User talk:Ksyrie

For discussions before 18 march 2007 see User talk:Ksyrie/Archive1

Well, the info that you added just seemed to be a repetition of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima and Qoigyijabu. While I appreciate your efforts, it appeared to be redundant with the info that we already had. Khoikhoi 03:19, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But the details can already be found in the relevant articles. The Panchen Lama article is only supposed to give a general overview/summary, and not get into too many specific details. Khoikhoi 03:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:ATT. Khoikhoi 03:43, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's necessary, but if you insist on having it, at least make it NPOV. Khoikhoi 07:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, on second thought your way is probably a better idea. Or what do you think of restructuring the page entirely? Instead of having a separate section header for every country, have just three section headers for chronological order: pre-Japanese colonization (talk about the Koreans in Northeast China and the Russian Far East), during the Japanese colonization period (more Koreans in Northeast China, Koreans in Japan, Koreans in Sakhalin), then post-division of Korea (USA, Latin America, and then China). Or got any other ideas? And thanks for finding that article, was interesting to read. Cheers, cab 03:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ksyrie for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Wikimachine 04:45, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if you see this as an attempt by me to infuriate you. I'm unlike all other KPOV editors you've seen. But, I was quite surprised when both of you replied to my posts within 5 min of my editing 2 times (to my 2 posts), alternating in order. (Wikimachine 05:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

If that's the case, I'm really sorry. Once the sock puppet case is closed, I'll take time to apologize formally. (Wikimachine 05:23, 18 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

But please be understanding. I'm very weary of my experience with sock puppets @ my disputes against JPOV editors (i.e. talk:Dokdo). I'm also sick of KPOV editors using sock puppets. (i.e. user:Appleby, who was a really productive Wikipedian for WP:KO). (Wikimachine 05:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Yes sir. At the same time, I was thinking that @ disputed cases, using multiple voices would be more productive than providing evidences because the evidences themselves are contested -that is, should we use Chinese evidence, or Korean evidence? Actually, that was a bad example. A good one would be "should we use Chinese or Korean name for that specific individual?" (Wikimachine 05:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Ksyrie, I've tentatively cleared you. --Nlu (talk) 00:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I am at work now and will be abel to respond later today.--Woogie10w 12:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC) · The population data for each country is 1939.[reply]
· The schedule adds across and down the page, the numbers are not a range.
· The footnotes must be in English.
· The footnotes are the appropriate place to list disputed data.
· The footnote for China makes it clear that China’s losses are disputed. The sources listed by R. J. Rummel range from 10.6 to 37.0 million.
--Woogie10w 14:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC) Can you please provide a translation of the material you posted today. To bump the number up to 35 million we need a real solid source, not the Peoples Daily--Woogie10w 00:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Posted this back in 2005 because I had a hunch that the China number was bigger than 10 million. I hope you have the answer to my question.
Can anyone provide authoriative information on China's civilian losses in WW2 1937-45?--Berndd11222 23:32, 26 November 2005 (UTC) --Woogie10w 01:01, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I just sent a E-Mail to a Prof. Stephen Phillips who teaches East Asian history asking him for sources that will clear up the issue of Chinese losses, hopefully he can point us in the right direction. In any case I want to get the number right, I do not care if it is 10 or 35 million.--Woogie10w 23:12, 21 March 2007 (UTO)
Official Chinese sources confirm that the figure of 35 million includes dead as well as wounded. The WW 2 Casualties page does not include statistics of wounded ,only war dead[1][2][3]

You are right, I think the number should be 20 million based on the data you posted from the China Academy of Science. In any case the English language source R. J. Rummel will back up the 20 million. What do think abou that?--Woogie10w 12:21, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, maybe if you have the time to provide a Chinese source. I think it would be better than R.J. Rummel--Woogie10w 12:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The statistic of 11.4 million military casualties includes battle dead, wounded, conscript dead and deserters. The source I listed Ho Ping ti details military losses as 1,500,000 killed, 750,000 missing in battle plus 1,500,000 million died of disease and 3,000,000 wounded. There were 14 million men who were concripted of whom 3.5 million were on active duty in 1945. R. J. Rummel believes the balance of 3 million died of mistreatment during conscription campaigns during the war. The Kuomingtang forcibly rounded up men for service who were treated in a real brutal manner. Life in China was real grim then. My best friend in grade school back in 1958 was from China, his parents were in Chungking during the war. They said the Japanese bombed every day. I grew up in the NY Chinatown--Woogie10w 00:53, 25 March

2007 (UTC)

This is a great film, real powerful.Devils on the Doorstep.--Woogie10w 16:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kysrie, you have violated the 3RR for the Korean War. See WP:AN/3RR wbfergus 11:06, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Please be courteous to other editors and use edit summaries when updating articles. The Mathbot tool shows your usage of edit summaries to be very low:

Edit summary usage for Ksyrie: 4% for major edits and 55% for minor edits. Based on the last 150 major and 44 minor edits in the article namespace.

Using edit summaries helps other editors quickly understand your edits, which is especially useful when you make changes to articles that are on others' watchlists. Thanks and happy editing! --Kralizec! (talk) 00:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok,I will improve.--Ksyrie 00:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ksyrie! I'm sorry for my accusation. It wasn't you after all.

When I was checking through your edits, they were all excellent & the range of topics that you covered with your edits clearly show that you are very NPOV and a good citizen.

I hope that the sock puppetry case has not messed up your image, but that it actually elevated your status in the Wikipedia community by showing all others that you have absolutely nothing to do with stupid things like sock puppetry.

