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.
Certified Gangsta is away on vacation and may not respond swiftly to queries.
Bonafide.hustla is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.
Thanks for experimenting with the page Chinese on Misplaced Pages. Your test worked, and has been reverted or 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. Kusma(討論)03:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Please stop distorting information about Taiwanese opinion towards Chinese reunification. How "Chinese" Taiwan is is a delicate topic, and we are trying to apprach it with a neutral point of view. Also, your edits on Chinese can be understood as vandalism, so please stop. Thank you, Kusma(討論)04:56, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Please do not remove large chunks of text without explanation, in the edit summary and on the relevant talk page. Otherwise, your edits are automatically reverted as they are construed as vandalism, which can easily get you blocked.--Jiang06:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
I do not endorse the views presented by the man depicted on my user and talk pages. The NPOV rule only applies to articles, not user pages.--Jiang07:11, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
(I was too slow in typing this, so my answer comes a bit late) I can understand your edits on Taiwan independence and am also not completely happy with the sentence you removed that basically said Powell was right and all Taiwanese parties miss the point, but I can also see why Jiang reverted them since you didn't really say why you removed them. It might be a good idea to discuss this issue on Talk:Taiwan independence. However, you should restore the image on Jiang's user page - it is not very polite to edit other people's userpages, and he is only displaying a well-known San Francisco Chinatown figure whose ultra-nationalism is so silly it is almost funny. You should assume good faith and not believe that these are Jiang's personal opinions. By the way, Jiang is an administrator and I am not. Happy editing, Kusma(討論)07:18, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
I don't know about the factual accuracy of the section that you keep deleting (I am not an expert in international law; it would be a good thing to try to find verifiable sources on this matter). However, there are other ways to remove bias than outright deletion (I have just tried to remove bias by simply changing "unfortunately" to "however"). The article in general seems to be more or less balanced to me, giving all different views on the matter without favoring one over the other (that is what or neutral point of view policy is about). Kusma(討論)14:44, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Administrators are human; we are bound to be biased in something in all our lives. The question is whether if our actions as editors and as administrators cause Misplaced Pages to be biased. I don't see any evidence that Jiang has done that. For example, I state on my own user page that I am against George W. Bush, but I don't think I've made any edits that caused Misplaced Pages to slant against Bush. --Nlu (talk) 07:50, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
The picture is protesting an issue, I am unsure what issue. How is it different from shame italy and europe, and shame=jiang that are found on your pages? Mike(TC)07:02, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
You probably know this already by now, but this kind of thing gets fastest replies if posted to the admin incidents board. Also, you need to sign comments with ~~~~. I'm guessing someone is already on the case, but I am going to have a look - I'm also removing the comment at the head of your talk page as being distinctly unhelpful. Just zis Guy, you know? /10:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
Warning
You are not permitted to edit my user or user talk pages (except to post a comment in the appropriate format, not to delete anything). If you do so once more, you will be blocked. --Jiang09:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Enough is enough. For your personal attacks and apparently unwillingness to learn Misplaced Pages regulations and follow them, you've been blocked from editing for 24 hours (which does not affect your ability to read Misplaced Pages). If you are willing to contribute positively, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. --Nlu (talk) 04:34, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Your prior edit on February 14 () clearly constituted personal attack (particularly in conjunction with the edit summary). That's why I blocked you. --Nlu (talk) 06:00, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
this ain't no personal attack son. i simply said why did u edit jiang's talk page?? what is wrong with you?? but like i said, y'all are full of crap (i ain't gonna cuss out on herre) so i'm outta dis site. oh and before i go, why did jzg edit my talk page and you edited jiang's talk page but i can't edit no one's talk page. jzg said my picture is unhelpful so he removed it and now tha image is lost, shouldn't he get a warning??
leavin wikipedia
i'm outta wikipedia. dis place is sad. nothin can be done and accomplished and da adminz themselves are biased so anyway i'm out.
Peace
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Misplaced Pages are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator.
