This is the second page of my talkpage archives, dated between March to early April, 2005. Please do not edit this page. If you wish to leave a message, click here! :)
Mailer, thanks for marking those nonsense pages which need to be deleted. I have been going through your list and removing them. Could I ask you to add the {{delete}} tag at the top of the nonsense text rather than just replacing the nonsense text with the tag though. It saves me (or another admin deleting nonsense pages) a little time since we can see what we are being asked to delete without having to go through the history. Cheers -- Derek Ross | Talk 06:32, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
While I am here to acknowledge my mistake to haory and all regarding the mandarin(linguistics), I wish to say that I was NOT responsible for what had happen in pages regarding Macau/Hong Kong etc that Huaiwei encountered.
Pages that I have made contributed through minor improvement/additions include
Hi, I would just like to point out that the above user, in a continuation of the previous bouts of revert wars, has continued to edit the following in his favour despite the fact that there was supposed to be a resolution related to this. You have returned them to a state prior to the edits, and User:Refdoc has similar called for a respect of a voting process conducted in one of those categories. Despite this, he continues on his exercise a few days after things calms down.
The categories are:
Category:Airports of the People's Republic of China
Category:Airports of Hong Kong
Category:Airports of Macau
I am now returning them yet again to what they once were. Should he decide to continue on his reverts, I suppose I will have to leave it to the admins to step in?
Just a few minutes ago, he has similarly made controversial edits to several other categories and pages which were clearly under contestation. Marking them as "minor edits" dosent seem to be a good practise. They are:
Hope you may look into this. Thank you!--Huaiwei 18:34, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have been tired with all these long battles, and yet there's always something that you cannot surrender. Huaiwei has shown no sign of reaching any consensus. What is controversial to him could be the best option for others, but he simply carries on enforcing his perceptions. And indeed, I cannot understand why he has been keen on editing stuffs that are not related to his home town. It is not his business and it's meaningless for him to spend so much time on it. He'll never be as familiar as the locals, unless he becomes one some time in future. What makes the situation even worse is that he doesn't seem to respect the locals.
While consensus building through discussion is impossible and the 3RR has to be followed, the only way out is to edit these articles and categories roughly every three days. I understand it might be a nuisance to some users, but I am afraid I cannot be fully responsible for what is happening. I do, however, have the confidence that administrators will make fair judgements, and are capable in doing so. — Instantnood 18:50, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)
Mailer diablo, I believe this very episode of seeing him ignore your mediating efforts when you restored the articles to their original state is strong evidence enough. On my part, I decided to bring this attention to you, as I feel that those reverts are probably going to spark yet another round of rv wars, and I dont think it speaks well of anyone involved in it. If his above statements means he is simply going to keep persisting in making those edits despite all forms of concensus and efforts made by admins, than I suppose it should be worthy of attention.
Now I dont know if you would actually agree with him that "one has to edit things which are only related to his home town" in this site. Afterall, you are a great example against that kind of immature and provincial thinking yourself! :D--Huaiwei 19:07, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
For someone as partisan as Instantnood is it might be beneficial for him not to edit things in his home town. I'd love to see him try to convince American editors that the US belongs in some minor category like "lower 48" because of Puerto Rico. :) SchmuckyTheCat 21:35, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the precious effort that you have paid to mediate. I have always been prepared to compromise, and this has in fact been reflected in the long edit wars, that I have been moving towards and finally reached my bottom line.
3. to have the three categories interlinked by hyperlinks, as illustrated by these edits: [1], [2] and [3]
4. I am open on whether these three categories, namely, category:Airports of mainland China, ..of HK and ..of Macao, should be subcategorised under "category:Airports of the People's Republic of China".
No.3 above is an alternative to subcategorisation, which I opposed. And under my proposal it has to be done together with moving the airports to category:Airports of mainland China.
The website that you cited does not say Hong Kong is no longer a dependent territory (of anybody). What it says is it was a former dependent territory of the United Kingdom.
I will be looking close with your discussion page and probably SchmuckyTheCat's, but please keep me informed whenever there's any progresses. Thanks man. — Instantnood 19:43, Mar 20, 2005 (UTC)
Sure. Thanks very much. — Instantnood 09:32, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
My responses are listed as bullet points below each proposal:
Categories Airports of the People's Republic of China, Hong Kong & Macau
1. The two categories Hong Kong and Macau are sent for CfD. The categories should be kept. (General Community Consensus)
I agree that these can be kept, although I am less enthusiastic about the existance of the Macau category. As mentioned in the discussions over the issue, I am pro-merger between the two categories.
2. Airports of Hong Kong and Macau remain as subcategories of Category:Airports of the People's Republic of China
Agreed.
