User talk:Instantnood/Archive 5

{|align=right cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 border=0 style="background:transparent" {|align=right id=toc width=200 style="margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px" notifier
 * bgcolor=#ccccff style="border-bottom: 1px solid #505090""|
 * bgcolor=#ccccff style="border-bottom: 1px solid #505090""|
 * style="border-bottom: 1px solid #C0C0F0""| Let me know if you have messages for me on any discussion page, by dropping a time stamp below. Alternatively, you are welcome to reply me on this page. Thanks.
 * style="border-bottom: 1px solid #C0C0F0""| Let me know if you have messages for me on any discussion page, by dropping a time stamp below. Alternatively, you are welcome to reply me on this page. Thanks.

notifier                    to edit &rarr;

 * }

Hello. Enjoy the discussion.
 * }

/Archive 1 (January to March 2005, 58kb) /Archive 2 (April to June 2005, 82kb) /Archive 3 (July to September 2005, 73kb) /Archive 4 (October to December 2005, 150kb)

Unsourced images
OrphanBot does not tag images as unsourced. It just removes images that are already tagged from articles. Images that OrphanBot removes are generally candidates for speedy deletion under grounds I4: images with unknown source or copyright status that have been on Wikipedia for over a week. --Carnildo 10:34, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

categoryredirect
Please be advised that categoryredirect requires a parameter in which the redirect is redirected to, otherwise the bot does not operate on that category. Furthermore, that feature has now been restricted to sysop use only. --AllyUnion (talk) 11:35, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * You used on Category:Transportation in Hong Kong. It was recently restricted due to abuse and complaints made by various people.  One of them was due to a new user not understanding the Wikipedia enough, and another by an anonymous IP. --AllyUnion (talk) 11:49, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Why are you reinstating the images?
Apparently the images you are putting back on have no source info. They don't belong on WP if that is the case. Isn't it better to be trying to get the source data rather than fighting a bot? novacatz 12:48, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Non-soverign territories
What is this new phrase supposed to mean? SchmuckyTheCat 22:27, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Re: Des Voeux Road
For me, it essentially just came down to flow. The previous version just felt very segmented, and didn't seem to flow very well. The history of the two roads are essentially the same, so I don't think there's any point splitting it (and they were already bunched together in the previous version anyway). I wouldn't mind it though if you split the transport section and put them back under each road. - Hinto 19:07, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied


 * Looks good; I just removed a duplicate sentence in the intro. - Hinto 23:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Comments on Alanmak
Alanmak is kinda phobic about the IPA phonetics symbols, and he's trying to set them abay. His very reason to avoid others adding back the symbols is do not make any revert "until a concensus is formed" or "I've warned you". I don't this makes sense: from alpha to omega he is the only player of the devil's advocate. What say you? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 05:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

The country names China and Taiwan
I've added my opinion on this issue at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese). Please feel free to provide your opinion and engage in discussions. Chanheigeorge 08:25, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * responded at Wikipedia talk:naming conventions (Chinese)

Let it go man
Hi, I am not sure what is going on between you and Huaiwei, but can you just cool it down a bit. I just noticed you reverted something on Queensway that Huaiwei did. Now, I know the edit summary looks like it was crafted deliberately to annoy you -- but you don't have to respond. And bring the revert war to a new article (queensway) is just causing collateral damage -- please cool it down a tad. novacatz 15:57, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Nuclear war
Hi, please stop your nuclear war with User:Huaiwei. Only you can prevent ForestFires. Reverting will just hurt the project. Please don't do it. I've blocked both of you for 24 hours, to give you some time to cool down. --Phroziac. o ºO (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!) 16:40, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * You're welcome. Yes, we are, but only in clear cases of abuse. You and Huaiwei aren't one of those cases, I believe. (Since arbcom already ran a case for you). Mindspillage made a motion on WP:RFAr to extend the probation (for both of you) to all articles, and it looks like it will pass. (has 4 votes for and 0 against right now). I feel that it may be possible to use it to put out the forest fire. Who started this anyway? --Phroziac . o ºO (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!) 23:12, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Char siu
Hi there! I saw your request, but after deleting it I couldn't figure out what you wanted to do with the page to fix the edit history, so I'm going to leave it as is. --HappyCamper 19:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Char siu
I was doing CSD patrol when I came across Char siu. My suggestion is at Talk:Char_siu. enochlau (talk) 23:38, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Disambig pages
Please note Manual_of_Style_%28disambiguation_pages%29, which suggests that piping is not to be used. This is in reference to Queensway. enochlau (talk) 23:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Category:Ancient peoples of China
Since I know you have that whole issue with Taiwan/China/mainland... I figure to asked you first whether you would think it be correct to title it "Ancient Chinese" otherwise I'd incline to change it to "Ancient people of China". --AllyUnion (talk) 05:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * The usage of "peoples" is unobjectionable. Plus it's a subcategory of Category:Ancient peoples, so I'd leave it as is for uniformity. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 05:53, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