Once again, thanks for your patience. Good luck with the rest of your Wikipedia career & perhaps run for adminship! (if you run for adminship, invite me to your rfa) (Wikimachine 16:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Hello, I am wondering what was the problem with the categories which you removed form the suborbital page? Thanks. Charles 16:15, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've nominated the article on “South Tibet” for deletion. Please have another look at the discussion on that article. —Babelfisch 08:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have tidied your insertion in gyrfalcon:-

In the 12th century AD the Jurchen tribes rebelled against the Chinese Liao Dynasty which was set up by Khitan people. The primary cause was that the Khitan nobles extorted a big tax of gyrfalcons. ^{[citation needed]}

Please provide a source reference for this information. Anthony Appleyard 17:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page, the archive for your talk page should have a space before the number in its name. I don't mean to be picky, but policies are policies, no matter how unnecessary. --Chaffers ^(talk)/_{(contributions)} 15:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Baekdu_Mountain#Suggested_Merge —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yeahsoo (talk • contribs) 21:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Please provide a source for the material that you just added to the Yue Fei page. (Ghostexorcist 04:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

It doesn't matter if the source is in Chinese, just as long as their is a source. Just make sure you turn the web address into an 'in-line citation'. Just type the formula: <ref>[http... title of page] {{zh icon}}</ref>

If you typed the address for the Yue Fei page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yue_Fei) and then the title "Yue Fei", the end result would be like this:^[1]

(Ghostexorcist 04:27, 12 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

What's with this split suggestion? The article isn't long enough to have any splits. Perhaps after the plot section is completed. Lightblade 10:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you look up Shaanxi Y-8 and China PLA Air Force KJ-200 Accident you will see that this accident, although initially kept secret by the Chinese, is though to have involved not a KJ-2000 based on the Il-76 but the KJ-200 based and the Y-8, a Chinese built An-12. That incident had already been added on the Il-76 page and then removed

In the references given, the Janes Articles, which is dated Oct 2006, several months after the accident leans towards the KJ-200 The the Aviation Safety Net Database which records worldwide aircraft accidents states it is a KJ-200 http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20060603-0&lang=fr

This 2007 Article states it is a KJ-200 : http://www.sinodefence.com/news/2006/news06-06-08.asp

Another that says the same : http://www.isrjournal.com/story.php?F=1865776

This article also says its a KJ-200

Only the initial reports publishe right after the accident speculated the aircraft might have been a KJ-2000.

Hudicourt 14:17, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Mengyao Zhou, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in Wikipedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert notability may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is notable, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page (below the existing db tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mhking 02:16, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labeled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the edit summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the edit summary field, especially for big edits or when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. 71.183.106.162 11:07, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please come to Chicago Sun-Times to help edit the article. Dongdongdog 22:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! : )

This is Daniel Bryant and Armed Blowfish from the Mediation Committee, and as you may be aware, we are mediating the Goguryeo Mediation Committee case.

We are sending you this message as you are one of the involved parties in this dispute. Recently, a private wiki was set up for private mediation by the Mediation Committee. As noted by the Mediation Committee policy on confidentiality, mediation is confidential, and therefore the Committee has decided in this case to hold all mediation discussions in this case on the private wiki. Therefore, we need you to get an account so the case can proceed.

To request an account on the private Mediation Wiki, please click this link to email Armed Blowfish. Please include "Goguryeo" somewhere in the subject, e.g. "Private wiki account request for Goguryeo mediation", to note that this email has highest priority. If you do not have email enabled on your account and are unable to use the mail feature, please let us know on Armed Blowfish's talk page.

Thank you so much,
Daniel Bryant and Armed Blowfish (mail), 04:41, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be possible for you to do what is outlined above as soon as possible? Many of the parties are itching to begin, and it'd be great if you could get on board too. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 05:39, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use them.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 18:43, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You mustn't refer to other editors as "vandals" or their edits as "vandalism" unless they actually are.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 20:24, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop the edit war on South Tibet and please stop re-inserting unsourced material. Please have another look at the talk page for that article. —Babelfisch 03:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again: Stop the edit war on South Tibet and stop re-inserting unsourced material.

You have re-inserted the same unsourced stuff several times, without addressing the issues I've brought up in detail on the talk page:

1. 18:50, 20 April 2007
2. 05:54, 6 May 2007
3. 01:00, 7 May 2007
4. 04:14, 7 May 2007
5. 21:43, 8 May 2007

Such behaviour – and calling other users "vandals" for removing unsourced material – is unacceptable. —Babelfisch 07:04, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! We believe enough participants have signed up for us to begin mediation. However, if you have not yet signed up for the MediationWiki, please do so.

Those of you who have signed up can log in at the following URL using the username and password sent in your account creation email: http://www.southportbeekeepers.co.uk/medcom/index.php?title=Special:Userlogin&returnto=Goguryeo:Noticeboard

Be sure to watchlist this page, if you have not done so already, and check it regularly: http://www.southportbeekeepers.co.uk/medcom/index.php/Goguryeo:Noticeboard

There are questions for you to answer here, and you should watchlist this as well: http://www.southportbeekeepers.co.uk/medcom/index.php/Goguryeo:Opening

Thanks!

Armed Blowfish and Daniel Bryant, 07:10, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please respond to my comments at Talk:South_Tibet#Sources when you get a chance.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 23:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also stopped by the article and requested that you explain your position and the sources that support it. I am new to this issue and it would be helpful.--Danaman5 17:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, could you give me specific statements that you believe should be in the article and the sources that accompany them? I am trying to make a compromise between your position and the others, and to do that, I will need to know exactly what statements you want in the article. I looked at the Arunachal Pradesh article, but I can't tell which statements you support.--Danaman5 02:08, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

我假设你会中文。我发现那个叫“Cy鬼38”的南朝鲜用户和人在自己的talk页里用朝鲜文交流，不让人知道他们在干什么。因此我也就不客气，用中文和你交流了。我也没什么见不得人的话，请看一下我的contribution页，注意一下那些我无法再继续操作的页面。--Jiejunkong 03:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

哦，没注意上面的多条留言。祝你思考愉快，其实不必生气，要向另一面的用户学习游戏规则，讲理是很费事的，但这对双方都一样。--Jiejunkong 03:36, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

