User talk:Nlu/archive63

Block of User:Pretender2j

I see you blocked this user for 24 hours for harassment, etc. I'd personally be inclined to go with an indefinite block. He has been logging out and editing from his IP address (User:118.208.49.197), which I see you've also blocked. He's admitted that that is his IP address, and has been warned about this. Since "Logging out to make problematic edits as an IP" is sock puppetry, do you agree that and indef block of the username is in order? Not sure what to do about the IP, as it's shared, but probably a longer-term block. I thought I'd ask you before I went ahead and changed your block. Cheers! — GorillaWarfare ^talk 18:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

The thing is that based on what I see of the person's edits, while a block is justified, I don't see an indefinite block as justified. As far as admitting that it was his IP, the IP is a shared IP and not really "his." --Nlu (talk) 18:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

He's admitted the edits were his. — GorillaWarfare ^talk 18:35, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Correct, but he's had many constructive edits before. I really think that a shorter block is warranted first before indefinite block. --Nlu (talk) 18:36, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Alrighty, fair enough. — GorillaWarfare ^talk 18:36, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

• And now he's evading blocks. HalfShadow 17:16, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

  I extended the block to 72 hours. If this continues, please let me know and I'll make it indefinite. --Nlu (talk) 17:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

All of this was simply because I was TRYING to add a new userbox to my main page and WayneOlajuwon took it upon himself to police the world telling me that I wasnt allowed to do what I clearly was. Although I'm sure some of you appreciate someone who is so clearly, extremely dedicated to making sure Wikipedia is never edited by who has a less than perfect knowledge of how the site works, I can't help noticing all his obvious false positives. Perhaps toning it down a bit would be good? :) Also I'm sure you are aware that if you block a username someone could potentially just get a new one... Pretender2j (talk) 12:26, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Actually you know what, I'm not using this account anymore. I've always tried to be a good contributer and your damn elitism is pissing me off. Maybe I'll make a new account. Maybe I'll start ip editing. But you'll never know. Pretender2j (talk) 13:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Yuan Weishi

This article Yuan Weishi is more of a compilation of random statements made by Yuan Weishi on history, rather than a biographical article. it is full of NPOV language, something needs to be done about it.Дунгане (talk) 19:26, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

You mean POV language... I'll take a look at it, but assuming that it is relatively recent, there is probably little I can do about it, since my knowledge field for Chinese history is pretty much pre-Song. --Nlu (talk) 21:09, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Just took a look. Out of my field of expertise. I did add a {{cleanup}} tag to it since it clearly needs cleanup. I considered requesting deletion since the article does not clearly show his notability, but looking at the Chinese Wikipedia article it appears that he's sufficiently notable. --Nlu (talk) 21:12, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

can you proxy this edit for me

I have said on the talk page of Boxer Rebellion that I will not edit the article as long as User:Binesi does not, can you add this reference

<ref>{{cite news |title=Lost souls|author=John Gittings|newspaper=The Guardian|date=Saturday 5 August 2000|url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/aug/05/china.johngittings|accessdate=2010-11-30}}</ref>

after the sentence "Boxers regularly killed and mutilated foreigners, including women and children, but did not rape them" in Boxer_rebellion#Boxer

the reference itself, a british news article on the boxer rebellion, says that " When it lifted the siege on August 14, it proceeded to loot, kill and rape with as much ferocity as the Boxers had shown (with the difference that the Boxers looted and killed, but did not rape)."

the guardian is a reliable newspaper, and i'm not requesting to add any content, i don't think this will be controversial.Дунгане (talk) 22:33, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, I know it's largely noncontroversial, but I think I'm actually probably a little too involved. I think it might be best if you can put it as a request on the talk page and ask someone else to review it and then put it in. That way this avoids any appearance of impropriety. (And don't call it a proxy edit — that will sound improper.) --Nlu (talk) 23:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Personal attacks?

