User talk:Dunshi

&#65297;&#65289;&#36935;&#20107;&#19981;&#35201;&#24908;&#24352;&#65292;&#29282;&#35760;&#25805;&#20316;&#35201;&#39046;&#65306;&#36827;&#19968;&#27493;&#29087;&#24713;&#20132;&#36890;&#35268;&#31456;&#21046;&#24230;&#65292;&#21152;&#24378;&#22522;&#26412;&#21151;&#35757;&#32451;&#65292;&#26377;&#24847;&#35782;&#38203;&#28860;&#33258;&#24049;&#30340;&#24212;&#21464;&#33021;&#21147;&#65292;&#20570;&#21040;&#36935;&#20107;&#27785;&#30528;&#20919;&#38745;&#65292;&#25805;&#20316;&#33258;&#22914;&#65292;&#30830;&#20445;&#34892;&#36710;&#23433;&#20840;&#12290;

&#65298;&#65289;&#25511;&#21046;&#39640;&#36895;&#34892;&#36710;&#65292;&#20811;&#26381;&#39556;&#20658;&#24773;&#32490;&#65306;&#35201;&#21560;&#21462;“&#21313;&#27425;&#20107;&#25925;&#20061;&#27425;&#24555;”&#30340;&#25945;&#35757;&#65292;&#20811;&#26381;&#39556;&#20658;&#24605;&#24819;&#65292;&#25511;&#21046;&#39640;&#36895;&#34892;&#36710;&#65292;&#22521;&#20859;&#33258;&#24049;&#32784;&#24515;&#12289;&#27785;&#31283;&#12289;&#31036;&#35980;&#30340;&#22909;&#20316;&#39118;&#12290;

&#65299;&#65289;&#36935;&#26377;&#32039;&#24613;&#24773;&#20917;&#65292;&#26524;&#26029;&#36805;&#36895;&#22788;&#29702;&#12290;&#32039;&#24613;&#24773;&#20917;&#22788;&#29702;&#30340;&#21407;&#21017;&#20026;&#65306;&#20808;&#36393;&#21046;&#21160;&#36367;&#26495;&#21518;&#25171;&#26041;&#21521;&#65292;&#36716;&#21521;&#30424;&#19981;&#33021;&#21482;&#25171;&#19981;&#22238;&#65292;&#20197;&#20813;&#36896;&#25104;&#26032;&#30340;&#21361;&#38505;&#12290;

&#65300;&#65289;&#39044;&#38450;&#20026;&#20027;&#65292;&#30830;&#20445;&#34892;&#36710;&#23433;&#20840;&#65306;&#24320;&#36710;&#26102;&#65292;&#27880;&#24847;&#30740;&#31350;&#21508;&#31867;&#34892;&#20154;&#30340;&#24515;&#29702;&#29366;&#24577;&#21644;&#34892;&#21160;&#29305;&#28857;&#65292;&#20859;&#25104;&#21892;&#20110;&#35266;&#23519;&#65292;&#19981;&#24320;&#33521;&#38596;&#36710;&#12289;&#36172;&#27668;&#36710;&#30340;&#33391;&#22909;&#20064;&#24815;&#12290;&#34892;&#39542;&#20013;&#20197;&#40483;&#21495;&#20026;&#35686;&#21578;&#65307;&#20197;&#21046;&#21160;&#27714;&#20445;&#38505;&#65307;&#20445;&#25345;&#23433;&#20840;&#36710;&#36317;&#65307;&#36935;&#35265;&#34892;&#20154;&#23425;&#36828;&#31163;&#32780;&#34892;&#12290;

__________________________________________________

Collaboration on China-related topics
Hi Dunshi:

You may be interested in this: China-related topics notice board. Also read its talk page.

-- Felix Wan 22:45, 2004 Oct 30 (UTC)

China Collaboration of the Week
You showed interest in taking part in China-related topic development. I have just set up a China Collaboration of the Week. Please add one, or several, nomination(s) and tell others about it. You may access it via the COTW page at China-related topics notice board/ZHCOTW or through the shortcut WP:ZHCOTW. --[[User:OldakQuill|Oldak Quill]] 11:23, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Gwohngdongwaa pengyam
Please address the doubts raised at Votes for deletion/Gwohngdongwaa pengyam. In particular, the article doesn't explain the history and origins of this romanization. The same objections seem to be applicable to Penkyamp. Can you update the articles with the information about the history of these systems? In particular, can you add some reputable external links or books, is it is in, e.g., Jyutping article? Thank you, Mikkalai 01:12, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Penkyamp
Please also address the doubts raised at Votes for deletion/Penkyamp. -- Felix Wan 19:31, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)

Thank you for your support on keeping Penkyamp, but you have forgotten to sign your comment. Please sign it to make sure that they count your vote. Also, you should add your comment to the end of the list, not the beginning. -- Felix Wan 08:01, 2005 Jan 2 (UTC)

Thanks for leaving me a message. Unfortunately, I can't understand what you're trying to say. If it's important, please try writing again using plainer language (for example, I'm not sure if you intended any irony, or not). Wyss 20:35, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

My only point is that this looks like original research to me and as such it's not appropriate for an article in Wikipedia. With wider acceptance and some peer-review, perhaps one day it will be. Wyss 22:48, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

China-stub
I invite you to resolve the issue over the picture for the China-stub at Template talk:China-stub. -- AllyUnion (talk) 10:16, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Penkyamp
 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete.

This was a difficult thread to decide. I have temporarily moved the article to User:Felix Wan/Penkyamp so that he can continue to do some additional research. If the use of this scheme can be more definitively sourced, it may become a candidate for Votes for undeletion. Rossami (talk) 22:34, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Penkyamp
Original research? I posted the question to some of contributors. Mikkalai 01:49, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

See also Votes for deletion/Gwohngdongwaa pengyam


 * Keep. I don't think the lack of previous on-line presence is reason enough to delete. Secondly, Beijing University Cantonists seem to be using or at least promoting it. Thirdly, I've learned the system myself. Beijing linguists might be referring to in using a name in Chinese character or a different name altogether.
 * User:Dunshi voted twice in one edit (see another vote below) --Jiang
 * Delete. A first look at the Google results show an impressive number of hits on penkyamp. Thousands. But, after eliminating -wikipedia, -wiktionary, -OpenFacts, and the other obvious clone pages, there's barely 1000 hits left -- most of which are also clone pages, which do not attribute to Wikipedia. That's not really passing the Google test.... If it is indeed an underground Cantonese romanization movement. It's a pretty weak one! And in regard to the somewhat widespread appearance of Penkyamp in WP itself, I'm afraid I'm somehow responsible for that...due to my ignorance. When I first came to WP, I was very into adding Romanizations to Chinese-related articles, and I thought that -- without checking other sources, even Google -- that Penkyamp is the official HK romanization system -- which is obviously not true. So, instead of saying "offfical HK system", I wrote "Penkyamp", thinking it's a name I haven't heard, but synonymous. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa...Feel free to flagellate me, metaphorically. --Menchi 02:22, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, as explained above, this is a neologism first invented for use on Wikipedia to describe a non peer-reviewed romanization scheme. Wyss 02:28, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I once suspected that article was original research but later reversed my position. See Talk:Penkyamp for detail. I even created a Yahoo! Groups Forum to deal with this matter, where I learned about its popularity among enthusiasts in Guangzhou. Unfortunately the Internet does not have much information on it. The article has received much more collaborative work from Wikipedians and the system is used by some Wikipedians in Romanizing Cantonese. It is also mentioned byomniglot although that could have been a self-fulfilling prophecy. I request to give a benefit of doubt to the defendant and keep this article. Also, since deleting both Penkyamp and Gwohngdongwaa pengyam will result in loss of information. I would like to keep a copy as a subpage of my user page if this article cannot survive VfD, although it seems that someone want to disallow that practice in another VfD. -- Felix Wan 03:04, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)
 * Having a small number of local enthusiasts and having a club ... How "popular" is this? Guangzhou, a big city, is not exactly lacking in Internet. One'd imagine a popular romanization movement to be popular on the net as well. After all, Cantonese romanization is not often used within the China itself. Not to mention that it is a recent invention, and not an ancient scroll which could have difficulty reaching the Net. --Menchi 03:13, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Good point. Just to set the record straight, this article was not likely to be created by the same author of the other related article on the VfD. See their history pages . -- Felix Wan 20:35, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)
 * This article was originally at [Cantonese Romanization] before I moved it to its current location. The original text equated Cantonese Romanization to Penkyamp which might have led to more confusion. Given Menchi's explanation, I'm leaning towards delete. Fringe movements have no place here. If kept, it should be given as much coverage as it is important (that is, it should be delinked in all places except the article on Cantonese). Perhaps we can give it passing mention in a general article on Cantonese Romanization or at Cantonese (linguistics) (or at least merge some of its info there), but as a stand alone article, I dont think it should exist.--Jiang 20:11, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments. If such an article cannot survive VfD here, will it be eligible for WikiSource or some other Wiki outlets? -- Felix Wan 20:35, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)
 * As Jiang said, I think it should be given a passing mention in Cantonese Romanization. Coverage is supposed to be proportional to support, after all. --Xiaopo &#8465; 20:45, Dec 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, see previous Gwohngdongwaa pengyam vote. Megan1967 00:43, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep: Fellow Wikipedians, please pause and think for a second: do you know the exact origin and meaning of "penkyamp" in the Cantonese language? Proper nouns(let's have no doubt that "Penkyamp" is indeed a proper name for the orthography), have varying degrees of SPECIFICITY. The fact that the name "penkyamp" does not automatically lead us to the origin of such system doesn't mean that such system wasn't in use under different names. Let's see: "penkyamp" as a GENERAL NOUN is inspired by Mandarin "pinyin", which is itself both a proper name for a system and a general noun designating "phonetic script". As a result, "penkyamp" as a general noun has been in use among the Cantonese referring to any phonetic script since at least the birth of the Mandarin Pinyin. And "Penkyamp" as a proper noun for a specific system might not be in place well after this system was in use for many years, only until it was introduced to us as such. What if on-line records before 2003 has been mostly erased?
 * Besides, the article started under the entry Cantonese Romanization instead of Penkyamp. Maybe back then "Penkyamp" wasn't finalized as its only proper name. It could be "Lomazi" or "Zeuyamp". At least it's nothing as specific as "Jyutpin" (a name that is hightly stylized and specified as a "PINyin"--note: not a Cantonese pronunciation--- of the "Jyut"(Guangdong)-- nothing can get as specific as this, which will garantee to trace back to its origin as an officially sponsored scheme). But "penkyamp" is not as specific as this. It means "phonetic script", is spelled as is pronounced in Cantonese, and is in circulation among the Cantonese thanks to the already existing Mandarin "Pinyin". I urge you to think twice about our obsession with the specificity of the proper name of the entry: what you call "Penkyamp" is actually of secondary relevance. The question is, what kind of usage, or systems were in existence before this name was finalized, on Wikipedia? Dunshi 18:44, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * It would be great if this article were a general overview of Cantonese Romanizations, but it is not. It is on a specific Romanization used by only a handful of people, if at all. If this article is not converted to what you portray it to be then it should be deleted. As long as what you say doesn't exist on wikipedia, I dont see a reason or argument to keep.--Jiang 08:13, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * uninformed keep . I posted this for vfd for the sole reason of the similarity between this article and Gwohngdongwaa pengyam. And both of them lack of historical references: history of developments, prominent contributors, as well as lack of external references. Dunshi, I believe you (as much as uninformed person may believe), but these drawbacks of the article must be eliminated, to ensure credibility. Mikkalai 18:59, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * One would think that something complete unsourced and unheard of should be deleted instead of kept. Maybe if we dont hear about it then it doesnt exist?--Jiang 08:13, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Only notable because of Wikipedia forks. Jayjg |  (Talk)  04:25, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I've already explained the "name issue". So if you want to search google, at least search under something other than "penkyamp". What is the name of the English orthographic system, anyway? "Script"? "Webster Orthography"?
 * Rather than engaging in word battles, please put additional verifyable information about the usage of the system into the article. Chinese refernces will do, if there is nothing in English. Some of us read Chinese, I think. Mikkalai 22:29, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I still doubt the reliability of google, as I have discovered that Yahoo! groups information and discussions on Cantonese romanization before 2002 are totally non-existent. Needless to say, they were simply erased, as I definitely participated in these discussions. I hope someone can reach James Campbell, aka Glossika, a Western linguist on the Chinese language living in Taiwan, who might have passing aquaintance of Cantonese romanization schemes which surfaced in online communities around late 90s. I doubt the name "Penkyamp" was much used back then. A friend I used to communicate with using modified Cantonese romanization in early 90s was Li Zhu of Guangzhou. I have lost touch with him since 95. Guangzhou is a city where Cantonese romanization schemes were experimented as early as the 1930s. The Internet did not exist in that city until at least 1996 and traffics with foreign countries are still quite tightly controlled. (for one, I doubt that Mainland Chinese have free access to Wikipedia). These are my arguments against the reliability of google search on Guangzhou Cantonese romanization schemes.
 * keep. This article is a detailed one, and the system does exist. -- 10:32, January 4, 2005, UTC
 * (please note that this vote is unsigned) Wyss 22:52, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. IMO 5 days was enough for the main supporter to provide more confirmation, instead of writing Webster Orthography article. As for reliability of google, we are well aware the it may only prove the existence. If google fails, then please provide other confirmations. Sorry about that, but unconfirmed articles are against the rules. Mikkalai 23:49, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * I must add, it's time for this article to go. Wyss 04:55, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment Hi, I'm kind of new here. I find this discussion fascinating. Though I'm not casting a vote (I'm not sure I'm eligible anyway since I'm new), I would like to leave a comment. I'm part Chinese, but I was born in the West. Unfortunately, I didn't learn Chinese as I was growing up. But I find it to be extremely fascinating, so I'm doing what I can right now to learn Mandarin, Cantonese, and reading/writing. It's a slow arduous process, but I'm having a lot of fun along the way. Though I enjoy both, I personally feel Cantonese is the more interesting of the two dialects. Concerning transcription schemes, I think I'm in a good position to comment on it. As a non-native speaker learning Cantonese, I'm actually in the position of needing to use the transcription schemes. Cantonese may not have a single "standard" romanization scheme, but I think that is part of what makes it interesting. When I started learning Cantonese, I mainly learned from friends and colleagues. But that didn't provide the structure that I wanted, so I bought a book that I found at a local bookstore. That book used its own version of a romanization scheme. I searched the internet and local libraries to help me find additional materials to help me learn Cantonese. This is my own experience only, but the websites that I found useful on the Internet were using LSHK's jyutping. And the books I found in the libraries in my city were using other (perhaps older) schemes like Sidney Lau. But I think that's okay, because a transcription scheme is just a tool for learning Cantonese. I think that the preference in transcription schemes is just the prerogative of the person teaching it. By the way, I never came across Penkyamp until I came to Wikipedia. About learning Cantonese, I came across a statement in Wikipedia's own Cantonese (linguistics) article in the Romanization section that states, "learners may feel frustrated that most native Cantonese speakers, no matter how educated they are, really don't understand any romanization system." I respectfully disagree. That statement wrongly suggests that the education of a native speaker has anything to do with the matter. My opinion is that native speakers shouldn't have to learn a romanization system for their own language. The romanization system isn't actually part of the language after all. Why should native speakers be forced to learn something that won't be useful for them? It would only be useful for the rest of us who are learning. I personally feel that it would be selfish for us (learners) to expect the native population to go through all that trouble just to make it easier for us. Please excuse me if I'm too opinionated about this. I mean no disrespect to anyone. Good luck to both sides of the Penkyamp argument. Happy New Year to everyone. --Wang123 Friday, January 7, 2005 at 09:01:01 UTC.