我是美籍华人,我会"CSL"(Chinese as Second Language)的学生。我只是想给你打招呼，让你知道我也发现许多Wikipedia基于的反华/夏国家与民族分裂宣传以及别有用心信息中心,用来对付中华国家和民族团结。搞反华分裂宣传不只是小/土流氓,而包括一些大学学历与大学教授。我简单给你介绍，但是你可能已经知道了，一些"华人的朋友"，他们的"CSL"挺厉害的，但他们别有用心"支持"华人文化和历史。Andrew West (魏安) 这个"华人朋友"删除了我连接故突厥文文章到半坡陶符的编辑。他自己的意识在六月二十六日二零一零年说:"resemblence of some symbols to Banpo, Runic, Etruscan etc. is just coincidence and unsourced". 问题是魏安这个Euro-centric 混蛋否拒绝同样意识的故突厥文文章里的Runic script文章连接。我后来很简单无辜连接"半坡文"的Wiki文章到Old Turkic Script文章;马上就有另外一个白人老外躁急反编我的连接编辑(一个纽约意大利族男子叫做"Robbiemuffin")；他说:"Most pottery shows only one, sometimes two of the above marks (because) image makes it look like an alphabet". Andrew West 与 Robbiemuffin 这种人应该了解"半坡文"是新石器时代的(陕西地带)考古发现，而故突厥文是3000多年以后的(现代蒙古国)考古发现；可问题存在这些白男人大主义的别有用心。我不耽误您时间，在最后给您说一下另外喜欢失真亚洲+华夏历史的分子:Christopher Beckwith. 他是丹增嘉措的政治顾问之一；宣传"Sino-Tibetan"汉藏语系的分裂. 说实在的，阿尔泰语系+汉藏语系+突厥语系都很可能有同一个青铜时代之前的来源。这也就是简单的说，中原+北原+草原人都拥有一个祖先；虽然"合久必分，分久必合"，但是语言一致保持分别；除非同化。历史告诉我们，汉人语言以及文化是最强的同化系列。我前面给你表达一些人的名字,他们只不过代表反华合"Pan-Asianism"恐惧症的小部分。他们将尽其所能，失真文化，历史以及种族，以满足他们的种族主义和恐惧症。Got Milked (talk) 14:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I cleaned up some grammar on your edit to Chi Mak and also presented the prosecution viewpoint. Thought you'd want to know... --KNHaw ^(talk) 04:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You asked "why you deleting the public domain materials?" Well, the term Public domain has a very specific usage, implying that anyone can copy, distribute, or sell it for any reason we wish. From what I understand about the case, his defense attorney was claiming that it was not classified or export controlled, not that it was public domain (more than likely, his employer owns the information that he produced and could sue anyone who went out and publically claimed they owned it). The government was not prosecuting him for taking copyrighted material out of the U.S., but for taking out information that was covered by other specific espionage laws. --KNHaw ^(talk) 05:11, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've done a poor job of explaining my terms here. I think the phrase you want is something to the effect "information that the public has viewed and knows of and is thus not classified." Is that right? If so, the term "Public Domain" does not mean that. Public Domain instead means "information that can be reproduced and distributed without license or royalty."

Here's an example to better clarify: The movie Star Wars is not in the Public Domain. If I start up a factory and begin making DVDs of that movie and selling them, I will be sued. Nevertheless, the movie is not export controlled since it does not have sensitive military information in it. You can take a DVD of Star Wars anywhere in the world with you and the U.S. government won't arrest you. Chi Mak's defense attorneys were arguing that his CDs were like Star Wars - not miliarilly sensitive. They never claimed that the CDs were in the public domain, which would have given him the right to start up a factory and begin selling them (which he didn't do). They just want to explain why he wasn't exposing military information - they felt the information had no military value because it had been presented to the American public.

Again, I think you want a term that means "information that the public has viewed and knows of and is thus not classified," not "Public Domain." Someone else chopped out "Public Domain" but I edited it and reintroduced your thought about exposure of public information. Check it out and let me know what you think.

--KNHaw ^(talk) 20:18, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for citing sources for the Public Domain term. It should eliminate any questions about using the term.

--KNHaw ^(talk) 23:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on China International Aviation & Aerospace Exhibition, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because China International Aviation & Aerospace Exhibition is very short providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting China International Aviation & Aerospace Exhibition, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 02:43, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Flash marriage, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Cathal 04:15, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:ChineseArmyspecial1lg.jpg, by Strangerer (talk · contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:ChineseArmyspecial1lg.jpg is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:ChineseArmyspecial1lg.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --Android Mouse Bot 2 07:28, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since you were the last (non-anonymous) to change the page Sick man of Asia, I would like to mention that there's a typographical error, a "the the". I don't want to edit myself, because I don't know if this browser will mess up the chinese characters. Albmont 19:49, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have to politely disagree with your edit changing "proteges" to "surpporters" (which is misspelled) in the Long march article.

A protege is defined as "a person who receives support and protection from an influential patron who furthers the protege's career". The sentence states that these proteges became leaders of the future, which is indeed what occurred. A "supporter" gives aid or encouragement to a person or cause. There is a different relationship, which is more general and does not imply that the leader returns a benefit to the supporter. The use of protege adds an extra level of meaning to the sentence.

I have posted this in the discussion page to see how other editors feel. Ryanjo 03:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion of Xinjiang Chalkis Co.Ltd[4] is in question,this company is the second biggest Ketchup producer in the world.--Ksyrie 06:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wait your reply.--Ksyrie 22:36, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With only the words "One of the most biggest Ketchup producer in the world", the article Xinjiang Chalkis Co.Ltd did not assert the notability of the subject. If you create the article with reliable sources, and it is notable as you say, then it will not be deleted again. —METS501 (talk) 04:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

please to restore it,I will add the necessary references.--Ksyrie 04:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've restored it. You should add the references quickly before another admin comes along and deletes it :-) —METS501 (talk) 04:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the voting from Talk:Goguryeo-Sui Wars‎ to Talk:Goguryeo-China wars. Also, I have formally listed it at WP:RM. I hope you don't mind.--Endroit 00:02, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here they are:

Sudan's Enablers "This funding came through our investments in companies such as Fidelity, which has major holdings in PetroChina and Sinopec -- two Chinese oil companies that have poured billions into Khartoum's coffers. At least 70% of Sudan's oil revenues have been used by Khartoum to purchase attack helicopters, Antonov bombers and small arms used to kill and inflict immeasurable suffering upon the population of Darfur."

See first link: China’s rise: Hope or doom for Africa? (III) "Amnesty International last month accused China of continuing to supply the Khartoum regime with arms in violation of an international embargo. Earlier this year the Chinese government even offered to increase military cooperation with Khartoum."

Can LeBron save Darfur? " For more than a year, Sudan has resisted U.N. attempts to post a peacekeeping force in Darfur, where more than 200,000 ethnic Africans have died since a 2003 uprising. The government has shrugged off diplomatic gestures, foreign divestment campaigns, economic sanctions and entreaties from celebrity activists including Mia Farrow and George Clooney. Sudan has reason to listen to China, which has invested billions in Sudan's oil industry, buys two-thirds of its oil and sells the Sudanese army the weapons that end up in the hands of the murderous militias. But China is reluctant to pressure Sudan, so the strategy now is to pressure China."

