Talk:Missile issues in East Asia

This article which you have created appears to be an opinion discussion rather than a factual encyclopedia article.

It does not cite any missile proliferation or geopolitical sources (see our policy on reliable sources). It appears to be a synthesis document and opinion piece, which Wikipedia is not here for (see our policies WP:NOT and WP:OR and WP:SYN).

We simply are not here to host this type of opinion article.

I am going to re-redirect the article again, as other administrators have done twice already. Please do not change the redirect again without discussing here. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 18:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC) -- Hi
 * Regarding the Article pls understand I wrote Japan H2 Rocket and Taiwan tactical missile development for respecting NPOV.
 * There are a lot of Page about List of Militaly asset
 * For EX List of countries by military expenditures List of countries by size of armed forces
 * I'll change the title "List of East Asia countries by size of Theater Missile force " and I'will deleate "Issue/Probrem" from the article
 * Please complomise on this proposal.
 * Wikipedia is NOT the Advertisement Board for Right people or Left people. Right people should not breach the incovenient article for EX "Green House effect probrem", Left people should not breach the article about Global/Aerial security. If the article try to keep NPOV ,and with reliable Citation like Goverment organization(Pentagon) Report. --Jack332 (talk) 23:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

-
 * Jack, I'm not sure you understood my point...
 * This is not a right wing or left wing issue. I'm very aware of the issues of missile proliferation and threats and defenses.
 * What you're writing, as a topic, is not an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia is here to be an encyclopedia.
 * What you're writing is an opinion piece. Those are fine - as blog entries, articles in nonproliferation or geopolitical or politics magazines, etc.  Those are the right places for them to go.
 * But it's not an encyclopedia article.
 * Wikipedia isn't here for people to publish opinions or to publish original research or synthesis. That's what your article topic is.  So it doesn't belong here.
 * I think it would be fine for you to write it up and publish it elsewhere - I don't disagree that you're talking about an important point. But Wikipedia is not the magazine Nonproliferation Review, or Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, etc.  We're an encyclopedia.
 * Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 23:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

- Hi I've got your point Basically I wrote the article based on "Internarional Crisis Group's" this Report "The Asian Balance of Weapons of Mass Desruction" That is ICG's opinion, and also wide spred people's concern -Jack332 (talk) 18:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * And I'm sorry that I add on INF part in the Article
 * But I think there are some mis-understanding between us
 * So basically the article is NOT my private opinion
 * And if someone Write the article about Grobal warming,based on the Stern Review it is not against Wikipedia's Rule.
 * "If your truth is NOT original reserch, then it should be easy to find Famous person's/Organization's report/article about it"
 * So,My second proposal is" I delite INF part and rewrite the article's Main Part based on ICG report"
 * I hope you kindly accept my second proposal

--
 * Jack - again... It's an opinion piece. Wikipedia is not the place for opinion articles.  We're an encyclopedia.  Encyclopedias don't contain opinion articles.
 * Please understand that this is not what Wikipedia is for and respect what our goals and purpose are.
 * Thank you. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 19:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi　Pal
 * I think any　Organization's Report contain some opinion
 * If somebody breach the article Globalwarming or Stern Report and say "This is opinion article so I delite it" then pls imagine how do you feel


 * Wikipedia prohibit "Original reserch" but I based on Pentagon report and ICG report.
 * Again the new article will NOT be my private opinion,it is ICG's opinion and Pentagon's Data.


 * At least I write CRS' Chinese Analyst's report(Which concern Japanese Rocket and Taiwan's Tactical Missile Development) for NPOV I love democracy and Pluralism, so I respect defferent opinion


 * Please make clear the difference between "Grobalwarming Article based on IPCC/Stern review" and "The Asian Balance of Weapons of Mass Desruction Article based on ICG/Pentagon report"
 * And please make clear which wikipedia rule are you based on."Original Reserch?""NPOV?"which one?

--Jack332 (talk) 19:58, 24 April 2009 (UTC) --- Hi Pal --Jack332 (talk) 00:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Obcourse I also want to save time, so your compromise proposal will be wellcomed
 * I understand you looks busy, but every court fix judgement/arbitration within certain period.
 * Would you mind give me reply until the end of this month?
 * If no reply until the end of this month I recignize you agreed to revert this article
 * Sorry busy moment thank you!