User talk:CA148

A warning about your recent editing behaviour
Hello, CA148. I am sorry to inform you, but your recent editing activities have been disruptive and unconstructive. It is advised that you refrain from editing articles which are related to separatism in China, such as Bashu nationalism, List of active separatist movements in Asia, Cantonese nationalism, Kapok Flag and the likes. Your edits have included the following:

•	Removal of references due to them not following Wikipedia policy: These include Flags of the World and the book Diantnam - the Mainstay of Southeast Asia. Flags of the World is an online encyclopedia of flags, which uses twitter as one of its many sources and states, for sake of guaranteeing nobody holds them accountable, that they cannot guarantee that their flags will be accurate. The policy of reliable sources is a Wikipedia policy. It does not extend to the references which used on Wikipedia. Sources may get some of their information from certain places which may not be suitable to cite on Wikipedia, and may also contain original research as well. That does NOT mean they are unsuitable for Wikipedia. Flags of the World for example, used both a twitter post by the Basuria independence movement and by Channel News. That twitter post by Channel News has the exact same picture as the article, so FOTW might as well have cited the article. It is not unreliable, and can be used alongside, other, surely-reliable sources. There is nothing in Wikipedia policy against that. For the second source removed, Diantnam - the Mainstay of Southeast Asia, the reason given was 1, not a reliable source no citations, no peer review, not cited by anyone. 2, does not mention "Diantnam separatism". That is plainly ridiculous. A Wikipedia reference does not need a peer review or need to be cited by any one. Nor does it need to have any citations, as no original research is a Wikipedia policy. Also, Diantnam is the nation state proposed by Dian nationalists, although I do not blame you for not knowing that, you should not have removed the reference.

•	Removal of references due to alleged unreliability: I noticed that you removed China Daily from an article claiming it was unreliable. Your claim was false, and it was wrong of you to remove that reference. Wikipedia’s guide on perennial sources clearly states that China Daily is unclear or marginally reliable. It is NOT unreliable. The guide clearly says “There is consensus that China Daily may be used, cautiously and with good editorial judgment, as a source for the position of the Chinese authorities and the Chinese Communist Party; as a source for the position of China Daily itself; as a source for facts about non-political events in mainland China”. The ages of ancient civilizations has got nothing to do with the CCP, the political party that owns China daily, so there is no need to exercise any caution when using it in this context, due it being apolitical. Removing sources because you think they are unreliable with only your own opinion as proof is not acceptable.

•	Claiming policy violations when in fact there are none: On the Wikipedia page Bashu nationalism, you claimed the inclusion of ancient civilizations in the article was a violation of WP:Notability. That policy is for whether or not a topic should have its own article. Then you said that same content violated WP:Weight, which is a policy against the inclusion of the views of tiny minorities into articles. That policy has got nothing to do with what is notable enough to be included into articles! It is not nice to accuse of policy violations when are there are none.

•	Extraneous requests for citations: On the Wikipedia page List of Chinese flags, you added a tag to ALMOST EVERY listing in the Flags of Political Organisations and Separatist Movements section. That was not appropriate. If you can add those tags to THOSE flags, somebody else might decide to add a tag to every flag without citations in the entire article! Trust me, there are a LOT of un-referenced flags in that article. We can ask for citations on the talk page, do not do such a thing in the future. Also, and IP called 64.187.180.126, whom you revealed was you, added citation needed tags to request for citations proving what Bashu nationalism and what the Basuria independence movement is. The page says exactly what is meant by Bashu, and what is meant by Basuria, and is filled with independence movement and nationalism related to the two, we do not need citations to explain to people what independence movements and nationalism is.

•	Not understanding the purpose of Wikipedia: On Wikipedia, our purpose is to inform our readers about a large variety of topics. We are not here to argue about the verifiability of sources which are used alongside, other, surely-reliable sources over and over again- that is pointless. We are also not here to ask for citations for things that do not need them, nor are we here to make disruptive edits.

