User talk:Benlisquare/Archive 5

Your userpage in monobook

Hello, my friend. Maybe you didn't know this, but those who use the monobook skin are having trouble with your user and talk page. There is text covering the whole line of tabs. None is clickable. To leave this message, I had to go to the section above and click edit, and add the two equal signs to make a new section. :) Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:11, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

I'll come around and see if I can remedy this in a few days. I have been aware that the page displays normally on Vector and abnormally on Monobook, but haven't come to doing anything about it yet. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:30, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Pandeism#Chinese materials. -- Chinese-speaking assistance needed!!

I am sorry to bother you but do you know how hard it is to find a Chinese-speaking Wikipedian who is around on a regular basis? There ought to be some tool to go through the category and only see the ones who have edited within some recent period. But all that is beside the point.

As detailed in the talk page section I added material to Pandeism from authors who have written of it in Chinese-language secondary sources. I added direct quotes from these authors, translated by the assistance of Chinese-speaking friends (who are, sadly, not Wikipedians). I provided complete citations (I made a few minor errors, but none that would affect verifiability of the sources). And some editor with a questionable username comes along and tosses it out with nothing more than a 'Chinese stuff, OR.' Can you please verify that the material provided actually reflects the quotes from the respective sources? Blessings!! DeistCosmos (talk) 18:59, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

About Girls und Panzer

To be clear under my logic, this series define tank warfare as a form of martial arts discipline. If you've seen the series, Miho Nishizumi comes from the Nishizumi Clan, known for their style of tank warfare for several generations; it's a well-known method called Nishizumi Style. Whenever Miho simply mentions her name, the prestige of that name carries weight. Just like martial arts, there's Yang Style Tai Chi as well as Chen Style. I double-checked the anime and they used Nishizumi-dou, as in Nishizumi method (aka style) and doesn't use the term family; it's a common term that martial artists that inherit a combat style would use their last name as both identity and classifying their method of combat. As for the spelling, it was a typo on my part. As for the ending, everyone wants closure to a story. What's the point of not giving the person the ending? Every major movie wiki page gives the ending to the story; I would like to hear your reasoning not to include it.

Taikage (talk) 05:18, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Kamikaze museum

Have you read the references? They are saying the exact opposite of what the quote I deleted said. The quote is either completely made up or has its meaning inverted through omission:

'Mr Hamazono, though, bristled at the suggestion that he and his fellow Tokkotai pilots were the forerunners of modern-day suicide bombers.

"We were completely different," he said. "We did what we did for our comrades ... the terrorists kill themselves for purely selfish reasons. I don't get angry when I hear them described as the modern-day kamikaze, but it troubles me that religion, not love, inspired them to do these things.'

'Missions "totally different"

Japan's originals are insulted to be mentioned in the same breath.

"When I hear the comparison, I feel so sorry for my friends who died, because our mission was totally different from suicide bombers," Hamazono says as he strolls through the Peace Museum for Kamikaze Pilots in Chiran, a former air base on the southern Japanese island of Kyushu.

The kamikazes attacked military targets. In contrast, "the main purpose of a suicide bomber is to kill as many innocent civilians as they can," Hamazono says. That, he says, "is just murder."

The same distinction is made by other survivors of the Tokkotai, or Special Attack Force, conventionally known as the kamikaze. Its survivors tick off the reasons why their goal-line stand against an American invasion was different from the blind lashing-out of suicide bombers today:

• We were ready to die out of love for our country, they say. Suicide bombers are driven by hatred and revenge.'

--Declan trott (talk) 07:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Android version history

Hi Benlinsquare, i've taken out the example languages since "Hebrew" is being re-added and removed too much for my comfort. I think i've reworded it enough to cover it now. Just a heads-up ツ Jenova20 ^(email) 14:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Teamwork Barnstar
	This barnstar is awarded in recognition of your contributions to building the evidence base for the Chelsea Manning move. Well done! Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 06:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Revert of IP Edit

I did it per this sockpuppet investigation [1]. NativeForeigner ^Talk 17:04, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Alright then. I had no idea he was a confirmed sock. I was initially confused why he was reverted, when it seemed from first glance that nothing was wrong. --benlisquare_T•C•E 17:08, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I haven't used the rollback all script in a while, and I thought you could leave an edit summary. It turns out that is only on the twinkle variant. It's good you caught that, under most circumstances I would have been in the wrong. NativeForeigner ^Talk 17:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

鎮守府生活のすゝめ

『鎮守府生活のすゝめ』には「海防艦の用途は対潜や任務、駆逐艦よりさらにロリ！」と書かれていません。これが書かれているのは「やらおん」というアフィリエイトブログで、そのサイトはウィキペディアの出典源とするには極めて不適切なところです。あなた自身が直接『鎮守府生活のすゝめ』を参照できる環境に居ないのであれば、あなたは記事に「『鎮守府生活のすゝめ』が出典である」と書かないようにしてください。--Starchild1884 (talk) 21:13, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

悪い、悪い、僕不注意だった。ごめん。--benlisquare_T•C•E 21:19, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request

Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:29, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Have some consideration?

Yes, Vietnam is a country in South-East Asia, but does that exclude it from any relations with East Asia? Of course not. One particular topic I would like to address you with is that Vietnam does, and still holds strongly to it, shares a Confucian philosophical world view with China, Korea and Japan. From what I've seen, myself, Vietnam probably preserves it better than Japan, or even China itself, especially people living in urban, or modern, areas as opposed to the more traditional rural Chinese. This additional information, although minor, is nothing but the truth and from what I see you didn't seem to take much, or any at all, of these things into consideration. Nonetheless, geographic views will never, I repeat never, stand in the way of cultural and historic information. One last thing I would like to say, is that, although it may not apply to you, being in any way biased or removing or re-writing information in favor of one's self is something that I utterly hate. Keep things neutral. Don't exclude but include. --TheNano7474 (talk) 11:13, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Most trafficked Hong Kong-related articles

Ben,

What are the most trafficked HK-related articles that don't yet have ZH-YUE? I ask because if there are ZH-YUE stubs of them, it will make ZH-YUE more visible and there will be more pressure on it to be correct.

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 16:25, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure. I personally don't know, and I don't quite know where to go looking for this information either. I don't quite pay attention to HK-related topics that much, sorry. --benlisquare_T•C•E 16:36, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Ok. I raised concern about the Republic of Cantonia article with some ZH-YUE Wiki admins, pointing to the English AFD. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:40, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

User page at zhwiki

I have rephrased some sentences and I have made direct changes to your user page. Feel free to revert if you find it uncomfortable.--William915(discuss with me) 07:39, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I usually don't notice typing mistakes like 以下 (一下). Also nice of you to clean up the grammar as well. --benlisquare_T•C•E 08:17, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

A lesson on the Internet

It's called a dynamic IP address. http://pcsupport.about.com/od/termsd/g/dynamic-ip-address.htm 69.171.187.30 (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

No shit, but is there a need for you to be resetting your router once every 5 minutes? --benlisquare_T•C•E 19:57, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

You have much to learn. 69.171.187.90 (talk) 22:07, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

No, not really. There is no practical reason for an ISP to force you to change IPs once every few seconds. This might have been the case with a cellular provider, but your ISP doesn't seem to be one. Come on, take a serious look at your edits: barely a two minute span between each edit, and you're already on a different IP. The only believable reason why this is the case is that you're being intentionally disruptive, by trying to make it more difficult to link your posts together. Either you're manually reconnecting each time, or worse, you're using an anonymous VPN service that regularly switches nodes every few minutes. --benlisquare_T•C•E 05:02, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

調

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNNCRzT_9vE

請問這首歌是F大調或者降G大調？ 198.105.121.83 (talk) 01:40, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

To me, it sounds like the opening riff of that song goes $A\flat G\flat D\flat A\flat B\flat$ (I'm not sure whether it's because of the fuzzy quality of the recording though), so I would say that it is in G flat major. --benlisquare_T•C•E 07:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Maybe between F major and G-flat major ? 198.105.121.83 (talk) 12:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

I'll probably stick with G flat major. Though sometimes it sounds like there's some strange sounding tone shift that's probably due to the video source coming from a VHS casette tape or something (over time, high pitched sounds go off-tone due to VHS tape wear and tear), it doesn't sound low enough to be F major. --benlisquare_T•C•E 13:28, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UH6I3m5_bDg
• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YNNCRzT_9vE

這兩個版本的調是不同。第一個版本簡直是降G大調。 198.105.121.83 (talk) 13:44, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

●

あなたの編集は

• ① 出典を誤って解釈している部分が多く
• ② 出典も信頼不可能なサイトからが多い

です。テンプレートを使用できないなら、私はあなたの編集を除去しなければならないです。--Starchild1884 (talk) 22:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

どっちの出典？事例は？より具体的に説明してください。 --benlisquare_T•C•E 23:02, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

『鎮守府生活のすすめ』のときは、「やらおん」という信頼できない情報源を参考にして誤った記述を行なっていました。先ほど直した部分も田中プロデューサーとは記事中に全く書かれていないのに「田中プロデューサーが言った」と書いてありました（実際は安田社長）。リンク先の中国語サイトがどういったサイトなのか分かりませんが、公式な翻訳ニュースサイトであればあるはずの大元の日本語記事（ダイヤモンド・オンライン）へのリンクも無いようで、信頼できる情報源と言えるのかどうか私は疑いを持っています。

