your level of understanding of the PRC. There are several constitutions since the PRC was established in 1949. The current one is the forth one, replacing the older ones. These aren't merely amendments, but new constitutions. The Article 31 that we've talking about has been in place since the current constitution, aka 1982 Constitution, was first promulgated. It has never been amended. 218.250.143.16 (talk) 06:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- You were the one who referred to the 1982 Constitution. Any other person would have said "2004 Revision of the PRC Constitution". I am subjective, not objective; I don't like spend time daydreaming about what people might have wanted to say, I just read what I see. The clarity of your words is your issue and not mine. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 05:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- With all due respect, your remarks revealed and highlighted your level of understanding of the PRC and its constitution. The 1982 Constitution isn't "Roman law". It has been amended a number of times and is still in force. And Article 31 was tailormade for the offer to the ROC, and for the then ongoing Sino-British dialogues over the sovereignty of HK. 218.250.143.16 (talk) 05:30, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
You have missed my point, Benlisquare. I have not denied that Hong Kong and Macao are under Chinese sovereignty. And I was not trying to 'justify replacing 'X, China' with 'X neither.
Hong Kong and Macao are Chinese territories by definition, but it is acceptable to treat them as territorial entities which they are; that does not mean recognising them as independent countries. For example, putting British Virgin Islands in the field of 'country' has laways been a common practice and it does not imply that the British Virgin Islands is an independent country from the UK. Hong Kong and Macao has always been treated as territorial entities and they are always referred to as simply 'Hong Kong' and 'Macao' respectively. 'Hong Kong, China' and 'Macao, China' are only names used when the 2 territories are participating in international sports events or conventions. 'Hong Kong' and 'Macao' is already adequate, there is no need to add ', China' after it. It is over the top. Also, there are always links for 'Hong Kong' and 'Macao' so people can understand more about the 2 territories if they go to those 2 pages.
Macao's national anthem has become The March of the Volunteers since 1999. I do not disagree with that and I recognise that. My point is: Macao, same as Hong Kong, is still a territorial entity despite a transfer of sovereignty. It maintains its own political system, legal system and immigration control. This is similar to the British overseas territories which have their own say on everything except military defence and foreign policy. As long as a territory meet such requirement, they are regarded as territorial entities and it is customary to treat them as countries. Of course that does not mean that they are indepenent countries, but it is just a normal practice. People do not add ', UK' after 'Falkland Islands' or 'Gibraltar' and no one has even complained about that. Equally, hardly has anyone complained about not adding ', China' behind 'Hong Kong' or 'Macao'; I am afraid you belong to a minority. I think you are over-sensitive about this issue.
Let me stress one thing: I recognise that Hong Kong and Macao are under the sovereignty of the People's Republic of China. But, Hong Kong and Macao are not ordinary Chinese cities like Canton or Shanghai, they are territorial entities under Chinese sovereignty.
Douglas the Comeback Kid (talk) 12:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- I would still recommend seeking the consensus of the greater community first. Start a new thread at NC-ZH or WPCHINA and state your view there. In addition, something I did not mention earlier was in regards to your removals. For instance, what you did at List of cities in China, amongst other pages. To me, it seemed that you were trying to make a point that HK was not China; you claim that you wish to represent fairly the autonomy of HK from the mainland, but then how do you explain this? This page surely has nothing to do with the mainland, yet you still have blanked out the entries for the cities of HK and Macau. I'm sure you are aware that "first impressions last", and since this was my first impression of you when you tripped 10 pages in my watchlist, this is probably why I don't seem to be able to assume good faith on your behalf, even if you really did not mean any harm in the first place. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 12:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- March of the Volunteers isn't the anthem of Macau. It is the anthem of the People's Republic of China and is extended to cover Macau. Macau itself, unlike many British overseas territories, got no anthem of its own. 218.250.143.16 (talk) 21:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- You know why? That's because Macau isn't a country. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 05:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Could you elaborate your understanding of the English word country, and explain why some countries that aren't sovereign states are having anthems of their own? 218.250.143.16 (talk) 06:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- How about, instead of playing with lexicon and changing the bend of the discussion, you take a nice warm cup of concrete mix and sit back down. Got a reliable source that verifies that Macau is a country? No? Well stay sitting down. Wikipedia doesn't care if you are right, Wikipedia cares if you can prove what you say; Wikipedia is built upon foundations of policy. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 07:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Could you elaborate your understanding of the English word country, and explain why some countries that aren't sovereign states are having anthems of their own? 218.250.143.16 (talk) 06:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- You know why? That's because Macau isn't a country. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 05:41, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi Ben, I am in total agreement that this user (and probably some compatriots, because there are several IPs doing the same thing) are making systematic edits that make HK/MO appear as independent from CN. Unfortunately, I am trying to lay low for a bit on reverting this because they are using my contributions as a list. If I edit a Chinese article it is a big red flag that says "EDIT WAR HERE". I am also the subject of several Chinese blogs that advocate coming to Wikipedia and blindly reverting everything I do. If a discussion arises, I would gladly lend my voice. Doing the actual in project work right now to revert/combat this is not a good idea. Thanks, and do keep me in the loop. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of past discussion. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this section.