Specifically, who have I attacked, what are you talking about, and if that's my LAST WARNING, when was my first? Who are you and why are you going crazy at me? Couch on his Head and Smiling (talk) 23:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Take a look at your own contribution list. If you don't see the personal attacks, you're not looking at yourself enough. --Nlu (talk) 03:53, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Shi Zhi or Shi Kun was younger

Dear Nlu, please see [1] Barefact (talk) 05:13, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Template:Zh

as you know, templates can only be edited by admins. I have a new suggestion for Template:Zh, add another paramater, just like pinyin, for Xiao'erjing, which is arabic script used for writing chinese. it will be usefull on Hui related articles, and for names of mosques in China and other islamic related stuff like the Great Mosque of Xi'an.Дунгане (talk) 21:24, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll take a look. I'm not good at programming text for templates, so I'll see if it looks easy to add; if it is, I'll add it; if it is not, I'll let you know and what you may need to do is to make the request on the talk page and see if some other admin with better programming skills can figure it out. --Nlu (talk) 21:53, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I can't make heads or tails of the syntax. On the documentation for Template:zh-full, it was suggested that you make the request to Rjanag's talk page. That's what I'd suggest at this point. --Nlu (talk) 21:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

User:Show68730

I added a level 4 warning on his page - he's received a number of previous warnings and removed them all, but continued to vandalize. Just telling you in case you were wondering. dmz 22:51, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for paying attention on this as well. If he/she does it again, I am intending an indefinite block. --Nlu (talk) 22:51, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Biographical information policy proposal

I have proposed a change in policy at [[WT:BLP#Do we need a WP:BILP policy?]], it should explain what my motivation was. Also sent to some other people: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. <( User:Couch on his Head and Smiling (talk) )> 06:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Incredible. Topic: Chinese languages link

I added a link of a wellknown mark just because its very helpful to every chinese student. You just erased that one and another one that another person wrote there. Spam? Do you know what does spam mean? This kind of attitude of yours is called trolling, you guys should be banned as you do not contribute in these wiki places as you only intend to publish the info you like in an arbitrary way that doesn't express the users willing. I personally learnt chinese with them as many students I know, just because it was good, completly free and part of the Education Minister in Beijing. Is that spam? You all should be well tested before giving you such powers. Regards --84.78.42.119 (talk) 20:12, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

It is still promotional and inappropriate. --Nlu (talk) 20:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

It isn't promotional, its useful. I'm not an enterprise, IM A STUDENT... If its useful for me and my mates, it is going to be useful for other students. I don't understand your position. --84.78.42.119 (talk) 20:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I know it's your view. I disagree with it. If you disagree with me, you can always ask other administrators' opinion on WP:AN. --Nlu (talk) 20:23, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

WP:EL :- Outside of citations, external links to English-language content are strongly preferred in the English-language Wikipedia. --GraemeL ^(talk) 20:27, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok that's a reason I can understand. Thank you, I appreciate this explanation --84.78.42.119 (talk) 00:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Needs attention

Hello, I've come to you for help because your one of the administrators in this site. Ip User User talk:24.99.32.112 have be constantly vandalizing the Han Chinese clothing article (ie, [2]). Can you do something? He/She keeps on even after i sent the last warning to him. --LLTimes (talk) 02:22, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Blocked for 24 hours. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. --Nlu (talk) 02:24, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

How to translate Gongbu Langzhong into English?

This problem occurs when I am describing a son of Yuan Qianyao. Thanks.Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern (talk) 14:24, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I have myself left it deliberately vague when translating titles like this; I would have used "Gongbu Langzhong (工部郎中), a supervisory official at the ministry of public works (工部, Gongbu)." If a more precise translation is necessary, since Gongbu Langzhong, according to the New Book of Tang, would be in charge of constructions of walls, cities, ponds, &c., I'd say "supervisory official of construction," but which I think is overly specific (since Tang officials didn't always have the responsibilities that they formally should have). --Nlu (talk) 16:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, I see.Heinrich ⅩⅦ von Bayern (talk) 16:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Separating vehicles by generation rather than powertrain or trim level