確かにここはenwpで、jawpとは習慣が違う点も多々あると思います。しかし、いわゆる「信頼できる情報源」や「出典の明記」「検証可能性」といった基本方針は、どの言語版でもほとんど同じだろうと思います。私は英語ができないので、Benlisquare氏に心からお願いします、英語版記事に変な出典を持ってきて変な記事にしてしまうのは止めてください。--Starchild1884 (talk) 23:15, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

ひとつお聞きしたいのですが宜しいでしょうか。あなたが記事を書く際、当然、ソース（出典）を付けますが、そのソースはどのように発見しているのですか？ 中国語コミュニティの「艦これまとめサイト」のような場所があるのですか？ http://news.hankooki.com/lpage/opinion/201311/h2013110321115924420.htm など、日本ではほとんど話題にもなっていないニュースを持ってくるなど、私はあなたのソース発見手段に興味があります。--Starchild1884 (talk) 23:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

そのSina.com（中国語）の出典は「安田善巳が言った」と書いて、僕は英語人名をcopypaste間違った。あの時、僕の現地時間は朝６時です。（专访安田善巳：角川游戏的原创IP之路 = Exclusive interview with Yoshimi Yasuda: The path of Kadokawa Games' original IP = 安田善巳と独占インタビュー：角川ゲームスの原作IPの道）

別の出典問題僕今すぐに修正する。--benlisquare_T•C•E 23:31, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

僕大部分の艦これ情報4chanから入手（２ｃｈ同等のオンラインコミュニティ）、だがその中国語の出典僕偶然で見つけた(4chan以外)。--benlisquare_T•C•E 23:36, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

今そのページはどう？--benlisquare_T•C•E 23:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

消さなくてよい部分まで消している気もしますが、概ね問題は無いように思います。ありがとうございます。

英語が読めないので利用はしていませんが、4chanは名前を聞いたことはあります。2chというよりは、ふたば☆ちゃんねる （futaba-channel) に近いところです。4chanを情報源とすることは、必ずしも悪いことではないと思いますが、特に "Reception" に関しては、元のソース（可能ならば、日本語のソース）をしっかり確認してください。

Thank you. --Starchild1884 (talk) 23:53, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

「艦隊これくしょん -艦これ- 鎮守府生活のすゝめ Vol.1」について、この本僕もう買った（オンラインショップで）、だが郵便配達は超遅い(Japan Postの国際SAL知っているか？)。到着したとき、この出典僕自分で検証する。

将来はStarchild1884さんどのような援助が必要な場合、僕に聞いて下さい。--benlisquare_T•C•E 23:57, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Print reference verification

@Starchild1884: My copy of 《艦隊これくしょん -艦これ- 鎮守府生活のすゝめ Vol.1》 (ISBN 9784047292338) has finally arrived in the mail. I have personally verified the validity of the contents of the print source:

• http://i.imgur.com/Ir4Rs8v.jpg
• http://i.imgur.com/CikVykY.jpg?1

I will make the appropriate adjustments accordingly. --benlisquare_T•C•E 05:52, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Standard Chinese

a. What a great talk page. So cow. I'm jealous.

b. I pushed mention of "MSM" back down out of the lead per WP:UNDUE. Before you restore it, kindly address the concerns on the talk page. It's obviously just not common at all and I don't see the reason to duplicate "Mandarin" with a bunch of qualifiers in the lead sentence.

The page should include it. Can we be cool with it just showing up further down the page as a classification employed by particular linguists to distinguish this "Mandarin" from others which they (but no one else) sometimes need to talk about?

c. The page has much bigger problems than where MSM . The conversation got off topic (and long), but when you have a minute, check out the talk page at Mandarin Chinese and Standard Chinese and add your thoughts at least on the suggested action parts of the original posts. — LlywelynII 04:55, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Also, (since I'm looking around) thanks for your work on the Nine familial exterminations and 10 Mythical Creatures of Baidu. Loved those. :)  — LlywelynII 05:01, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Regarding MSM: It's alright, you've convinced me. I'm fine with the first mentioning of that term being pushed down, since it's not as common used compared to the other terms. I did originally believe that it should have at least had a mention somewhere within the article, so right now I think this compromise is perfectly acceptable. As for the other issues, I'll take a look at them in a moment. --benlisquare_T•C•E 05:40, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Transcription into Chinese characters#Regional differences

I don't know if you're interested at all, but (a) my poking around the Chinese wikipedias and Wiktionary could use some double checking and (b) it's a good section, but needs sourcing and more material from Singapore and Malaysia if you know where to find either. — LlywelynII 05:07, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

About some no reference change

Sorry to disturb. Someone always change the article related with Japanese invasions of Korea (1592–98) and Sino-Japanese war without any reference. He changes or just deletes the Japanese casualties data. Even just change the result part from Japanese victory to Decisive Japanese victory. I don't know the difference and also no explanation for these change. Most of time just tag mobile edit without explain. I cannot determine whether these changes are correct and just revert to previous version. Can you find some reliable sources about these and add the data from these sources to these articles? These includes Japanese invasions of Korea (1592–98), Siege of Suncheon ,Battle of West Hubei and Battle of Dadaejin Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miracle dream (talk • contribs) 01:04, 11 November 2013‎

Can you find some sources about Japanese casualties about in Japanese invasions of Korea (1592–98). Someone requires the reliable sources for this. I try to check the book "The Cambridge History of China" but didn't get the data. I don't have book "The Cambridge History of Japan". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miracle dream (talk • contribs) 03:56, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Regarding the article Daughter of Emperor Xiaoming of Northern Wei

Hi.

There is a discussion about the article title at Talk:Daughter of Emperor Xiaoming of Northern Wei. Could you please take part in the discussion? Thanks! --HYH.124 (talk) 05:25, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I can't really help you, since I'm not really that familiar with the topic of Chinese monarchs. Sorry about that. --benlisquare_T•C•E 10:36, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

It's okay. :) I invited you because you edited the article. --Huang (user page | talk | contribs | info) 13:08, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

Hi Benlisquare, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the autopatrolled right to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the patroller right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! —Tom Morris (talk) 13:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Cantonese question

What do you think of zh-yue:User_talk:William915#嘢玩? What is the solution? WhisperToMe (talk) 19:00, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Not too sure. On the one hand, there's the claim that one term is used in HK Cantonese, whilst on the other hand, there's the argument that the other term is more often seen in Cantonese in general, and that the other term is a neologism. I wouldn't have much of a useful opinion in the matter anyway, I think it's best to leave it to the local community over there. --benlisquare_T•C•E 01:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Ok :) WhisperToMe (talk) 02:02, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Kantai Collection

Hey there, just took a look at Kantai Collection. After careful consideration, I have decided to leave it as a C-class. Here are my comments:

• The vast majority of the references are written in something other than English. This is going to make it difficult to get through GAN/FAC. Are there no reliable English secondary sources?
• There is a lot of detail in the article, especially in the publications and voice actor sections. Is all of the information necessary for the average reader to get a good idea of the subject?
• The gameplay section is pretty good, but does not actually explain what kind of device the game is played on. Is it played in web browsers, or is it a PC title?
• In Reception can you put a section with comments from reliable reviewers?
• There is no Development section. I did notice some development-related comments in Reception (about the game's financial performance).
• Perhaps you could start a Merchandise section or something similar, and put the merchandise-related info from Reception in there, and also clean up the list of publications or turn it into prose.

Keep up the good work! — Mr. V (t – c) 03:24, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I see what I can do to address those issues. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:29, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

User ip 111.243.34.140

Hi, please notice , this User ip 111.243.34.140 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/111.243.34.140 , Vandalism a lot of article, please stop it , thank you Buglerazedg21dnlole (talk) 12:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Bitcoin reversion

To me (and some random person on the internet who brought it up on the Bitcoin talk page), the sentence 'The concept was introduced in a 2008 paper by a pseudonymous developer known as "Satoshi Nakamoto".' screams for either a citation or a link to the paper itself. I suppose you disagree because you reverted my edit. Instead of just removing the link like that, could you please instead suggest an alternate means of citing or providing a link to the paper? Chris Arnesen 02:43, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I've just made another change to the page. What you do think of this? --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:03, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Better, thanks! I spent some time looking into whether the paper was published in a peer-reviewed journal or something like that. As far as I can tell, it wasn't. It was first "announced" to the world via a cryptography mailing list at metzdowd.com. I put together a reference to the archive of the mailing list to establish chronology. What do you think of this? Satoshi Nakamoto (2008-10-31). "Bitcoin P2P e-cash paper". Cryptography mailing list at metzdowd.com. Retrieved 2013-11-19. Chris Arnesen 03:16, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

It might be a good idea to get various opinions on the Bitcoin article talk page. The thing is, Wikipedia is sometimes a bit allergic to primary sources, and using primary sources in general is a bit of an iffy issue. Have an ask around, and see what others think. See WP:PRIMARY for the details regarding usage of primary sources on Wikipedia. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:21, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Interesting. I didn't realize that the preference was for secondary sources. Makes sense I guess. I'm a longtime Wikipedia reader, and am only now dipping my toes into the world of editing. I'll take the discussion to the Bitcoin talk page. Thanks for the info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisarnesen (talk • contribs) 03:26, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

probably disruptive editing

Sorry to disturb. I think editor Knsn57 probably disruptive edit in some articles about the war between Japanese and Korea like article Battle of Dangpo ,Siege of Suncheon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miracle dream (talk • contribs) 04:45, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

question

Just wondering, do you like hentai? 144.76.97.109 (talk) 18:58, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Collapses in that ongoing RM/CM