Hi again
- Please have a look:1900 National Upheaval 庚子國變記 (李希聖), your comments are to be appreciated. Arilang talk 13:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Vietnamese spelling "sát cộng"?
hey goon, out of curiosity, where did you get the spelling "sát cộng"? Do you yourself speak Vietnamese? I ask since gTranslate gives me "community monitoring" as a translation, but it's completely possible/likely that gTranslate isn't getting it right. BTW, how did you get it so that the Welcome above my editing box is in a foreign language? Is there somewhere I can change my default settings so that my Welcome appears in a different language? I already have my prefs set for Asturian, so all my control buttons, etc. are in that language, but I didn't know I can make it so other people see parts of my account in Asturian. Thanks for any ideas, MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:19, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- "Sát cộng" (as written in Quoc Ngu, the modern latin-based Vietnamese alphabet; in Han-Nom used in the old days this would be 殺共) is a Sino-Vietnamese word that means "kill commies". A large portion of Vietnamese nouns, verbs and adjectives are loanwords from Chinese. "Sát" (殺) is a Sino-Viet word meaning "to kill, murder". "cộng" (共) is an abbreviation for "Cộng sản" (共產), which literally means "communist", for example, "Việt cộng" (as in Viet Cong; 越共) literally means "Vietnamese communists". Though, by itself, the character 共 can mean anything from commune, community, togetherness, similar, et cetera, in the case of "Sát cộng", the usage of cộng would be an abbreviation of 共產, and can only refer to communism. Although "communist" is a compound word that is more than just "cộng" (e.g. Communist party is "Đảng Cộng sản" (黨共產); Communist Party of Vietnam is "Đảng Cộng sản Việt Nam" (黨共產越南)), 共 by itself is widely recognised amongst East Asian countries to be the shortening/abbreviation for 共產 (communist) (共產 Gòngchǎn in Chinese, Kyōsan in Japanese, gongsan in Korean, Cộng sản in Vietnamese). Other East Asian countries follow the same principles relating to this type of wording.
- As for your welcome box, I have no idea, I didn't do anything to it. Since you asked, no I don't speak Vietnamese, though I am familiar with the linguistics behind Vietnamese and other East Asian languages. I am Chinese myself. And in case you are wondering, I saw your post on the WPMILHIST noticeboard and thought your page was interesting; hope your future DYK goes all well.
