Misplaced Pages

User talk:YellowMonkey: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 01:53, 4 July 2007 view sourceKintetsubuffalo (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers203,496 edits →Nam Phuong← Previous edit Revision as of 04:24, 4 July 2007 view source Tariqabjotu (talk | contribs)Administrators36,354 edits →Bias against Arrow: clarify that these are my actionsNext edit →
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 148: Line 148:


:To be honeset I haven't really looked into any of the deeper issues of this matter. I have simply looked at the 3RR reports on the noticeboard where they have occurred and counted from one to four and identifying the reverts. I haven't looked at any patterns of bias at all yet. To be honest, I've already spent by religious battle quota researching Hkelkar_2 and haven't gotten to any articles yet.....:(...''']''' (]) 05:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC) :To be honeset I haven't really looked into any of the deeper issues of this matter. I have simply looked at the 3RR reports on the noticeboard where they have occurred and counted from one to four and identifying the reverts. I haven't looked at any patterns of bias at all yet. To be honest, I've already spent by religious battle quota researching Hkelkar_2 and haven't gotten to any articles yet.....:(...''']''' (]) 05:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

::I take back my previous comment, as it was a hopelessly silly question. Why do I need to defend myself against accusations of bias when at some point here, you're going to have to admit . I'm not saying you're biased (no, I'm not even being facetious about that; I don't think you are), but an outsider looking in would have to suspect that Arrow has been influencing some of your actions, perhaps even requesting your assistance by e-mail. I understand overturning the actions of an admin without consultation is done, but the overturning of the actions of four admins (me, {{user|Tom harrison}}, {{user|Evilclown93}}, and {{user|After Midnight}}) on four different occasions in such a short period of time is quite odd. Add to that the fact that your first Misplaced Pages action in over sixty hours was unblocking an editor w/o an (unanswered) unblock template on his talk page. Then there's the block against Aminz (borrowing your words... ''use did not edit war more than anyone else on that page'') that, from this vantage point, appears excessive and punitive, given the problem article is protected. Yes, you're a popular and good guy nonetheless, but I just have to be upfront about this. Are we not doing our jobs well enough? Are we failing to be even-handed? If so, please explain (no facetiousness again), because I would hate to have every action of mine related to Islam nitpicked and overturned quietly, with ] ] using such actions to conjure up about my conduct. Sigh... sorry if this sounded rantish, but I'm insulted in so many ways. By Arrow and Karl's comments. By the way in which said comments are justified by an unblock. By the way so many admin actions have been overturned recently. By the appearance of impropriety and off-wiki contact. But perhaps most importantly by the fact that I'm questioned for actions made in good-faith based on the fact that ''Muslim'' appeared on my page at one point, while no one gives a damn about your similar good-faith actions. -- ''']''' 04:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)


== ] GA Review == == ] GA Review ==

Revision as of 04:24, 4 July 2007

User:Blnguyen/Top

    This user is a cricket pundit for the Times of India, the world's largest distribution daily newspaper. Details/disclaimer
Userboxes
This user has written or significantly contributed to 2 Featured articles on Misplaced Pages.


This user helped promote 2 featured lists on Misplaced Pages.
This user has helped promote 10 good articles on Misplaced Pages.
This user has written or expanded 108 articles featured in the Did You Know section on the Main Page.
This user is an administrator on the English Misplaced Pages. (verify)
enThis user is a native speaker of the English language.
vi-2Thành viên này sử dụng tiếng Việt với trình độ trung bình.
fr-1Cet utilisateur peut contribuer avec un niveau élémentaire de français.
hi-0इस उपयोगकर्ता को हिन्दी भाषा नहीं आती है अथवा हिन्दी समझने में बहुत कठिनाई होती है।
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

User:Blnguyen/Recent

You are welcome to leave me a message or request admin action.

Blnguyen (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) has been an administrator since 29 May 2006 and an arbitrator since January 1, 2007.


FOR ANONS, I WILL DEFINITELY REPLY HERE. FOR EVERYBODY ELSE, THIS MAY BE HERE OR AT YOUR TALK PAGE. IF IT IS A MULTI-PARTY DISCUSSION, THEN DEFINITELY HERE

File:Blnguyen studybreak.jpg
Ought to be studying......
Archives  

Archives roughly divided into 40kb chunks

My name is BNGUYEN

-Yes, this is my issue, I want to start a dialogue of two professional people that are members of wikipedia. You have been a contributer to wikipedia and I can see have alot of time on your hands to volunteer on wikipedia and recived awards.