Hi Benlisquare, thank you for your efforts in the ongoing RM/CM! You did a right and correct thing by collapsing the two subsections there at that time. Now user Phoenix7777 moved his stuff (with comments from me and user STSC) out of that subsection and put it in his own argument part. This is very similar to what I did when he improperly posted it as an independent section, but he ridiculously reverted my correct format. His such misplaced stuff is the earliest and most clutter. As now he moved away his such one, could you remove the two collapses in order to let new comers and closure admin easily find the summarized subsections from content-table by simple clicking? If user Phoenix7777 dares to touch them again, the immediate right place for him to go is Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement board (he was supposed to have been there already but I was just busy on concentrating on this RM/CM). Thank you! --Lvhis (talk) 19:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Tank additions

Hi Benlisquare, I have been working on all the different countries pages of tanks and noticed there were a few missing any mention. I just finished the Tanks of South Korea, any help or critique is appreciate. Thanks. Simbagraphix (talk) 07:08, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

DYK for China

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for PL-01

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Just wanna say hi ~

今天路过，看到老维基人，而且是华裔，而且是东方党，感到十分激动，无他。SzMithrandir (talk) 23:58, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

您好。如果有什么事情想找我，请随便来问问。 :) --benlisquare_T•C•E 11:26, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

我屌你老母臭西（李博杰Benlisquare）絕子絕孫食屎啦柒頭 契弟

我屌你老母臭西呀 李博杰Benlisquare　你想同我玩野慳撚d啦 屌你老母李博杰Benlisquare係咪打飛機打撚懵左你呀撚樣柒頭　我屌你老母隻爛臭化西...生你個李博杰Benlisquare孽種出黎害人害物搞搞震，你乜撚都吾識做學人編輯維基（假公濟私 不分是非黑白 利益輸送死2手佬）去食屎啦屌你老母李博杰Benlisquare....含撚食屎啦死鏟，我屌你老母臭西屌到你老母生子宮頸癌死，屌你家姐細妹屌到佢生直腸西癌乳癌死，你老豆生睪丸癌前列腺癌死，全家出街比貨櫃車車撚死，橫屍街頭身首異處死無全屍絕子絕孫，你條死打靶仔柒頭契弟李博杰Benlisquare真係買棺材吾知訂.....我一得閒就會上黎再同大家吹下水開心下

我要去投訴你條死契弟李博杰Benlisquare

我屌你老母臭西呀 食屎狗李博杰Benlisquare 正契弟 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.102.180.23 (talk) 10:52, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

lololololololol

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

>pcd648023.netvigator.com
>Happy Valley, Hong Kong
ｗｗｗｗｗｗｗｗｗｗｗｗｗ（大笑） looks like the mad is seeping from every orifice, cry some more, m8 --benlisquare_T•C•E 11:22, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

P。S。請使用正常漢語，我看不懂你的粵粵垃圾。有本事別像一個懦夫一樣用我看不懂的垃圾文字來罵我。 --benlisquare_T•C•E 11:36, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Just wanna say hi 2 ~

I see your profile didn't update after all these years. I imagine you graduated already, kid? 174.89.163.195 (talk) 01:22, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Are you trying to be patronizing? Mind changing the tone a little bit, especially since I haven't specifically wronged you as a person on my behalf yet? And no, I haven't, because I've made a career switch away from pharmacy because I thought it was a poor choice to make, since I didn't like business or chemistry. I'm not going to get a degree to something that I won't enjoy for the rest of my life. --benlisquare_T•C•E 01:56, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I didn't have that in mind actually. It was genuinely a fancier version of "how are things". Also, I'd relish the occasion of being called a kid. You will too, in several years

Yeah, making right career choices is important. Pharmacy is an incredibly boring career stream and it's one of those choices that compensates lifelong boredom with lots of money. If you aren't sure what you'd enjoy, it'd be a good idea to sign up for some co-op or internship programs. 174.89.163.195 (talk) 03:12, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

It's okay, things don't always communicate that well over the internet. At least we cleared up that misunderstanding properly. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:14, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Senkaku Islands talk page

Generally I prefer to use hat/hab per WP:REFACTOR and this message from an admin, but I know others prefer to delete them. Just wanted to explain my reasoning. EvergreenFir (talk) 03:55, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Tibetan PUA

Note at {{Bo}}. BTW, I can't click on 'new section' on your talk page because the text you have overlying the top is blocking the edit buttons. — kwami (talk) 22:55, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah, just deleted some PUA Mongol text from Ayding Lake, and it turns out you added it back in 2010. We're now doing periodic scans of the WP dump for PUA characters, and things like this that can't be easily fixed will probably just get deleted. In order for PUA to work, you'd need to force the use of a supporting font, but better just to convert to Unicode. I'll try to remember to notify you if I come across any more PUA Mongol. — kwami (talk) 01:04, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) [but see below] Uyghurjin script should be replaced w graphics. It's doubtful anyone with those fonts would need the table. They could be sub'd and formatted for the proper fonts, but it's probably not worth it. — kwami (talk) 01:16, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm not too sure on the process of converting PUA to unicode. I notice that a lot of mainland China-based sites use PUA instead of the unicode standard for some reason (does it have something to do with using a separate GB standard there?), and this is especially the case for Mongol text. Even Mongol-language government or official sites such as the People's Daily Mongolian edition use PUA characters. --benlisquare_T•C•E 01:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Unicode is a rather half-assed standard, and it doesn't handle Chinese well. Not good for academic work, anyway. For Mongol, I suspect it's the recent history of a lack of support, and how many outsiders are going to use it anyway?, but I don't know. What we could do is create a Mongol template analogous to {{Bo}} for Tibetan, so that the proper fonts are triggered; I think we can even get them embedded into WP so that they'll display for people who don't have them installed. I don't know how to do that, but you can probably ask at the village pump for who to talk to. If you can get the fonts embedded, that solves the biggest problem with using PUA, that if people can't read it, we have no business using it. A secondary problem is that bots such as AWB don't function on pages w PUA characters, so they need to be substituted with their hex codes. As long as it's only a few characters, we can do that by hand (see {{PUA}} for the basics), but when you get something like emoji that's a hell of a lot of work. Still, I doubt we're looking at many long texts in PUA Mongol script. — kwami (talk) 01:29, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the creation of something to aid people who don't have the proper fonts installed, I believe at one point User:虞海 (or User:Yaan, or someone else, it's been years ago and I've forgotten) attempted to create a template which converted Mongol into a series of SVG or PNG images bunched together, but it turned out to be unfeasible or something. I haven't heard anything about it since. --benlisquare_T•C•E 02:09, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Evidently fonts are being embedded in WP somehow so that readers have access to all articles even if they don't have the proper fonts installed. But we're only talking a few articles here. — kwami (talk) 21:30, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

I rv'd myself on Ayding Lake, so that needs to be cleaned up with the others, but changed the problematic Uyghurjin article back into a rd. — kwami (talk) 00:50, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

That Uyghurjin article appeared to be a content fork anyway. What was covered in that article can be covered at the Mongolian script article. If the redirect becomes reverted again, you could always start an AfD discussion or something. --benlisquare_T•C•E 00:54, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

Re. the font issue: I believe svg is not the way to go. It is cumbersome to create and maintain, and not searchable. However, it is possible to embed fonts into websites so that they work even if the user has no Mongol fonts installed. See e.g. http://www.president.mn/mng/ (takes a while to load) for an example. What we need then is a font that wp can use. Probably some of the fonts on [2] could be used for this. And then someone would have to sort out the technical issues, basically asking wikimedia foundation to change their software so that these fonts can be included in the html header. That last part I was always too lazy to follow through with, although it is probably not really that a big deal.

Regards, Yaan (talk) 21:22, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

That's straightforward enough with Unicode Mongol, and this is being implemented at least for other scripts. But I doubt PUA Mongol is worth it; there were only two words using it that we couldn't Unicodify, the name of a lake in a Uighur-speaking region and of a town in Inner Mongolia (such towns are not generally given in Mongol script), and those have now both been deleted without significant loss to WP. As for the site you linked to, it tells me I need to install another browser to see it. — kwami (talk) 21:44, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

My point was in relation to Unicode Mongol. Currently, I am not able to read Mongolian unicode as used on wp on my Ipad. But I am ble to read this president.mn site (Maybe this subpage works better for you). So the point I was trying to make was that in order to solve current issues with lack of proper fonts on certain devices (esp. apple devices) it might make sense to embed appropriate fonts in the same way that other websites do. Yaan (talk) 21:56, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

P.S. seems like president.mn is a actually not really such a good example, as they do not use Mongolian unicode themselves. The only thing it is good for is to demonstrate how fonts can be displayed without the user having installed them. But www.mongolfont.com is an example actually does use Mongolian unicode and displays it properly, even on Apple devices. Yaan (talk) 22:05, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

关于翻译的事宜

你好哦！我是Ｙuri有理汉化组的组长，最近正在组织从pulla-magi wiki上翻译一篇有关魔法少女小圆的条目（标题为Yuri undertones）。目前进度良好，但是人员还是比较缺乏，尤其是校对人员。考虑到这篇文章本身就是一篇用wikitext写的条目，所以我也打算以相同的方式移植到魔法少女小圆中文wiki上，目前已经移植了一部分校对完成的文本：百合成分。整个小组里只有我一个人会wikitext，但我也只是个初学者。另外，现在这个小圆中文wiki也还处于建设阶段，还有相当多的条目都需要从Puella-magi或者wikipedia上面翻译（英译汉和日译汉都有），而wiki本身也需要些熟悉wiki运作模式的人来维护。如果不介意的话希望你能加入我们，茫茫人海中找到你不容易。Q群：318524201，也可以到我的中文维基百科页面留言。我的组里也有一个在澳洲的华侨。 --Xhwkcj (talk) 18:06, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