To summarize, I do not know if all of actions were unintentional or intentional, but I am assuming good faith and I apologize if you feel offended and for any mistakes I may have made towards you, but you have got to understand that you are making my life harder than it should be, and that I do not have time to argue with you, not to mention you are not benefiting Wikipedia in any way whatsoever by performing the aforementioned actions. Please allow me and yourself to spend our time doing something more productive, whether that is on Wikipedia or not on Wikipedia. Thank you.
 * All reference links on the FOTW page come from Twitter. Diantnam - The Mainstay of Southeast Asia does not mention Diantnam as a separatist movement. The China Daily article does not mention Basuria. The history section of Basuria says that X civilizations were Basurian without sources. CA148 (talk) 11:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


 * I apologise if you took what I wrote the wrong way, and I ask to to forgive me if you felt offended or thought you were a victim of WP:BITE- neither of those were my intention. Please understand that you and I have got ourselves into an edit proxy-conflict, which I think should now stop. Diantnam - The Mainstay of Southeast Asia does not mention Diantnam as a separatist movement- you are absolutely right about that, but the term "Diantnam" is only used by Yunnanese nationalists, as mentioned here. If that does not satisfy you, look on the internet or anywhere else. You will not see Diantnam being used in any other context other than the as the nation state of Yunnanese people. I have already stated in the talk page of Bashu nationalism that I misunderstood what you were saying- my bad. When it comes to Flags of the World, I also explained why that should be kept once more on the talk page, but if you are still not OK with its inclusion in the article, I can only suggest we seek WP:DR, by putting both our arguments on the WP:DRN, and see what a neutral, third party mediator has to say. I am willing to compromise on the inclusion of FOTW, but only after dispute resolution via mediation. Crab2814 (talk) 15:40, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Medium is not a WP:RS.
 * CA148 (talk) 17:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Who said I was going to use Medium as a Wikipedia ciatition? I was trying to prove my point to you- Diantnam is a term used only by Yunnanese nationalists for their proposed state. Unless you can prove otherwise, the book can be cited as a reference. Crab2814 (talk) 13:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * It is not sourced CA148 (talk) 23:57, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned to you in the warning, WP:NOR is a Wikipedia policy, and does not extend to its citations. Diantnam - The Mainstay of Southeast Asia is a primary source. WP:PRIMARY states that a primary source is an original material close to an event, or in this case, a separatist movement, and are often written by people who are directly involved. Primary sources have no citations, and consist entirely of original research by some individual or individuals. As per WP:PRIMARY, usage of such a source requires it to be reliable, published, used only for statements of fact, and not subject to any interpretation. Here, I only used the book to prove that a separatist movement exists, and it is hard to argue that the book is unreliable or unpublished. Also, almost anybody can verify that Diantnam is the proposed nation of Yunnanese nationalists, so there is nothing in Wikipedia's policy to say that it is not usable. In future, please do not assume that Wikipedia policy extends to is sources- you must prove it does. Crab2814 (talk) 11:20, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The claim that Diantnam is a proposed nation of Yunannese nationalists is not sourced and the claim that it is a movement is not sourced CA148 (talk) 23:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Would this image suffice? Or how about this? Look at the turquoise blob near Tibet- that is clearly labelled "Diantnam". Also, there is this which mentions Diantnam has an independence organization. As I mentioned to you earlier, Diantnam is a term used by Yunnanese nationalists for their proposed state. Just because you do not know something that does not change anything. If there were a list of fruits growing in a specific orchard, if someone added apples to that list, but that source said that apples grow in that orchard but did not say apples are fruits it does not mean that the list cannot include apples, does it? That is because although the claim that the apples growing in the orchard is not verified, it is verifiable. Crab2814 (talk) 15:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * OK. CA148 (talk) 21:29, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * CA148, I noticed you removed the following reference from the article List of active separatist movements in Asia, saying that it was just a gallery of books. Those books in the gallery are about the different proposed nation states which were listed on the article, such as Komeseland and Diantnam. Crab2814 (talk) 16:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * You should put the books indivdually not a link to a gallery of books. CA148 (talk) 17:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I would love to cite those books individually, but alas, the tag exists. By citing an entire gallery, I can cite each book together in one go. If you have a good reason why I shouldn't do that, then give it to me. Crab2814 (talk) 13:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * OK. CA148 (talk) 23:58, 3 June 2022 (UTC)