Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:54, 16 July 2007

Archives

/archive Dec 2006: July 2006 to December 2006 /archive Mar 2007: January 2007 to March 2007 /archive May 2007: April 2007 to May 2007

Image tagging for Image:WWH.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WWH.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

• Misplaced Pages:Image use policy
• Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 14:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Ma Lik

It was in couple chinese news paper like Apple Daily. They even have a satire comic written about that. The only problem is that I recycled my newspaper few days ago, but I'm sure that it's in A section (the main news section). OhanaUnited 14:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fresh raspberries.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Fresh raspberries.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Misplaced Pages articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Misplaced Pages:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Misplaced Pages policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Student Television: GUST

Hello again. I wonder if you could possibly give your opinion in a new debate over the notability of Glasgow University Student Television. User:Sherzo wasn't sure about the article, and we've been in dire need of a third opinion. Given that you've discussed the page in the past, and I believe you recently contributed to the debate over LooSE TV, I thought you might be willing to throw your hat in the ring. Cheers. JMalky 09:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop

I've nominated Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Misplaced Pages is not" and the Misplaced Pages deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Gaff 08:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

• Maybe I was a little too trigger happy on this one. You see enough junk and everything starts looking like the same. Nom is withdrawn. cheers. —Gaff 09:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Hahhah I just noticed this AfD. Somebody did the same to the first article I ever started, and actually he tagged it for speedy deletion. Luckily an admin noticed that I was new and left me a note instead of deleting it. What I do now is that if I want to create a short stub-class article, I make sure that notability is asserted with English sources, or if I plan on creating anything more than a stub, I'll work on it in my userpage subspace first, and then moving it out to its own article space when it's near finished. For example - . Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:21, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks guys, and thanks for the advice! Ohconfucius 03:19, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Huang Ju

Hi, I see your point. I was unaware of these policies. Anyhow, the Chinese biography of Huang is actually very interesting, as it shows the official CCP version of Huang Ju's life in relative detail (and thus is considered the current official evaluation of his legacy), and thus is a very good alternative to the generally accepted views of Huang Ju. If you still see it as unnecessary, please post them up in the talk page so I can at least put it on the Chinese Misplaced Pages. Colipon+(T) 05:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

• thanks. I'll take a look and see if there is any information I can work into the article, and get rid of the EL. Ohconfucius 01:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Amvest.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Amvest.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Misplaced Pages under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Misplaced Pages. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Misplaced Pages (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Misplaced Pages page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:39, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

LSRfm.com

i believe engineering and web development are notable position, since a) its a student radio station and engieering is the 2nd most inportant element b) web dev - its a .com station so webmasters are also important, but since its the second removal by you, i shall leave it be

Barry Carlyon 16:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Radio stations

As things currently stand, the notability of a radio station is determined by whether that station holds a broadcast license from the appropriate federal broadcast regulator and directly originates at least a portion of its own programming. Apart from those two criteria, we don't care whether the station is commercial or student-owned or just broadcasts bingo games all day or used to meet the criteria but went bankrupt and stopped broadcasting five years ago — if those criteria are met, the station's in. Bearcat 08:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• thanks for the information. only on some of trhe articles, the fact that it has a license is not stated.... Ohconfucius 09:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
• Come to think of it, I have seen quite a few student radio and TV station articles deleted, and have decided to put one of your de-prodded articles to test your assertion. please see The Most FM Ohconfucius 10:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• The diffuculty being, where does one put the fact that one has a license, ppLSRfm.com]] - obvious since we have an FM Frequency
• What about pirate stations that currently operate, they dont have a license and some of them maybe be noteable.
• There have been quite a few students stations suffering deletion of late, somesones after increasing their edit count....