- N.B. A google search for "Sát cộng" gives you all sorts of things, such as anti-red hate videos on Youtube, and Google Image Search gives an image of a tattoo you mentioned and linked in your page. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 15:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Wow, great explanation! I didn't necessarily doubt your translation's accuracy, was just curious how it works, and to reassure that you were firm on that spelling. I've occasionally done some Persian spellings that I was 90% sure were right, but then I'd tag them "verification needed" to let folks know it wasn't necessarily spot-on. Mostly for terms that just don't exist written in Persian in online resources. Thanks for the wishes on the DYK; I've got about 30 refs (not that I'll use all of them), and though it'll be close I think I can make DYK minimum length (which is tough for just a slogan), and also get both a .mil photo of a tatooed sailor, and a pic of a .mil patch. Should give it some visual pop. Thanks for the transcription! MatthewVanitas (talk) 15:49, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
|
User:CentralAsianHistory
User:CentralAsianHistory could be considered a vandal.
he inserted this map which he created on his own with absolutely no sources, its considered WP:ORIGINAL RESEARCH, not only that, but he puts a Star of David on the Chinese flag on his "map". this is just laughable.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 00:48, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Unlicensed image on Commons, potential attack image. I've already taken action on it. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 04:46, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi again
- Please have a look:1900 National Upheaval and kindly suggest ways to improve the article, thanks. Arilang talk 08:43, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Your reply is requested [10] Thank you. Mlpearc powwow 14:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
My question has been replaced by a block notice. My query is still live though, "I know of no restrictions on Usernames because of them being of "political nature" as your warning stated, could you please cite the section or passage from our username policy that your notice was based on"? Thank you. Mlpearc powwow 21:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- "Chicom" is a disparaging term for someone from the People's Republic of China (as opposed to Overseas Chinese and those from the rest of Greater China, who aren't, in effect, "coms"). Since a username like "lynchalln1gg3rz666" or "j3wsdid911" would be promptly blocked, I believe that the blocking of this user is just as necessary. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 03:40, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
- Also, I'd like to suggest that the remainder of this discussion take place at User_talk:Daniel_Case#User:Nochicomsubversion, if you don't mind. I'd prefer to have all the discussion take place in one area, and not have pieces here and there. Is that alright with you? -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 04:00, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 14:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
—HXL's Roundtable and Record 14:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I Need Hanzi
can you type up the Hanzi in this image-
I don't have the software to do it, I want to run the hanzi through a xiaoerjin converter and compare it to the image (to see if the converter's creator is telling the truth about whether it works). (the hanzi should be in traditional, not simplified)
I also need the Hanzi for the second image at this link, its written directly under the xiaoerjinΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 22:22, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Here's what I could do:
- 同相—柱—領首—富—乎合
- 聖人的女子是四個;哎一切人,你們知道此是,惟人的性格,(unclear)根在两分上,受囊?;(unclear)的,受**的,受(unclear)(unclear)的是,六十様(unclear)然他的根子是七個,(unclear)真
For the second one, a few of the characters in the image were unclear and difficult to read (likely a scanning issue). Regarding two characters from the 3rd line both with the 言 radical, since I would be technically/officially classified as illiterate in China (Chinese language home-taught at a late age, English first language), I never learnt these two characters and don't recognise them (are they traditional Chinese?); they are marked with **. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 03:30, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
- I think the xiaoerjin might possibly in Lanyin Mandarin or Central Plains Mandarin, do you know anyone from gansu here who can speak northwestern dialects?ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 21:39, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
South American dreadnought race
Hello, thanks very much for adding categories to this article. I wasn't really sure which ones should be added, but you cleared that up for me. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
books
there are issues concerning the neutrality of the content of the articles of the two following books.
Divine Boxing: The real Yihetuan and 1900 National Upheaval
ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 20:10, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
And wasn't he advised to back away from the topic of Boxer rebellion? He is essentially repeating everything he spewed out on the talk page of the article onto the articles of these two books.ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 20:12, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Welcome to WikiProject Film
Hey, welcome to WikiProject Film! We're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of films, awards, festivals, filmmaking, and film characters. If you haven't already, please add {{User WikiProject Film}} to your user page.
A few features that you might find helpful:
- Most of our important discussions about the project itself and its related articles take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
- The project has a monthly newsletter. The newsletter for May has been published. June's issue is currently in production; it will be delivered as a link, but several other formats are available.
There is a variety of interesting things to do within the project; you're free to participate however much—or little—you like:
- Want to jump right into editing? The style guidelines show things you should include.
- Want to assist in some current backlogs within the project? Visit the Announcements template to see how you can help.
