User talk:Nlu/archive38

History of Northeast China compromise?

Apparently, someone has made the claim that their has been a compromise to change the "History of Manchuria" template to "History of Northeast China." I am not aware of such compromise. Could you please fill me in if such a thing happened? WangKon936 22:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I am aware of no such compromise. There has been discussion at Template talk:History of Manchuria, but I see no compromise and no consensus. --Nlu (talk) 00:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Dear Nlu, Thank you for blocking that template. My English is not very fluent i am not able to face Assault11 and his POV. I tried to keep a good faith, but Assault11 remain arrogant and provocant. I dont know what to do against his statements although i'm convinced that his POV is greatly biased and close to adopt a Chinese chauvinist POV. Whlee 07:51, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Cydevil38 has written interesting things on my talk page :

I think renaming it to "Northeast China" is too contentious and in the end not going to work. To address the points you have made, which I believe are valid, how about reverting the name to "History of Manchuria", and providing sub-defintions of "present day Northeast China" and "present day Primosrky Krai", and any other modern political/geographical entities that historic Manchuria are divided into? Cydevil38 00:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

have a look at those templates : we are trying to find an outcome :

-Template:History of Northeast China

-Template:History of Russian Manchuria

RegardsWhlee 09:54, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

:::The History of Manchuria template has been only inserted as a compromise to put an end to a revert war, which I believe was at the cost of the integrity of the article. An independent historiography of Manchuria is a minority view. And going further to divide this into two other non-historic entities, I believe, is only worse. In other words, treating Northeast China and Russian Manchuria as historic entities is even more controversial than treating Manchuria as a historic entity. Additionally, using a "Northeast China" history template would be to some extent adopting China's Northeast Project. Cydevil38 23:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC) :::Anyways, I'll partially revert your changes, while addressing some of your valid points. Cydevil38 00:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The History of Manchuria was offered in place for insistance of some CPOV editors that a History of China should be placed on a kingdom that is considered by most NPOV sources to be non-Chinese. Having some historiography of Northeast China would be doing serious disservice to the integrity of Wikipedia, as it's a very modern political entity, not a historic or geographic entity. It would be like having a history template of "South Korea" or "Siberia". The majority consensus was on a History of Manchuria, not Northeast China.[1] Cydevil38 00:34, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, I think Cydevil38 is just, in his own way, almost as bad as Assault11 (although Cydevil's being getting a little better recently). These two editors are, unfortunately, a bad combination for each other. They insist on fighting with each other and ignoring WP:NPOV principles. I am frustrated with both of them. --Nlu (talk) 07:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Dear Nlu, you may be right in that point and i can understand your frustration... but i've just read o one talk page an interesting comment of H27kim (Balhae talk page) :

One question to all involved: why do so many feel that identities of a people (or, more likely, several different peoples) well over a millenia ago have to be defined as belonging to those of today? Neither Koreans nor Chinese of the time are as they are today, in language, culture, or otherwise. Descendants of Balhae wound up as subjects of states run by Koreans, Khitans, Jurchens, Mongols, Chinese, and Russians at different times--as their countries ruled, at different times, the territory that was once held by Balhae--either that or they died out. I'm perplexed that so many feel that they have to belong to some present-day nationality. Charlemagne's (or is it Karl der Grosse?) capital was Aachen. Do the French claim as Aachen as their own on this basis? Karl der Grosse ruled over what is now France--do Germans claim France as "historically" theirs on this account? The past belongs to history. People should just let it be. Just my two cents. H27kim 04:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

That was also my policy but i was not able to formulate correctly in English at this time. Whlee 12:24, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

in general, I agree with H27kim. The thing is that I don't think Balhae can be said to be Korean or Chinese, per se, in any case, but it is clearly a part of both Korean and Chinese histories -- and the role it had in those histories should be looked at neutrally and historically, not possessively, as both of those editors are doing. --Nlu (talk) 15:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes you are right, in addition to that i made researches about the etymology of Dae Jung Sang or Qiqi Zhongxiang see talk page and as you can see there is no more revert edit war on that article i would like to be able to renew that things finding a compromise in the other Sino-Korean disputes articles but it will not be an easy task. According to me (but perhaps i'm wrong because i've found that Mohe language has probably no relationship with Jurchen language from a Russian source), Balhae(Bohai)/Malgal(Mohe) is a Tungusic Kingdom neither Korean nor Chinese.Whlee 07:46, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Unblock request by User:Gabeyg