You have been blocked from editing for vandalism of Misplaced Pages. The block is for a period of 1 week. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. --Nlu (talk) 04:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Response to Nlu's accusations on admin's noticeboard
I am forced to write my response on my talk page 'cause this is the only page I am allow to edit at the moment. First I want to deny that I have any connection with GrandCru. I do not know the guy and never have any interactions with him whatsoever. I got an account on wikipedia last month when I was using the website for a school project. I noticed some of the info in the articles are outdated or biased. Some users, including Kusma, admits there are flaws in some articles such as Taiwanese Independence and China. Anyway, I was able to reach compromise in those articles (see history in these articles for more details). However, I was extremely concerned with user Jiang (who was also very active in Taiwan-China articles) images on both his userpage and talkpage that says Taiwan=shame and writings that attack Taiwanese president. I was told by admin Nlu and admin Jiang that you can put any images you like on your user page and talk page as long as you don't personally endorse it. This rule troubles me greatly, for we are not allow to edit others' talk page and userpage according to Nlu. In response, I created an image title "jiang=shame" which was later removed by another user (see my talk page for more details). As some of you might know, other users also voiced their concerns regarding the images on Jiang's talk page (see Jiang's talk page for more details under the heading are you a administrator?) I questioned Nlu if i can upload a image disrespecting Muhammad or praising the Nazi party or Japanese soldiers during the Nanjing Massacre. Are they acceptable? Nlu interprets this as a personal attack and I was blocked. Due to this incident, I was both mad and disappointed toward wikipedia andd the actions of the admins, who sometimes can't adhere to NPOV. I announced on my talk page that I was leaving the site. I'm man enough to admit that when I first began to edit on wiki, some edits are biased and irrelevant. I sincerely apologized to those whom I offended. However, there is always a learning curve, as I began to learn the rules, I gradually know how to make useful edits (see contributions). Recently, I noticed a lot of articles about sports and NBA are outdated and player names' are misspelled. While I was editing, I noticed Nlu was once again disrespecting other user "PoolGuy" and I also read "Silensor" userpage which I found clearly reflects the thoughts of many wikipedians, so I put it on my userpage as well. When I told Nlu to treat PoolGuy, who apparently made his comments in good faith, with respect and dignity. He responds by removing by userpage, which he called trolling. Like I said, the userpage is not mine. I copied it from Silensor and it is more or less true. Nlu is the very person that told me I am not allow to edit others userpage and talkpage when I removed the image from Jiang's userpage but he is violating the rule himself. And he blocked me before I can send this case to arbitration and therefore shut down my voice in every pages except my talk page. I can't even revert my userpage. This block clearly is not justified. Throughout my time here, I was brutalized, discriminated against, and totally lost faith in the authority of wikipedia. Like i said, I am man enough to admit my errors at the very beginning and as you can see in my contributions, I been focusing my time on articles regarding sports and basketball. Hopefully, someone will look into this situation. And I did not attack Nlu so I don't know why I was blocked.
Since I do make useful edits, I do not know why they want to block me indefinitely.--Freestyle.king21:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Project
Oh man, sorry i didnt notice your comment. Definetely you can join as I see you already did. Thanks and real sorry for not responding. Tutmosis03:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
arbitration
I'm filing an arbitration against Jiang and Nlu. Go to my talk page herre or the arbitration page to show your support. Provide evidences of bias and hostility if you have any. thankz--Freestyle.king06:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
Crip Shyt
What up cuz, mayne their ain't many cripz on thiz shyt (Mayne I'm tha only one I've seen) I dunno what you is, I suppose crip? But thiz tha white mans site, they always clownin' on my 'urge' ta vandalize thiz shyt, and all their hip hop shyt is fucked up so I gotta fix it, holla if ya need anything nigga. peace.
...Also do ya rap, cuz me and some of my niggaz do that rekord lable shyt, right now I'm working on a "Duets" mixtape with some of tha crew, Hit me up. Also Nlu is a dick don't worry bout him.
Nlu
Shyt, mayne I don't care that much bout slashin' Nlu, but he's been a dick so I've got ya back, they banned me agene for saying Nigger...