Why China Blocks Sanctions on Iran, Sudan, Burma "The People's Republic of China, a veto-wielding permanent member of the U.N. Security Council and one of the world's prolific arms producers, continues to remain a major stumbling block to U.S. efforts to impose economic and military sanctions on three countries: Sudan, Burma (Myanmar) and Iran.

"The reasons are obvious," says a Southeast Asian diplomat who closely monitors the politics in the region. "Just as much as the United States and other Western powers protect their own political and military interests worldwide, so does China." With the threat of its veto power, China has expressed strong reservations over recent U.S. and Western attempts to either penalise or impose sanctions against Sudan, Burma and Iran for various political reasons. But the 15-member Security Council has been unable to take any action against any of the three countries because of opposition from China or Russia -- or both. "

"According to the AI study, more than 200 Chinese military trucks -- normally fitted with U.S. Cummins diesel engines -- were shipped to Sudan last August, despite a U.S. arms embargo on both countries, and the involvement of similar vehicles in the killing and abduction of civilians in the politically-troubled Darfur. The study, titled "China: Sustaining Conflict and Human Rights Abuses", also cites regular Chinese military shipments to Myanmar, including the supply in August 2005 of 400 military trucks to the Burmese army despite its involvement in the torture, killing and forced eviction of hundreds of thousands of civilians."

China urges patience on Sudan, opposes sanctions " "New sanctions against Sudan would only complicate the issue," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu told a regular news briefing. "China appeals to all parties to maintain restraint and patience." Beijing, which has veto power on the U.N. Security Council, is a major investor in Sudan's oil industry, sells Khartoum weapons and has invested heavily in its infrastructure. It also opposes sending U.N. peacekeepers to Darfur, where the United Nations estimates that fighting by government-linked militias and rebel groups has killed 200,000 people and forced 2 million more to flee their homes, without Khartoum's consent."

China, Russia bar Sudan sanctions "Russia and China say they will oppose UN sanctions against four Sudanese officials accused of involvement in continuing violence in Darfur. Russia's UN envoy said the Security Council should delay sanctions until Sudan's talks with Darfur rebels reach an African Union deadline of 30 April. The Chinese UN envoy also said the time was not right for the measures proposed by the UK and the US." "Russia and China have long opposed sanctions against Sudan. Both have strong trade links with Khartoum."

Bush Announces New Economic Sanctions on Sudan to Halt Darfur Crisis "The U.S. Mission to the United Nations has already drafted a resolution and plans to start discussing it with allies on Tuesday, a Security Council diplomat said, speaking on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the issue. But a U.S.-backed sanctions resolution is expected to face a tough time in the council, not only because of longstanding opposition from China which has strong commercial ties with Sudan but because of the timing."

The purpose of the section on sanctions busting is that Amnesty International issued a report accusing Russia and China of supplying arms, ammunition and related equipment to Sudan, which were then used in Darfur to commit atrocities. It also highlights the point that China has obstructed further economic sanctions and explains why China is so happy to maintain a close relationship with Sudan - namely because of its business interests there. Custodiet ipsos custodes talk 21:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Shanghai International Film Festival, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Od Mishehu 08:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry that you feel that I made made an untrue accusation, however the revert history I am posting on the 3RR page clearly shows otherwise. As I've gone over my posting there however, I'm thinking that maybe this may be more of a matter for arbitration, so I think that I will also add an arbitration request as well, and maybe we can all come to a mutually acceptable agreement. wbfergus 13:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC) (edited: I should have stated that this is in regards to the Korean War article)[reply]

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Korean War, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible.

Regardless of the outcome we finally reach on the Korean War issue, how about updating the various unit history pages under Category:Military units and formations of the People's Volunteer Army (PVA)? It sounds like you may have access to many texts or other sources which we in the West do not, and judging by some of the other comments people have made regarding your other edits, you do help improve some articles, though we disagree on a few points on the Korean War. Your assistance updating the PVA articles would be a big help. wbfergus 13:54, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Chinese rap, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 21:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've temporarily removed the db tag to give time to expand the article. In the future, though, it would be helpful to include the {{in-use}} tag right away when creating an article that doesn't yet meet the minimum requirements for a stub article. Thanks, and good luck on your article. :) -- Shadowlynk (Talk) 21:39, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Korean War. For the Mediation Committee, ^demon[omg plz] This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Hey there. I've tagged Lu Wan for speedy deletion because it makes no claim to notability. (I very much doubt that "friend of an emperor" is very much notable).

If there are other claims to notability that would apply to this person, you might want to add them to the article as your create it, otherwise chances are it will just be tagged again.

Happy editing! — Coren ^(talk) 03:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ayup. A king is notable indeed, indeed!  :-) Happy editing! — Coren ^(talk) 04:02, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:New Seven Wonders has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Joopercoopers 11:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wiman Joseon is a Korean kingdom... It may have been founded by a Chinese man, The population of Wiman joseon was almost, if not entirely Korean. Also, the comment you have left to the Jumong tv series talk page is irrelevant. The article is about a television series (a crappy one at that), not about actual history. Odst 00:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Korean War. For the Mediation Committee, Daniel This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

I'm not removing it, the threads are alive and well in archive 3 and you don't have to worry about it.Kfc1864 04:07, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- *talk in ZH, thankz.--Suguru@Musashi 05:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for creating the page as we discussed. I have done a little copy-edit, correcting some spelling and grammar, and will keep my eyes open for any new information that I can find. Hopefully, we can cooperate on other projects in the future. --MChew 07:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hello. i just wanted to let you know that i appreciate and agree with your points on the korean civil war, the use of the pix of a dead chinese soldier, and the un-spoken/invisible american-centric assumptions that dwell within so many of the contributors to the entry.

since such views are often so imbedded in the contributors as to be invisible, these ethnocentric views are often assumed to be non-existant and escape charges of POV. how can an article about the korean civil war be considered "NPOV" if it shows americans as major actors in virtually every paragraph and makes the average korean people (people who lived in villages, children, grandmothers, farmers, etc) into nothing more than "casualties"? where are the korean people in this article?

by the way, in the new lead-in collage pix, four of the five images are about/concerned with americans. one about the chinese. once again, the korean war lead in pix has NO koreans in it. no POV there, right?