- Want to see some great film article examples? Head on over to the spotlight department.
- Want to know how good our articles are? Our assessment department has rated the quality of the majority of film article in Wikipedia. Check it out!
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask another fellow member, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:24, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Mirroring a thread to Project China
Hi 李先生, I would like to post a mirror of a thread to the Project China discussion page. Do you happen to know what code I should use for that? --Bobthefish2 (talk) 03:01, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Just transclude it (but don't WP:SUBST it or it will never be up-to-date), for example, if the talk was at User talk:Example#Foo, you would type {{User talk:Example#Foo}} (ignore the redlink, the {{tl}} tag is being silly). However, be sure to remember to remove the transclusion after (and if) the talk has been deleted or archived, otherwise the whole page (and not just the section) will be transcluded, which will be quite messy. For an example, refer to here; there was originally a translcluded section here. Following archival of the talk, I have replaced the transclusion with a simple link to the archived talk, as seen here. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 04:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. I did a couple of tests but that doesn't seem to work very well for me. Apparently, the entire page gets transcluded, which is not what I wanted. I read a bit on WP:Transclusion and a few pages about templates and I don't seem to be able to find a way to do a partial transclusion (by the way, those pages are so damn terribly organized/written). Here are the two sections I wanted to mirror. Maybe I've not written the code correctly:
- {{Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names)#Question}}
- {{Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(geographic_names)#Comments}}
- --Bobthefish2 (talk) 05:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Argh, I'm not sure now. Transcluding sections used to work, I don't know what's going wrong now. Either one of the devs changed the code for Wikipedia, or I'm doing something wrong (I've seen it work perfectly before)... I'll have a look into it. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 05:45, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, I've seen that work too and it's strange that it doesn't work now. Anyhow, I simply copied and pasted the lead paragraphs since the rest of the thread seems to be going off-topic anyway (and thus updates may not need to be mirrored) --Bobthefish2 (talk) 06:04, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Argh, I'm not sure now. Transcluding sections used to work, I don't know what's going wrong now. Either one of the devs changed the code for Wikipedia, or I'm doing something wrong (I've seen it work perfectly before)... I'll have a look into it. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 05:45, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry if this is a bit late, but I think Template:Anchor may have something to do with this, I'm not sure. I've seen it used to assist with link piping/redirects, but I'm not sure if it can be used the same in regards to transcluding. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 06:58, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks. I can use that in the future. By the way, how active is Project China/Taiwan's talk page? --Bobthefish2 (talk) 17:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I saw your SPI case against KoreanSentry, and become very concerned of his onsite and offsite behavior. I think he should be notified about his constant racial attacks on editors of Chinese origin, and other various threats. I've also noted that he shares a username with a particular internet forum, which I would basically call a hate site.--PCPP (talk) 14:42, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Well, what avenues are there to take? What happens off-wiki (i.e. any hate speech) doesn't technically break any on-wiki rules, as whatever happens elsewhere is none of Wikipedia's concern... the only thing that can have action taken is any off-wiki WP:CANVASSing that occurs, which has happened in our case, however it isn't serious enough to warrant any significant action taken against KoreanSentry. Unless, of course, if you had a particular idea in mind? -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 15:09, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- I personally think he should be notified to not to further engage in personal attacks per WP:NPA. Looking at his talk page, I believe several of his responses are unncessarily hostile, and I also believe his username advertises his off wiki website.--PCPP (talk) 18:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Bitcoin
The key in the below is that the site was effectively NOT hacked. The previous version suggests the crash was a result of a hack, there is no real evidence of this at this time.