Thanks for uploading Image:6 p.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then there needs to be an argument why we have the right to use the media on Misplaced Pages (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then it needs to be specified where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, consider reading fair use, and then use a tag such as {{fairusein|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, consider checking that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, 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 unsourced and untagged images 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 Image legality questions page. Thank you. --Syrthiss03:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
sorry. I wish I could help you about Nlu, but I've given up on fighting against users (especially if they're admins). There's not much you can do, even if you get the support of a few. He may not be the perfect admin (actually, he's the opposite), but what can you do. Stop filing complaints, make a bunch of neutral edits, become an admin, and then deal with it. Right now, you have no power, and neither do I, so, my "help" wouldn't really do much. --Boris Malagurski₪04:51, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Keeley.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Keeley.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Mayne I'm down if we ganna bust that bitch/nigga cuz he ain't shyt, so tell me what we ganna do, it's on you
Image copyright problem with Image:Hazell.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Hazell.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Please cease reverting the Keeley Hazell entry unless you take a look at your mistakes and fix them first. Crv103:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
Keeley Hazell mistakes
1. "photo =" code still left on page. Should not be there.
2. Spelling/grammar mistakes in "Polls" section. (i.e. "The Sun Page 3 Favourite Page 3 Girl of All Time," should be "The Sun's Favourite Page 3 Girl of All Time")
3. Last pic is not from "Page 3 Calendar." It is from "3zine."
4. 3 Revert Rule. I have only formally reverted it once. You have reverted it many more times than 3. Crv103:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Due to severe wiki-stress and the pressure of being a high school student. I decided to take a wiki-break. after reading through wikipedia regulations and learn more about this great project, i think wiki break is the chance for me to calm myself down and rethink my direction. I hope someone will unblock my account when i come back though because i am NOT a vandal. I will come back sometime and make occasional edits (hopefully someone will punish me more lightly than blocking me forever) but possibly not anything big in like a couple of months. But you guys can continue to discuss my request for unblock on my talk page. I would definitely love to listen to different opinions and feedbacks.
2 big things i learned on wikipedia
1. assume good faith
2. Neutral point of view, accepting others opinion
There are also others more difficult encounters that occured during my experience on wikipedia. Well, for the time being, this is good-bye. I strongly hope that together we can make this project works. Keep up the good work, fellow wikipedians.
Cheers--Freestyle.king06:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Just a brief note during the middle of my wiki-break. I found the following statement by user:Guanaco in the administrator noticeboard and provide a brief explanation for each of his accusations.
I have blocked Freestyle.king (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) indefinitely for disruption, personal attacks, and vandalism. —Guanaco 02:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
Reply: Like I have said million times before, Jiang's "Happy happy happy image" is a violation of wikipedia's NPOV regulation. It needs to be removed permanently from his userpage and talkpage because it provokes racial hatred toward a specific ethnic group. Note the caption on the image said "Taiwan=shame".
Reply: The above edit was unsigned and based on user:Jiang's talkpage history. The above edit was made by User: Thousandsons. The personal attacks has no relation to me and therefore the accusation is not justified. Please do not make false accusation unless you got proof.
Reply: A clear racism display by User: Guanaco. Just because I talk in hip-hop slang related style, it is considered general nonsense? I simply warn user: Nick Bush not to delete and vandalize on my user talk page.
Reply: Based on the history of the above article. I did not edit the article "Taiwan Independence". All I did was revert it to the orginal version of User:Tw4unga, whose previous edit was apparently made in good faith. Therefore, it was definitely not POV pushing of any kind since I did not personally change anything in the article.
A week had passed since my initial indefinite block. User: Guanaco also accused me of being a vandal "for a while", which was something without evidence. Based on my history, I do make useful edits and involve in wiki projects. One must assume good faith for this project to succeed. An unblock is respectfully requested on the ground that there is no clear violation of wikipedia regulations. And an indefinite block is a clearly not justified.
I sincerely hope more users and admins can look into this situation. More info available upon request.
--Freestyle.king03:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
I unblocked you since there's no real reason to put down an indef block just because the admin thinks he violates WP:NPA or WP:NPOV too much. If he feels it's such a problem, lsend him an RfC or let the ArbCom handle it. It's not like he's a straght vandal, as a brief look through his contribs shows. --LBMixPro03:24, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for unblocking, but my IP address was still blocked, so i still can't edit. Apparently--User:Guanaco, has been using his sysop power inappropriately and was recently removed from adminship.