您好。我觉得没问题，有空的话我愿意帮助你们。因为我是大学生我有些时候有可能会比较忙，可是大部分空时间我可以花点时间帮你们，哪里缺什么哪里补。到时候，我来看看哪里需要修改，帮你们翻译或调整wikitext。但是，有个问题：我已经好几年没用QQ了，几年前我的QQ帐号被人hack了，从此一直没再次用过QQ。什么是最好的办法和你们联系（你们方便为主）？你可以用Special:EmailUser/Benlisquare给我发email，或者在IRC上跟我联系(我一般idle在irc.rizon.net上)。 --benlisquare_T•C•E 19:14, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

我已经发了邮件，请查收。还有就是irc.rizon.net好像被GFW封锁了，上不去。--Xhwkcj (talk) 02:13, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

好，受到了。--benlisquare_T•C•E 04:00, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Ref needed

ref needed. Got a good ref for that? All those characters at the top of your talk page make many parts unclickable. HalfGig talk 00:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

They're both taken from the interwiki links.

Reference for Chinese

• 中国科学院微生物研究所制作 (China Institute of Microbiology Research and Production)

Reference for Korean

• Bio Resource Information Service, Government of the Republic of Korea
• Nature.go.kr (government website)

Regards, --benlisquare_T•C•E 06:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

2009 Urumqi riot article

Hello, do you still want to uphold the no-off topic discussion consensus at that article? The Soapbox on the talk page is getting out of hand. Jim101 (talk) 12:49, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

What is even going on over there? Does the mountain of text have anything to do with the 2009 riots? All I'm reading is Han immigration during the Qing Dynasty and CCP policies. It's getting to the point of becoming a forum for the sake of discussing things, since the focus is straying far from the actual riots. --benlisquare_T•C•E 13:14, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Basically an editor argue to include discussion on Qing colonized northern Xinjiang before PRC, PRC only populate north Xinjiang devoid of Uyghur, etc. in the background section as balance against an unknown bias, which I view is completely off topic since none of those information actually explains why Uyghur is currently discontent at PRC government. POV pushing/insults/Chewbacca defense/protest against Western censorship against "Han Opinion" just start from there. Jim101 (talk) 13:52, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, I don't see why the debate shouldn't be closed if it's going off tangent; at this rate, it's hardly going to be of any help towards improving the article, which is the point of having talk pages. What happened a few hundred years ago really shouldn't be the "cause" of the 2009 riots, just like how Karl Marx didn't start the Vietnam War, and debating "my people were here first" has never ended in a pretty finale. Going too deep into that kind of thing wouldn't help anyone, since people get too emotionally involved. That said, you should probably consider bringing an uninvolved admin into this if it goes further into a bigger mess. --benlisquare_T•C•E 13:58, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Well, the other editor refuse to let it go even after I stated the same point on the talk page. There has to be some formal dispute resolution mechanism to stop endless soapboxing in talk pages. Jim101 (talk) 14:10, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Some bubble tea for you!

thanks for catching this, and many many other good edits. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:36, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

woops

misplaced sorry (see edit history) --Hammersoft (talk) 16:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Talk:Nanking Massacre

您好。这个条目正在就南京大屠杀的遇难人数和有关问题进行讨论。期待您的意见！谢谢。--MtBell 22:35, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Require administer for discussion in talk page of Nanking Massacre

I guess you are an administrator.If you are an administrator, can you administer the discussion of Nanking Massacre in its talk page? This discussion is totally mess. I hope there is at least two administrator to administer it for fair.
It is really a mess and endless discussion if no administrator to manage it. I hope at least two administrator to manage this. There will be no result to make everyone satisfy. I hope there is a vote which is managed by administrator. Otherwise, this discussion will be endless. Everyone is wasting their time. This discussion started from section "I see a significant change of the figure about people killed in this Massacre".
If you are not administrator, you can ignore the comments above. Miracle dream (talk) 23:42, 22 February 2014‎

I am not an administrator, sorry. You'll probably be able to get someone to help you by asking around at WP:AN. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:58, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

2014 Kunming attack

Hi there, I'm writing to you because of your past involvement with the Urumqi riots in 2009. There was a major knife attack in Kunming. Death toll somewhere between 29 and 34, about 140 injuries as of most recent reports. It's looking likely that the attack is associated with the Uyghur independence movement although the situation is obviously cloudy. Editors with experience working on Han / Uyghur conflict would be appreciated to make sure we stick to WP:RS and avoid WP:RECENTISM while this situation unfolds. Simonm223 (talk) 16:53, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Maintaining records of China Coast Guard's patrol operations around Diaoyu Islands

I've invited you to the discussion of removing Japan's reaction column in the China Coast Guard page to remove "Japan's reaction". China Coast Guard has been conducting regular patrol operations in territorial waters around Diaoyu Islands and exercising China's administration there. I propose to keep that record but remove contents that reflect Japan's twisted view and unlawful interests.Tiffany M-F Lee (talk) 21:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Archival Disc

The DYK project (nominate) 01:12, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		Thank you for volunteering your free time by helping me with the whole language barrier thing and sending that letter on my behalf. I really appreciate it. —  dainomite   05:54, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Another move request regarding Ukraine and Crimea

Hello, you participated in a previous move request regarding Crimea and Ukraine, so I thought you might be interested in this new request that is intended to address objections to the previous one. Cheers.Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, regarding your recent comment, could you please replace "you" with the name of the editor? Thanks.Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:48, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Never mind.Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:50, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Interesting comments, thanks. I guess an admin might infer a support !vote from them. Cheers.Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Did you create that Euler diagram showing difference between the Republic of Crimea (country) and the current Russian entity of Republic of Crimea. If you did, well done. I think you should post the diagram some other places as it will get lost and forgotten on the talk page there and I think it is useful. I did not know how to copy and paste it. Thanks. Frenchmalawi (talk) 03:41, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

AFD of 屌絲

May want to take a look here. "My master, Annatar the Great, bids thee ^welcome!" 02:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Dear SuperNewbie

Please tell me I have succeeded. I have bothered poor Itachi enough already. starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 06:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

This should be alright. When you attach the image to the email to be sent to the Wikimedia OTRS team, make sure you mention within the email that ____ from Pixiv is the same person as ____ from ____, et cetera. For example:

JohnExample1488 on Pixiv <http://www.pixiv.net/member.php?id=000000> and JExample_NewYork88 on Youtube <https://www.youtube.com/user/JExample_NewYork88/videos> are the same person, refer to the attached screenshot of previous discussion (21may2003_talk_screenshot.jpg) for further details.

You probably have Facebook chats (or whatever) which confirm that they're the same person, right? --benlisquare_T•C•E 08:13, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Sent the email to the Commons OTRS team. Included screenshots of... the Pixiv page linking to the Facebook page, then the Facebook page links to the DeviantArt page, therefore they are the same person. starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 08:40, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Eh it might have to wait another 24 hours. I'm kinda done with editing for today.

Could you please ask him/her to add a short statement such as "this work is licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0" to the DeviantArt page erm did you get that as well? starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 13:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

No. Mine hasn't been processed yet. I had a chat with the OTRS person who did yours, see commons:User_talk:Whym#OTRS_question. --benlisquare_T•C•E 13:27, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Actually, scratch that. The one that I sent first was passed successfully. --benlisquare_T•C•E 13:58, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Benlisquare, thanks for your help. The OTRS person got into touch with the artist and settled the matter. starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 13:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Benlisquare, great work on uploading the fair use image. However, I think that we could have used a better screenshot at the different time of the video. I've taken four more screenshots which I believe are all better than the current one. Do you think they are better and would you like to choose one? 1, 2, 3 and 4. starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 01:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

@Starship.paint: The first and the second look alright, you can choose one of the two, and overwrite a new revision of the file at the same file location. You can do this, and I don't really mind which one you upload. You won't need to write up a new rationale or anything, and the old version will eventually be deleted per usual process with non-free fair use. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:35, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi benlisquare, I'm not sure if the existence of this will help or hurt our arguments. starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 08:37, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

4 letter word

Please remove the word from your comment, I find it insulting. Xx236 (talk) 08:45, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Taiwan protests

You are aware that the protests and the occupation of parliament are quite a big deal here and have dominated the Taiwanese news for the last week? The Clever Boy (talk) 01:15, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I am aware, and I'm not arguing otherwise. What I am saying is that Wikipedia talk pages are not internet forums that cater for generalized discussion on the topic. If you want to talk about how to improve the Taiwan article, then by all means do so at Talk:Taiwan. However, Talk:Taiwan is not the place to be discussing the latest events and affairs. Refer to the talk page guidelines and Wikipedia is not a forum. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		Valued Picture Barnstar
		This barnstar is awarded for your contributions towards the Natalia Poklonskaya article, particularly in obtaining both free and fair use pictures. Thank you! starship.paint (talk | ctrb) 05:28, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

降G大調

降G大調是不是最好聽的調？166.48.194.46 (talk) 20:46, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Project DIVA F 2nd