From Mt. Gox site:
It appears that someone who performs audits on our system and had read-only access to our database had their computer compromised. This allowed for someone to pull our database. The site was not compromised with a SQL injection as many are reporting, so in effect the site was not hacked. Two months ago we migrated from MD5 hashing to freeBSD MD5 salted hashing. The unsalted user accounts in the wild are ones that haven't been accessed in over 2 months and are considered idle. Once we are back up we will have implemented SHA-512 multi-iteration salted hashing and all users will be required to update to a new strong password. We have been working with Google to ensure any gmail accounts associated with Mt.Gox user accounts have been locked and need to be reverified. Mt.Gox will continue to be offline as we continue our investigation, at this time we are pushing it to 8:00am GMT. When Mt.Gox comes back online, we will be putting all users through a new security measure to authenticate the users. This will be a mix of matching the last IP address that accessed the account, verifying their email address, account name and old password. Users will then be prompted to enter in a new strong password. Once Mt.Gox is back online, trades 218869~222470 will be reverted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hisabness (talk • contribs) 18:57, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- ...which is exactly what the article (once) said. In the section that you blanked. Reading comprehension, are you game for it? -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 07:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
DYK for The Founding of a Party
Sawndip
I very much appreciate the work you have done to expand the information on Zhuang writting systems. In one edit I changed two things both of which you have undone. Firstly "In addition to Chinese characters categorized using the six traditional classification principles, sawndip also consists of" contradicts the section below which includes several of the six classification principles. A rewording closer to that of Bauer would better. Second, there are latin letters used in Sawndip, Bauer was only aware of there use in Cantonese because he limited his research of Sawndip to the Sawndip Sawdenj. See for example http://gdzhdb.l10n-support.com/cgi-bin/test2.cgi?sample_text=[Kk] which lists the use of the letter k by a number of different authors in <平果嘹歌> five volumes published in 2005/6 . Johnkn63 (talk) 08:04, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry about that. I should have assumed better faith. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 09:18, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Cao ni ma.jpg
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:05, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Your signature
Wikipedia:Signatures#Length I think you should cut your signature down in size some as it makes editing difficult. Colincbn (talk) 17:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Proposed Tibetan naming conventions
A while back, I posted a new proposal for Tibetan naming conventions, i.e. conventions that can be used to determine the most appropriate titles for articles related to the Tibetan region. This came out of discussions about article titles on Talk:Qamdo and Talk:Lhoka (Shannan) Prefecture. I hope that discussions on the proposal's talk page will lead to consensus in favour of making these conventions official, but so far only a few editors have left comments. If you would be interested in taking a look at the proposed naming conventions and giving your opinion, I would definitely appreciate it. Thanks—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 20:40, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
WP:FILM June 2011 Newsletter
The June 2011 issue of the WikiProject Film newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. We are also seeking new members to assist in writing the newsletter, if interested please leave a note on the Outreach department's talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Isuzu1001
Someone's at it again...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Isuzu1001
ΔΥΝΓΑΝΕ (talk) 17:01, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Shanghai vs. Chongqing
There is a RfC thread at Talk:Shanghai regarding the question whether Shanghai or Chongqing can claim to be the largest city in the PR China. However, this thread has not seen participation from anyone in more than 5 days, and there really needs to be more input. You may wish to give your opinion on this matter. Thanks much—HXL's Roundtable and Record 01:52, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011
|
Blank line removal
I noticed you removed some blank lines in Gregorian calendar. It makes no difference in how an article looks to the reader whether a heading has one blank line before it and one after it, or whether there no blank lines around the heading. Also, it does not save any Wikipedia storage space to remove the lines, since Wikipedia saves all old versions of articles. So it seems to me this type of edit is not worthwhile. Is there a good reason to do this that I don't know about? Jc3s5h (talk) 12:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Though this might be subject to discussion, but wouldn't articles look aesthetically better if there was uniformity throughout the article? Having a few gaps between a few sections, and then having none between another few seems uneven to me. Sure, it isn't a necessity, though I do think it makes the article a tiny bit more tidy. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 15:59, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- The article is presented to the reader exactly the same way whether the heading is surrounded by one blank line above, and one below, or if there are no blank lines. However, if there are two or more blank lines above the heading, or two or more blank lines below the heading, the presentation will change and that would be a good reason to delete some blank lines. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- I suppose you were originally referring to this edit? I've removed a double break, so that it is now a single line break, so that there isn't a large gap after the section. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 16:55, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Yes; I don't pay much attention to Wikipedia's diff, because it isn't very good. When I looked at the text of the two versions in edit mode, it looked to me as if a single break had been removed, but I guess I was mistaken. Thanks for trying to make the articles look a little neater. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:52, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- I suppose you were originally referring to this edit? I've removed a double break, so that it is now a single line break, so that there isn't a large gap after the section. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 16:55, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- The article is presented to the reader exactly the same way whether the heading is surrounded by one blank line above, and one below, or if there are no blank lines. However, if there are two or more blank lines above the heading, or two or more blank lines below the heading, the presentation will change and that would be a good reason to delete some blank lines. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Request
Hello! Could you write an article about my city - Żagań on Chinese Wikipedia? I would be thankful. Only 2-4 sentences enough. Saganum (talk) 17:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- Here you go, zh:雜幹. I did a quick and basic job covering most information in the lede from the English article, along with a few other things. Don't know if it will survive AfD though - currently the article is short and unsourced, and ZH Wiki tends to cull unsourced stubs quite quickly. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 16:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
hanzi
can you type up the characters for the adam, abraham, david, arabia, and the buddha thing over here at the right side of the page.