 * Keep Vote retracted: see Addendum Sorry. I originally intended to stay neutral in this debate over whether to keep or delete the Penkyamp article. But after some consideration, I’ve come to the opinion that there is not enough reason to delete the article. Being so new to Wikipedia, I don’t know if I’m eligible to vote in this poll, so I won’t mind if you don’t count my vote. But, if nothing at all, I hope you guys will listen to my reasoning. So here it is: I don’t think that the Penkyamp article should be deleted, because that would cause a loss of information. It is the duty of an encyclopedia to provide information. In addition, I don’t think that a lack of popularity for a transcription scheme warrants not including it in an encyclopedia. If Penkyamp should be deleted, then why shouldn’t all the transcription schemes be deleted. After all, none of the Cantonese transcription schemes have gained wide acceptance. Furthermore: I feel that it is the duty of Wikipedia to provide information rather than promote a cause. Thus, there is no reason for the hostility between supporters of different transcription schemes. Supporters of Penkyamp should feel free to provide an informative article on Penkyamp in Wikipedia, and supporters of other schemes, like my personal favorite LSHK’s jyutping, should feel free to provide an informative article on their scheme in Wikipedia. But I strongly feel that the articles should be limited to only providing information on how to use each transcription scheme and not advocate any one as better than another. Wikipedia should strive to provide impartial information on such a benign topic. --Wang123 Friday, January 7, 2005 at 10:16:16 UTC. .... Addendum: I just read the arguments for deleting the other article, Gwohngdongwaa pengyam. Now I understand the point of view where all those ‘delete’ votes are coming from. Wow, this is problematic. I understand now that the debate over deleting Penkyamp (and the other one) is not over which transcription scheme is more popular or over which one is better, but over whether Penkyamp and Gwohngdongwaa pengyam are actually legitimate transcription schemes. Since I feel that Wikipedia should not be used as a portal to further a cause, then of course we should not have an article on Penkyamp if it is indeed illegitimate. I’m sorry that I didn’t understand this debate until now. I don’t know how legitimate either scheme is, and I’m unfortunately not in a position to find out. So I respectfully retract my vote. --Wang123 Friday, January 7, 2005 at 10:47:28 UTC.
 * Additional Note: As a note, I just checked the online Chinese Character Database, Chinese Character Database: With Word-formations Phonologically Disambiguated According to the Cantonese Dialect, at the website of the Chinese University of Hong Kong's Research Centre for Humanities Computing. That database can be used to show Cantonese pronunciations of Chinese characters, and it works with 7 transcription schemes. Penkyamp and Gwohngdongwaa pengyam (as described in Wikipedia's articles) are both not among those seven. In case you guys are curious, those seven are: LSHK's jyutping, Yale, Yale Orthodox, Wong Shik Ling, IPA, Canton, and Sidney Lau. I checked each one of them. None of them are Penkyamp or Gwohngdongwaa pengyam. --Wang123 Friday, January 7, 2005 at 11:12:17 UTC
 * Thanks for your comment Wang123. The Internet has its own treacherousness and I just recently found out that the pre-2002 discussions and articles in Penkyamp is all lost to data crunching and I guess it's none of our fault that Penkyamp is deleted for "not meeting Wikipedia rules". I just wish, that people like you, me and FelixWan who has seen something of value in Penkyamp could get together (cybernetically speaking of course) as in a Penkyamp Society and study this scheme further, along with the official Jyutping and the foreign Yale. Perhaps this way we can find Cantonese Romanizationists in the Mainland later on as the Web becomes less hindered by government control. Please note that Wikipedia's information on any Pinyin inspired Mainland Cantonese romanization system is blank. But such schemes exist.
 * Please don't misunderstand me. I've never used Penkyamp, and therefore have no opinion on the value of Penkyamp. Penkyamp could be a great transcription scheme, but I don't know for myself because I've never had the opportunity to use it. I only first heard of Penkyamp when I came to Wikipedia. By the way, to Felix_Wan, are you still working on an overhaul of the Cantonese Wikipedia articles? I love Cantonese, and I'd like to commend you for taking on such a big task. Is there any way I can help? --Wang123 Saturday, January 8, 2005 at 09:07:19 UTC
 * I don't want deletion to happen to less published Chinese dialect phonetic scripts such as the Wu-Shanghainese Romanization, the Mogo dialect syllabary, and many Minnan systems simply because they appear original, but are in fact well known in off-line circles.
 * Keep. I don't see overwhelming proof that this is original research or a vanity page.  Sure, it's a minor scheme, but there are plenty of others on Wikipedia too (cf. Nihon-shiki, Gwoyeu Romatzyh) and merely being obscure, neglected or unpopular is not a criterion for deletion. Jpatokal 08:59, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * The Penkyamp article is extremely biased. If it is kept, then it must be rewritten to conform to Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Wang123 08:29, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Template:Bush-stub
This is to say that Template:Bush-stub, which you created, is up for deletion at Templates for deletion. (I'm afraid I voted against it.) If you still find it important, you might want to list your arguements, or at least vote in favor of keeping it. -- Itai 02:11, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Bush-stub
I put subst: before to ensure that the template would still show after it's deleted. Just to let you know, because it's going to be deleted shortly. Sorry for any trouble I may have caused. -Frazzydee|&#9997; 03:30, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image source
Thank you for uploading Image:Amy Lu.jpeg3.jpeg. Please leave a note on that page about the source of the image because of copyright law. Thank you. --Ellmist 02:17, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image copyright
Thank you for uploading Image:Manwen.gif and for stating the source. However, its copyright status is unclear, so it may have to be deleted. If it is open content or public domain, please give proof of this on the image page. If the image is fair use, please provide a rationale. Thank you. --Alan Au 06:02, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Current events
I'm not sure why you made those changes to current events. You deleted a link to a news story, added some weird wording, and changed the tense of some other stuff. These changes didn't really help. CryptoDerk 18:56, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