See also other HK series
Some nice ideas have brewed in the Chinese wikipedia. Could you help upgrade the templates? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 12:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

"Western"
by "Western" we mean influenced by Europe and its colonial descendants. we do not mean describing a cardinal direction opposite of "east". as such, it should be capitalized--Jiang 23:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

Article Ban: Category:Chinese newspapers
Instant, per your probation and constant warring with Huaiwei on this category I have elected to ban both of you from editing it further. The notice is posted on AN/I. Please take a moment and consider your actions on these articles and interaction with Huaiwei, it does not reflect well on either of you. --Wgfinley 09:12, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

ROC local elections, 2005
This article lists the Chinese name of the election as "94年中華民國地方公職人員選舉". Is this wrong? Because on the Chinese Wikipedia, the article is called "2005年中華民國地方公職人員選舉". — J3ff 13:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Notice of new bans
For continuing sterile edit wars, despite all of the warnings and previous bans, I am banning both you and Huaiwei from Char siu, List of railways in China, and Guangshen Railway for the duration of your probation. This is going to be logged and discussed at WP:AN/I. Dmcdevit·t 00:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Talk:Queensway
Could you please comment on Talk:Queensway about the reasons for and against each wording? I want to resolve the edit war. If the edit war continues, I will consider blocking you and Huaiwei from this page. Thanks. enochlau (talk) 00:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * responded at talk:Queensway

Additional Ban
I have now also added Queensway to the list. Instant, I know that you can be a valuable contributor to Wikipedia, replying in kind and continuing this edit warring is not helping anything. I'm begging you, please stop, you and Huaiwei need to step back for a bit and then try to work out an understanding, I will be happy to help with that any way I can. --Wgfinley 02:21, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Egg Tart != Dim Sum
In North America, Egg Tarts ARE standard fare in dim-sum restaurant. I have seen them in dim-sum restaurants in NYC, LA, San Francisco, Toronto, Vancouver, Philadelphia, Boston, etc. If that is the case, I don't know why they wouldn't be considered dim sum, especially since more expensive dim-sum establishments are always inventing new dishes. Dyl 03:02, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

HK Wikipedian meeting
As you know, Hong Kong Wikipedian on Chinese Wikipedia is proposing the next meeting. Hope you would come. :P--Simon Shek 12:06, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Well, I certainly hope you can join -- then I can clip you over the ears for getting yourself blocked (LOL just kidding). Hope you can make it -- disappointed if you can't.  Take care.  novacatz 01:38, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

24 Hour block for Char siu edit
I appreciate the honesty but I'm afraid I do have to block you for 24 hours. Please be mindful of your bans and make a concerted effort to not earn anymore! Stay away from Huaiwei wherever possible, if he comes and edits on something you've been working on it will be noted, several admins are watching this now, do not respond in kind if he does. --Wgfinley 19:54, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

How do I...
Recently I am editing the page Cheung Wang Estate and was puzzled by the making of the link "Princess Margaret Hospital". There are four hospitals with the the same name in the world and how should I make it a link to Princess Margaret Hospital (Hong Kong) but at the same time still appearing as "Princess Margaret Hospital"?

(Nxn 0405 chl 21:52, 13 January 2006 (UTC))
 * replied

List of languages
Hi Instantnood,

Just to notify you that both you and Alanmak have reached your 3RR limit for this article.

The page history is starting to look like a script from the Three Stooges. I'm not saying that you are the one to blame, but I would appreciate it if you would refrain from bringing your ongoing fight to this article.

kwami 19:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Classified information
Could you and alanmak join the discussion on the talk page for this article?--agr 23:34, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

List of cities in China
Unfortunately the edit warring has now continued on this article as well so I have instituted another article ban for you on this page. I was hoping that after the first few the point would be made but it appears that is not the case. I'm growing tired of them and you must be growing tired of the growing list of articles you can't edit. Please, cease the warring with Huaiwei before this results in another Arbitration case seeking more serious sanctions. --Wgfinley 10:03, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Supreme court
I have added this to the ban list for both of you, it looks like it was going on before the above and I wasn't aware of it. That one was far too much back and forth with the two of you though, it's pretty much a no-brainer for a ban on that article for both of you. --Wgfinley 04:07, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

You are now banned from List of museums --TimPope 17:46, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Taiwan Mandarin
Hey Instantnood - thanks for your input on this article. I think I have answered your concerns on the article's talk page, please check it out and see what you think. I'd like to hear your opinions on the matter. Thanks! Taiwantaffy 05:30, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * responded at talk:Taiwanese Mandarin

Wikipedia: Superpower
Would you like to come to join us to edit the Subject "Superpower", the China section? I found that some people editing that page are very bias against China. I just want to bring more people with more knowledge of China to edit that page.Here is the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower   Thanks &mdash;The preceding unsigned comment was added by Junlee (talk &bull; contribs). 01:55, January 17, 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

List of airlines
I've banned you both from this article, it is quite obvious it is in order, you both continue to revert each other with comments being made in edit summaries instead of where they belong -- on the talk page. You haven't posted anything here in over two weeks yet continue to revert each other, hence, I'm banning you both from editing this one. --Wgfinley 05:24, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Are you going tommorow?
novacatz 06:42, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Re:Unidentified image
Thanks. But I'll probably reupload it when I get a chance so it's got a proper filename :) enochlau (talk) 23:04, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

Arbcom again
I've asked for something more to be done about your continual crusade.SchmuckyTheCat 05:49, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * And, of course, there is a section for you to reply there. SchmuckyTheCat 20:12, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Clock tower
I've banned you from this article as well. --Wgfinley 18:33, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

More Category Bans
I've now also banned you from Category:Transport in Hong Kong, Category:Transportation in Macau, and Category:Transportation in China. I'm really disappointed with you on these Instant -- Schmucky is 100% correct, this appears to be nothing more than to stir up an old debate. It's particularly disappointing because he's been leaving you alone and this could also be perceived as goading him into a fight. I cannot stress more that you need to re-think your actions in regard to these articles. This kind of behavior isn't helping anything. --Wgfinley 18:56, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Lists of country-related topics
Is now also on your ban list. --Wgfinley 20:20, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Singapore Science Centre
You have been banned from this page, the revert warring is blatant and obvious. --Wgfinley 20:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

7 Day Block
Effective immediately I have blocked you for 7 days for continued defiance of the ArbCom ruling and continuing to edit war on various articles. Your actions to intentionally and clearly edit war after numerous warnings, pleas, and blocks of 12 articles in the past 12 days are a continued disruption to Wikipedia. I suggest you take the 7 days to reflect on your actions and consider more appropriate forms of editing that are not prone to the incessant edit warring. --Wgfinley 20:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3
Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelly Martin (talk • contribs) 03:05, January 26, 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Kurów
Could you please write a stub http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kur%C3%B3w - just a few sentences based on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kur%C3%B3w ? Only 2 -5 sentences enough. Please. Pietras1988 21:20, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * Yes, you can. Look Polish phonology. If you finishing, you would link to this article? Pietras1988   TALK  20:14, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Tram
hey, instantnood, i thought i saw a air-conditioned tram today, but i'm not sure, u know anything about that? --K.C. Tang 06:00, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Wow, nice to see my $2 is going to good use there... novacatz 08:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * It probably wouldn't be $2 any more... the air conditioned buses cost more than the non-air conditioned ones, they'd probably do the same :) Lucky Hong Kong, in Sydney, from Central to Chinatown is $A2.80, and that's a 5 minute walk >.< enochlau (talk) 00:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Air-conditioned trams are also $2. Yes, they exist. - Zachkchk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zachkchk (talk • contribs) 04:42, March 26, 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * haha, it's a bit 大鄉里 of me indeed. they must have been running on the island for some years, but i just noticed them some weeks ago!--K.C. Tang 04:50, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Friendly Warning
Instant for the love of all that is holy please refrain from going into articles and re-igniting old debates, even if it appears to be minor. This edit was brought to my attention. I'm not going to block you for parentheses however the point that this article was previously hotly debated and has now calmed down is a point well taken by those who brought it to my attention. My suggestion to you for the near future is to avoid articles you edit warred on wherever possible. Ones like these where there was a war, then it went away, then you come and make a change somewhat related to that war makes it look like you are going around starting the edit warring all over again. In some cases I think that's what you're doing, in others not. Whatever the case, the appearance is there and should be avoided at all costs. --Wgfinley 13:30, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

New Block, Two Weeks
Instant, I can't tell you how disappointed I am but I am forced to block you for two weeks now. Despite continued warngings about revert warring, despite my continued advice to you here to avoid conflicts with the aforementioned folks you continue your behavior of edit warring with them. I don't know how else to get my point across, so I have blocked you for two weeks. I also have an inquiry into your alleged use of a sockpuppet in order to vote in a CfD which was done in evasion of a block. --Wgfinley 22:27, 3 February 2006 (UTC)


 * FYI enochlau (talk) 00:13, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

I've read Enochlau's request, if you want to enter into a mentorship agreement I will consider lifting the block as soon as it is put into place. I think there should probably be three but let's see what could happen, at least one of them should be an admin. --Wgfinley 00:55, 4 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Instant -- I understand what you are saying about the other three, however, like I said before and what I have likewise told to Huaiwei a hundred times, it's not your holy mission to correct this wrong (as you see it) on Wikipedia. You're on probation, conflicts like this should be avoided and not sought out.  I have argued this ad nauseum with Huaiwei so I certainly don't want to do so with you.  I suggest you actively and cooperatively work on a mentorship program, get me some folks who will work with you and I will remove the block.  Then go about making the great contributions to many articles I know you're capable of and ignore the infighting of the past resting assured that other editors, maybe not right away and maybe a bit longer down he road, will look at things and make changes.  --Wgfinley 14:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied, also relevant

Instantnood, we'll see if you can stay away from anything controversial and make good edits. Otherwise, I will again call for mentorship, perhaps in conjunction with an ArbCom order. But do let me know if you change your mind about mentorship. enochlau (talk) 05:10, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Controversial? It's hard to give you a precise indication, but silly stuff like changing commas/brackets with "Hong Kong, PRC" is definitely out. If you want an indication of what's not acceptable, Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3/Evidence has plenty of diffs. I know it may seem unfair, especially since you believe a certain point of view/piece of information to be correct, but I think that before you make any edits, make an honest assessment as to whether the other guys are likely to oppose your edit. If so, to nip conflict in the bud, don't do it, and put a note on the talk page instead. If your assessment was wrong, and your edit is reverted by others, don't revert them to your revision. You also need to provide a statement at Requests_for_arbitration/Instantnood_3, even if you feel the case should not be proceeding. Wgfinley is doing a fine job helping you out with evidence and counsel, and you should be cooperative with the Arbitration Committee because the stuff they'll dish out to you will be harsher than the two weeks off you just had. Cheers. enochlau (talk) 10:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Re:"Kung Hei Fat Choi" signs
Too late! I was in the city yesterday and they were all gone already. Next year :) enochlau (talk) 23:04, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied
 * Actually, I managed to snap one, but I didn't have my camera on me, so I just took it with my camera's phone. As such, the quality is pretty bad and I don't quite want to upload it. Better luck next time... and welcome back. enochlau (talk) 01:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Wikipedia:Deletion review#List of interesting or unusual_place_names
Further to your views on the undeletion, you may be interested that the page was relisted on Articles for deletion/List of interesting or unusual place names (2nd nomination). Regards--A Y  Arktos 10:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Pictures of Lam Tin & other HK places
I've recently took some pictures of Lam Tin MTR, including the plaque, and put it onto the article as you requested some months ago. In addition, I've also took some other pictures of scenes in Hong Kong. Deryck C. 09:14, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * Lam Tin (MTR), Airport Tunnel, Chatham Road. That's all I can remember. Deryck C. 09:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Template
I've been busy recently. And I thought you would change the HK-series templates into the style of the Chinese wikipedia's ones. :) -- Jerry Crimson Mann 03:53, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Jerry, could I have a link to the template on the Chinese WP please? :) enochlau (talk) 05:11, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

languages of Hong Kong
i think the article has gone astray. now there are even sections for Russian and Persian. the article is supposed to mention the representative languages used in Hong Kong, but now... writing this way one can list more than 100 languages in the article. frankly, i regret initiating the article... it just snowballs into something messy and incompletable... what do u think? --K.C. Tang 02:24, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * yes, the statistics is a problem. but i think in this case common sense is to be trusted. the comment made by user:Kvasir hits the point. the article has become a photo gallery for foreigin languages visible in Hong Kong... yes, i confess i committed the sin at the very beginning... but i did't know it was to snowball into something like that... headache, real headache--K.C. Tang 07:14, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * do u think i should axe the undesirable content? don't just say "be bold!", u know how much diplomatics there is on Wikipedia... --K.C. Tang 06:47, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Re: Country templates
This list is not only for ISO 3166 codes. The article has already mentioned the problem that "a number of such country codes exist, including the ISO 3166-1 codes, the IOC Country codes, and the FIFA country codes. They are not always compatible and consistent with each other, and are often counterintuitive." The name "Hong Kong, China" and the code "HKG" has long been used in pairs in a lot of sport events. For many times, a lot of non-Hong Kong Wikipedians that don't know much about Hong Kong would automatically use HKG for articles about sport events. But in those situations, "Hong Kong, China", instead of "Hong Kong" should be used. Every time it took me a long time to change all the "Hong Kong" to "Hong Kong, China". This has happened for many times. It is pragmatic to use "HKG", according to the IOC, for "Hong Kong, China". We can simply use "HK" for "Hong Kong". For the HKG-PRC and MAC-PRC, the names of the templates are not descriptive. Because "PRC" should stands for he "People's Republic of China", instead of just "China". Anyway, there are many many templates already. So, I just redirect the redundant ones to the existing ones. HK, HKG, HKSAR, HK(PRC) and HK-full are already sufficient to serve all kinds of purposes, and are more user-friendly (because the names of the templates are simplier and descriptive). - Alanmak 06:21, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

Crown copyright
I'm writing an article about Hong Kong Strategic Route and Exit Number System and I wanna include a map of it into the article. As it's HK gov't copyright, is it legitimate that I "crown" the map and poster and put it up here? Deryck C. 14:55, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

edit war
Hello, Don't edit war over templates. See User_talk:Alanmak. -- Curps 23:31, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied, also relevant

HKCOTW - HSBC
Thought I'd just share some thoughts about the prospects on this - I hope the comment I made on the nomination didnt come accross badly... to be fair both articles need work...

If you were thinking of HSBC I had been thinking about the local parts of this and have been sketching out some ideas User:Ian3055/HSBC table draft, the text and links and so on probably arn't 100% yet, I'm erring towards option (b), but I'm not completely sold yet...

Only other thought was that if it is the global company probably ought to post the colab to the UK board and the Business and Economics wikiproject. (PS I do have a conflict on this one, please tell me if you think its unduely influencing me!!) Ian3055 20:28, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * I didnt really mean do the nominations there, I recon its a legitimate nomination for HKCOTW regardless - just thought we could let them know if it is HKCOTW. Cheers. Ian3055 22:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Rebecca Lee
Hello. Is this article to be taken seriously? Since when does Earth have three poles? Maybe a few sources would help. Greetings, Sandstein 20:50, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

National languge of the ROC
Thanks; if only Alanmak was this helpful. – Zntrip 21:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

Category:Hong Kong cultural icons
Re: : Do you intend to create such a category? Otherwise I'll revert the addition of the non-existent category. Cheers. enochlau (talk) 04:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * I don't know - the only article in that is Bauhinia blakeana, and the category doesn't appear to have ever existed. enochlau (talk) 10:13, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Re: photos and mock exam
About the photos: in that case can you help me checking out?
 * reference

About the exam: I'm just F4 this year enjoying life. Mock exam the same time next year. De ryc k C.  07:48, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

enough is enough
hello, i just came across this article, and i confess i hate this kind of childish, pseudo-encyclopedian scrawling (i've had enough of this kind of thing in the Chinese wikipedia). where can i put up my proposal for its deletion?--K.C. Tang 09:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Information Request
Instantnood, my name is Casey Harrigan. I am a collegiate debater for Michigan State University. Could you contact me about proper citation of some of your work? Please email me at: e-mail@address.hidden. Thanks. 03:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Follow Up

 * reference

I know this isn't quite protocol for Wikipedia, but for our collegiate debates its standard to cite both the Author's name and any applicable qualifications for their work. Rather than citing Wikipedia, I'd prefer to cite some things that you have written. Would you please email me these two pieces of information at e-mail@address.hidden. Thank you.
 * replied

Re: RFAr
Your request isn't, but the case is already at decision making. The proposed decision is even harsher than my requests. I suggest you figure that out before you're permanently banned - which isn't my goal. SchmuckyTheCat 18:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

New Article Ban
Sorry, have to ban you from Naming conventions (Chinese), I'm going to look into the claim and counter-claim on my talk page. My advice, again, stay away from the China stuff for a while and stay away from Schmucky and Huaiwei. --Wgfinley 02:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

About Noticeboard for wikipedians from Macau
Indeed there are very little amount of wikipedians from Macau either Chinese version or English version. I am afraid there are no wikipedians paying attention on the Noticeboard. Maybe you can ask Whhalbert for opinions.--HeiChon 05:57, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

List of Hong Kong MTR stations
could u find a reference for the list? i want to to norminate it as a featured list, but find that only a referenced list can be norminated, and i can't find refernce on the official MTR site. thanks. --K.C. Tang 06:33, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * i've norminated it, hope it can get its deserved honour. :-) --K.C. Tang 05:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Rfar opening
SchmuckyTheCat 01:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * responded at WP:RFAr

Clarification
In all honesty, all I'd like is your full name for citation purposes. Could you provide me with that? I understand that normally people are reluctant to disclose personal information, but I assure that that this is on the up-and-up, I'm a student, and I'd only use it in a private academic setting. You can reply on my talk page or email at: harriga@msu.edu. Thanks. 09:49 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

Crown Copyright Again
The copyright notice reads "本網頁的內容，包括但不限於所有文本、平面圖像、圖畫、圖片、照片以及數據或其他資料的匯編，均受版權保障. 香港特別行政區政府是本網頁內所有版權作品的擁有人，除非預先得到香港運輸署的書面授權，否則嚴禁複製、改編、分發、發布或向公眾提供該等版權作品. "
 * reference

So is this covered by crown copyright, or do I have to ask for the permission individually? De ryc k C.  06:59, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

table fixing
hello, i guess u must be busy in real life, but would u have some time to edit the List of Hong Kong MTR stations? the colours expectedly have caused some objections, the voters suggest that the liveries should occupy a seperate column, what do u think?--K.C. Tang 14:43, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * wonderful! it's much less "dazzling" now, but could the color occupy a bit more space? but then i'm a design idiot... never count on my words on these matters :( --K.C. Tang 15:05, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * would u have time to do the other lines? :) --K.C. Tang 00:29, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * it's too difficult for me... i simply dun have the knowledge :( --K.C. Tang 00:38, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

HKCOTW
- Deryck Chan 07:58, March 8, 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

re:Transwiki
It is currently at wikt:Transwiki:See lai. You can find out the destination of a transwiki'd article (as long as someone did the paperwork) by searching Transwiki log. -Splash talk 21:33, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

Orphaned cats conundrum
Hi. As a party who contributed to the discussion on the Orphaned China cats recently, I wanted to see if I could get a comment from you at the unresolved discussion. I don't want to see this matter tossed back into the limbo of no consensus, so please vote under Agree with proposal or Disagree with proposal with the numbering and we'll see if this can be resolved. Thanks very much for your continued patience. --Syrthiss 22:36, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

PRC vs. mainland
Hi,
 * reference

As I indicated, I know nothing of the dispute among editors, except what I read in the ArbCom decisions. Not a linguist, I can only speak for the currency of terms in use in the region with which I am familiar, the US. Here, "mainland China" was a term used to refer to the PRC publicly prior to its recognition by our government in 1971. Its use in the encyclopedia strikes me as antiquated and politically-charged, but I understand that US-usage alone should not govern decisively.

What does govern decisively, in my opinion, are user-friendliness and NPOV. "Mainland China" and "Taiwan" are both considered, in formal contexts, to be politically insulting to the inhabitants of those two places, each of which claims sovereignty as the Chinese government. The NPOV solution (notwithstanding "One-China policy") is to grant dignity to both, as the People's Republic of China, and the Republic of China, respectively. This is what is done with the articles, and what should done with the categories, for it is wise. Best wishes, Xoloz 16:50, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * I understand your logic, and have no reason to doubt the accuracy of your account; however, to editors unfamiliar with direct Chinese media sources, this usage is obscure, and likely to cause confusion, and seem disparaging, as it did to me on first reading. I suspect that this confusion is what caused your proposal to fail to reach consensus: at least, the confusion could provide an alternate explanation, as opposed to any voting irregularities.
 * In any case, I hope you do agree that the current nomenclature, while perhaps less exact than the most informed reader would want, at least provides neutral language to describe a delicate political situation. Until usages now current within the Chinese media become standard elsewhere, the present nomenclature seems optimally non-controversial, if perhaps a bit unrefined.  It is for this reason that I continue to support Syrthiss' proposed closure at issue. Best wishes, Xoloz 18:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

List of languages
Hi Instantnood,

Please don't delete the links to other language wikipedias. Also, I think it might be wise to use a single Sovereign State (Dependent State) format. Mixing contrary formats only invites argument as to which political systems are equivalent. (Are HK and Puerto Rico really equivalent, for example.) kwami 20:02, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * Okay, glad to see a set list of polities. However, to be consistant, the British miliary bases on Cyprus would need to be accorded the same treatment as "countries", which might strike people as odd. kwami 20:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Sociedade de Turismo e Diversões de Macau
Howdy! Could you please expand Sociedade de Turismo e Diversões de Macau to explain why it's a group/org that meets notability guidelines for Wikipedia? If you don't, I predict another admin will delete it shortly as I did the first time. - C HAIRBOY (☎) 20:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Hello! Actually, very few articles start as small as the one you did, and those make an assertion of notability.  Your article makes no assertion of notability (and consequently meets the A7 criteria of WP:CSD.  I'm not trying to be a jerk here, but there are some established rules for keeping the quality of WP up, and I'm trying to help you meet them.  - C HAIRBOY  (☎) 20:41, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

"mainland China"
Ahh I see - I think...! I'd better leave this to folk like yourself more acquainted with the twists and turns. Thanks, though, for taking the trouble to leave an explanation. Best wishes, David Kernow 18:31, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

Categories
The way I see it, the idea of "categories", especially a hierarchy of categories, is fundamentally troublesome given Wikipedia's NPOV policy. A quick look at the Category:Kurdistan poll reveals this problem... we can state under Kurdistan what people think Kurdistan is, but by having Category:Kurdistan, we are creating implications that cannot be easily resolved.
 * reference

I would suggest / comment that:


 * 1) Categories are not remotely the most important thing on Wikipedia. The most important thing is the content of each article. Categories are for reference purposes only.
 * 2) Lay low for a while. There are plenty of other, less contentious ways to contribute.
 * 3) You can make a list of articles that do not discuss what they are named for. For example, Economy of the People's Republic of China.

-- ran (talk) 18:33, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * What do you mean? Yes, the categories may be laid out in a way that you wouldn't be 100% satisfied with, but so what? Categories are an indexing tool, that's all. What matters is that readers can get accurate, up-to-date, and unbiased information from the articles themselves. And I don't think that this is a problem right now with Mainland China related articles. -- ran (talk) 01:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * replied


 * Well, I suppose you could try advertising at the Chinese notice board whenever something like this happens in the future. This way you ensure that the people who know the topic are the ones participating in the vote.