and the argument that we "should go find counter images" is gratutious at best. wiki-contributors have presented a highly biased image, then challenge those who object to the images. should they not FIRST object to their own bias?

thanks for fighting the good battle. i waged a sort of "wiki-guerrilla" war some months ago, but after unending "nibbling" by many editors that restored original biases, mis-facts, etc. i just ran out of energy and time. Hongkyongnae 10:10, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

wow, thanks for the fast response. you raise many good points, and a crucial one is what if NPOV simply a relative to each culture and society? (e.g. american wiki, korean wiki, djibouti wiki, etc.) if so, then the ENTIRE rationale for NPOV falls apart. there is no such thing as "true objectivity" and without that, no NPOV is possible. and without NPOV, wikipedia as it is currently constructed becomes a self-contradictory creature that simple promotes local biases by encouraging local authors to interpret the biases as NPOV and hide their bias from themselves and their readers.

in brief, wikipedia may be a fraud. :)

anyway, if you are interested and can read korean, perhaps you will like this article on wikipedia and the korean civil war.

http://www.ohmynews.com/articleview/article_view.asp?at_code=414347

한겨레21 may also be publishing something similar about wikipedia and democractic knowledge fairly soon. Hongkyongnae 11:17, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Be a lot more careful when you arbitrarily revert an article. The last one you did to the People's Volunteer Army erased a lot of very valid article additions, much more relevant and accurate than what you reverted back to. The part you opposed being removed is questionable at best, as it is NOT a valid reference. Just because it is a web page does not make it legitimate, verifiable, or accurate. wbfergus 18:33, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I almost forgot. There 'may' be a discrepency with the 180th Division (People's Republic of China), as yesterday I did find another site that referred to the same debacle (complete division being lost) as the 88th division.^[1] wbfergus 18:39, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The site is questionable in that there are 1.) several obvious falshoods (the CPV did not invent bunker warfare) and 2.) it's really difficult to believe that anything with any historical accuracy or factualness could contain so many typos and grammatical errors. There is no way anything subjected to true academic review by real historians could have been published in it's current form. It is merely a web page where somebody expressed their opinions. wbfergus 18:43, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I say it's personal opinion because parts of it are obviously so, like the bunker war claim. No reputable historian would ever make a claim like that, as it's so blatantly false. Even if was meant to say "reinvent", it's still false. The exact same tactics were employed during WWI and the American Civil War, many years before the Korean War. Also, being linked to a discussion forum doesn't help it's legitimacy, but hurts it. Finally, it starts out question 1 by saying it used 6 main references, the last being listed as only "Chinese references" without qualification. All the rest of 'question/answers' don't bother attempting to reference which 'source' a claim was made by, giving the whole site the appearance that the person read the listed references, then went back and created the 'answers' from memory, not by re-verifying the actual claim. I have used the site for some references though myself, but I am picky about the verifiable accuracy of what I refence from there. wbfergus 19:03, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I never claimed that Americans or the Europeans invented bunker warfare. All I did was say that they were used by the Americans and Europeans way before the Korean War, and the claim from the centurychina web site that "During the truce talks, PVA invented the bunker war...". wbfergus 19:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is shameful and worthy of opprobrium that you are now at the point, not only of reverting without an edit summary, but of not even bothering to get basic grammar right. Why "suffered mass killing from european colonist" rather than "suffered mass killing from European colonists"?—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 19:36, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please put discussion of the merits of your edits on the article talk page.&mdsah;Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 20:00, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt find the necessity to discuss.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 20:18, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think, Ksyrie, that your English is just not worthy of Wikipedia. And you seem to rely on mythology instead of citations. It sounds like you've made some real contributions to pages about Chinese culture, but that you are harming other pages. I think you could contribute on the discussion pages more and do less editing, at least until your English improves. --Dylanfly 02:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a lot, to be honest, and I think you need to open your eyes to it. Do you remember what happened during the 2004 Asian Cup? Arbiteroftruth 23:49, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind comments about Zhou Tong (archer). I would like to see the Chinese edition of his page greatly expanded. --Ghostexorcist 00:02, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not a Chinese speaker, but once I return to college, my main focus is getting a degree in Chinese. I was able to track down a large portion of historical Chinese info on Zhou via the China History Forum. But I found most of the scholarly English material through reading research papers and a huge doctoral thesis on Yue Fei. However, the majority of internet material available on Zhou has to do with martial arts. There is no historical evidence that he knew martial arts, but lots of westerners think he did.