Gabeyg (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), who you blocked with the summary Abusing multiple accounts has requested unblocking. I don't see any evidence of these multiple accounts and it looks like it could all be confusion over a messed up attempt to change their username to "AirFrance358". Could you please look over the situation and explain exactly why they were blocked so I or someone else have something to go on in handling their unblock request. Thanks. —dgies^t_c 22:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I looked at the situation. It's not a simple failed attempt to change user name. Take a look at the edit history of the (now deleted) User:AirFrance358 and User talk:AirFrance358. I am fairly convinced that it was an attempt to confuse to hold off WP:NPA and vandalism blocks. I do not recommend an unblock, although I understand if you'd decide otherwise. --Nlu (talk) 00:19, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

• I posted a thread at ANI for more input: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Gabeyg_sock_clade —dgies^t_c 01:15, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Your proposed solution appears to be reasonable. --Nlu (talk) 01:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

On Komdori

Komori made some allegations that removing warnings from one's own talk page is considered vandalism. This user has previously made a spurious attempt to get me blocked for 3RR violation[2], so I had my reasons to doubt the veracity of his "warnings". Can you please confirm whether or not there are such rules that prohibit removal of warnings from one's own talk pages? Thanks. Cydevil38 01:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

This is debatable even among the administrators. Some administrators believe that there is, and some administrators believe there isn't; WP:VAND's language is somewhat ambiguous on this. I don't consider it vandalism per se unless it is clearly intended to create an impression that the person has not been warned. --Nlu (talk) 01:01, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Oh, and thank you for your intervention on the template. I really appreciate it. Cydevil38 01:05, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 01:06, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Protection guideline breached

In the recent protection of History of Manchuria template you might have breached the protection guideline under "Content dispute".

1. "Except in cases of clear vandalism, or issues with legal impact such as copyright or defamation, pages protected in an edit war are protected in whatever version they happen to be currently in." You edited the template to a new version and immediately executed protection instead of protection in the current version.

2. "During edit wars, admins should not protect pages when they are involved as a party to the dispute, except in the case of simple vandalism or libel issues against living people."Wiki pokemon 22:17, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so. I am not a clear proponent of one version, just of unilateral changes. Admins are allowed to revert to the wrong version if they believe that one side of the edit war is more at fault than the other. --Nlu (talk) 22:27, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I must say your answer is not exactly satisfactory. Except for the very useful information the wrong version. Playing multiple roles on the page, its reasonable to raise the question of conflict of interest here, especially your last edit. Of course like they say in the wrong version, admin can't be wrong.Wiki pokemon 18:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Gabeyg / AirFrance358

Gabeyg / AirFrance358 is blanking sock tags for a second time after I warned them not to. Looks like a longer block maybe... —dgies^t_c 03:35, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. --Nlu (talk) 03:37, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Stridepack

This guy and his buddies have been vandalizing boy bands for the last hour or so. I'm trying to identify and request blocks on all...—Gaff ^ταλκ 07:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm trying to sort through this mess as well. --Nlu (talk) 07:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Userpage vandalism

Thanks for reverting!Inter16 08:41, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you. --Nlu (talk) 08:42, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Taoh Ren

Hello, I was wondering if you knew anything about this given your interests. Seems like a character in Dynasty Warriors given other pages but all I can find is user names on forums. Cheers Dmanning 08:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I am not aware of such a person, and "Taoh Ren" would not fit Pinyin romanization for any Chinese characters. I highly doubt that it is from Dynasty Warriors, since DW uses Pinyin. --Nlu (talk) 08:47, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Ok, just Taoh Ren is very lengthy for a vanity page and Dynasty Warriors - Taoh Ren seems to connect it with that game series. I'll add some prods tomorrow then. Cheers Dmanning 08:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Chickitychina`1`1

Thanks, much appreciated. --YFB ¿ 08:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Thank you. --Nlu (talk) 08:56, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Protection on Goguryeo

I think it'd be a good idea to put a semi-protection on Goguryeo to prevent new editors from editing it. Cydevil38 21:57, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps. I'll review the situation tonight. --Nlu (talk) 01:30, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I looked at it. I don't think it's warranted yet, particularly some of the edits are at least arguably productive edits. --Nlu (talk) 04:57, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

209.11.242.250

Has vandalized List of characters in Ed, Edd n Eddy yet again. -- Elaich 13:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think level of vandalism warrants any action yet other than a simple warning. I don't believe that this vandal is related to the others. --Nlu (talk) 15:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Never mind. The vandalism was more recent than I thought. I blocked him/her for 48 hours. --Nlu (talk) 15:27, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Ashina

Hellow, are you there. The article needs a comprehensible English for a removed phrase under the origin section of Ashina, is a short simple sentence. I thought that maybe you could help me (and all of us) out as one user actually requested for this. Eiorgiomugini 07:45, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you clarify what you want me to do, exactly? I'd be happy to help, but I'm not sure what you want. --Nlu (talk) 07:47, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

My source listed pointed out about the stories origins of the Ashina clan, however, the author himself actually pieced them together for a narrative of early Ashina's history (from 7th century BCE to 5th century CE) from one point to another (depend on which source, but none of these events had a date for it), now he also listed some objections by others, and the constitute of those stories could be listed in one way or another by timeline. Eiorgiomugini 07:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

The current list seems just fine to me, since it more or less acknowledges that no version of the events is necessarily more predominant than the other and might be related to others. As I am not actually familiar with the mythical origins of the Ashina myself all that much (I am really only more familiar with the time when they started resisting the Rouran), I am not sure that I can in fact improve on it. --Nlu (talk) 07:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I will explain clearly, the story that listed by him goes like this: 7th century BCE- 3rd century BCE (from Youyang), 2nd century BCE-2nd century CE (from Zhoushu), 4th century (from Suishu), and 4th century-5th century CE (from another account of Zhoushu). And the objections he provided from others listed the other way round depend on different stories. But it should be noted that those stories do not have a date for the events. So do you think that current status is good enough?Eiorgiomugini 07:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, any chronological assignments for the accounts may not be correct, as while the books' subject areas had that chronological order, the Youyang, Book of Zhou, and Book of Sui accounts are actually written roughly simultaneously. (The New Book of Tang was written several centuries later, of course.) I don't see a problem with the current version. I think, given the lack of information we have, a generalized section is preferable than a specific one, unless specific sources can be cited for each of the competing interpretations. When I myself note different events, I try to give citations to those different versions if citations are available. If citations are not available, leaving the section as it stands is OK. --Nlu (talk) 08:05, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

O.K, very much thanks, but you might like to make some edit over the article if the disputed goes on. Eiorgiomugini 08:07, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. --Nlu (talk) 08:09, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

thanks.

revert enough vandals and eventually you will piss one off, eh? —Gaff ^ταλκ 08:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

One?  :-) --Nlu (talk) 08:23, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

up all night? :)

• 

JuJube has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

JuJube 08:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I should be going to sleep... --Nlu (talk) 08:51, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

ULL

He's baaaack.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ULL&oldid=131225479

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:ULL&oldid=131225891.

It's the same guy as before, the reason you made ULL semi-protected.--Viridis^{talk|contributions} 15:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I blocked that account indefinitely. Meanwhile, I also unprotected the page. Thanks for letting me know. --Nlu (talk) 15:24, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for swiftly resolving this matter.--Viridis^{talk|contributions} 18:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Unblock Request on behalf of Leonitis (207.195.79.254)

Recently you have soft blocked Leonitis for a period of 30 days. 207.195.79.254 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is a shared IP that is already blocked. I am okay with the previous IP block, but please unblock Leonitis (and any other users of IP 207.195.79.254 who have signed in and have been contributing responsibly). There are currently 13 users of IP 207.195.79.254 who have signed in and are working with me on a project to contribute to Wikipedia.

Delzen 17:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

The block is already a soft block, so anyone properly logged in should be able to edit. If they are blocked for other reasons, my block won't affect them. --Nlu (talk) 17:29, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank for your time. It is now working.

--Leonitis 17:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Nlu, can you tell me how to get an RSS feed of 207.195.79.254 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) talk page? --Delzen 20:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)(talk)

I actually don't know how to do it. Sorry. --Nlu (talk) 04:51, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[3] would let you watch for warnings and other changes to the talk page. It doesn't appear to be possible to watch for contributions using RSS, but read WP:RSS for more information. Will post to Delzen as well. Tswsl1989 18:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 22:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

problems with another editor who doesn't seem to know how to compromise

User:Jiejunkong is giving a hard time to everybody. He has repeatedly wrote POV statements in Goguryeo and is re-adding a section that is already covered in the Goguryeo controversies article. He is also using biased sources.

And for some reason, he wishes to delete Goguryeo-China wars claiming that Goguryeo's main enemy was Silla.

I am requesting help that something be done with this user. I don't think he is informed about several Wikipedia rules and I don't want another edit war related to Goguryeo start again. thanks for the help, Good friend100 01:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I suggest that you point him to WP:NPOV. If he still won't relent, I suggest going to WP:RFC. I'm kind of busy right now to look at the situation fully. --Nlu (talk) 04:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Dear Nlu, my biggest problem in that pleasant place is User:Assault11/User:208.106.25.153 (his IP maybe), this user  :
- is delaying the progress of Wikipedia Instead of contributing significantly he prefer to be engaged in revert edit war (seeSpecial:Contributions/Assault11) refusing to find a compromise see recently revert edit war with me recently - Russian Manchuria (History of template
- is a pure and stubborn Chinese populist, a fierce supporter of Sinocentrism and Chinese Northeastern project See that page or [4], [5], [6], [7], see part 5, anti-Korean sentiment, [8], [9] ) assimilating Goguryeo as Chinese based on his minds without reading articles about Goguryeo language and consulting soucrces like the Hou Han Shu
- a bad-tempered and provacant user since his first contribution on Wikipedia.
- has a biased POV :i can demonstrate that he can be wrong about Manchuria :this is what he said and this is what i found Manchuria exist much earlier than Manchukuo

If Manchu are Chinese then why Manchu script had been created? why Manchurist or philogist are they wasting time, why Manchu language primary school has been established recently at Sanjianzi?

If Chinese is not an ethnicity, Then why we way Wo xuexi/shuo "Zhongwen" = Wo xue/shuo "Hanyu"

- is disobedient : you warned him previously but he still continue [10]

- is Lacking respect [11] China proper is not a idoiotic term], a Chinese PhD. sometimes use that term on her report, in addition to that refusing to adhere to Western policy show us his POV.

- is an untrustworthy user :[12] he said he would leave that from now but he failed his engagement twice see below :

Whlee, I have no idea what you're talking about. Please explain more clearly so I know what you're trying to get across. Also, Manchus are Chinese. If you want to create a History of the Russian Far East or History of Siberia template, then by all means, feel free to do so. But whatever the case is, I will certainly not accept anything that would compromise Dongbei.

- is out of context (i was talking about the Northern expidition involving a Manchu-Korean joint army against the Russians which occurs in 1650's which occured during the Ming-Qing transition (last Ming emperor 1644-1683 Koxinga last bastion) he talking about another expedition 1685-1687) : he is diverging, and ignoring King Hyojong Northern Expedition cause of lacking knowlede on it.

- I made research on Russian sources he is vandalizing [13]: Such excuse/behavior are not valid

However i agree with Some of his statement against funny non-reasonable KPOV statement:like considering Wanyan as a descendant of Silla or claiming North Korean as descendant of Koguryo

This user is creating his own (pseudo-history) attempting to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia. (definition of vandalism)

I have repsect on Chinese user like You or Wikipokemon ([14]) who are trying to find an issue but i have very frustrated on Assalut11.

I will ask you a favor can you :semi-portect the template history of Russian Manchuria because he is delayin that project Template_talk:History_of_Russian_Manchuria provocating and flouting me without contributing seriously. meanwhile the lap-time of blocking this editor temporarily i will try to build that template safely with Chinese Wikipedian (like Wiki pokemon) and Russian Wikipedian. RegardsWhlee 18:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Block Request for 165.166.57.126

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maize_%28corn%29&diff=prev&oldid=131598384 - MSTCrow 18:56, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

It's a shared IP, and there was only one instance of vandalism today. I don't think block is warranted. --Nlu (talk) 22:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Recent award

I certainly appreciate the thought, thanks! MadMax 05:29, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

No problem. --Nlu (talk) 05:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)