This is an old revision of this page, as edited by RoyBoy (talk | contribs) at 00:32, 5 October 2005 (→Blocked.: +response). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:32, 5 October 2005 by RoyBoy (talk | contribs) (→Blocked.: +response)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Welcome!
Hi Yiyu Shen! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Misplaced Pages community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Misplaced Pages page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Happy editing! --PhilipO 01:11, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Re: Mao Zedong's poetry
Copied from the deletion vote page: Better idea: move to Wikisource under the main banner of Poetry of Mao Zedong, then create an article detailing Mao's Poetry at Poetry of Mao Zedong then link to the source poems. Best of both worlds, you have the article detailing his style and influence then you have source documents that are linked to. How does that sound? I'd be happy to help finish that up. Sasquatcht|c 03:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
That sound good to you? Sasquatcht|c 03:46, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Wikisource
Ni hau. In response to your complaint about articles that contain the full text of poems, I posted a suggestion on Talk:Ame ni mo Makezu, that the article be moved to Wikisource. The other two poem articles you mentioned do not contain the full text of the poem. I hope this helps persuade you that our votes against "Snow" are not based in anti-Mao or anti-Chinese bias.
Incidentally, I noticed that you did not yet have a user page, so I created one for you. It's very plain, but you can change it to be whatever you want. DS 12:13, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Mao Zedong
This message is regarding the article Mao Zedong. Thanks for experimenting with Misplaced Pages. Your test worked, and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Jtkiefer ----- 22:53, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
3 Revert Rule
You should be aware that there is a three revert rule with Misplaced Pages. Your reversions of Mao Zedong could result in your account being blocked. Try and resolve the issue on the article's talk page. --PhilipO 22:55, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
A bit puzzled
The thing is the passages I tried to delete are obviously POV, I believe it's offensive to most people from China. I don't see why other users keeping reversing back could be tolerated while mine will result in blocking the account. I don't know what Jtkiefer was saying in the message above, I am not experimenting anything.
I think this kind of keeping deleting and reserving between two opposite groups of users is kind of stupid. Please tell me if I can find anywhere on Misplaced Pages I can complain and argue about POV matters in a more reasonable way. If I can't find a better solution for this problem I will keep deleting those passages in Mao Zedong which seems to me strongly distorted and biased.
If at the end it results in my account being blocked, well, I don't mind. If such things happen then I will believe Misplaced Pages is not a place as 'neutral' as it claims and I won't bother staying.
Yiyu 23:07, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
If you look at the edit history of Mao Zedong you can see Great Veritas has reversed at least 8 time
- Yes, I realise that, and left a message on his Talk page too about 3-RR violations. --PhilipO 23:19, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Blocked.
You have been blocked for 24 hours for violation of the three-revert rule. If you have any questions about this block, leave them here, and I will answer them as soon as I can. Ral315 WS 23:22, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
I think for this kind of polarized argument it will be better for you administrators to take a look at the disputed passages and decide if it's POV nor not. Anyway it's you guys who decide the definition of POV and you should have a better opinion about it. Yiyu 23:30, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- In future, if you feel there is a POV issue on a given article, please discuss it on that articles discussion page. If you unilaterally remove large parts of the article (regardless of whether the reason is valid or not), it will be quickly reverted and you will not get a receptive audience. Please employ a defter touch, and discuss large edits before making them, since you as well cannot decide what is POV or not. I hope you will come back and contribute to our growing community. - RoyBoy 00:32, 5 October 2005 (UTC)