3. Add "the two subcatergories are aiports of PRC's two Special Administrative Regions, Hong Kong and Macau" to Category:Airports of the People's Republic of China
Agreed.
Hong Kong, Macau, Category:Cities in Taiwan & Hong Kong
More or less agree, although I dont think the term "China" may not really be seen as geographical there.
2. Category:Cities in mainland China should be populated, or else be listed for CfD.
Agreed.
3. Add Category:Dependent territories to both Macau and Hong Kong, while retaining Category:Cities in China with the above-mentioned changes.
Partial disagree. HK and Macau cannot logically be dependent territories today when they are territorially a part of the PRC. This I have debated over at length in the relevant discussion pages. They can, however, be classified as "special territories".
In addition, I must point out that I find it counter-productive to insist that Beijing's airport be listed as "Airports of Mainland China" when they can do fine in "Airports of the PRC". It is not factually wrong for both. It is problematic to have an "Airports of Mainland China" category when we cant list it in "Airports by Country".--Huaiwei 11:39, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hello again Mailer diablo. Frankly, I found it hopeless to reach any consensus with Huaiwei. I have made more than enough concessions, and he's carrying on hitting at my bottom line. Although the mediation will, most probably, be fruitless, you should be praised and merited for taking the time and effort in this mission impossible. Thank you. — Instantnood 12:57, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
Really thanks. I don't want to, but, as you can notice, there is hardly anything in common. :-( — Instantnood 14:07, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
Mailar diablo, I suppose at this juncture, some folks might realise that "reaching concensus" does not equate to others having to agree with him wholeheartedly in every issue. If he came to any "compromise", I would like to know what they are. The above replies seems like a repeat of what he has been saying all these while, with no sign of recognising or accepting the existance of counter arguments. In comparison, I am more then willing to deal with the idea of treating HK and Macau as thou they are countries. My position does not shift, however, when it comes to the usage of "mainland China" over "the PRC". Unless he can proof to us that "Mainland China" is a country, I shall rest my case. In fact, this is not the first time I asked him to do that, and he still hasent.--Huaiwei 14:43, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have said "mainland China" is not a sovereign State, didn't you notice? But this does not affect it to be listed or categorised as countries. — Instantnood 15:11, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
Huaiwei can make plenty of compromise, by his door-in-the-face technique, and hit my bottomline. — Instantnood 15:18, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
Actually he did say "Mainland China" is not a country or a Sovereign State the moment I asked him that ages ago. Still, he continues to think he can treat them as such. I dont see any "compromise" so to speak?
I'm sorry Mailer diablo. I don't know if I should continue the discussion here. I am afraid I have now discovered Huaiwei can't even tell why the S of State has to be capitalised, and the difference between sovereign State and country. — Instantnood 15:34, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
I dont know what he means by "door-in-the-face technique", but that still sounds much better then his "behind-the-curtain techniques".--Huaiwei 15:23, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
There're plenty of good resources on "door-in-the-face" on the web, in case you don't know about it. — Instantnood 15:34, Mar 21, 2005 (UTC)
Well...if there is a need, proof it somewhere else. I am not going to ruin Mailer diablo's talk page with this kind of content, and as per his/her wishes. Sorry about this, Mailer diablo.--Huaiwei 16:23, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
hey do you have MSN Messenger anot diablo?Sghan 06:23, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
sad:( cause i thought it would be easier for you to answer my questions on msn...
anyway which jc are you in right now?
where were you during the first 3 mths and where you goinf after 1st 3 mths?:)
hey why dun you sign into msn now so can talk i am rather free now...you have my email?Sghan 06:59, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
h_salliance >a-t< hotmail >d-o-t< com see you online in a short while ya?
Um, you have noticed the "E-mail this user" link on the left? (If you hadn't, I don't blame you. I didn't notice it for a long time myself.) -- Hoary 07:12, 2005 Mar 20 (UTC)
Thank you for supporting my RfA. I very much appreciate your confidence in me. Please let me know if you see something I should (or shouldn't) be doing as an admin. Regards, Patrick. Carbonite | Talk 13:42, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for your note. Unfortunately I have some real life issues to tackle and will be away from Wikipedia until June. But my comments would be the same as other guys on WP:FAC anyway. Good luck with your work. JuntungWu 12:44, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
THERE IS THIS IDIOT WHO DELETED EVERYTHING THAT I TOOK TIME TO ADD. F**K ...WHO IS THAT PERSON?Sghan 10:19, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Mailer Diablo may not know which page you're referring to. (I certainly don't.) If he does know, and is interested, he'll find out the username that deleted your comments by clicking on the "history" link at the top of the relevant page. You can do this yourself, rather than asking others. -- Hoary 10:32, 2005 Mar 22 (UTC)
hairy or rather haory, i am asking diablo...not you. I am new in here not very sure with how things work. i need help and if you want to help i would be most grateful if not just shut up.thank youSghan 05:34, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hello. Would you like me to nominate you for adminship? Admin privilages will help you in janitorial tasks and also allow you to delete CSDs. -- utcursch | talk 10:20, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)
Thankyou for your welcome. I have a question too - I see some pages like Las Vegas have a "template" at the bottom which makes some useful geographic links. But this link (Mapit-US-cityscale) only works for USA places. Do you know if one exists for the whole world (I am adding information about parts of the former soviet union)? -- BigHairyBoris 18:05, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oh man, that will mean a round of massive edits to add in that notice in the countless stubs all over! :D Thanks for creating it thou! ;)--Huaiwei 18:53, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
As of March 25, 2005, there are an additional (6) articles listed for deletion under the POV notion that schools are non-notable (even though this is invalid reasoning as per the Wikipedia deletion policy). Please be aware that the following schools are actively being discussed and voted upon:
In response to this cyclical ordeal, a Schoolwatch programme has been initiated in order to indentify school-related articles which may need improvement and to help foster and encourage continued organic growth. Your comments are welcome and I thank you again for your time. --GRider\talk
Hey,nobodys perfect,right?No hard feelings,or anything.And a good weekend and plenty of Easter eags to you to!
David(the "monarchs deposed in the 17th century"freak)
Hi,
Thank you for your advice on The Straits Times. However, having fought with an anon contributor over the state of the article, I look back now and wonder if I have been too partisan in my defence of the paper. That's why it'll be great if people like you and Huaiwei can give your inputs of the paper. It'll always be great to have a third or fourth party adding something or editing the article to ensure its NPOV. All the best Mandel 18:54, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)
I didn't think you had to, I meant to ask if it's okay to. I was thinking it would be a good idea, since that would avoid cluttering up the recent changes so much. (When people aren't looking at minor edits.)
Also, is it okay to use User:NAME/Sandbox to test things without interfering with others' tests? It wouldn't interfere with the articles, but then the Sandbot wouldn't clean it. (I wonder if that would be hard to change.) Thanks for the help! -Jobarts | Talk 21:09, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 16:23, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
My congratulations as well. That was quite a unanimous vote! ;) --Huaiwei 16:31, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Ah...dont mention it. Its my pleasure of coz ;) But this comes at a cost: I need help in collaborations to come up with more FAs! :D Consider Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore), which I have been slowly trying to work on, but I would need lots of help from more folks. Shall we do a discussion over on its talk page on this one, and other potential FA candidates on the Wikipedia:SGpedians' notice board? Hope I arent scaring you on the first day of your job! :D --Huaiwei 18:57, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Don't mention. You have been very helpful. — Instantnood 19:01, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
Congrats on your adminship. I know I was rough on your Singapore article, but it would need to also conform to the city projects. Anyways, looking to work with you whenever our paths meet. =Nichalp (talk·contribs)= 18:39, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
Hey, it was my pleasure, and congratulations! SlimVirgin(talk) 18:59, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations, and you're very welcome! --Merovingian(t)(c)(w) 19:50, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
Congratulations, and you're welcome. You earned it. SWAdair | Talk 03:38, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well done -- but now take a few hours off, relax with a beer (or whatever), and anyway make sure you don't burn out. Oh, and if you want to practise the art and craft of banning, you can always try it on me! (Not for too many hours at a stretch though, please.) -- Hoary 05:55, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)
JIP has recongized that 212.190.127.164 (the poster of this message) is the original copyright holder of the article Thanikaimoni, and the Copyvio listing in WP:CP has been detracted with the article restored. See JIP's follow up - User talk:JIP.
Dear Sir,
I am new to the WIKIPAEDIA website so please bear with me IF I commit any usage mistakes.
I have found the message posted on the COPYRIGHT VIOLATION section to say the following concerning an article I submitted to the WIKIPAEDIA website :
Thanikaimoni from [375] (http://www.scirpus.ca/cap/people/person19.htm) and [376] (http://www.palynology.org/history/thanikaimoni.html). The article first contains a copy of part of the first page, then a copy of the second page, and then some text I couldn't find on Google. It fairly cites the sources but I don't think that justifies verbatim copies. — JIP | Talk 10:57, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Please note that I am a bit surprised because :
1. I have clearly stated that this article is 'compiled' from existing articles 2. I have in good faith provided not only the SOURCES but also the URLs 3. I have mentioned that the original 3 authors for certain parts of the texts 4. The article does not aim to promote myself 5. The person on whom the article is written is an internationally reknowned scientist in the field of Palynology (winner of the 'Fyson Prize')
IF you still think that there is a reason for 'black balling' this content, then atleast tell me what I can do (recommendations, advise, commments, etc.,) so that the content can be 'okayed'.