I also need the characters for the sha-ba-ti thing here, at the bottom left corner of the page DÜNGÁNÈ (talk) 02:59, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
the cartoons on Senkaku Islands
If you want to just delete this, feel free; I just didn't want to clutter up the article talk page by continuing there.
This form of "satire" is something I deal with on an academic level, and let me say, you and Bobthefish2 are neither the first to raise my anger, nor the first to get defensive about it. It's like when someone makes a joke about how terrible women drivers are, and then the defense is, "Hey, it's just a joke!" or "Hey, it's funny cuz it's true!" (even when statistically it's not). The perpetuation of stereotypes as comedy is harmful, no matter who perpetuates it, no matter whether its "true" or not...Do Japanese natives speak English with an Engrish accent? Sure some of them do; others have milder accents then people from the Midwest, from Barbados, from "native" English speaking countries. Would I ever go on a public forum, especially one with actual rules about civility, and post a joke about Engrish? Never.
Let me give another example: sometimes, celebrities in Japan put on Blackface and do tv commercials, skit comedy, what have you. Do they intend it to be offensive? No. Are they aware that the use of blackface is part of a nearly 200 year old tradition of demeaning the competence, intelligence, and attractiveness of African Americans? No, they don't. Does that mean that when they do it, I (as someone who does know) should be silent, and let it slide as cultural naivete? Absolutely not. The only way to make racism and sexism and homophobia go away is to challenge them when and where they occur. In the case of the Japanese blackface, its a teaching moment (hey, let me tell you a little about that...). In the case of allegedly smart, allegedly civil people posting on Wikipedia to lighten the mood, it's not a teachable moment, it's time for a scolding. I appreciate satire. I don't appreciate racial stereotyping dressed up and called satire. And you know what gets me most angry? Calling it political correctness, which, is a term invented by the political right as a way of justifying prejudicial, discriminatory language. Almost all of the "extreme" pc that people rail against was never used by "liberals"; no reasonable person ever used the phrase "vertically challenged" for short; but by doing created these ridiculous fictions, the right attempted to justify continuing to use gendered pronouns as if they were generic, words like "retarded" and "female doctors"....I'm not taking a pc stance against those comics--I'm saying that I saw them, they offended me immediately, and I called Bob out on them, since this type of behavior is 100% in line with his standard operating procedure: make a trolling, offensive comment but defend himself by calling it a joke or by blaming the listener for misinterpreting him.
Did I overreact? Yes, probably. My apologies. Was I partially reacting not just to the comics but to the editor who posted them? Yes, I was, and that's not fair. Does that change the fact that the comics are offensive and have no business being passed off as a moment of lighthearted comedy on a Wikipedia talk page? No, it does not. I have no problem defending my actions at WQA, ANI, or wherever, because as someone said recently, WP:NPA doesn't prevent us from calling out racism when we see it. Qwyrxian (talk) 08:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC)