Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mccready (talk | contribs) at 11:06, 4 July 2005 (Chinese language). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Note: Unless you specify that you will be monitoring this page, I will respond to you on your talk page instead of mine. But if you want a speedier response or any response at all, answer on this page since I will probably forget to check yours.

Archived versions: 18VIII03 | 21X03 | 30XII03 | 21II04 | 17IV04 | 07VI04 | 28VII04 | 2X04 | 5XII04 | 18II05 | 14IV05

Taipei American School

The unknown user has been persistenly trying to get his views back on the Taipei American School article. Every time we edit his stuff out he edits back in. And now he writes that the track and field facilities were built on a former trash dump! Whether or not the track and field facilities were built on a former trash dump sounds irrelevant. What should we do about this? Allentchang 19:06, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• I think there is a tag team of vandals. At least one of them is at UC Berkeley. Jiang, go kick them in the nutsack or something. Anyways, I put the page itself on the administrators vandalism notice board since the IP being used to vandalize is changing frequently. SchmuckyTheCat 20:50, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Chinese Taipei NOC Flag

Hello. The reason why I replaced the flag image is that I found a cleaner version of the NOC logo and use that instead. I put to the left that the NOC flag consists of the NOC logo centered on a white background. I do apologize for not giving you a head's up on it, but I personally think the small logo looks better than what we have right now. If you still want to use a flag image, I will create a png file for yall to use in the next few days. Zscout370 10:17, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• I did what you asked and now the old image has been replaced by the new image. Zscout370 17:02, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Urbi et Orbi

Just wanted to remind you that the next time you move an article under a new headline, please also correct links to it in other articles. You can access them via "what links here" in the "toolbox" at the left side of the screen. Thanks for all your efforts. --Eleassar777 10:54, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Stop Pushing POV

I'm checking your page so you can repsond here. Why do you insist on pushing clear BIASED POV? You can't say it's POV to say that Taiwan is not a part of China. You can only say it's POV if you don't recognize that there are some people that think it is illegitimate that Taiwan is not a part of China. Please spend more time thinking.

By the way, your photo is hilarious. It's hilarious that you would think that someone would purposely try to get shot in order to be elected president. Do you know what sensationalist news means? You have got to be kidding me. I thought Berkeley was a good school, but I guess they do take a lot of people.--160.39.195.88 03:21, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please post new comments to the bottom.

I am not the Happy, Happy, Happy man. This Mr. Happy, Happy, Happy has been hacking at it for 30 years and I have no idea how he makes a living or who is paying him. His usual hangout is SF Chinatown, but he shows up at other places, like Telegraph Avenue occasionally. No, I don't agree with everything Mr. Happy, Happy, Happy says. In fact, I probably disagree with him most of the time. For example, I don't think Bush is 666 or that A-bian shot himself. I'm glad you agree with me. His picture is here for decorative purposes only.

I don't see how it is not POV to say "Taiwan is not part of China". The statements "Taiwan is not part of China" and ""Taiwan is part of China" are both conflicting POV. If we want to be NPOV, we must write in a way that will satisfy both sides. --Jiang 03:41, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You just self-incriminated yourself. Thanks for making the argument for me. Also thanks for having no appreciation of complexity. Taiwan is not a part of China with the context that you're talking about 1) reality and 2) the de facto situation is not POV. If you are talking about de jure should it be, shouldn't it be, then yes, I acknowledge some people because of nationalistic fervor (forgetting that they hate the Jiang Jieshi/KMT and not Taiwan), feel that Taiwan should belong to China.--160.39.195.88 04:56, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The de facto situation can be interpreted either way to mean that Taiwan is or is not part of China. The way you do this is to follow the naming conventions and say that China is not synonymous with the PRC. It is a cultural/geographic entity divided by an unresolved civil war between the PRC and ROC. Under this argument, Taiwan is part of China. A more outdated argument is that the Republic of China is the legitimate China. Under the argument, Taiwan is also part of China. Here are your counterarguments and I can find plenty of people believing the former. The naming conventions explicitly said not to equate China with the PRC. Refer to the China details for the definition used here. --Jiang 05:03, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Stop Reverting without providing any Evidence

I have provided plenty of evidence and citations and argumentation for my changes. Your strategy has been a ridiculous avoidance of many points, responding to one which basically just states that you disagree or you pull some POV card, citing no evidence and reverting. You need to think harder instead of clicking revert harder.--160.39.195.88 05:19, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

see no. 2 at Misplaced Pages:What_wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox. I told you that I'm not interested in participating in a political debate with you. As long as some people will disagree with the text, then it is not acceptable. It doesn't matter if we both agree with the text as long as some people disagree. I fail to see that Taiwan's status as a nation is not disputed at all, so showing me "evidence and citations" on how Taiwan is a nation, as long as some people claim otherwise, does little good. --Jiang 06:03, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You're the one pushing POV and if anything, you're pushing a minority POV. You still won't read the argument and you still won't respond to any of the facts about Taiwanese culture and traditions. And really dumb is you STILL think nation=ethnic group. Why the hell do you sitll think that? Please read nation because you sound like you have no clue.--160.39.195.88 13:03, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jiang, I feel so sad for you. I know you have the appartus of intelligence, yet I see that your opinions are still merely a product of your historical and cultural trace. Do you honestly think if you were Anglo-American you would feel the same way? It makes me so sad that no matter how smart people are, they are still subject to propaganda, to biases--slaves to their own backgrounds. You willingly give up your own rationality for the cause of your ideology. Really remarkable, yet so sad. I don't know what to say. I wish you could be saved, but I know that you'll read this and go on being the way you are.--160.39.195.88 06:00, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Nanjing Massacre

Hi Jiang, due to an ongoing dispute in this article, I've attempted a rewrite of the intro, which you can find in Talk:Nanjing Massacre#Rewrite. Could you come over and take a look? I have nagging fears that by trying to ensure NPOV I'm appeasing the massacre deniers a bit too much. -- ran (talk) 00:47, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

Um... what about the bot???

Er... I haven't really heard anything about the bot for awhile... -- AllyUnion (talk) 06:47, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My adminship: thanks!

Hi Jiang. Thanks very much for your vote for my RfA. I promise to be prudent, wise, sagacious and totally unilateral in all my admin affairs. I should say that I am very pleased at the number of people who supported me – it's very nice to know I'm making a positive impact. Cheers again, Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 21:15, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Moving page

If you would like the page moved, please gain consenus first. That's what we have to say to you. I worked on restoring the original condition. Feigenbaum 04:11, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Of course, is a temp. page. And "I am not trying to get the page move." Nice. Then let put things back to the origianl situation by moving back the article to Liancourt Rocks and start discussion. Feigenbaum 04:16, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"There is no consensus either way." So let put things back to the origianl situation by moving back the article to Liancourt Rocks (after the page is unprotected)　and start discussion. Feigenbaum 04:20, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Republic of China

Hi, please don't edit protected pages in which you're involved as an editor.

The reason I favored one version was that it appeared that one person was repeatedly reverting to his own version against two or more others. An administrator is permitted to use his discretion in choosing which version to keep in such circumstances:

Additionally, when protection is due to a revert war, the protecting sysop may choose to protect the version preferred by those more closely complying with the guideline on repeated reverts. See wikipedia talk:revert#The protection option for the discussion on this.

In the event I compromised by using the "twoversions" template. I prefer this approach to waiting around until an editor reverts four times. Blocking doesn't really solve an edit dispute. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 10:45, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

As well as 203.218.222.112 and 222.145.8.12., I also took into account User:Winhunter's edit: 15:37, 24 Apr 2005. So it appears to me to be one chap repeatedly reverting against two. Of course I'm only human and working with limited information, so if it should turn out that Winhunter is the same as 203.218.222.112, I've made a bad call. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:04, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Anyhow I cheerfully agree that I may have made errors of judgement on who said what--if I knew exactly what was going on I'd be too involved. I thought, and still think, that a period of protection would be better than letting the slug it out forever. I'm trying to nudge things along because I think the problem was mainly on the use of a scary warning rather than real differences of opinion over fact or emphasis. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:24, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Are you interested in being a Bureaucrat?

Hi, I am considering nominating you to become a Bureaucrat. The role would involve giving administrator or bureaucrat access to other users following consensus on Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship. Although there are currently 18 bureaucrats, it may be helpful to have a few more. If you would accept a nomination, please let me know. Kingturtle 04:27, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Liancourt Rocks vote

Hey, there's a vote going on at Talk:Liancourt Rocks. I thought you might wish to participate. --Xiaopo ℑ 08:09, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

bureaucratship

please accept my nomination for you at Misplaced Pages:Requests for bureaucratship/Jiang. Kingturtle 06:14, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• I am horrified at how people have responded. Please accept my apologies for putting you through this process. I had no idea people were like that. Kingturtle 03:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Imposter

User:Adam Bishop has just informed me that someone is impersonating you on Misplaced Pages. The vandals name was Jianq. He had reverted a few flag pages you and I watch, but all should have been reverted back. Zscout370 (talk) 00:39, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

On a related topic, you may want to have a look at WP:ANI#User:Amerinese, User:DINGBAT et al.. --MarkSweep 22:41, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

category move... Category:Asian-American-related topics --> Category:Asian American-related topics_Category:Asian_Ameri">

I proposed this category move on cfd. I feel that it is improper to use "Asian-American" instead of "Asian American" when describing people. However, there are some people opposing this move, saying that my claim is improper grammar. I would like your support; please post a comment here. — J3ff 02:12, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Nanyang

Hello Jiang. Would you be interested to join the discussions at talk:Nanyang (geographical region)#Common usage and user talk:Huaiwei#Nanyang, and perhaps to mediate? Thanks in advance. :-D — Instantnood 16:21, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

Cut and paste move

Hello again. Would you mind help telling Huaiwei why cut and paste move should not be done? (at User talk:Huaiwei#Nanyang (disambiguation)) Thanks. — Instantnood 21:55, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

Personal Attack

Look at User:160.39.195.88's user page. There was an edit by 50Stars, claiming that you were hired by the PRC Government, effectively calling you a Communist. To me, saying that an Eagle Scout Brother of mine is a Communist while enforcing Wikipolicy is a personal attack. I hope you look into this more and see if any action can be done. Zscout370 (talk) 01:01, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Almost vandalism on Jawaharlal Nehru

On April 21, the article Nehruvian-Stalinism was deleted due to its being a nearly unused neologism, used only by a certain commentator on http://www.rediff.com. Here's the delete log: Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/Log/2005 April 21#Nehruvian-Stalinism. Notice the suspiciously large number of new users.