-I have been a member here befor you as you can see from my records http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Bnguyen&action=history

-My name is Brandon Nguyen and I am a proud Vietnamese-American and proud of my heritage, if you are as well a Vietnamese American that is fine that you would like to use Nguyen but can we come to a professional dialogue and agreement to extend your name your first name such as Bobby_Nguyen or etc.

-This issue yes, it is mine and I do not want other people contacting me, I want to converse to you on this issue.

-This is a new day and new way of talking about this professionally and I am not demeaning you, only want to talk about the issue at hand of my name is Bnguyen. Thank you for your assistance. Bnguyen 11:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I can see that you were a member before I was. I use this name because my real name is the first thing that springs to mind, however, I am not willing to disclose my full name to almost everybody. Since you are already publishing your full name on your userpage, it would be more convenient if you changed your username to your full name. WP:CHU is the place to do this. You may not be aware, but this function allows your name to be changed, but your edits are transferred to your new name, so that you do not "abandon" your account or "lose credit" for your contributions. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Just dropping by to add a comment: I have met Blnguyen in real life, and I can confirm that his Misplaced Pages username represents his real life name accurately. Just for the record, Daniel 07:51, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Same here. ~ Riana ⁂ 03:11, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Vietnam

"French....for about 95% of the time" it was, but neutrality is to mention japan as well so "colonial era" is more neutral than "french colonial era". french colonial era souds like the japanese occupation was not "colonial" which is oriented. Paris By Night 19:13, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Well it was simply interrupted by Japan for about four years. Japan did not dismantle or replace the French system. They simply put themselves above the French apparatus with another layer controlling the French. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Neil Harvey

Hi Blnguyen, thanks for your message. Okay, so I'll stop blowing a gasket every time you're accused of being a sockpuppet! And yes, Neil Harvey's article looks in a good state to start pushing to FA. Let me know if I can do anything. The Rambling Man 08:00, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Looks pretty close. Can probably go for FAC after a look through by ALoan & co. The name of Haigh's book is not mentioned in the notes/refs. Did he throw right handed or left ? Tintin 17:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Ya, unfortunately, ALoan isn't feeling so good at the moment. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I have a Neil Harvey graph. You seem to have accidentally removed it in this edit a few weeks ago. I'll let you add it back in where you think it should go. Raven4x4x 05:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Ah whoops, silly me. I should probably ask you for a copy of the excel template so that I can DIY. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Harvey pic

It was from http://premier.cricketvictoria.com.au/page/harvey_robert_neil.html. I suppose that we can't be 100% certain that it was taken on Australian soil, but given its on a Cricket Victoria website, that'd be a reasonable assumption to make - no? If the copyright Nazi's (I'm not accusing TinTin of being one of course) feel strongly about this, I'm pretty sure that there's a very youthful pic of him in my "200 Years of Australian Cricket" which I could scan for you. Let me know if you want it. —Moondyne 02:28, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

If I were a c-Nazi, I would have tried to make an issue of out it instead of communicating it discretely to Bln offline :-) Tintin 02:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
Well I think the picture of Harvey's batting stance is ok. It was taken during an Australian home season and it looks like it was a pre-arranged photoshoot for a textbook....anyway, if we're short, we've a got a picture of his first wife here.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:36, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Is it just me, but do the left aligned photos when placed immediately below the section title, overlay the title? I'm seeing it twice in that article. I can't see a problem with the markup and haven't seen this as a problem eslewhere. I'm using FFox. —Moondyne 02:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm also using firefox and I don't have a problem. In the instance of the sweep shot against India, the picture is longer than the section so it is invading the next part, but it is not overlaying the title. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Seperatist user posting inflamatory messages

On Talk:Sino-Indian War, an IP user (check the history) has been going on about India's Rape of Goa and keeps posting links to Goan seperatist websites. He also goes on about Indian bullying of Sikkim and Bhutan and his words, despite being irrelevant, remain on the talk page, sending viewers of the talk page to Free Goa websites. How does one deal with this? Traing 02:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