I don't get why you're against on letting Project DIVA F 2nd have a modules table when the other games of the Project DIVA franchise do.--24.152.227.59 (talk) 21:21, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

If you have disagreements, you can voice your opinion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Excessive in-game detail in Hatsune Miku: Project DIVA related articles. --benlisquare_T•C•E 21:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Re:Eerie

As all complicated topic, the answer for now is maybe. There are two battles of Hill Eerie, one is UN Operation Counter in June 1952 and the following regiment sized counter attack by the Chinese 39th Army （联合国军回击行动和39军190.8高地反击战）. The other is the 2nd Battle of Old Baldy（39军115师1952年秋季战术反击作战） . The current article somehow (in an OR sense) merged the two events into one and add an extra lay of the unit history of the Filipino battalion combat teams from March to July on top of it...until somebody made up mind on what the article is really about, it is not even worthy it to find source. Jim101 (talk) 23:39, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Upon further inspection, it appear the 1st Battle of Old Baldy also covers first Battle for Hill Eriee...why are we having duplicated articles here? Jim101 (talk) 23:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

It is really pointless to even talk about accuracy if even the article time frame/context could be not verified (are we talking about casualties of 1st battle , 2nd battle, 1+2...etc?). FYI, Hill Eerie was not seized by UN force until June 11, 1952 (Checkout official US Army history, section Old Baldy, page 288 and South Korean official war history)...so all article content before that date are grossly off topic, if not obviously faked. Jim101 (talk) 04:08, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

Military anthem AFD

Take a look here, if you will. "My master, Annatar the Great, bids thee ^welcome!" 22:38, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

KanColle registered users

I see that you made the graph for the number of registered users on the KanColle page. I really like this graph, however is there more recent data available? The curent graph only goes to October 31, 2013. You said you got the information from their Twitter feed. I took a look there and didn't see anything like that, at least in the recent history. Did they stop publishing this?

I'm just curious about exactly where you got the information for that graph. Thanks.

67.170.104.45 (talk) 05:18, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I haven't checked in a long time, however the official staff twitter periodically makes posts such as these: (1, 2, 3). Someone (or some people) on 2ch usually compile player population data based on twitter posts, so to be honest I've relied on the data gathering of someone else. --benlisquare_T•C•E 05:45, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

DYK for China National Salt Industry Corporation

slakr^\ talk / 09:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Congrats on the DYK nomination! I thought your article was great -- lots of information nicely organized and well presented. The only amendment that I would have is to let the reader know that a lot of salt is used industrially, so that edible salt is only part of the picture. Another tweak might be to break up the Background section to put the pre-1949 material before the "Founded in February 1950...." paragraph. ch (talk) 05:30, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Cheers. I'll look into it and make some adjustments soon, time willing. --benlisquare_T•C•E 05:42, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

You may have seen this discussion, but just in case: China Still Uses 2,600 Year Old Law to Control Salt at China Smack. Cheers in any case,. ch (talk) 04:30, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Uyghur deadly clash with Vietnamese article

Should this deadly incident between Uyghurs and Vietnamese botder guards qualify for its own article? How do you make a current events article?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/world/asia/deadly-clash-between-vietnamese-border-guards-and-chinese-migrants-reported.html?_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/22/world/asia/vietnam-returns-migrants-to-china-after-deadly-border-clash.html

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-04-19/an-seven-killed-in-shootout-on-vietnam-china-border3a-vietname/5399600

http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/855733.shtml

Rajmaan (talk) 04:47, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Given the media attention and the official response by both Uyghur organizations and Chinese and Vietnamese organizations, I created an article. 2014 China-Vietnam border shootout.Rajmaan (talk) 05:06, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

A minor favour

I can't tell if this image is copyrighted or not because I really want to upload it. I don't speak Mandarin, I only eat it! Khazar (talk) 18:43, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Most likely it is. The source URL doesn't provide an author name, however Commons can only accept files with verifiable author details that are freely licensed. The rule of thumb is that if in doubt, assume copyright. --benlisquare_T•C•E 19:07, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Cruft

I won't revert you, out of respect for your general contributions, but I must say your defence of this trash really surprised me. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 05:28, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

The article is in a bad state, no disagreement there, but that's only because we have limited information available in English. The Russian Wikipedia has much more "hard facts"-type biographical information about her, but I'm not one to be relied upon to get Russian-language sources. I would have preferred it if the article had more serious information so that the internet section wouldn't have made up such a significant proportion, maybe a 4:1 or 5:1 ratio instead of the 1:0.7 ratio we have right now; I'm hoping that someone with decent Russian ability is able to fix it since I'm incompetent to do such a thing (at most I can probably remember 120 Russian words and their word roots, clearly completely useless). That said, this individual has only come to prominence in recent events, and you could even say that she rose to notability moreso based on the "meme" rather than her political career. You really can't deny that the "trash" all has to do with her notability. I might even boldly say that without her online following, this person might have even been a typical Ms. Nobody in the world that nobody pays attention to, just like you and I. How many attorney generals out there do you know have giant wads of admirers? I can't even remember the name of the US attorney general. --benlisquare_T•C•E 05:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I'm unhappy to see such a crappy article get to the MP. I would stand by my view that the person is a politician first and foremost, and I think that attorneys general of countries are notable regardless of whether they have WP articles or not. Her glamorous looks have contributed to her elevated profile. She may have been made into an internet icon, but I the amount and type of content is not warranted. You admit that there appears to be undue weight, but I feel that undue weight isn't just relative but absolute. I do not have a problem with a few short a sentence in the biography about her internet profile. I never expect to see so much crap in a serious biography and this one is no exception. but it certainly does not warrant an entire section. And I'm sorry, the 5-picture gallery of anime/kawaii images is just too crass to be true. -- Ohc ^¡digame! 05:53, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

@Ohconfucius: The article has been reworked a bit; how does the current revision fare? The other sections have been expanded, and the internet section has been trimmed down, so right now it is no more than 12% of the article prose. --benlisquare_T•C•E 10:38, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

It's a huge improvement. I've gone and pruned the gallery down to one image. Regards, -- Ohc ^¡digame! 14:38, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

How did you do it Benlisquare, you read Russian? Also, how did we not have an edit conflict? starship.paint "YES!" 10:43, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

I probably have the Russian competency of a two-year old. I had a passing interest in Russian when I was a highschool kid, and so learned Cyrillic, basic grammar, and a handful of completely useless words like союз, мир, хуй, сука, винтовка, танк, водка, Балалайка, москаль and хохол. Don't count on it if your life depended on it. --benlisquare_T•C•E 10:50, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

• What about the sources? Reading the above, I guessed you picked from the Russian Wikipedia? Brilliant, I never thought of that, and was only searching in English...
• I'd also like to bring to your attention this, is it worth mentioning in the article. starship.paint "YES!" 10:55, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, all the sources (except one, the Pavlov resignation one) were taken from ruwiki.

"is it worth mentioning in the article" - for the time being, let's not do anything that even remotely makes the "internet" section any bigger, even by 6 bytes. For some reason it's a really sensitive section, look at all the discussions that have arisen so far. Currently there's a really big internet meme going on in Russia called Няш-мяш (Nyash-myash) that MoscowConnection really wanted to write about, and I suggested to him that he shouldn't, given the current circumstances here. --benlisquare_T•C•E 10:56, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Ok, but I'll just add the link to the article while hidden in case it will be useful in the future. About Pavlov, I'm confused, Prosecutor of Crimea was a newly created position, how is he the Vice-Attorney or something like that? starship.paint "YES!" 11:02, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Pavlov was the Vice-Attorney of the previous ARoC (the name of Crimea during the Ukrainian years), and once ARoC had its referendum and became the RoC, he was made Attorney (the previous guy was deemed too "pro-Kiev" and was removed, and so Pavlov naturally replaced him), and then voluntarily resigned from that position, which was then given to Natalia. "Prosecutor" (прокурор prokuror) is the Russian/Eastern Slavic term for Attorney General. --benlisquare_T•C•E 11:06, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

So Natalia isn't the first because Pavlov is? An experienced DYK editor suggested to me using a more "neutral hook without image - just her name and position" for DYK. So I was thinking stating that she was the first "____", whatever that may be. starship.paint "YES!" 11:33, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Actually, now that you mention it, Pavlov resigned before March 18, 2014, which was when the Republic was established. The referendum took place on March 16, and the declaration of unilateral independence took place on March 11, but during both those times, they were still technically the ARoC, and not the RoC. That means that Pavlov resigned from the ARoC position, and not the RoC position, if I'm not mistaken. --benlisquare_T•C•E 11:38, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Problem is we don't have explict sources to explain all these right? Also, Pavlov must have resigned before March 11 since that was the day Natalia became Prosecutor.

I read a source online that Natalia was new Prosecutor of ARoC instead. Alternatively, how about a DYK hook that says Natalia was the first Prosecutor of Crimea endorsed by Russia? March 25. Something like that? starship.paint "YES!" 13:18, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

You could suggest a hook that states that she is the first prosecutor of the newly created Republic of Crimea (instead of wording it as "first prosecutor of Crimea", which would include pre-March 18 events), that would be technically 100% correct. Having to deal with dates here and there would probably be more complicated, and by wording the hook like that, you don't need to explain all the things behind who was prosecutor of the ARoC first, what happened after that, and then after that, etc. --benlisquare_T•C•E 18:04, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mo Furuc

It has come to my attention that when nominating a article for deletion, Someone told me to come here to talk with you. What is your take on this? Happy Attack Dog (Bark! Bark!) 19:13, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

@Happy Attack Dog: I'm not sure. Currently the article has sourcing issues, but doing a quick google search for "莫福如" does provide plenty of hits for a military person. If someone is able to fix up that article's problems, it can potentially be saved, though I don't think the current state is satisfactory for a mainspace article. Perhaps ask if the author would be happy for it to be moved to a userspace draft, so that it can be worked on a bit? --benlisquare_T•C•E 19:21, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Few Japanese names.