Since then, 66.127.58.169 has been adding the article back as a section in Jawaharlal Nehru. Their edit descriptions have included calling everybody who opposes them "White Supremacists" or "Communists", and attributing them to "Typical American Stupidity". It would be great if you could look into this. Thanks! --Xiaopo ℑ 01:07, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

Image:Chinese_Taipei_Sports_Disabled.JPG

Hey, it is me again. I redrew this flag, and the image is now located at Image:Chinese_Taipei_Paralympic_Flag.png. I replaced the image you made with the one that I have made, making your image an orphan. If you have no problems with this, I wish for you to put the speedy delete tag, {{delete}}, on the image page so we do not have to go through the IFD process. Zscout370 (talk) 23:38, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

User:FreedomFighter228

I didn't realize that (s)he was a vandal; maybe just a different point of view on China and Taiwan. But vandalizing your user page was bad. utcursch | talk 05:31, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

Image:CTflag.jpg

I replaced this image with Image:Chinese_Taipei_Olympic_Flag.png, and replaced the links accordingly. If you want to go ahead and delete that image, or talk about it, just let me know. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 04:15, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

File:Jack straw.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Jack straw.jpg, has been listed at Misplaced Pages:Files for discussion. Please see the ] to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Thuresson 08:12, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

"Mainland China"

There are two Chinese states, the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China, usually called Taiwan. Those are the only names that can be legitimately used in an article of this kind. Adam 09:55, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Jguk's container pages

Hey Jiang - Jguk is using a bizarre scheme whereby 'articles' (template container pages, really) are built using transclusion (not unlike the FAC page). What's worse is he is using the wikipedia:namespace from WikiProject subpages to hold article prose and then linking directly to that from the headings on the container page. For an example see: 2005 English cricket season (8-30 April) (a page he is putting through peer review at Misplaced Pages:Peer review/2005 English cricket season (8-30 April) with the intent of finishing it up before FAC). Please add your input on this practice at Misplaced Pages talk:Template namespace#transcluding prose. --mav 21:43, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for re-adding Vietnam (Yuenan)!

Thanks, Jiang: for intelligently re-adding Vietnam back to the East Asia section, as the Vietnamese people are definitely NOT part of "Southeast Asia", and regard such a label as an insult!

 Sincerely, fellow East Asian:

 Le Anh-Huy (Vietnamese)
 Li Yinghui (Northern Mandarin)
 Lai Ingfai (Cantonese)

Transliteration

Are you able to transliterate the Chinese names of the Hong Kong political parties. Electionworld 09:40, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

W. Mark Felt

Salve!
I nominated W. Mark Felt as a WP:FAC. As you commented on the Deep Throat talk page, I'd appreciate your comments at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/W. Mark Felt. PedanticallySpeaking 15:45, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Macedonians vs. Macedonian Slavs

Dear Jiang, at the moment there is a poll taking place on the Macedonian Slavs talk page to which you could make a significant contribution. Thank you in advance for your participation. Ivica83 13:18, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The "East Sea" issue, again

Dear Jiang,

Since you've been involved in past discussions of this issue, I wanted to let you know that another push for a Sea of Japan naming convention (in Korea-related articles) has begun. Please drop by Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (Korean)#Disputed names, unless you are as sick of the whole issue as I am.

Haven't seen you in the Korea-related articles for a while... feel free to visit the new message board. Pretty quiet over there right now, but maybe it will get livelier. -- Visviva 14:03, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Royal Consorts

Just a heads up as you made a comment about Royal Consorts on the talk page of Misplaced Pages:Naming_conventions (names and titles). The title Royal Consort is under discussion on Talk:Marie_Antoinette#Requested move as well as the "Naming conventions (names and titles)". Philip Baird Shearer 20:01, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Taiwan Affairs Office and an ArbCom case

User:SchmuckyTheCat listed my edit to the article on Taiwan Affairs Office as an evidence to the ArbCom case that I'm involved, citing it as an example of my POV edit, and marking edit as minor without edit summary. In fact I did not change the meaning of the content of the article. I noticed that after User:Alassius reverted my edit, User:Yuje and you restored my edit ( ), similarly without edit summary and marked as minor. What would you suggest, in your opinion, we should do about what Schmucky has done? Thanks in advance. — Instantnood July 3, 2005 16:06 (UTC)

Sun Yat-sen FAC

As one of the main contribtors of this article, can I ask where you obtained your sources? I'm planning to push this through FAC. Borisblue 4 July 2005 06:12 (UTC)

Chinese language

Did you delete my contribution? If not, do you know who did Kevin McCready