see this. Traing 04:30, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
What does biradaari mean?? I blocked for 72 hours. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I...um...actually don't know. But you get the point of his message anyway. It's the "Indian vermin" and their Australo-Vietnamese Hindu-Shinto Latin-speaking Russians again. Traing 04:45, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I think a relative or something like that. May be you want to unblock that user and ask the meaning. :) I didn't know there is a Goan separatist movement too, although my native is very close to Goa. Gnanapiti 04:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Literally speaking, biraadari means brotherhood. — Lost 12:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Biradar means brother in Urdu and probably some other languages. Biradari (spelt differently like biradaari) means brotherhood as rightly pointed out by Lost who definitely never gets lost :). It may be interesting to note this aspect of biradari : "Descent is reckoned patrilineally, so only those related through male ancestors are considered relatives. The biradari, or group of male kin (the patrilineage), plays a significant role in social relations. Its members neither hold movable property in common nor share earnings, but the honor or shame of individual members affects the general standing of the biradari within the community. A common proverb expresses this view: 'One does not share the bread, but one shares the shame.'" etc. etc. However, the word is used in other contexts too like "hi biradar Blnguyen! I am sure that you are doing fine! However, context may make the use even sarcastic like "Biradar drive carefully. --Bhadani (talk) 15:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Bhadani, in spite of the verbiage, you haven't added anything relevant to what Lostinthebrush explained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.112.233.194 (talk • contribs) of 02.07.07

I know biradar. --Bhadani (talk) 16:46, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Nam Phuong

Binguyen, While I understand your concern over the Nam Phuong redirect, your contention that WP uses only "common names" flies in the face of actual fact. Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother is listed under Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon; Queen Mary is listed as Mary of Teck, et cetera, all pre-marital names, with proper redirects otherwise. The vast majority of royal consorts who have articles on WP have articles titled with their premarital name, and therefore, with all due respect, I see no logical reason why Empress Nam Phuong, an empress consort rather than an empress regnant, does not. I believe, quite strongly, that her article should follow the overwhelming precedent. I have already changed the links throughout WP to conform to this, so that anyone clicking on Nam Phuong will be redirected to Nguyễn Hữu Thị Lan. Also, anyone logging into Wiki can type NAM PHUONG into the search engine and be lead directly to Nguyễn Hữu Thị Lan, so no confusion will arise at all. (However, re the maiden-name precedent that seems to rule, in the majority of cases, on WP, take note that Empress Nagako of Japan, illogically to my mind, is listed under the name she was granted after her death, Empress Kōjun, which is not a common name in the slightest per WP nor is it her premarital name, which was Princess Nagako Kuniyoshi.)Kitchawan 17:30, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I'm not really too sure about this, I'll seek some more opinions. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I can see that in the cases of European names, the kings and queens don't change their name when they become king/queen, and the names are all very common as well, just plain William, Henry, Michael, Nicholas, Frederik, etc so that there will be many clashes due to the numbering and the country of origin. But still people use their throne name, since it is the same as their birth name (just not the full name is used). Anyway, popes etc also use their throne name so to speak. In this case, these names are only used in Vietnamese, unlike eg, Arab countries, where many of them might use Nasser or European countries using Henry or Louis etc. We also do not put Gia Long as Nguyen Phuc Anh. In response to the Queen Mother, you can see that she is not always going to be the Queen Mother, and another person is going to be the Queen Mother at a later point, so her real and royal name is used. Queen Mother is a title I think, like Duke of York and it passes from person to person. Gia Long, Nam Phuong, etc, do not. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

She's more well-known as Empress Nam Phuong. We should use the convention of using the most popular name. DHN 03:17, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Hmm.. I thought so. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I have posted the move-back discussion to http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requested_moves#July_3.2C_2007 Chris 01:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Bias against Arrow

As you may or may not have noticed, Arrow740 (talk · contribs) thinks I'm biased against him and people who agree with his opinions on Islam. Since you responded to a 3RR involving Itaqallah (where I did not block, and you later blocked) as well as a more recent report involving Dashes (where I asked a question, and you blocked), I'm curious whether you agree with Arrow (insofar as you believe I am biased against him and others with his opinion). I personally don't think I consciously am (especially because I was not aware of Arrow's opinions of Islam until very recently), but I'm afraid, based on your responses to both reports and the fact that Arrow's surprise, surprise comment preceded your response to Dashes, that you're starting to concur with him. -- tariqabjotu 04:41, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