--Freestyle.king06:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
Jiang was reverting his user page and talk page to a state that, in my opinion, called disruption of Misplaced Pages. (See .) I am tempted to revert it, but I might very likely be block by either Jiang or Nlu. However, I would like opinions on this. Should his preferred version be allowed to stand? Is it a personal attack (albeit against a group (specifically an ethic group, not an individual), deserving consequences? Am I wrong about this? --Freestyle.king02:09, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I am also demanding consequences for the actions of User: guanaco as well as User: Nlu, for blocking me without explanation.--Freestyle.king02:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for unblocking my IP. I look forward to making many more useful edits on wikipedia in the near future. However, at the moment, I am still on "wikibreak". keep up the good work.
Cheers--Freestyle.king04:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problems
Look, you know and I know that the image you uploaded, Image:Keeley.jpg, is not released under the GFDL. Yet you uploaded it with a GFDL tag. That is unacceptable and could leave the Foundation open to legal issues. Do not fake an image copyright's status again. --Cyde Weys09:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
Editing out vandalism comments
It is considered bad form to edit out comments on vandalism and the like from your own talk page. If you do so again, you may lose your edit privileges on this page. T. J. Day08:19, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
The discussion you referenced ( Archive36#User_talk:Nlu ) on your comment from my User talk page seems irrelevant. Am I missing something? As far as I can see, if a user blanks out comments from admins ref vandalism or violation of Misplaced Pages policies, it's OK for someone else to revert them, which is what I did and is something that gets done hundreds of times a day. If you can find an admin or a relevant discussion that says anything different please let me know. T. J. Day16:06, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Welcome to Misplaced Pages. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thank you. Naconkantarie|t||c|m02:01, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
To make sure you notice what I say on WP:ANI, I crosspost it here:
If ROFL is not a personal attack, you don't know what is? I reckon you don't. Go away. You're a vexatious litigant and a pest. You are hereby banned from posting on WP:AN and WP:AN/I. "Banned" means "Don't post here again or you'll get blocked." Bishonen | talk05:44, 5 May 2006 (UTC).
One is perfectly entitled to remove such warnings from his/her talkpage. An admin support my claim.] Another user removed my warning from his talkpage.].
To add to that the warnings is not justified. Another admin support my case. ].
Please research before reverting others' talkpage. Thank you.--Bonafide.hustla07:09, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Allrighty then. I'll quietly point out that I don't think the two situations are very similar. But I see that you've got a lot of stuff on your mind right now, so I say let's not fight about warning messages. Sorry if I seemed hostile; I guess it would seem like people are ganging up on you.
Anyway, I'll just go mind my own business now. No hard feelings, I trust, and if you need a sounding-board or something, I'll be listening. Good luck with everything. --Ashenai07:45, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
Mass deletions, reverts
Deleting significant chunks of text and mass reverting without explanation or rationale is considered to be vandalism. Thoroughly explain your edits on each talk page, stop the deletions, or be blocked. This is a warning. --Jiang 20:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
The edits you made previously are examples of POV pushing. In order for these articles to be unbiased, my reverts are necessary to maintain a NPOV on wikipedia. This is a groundless accusation and an invalid warning--Bonafide.hustla22:22, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
If you have justification for your reverts and edits, you should post them on the relevant talk pages--Jiang00:27, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
Uh huh, you give yourself a barnstar. Well, since you labelled it as being self-given, I won't mess with it. But I don't know how long it will last. BTW, did you ever learn English? I can't seem to understand anything you're saying. This is not an attack, just a question. Xiong Chiamiov00:56, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, yes, I understand that it is a joke. Sorry for not being clear, but that was what I was assuming since you clearly signed your name. And as to the English, yes, others may be able to understand it, but I cannot. I thank you for communicating with me in a way I can understand. I personally speak Southron and gamer, which I attempt not to use on WP so as to lessen communication issues. Anyway. Xiong Chiamiov01:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Copyvio
Why, Bonafide.hustla, I had no idea you liked my post above so much! Now I see you quoting it at other users. I think you know what I mean. Yes, it was rather well put wasn't it, LOL? But please don't recycle it like that, or I'll cite you for copyright violation! (That was a joke. But I kind of wish you wouldn't--it feels a little weird. Please?) Best wishes, Bishonen | talk21:29, 25 June 2006 (UTC).
