User talk:Nlu/archive22

Barnstar
Since I couldn't find a barnstar designed for editors working on China-related articles, I hereby award you the Descendent of the Dragon barnstar for your excellent work on Chinese history. With love, Sarazyn • TALK • DE 08:58, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I hope to be able to find time soon to return to writing these articles. :-)  --Nlu (talk) 09:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

BTW: Han Guangwudi is candidate for Good Article status. Sarazyn • TALK • DE 09:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Unfortunately, I don't know Deutsch, otherwise I'd try to help improve it. :-)  Thanks for all your work with regard to Chinese/Deutsch/English interactions.  --Nlu (talk) 09:39, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Hulk
You placed a partial protection on the Hulk TV series page, I am concerned that it may have been removed by some user. Can one revert a partial protection, so that it isn't there? Because right after you placed it there RogerR reverted it back to the day before, and he keeps removing the tag. Bignole 11:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Removing the tag does not remove the protection. But if he/she continues, please report it to WP:AIV if it becomes serious enough.  Thanks.  (Now, if you think it's time to unprotect it yourself, then you can let me know or put a request on WP:RFP.)  Thanks.  --Nlu (talk) 15:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Enlighter1 sock puppets
Thanks for blocking a couple of the Enlighter1 sock puppets (User:Almightytheone, User:Allpowerful1), but, because of the names and vastly similar vandal edits, User:Almightytheone, User:Enlighter11, and User:Allknowing1 are all three still not blocked. If you look at these users contributions you will see the indisputable similarities in their edits and how their names are all somewhat synonymous. ~ clearthought 16:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * They've been blocked already. --Nlu (talk) 16:26, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, I forgot to look at their block log and only looked at yours. Thanks and sorry for the confusion! ~ clearthought 16:33, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks.  --Nlu (talk) 16:34, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Following up on this, is there anyway that his IP address could get blocked. Watching the edits on FNC, for one, I continuously see him reappear constantly, and now appears to be User:Invincible1, though I am not completely sure of that one at this point. Anyway, thanks for what you have done already. Chris 05:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. The thing to do, if you wish to pursue it, is to file a request for CheckUser, which allows those with sufficient privilege to find out if these are indeed from the same IP and block the IP if they all come from the same IP and that IP is not shared by legitimate users.  --Nlu (talk) 05:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Another (alleged but obvious) sock puppet has appeared: User:Allstriker1. This guy really needs to be taken care of. ~ clearthought 01:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * He's been blocked by another admin. Would you mind filing a CheckUser request?  I am in the middle of something else here.  Thanks.  --Nlu (talk) 02:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I did. Thanks for everything! ~ clearthought 02:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Nlu (talk) 02:11, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Facilitated Communication
I am still working on this with another editor offline, but it's taking awhile, so no problem with your removing the "under construction" tag. Just thought I'd let you know. Thanks, Jim Butler(talk) 06:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. --Nlu (talk) 06:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for removing the vandalism from my talk page! —♦♦ SʘʘTHING  (Я)  07:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thank you!  --Nlu (talk) 07:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing mine, too! -Stephen Aquila 00:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks.  --Nlu (talk) 04:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Ra'anana
Why did you remove the link to the Urban Israel - Ra'anana page? Cymruisrael 05:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I looked at the site, and I believe that the site is not in compliance with WP:EL and WP:SPAM. --Nlu (talk) 05:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. Not entirely sure that I agree with you on WP:SPAM, but the first reason is true. Cymruisrael 06:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Award