Barry Carlyon 12:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• The argument that having "a license" makes one notable may be fallacious, as it still depends on other factors. The fact that I have a driver's license does not make me notable, same goes for a license to practice medicine. A stock market quotation may imply notability for a company, but even then there are listed shell companies which nobody knows about. The notability conferred by any given license may even depend on the country. As for radio stations, a license to transmit on a 5W transmitter is not the same as one for a 30kW transmitter. But I think that this is moot nowadays, as anybody can broadcast over the internet. The only facts which push LSR over the bar of notability, IMHO, is the awards won. I inserted the tag as an encouragement to strengthen the article with stronger assertions and better quality references, which the article is in need of, IMHO. I would refrain from inserting anything which is should not be in an encyclopaedia (I know it's vague, but those are the policies and guidelines we should follow). All facts should be sourced, and that usually excludes self-references. Also, please be mindful of WP:COI in editing the LSRfm.com article, as you may inadvertently insert information which is not "public", "published", or otherwise verifiable. Ohconfucius 09:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

• I appreaciate and thank you for your assistance in making LSR's article a better wiki article. Im just aware of the fact a lot of student stations have been removed from the encyclopedia :-)

Barry Carlyon 10:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

French translation for the Board of Trustees election

Hi, I noticed that you wrote you were fluent in French. I have started translating the candidates interviews, and I was wondering if you were willing to give a hand, translating and/or polishing them. For now I am the only one working on these and I am afraid of not doing a perfect job on that occasion :). -- lucasbfr 15:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• Good work. I've touched it up a bit in my own style. There may still be errors, or errors I've introduced, though... I'll keep an eye on the pages for new hustings postings :-) Ohconfucius 03:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

That's great! You got a lot of mistakes, I'm ashamed. I'm stuck in a train for 7 hours this afternoon. I'll try to translate all those that magically appeared today. -- lucasbfr 09:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

• Nothing to be ashamed of. You did a pretty good job, honest. I noticed you picked up a few of mine too! I often go back on my own work and wonder why it seemed pretty good on first pass, but poor in reality. Ohconfucius 09:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
• Perhaps we should consider moving the page to fr:wikipédia. Where do you think it ought to go to get noticed? Ohconfucius 10:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Closing Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Amy Ried

The way I interpret Misplaced Pages:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions, is that a non-admin may close a discussion if there's an obvious consensus. If there're four "keep" votes and only one "delete" vote, I think that would be a consensus. Also, the nominator rather clearly withdrew from that discussion, so I saw no point in keeping it open, regardless of that one "delete" vote. I may be ignoring all rules, but I at least know what I'm doing. Ten Pound Hammer • 17:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• If you look carefully at the link you supplied, indeed advises against closing anything which is not a "WP:SNOWkeep". The fact is that you have prematurely terminated a discussion, which I have occasionally seen been turned by a late influential argument. OK, it can always be renominated for deletion by a dissenter, but I think you will have missed the point. WP:IAR does not give you carte blanche to do anything you like, you are still obliged to follow consensus. Since your failed RfA, a number of editors have been watching you, and giving you helpful advice, so I would not bite them. As you claim to know what you are doing, then fine, I'll shut up, but please bear in mind that I am not the only one to have given you friendly advice on the matter. Ohconfucius 01:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

LSRfm.com Logo

Why have you applied US law to it when its an english logo?

Barry Carlyon 10:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• From what I understand, wikipedia is subject to copyright laws of the united states. We use the US doctrine of fair use as a means of justifying the use of images such as corporate logos here in wikipedia, so although the logo is under UK copyright, we would be relying on a US disposition to display it legally. The other possibility of using the copyrighted logo would be to seek permission from the owners. Ohconfucius 09:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

• I am the current owner, but thanks for clearing it up, i appreaciate it is a slightly silly question

Barry Carlyon 09:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Goma.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Goma.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Misplaced Pages articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog) 06:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

OSCAR Radio

I notice that you have put my article up for deletion OSCAR Radio. Fair enough, but what is the procedure and what do I need to do to ensure that it is not in the future if we pass the relevant tests? I hope you do not mind me asking. A simple explanation would he helpful rather than being pushed to various sites, unless I am being totally dumb (which is quite plausible). Your help would be gratefully appreciated.

One other point, no a separate issue, as I am about to start at a new school soon, I notice that the new school's wiki page is being 'desecrated' with silly comments which are not appropriate, how can the Thomas Deacon Academy ensure that this is not the case in the future or reduce the chance of errors? I note that my old school Oundle School seems to have it sorted.

All responses of interest and experiences passed onto students.

Thanks

Dfcf 19:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

• I have made further comments in the AfD page which may answer some of your questions. In response to your other queries, I would say that at present, there is no easy way of stopping frivilous postings due to the open nature of wikipedia that modifications to certain articles being unrestricted. There is also no way to stop an article from being put under the deletion spotlight: AfD is one of the checks and balances of the system. Misplaced Pages's greatest strength is the open collaboration structure, but this is also the source of its major weakness because anybody can post anything they want, and ther are always those minority of individuals who have an agenda, or who do things irresponsibly. In the case of AfD, the best way is to ensure that your article "survives" is to make sure it is well-written, and properly sourced from reliable independent sources such as major news organisations. Featured articles and "The perfect article" are good places to start, as they are mean to reflect best practice in style, substance, and referencing. In the case of vandalism, your first course of action would be to put the article on your watch page, and revert any vandal edits you may detect as a result. Schools are frequent victims of vandal edits, as pupils have been known to post all kinds of opinionated and unverifiable comments, or attack edits, such as "Mr. Jones is a jerk", or "Joe Bloggs is cool". If vandalism is frequent (ie occur at least on a daily basis), you may request for semi-protection of the page. This will at least stop edits from unregistered editors, which usually is the bulk of vandalism. If further persistent vandalism is still occurring from the same registered user, you may then request he/she be blocked. You may be interested in creating a wikipedia group within the school to work on specific articles or project areas (preferably unrelated to the school itself, to ensure independence), as well as collectively watching an article on your school. Happy editing Ohconfucius 03:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on both counts. I am not sure what other references you need to OSCAR Radio. But having been the person running it for the past 10 years, I know all there is to tell, and perhaps you could help me overcome your problem with the article to ensure that it survives. There will be no reference to the BBC comment on the web, although it is a quote, and we did get a brilliant tour of Radio 1 from it. With more to come. Yes Sir Howard Stringer, Chairman of Sony is an OO, but he has put a lot of money into OSCAR Radio. Being a public school it is difficult for us to attract funding from local businesses, although we do advertise them on the station for a fee during the broadcasts. I also note that you are concerned about the short term RSL license as opposed to the long term ones that some schools have. There is a huge difference in these and it may be worth explaining them here. First of all, we could easily go for a MW low power (max 1W) long term radio licence from OFCOM, these are cheap, and only offer a range of the school grounds. However, when we decided on what to go for, we thought we wanted the best quality at the time (FM) and the most power allowed (25W). This is what we have done and achieved over the past 9 years. The investment in fees paid by the school to OFCOM and other licensing bodies is in excess of £10,000 pa or a total so far of £90,000. This as you can imagine is a big investment and the School has been happy to support it. We do operate an FM license (rare in schools) and we do it daily during the broadcast for 24 hours each day for the period (unusual in schools as the kit needed to run it properly is expensive), also the day to day running and monitoring is done by the students who take charge (unique in schools where adults tend to be in the studios monitoring what the students do and say - we do not do this, but have a duty student manager). The internet broadcast is online when we go on air, and an online archive is also available. For the FM frequency RSL we cannot go for longer as OFCOM only offer RSLs to schools and colleges in the UK. So we are at the max. We do get plenty of visits from other schools to see what we do and how we do it. Having been involved in the industry for 10 years, it is interesting to see it beginning to develop in the UK, and there is likely to be an explosion of school radio stations in the near future. In the schools environment we are seen by those who have looked to be an excellent example to those who are interested in joining our ranks. I am away on holiday in Nice for two weeks, but please feel free to comment and help point me in the right direction. This is my first Misplaced Pages article and I am keen to get it right. Misplaced Pages is one of my main sources of information, and as a teacher of ICT I do appreciate what you are achieving, also the help you have given and hopefully will give will be passed onto future generations of potential authors. Dfcf 15:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• David, I also genuinely appreciate what you are doing. You appear to confirm that OSCAR does not have the level of notability that is usually required for wikipedia. Although what you write is not controvertial, it is still insider's information, and so you would need to work on the sourcing. The article will still fail the verifiability test if push comes to shove (ie if it is subject to another AfD). I have seen a few University radio station articles deleted on similar grounds, so OSCAR is by no means "safe". I will leave the article alone in respect of what you have done for the project, and because of what bearcat said, but I consider it very weak "keep" argument. It's great that Stringer is prepared to put money into the project too, for the sake of his old school. Who knows, Stringer may be prepared to help with publicity, if he isn't doing so already. Perhaps you just need to be patient: you have put in a lot of foundation work, and its notability should increase beyond school project circles. What may not be ready for wikipedia today may be tomorrow, but to include an article in wikipedia in the hope of it achieving widespread notability may violate two other important parts of WP:NOT guidelines, specifically Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox and Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball. Ohconfucius 02:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Antiquities and Monuments Office‎

Thanks for merging Antiquities and Monuments Office into another article. But I have to point out that it is not a department but an office of LCSD(Leisure and Cultural Service Department. Also, the Job Duties of the Office is quite different from the Antiquities Advisory Board. Please don't mix them up.(Please read the webpage http://www.amo.gov.hk/en/antiquities.php and http://www.amo.gov.hk/en/about.php for reference).

Usually, the Wikipedians add the merge tags on the page before merging the pages and then we shall discuss if it is suitable to merge the pages into one. I think you can try to do so.

Shrimp wong 14:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for pointing out the confusion on my part. It certainly doesn't help that the two, which have such similar names and created at about the same time. ;-) I don't quite see where they fit... I note the AAB has a brief paragraph in the AMO website. Should the AAB article perhaps be merged into the AMO article? Ohconfucius 01:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Your AFD Nominations

I think it would be much easier to people to comment on if all the entires were grouped together as it says over here. Its not fun to leave the same comment in five different entires Corpx 07:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for your comment. I know there are opposing schools of thought about the nominations, and it would have been simpler for me too. However, many people hate batched nominations, especially for biographies. I thought it would be the best way to avoid a train wreck. Ohconfucius 07:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Lexicon genetics

Lexicon genetics (Ref:User talk:Scottishancestry) has been recreated by User:Sensia25. Is it a major company or should it be nominated for deletion? Aeons | Talk 13:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

你好

I just saw your long posts on the Falun Gong talk page. I don't think you should stop editing the articles. I don't know what much of that was referring to though, about your edits not being appreciated and stuff--I could not check them all out. For my part, earlier on I just wanted to say something gently about deleting, but maybe I should have put aside some time and looked more fully into the edits and made some more sophisticated remarks in a friendlier and rather more engaging way.

At the least, I don't think a wholesale revert of good faith edits is ever appropriate, as happened to you in this case. I have not found a large amount of time these days to spend on the articles. They are all in bad shape and most of what you write on the talk page is true. The to-do list is very old. I don't even know who is seriously and conscientiously editing the pages now--no one I suppose. If you would like to collaborate, it would give me some motivation for spending a regular amount of time (like a set amount of hours on a weekly basis) in researching and writing and editing. I guess the first step would be to come up with a new to-do list for every page, then systematically work through them. This would accommodate different schedules and time constraints. I might do this anyway, and work on these things kind of slowly and steadily, but if you want to share ideas and things I think that would be a good idea and I would like it. It would be far better than doing it by myself.

What I thought would be great in such a crazy case like this is to follow the wiki manual of style "religiously", and make an extremely rule-abiding and even maybe boring set of articles. I would like to see these articles as featured, since to me the topic is extraordinary enough to deserve it. It would be great to have a month with nothing else to do but create the wiki articles from the bottom up. By the way, check out this top paragraph, like just to note, I think the writing about the claims and things is quite neutral and good, even though the content is obviously about the persecution etc.-- just pointing out this part as an example of what I think is quite okay.

As a side note, I have found that practitioners are an extremely eclectic mix of people with sometimes very different perceptions, attitudes and understandings. I quickly browsed through the history and can see what you mean with the good faith comment. I don't like to see those kind of accusations and unwelcoming comments either. I don't know from whither comes the paranoia. Maybe it is a combination of zealotry and the recent experience with Mr Luo and his companion--I am guilty of both these to some extent, too. You are very right when you ask where is the 真 善 認 --in looking through the edit summaries I had to ask myself the same question. Anyway, I think it would be a shame if you did not edit the articles anymore for some small incident of this nature. With this note I am also saying that if you want to make some kind of commitment to bettering the articles, that would be great, and that we could work collaboratively on a complete restructure of all the articles. As a downgraded version of this, if you do not want to make this a semi-longterm thing, may I request that I seek your advice on certain matters in the process of redoing the articles? It would be better if you wanted to invest yourself in the project, but for starters in either case, I would want to know about how you think the main article should be structured, in terms of sections, length, etc... Okay a really long post, so I will stop for now and look forward to what you have to say.--Asdfg12345 00:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. I am glad to have your feedback. I am saddened to see the article in the same dire need of work as was highlighted in the to-do list a year ago. It certainly does not help that the articles are the subject of edit wars like what I experienced, where people do not look and just revert because something was missing from where they put it. I did note what you said in your addendum last time that I should continue to make changes, and was encouraged to make some changes until they too were reverted with some paranoid claim of "vandalism", and then further being falsely accused by the same paranoid user. Perhaps the battles with Samuel Luo has left scars, but I would advise other FG supporters to chill out a bit more, maybe go and see a movie, or get a girlfriend. ;-) I am happy to continue working on articles where I am not made to feel unwelcome, and I sincerely thank you for taking so much time to engage me. I will pop in from time to time, provided that the rottweilers are put on a tight leash. In that vein, if you believe that I have been acting in good faith, it would be extremely helpful if you had a word with the editor who has been making groundless accusations against me. An apology is all I am after, to allow us to move on. Ohconfucius 01:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, for myself I will try to establish a regular kind of schedule when I edit the pages. I can only sigh when I see a lot of this stuff. I guess the key is to just be steady and methodical, one piece of the puzzle at a time. I don't know what's with the accusations and overreaction. Maybe just a defensive mentality left from Samuel and Tomananda's longterm destruction campaign. Good faith editors making edits that are in line with wikipolicies should not meet with this kind of thing. Anyway, I will just try to do my own little bit and be more 堂堂正正. The first thing on my hitlist is that summary of the persecution on the main page. Related to this a bit, I think one kind of major thing is to standardise the main page's sections with how they relate to their respective daughter articles, and also make sure every daughter article is represented equally on the main page. Then just plod through the rest one step at a time.--Asdfg12345 09:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Maybe you can enlighten me: you removed a paragraph on your last pass. I know it has been removed previously, but cannot honestly see anything wrong with it. What is more, it seems to fit into the article, as it seems to explain some of the more fantastic things alluded to in the article. Ohconfucius 13:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

oh yeah no problem, you are talking about that Li Hongzhi one which first introduces the fantastic things like invisibility etc.? I imagine you are talking about that. I just took it out cause the same stuff was repeated a bit further down. I don't see any point repeating the same thing. It also seems a rather odd way to introduce the practice, if you know what I mean. I guess there are two issues here, and I will say them in their order of importance. The first is just about the repetitive thing, I don't think there's any point saying that stuff twice, and I thought i put in the edit summary like, it can be here or there, but just pick somewhere. The other thing is that I wanted to say earlier, you know, these articles and the contents of them are so extra ordinary, maybe it is hard to figure out a non partisan way of approaching them, or a neutral way, a way that does not already acknowledge or give priority to certain assumptions or worldviews or whatever. I think starting things off with the theoretical backgrounds section is a good idea. I wanted to suggest that one way of getting around this is to make the writing appear quite bland and very deliberately non-sensational. Li Hongzhi has said a large number of things that may easily be subject to a kind of sensationalism. I think maybe part of the challenge here is to present them without that element, at least deliberately. Listen, I won't write much more cause this is getting too long again. The bottom line is that I actually don't care if the invisibility and magic stuff goes there or not. If that section is functioning as an introduction of sorts (it is called "origins", right?) though it obviously has to present a more multifaceted understanding. The whole point behind it is morality anyway, the reason all these things exist, so there is some kind of need to be sensitive to the context of this and present things intelligently, taking those factors into account. Practically I would propose expanding that little section and giving a kind of account of the general metaphysical system Li Hongzhi is presenting, what he has said about higher dimensions etc.. This is not really present anywhere. It would be good to do this, at the same time being careful not to breach original research. I think the lectures have spelled the ideas out in a clear and concrete way enough though that it should be simple to avoid this. Okay, for now about that paragraph I am not too concerned. I would like to look at things with a more long term view, so I am just giving you an idea what I mean. If it is part of the "origins" then the origins would need to include a deeper account of things somehow for it to make sense to put that there. At the same time, if it goes there, I don't see why it should also be below, just like anything else. I trust your judgement for now anyway. Sorry to write so much. --Asdfg12345 14:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

quiero decir unas cosas

Pensé que seria mas divertida si escrito en castellano, y así puedo practicar tambien. Igual esperes muchos errores porque mi castellano ya es mal todavia. Quiero decirte que no debes formar malas pensamientos sobre Dafa por los malos actos de un practicante. Ya te mencioné que no hay una forma singular por practicantes de Dafa, y no son iguales. Tienen muchos distintos ideas, entendimientos y maneras de expresarse. No hay organisación o nada formal, así que cualquier persona puede representarse como un practicante; si hagas los ejercicios y leas los libros, significa que es un practicante? Realmente lo que me ha enseñado Dafa son solamente cosas buenas. Ya no bebo alcohol todo el tiempo, ni toma muchas drogas. Estoy tratando de sacar pensamientos negativos en todo sus aspectos, y sea responsable por mi propio vida. Este es algo muy serio y maravilloso. Si un practicante no se comporta bien, significa que todos los practicantes son así? Significa que Dafa en si mismo es así? No se muestra nada mas que el practicante en si mismo, y tambien que no se ha cultivado suficientemente, y tiene apegos en su corazon todavia? De hecho, ¿has leido los libros?, y has tratado de entender realmente lo que se enseña Falun Dafa? Es also serio y profundo. No estoy predicando por nada, porque este viene del corazon de uno. No debes pensar que Dafa es mal sobre el base de unos actos de un practicante singular--ni te mueves tu corazon por el. Dafa es algo completamente pacifica, abierta, libre y buena. Ves que estoy tratando de sacar las cosas malas que dicen la gente? Ya se lo que es Dafa, y para mi no se hace ningun diferencia lo que dicen ellos. Tampoco quiero dañar el wikipedia y tratar a promover y poner mis propios opinions. Parami, pienso que sobre todo lo mejor sería que estas paginas son completemente vacio de fallas, falsificaciónes, y que se siguen muy bien las políticas del wikipedia. Porque yo sé que es obvio al final del dia, sobre todo, que Dafa no es mal, es pacifica, y el persecución es un injusticia obvio y grande. Unas practicantes tienen sus propias problemas y apegos, pero no lo dejas que entiendes mal sobre Dafa, porque no es verdad, y la majoria no hagan cosas así y no se comportan así. Espero que entiendes lo que quiero decir. --Asdfg12345 01:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

my hat off to you! Indeed it was amusing to find you had written in Spanish I had to do a double take - my wikipedia screen was playing up this morning, and I pressed the refresh button just to make sure ;-). mi espanol no es si bueno que tu, entonces, para la expediencia, escrito en inglese. I do take your point that the behaviour of one editor should not reflect on the collective and one should persevere. We both agree that this needs to be a collaboration to make it a better article. But so far, it has been a frustrating journey, and I think you know most if not all the story. I would be concerned that while the good FG practitioners are busy making themselves into better people and are probably too busy to edit wikipedia, the bad ones wear a persecution complex so severe that they have to go charging around banishing all criticism of FG, and giving the rest a bad name. In terms of personal growth, we become better people by accepting our own faults and then working on our strengths. We go nowhere if we deny their existence.

From the articles' edit history, it is clear these skirmishes have been going on since the articles' creation, and is likely to continue indefinitely in my view unless FG or wikipedia collective do something to break the deadlock. The person in question appears not to abide by any of the principles of wikipedia, and should have the grace to leave of his own accord before he is expelled. I am quite sad that many a 'good' wikipedian have been hounded out because of the behaviour of just these minority. I have tried talking to him on the article's talk, and also on his own page, but he is ignoring me. Maybe I have been saying it wrong, but I have no wish to engage in edit warring with a few persistent POV pushers as two wrongs don't make one right, so I am at a loss as to what else I can do. Obviously I could escalate this within wikipedia, but I don't want to spend my time generating negative vibes and stress for myself. Misplaced Pages is big enough for us not to cross paths, so if I can enjoy myself working on other articles where the particular individual does not frequent, there is little reason why I should hang around here.

Maybe I will still further investigate the teachings of FG, which is what I would have naturally done in the spirit of writing a better article, had I not been so majorly put off. For me, it seems like the sensible thing to do. I thank you for making me think for a minute, and bring ing me back last time. I have enjoyed talking to you, at least you are normal and have a sense of humour, but please do not take this as anything personal. I will try not to hold my disappointing experience against FG. Ohconfucius 02:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Regard your messages.

Friend,

I was very busy these days with my internship in Microsoft R&D and several other things. I could hardly find time to read through the messages you had left on my talk page. And I sincerely apologize if I offended you in anyway. We have been facing till very recently a lot of vandalism and removal of very relevant material on the Falun Gong pages.

I would request you to please go through the following book.. http://www.falundafa.org/book/eng/pdf/flg_2006.pdf

and the nine lecture videos here.. http://www.falundafa.org/eng/media.htm#GUANGZHOU

All of the teachings are covered here. Please go through them and decide for yourself what Falun Gong is. I have been practicing Falun Gong for around 2 years and I can tell you, from my own experience, that Falun Gong is very good.

The CCP has spread a lot of mis-information and lies on Falun Gong and has tortured to death many innocent Chinese people and their families. I feel every good natured Chinese person must stand up against such cruelties being committed against their own fellowmen. What if our own family members were going through this, merely for striving to be good people and cultivate Zen-Shan-Ren?

As for the Epochtimes.. I live in India and have never read Epochtimes.. As far as I know, the newspaper was established by a group of Falun Gong practitioners who wanted to let others know the truth about Falun Gong and the brutal persecution.. when repeated requests were met with only increased persecution they were left with no choice. How can anybody with a conscience stand and watch as people as innocent good natured people are being tortured to death?

I hadnt read your messages on my talk page and I apologize again if I offended you. I'll put you a more detailed reply soon.. I just came back from my intern work and its already pretty late here.

Dilip rajeev 17:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)