POV pushing
Please read NPOV to try to actually grasp the policy of NPOV. We are trying to apprach it with a neutral point of view. Your edits and repeated reverts on Chinese can be understood as vandalism. Even the admins reverted your POV pushing, so please stop. Thank you. RevolverOcelotX
Looking at your contribution history, you have a long history of POV pushing. You know that the admins are reverting most of your POV pushing, right? And regarding edit warring, did you know you were the one that started reverting first? RevolverOcelotX
I consider your latest edits to be talkpage vandalism and personal attack. Please stop or you will be block from editing. Please do not make baseless accusation without proof.--Bonafide.hustla00:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Some edits of yours
Re: Chen Shui-bian. Evidence of recall: http://www.etaiwannews.com/etn/news_content.php?id=118287. The current procedure is asking for a public referendum on Chen. An impeachment would send the case to be decided by the Council of Grand Justices.
Re: Chao Jian-min vs. Chao Chien-min. You should realize that Chinese romanizations vary, especially in Taiwan where pinyin is not uniformly (in the case of personal names, rarely) applied.
Re: Taiwanese American. I don't see how a citation is not needed there. If the statement were true, you would have no trouble finding one. If it can't be verified, then perhaps it shouldnt exist?--Jiang01:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification for the first two. However, a citation can't be present in every single sentences for every single articles on wikipedia. IF people argue about every minor sentences on every article on wikipedia, it is impossible for the project to work or else creating 2000 zillions citations needed signs on the same article. One can argue that kuomintang is still the gov. in china or put a question mark beside the death date of Adolf Hitler claiming that his body wasn't found. Some of the information are purely common sense or information that is public knowledge but couldn't be cited easily. If we were to pursue this kind of lawyering, it would be disastrous and could ultimately destroy this great project. But again, thanks for contacting me.--Bonafide.hustla23:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
I understand that not everything needs citation, but the claim made in the Taiwanese American article is neither common sense nor public knowledge. When something is in dispute, it needs to be backed up. Can you at least provide evidence of someone using "Chinese American" as being exclusive of Taiwanese Americans?
You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.
After a short wikibreak, I am furious to learn that I had been blocked from editing on the issue of removing warnings from my talkpage, 3RR, and lack of communication. Listed below is a concise and brief explanation.
1. Removing warnings:
A. One is perfectly entitled to remove such warnings from his/her talkpage. An admin support my claim.] Another user removed my warning from his talkpage.].
To add to that the warnings is justified. An admin support my case. ] ]
] support from another user. Read the full length discussion on User:Bishonen talkpage under the heading User:RevolverOcelotX.
B. Even if I am not allowed to remove such warnings, the warning clearly isn't justified. According to the history of List of Chinese Americans and Anti-Secession Law of the People's Republic of China articles, you would see Bonafide.hustla and RevolverOcelotX had both made 3 reverts in the past 24 hours 2 days ago. However, when the initial warning was placed by RevolverOcelotX I made only 1 edit to the article, making the warning totally irrelevant. He placed the warning on the ground that I BROKEN the 3RR on my user talk page after the final warning. As evident in the above discussion, an admin states that 3RR does not apply to a user's personal talkpage. The accusation is groundless.
2. 3RR
Again, the 3RR clearly states that a block should only occur if I have made MORE than 3 reverts in the last 24 hrs for an article. I did not unless you count my personal talkpage, but we already established the 3RR does not apply to personal talkpages. See A. and B. above for further details.