To be honeset I haven't really looked into any of the deeper issues of this matter. I have simply looked at the 3RR reports on the noticeboard where they have occurred and counted from one to four and identifying the reverts. I haven't looked at any patterns of bias at all yet. To be honest, I've already spent by religious battle quota researching Hkelkar_2 and haven't gotten to any articles yet.....:(...Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:25, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I take back my previous comment, as it was a hopelessly silly question. Why do I need to defend myself against accusations of bias when at some point here, you're going to have to admit this all looks suspicious. I'm not saying you're biased (no, I'm not even being facetious about that; I don't think you are), but an outsider looking in would have to suspect that Arrow has been influencing some of your actions, perhaps even requesting your assistance by e-mail. I understand overturning the actions of an admin without consultation is done, but the overturning of the actions of four admins (me, Tom harrison (talk · contribs), Evilclown93 (talk · contribs), and After Midnight (talk · contribs)) on four different occasions in such a short period of time is quite odd. Add to that the fact that your first Misplaced Pages action in over sixty hours was unblocking an editor w/o an (unanswered) unblock template on his talk page. Then there's the block against Aminz (borrowing your words... use did not edit war more than anyone else on that page) that, from this vantage point, appears excessive and punitive, given the problem article is protected. Yes, you're a popular and good guy nonetheless, but I just have to be upfront about this. Are we not doing our jobs well enough? Are we failing to be even-handed? If so, please explain (no facetiousness again), because I would hate to have every action of mine related to Islam nitpicked and overturned quietly, with other users using such actions to conjure up frivolous complaints about my conduct. Sigh... sorry if this sounded rantish, but I'm insulted in so many ways. By Arrow and Karl's comments. By the way in which said comments are justified by an unblock. By the way so many admin actions have been overturned recently. By the appearance of impropriety and off-wiki contact. But perhaps most importantly by the fact that I'm questioned for actions made in good-faith based on the fact that Muslim appeared on my page at one point, while no one gives a damn about your similar good-faith actions. -- tariqabjotu 04:19, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Lewis Hamilton GA Review

Thanks for your comprehensive analysis of what needed to be done to achieve GA status. A team of us have been busy implementing or providing responses to these points, and we'd be interested to see what you think of the improvement. The three key points that are most likely to require scrutiny are:

  • Is the lead reasonable now? It's certainly less statistical, but has this been over-edited to the extent that it's now too short?
  • What are your thoughts on the karting section (see talk)
  • Alternative sources have been found for a source that you questioned the reliability of, but the source itself is still being used in the article, to a far lesser extent. (see talk)

Again many thanks for your contribution to the article and to wikipedia in general. BeL1EveR 18:28, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've checked back in again. It's going well :) Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Cheers for passing Hamilton. Apologies if some of my comments were a bit stroppy! 4u1e 08:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Not at all. You need to edit articles about religious and ethnic conflict then......User:Blnguyen/J'accuse. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

E. V. Ramasami Naicker / Periyar

What's up with this article? User:Helloarise has requested page protection due to a "content dispute and edit war". What's with the move from E. V. Ramasami Naicker to Periyar and then back? Seems like something ought to be done here but I'm hesitant to come clomping in like an elephant when there are already two admins editing here. I don't have any knowledge in this area so I'm sure to make the wrong decision if I try to understand the content dispute. Let me know if User:Helloarise has a valid case here. Thanks.

--Richard 14:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure. But there was sequence of page moves to a whole pile of different spellings, and somewhere along the chain, the talk page got detached from the article and it got confusing. But the talk and article are together now. Not sure about the article, I haven't looked at it. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Phan Quang Dan

Updated DYK query On 29 June, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Phan Quang Dan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 17:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Updated DYK query On July 2, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle for Saigon, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Well done my dear sir. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh thankyou.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Don't mention it, Nishkid64 moved it to the loading zone. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:51, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Updated DYK query On 3 July, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nguyen Ngoc Tho, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 17:32, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

DYK backlogs

Hi Blnguyen. I was happy to add myself as a DYK admin. I'm looking forward to diving into the DYK backlogs. I've been working on improving the usability of the results from the "Good" DYK articles proposed by bot list. If the backlog is increasing, then my efforts are working! More often than not, my post is the only positive post on their talk page. The other posts usually are 'We're going to delete this image you uploaded', 'Stop doing xxx', 'I'm going to report you', etc. As you can see from my talk page, contributors are very happy to learn that someone thinks their article is Main Page material. It also seems a very good way to promote DYK so that they keep it in mind for their next article. -- Jreferee 18:59, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

That's true, that's very true...we need to reach out to the new article writers as well. Well done, but perhaps the 10-20 session is a bit busy? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

MAOTeen

Can you please comment on the latter half of the discussion at Miss Wisconsin's Outstanding Teen. I am furious out of my skin and desperately concerned that given the attitude of these guys the Miss Teen USA state articles are going to be next on their radar. PageantUpdater 23:01, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Ok, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:20, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Category: