Misplaced Pages

User talk:Hihihi100: 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 21:45, 5 January 2009 editLoren36 (talk | contribs)9,002 editsm Hanyu Pinyin: Section header← Previous edit Revision as of 01:27, 6 January 2009 edit undoLoren36 (talk | contribs)9,002 edits RE: CALL TO REFORM: ReplyNext edit →
Line 52: Line 52:
== RE: CALL TO REFORM == == RE: CALL TO REFORM ==
Thank you for on my talk page concerning simplified vs. traditional characters on various articles, this is certainly a valid topic that has been with us for some time. The Chinese Misplaced Pages allows readers to switch between traditional or simplified on all articles, but does so with the knowledge that its audience is indeed reading the whole article in Chinese. I think the question we need to ask ourselves is what the purpose of including any non-English text is on the English Misplaced Pages. Are the Chinese titles there simply to inform readers what the original non-English title of a particular topic is (eg. ] starts off with the national title in German: ''Bundesrepublik Deutschland'')? If so, then my interpretation is that we should use whatever language, or in this case, character set, is relevant to the subject in question. This would mean traditional characters on any Taiwan or ROC related topics, or simplified on PRC related topics. The interwiki link to the Chinese Misplaced Pages would be sufficient to allow non-English speakers to read about the subject in their own preferred character set. Of course, those are simply my personal views on the subject - not policy, and I welcome any questions or comments you might have on them. -] (]) 21:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC) Thank you for on my talk page concerning simplified vs. traditional characters on various articles, this is certainly a valid topic that has been with us for some time. The Chinese Misplaced Pages allows readers to switch between traditional or simplified on all articles, but does so with the knowledge that its audience is indeed reading the whole article in Chinese. I think the question we need to ask ourselves is what the purpose of including any non-English text is on the English Misplaced Pages. Are the Chinese titles there simply to inform readers what the original non-English title of a particular topic is (eg. ] starts off with the national title in German: ''Bundesrepublik Deutschland'')? If so, then my interpretation is that we should use whatever language, or in this case, character set, is relevant to the subject in question. This would mean traditional characters on any Taiwan or ROC related topics, or simplified on PRC related topics. The interwiki link to the Chinese Misplaced Pages would be sufficient to allow non-English speakers to read about the subject in their own preferred character set. Of course, those are simply my personal views on the subject - not policy, and I welcome any questions or comments you might have on them. -] (]) 21:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

: Let me address the issues you raised in your reply sequentially:
:* ] is a whole other project from Misplaced Pages. While similar in that it relies on volunteers and is editable by anyone, the overall objectives of Wiktionary are different from Misplaced Pages. There is in fact, an entire guideline clarifying why this is at ], I encourage you to pursue it if you are unclear on the objectives of the projects.
:* Actually, I'd strongly recommend against unilaterally changing the guidelines without community consensus. If you do make a change to the guidelines without a broad community agreement, then it is likely to be reverted anyways, and you'll have a bunch of annoyed editors to deal with. I notice that you are already engaged in a discussion on the subject on ]. The discussion still appears to be ongoing, and more editors should probably join in before a formal consensus can be reached. This is usually a time consuming process, which is why it doesn't happen all that often. I've gone over ], and from what I can tell, we really don't have any guideline on which character set to use in infoboxes (as opposed to the templates used in introduction, shown on ]). If all you want is a Wiktionary link, it might be better to simply incorporate the link into the aforementioned template, rather than creating a dedicated infobox.
:* Anyone who edits Misplaced Pages in good faith is an editor, including you. Perhaps you were inquiring about my ]? There really isn't all that much between a regular editor and an admin. As far as policy and guidelines go, I'm just another editor, and don't have the right to make up policy unilaterally. The only difference is that admins have access to a few extra technical tools, notably the ability to ] certain articles from editing, or to ] certain people from editing. Neither tool is used often (expect in the case of very obvious vandalism, such as replacing every other word in an article with "poop"), and admins generally will ask another uninvolved admin to intervene in the event of an edit war they are personally involved in. To become an admin, you have to be nominated (by someone else, or even yourself), and the community may decide to make you one if you've been around long enough, and made enough good edits that people feel that you can be trusted with the keys, so to speak.
:* Again, it seems we really don't have any consensus on how to deal with the issue, and the subject should be discussed further before we can decide how to proceed. I've already told you where I stand on the issue (incorporate the Wiktionary link to the ] templates), for what its worth, but other people should also have the chance to voice what they think.
: Hope that helps. -] (]) 01:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 01:27, 6 January 2009

If you're working on a section, I suggest that you use the {{underconstruction}} template rather than the comment that people may not see. --Nlu (talk) 19:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi, regarding the Beijing subway map --- I don't have plans to convert the map into Traditional Chinese yet as Traditional Chinese is not official in Mainland China. -- ran (talk) 17:55, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Renaming Pescadores to Penghu

Please give others a chance to respond to your suggestion that we move Pescadores to Penghu. Small changes to a single page often don't need consensus first. But changing the name of a page, and going through many pages to change all the links to that page, is a very significant edit. You really should give people a chance to respond. Otherwise you may find that all the hard work you put into your changes will quickly be reverted. Readin (talk) 23:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Please stop continuing your campaign to replace every occurrence of Pescadores to Penghu. You have not given people time to comment at Talk:Pescadores. As it is, by continuing to do this you are showing disrespect. There are over 300 usages of Pescadores here, compared to about 30 usages of Penghu. Clearly one usage has been standard here. Without getting a consensus to change, all your changes will be reverted. You may be right, but you are doing it wrong. Shenme (talk) 23:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
I entirely agree with Shenme. I am appalled at what you have done to the article Pescadores Campaign. My three main concerns are (a) the politically-motivated use of Penghu when the islands are normally known in English as the Pescadores; (b) the politically-motivated replacement of Wade Giles by pinyin; and (c) your bizarre habit of not using capital letters for French, Chinese, etc. I can vaguely understand your motivation for (a) and (b), though I deplore it, but the motivation for (c) simply escapes me. You have also ruined the style of a hitherto well-written article. Most importantly, to have made these changes without first discussing them with me, as the main author of the article, was extremely impolite. I would like you to voluntarily withdraw these changes. Otherwise, I will ask for them to be reverted.
Djwilms (talk) 09:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Gumuhua, it is one thing to change the name used on the main page (we're discussing that). It is another to change the name in historical contexts. I don't have time to look into this for you right now, but please review WP:NAME and other relevant policies that may apply to using names in historical context. The Pescadores may be called Penghu right now, but they weren't called that during the Pescadores Campaign. Readin (talk)
Dear Gumuhua,
I have reported you for vandalism to the article Pescadores Campaign. May I suggest you now leave the article alone until this matter is sorted out. Sticking absurd tags on it doesn't really help your case.
Djwilms (talk) 01:18, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Re:some help..

Template:Underconstruction is probably your best bet. Please use it limitedly though, i.e. maybe for a day or so. --User:Woohookitty 12:15, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Pescadores was finally moved to penghu... DJ: "the islands are normally known in English as the Pescadores" hahahaha...

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 17:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

The tilde looks like a tiny wave. Or like a wavy minus sign. On my keyboard, and a lot of other keyboards sold in the U.S., it is on the upper left key on the same key that contains the accent mark (`). On these keyboards you need to use the shift key to type the tilde. If you know ASCII it is decimal value 126 (hex 7E). I'm not sure what else I can tell you to help you find it. Readin (talk) 02:52, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Style Manual

Please take a look at Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (use of Chinese language). It may answer some of your questions about articles related to the Chinese language family. Readin (talk) 00:38, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Chinese Romanisation

Okay, you win on that one. Sorry, I didn't hear about the ruling. Nice to know now thought that they're using the Hanyu romanisation. But still, that doesn't mean that we're going to have to change all the Proper nouns of the places. Some places still retain their Wales-giles and now, Tongyong names as their OFFICIAL Romanised name (e.g. Taipei, Kinmen), thus we will have to keep those names UNTIL they are officially changed to Hanyu romanisation.

I have nothing against Hanyu romanisation, I prefer it more than tongyong and Wales-Giles. Liu Tao (talk) 22:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Yes Hanyu Pinyin is now the official standard in Taiwan, so I changed the infobox in the "Republic of China" article.--pyl (talk) 02:06, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Hanyu Pinyin

"To carry out its policy of adopting Hanyu Pinyin (漢語拼音) as the official Romanization system for Chinese, the central government will not grant financial assistance or aid to local government events in which Tongyong Pinyin (通用拼音) is used, a government minister said yesterday." No aid for Tongyong, official says

Well, at least their not slapping children's fingers with rulers for using their native language in school like they did when the forced everyone to learn Chinese. Ma was able to use Hanyu Pinyin without penalty as mayor of Taipei while Tongyong was the national standard, but now he has no tolerance for anyone who disagrees with his own policies. Is Taiwan moving backward? Readin (talk) 00:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

RE: CALL TO REFORM

Thank you for your comments on my talk page concerning simplified vs. traditional characters on various articles, this is certainly a valid topic that has been with us for some time. The Chinese Misplaced Pages allows readers to switch between traditional or simplified on all articles, but does so with the knowledge that its audience is indeed reading the whole article in Chinese. I think the question we need to ask ourselves is what the purpose of including any non-English text is on the English Misplaced Pages. Are the Chinese titles there simply to inform readers what the original non-English title of a particular topic is (eg. Germany starts off with the national title in German: Bundesrepublik Deutschland)? If so, then my interpretation is that we should use whatever language, or in this case, character set, is relevant to the subject in question. This would mean traditional characters on any Taiwan or ROC related topics, or simplified on PRC related topics. The interwiki link to the Chinese Misplaced Pages would be sufficient to allow non-English speakers to read about the subject in their own preferred character set. Of course, those are simply my personal views on the subject - not policy, and I welcome any questions or comments you might have on them. -Loren (talk) 21:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Let me address the issues you raised in your reply sequentially:
  • Wiktionary is a whole other project from Misplaced Pages. While similar in that it relies on volunteers and is editable by anyone, the overall objectives of Wiktionary are different from Misplaced Pages. There is in fact, an entire guideline clarifying why this is at Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary, I encourage you to pursue it if you are unclear on the objectives of the projects.
  • Actually, I'd strongly recommend against unilaterally changing the guidelines without community consensus. If you do make a change to the guidelines without a broad community agreement, then it is likely to be reverted anyways, and you'll have a bunch of annoyed editors to deal with. I notice that you are already engaged in a discussion on the subject on Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Linguistics and related boxes: Please make distinctions. The discussion still appears to be ongoing, and more editors should probably join in before a formal consensus can be reached. This is usually a time consuming process, which is why it doesn't happen all that often. I've gone over Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (use of Chinese language), and from what I can tell, we really don't have any guideline on which character set to use in infoboxes (as opposed to the templates used in introduction, shown on Template:Zh-all). If all you want is a Wiktionary link, it might be better to simply incorporate the link into the aforementioned template, rather than creating a dedicated infobox.
  • Anyone who edits Misplaced Pages in good faith is an editor, including you. Perhaps you were inquiring about my admin status? There really isn't all that much between a regular editor and an admin. As far as policy and guidelines go, I'm just another editor, and don't have the right to make up policy unilaterally. The only difference is that admins have access to a few extra technical tools, notably the ability to protect certain articles from editing, or to block certain people from editing. Neither tool is used often (expect in the case of very obvious vandalism, such as replacing every other word in an article with "poop"), and admins generally will ask another uninvolved admin to intervene in the event of an edit war they are personally involved in. To become an admin, you have to be nominated (by someone else, or even yourself), and the community may decide to make you one if you've been around long enough, and made enough good edits that people feel that you can be trusted with the keys, so to speak.
  • Again, it seems we really don't have any consensus on how to deal with the issue, and the subject should be discussed further before we can decide how to proceed. I've already told you where I stand on the issue (incorporate the Wiktionary link to the Template:Zh-all templates), for what its worth, but other people should also have the chance to voice what they think.
Hope that helps. -Loren (talk) 01:27, 6 January 2009 (UTC)