3. Lack of communication
A. A series of POV pushing by RevolverOcelotX occured when he first arrived at wikipedia, when I revert his edits as an effort to preserve NPOV (never violating 3RR), he started to engage himself in edit warring with me and many other users ] While I have also posted relevant reasons for reverts in both edit summary and relevant talkpages, he failed to do so. When I attempted to communicate in order to end edit warring, he angrily responded and continue to make POV edits specifically in Taiwanese-Chinese relation. ]
4. Conduct of User:RevolverOcelotX
A. Ever since this user's initial arrival, he has been on a crusade to distort information about Taiwan, China articles. see ].
B. His behavior is similar to User:PoolGuy and often commits wikilawyering. He is in the process of wasting the community's patience. ]
C. This user went as far as harassing admin to support my case in order to prove his point. ] (Sorry this is my mistake see below)
D. This user even edit the naming convention: Chinese in order to justify his edits. ]
E. Spamming ]
Conclusion: It is obvious that the block on me is not justified. Thanks and I hope someone will restore this unfair treatment.--Bonafide.hustla23:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Your block
You were in obvious 3RR violation on your own talk page , ,
,
,
Removing warnings from your own talkpage is often considered vandalism, if you think that a warning is given in a bad faith or undeserved - please ask somebody else to review the warning, not delete it yourself.
You also often just on the brink of viloation of the 3RR rule on the pages Anti-Secession Law of the People's Republic of China and List of Chinese Americans. Please try to get a compromize on the talk page, or ask for a mediation, or start an WP:RfC on the article. Constant edit warring is not an option and can make yourself blocked even if you did only 3 reverts in the 24 hours period.
The conduct of the user User:RevolverOcelotX is probably should be discussed on a WP:RFC. It seems that your saying are (at least partially) true. In any case a non-perfect behavior of your opponent is not the reason to violate Misplaced Pages rules myself.
And the last but not least, I am sorry that I did not provide better explanation of my block when it was given. Please continue productive work on the articles and try to reach compromise in your edit conflicts. abakharev01:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
After reviewing the matter I found that my block was too harsh and one-sided. It was an error of judgement from my side. I am sorry for this action. Please also see my notice in block logabakharev23:38, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
RevolverOcelotX didn't harass me
Hi, BH. I just noticed that you write above, and on abakharev's page, too, that RevolverOcelotX harassed an admin, with a link to my talkpage. No, he didn't (actually nobody did, but that's another story). I'm afraid you've misunderstood the diff. They're pretty confusing, and I can see that it was an honest mistake. RevolverOcelotX didn't have anything to do with the section that you can read in the diff, the one I removed with an impatient edit summary—it was written by somebody else. You should strike that out, or remove it or someting. Best, Bishonen | talk23:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC).
Misplaced Pages is a factual, NPOV encyclopedia. I edited the Chao Chien-ming article to reflect this and you reverted. I see this as deliberate pushing of your (biased) point of view. I would point out that I am a neutral observer in Taiwan politics - I do not support any side but I am interested in seeing a fair and neutral representation of the facts. If you disagree with my revert please ask admin to arbitrate. -- Taffy U|T|E06:26, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
This is a groundless accusation and invalid warning. Please do not make groundless accusations such as that I "deliberate pushing of your biased pov". Whether or not you support any side is irrevelant. Misplaced Pages is a great project and I take pride to be part of the community. Reverting questionable edits is something experienced users do at a daily basis.Unexpalined changes are considered vandalism or a form of pov pushing. --Bonafide.hustla06:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Read Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy and then explain to me why what I did was wrong. You are in clear violation of this policy. I explained my changes and my edit was in no way questionable. I will be asking for an admin to arbitrate in this matter, seeing as you are not interested in either a discussion or indeed in following the rules. -- Taffy U|T|E07:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
After re-reading Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy myself, I have attempted to initiate a discussion on the talk page of the article. Please justify yourself there. -- Taffy U|T|E07:29, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Glad you chose to accept Nlu's edits. My further edits were not warring with Nlu - my guess is he would agree with them. Think before you revert. -- Taffy U|T|E08:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Bonafide.hustla, what are you doing? That was a good NPOV-ing Taiwantaffy did, and you reverted several times back to a horribly POV version. Next time you feel something like that coming on, feel free to ask me for review. Bishonen | talk10:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC).
You moved 2003 Invasion of Iraq to Gulf War II, which was not only done without any consensus or discussion, but isn't even an accurate term since the invasion and the resulting war are different topics. On a similar note, please do not change "Post-Invasion Iraq" to "Post-Liberation Iraq" in articles, Liberation is a term that carries more POV than Invasion. Sherurcij 12:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I did not change it to liberation. I change it to Post Gulf War II in order to maintain NPOV since invastion is pov pushing.--Bonafide.hustla06:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
Mediation Committee Request
I appreciate your concern as to my reasoning, and I'm sorry I didn't further look into that situation. However, I am standing by my decision of deny. -^demon /00:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
I accept that.--Bonafide.hustla01:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to point out to me the fact about your second block. However it was not the blocks that were the only reason for my objection. From looking at your talk page there are numerous warnings for a number of different offecnes. On top of that you do not have the necessary experience I would like to see for a member of the MedCom. I would advise getting some good experience under your belt with the Mediation Cabal, and reapplying later on. --Wisden1719:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
Just to let you know, when I changed his nationality from Tawainese to Chinese I was trying to make it consistant. Someone had changed the category back and forth and put in statements that called him both Tawianese and Chinese. For consistancy I though changing it to one or the other would be better, maybe I should just change it all to Tawianese and then leave it and see if someone changes it again. Davidpdx22:37, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
I'd appreciate it if you could leave me a message concerning this article. I saw you changed it back citing POV guidelines. My question is that the article calls him both Chinese and Taiwanese. Given the fact that the country is one, can't we stick to one or the other (I personally don't care which one). Using two makes the article confusing and more bias in my opinion.
I noticed once again, you've reverted the changes on David Wu article. I invite you to visit the talk page to actually discuss what is going on rather then get in an edit war over it. I have posted a few notes as well as User:Jiang. Davidpdx11:23, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
I'm glad we figured out were on the same side of the argument. Maybe when I was first trying to explain my opinion I wasn't clear enough. I just left additonal comments on the talk page. I let him know I'm willing to discuss this, but insisting the reference be changed back to "the first Taiwanese-American." Davidpdx09:30, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
Citing sources
If you come accross unverfied statements, you should tag them, not delete them. Template:Fact and some associated tags listed there should help. This way, if it is a valid statement, another editor can find a reference, or if it is not, change the text accordingly.--Jiang 07:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
thanks--Bonafide.hustla04:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed content from Elvis Presley. Please be careful not to remove content from Misplaced Pages without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Thank you.
Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert an article to a previous version more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. RevolverOcelotX
It doesn't matter as long as you're warned. The 3RR applies to over 3 reverts within the allotted 24 hours. The warning is completely valid. RevolverOcelotX
I wanted to let you know that I put the article up for comment. Hopefully you'll return after vacation. I just got back myself after being gone a few days. Davidpdx01:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your additional comments, especially seeing that your on vacation. The sign you mentioned, is that the one that is in Chinese? I can't read Chinese, so I'm not sure if that's what you were referring to or not. Have a good vacation and I hope you come back after you return from your time off. Davidpdx02:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I see it now, it's on his talk page. That is pretty blatent in terms of his POV and bias, maybe that should be brought up in the discussion.
At this point I'm going to wait and see how the RFC goes, but I will see this out until there is some kind of a resolution. If it takes going to arbitration, then that's where it will go. Davidpdx02:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I will pass that along to him that you would rather have nothing in terms of nationality or ethnicity. Would you be ok with both of those being there like it is now?
Did you mean Jiang is a admin? If he is and he gets into an edit war, certainly I'll file a complaint about abuse of power. Davidpdx06:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
To be fair to all parties involved in the dispute, I reverted the page to a version which predates the current edit war between yourself and RevolverOcelotX. The version you are referring to occured in the middle of the edit war. I'd appreciate it if you and the other parties involved could come to a consensus using the talk page before making any further changes. Edit wars are disruptive, and while it may be satisfying to repeatedly revert the edits of someone you don't agree with, they don't work out for anyone in the long run. Thanks. -Loren06:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
03:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
03:21, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
10:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
--Pcj 01:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)