Hi, I am just dropping a note to inform you of a discussion currently taking place here (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#Mass article merger). In summary, WikiProject Automobiles is soliciting opinions based on the separation of automobile articles by generation, as opposed to other means such as powertrain or trim level. For example, rather than having an article on the Audi S3, the Audi A3 article would be split into two sub-articles (one for each generation), and the S3 content would be moved to the appropriate location. This would place automobiles with common engineering in the same place, as opposed to grouping by a mere marketing term. Since separate articles are always provided to detail the powertrain (engine and transmission, et cetera), the partitioning of articles based on this principle is superfluous (the powertrain is only briefly discussed in the article about the car). The reason for giving the actual powertrain a separate article is to cut down on overlap: engines and transmissions are almost universally used in more than one model.

This message will be/has been posted on the talk page of all editors who contributed to the previous discussion at Talk:Toyota Camry Hybrid. Regards, OSX (talk • contributions) 23:43, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

weasel wording

at the boxer rebellion article, several nianhua pictures, which i added, depict events, some of which did not happen, and others which did happen but were not portrated accurately due to the author not being at the location, after complaints that the nianhua did not represent reality, i added words like "alleged", and "by anonymous artist who did not see the event". Now, someone has remove the words. The captions still do say that the nianhua "depict", the event, and don't say that they are the truth, but i'm afraid that we will get bombarded with complaints again, do you think the word "depict" is enough? (and if you don't can you rv the user because i agreed not to touch the article.)Дунгане (talk) 03:02, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I think that if pictures did not depict the events, they don't really add much to the article anyway. --Nlu (talk) 04:11, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Re: User:NCBrunswick

I softblocked the account because the username was the same as the website he was pushing. I'm sure somebody will spot and warn him if he comes back adding more links. --GraemeL ^(talk) 16:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks. --Nlu (talk) 16:22, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Celibacy

Dear Nlu,

I spent about an hour of my personal time to rewrite the intro of Celibacy. In comments, I have specifically stated that articles must be written in an encyclopedic manner, i.e. "Celibacy means having no partner" is very lame. Moreover, definitions were wrong. Yes, I also removed a source request there, which was not needed anymore anyway since I rewrote it.

You reverted my edit, came write about vandalism on my page, moreover, jumped to the last warning right off. I demand explanation within the next 24 hours, or I will a) revert YOUR edits and b) complain about your behavior to an administrator.

Thank you, 184.163.123.4 (talk) 16:43, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Read WP:NPOV. Your "definition" of celibacy is not in accordance with neutral view of what the term means. If you continue to do what you've been doing, expect to be blocked. --Nlu (talk) 19:40, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Mmbabies socks

Hi Nlu, I see that you have been introduced to Mmbabies. His whole sordid story is at WP:LTA/MMB (including his list of socks) and WP:Abuse reports/AT&T (Mmbabies). Despite being community-banned nearly four years ago, he continues to come back and vandalize WP with impunity, since he uses his constantly rotating DSL IP addresses to vandalize. I want to propose that a rangeblock be enacted. 68.88.0.0/14 would cover 95% of his IPs but would also cover the vast majority of Houston's AT&T DSL customers. I'd like to get a sysop's opinion. -- Gridlock Joe (talk) 01:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

In light of the huge amount of collateral damage, my own opinion is no; we just whack him whenever he resurfaces. --Nlu (talk) 01:04, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I understand the reluctance to inflict such a large amount of collateral damage. But keep in mind that he's been at this for four years. He ain't gonna stop unless we being down the big guns. -- Gridlock Joe (talk) 01:06, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

In a way, I'd rather keep him where we can keep an eye on him. Blocking almost the entire Houston area of AT&T IPs is likely to permanently cause him to migrate to another rotating IP service provider rather than to stop him entirely. But that's just one person's opinion. --Nlu (talk) 01:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Reply

I've removed more of the user's edits from the past week, but there's other articles that he or she has edited in the past month that I don't have much knowledge about. I can only assume and hope that any other unconstructive edits the user has contributed have been noticed in the time since.-5- (talk) 05:09, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks. --Nlu (talk) 05:13, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

request semi protection for ming dynasty and yunnan

This user User:Yongle the Great and his sockpuppets- Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yongle the Great/Archive, have some fascinating obsession with deleting massive amounts of referenced information i add to ming dynasty related articles.