 * An example of what happened at Talk:Inner Mongolia: someone suggested moving it to Southern Mongolia, and one of the earliest support votes came from someone who was completely clueless (he apparently thought that no one except "apologists of Chinese Imperialism" would ever use the term "Inner Mongolia", and that "normal people" would use "Southern Mongolia"). I advertised at Talk:Tibet, and although the arrivals were divided in their political opinion (they were watchers of the Tibet article, after all), they could all agree that the proposal was unrealistic. And so it was defeated. -- ran (talk) 00:33, 1 April 2006 (UTC)


 * replied

Arbitration case
I have made a note at Requests_for_arbitration/Instantnood_3/Proposed_decision not to close the case without considering your statement and evidence. Please notify us regarding the location of your argument and evidence. Fred Bauder 19:56, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * True, no use responding to the original request, but you can certainly give us some feedback on the finding of fact and proposed remedies. If they aren't fair you can tell us why. Fred Bauder 22:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Re: Mandarin
According to the HKCEE Putonghua syllabus, Mandarin means Taiwan Guoyu. -- De ryc k C.  07:11, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied


 * Written in the syllabus says "To distinguish between Putonghua, Pekinese and Mandarin", and the explanation as I've told you is given by the teacher. I don't know where is it written explicitly. -- De ryc k C.  08:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * Maybe I took a bad assumption that all direct-transliterations took the meaning of what they originally meant in Chinese. -- D e  ryc  k C.  15:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Chinese name help
Hi, could you help me find the Chinese characters for Jin Weiying, Deng Xiaoping's second wife? I need to Vietnamize the name, but could not do so without knowing the characters. Thanks. DHN 17:29, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Thanks! :-D DHN 17:35, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Could you also give me the characters for his birth name? DHN 17:43, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

請參與「啟德機場」的集體提升！！
zh:啟德機場條目正在被選作今期zh:wikipedia:香港條目提升計劃的主題，得知您曾經對條目貢獻過，如果您有仍興趣參與，請立即行動！提升將在3月26日結束. Stewartcc 10:14, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3
A final decision has been made in the above Arbitration case and the case has been closed.

For the Arbitration committee. --Tony Sidaway 18:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

List of species native to Hong Kong
man, we have a problem, would u see the discussion page and give some opinion?--K.C. Tang 02:53, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Young Pioneers
Well, since the Young Pioneers do not exist in Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan, there's no ambiguity here. So we don't need to say "mainland China". -- ran (talk) 18:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied
 * When the original source says 全国, Wikipedia should follow and say "national". Only when it is explicitly stated that it's 不包括港澳台 should we mention "Mainland China". As for the YP, it's already stated in the article that the YP does not exist in HK or Macau. -- ran (talk) 00:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

What the hell are you doing? Trying to go out with a bang?
Arbcom finalized the decision that you can be banned indefinitely for being a revert warrior and you've spent the last two hours reverting something like 30 articles! I hope you noticed my proposals didn't included you being banned for life but they decided that was an appropriate solution. Can you please stop? SchmuckyTheCat 22:26, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * I really, truly, do not want you indefinitely banned. The point isn't even about whether those reverts were correct or not anymore.  For that matter, I agree with you on some of them.  However, the sheer amount of reverts your doing is disruptive - like you're calling attention to yourself begging to be banned. Please stop reverting and find ways to edit productively. SchmuckyTheCat 10:04, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

email
your email is disabled but ive sent an email to your yahoo address. please check it.--Jiang 05:41, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * emailed again. did you visit Special:Confirmemail?--Jiang 00:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Please be careful
Is StC out to get you? I don't know -- but have a look at this. Please be careful in the future considering your ArbCom sanctions. I like having you around. 61.10.12.130 09:49, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Categories
While I agree that we should consider the issue of convenience for our readers, I disagree that we need to create a whole new category crosslisting everything because of it. This is why we maintain a strict distinction in the uses of "ROC" and "Taiwan" in articles pertaining to government affairs even though both terms have practically become interchangible in everyday speech. Convenience issues can be more then adequately addressed using disambiguation pages such as Military of China or redirects without compromising NPOV. -Loren 00:12, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * reference
 * replied

Short block
I am blocking you for 48 hours in light of the fact that, as you gave no statement in the third ArbCom case against you and they reprimanded you for revert warring, ridiculous reverts like the kind you made at Transportation in Beijing ("Previous edit summaries apply") are no longer acceptable. Revert warring is not helpful to anyone; discussion is. Ashibaka tock 00:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * I noticed Alanmak was deleting your attempts at communication, so I blocked him as well for being another edit warrior. But keep in mind that the RfA was filed against you. It's not a conspiracy against you; it's simply that you revert way too much. When talking with one person fails, get a third opinion in the debate, or ask for help with an RfC or Administrators' Noticeboard complaint. Ashibaka tock 02:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * replied