I am actually writing a research paper on Zhou's historical, folklore, literature, and martial arts references. But I won't publish until my Chinese greatly improves and I've had time to read over certain Chinese manuscripts. I believe Zhou's modern day image is a distinct fictional persona born from wuxia novels and folklore. --Ghostexorcist 00:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I used an internet translator to read the editors' comments. It does my heart good to see that others enjoy my work. I am an okay writer, but I really pride myself in my research. Thanks for showing me that link. --Ghostexorcist 09:18, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Chain Barnstar of Recognition
		For making a difference! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 3-5 others with 500+ edits but no barnstar. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 01:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Chain Barnstar of Merit
		For your hard work! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 4 others with 1500+ edits but no barnstar or has few barnstars. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 01:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Chain Barnstar of Diligence
		For shaping Wikipedia! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 3 others with 2500+ edits but no barnstar or has few barnstars. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 01:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Wikipedian's Chain Barnstar of Honour
		For building Wikipedia! This Barnstar isn't free, this is a chain barnstar, as payment please give this star to at least 2 others with 5000+ edits but no barnstar or has few barnstars. So that everyone who deserves one will get one. Hpfan9374 01:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concerns, but please don't violate WP:3RR. I suppose it's time to deal with the anon.--Samuel di Curtisi di Salvadori 12:46, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have reviewed your vandalism report and then removed it. Addhoc's edits are content dispute related and therefore not considered vandalism. Please read "what vandalism is not" at WP:VANDAL. I suggest you attempt to resolve your dispute with this user on his talk page. Trusilver 23:24, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above article you created has been the target of a POV fork Hwando. It is nominated to be deleted at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hwando_(fortress). Please look into it. Thanks.Wiki Pokemon 17:21, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now the article you created is the taget of a MOVE. Please look at Talk:Wandu_Mountain_City.Wiki Pokemon 18:06, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will have to remove the footnote if you insist on changing it as that is not what the newspaper I am using as a source says. A newspaper is a better source per WP:V and WP:RS than the site you reference. Regards, Mattisse 17:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They may have made a mistake, but remember that Wikipedia's policy is not "truth" but "verifiability". If you cannot find a reliable, unbiased, third-party source, then the material can be removed by any editor. Regards, Mattisse 18:02, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article you suggest has no references so it does not matter what it says. Regards, --Mattisse 18:05, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The fact is that the term "South Tibet" is hardly ever used, except when talking about geology. I was lucky to find that one reference. Believe me, I have looked through Google books and the term is not used consistently, even in the same article. South Tibet is capitalized when it is a title but rarely in the text of an article is it used with capital letter. Regards, Mattisse 18:17, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you change text, please make sure the footnote citation actually reflects your change. I have had to remove two good footnotes so far. Regards, --Mattisse 18:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't, actually... -- Миборовский 07:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted your recent contribution to Go_ranks_and_ratings. The book you mention sounds very interesting, but it does not describe Wei Chi. Please do not confuse (undocumented) tradtion with history. I say more about it on the Discussion page there; feel free to rebut there or at my talk page. Pete St.John 16:35, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found it is a violation of the spirit of neutral point of view, by showing a dead Chinese soldier with clear face identify while showing an US soldier on his back. How about the delist of this bloody image? It is hard to believe such a bloody picture was nominated as a "featured" picture. Is wikipedia funded by US National Defence?Dongwenliang 19:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but Wikipdia is not funded by anyone but ordinary people. Kfc1864 talk _{my edits} 05:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War Help! I don't expect you vote in the talk page as Chinese, but only vote in a good faith of fair person. Dongwenliang 04:18, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Future Chinese aircraft carrier, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. TomStar81 (Talk) 10:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is being nominated for AfD because there is no substance to the article. It has one sentence and it relies on external links for information. The article is over a year old, more than enough time for the article to have been expanded. Furthermore, your sources are from 2005; there are no recent development, thus the tunnel has lost both notability and relevance. Butterfly0fdoom (talk) 03:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:ChinaUionPay.gif. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
• That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --22:42, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting the article on Tang Zhongming. There seems to be a lot more information about his life in the article you linked. Unfortunately I can't expand the article very easily as I have to rely on translation websites to translate the Chinese. Could you add some more information?

In particular, was the car charcoal-powered? As the article is, it sounds as if the entire car was made from charcoal. JRawle (Talk) 15:10, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Future chinese big plane, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Future chinese big plane. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Samuell Lift me up or put me down 02:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Creationism2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Neelix (talk) 20:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Shaanxi Diesel Engine Heavy Industry, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:03, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't change the date of Chinese writing to 6000BCE. It's only known from 1300BCE, and the objects you're changing the date for are also from c. 1300BCE. kwami (talk) 09:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proto-writing, yes. But the pic does not show the Jiahu artifacts. kwami (talk) 13:14, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Yodao requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Toytown Mafia (talk) 11:08, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on SmartNX Mobile, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the article and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. PMDrive1061 (talk) 06:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please, please take a moment to research your subjects before leaving single-sentence substubs of the types you've been leaving lately about numerous Chinese companies. Your contributions are certainly welcome, but they have got to be longer than a single sentence. You may wish to review WP:STUB in the meantime. Thanks and have fun. Just trying to help. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:11, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article BYD e6, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Triwbe (talk) 19:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that Lakshmix was engaging in some edit warring at Automotive industry. However, I would caution you to respond wisely - you may have come across the suggestion not to template the regulars. I understand your frustration, but edit warring, combined with explaining the edits on the talk page, does not amount to vandalism here. Saying so might inflame the situation. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A page you created, 氢, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it redirects from an implausible misspelling.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thanks. =Species8473= ^(talk) 13:47, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not go around accusing other editors of vandalism. Basically all Wikipedia editors know that this is not acceptable. Why don't you?—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 10:54, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, you seem to have misunderstood. If you refer to the page on Wikipedia:Vandalism, you'll find that, "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Even harmful edits that are not explicitly made in bad faith are not considered vandalism" and "However, significant content removals are usually not considered to be vandalism where the reason for the removal of the content is readily apparent by examination of the content itself, or where a non-frivolous explanation for the removal of apparently legitimate content is provided, linked to, or referenced in an edit summary" and "Avoid the word "vandal". In particular, the word should not be used in reference to any contributor in good standing or to any edits that can arguably be construed as good-faithed. If the edits in question are made in good faith, they are not vandalism."—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 17:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why you continue to refer to my edits as vandalism after you have been advised of Wikipedia policies to the contrary. This behaviour is considered inappropriate on Wikipedia.—Nat Krause^{(Talk!·What have I done?)} 14:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated MDict, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MDict. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. --VS ^talk 06:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Chang'an CV8, an article you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chang'an CV8. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. --VS ^talk 07:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Please don't break the article into small main sections. A proper encyclopedia article shouldn't have sections that only consist of one or two sentences. These two sentences about Qi and Yue, in terms of its content, should be part of the history section, especially after the part where it says the fall of the Xia and the overthrow of Jie; it makes the article thematically more cohesive as well. Also, if you cite a reference, be sure to review it before presenting it to the article. The source "State of Yue" from "cultural-china.com" [5] which you cited did not mention anything about Minyue and Han Dynasty, so please do not add statement that might be of original research.--TheLeopard (talk) 16:53, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You did not answer a single one of my questions? I removed part of the statement because the sentence about "Minyue" and "Han Dynasty" (After defeat by Chu and Qi in 334 BC the royal family fled and founded the state of Minyue, which was subjugated by the Han dynasty) wasn't to be found in the "State of Yue" source you cited. If you disagree, please show me where is it on the link [6]? Also, I said that an encyclopedia article should not have short main sections that only has one or two sentences, and the information about Qi and Yue are the kind of information that goes with the history section, so I merged them. Understand now?--TheLeopard (talk) 14:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

我的帐号，User:Jediarc，被基督徒管理员User:Gzdavidwong封杀。请大家看看User:Jediarc的贡献，破坏维基了吗？应该被封吗？基督徒管理员User:Gzdavidwong封杀Jediarc的理由是“"确认为傀儡: 使用傀儡User:石皮土不破坏。如果阁下对此有异议，请向本人发email申诉"”。如果我发email给督徒管理员User:Gzdavidwong，会有用吗？User:石皮土不根本不是我，可以查一下。？User:石皮土不的贡献中所写的你们说你们不是汉奸洋奴，那你们为什么要建立Wikipedia:维基小天使？天使是西方宗教里面的，你们分明是崇拜西方宗教，你们还敢说自己不是汉奸洋奴？—石皮土不 (留言) 2008年11月4日 (二) 05:45 (UTC) ” ，这根本不是我的观念。天使怎么会是西方宗教里面？中国文化中本就有天使的概念。请问基督徒管理员User:Gzdavidwong，你凭什么确认User:石皮土不是User:Jediarc的傀儡？管理员能够随便确认一个用户是傀儡吗？这不是随便栽赃一个人吗？User:Jediarc本身破坏维基了，还是对维基有贡献？为什么要封杀？应该怎么处理，希望维基参与者共同来讨论一下。 -流星天使 (留言) 2008年11月4日 (二) 16:52 (UTC) -（我是流星天使，但是好像一登陆流星天使就不能发言，所以重新注册了一个账户）Gdiarc (留言) 2008年11月4日 (二) 17:43 (UTC)

以上是User:1j1z2删除掉我的投诉。

另外，我佩服两个独裁的白种亚当子孙基督徒1j1z2、Gzdavidwongd的配合，甚至让人不得不怀疑这是不是一个人的两个傀儡账号，尽管可能不是（白种亚当子孙可能是个侮辱，实在忍无可忍。基督徒、独裁都是事实）。连接

• (当前) (先前) 2008年11月4日 (二) 16:58 1j1z2 (对话 | 贡献) (47,430字节) (undo vandalism)
• (当前) (先前) 2008年11月4日 (二) 16:57 Gzdavidwong (对话 | 贡献) 小 (保护 Wikipedia:互助客栈/其他: 被IP用户或新用户破坏: 十字军大屠杀傀儡破坏 ([edit=autoconfirmed] (终止于 2008年11月5日 (三) 16:57 (UTC)) [move=autoconfirmed] (终止于 2008年11月5日 (三) 16:57 (UTC))))

有关争议，参见

• Wikipedia:互助客栈/其他/制止基督徒管理员的独裁行为，维护公正、自由的维基百科
• Wikipedia:互助客栈/方针里也有关于傀儡账户的讨论问题

希望你能关注维基上最大的独裁迫害行为，基督徒管理员制造的这个问题，并讨论建一个防止独裁的不扼杀人的制度。谢谢。 -Gdiarc (留言) 2008年11月4日 (二) 17:43 (UTC)

以上内容，Gdiarc刚才在几个行政员、管理员的讨论页上留言，Gdiarc的贡献，刚才又被白种亚当子孙基督徒管理员User:Gzdavidwong全部给删除了。他有权利去删除别人讨论页上的内容吗？ -（Gdiarc被基督徒管理员User:Gzdavidwong封了以后重新注册的账号）Gediarc (留言) 2008年11月4日 (二) 18:29 (UTC)

谢谢你帐仗义执言！“User:石皮土不”并不是我的傀儡，也就是说不是User:Jediarc的傀儡。但基督徒管理员User:Gzdavidwong却栽赃“User:石皮土不”是User:Jediarc。请求你帮我提出做一个Check User。谢谢。希望大家都来讨论，制止基督徒管理员的独裁行为。 -Gediarc (留言) 2008年11月4日 (二) 18:29 (UTC)

以上中文版被基督徒管理员User:Gzdavidwong删除，只好到这里给你留言（连接如果要能正确显示，请找中文版，或者把这段复制到中文版去看）。 -Gediarc (talk) 18:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Baidu Space requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the article (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Schuym1 (talk) 16:24, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As the deletion comment states it lacks notability or the assertion of being notable. It could also be deleted as spam. If the company is notable, feel free to recreate it providing some sources that are reliable and verifiable that show that it meets WP:N. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If the satellites are notable and have news articles about them, they probably can get articles. That in and of itself does not make the company notable. Like I said above, source the notability with reliable and verifiable sources and there is no problem. 05:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)Vegaswikian (talk)

It's not a logic test. Did you look at WP:CORP?

An easier question would be which sections of WP:CORP does it meet? I believe the answer to this question is none. Playing word games is not productive. You would be better off following the suggestions above to create an article if the case for notability exists. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:22, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the article text. Have fun.

Sinosat (chinese:鑫诺) is one satellite manufacturer in China.

• Official site

{{manufacturing-company-stub}}

Vegaswikian (talk) 06:30, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was planning on editing a portion of the Chiyou article which you had contributed to. I have listed my reasons in the talk page [7], but before I make any changes, I would like to get your comments on it if possible. Thank you whipsandchains (talk) 18:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the r-K scale article you created, we actually already have a quite detailed r/K selection theory article, so I converted r-K scale into a redirect to the other one. As usual, feel free to add more information and improve it. DMacks (talk) 15:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't edit war over the inclusion of "terrorist" categories. Two editors have already voiced their opinion against including them; if you think the article should be in these categories, leave your rationale at the article's talk page and we can discuss it. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 11:38, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Again, if you think the categories should be included, leave your rationale at the article's talk page and I will respond there. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 11:43, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on July 2009 Urumqi riots. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page 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 that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 12:06, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What part of "please discuss" do you not understand? This has been removed before by other editors (see, for example, [8][9]), and you are edit warring. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:58, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is where the discussion is. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 05:02, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You've started edit warring again today, with these two reverts [10][11]. I have reported you at the Edit Warring Noticeboard, here. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 15:02, 11 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop the edit warring or I will block you William M. Connolley (talk) 21:09, 11 July 2009 (UTC)w[reply]

You reverted my recent edit to the paragraph you introduced to the article. I have now read the linked article you linked to. The title and text ou placed in the article was ambiguous, and may violate WP:NPOV. I now replaced it with what I feel to be a representative citation from the parent article, in English, and a reference link thereto, as well as to the original Chinese language article. I hope this meets with your approval. Of course, there is plenty of text to quote from if you disagree about the precise quote. Ohconfucius (talk) 07:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I warned you. I've blocked you for 24h William M. Connolley (talk) 08:35, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I see that there has only been a low level of activity since the last time this editor has been warned. I can only presume this block is related to the revert Ksyrie made to my edit of today. Ksyrie introduced new text; it was changed by me and was reverted by Ksyrie. As far as this content is concerned, and although there was no discussion on Ksyrie's part, I don't consider there to have been any disruption or warring - just a normal part of the WP:BRD cycle. I would therefore appeal this block. Ohconfucius (talk) 10:24, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nope, Ksyrie also re-added his pogrom mumbo jumbo this morning (diff), so the block was well-warranted. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 11:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh, I missed that. As it was for that stupid Category:Pogroms nonsense, I cannot stick up for Ksyrie. Ohconfucius (talk) 13:06, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of criminal organizations. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of criminal organizations. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:38, 22 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Chinabounder. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinabounder. Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, the page you need to dispute a deletion is deletion review and instructions are at this location. Thanks, Black Kite 11:07, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding that item, but the ref doesn't support the text you have added. It does say they are working on a Windows version of the hardware but that doesn't support that the 1.5M installs will be Linux by any stretch. The article doesn't say Linux anywhere there. Do you have a better ref for this that supports the text? - Ahunt (talk) 01:49, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding that ref - that helps a lot! - Ahunt (talk) 01:54, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Ylmf OS has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable OS. Unable to find significant coverage in RS.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ^Bongo_matic 15:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

We'd like to translate your images to Hebrew. Do you have a version that's slightly easier to remove to text from? Something like SVG, PSD, or whatever format you used to create the final JPG?

Thanks in advance, Avihu (talk) 19:46, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on SCIPHONE N19, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 09:59, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on SCIPHONE N19, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 12:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated SCIPHONE N19, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SCIPHONE N19. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SchuminWeb (Talk) 18:02, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on SCIPHONE N19, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Pcap ping 21:47, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Category:SAIC (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ksyrie! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot notifying you on behalf of the the unreferenced biographies team that 1 of the articles that you created is currently tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 12 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Wang Shi - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 10:14, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make statements attacking people or groups of people. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Deutschgirl (talk) 16:29, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a {{hangon}} tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. GILO   ^{ACCIDENT &} _EMERGENCY 16:34, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article UC Browser has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Advertisement for nonnotable software

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MrOllie (talk) 23:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Inland city, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. mhking (talk) 00:48, 23 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Wang Shi has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

no sources since July, can't find any from a reasonable search. No asserted notability

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Errant [tmorton166] ^(chat!) 16:05, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese views? Since when this became issue?--KSentry(talk) 12:32, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposal to move FAW Group to a better-titled page was moved to here: Talk:China_FAW_Group_Corporation#Requested_move

I assume that as the originator, you would also like to explain why the move is needed. Thanks,  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃  (talk) 19:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mengyao Zhou 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/Mengyao Zhou 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. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 19:19, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. When you recently edited Dungan people, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mongolian and Qiang (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As a participant to previous discussions at the South Tibet/ Arunachal Pradesh / Arunachal Pradesh dispute / South Tibet dispute talk page, you might be interested to participate to the following poll. Thanks, --Pseudois (talk) 04:23, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In this edit you wrote over a redirect to "create" a this single-sentence article with no references about a modelling agency in China. Please don't do anything like that again. It breaks wikilinks from other articles. If you can create a legitimate article about a notable modelling agency by this name, with proper references to demonstrate why Wikipedia should have an article about it, you should create it as something like New Silk Road (modelling agency). If you have no references to reliable, verifiable sources that demonstrate it is notable, though, you should not create such an article. Thank you,  – OhioStandard (talk) 10:54, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This edit by 222.90.76.164 (talk · contribs · info · WHOIS) repeats your previous one, documented above. If you have been editing while logged out, via IP 222.x, or any other IP address, please refrain from doing so, as that violates multiple Wikipedia policies. Thank you. --OhioStandard (talk) 14:27, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The edits you put on the Stereotypes of East Asians in the United States article have been reverted because all of your edits lacked reliable third party sources. Please review WP:RS, if you put in any edits without reliable sources they will be reverted. Thanks. Nippler998 (talk) 01:45, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Nippler998 (talk) 02:00, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on UC Browser, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. MrOllie (talk) 11:19, 16 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of airliners by maximum takeoff weight has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is a incomplete, mostly unreferenced, and slightly WP:SYNTH-ish list that is a "comparison list" compared by a criterion that isn't broadly used in the real world. The usual comparison for airliners is number of seats, and below that, range; MTOW isn't something often, if ever, used as a benchmark, and when it is it's in pounds, not metric tons. The list also includes types that aren't even airliners (An-225, C-5, C-17...) and types it's ridiculous to compare in any way (Boeing 747-400 vs Saab 2000? Really?).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:44, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of airliners by maximum takeoff weight 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/List of airliners by maximum takeoff weight 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:38, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ez Station 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/Ez Station 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Eyesnore (pc) 17:15, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect 氢. Since you had some involvement with the 氢 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. GZWDer (talk) 11:00, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fetion 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/Fetion 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 08:18, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on UC Browser, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. AlanS (talk) 10:36, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Easy Programming Language has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails to cite even a single reliable independent secondary source. Googling turned up nothing useful on the web or in books and only a single, likely trivial mention on scholar.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Msnicki (talk) 15:18, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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) 13:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ksyrie. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Ez Mini".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 08:55, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ksyrie. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article IRICO has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NCORP and WP:CORPDEPTH.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DrStrauss talk 22:02, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. You made a bold edit. My reversion in that edit is not vandalism. The next step is to discuss. I have opened a talk-page discussion Talk:Sino-Tibetan languages#Changes to introduction listing my objections to your edit. Please engage there instead of attempting to force your change into the article by repeated reversion. Kanguole 10:33, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ksyrie,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged WEY （Luxury vehicle） for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

Diptanshu 💬 04:08, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

while it's an unfinished article, u did a good job, but it's too quick for u to respond.Ksyrie(Talkie talkie)

I would insist you to create an article at Draft:WEY (Luxury vehicle) (without using any special characters) and to develop it as per your convenience. Once you are done, submit it for review. There should be no problems with that. Diptanshu 💬 20:19, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ksyrie. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Ksyrie,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Godson for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

SportingFlyer T·C 11:20, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Al Noor City 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/Al Noor City until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Macktheknifeau (talk) 05:52, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Easy Programming Language 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/Easy Programming Language until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

'''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 12:33, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]