Hi Benlisquare! A month ago you helped me (anonymous IP) with a Japanese name (which I greatly appreciate).. right now I'm having trouble with few names. If you don't mind, can you give a little help? Regards. --The Canadian Surfer (talk) 04:21, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

@The Canadian Surfer: Sure, what can I help you with? --benlisquare_T•C•E 04:32, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply! Well, I already translated by myself very few names (from the game credits) but these ones...:

• http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t95/chromossomax9/Brawl_zpsfffd67d1.png

I had no chance. When you have four or five free minutes can you type the Japanese characters and translate them? With ease..?

Also, one other question, these sentences (tiny characters(!)) are not part of the credits, is that correct?

• http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t95/chromossomax9/04_zps71332aa9.jpg
• http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t95/chromossomax9/05_zpsbc9ed8b5.jpg

I think I can use google translate to check these but I'm not sure if my crappy translation will be good enough..

That's all. P.S. I'm going to put these credits in a gaming site (superfamicom.org), once the translation is done, can I link your Wikipedia profile? Thanks once again. --The Canadian Surfer (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

All names are in Japanese order (surname first).

• 吉田　明広 Yoshida Akihiro
  • 吉田 can also be read Kichida, Raide.　明広 can also be read as Haruhiro.
• 大原　健志 Ohara Takeshi
• 猪ヶ倉　康雄 Igakura Yasuo
• 竹内 史郎 Takeuchi Shirou
  • 史郎 can also be Fumirou.

絵 Art

• 倉持　伸幸 Kuramochi Shinkou
  • 伸幸 is also Nobuko, Nobuyuki.
• 渡辺　忠彦 Misato Tadahiko
  • 渡辺 is also Marina, Minayo, Watakabe, Watanahe, Watanahe, Watabe, Wananabe, 忠彦 is also Atsuhiko.
• 前川　恵一 Maegawa Keiichi
• 渡部　輝人 Watanabe Teruhito

企画 Planning

• 星　和明 Akari Kazumasa
  • 星 is also Hikaru.
• 倉持 亮一 Kuramochi Ryouichi

音楽 Music

• 伊勢村　篤義 Isemura Atsuyoshi
  • 篤義 is also Tokuyoshi.
• 内田 哉 Uchida Kanae

Within the 協力 Collaboration section, the　(いちぶ　うそ) in brackets means "some of these are lies" (一部　嘘). It then lists what sound definitely like person names, written in hiragana. Without further context, I have no idea what these names are supposed to mean, though. One guy's first name (Sasahara _____) is completely unreadable due to the white colour, Aoki Kouji has a ? mark, __naka Yasuko (again, unreadable due to the 16-bit era game text mixing with the background art) has a ❤ heart sign (it's a girl's name, if that helps), and everyone else has an ! mark.

The full list of names within the collaboration section is: Sekiya Hitoshi!, Shiora Yasuhiro!, Ootani Hajime!, Yokoyama Kango!, Arai Masahiro!, Nakanishi Hiroyuki!, Kagiana Naoki!, Kameta Takeshi!, Hara Hajime!, Honjou Tetsuhiro!, Wakabayashi Hiroyuki!, Aoki Kouji?, Yamazaki Yuusuke!, Kitano Eiichi!, Omotani Tomoji!, Watanabe Naoyuki!, Inoue Shou_rou!, Akiyama Nobaro!, Yoshimoto Tanashi!, Sasahara ___, Satou Hiroki!, Miyazaki Akira!, Hasegawa Kouji!, Matsuda Makoto!, _naka Yasuko❤, Nakagawa Kinjou!, Ooda Shigeyuki!, Hasaka Fusato!, Fukushima Youichi!. --benlisquare_T•C•E 07:02, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

God, this is just beautiful.. Thank you so much! I need some time now to check all these names carefully one by one lol. Thanks for being nice and helpful!! Cheers! --The Canadian Surfer (talk) 12:02, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

EDIT: I already checked the first names. "内田 哉" can also be Hajime Uchida, can you confirm it? Also, I think you missed the last two names from the Art section, can you please take a look again? [3] Thanks. --The Canadian Surfer (talk) 13:11, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes, 哉 can also be Hajime. The full list of readings would be Kana, Kanae, Kanaki, Sai, Chika, Chikashi, Hajime.

You're right, it seems I rushed a bit and missed two: 渡部　輝彦 is Watanabe Akihito or Watanabe Teruhiko. 高橋　将人 is Takahashi Masato, 将人 can also be Masahito and 高橋 can also be Takahasa/Takahami. --benlisquare_T•C•E 13:22, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. :) --The Canadian Surfer (talk) 22:03, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Natalia Poklonskaya

Benlisquare, I urge you to observe more courtesy in that discussion. I understand that emotions can get the upper hand, but this ought to be serious discussion waged in a respectful way. You cannot go around accusing other editors of not liking the article or whatever and therefore opposing its nomination, and using profanity ("shit") probably only weakens your case. Thank you. In addition, this edit war you've been waging isn't helping you either, and reverting your opponents when they are tweaking the article so they'll feel comfortable with it is a terrible idea. If you want to have this run, you're going to have to work with (some of) your opponents. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 14:49, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

• And did you really say "gook cartoon"? Or is that what you think some "middle-ager from Tennessee" would think? Either way, and I suppose you're trying for the last thing, it's pretty offensive, and as a middle-ager from Alabama I take great offense at it. Your explanation is appreciated. Drmies (talk) 02:02, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• @Drmies: I was under the impression that gook cartoon was the generic American internet slang term for "anime". If I'm not mistaken, it's a term which originated from Tumblr and spread elsewhere after that. It's used with a sarcastic tone in most cases but it is a real online expression, and it's used in internet forums throughout the internet. Since I am a gook, surely it wouldn't be that bad in this playful context? I've amended it anyway, in hindsight, since it can be seen in a different way to which I intended it. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:11, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• That may be so, but I took the liberty of Googling, and this is the first hit--click only if you have the stomach for some real (stupid) racism. I find no respectable use of the term, so if I were you, I would not want to be misunderstood, if you know what I'm saying. Drmies (talk) 14:00, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• @Drmies:Yes, I can see where you're getting at. You have my apologies. --benlisquare_T•C•E 15:24, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

• Accepted. I see you removed it from the discussion, right? I have to admit, I was shocked when I saw those cartoons: I didn't think it could be so bad. Racists are assholes. Drmies (talk) 16:22, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Acxle's source

The source is flatout unreliable, and cites no sources itself, the entire article is the author's opinion and alleged claims, some of which are blatantly false.

I've never heard of this one child policy being waived for Xinjiang Han migrants or children of mixed "Muslim" and "Han" couples being forced to regist as Han, first of all, Uyghurs are registered according to ethnicity and not religion (they could be an atheist and still receive affirmative action"), and secondly most of the time the human rights people claim the opposite- that in fact most mixed couples are registered according to the minority parent's nationality and not the Han, because the Chinese government allegedly wants to "dilute" their blood according to them.

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/com73e.htm

"The author, Dr. Paul George, is an independent analyst"- this is an alarm bell right away telling us that this guy is unreliable, like the "independent researcher" who write history from reading books at their local libraries and getting published at a vanity press, not an academic journal or press.

CSIS is a political security organization (CANADIAN SECURITY INTELLIGENCE SERVICE) and it even has to post disclaimers since it knows the author's views are flat out worthless since he isn't an academic on Xinjiang, doesn't have a PHD in Xinjiang history or area studies at all-

"Disclaimer: Publication of an article in the COMMENTARY series does not imply CSIS authentication of the information nor CSIS endorsement of the author's views."

"The views expressed herein are those of the author, who may be contacted by writing to :"

This "Dr. Paul George" had zero credentials on Xinjiang or Uyghurs. No Phd on Xinjiang history or Uyghur related studies.Rajmaan (talk) 03:43, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

Request for an opinion

Hi! You appear to be a person with knowledge in all of the domains involved, so I thought you might be a good person to ask for an opinion.

In many articles, (but let's take Spratly Islands dispute on English Wikipedia as an example), in a number of cases, supporting references are supplied which only contain "text" from East Asian languages.
(example: (from Spratly Islands dispute#References)

29. ^ 《元史》地理志;《元代疆域图叙》

30. ^ 《海南卫指挥佥事柴公墓志铬》

31. ^ 《清直省分图》天下总舆图

32. ^ 皇清各直省分图》之《天下总舆图

33. ^ 《大清一统天下全图》 )

To many readers of English Wikipedia, these are much the same as seeing .
(In the cases where they provide hyperlinks, at least one can use some sort of translation engine on the target page ... )
(I agree that English-language-text citations without hyperlinks aren't much better, but ... )

Anyway.
What do you think? (Thanks in advance.) Pdfpdf (talk)

@Pdfpdf: Generally, if formatted properly, foreign language (non-English) references are perfectly acceptable; WP:NONENG states that whilst English-language sources are preferred, non-English sources can be used if English sources are not available or if they are of inferior quality. However, those citations on that page mean almost next to nothing; they don't follow any useful convention, and it's completely vague and unclear regarding what they're actually supposed to be referencing. I would be inclined to say that those references don't meet verifiability standards, and that they really should be replaced with better citations.

Consider the following example citations:

• 《金瓶梅》 第七回
• Chen Zhiming, (1997). Why I'm so great (为什么我强大), 1st ed. (in Chinese) Xinhua Publishing. ISBN 000-0000000000. pp.147-189.

It's probably obvious that the first one is hardly useful as a citation at all, and barely serves any purpose. Or at least, it doesn't do a good job of proving that it serves any purpose. Those citations on the Spratly article are referencing old maps and books from centuries ago (元史 refers to the History of Yuan), so the whole thing is a grey area to begin with. --benlisquare_T•C•E 13:33, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Pdfpdf (talk) 04:24, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

About Mandarin Pinyin

Topics that I have removed Mandarin Pinyin are solely related to Hong Kong, which Mandarin is not the de facto language spoken in Hong Kong. There is no such reason and is not necessary to include Mandarin Pinyin. Likewise, topics related to China will only include Mandarin Pinyin, and topics related to Taiwan will only include Mandarin Pinyin and Taiwanese Hokkien Pe̍h-ōe-jī. Cantonese Jyutping will not be included in Chinese or Taiwanese topics.

Wymanb (talk) 20:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

@Wymanb: Your edits conflict with the Wikipedia Manual of Style relating to China topic articles. There is no rule which states that pinyin cannot be used on Taiwan or Hong Kong topics; rather, WP:MOSZH suggests quite the opposite. It is a general sitewide convention to use pinyin to gloss Chinese text, and in the case where a regional romanization also applies, to use that in addition to the pinyin.

Furthermore, you did not use any edit summaries, and to anyone seeing your edits, there's no doubt that they can be interpreted as blatant disruptive editing. If you have a point to explain, do so within the edit summary, that is what it is for. If you have a disagreement with the current conventions, feel free to start a discussion at WT:CHINA and gain community consensus first. Wikipedia works upon community consensus, and the current consensus is that pinyin is used as a gloss for Chinese in all circumstances. --benlisquare_T•C•E 05:05, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

@Benlisquare: Firstly, the Manual is a suggestion, it does not have de jure status to enforce all articles that fall in such category to follow every detail it stated. I did not say it "cannot" include other romanization translation, what I have said is there is no reason to have it, as it will confuse reader how the word is pronounced usually in the specific region, in this case, Hong Kong. Ideally, other Chinese romanization translations should also be included, separately on a language box instead of in the main article. Therefore, if you insist, you should have left the romanization translation on the main article and insert a language box and put whatever you believe is beneficial on it. However, in terms of fairness, I would suggest you to put more than just Mandarin Pinyin and Cantonese Jyutping, you should also include Taiwanese Hokkien Pe̍h-ōe-jīna and other dialect translations, as they are also part of the Chinese language that reader may find it beneficial and other group might find it unfair if you miss them. But of course, considering there are lots of different types of Chinese dialects, it would be impractical to do so. If you consider you have such duty to improve articles in Wikipedia that are related to China, I strongly suggest you should start improving all the Chinese-related articles and make sure they will get a language box with variety of Chinese dialects romanization translations. Wymanb (talk) 09:58, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

@Wymanb:I assure you that the MoS is by no means a "suggestion". It is a general convention that articles follow, for the sake of uniformity and completeness. We do not concern ourselves with "de jure" status or any other bureaucracy on Wikipedia, so I don't find that argument convincing at all. That said, if you really want to express your concerns, do so at WT:CHINA or the WP:Village pump. Gain community consensus for your changes first; otherwise, it's nothing more than general disruption. Right now, you are making "lone person" removals of content without the approval of the overall community, simply because you might not necessarily like the content on a personal level. --benlisquare_T•C•E 10:04, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

@Benlisquare: Yes, this is what I mean, so do you agree, a general convention. Therefore, when we are editing article we should take into account but also with our common sense to judge. In the last Wikimania, meetings specifically for Hong Kong-China-Taiwan Wikipedian community were held to discuss practical issue related to Chinese-related topics, and with real life discussion the consensus is editor shall take regional practices and customs into account. You shall check the record. I see you are forcing this discussion to be personal, implying that because I did not like certain things then I am making so-called "disruption" edit. I hope you recognise that for the involvement with Wikipedia and the foundation that I have come across with in these years, your accuse is no way near the truth, and is offensive. This would not leave to a healthy discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wymanb (talk • contribs)

@Wymanb: Well then, why aren't you taking it to the relevant forums at the Village Pump and elsewhere? What is the reasoning behind the lack of community engagement? You need to make your points here, on the English Wikipedia, and not at Wikimedia Foundation events at the like. Real-life meetups are by no means a substitute for community consensus here on Wikipedia. Don't hide behind the Wikimedia Foundation as if it's some sort of argument deflector shield - convince me, here on this project, that you can obtain community consensus for your actions.

Finally, when I say "general convention", it's not as if it's all fine and dandy if they aren't followed, and I assure you that in most cases such edits will be brought into question if there is no adequate and convincing reasoning behind it. This applies to anyone - if you make any change which strays from the accepted project-wide norms on the English Wikipedia, expect that people will ask for clarification. It's not law in many countries that you can't urinate in the street, but I assure you that doing so would definitely attract a cold welcome, as it's a general convention not to urinate in the street without a darn good reason for it. Don't assume that you don't have to adhere by something simply because it's not "law", that's a completely inane way of addressing the situation. --benlisquare_T•C•E 10:51, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

The Pulse (WP:MED newsletter) June 2014

The first edition of The Pulse has been released. The Pulse will be a regular newsletter documenting the goings-on at WPMED, including ongoing collaborations, discussions, articles, and each edition will have a special focus. That newsletter is here.

The newsletter has been sent to the talk pages of WP:MED members bearing the {{User WPMed}} template. To opt-out, please leave a message here or simply remove your name from the mailing list. Because this is the first issue, we are still finding out feet. Things like the layout and content may change in subsequent editions. Please let us know what you think, and if you have any ideas for the future, by leaving a message here.

Posted by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC) on behalf of WikiProject Medicine.

Hello

Hi Im so lonely and tired. :( . T-T So so cold. Nothing to do.... brrrrr *Light headed* So lonely and cold. *Sniffles* — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greatmarine3 (talk • contribs) 10:38, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Natalia Poklonskaya

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:36, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm.

"If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell." - old lawyers' nostrum, The People, Yes (1936), Carl Sandburg

Hmmm. (Reminds me of Wikipedia talkpages ... ) Pdfpdf (talk) 18:10, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I assure you, I happen to be an expert at pounding tables and yelling. --benlisquare_T•C•E 19:52, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Should I ever need the services of a table-pounding yeller, you'll be my first point-of-contact. Pdfpdf (talk) 21:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

I feel I need to acknowledge the calm way you persistently seem to preserve the status quo. I'm sorry, but to date I've yet to see any examples of your expertise in pounding tables and yelling ... Pdfpdf (talk) 13:31, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

I expect that you are not quite capable of walking on water, but until such time as you are, I wish to, once again, acknowledge the calm way you persistently seem to preserve the status quo. What can I say? "Good work" seems inadequate. Thank you, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:40, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

P.S. When you DO walk on water, please make sure that someone makes a video and posts it on YouTube. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

About foreign support in sino-japanese war

Hello, I don't want to make any edit war so I put my comment in the talk page [4] before. Now I see your comment so I also put my comment on the talk page of Talk:Second Sino-Japanese War and you can check it. Actually article Sino-Japan war in Chinese wiki [5] does not list Britain as one of major foreign support for Chinese force. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.181.173.116 (talk) 06:08, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

BMJ offering 25 free accounts to Wikipedia medical editors

Neat news: BMJ is offering 25 free, full-access accounts to their prestigious medical journal through The Wikipedia Library and Wiki Project Med Foundation (like we did with Cochrane). Please sign up this week: Wikipedia:BMJ --Cheers, Ocaasi via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

AN/I

Mind taking a look and lifting the barrage? Thanks much "My master, Annatar the Great, bids thee ^welcome!" 23:10, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

"cleanup spacing"

I'm guessing that you "cleanup spacing" using a script? (Which one?) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:09, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Nah, I just copypaste the entire page (or a specific section) into Notepad++, and then CTRL+F auto-replace all instances of "(space)(space)" with "(space)". --benlisquare_T•C•E 11:14, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

ROTFL!! (Simple and effective ... ) (Chuckle) Pdfpdf (talk) 12:25, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Information Operations?

In hindsight, it occurs to me that you have completely subverted my "campaign" to emphasise that "Taiping Island" is a "Chinese" information operations campaign to remove anything other than "Taiping Island" as the English name of the island. Don't worry: a) The world won't end. b) I'll live ;-). Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:42, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

To be fair, the entire South China Sea thing is a very messy topic, and I think it's one of the dark corners of Wikipedia (right next to the Arab-Israeli conflict and anything to do with 1990s Yugoslavia) where there will always be things happening. I've seen quite a few users who have left the project due to the way people interact when discussing territorial dispute pages, which is why I often suggest to newcomers and the majority of editors in general to tread lightly around these problematic articles. I'd rather not have people up in flames over these things, as it discourages them from adding to the project as a whole. --benlisquare_T•C•E 14:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

My general experiences on WP are consistent with your description, and I agree with your approach.

So, I have been quite surprised by how well-received my recent edits have been - I have received more positive feedback from my recent contributions to these pages than at any other time in my 7 years of editing.

Thanks for your helpful comments about background and history, and for tying up the loose-ends that I haven't noticed I've left behind me. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 17:35, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

Precious

Babel
Thank you, user of many languages, but not bs "(or understands it with considerable difficulties or does not wish to communicate in Bullshit)", for quality articles such as Anti-Korean sentiment, for concentration, for notable images, - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:17, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

That was rather unexpected, but I'm happy people think I'm being helpful. Thanks for that. --benlisquare_T•C•E 14:02, 26 June 2014 (UTC)

O ... M ... G ...

Are we Are you the only sane editor of Wikipedia?
(No! Please don't answer that.) Pdfpdf (talk) 14:27, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Source for Paracel islands dispute

Can you incorporate this into the Haiyang Shiyou and Paracel islands article? Sam Bateman is a senior fellow in the Maritime Security Program at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS) at Nanyang Technological University. He argues that while Vietnam manipulates international opinion and media, most objective observers argue that Vietnamese claims to the islands are weaker than China's.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/11/world/asia/china-vietnam-paracels/

http://www.eurasiareview.com/15052014-new-tensions-south-china-sea-whose-sovereignty-paracels-analysis/

Rajmaan (talk) 02:48, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Woody Island (South China Sea)

A) I have a few problems with a couple of your removals of some of my edits.

1) Replacing:

"This is English Wikipedia - citations that do not have an English-language translation are useless to readers of English."

with

"This is English Wikipedia - citations must have English-language translations please."

I made that change because, as you point out, it is NOT the case that "citations must have English-language translations".
Whereas: "citations that do not have an English-language translation are useless to readers of English".

2) Removal of WP:OR and - What is/are your justification for this/these removals?

B) Do you have some doubt / problem / disagreement / whatever that "citations that do not have an English-language translation are useless to readers of English".

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:24, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

@Pdfpdf:
One: It isn't standard procedure to write things such as "This is English Wikipedia - citations that do not have an English-language translation are useless to readers of English" within mainspace. If you would like to bring these concerns over to other users, you can do so perfectly fine on the talk page, right? Furthermore, citation needed tags are used for when a statement does not have a citation, they're not used if a user disagrees with the usage of a particular citation.
Two: I missed the {{dubious}} tag whilst looking through the diffs, my bad. That wasn't supposed to happen.
Three: Use the inline {{OR}} template instead; "naked" links to Wikipedia policies within mainspace articles look really out of place. --benlisquare_T•C•E 15:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

Just noticed your reply. a) Thanks. b) Past bed-time here - will respond "tomorrow". Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

@Pdfpdf: (edit conflict) Perhaps I should explain it a bit more clearly. We don't add comments such as "citations that do not have an English-language translation are useless to readers of English" within articles; if a template exists, use the template, and if it doesn't exist, then it's probably something that's not against policy or procedure on Wikipedia. Wikipedia permits non-English sources, because not everything is written and covered well enough in English; in fact, we have plenty of good articles on topics such as German footballers or Spanish governors that feature majority non-English sources, because English sources don't cover these topics well enough. If Chinese sources exist regarding the Warship Yung-Hsing's voyage to the island group in the late 1940s, however English sources on the same topic are hard to find, then it's completely acceptable to use the Chinese source to cite that statement. --benlisquare_T•C•E 15:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

The "problem" with reasonable editors making reasonable replies is that you can't ignore them, and then expect them to continue to behave reasonably ...

Before I start replying, I want to emphasise that I have no problem with your POV. Yeah, maybe I don't like some of the details, but I'd much rather stay in harmony with you than accidently, or due to bad/inadequate/ambiguous/etc communication move into some form of conflict. OK?

So, here we go ... Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

It isn't standard procedure to write things such as "This is English Wikipedia - citations that do not have an English-language translation are useless to readers of English" within mainspace. If you would like to bring these concerns over to other users, you can do so perfectly fine on the talk page, right?

Largely, but ...

Yes, perhaps this a larger issue for discussion in a bigger forum. (Why is nothing "simple"?) Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Furthermore, citation needed tags are used for when a statement does not have a citation, they're not used if a user disagrees with the usage of a particular citation.

I don't completely agree. i.e. It's not that simple. Irrelevant citations and/or citations that contain nothing relevant deserve a new , no doubt as well as other tags too. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

My point is, and I agree/admit that it is a broader point that applies more widely than to just this article, is that the target audience of English Wikipedia are those who speak/read English - hence, a reference that is not intelligible to someone who speaks/reads English is ... "not useful". Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps I should explain it a bit more clearly. - That rarely hurts!! Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

We don't add comments such as "citations that do not have an English-language translation are useless to readers of English" within articles;

Firstly, a distraction: Who are "We"? By definition, the fact that I did that suggests that I am not part of "We".

I hope you don't mean that, and I hope I'm simply confused by your choice of words. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

if a template exists, use the template, and if it doesn't exist, then it's probably something that's not against policy or procedure on Wikipedia.

Hmmmm. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia permits non-English sources, because not everything is written and covered well enough in English; in fact, we have plenty of good articles on topics such as German footballers or Spanish governors that feature majority non-English sources, because English sources don't cover these topics well enough.

Yes. But ... that's not the point/issue here. I'll get to that point later. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

If Chinese sources exist regarding the Warship Yung-Hsing's voyage to the island group in the late 1940s, however English sources on the same topic are hard to find, then it's completely acceptable to use the Chinese source to cite that statement.

Sorry, you've lost me - I don't understand what that has to do with the topic under discussion. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I seem to have fallen into being WP:POINTy - rarely useful in achieving a productive outcome. My apologies.

My point is: the target audience of English Wikipedia are those who speak/read English - hence, a reference that is not intelligible to someone who speaks/reads English is ... "not useful".

Yes, life is not that simple.

Yes, in principle what you say has merit, but in practice: a reference that is not intelligible to someone who speaks/reads English is ... "not useful".

What's a useful way forward? Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 12:55, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

@Pdfpdf: One of the Chinese-language print sources used within the article stated that ROCS Yung-hsing visited the island group in 1946. This was one example which I'm pointing out: Currently, all we have is a non-English source, and per WP:NONENG, currently it suffices. However, this does not mean that it should stay like this forever, and as soon as English language sources supporting the statement become available, it should be replaced immediately with the English source, as long as the new source meets the usual reliability requirements.

If we have something that could be trivially referenced with English sources, however for some reason the article uses a non-English one, then that reference should be replaced ASAP by a contributor who can find the time to bring a better reference. For example, currently "Woody Island is the largest of the Paracel Islands in the South China Sea" is being referenced by this Chinese-language (Sina.com) reference - however, the same statement can be better affirmed with a better, English-language source, which is why (in my opinion) that reference should be replaced ASAP. However at the same time, it isn't procedure to "tag" such references and hope that somebody else will find time to replace the citation, because from a fundamental perspective, usage of that non-English cite hasn't broken any rules, it's just undesirable since we're striving to create an encyclopedia for, surprise surprise, English readers. Hence, it is preferable if English sources are used, but in some cases, they're not available yet and so it can't be helped.

Non-English references are useless to people who don't understand those languages. However, should this come at a price of having decreased ability to write content in articles, since restricting the types of sources we can use by language ultimately restricts the information that can be written? As an example, see 2014 insurgency in Donbass - how many citations are written in Russian or Ukrainian? If we suddenly disallowed non-English sources, then 40% of the content within that article would have to go, which in my opinion would be a bit of a loss.

Let's look at a hypothetical situation with "Mr. X", an Argentine scientist. Imagine that he meets all the notability requirements, et cetera. If an important statement about Mr. X is only present in The Buenos Aires Post and other Spanish-language newspapers, we would still mention that statement, there wouldn't be a reason not to. However, if a statement is cited with a Spanish-language cite within an article, and at the same time a BBC article says the exact same thing, then it's reasonable to replace the old Spanish ref with the BBC one, as it would be more helpful to English readers.

I hope I haven't been too verbose, it's one of those things that probably can't be summed up in 20 words. --benlisquare_T•C•E 14:26, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict)(Again), Just noticed your reply. a) (Again), Thanks. b) (Again), Past bed-time here - will respond "tomorrow". Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 15:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC) Pdfpdf (talk) 14:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd also suggest: If a citation is irrelevant (e.g. a sentence says that the sky is blue, but the citation talks about the price of tea), simply remove it. If a sentence is really dubious and seems like original research, then comment it out using <!-- these things--->. If you think a citation is improperly used or is suspiciou/nontrustworthy, using {{Better source}} or {{Failed verification}} would seem like a much more logical option than {{Citation needed}}, which in such a case would be vague and confusing for other editors to understand what you mean. If a tag isn't clearly understandable by other editors, it kind of defeats the purpose of tagging. Other useful tags include {{Verify source}} and {{Verify credibility}} if a print book source is used and needs double-checking by someone with access to it, and {{Source need translation}} might be helpful if you suspect that a non-English source is being inappropriately used. That said, remember that it isn't a crime to use non-English cites, so the last tag should be used when you really doubt the usage of a source; this is probably when assuming good faith comes in. These tags aren't used often, and they generally only see usage in genuine cases of doubt, otherwise articles such as 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine would be covered in them. --benlisquare_T•C•E 14:51, 10 July 2014 (UTC)