 * Request mediation then. Don't fight fire with fire. Ashibaka tock 12:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * Other people have taken the time to open and close three RfAs against you, so I don't see why you can't also make the best of our rather complete set of dispute resolution methods. I have no familiarity with this case but endless revert warring is a problem, not a solution. Ashibaka tock 12:27, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Please don't get yourself banned from this project. You've made a lot of helpful edits and I really don't want to see this happen. If there's something that is truly worth reverting, then someone else will do it. If they don't, then bring it to their attention and they will help you out. Having one bad version of an article appear a bit longer in the short run beats getting yourself banned in the long run. --Jiang 04:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * replied

I'd like to note that although I am not a fan of your revert warring, I just made some use of the information you added to List of railways in China in a separate project of mine, so I'd like to thank you for your continuous hard work there and on other China-related articles. Ashibaka tock 20:27, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * replied

Hong Kong Island
I noticed you reverted several spellings on the Hong Kong Island to British spellings. While I appreciate that Hong Kong was years ago a British colony, and still in its government functions uses British spellings, all English media in the territory has adopted American spellings. The SCMP is the only one that still on occasion uses British spellings, but it will be making the full switch in the next few months under their new editor.

I argue that American English prevails in all HK posts as that's the case with English usage in the city. - Zachkchk —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zachkchk (talk • contribs) 04:35, March 26, 2006 (UTC)

In either case, patroling all HK posts for inversions of "re" and "er" is not the most beneficial use of time, as quite a number of HK posts need serious copy-editing, clean-up and documentation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zachkchk (talk • contribs) 04:39, March 26, 2006 (UTC)
 * replied


 * Note that where there is a dispute about whether to use American or British English, the spellings that were used in the article originally should be retained - so if they were British spellings originally, your reverts are justified. See WP:MOS: "If no such words can be agreed upon, and there is no strong tie to a specific dialect, the dialect of the first significant contributor (not a stub) should be used." -- enochlau (talk) 15:17, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied

Block
Per your entry on Requests for arbitration/Admin enforcement requested, I am blocking you for 24 hours for continued move-warring at Template:HK/Template:HONG KONG. Please do not continue to disrupt articles by moving them to other places; if there is a dispute about a page, check out dispute resolution options here. (ESkog)(Talk) 12:43, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
 * replied, also relevant


 * Here's the bottom line. I don't really care whether the template's ultimate home is at HK or HONG KONG, and I quite frankly can't see any long-term benefit to having one or the other. I do know that it is preferable to keep it constant though, and avoid redirects/moves whenever necessary (as they strain servers and, more problematically, lead to double redirects). The ultimate name of the template is of no concern. The constant move war is a concern, and I acted to stop it. You are welcome, once your block expires, to attempt some other means of dispute resolution to have other interested users help determine the ultimate fate of this template, but editwarring over it clearly violates the terms of your probation. Don't do it. (ESkog)(Talk) 18:25, 29 March 2006 (UTC)


 * replied

Solving our recent disputes
Instantnood, I am writing to you regarding our recent edit wars. I think, by now, both of us have already "enjoyed" the consequence of edit wars. It has been a hard time to live without Wikipedia.This is obviously not a good thing for either of us, and not a good thing for the Hong Kong-related articles in Wikipedia as well. I believe that you won't like that either. From the fact that you are avoiding the use of the disputed flag templates, I see your willingness to stop our edit wars. I hope to reconcile with you, and work something out together.

Several months ago, I pointed out that the Indian Wikipedians are doing a very good job in improving India-related articles and promoting them to featured status. In contrast, we Hong Kong Wikipedians are having edit wars amongst ourselves and cannot do anything to improve the Hong Kong-related articles. Furthermore, the Hong Kong weekly collaboration has been left unattended for a long time. I find that pretty sad. I think we should concentrate our effort for the good of the whole community, rather than using our effort to go against each other.

This is my plan for solving our recent disputes step by step:
 * We should stop reverting each other's edit so frequently.
 * It seems that we are the only two Wikipedians that are invloved in the recent edit dispute. I think we should discuss more on our own in MSN, so as to have a consensus amongst ourselves first.
 * Avoid changing or adding more the disputed flag templates at this moment.
 * There are several "core members" who always involve in Hong Kong-related article. We should work with them together, communicate more with them, build a sense of trust, and resume the plan for bettering Hong Kong-related articles.
 * Stop saying things that are offensive.

I hope this plan would help us to solve our disputes.

Apart from this, we had different opinions about whether the article "Jau Gwei" should be deleted several weeks ago. I suggest starting a new article called "Hong Kong street food culture", which includes a brief introduction of several kinds of common street food in Hong Kong and the practice of "Jau Gwei". I have some photographs for that. You can also take more photographs for that, as you are now in Hong Kong. I hope to work on this article together as our first step of reconciliation. What do you think?

- Alan 00:58, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * replied
 * If you two would like a mediator or just a third opinion on HK related articles, I'm happy to assist in that regard. The last thing I want to see happen is both of you blocked for an extended period of time. enochlau (talk) 03:12, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
 * replied