Thanks ... and hope that you will review your position in a favourable light.
Hope that you will give me some feedback. My e-mail address is NO-SPAM_lockhimupasap@yahoo.com (please remove NO-SPAM_ when writing to me)
I've a feeling that Mailer diablo may be slightly exhausted from recent (well deserved) celebrations. I don't think he'll mind if I answer in his place. (Of course, he may well add to or correct what I say.)
Neither of these source pages has a copyright notice. However, they can be understood to be copyright. Please read "Myth no. 1" within Ten Big Myths about Copyright Explained. (Indeed, I recommend the entire web page.) Copyrighted material may not be brought into Wikipedia unless the copyright holder gives express permission for this. Note that when you edited the page, you were shown the following:
By submitting your work you promise you wrote it yourself, or copied it from public domain resources - this does not include most web pages.
(Try editing this page and take a look -- it appears at the very bottom.) You say:
1. I have clearly stated that this article is 'compiled' from existing articles 2. I have in good faith provided not only the SOURCES but also the URLs 3. I have mentioned that the original 3 authors for certain parts of the texts 4. The article does not aim to promote myself 5. The person on whom the article is written is an internationally reknowned scientist in the field of Palynology (winner of the 'Fyson Prize')
All of these five are commendable, but none of them alters the simple matter of copyright. -- Hoary 12:14, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)
PS to MD: mere seconds after writing the above, it occurred to me that it probably wasn't a good idea to do so here. You're very welcome to move it to the questioner's page, to email it to him, and/or (of course) to delete it. -- Hoary 12:16, 2005 Apr 1 (UTC)
Hi, i've been around a while and you left a message on the talk page asking if I need any help. I do a lot of RC patrol and I would like to know the proper method of reporting vandals and how if they are wrecking a pile of pages, how to get help in reverting them. I don't always know how to get an IP address from a username either. Thank you very much.--Theloniouszen 18:51, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Please unprotect Letter carrier and remove the pending deletion notice. That page warrants being in the wikipedia and I marked it for deletion by accident. Kevin Rector 23:15, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
I know you're new to sysop status, but please take care when clearing out the backlog of VFD discussions. For an article to be deleted, there should be a consensus (75-80%) in support of deleting the article. When you deleted it, claiming that the VFD result had been to delete, Wikipedia:Association of Member Investigations had more than 50% support to keep. I've now undeleted the page, but please be careful in future. Ambi 03:56, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I'm a newbie to Wikipedia but not to the Manx breed cat. When I came across the article that was posted about the breed I decided to make some changes to it in order to have a more experienced, honest description of the breed. Apparently, the former person who has posted the article was offended by my article and keeps reposting their version of the information as well as saying some pretty mean thiings to me. Having breed the registered Manx cat for over nine years now I like to think I know a little about the breed along with being associated with other registered Manx breeders who know even more than I do. The things that are posted about the Manx breed cat are just not correct I know this to be the truth by breeding this breed. I've read over your fair posting rules and posted a reply to the discussion page offering the other individual a chance to post something to the page as long as they know it to be the truth and thay are not taking it from other sources. Everything I've posted about the breed is the truth as I have seen it happen the past nine years I've worked with the Manx breed cat. If this person persists in removing my knowledge about the breed and replacing it with their version that is not accurate I will not play the game, I will allow your site to have incorrect information on it and consider the source.
Please send or forward someone to the Manx (Cat) page to stop EliasAlucard from posting nasty negative things about the information I've added to the article. This individual has demonistrated they alone think they can and can not say what is posted to the article. My last picture was removed due to the reason "no one wants to see an old lady." I think my reply justifies my posting the picture and I have every right to post it and my thoughts there as anyone else especially since I am a CFA registered Manx cat breeder and am very knowledgable about the breed more so than most.
It's a dispute all right. I think before anyone takes actions on any of us, they should read the entire talk page for the Manx breed. It's a lot, but it's well documented. Also, someone should check the Manx article, its history, and some of the sources I've provided on the talk page. Anyone can allege that they're breeders and know everything. On wikipedia, if I'm not mistaken, we go by sources, right? And the sources (Yes, they're credible) are in direct opposition to what Karello states that she knows.
haory and mailer, somehow i got blocked for a supposedly"vandalism" by deleting some commas and inserting text (of the time of death of the holy father) in pope john paul II.
apparently, i was accused of deleting the texts from that page. can anything be done to unblock me?202.156.2.170 06:10, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)thanks
Seems like 202.156.2.170 is stuck between legitimate users and subtle vandals. Problem was ressolved after user has logged in.