[3] [[4] [5] [6] [7][8] [9] [10] [11][12]

he gives absolutely no explanation for his removals, and all of his scoks are blocked every time. since hes been going at it for a while, and at times his deletions have gone unnoticed, i request you semi protect ming dynasty and yunnan articles.Дунгане (talk) 18:58, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Done. (Semi-protected for one week.) --Nlu (talk) 21:35, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

Happy Holidays!

Dear Nlu, Best wishes to you and your family this holiday season, whether you are celebrating Christmas or a different holiday. It's a special time of the year for almost everyone, and there's always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! ;) Love, --Meaghan [talk] ≈ 15:32, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Same to you and yours. --Nlu (talk) 15:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Check this out

[13] NHRHS2010 |  Happy Holidays!  16:36, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! --Nlu (talk) 16:38, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Also, thank you for semi-protecting my page! I have no idea what is going on, but the group of IP addresses that vandalized my page all of a sudden is the same person. Like I said before, this all started on YouTube when he started harassing me and after I blocked him, he used his sockpuppet (also blocked) and then onto Wikipedia. NHRHS2010 |  Happy Holidays!  16:46, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I blocked each of the IPs for three hours to hopefully stop it for now. Let's see if he/she/it comes back later. --Nlu (talk) 16:50, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

I saw that. And regarding the semi-protection, I would like a 24 hour semi-protection while my talk page be semi-protected for one hour, if that's okay. I also listed additional IP addresses on WP:AIV that were being used for harassing me and yet to be temporarily blocked. Thank you again for all your help! NHRHS2010 |  Happy Holidays!  16:57, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for getting back to me. --Nlu (talk) 16:59, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

All about New Taipei City and Eric Chu

As news sources: "New Taipei" is the English name of 新北 since December 2010, not may be, The Mayor Eric Chu said just is New Taipei, the currect name is New Taipei! I don't have idea even if I was be blocked. But I must say the truth. Repeat: Please writing the mail ask for the Mayor of New Taipei City -- Eric Chu, Is he the Mayor of New Taipei, or Xinbei? The E-Mail of Mayor Chu Address: 台灣新北市板橋區中山路1段161號 / 161 Zhongshan Street, Banqiao District, New Taipei City, Taiwan To:朱立倫 / Eric Chu --75.65.40.180 (75.65.40.180) 02:00, December 26, 2010 (UTC)

As the news sources themselves said, that's what he wants, not what the central government approved, and the issue is still up in the air. "New Taipei City" may be adopted, but has not been yet, officially. Please stop. This refusal to see the facts will be considered vandalism if continued. --Nlu (talk) 00:03, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I was talking to the IP too on a few pages and I think he just did not understand that until we know for sure what the central government has decided, Xinbei has to be the city name. I sent an email to both Xinbei City and also to the ROC Ministry of the Interior to see what is going on. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:43, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for being engaged. But I think we already know what their current positions are. The question is what eventually will be their positions. --Nlu (talk) 13:56, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

And whose decision will defeat all others because of legislation or any other decree. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:45, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy Holidays!

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!!

Also, thank you for continuing to revert vandalism on my userpage. Hopefully the vandal has a New Year Resolution for 2011, which is to stop the IP hopping and vandalizing userpages! NHRHS2010 |  Happy Holidays!  03:11, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. You too! --Nlu (talk) 03:38, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Drtonyriviera

There is a discussion at User_talk:Martijn_Hoekstra#Drtonyriviera to change a 48 hour block to indefinite. Could you drop in an add your thoughts or if you concur, make the change? Jeepday (talk) 11:48, 27 December 2010 (UTC)