[[Image:Chinesedragon.jpg]]
The image you submitted for use with the China-stub stub template is likely to be deleted soon unless details of its copyright status can be provided. Speaking for myself, it would be nice to not have to find another image. Caerwine 22:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Blue Mediterranean
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Blue Mediterranean, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Blue Mediterranean. Caerwine Caer’s whines 03:13, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Red Mediterranean
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Red Mediterranean, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Red Mediterranean. Caerwine Caer’s whines 03:13, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Manjiangwen.gif
File:Manjiangwen.gif is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Manjiangwen.gif. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 07:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Nomination of Akrom Yo‘ldoshev for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Akrom Yo‘ldoshev is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Akrom Yo‘ldoshev until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

occupy
The "occupy the dollar" will not initially take the form of printed paper bills. It will take the form of special wristbands with uniform design (for example, with "occupy the dollar" imprinted on it, with uniform width and thickness)

The colours of the "occupy the dollar" will be of four different colours representing the pluralistic viewpoints of participants.

1) Green 2) Red 3) Black 4) White -- clean govt and non-descript populism

Green is lowest value and is most abundant, followed by Red, followed by Black, and finally followed by White

Equitably distributed as a "foodstamp" to assure wristband holders' subsistance (food, daily necessities). So basically, encourage sharing: should ensure your immediate neighbors (not just companions) have enough wristbands to barter/buy enough substance. If your neighbor is out of wristbands, ensure that you share wristband values, or share daily necessities.

Secondly, award creativity with wristbands: Artists may get them as appreciation.

Thirdly, donate to charitable causes using wristbands.

Maker of the wristband teams up with volunteer groups providing necessities, food. So much wristbands will end up in the hands of volunteer groups. Be creative with large wristband reserves.

All participants can reject wristband on the basis of irregular design. They have right to demand design to be exact width, colours matching the four aforementioned colours, and letters printed on top, and not to be defaced by permanent damages.

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Northern Alliance (Canada) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Northern Alliance (Canada) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Northern Alliance (Canada) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Huon (talk) 12:46, 3 October 2016 (UTC)