 * From Martial Law 06:24, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Nlu (talk) 06:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You're Welcome. Martial Law 17:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Xia and Helian Ding
I see no source that indicates that the Shanyu in Mulan was modelled after Helian Ding. I therefore reverted those edits. Do you have a reference for your edits? Or is this a Chinese version vs. U.S. version thing? --Nlu (talk) 18:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello. Whether it is true or not, it is now part of popular culture that Mulan was responsible for desposing of the last chinese "Hun" ruler. Hence the sections were entitled "Pop Culture". I do think they are relevant, but if you don't then that is fine. Someone else will eventually write it in anyway, just thought I could beat them to it. All the best. Kaz 18:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * If it's not true it shouldn't be edited in. See WP:V.  --Nlu (talk) 18:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * It is true that it is part of Pop culture. Thank you very much for the reference to Wiki policy. I am very very familiar with them all. I have been enjoying reading about wikipedia for years. I think you should look at the pop culture sections of several articles. We can not escape pop culture. Stay Happy. Kaz 19:02, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * It's not a matter of whether it's pop culture or not. It's that the movie doesn't say that Helian Ding was the Shanyu.  If it did, even if it is not historically true, it's verifiable and can be inserted (after being stated as fiction), but since the movie doesn't refer to Helian Ding, inserting it is wrong.  It's unverified and also original research. --Nlu (talk) 19:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, now I understand your point. Thank you. However, Helian Ding was the last ruler of the Xiongnu remember, so it is verified. P.S. stating a fact of po culture is not original research. Kind regards. Kaz 19:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Whether Helian Ding was the last Xiongnu ruler depends on how "Xiongnu ruler" is defined -- and very few scholars would agree that he actually is. And you are misusing the word "fact."  It would be a "fact" of pop culture if Mulan actually stated that she defeated Helian Ding (as unfactually true that might be in real life).  But that's not what the movie said.  --Nlu (talk) 19:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Very well then. By the way may I say how interesting it is that you say he was not the last leader of the Chinese "Huns". Do you know much about this topic then? Have you written much about the Xiongnu after Helian Ding? I would like to read more about this, because I thought that the Huns disappeared from China after Helian Ding. Thank you.Kaz 19:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Xiongnu did not "disappear" from China after Helian Ding; there was simply no longer a state afterwards with an ethnic Xiongnu ruler. However, there continued to be key figures of Xiongnu ethnicity.  Many Northern Wei officials named "Liu" were actually of Xiongnu ethnicity, as was the paramount general Erzhu Rong (of whom an article will be created at some point).  --Nlu (talk) 21:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Fantastic. I am looking forward to it.Kaz 23:34, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Shenjia vs Shengguang
I have a question for you. Why did you write that the 428-431 era was called Shenjia on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Wei but called Shengguang on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helian_Ding#Era_name ? Thank you very much. Kaz 19:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Different states use different era names. --Nlu (talk) 21:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. You are a very interesting person.Kaz 23:33, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

GFDL Conformity
Hello Nlu. As a main contributor to Chinese articles, I just wanted to inform you that I restarted the controversial Template:Translation for GFDL upkeep (since the authors have to be mentioned). I also try to add this template to all the articles I've translated. Sincerly, Sarazyn • TALK • DE 12:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know, although not understanding Deutsch or the controversy itself, I'm going to stay out of it, I think. --Nlu (talk) 15:27, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppet mis-identification
I got two 9/11 related diffs from Anon2 and Mdmorrissey mixed up. They weren't related at all. Thanks for spotting my mistake. --  Netsnipe  (Talk)  15:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for your hard work.  --Nlu (talk) 15:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:Infobox_Chinese_emperor
I made an infobox to standardize the tables I saw on some Chinese emperor pages and make it easier to make new Chinese emperor information tables. You seem to have done a lot to help with Chinese history articles, could you offer me some input on this? I applied it to Emperor Xuan of Han, which you wrote most of. What do you think? LittleDan talk 16:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks very nice. --Nlu (talk) 06:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Chineseblast.com link addition
Hello, I am the site owner for Chineseblast.com. I received your email about posting commercial links on this page. Chineseblast is not a commercial site, it is completely non-profit and was created for the sole benefit of the Chinese learning community. The site's potential as a learning tool for everyone is limitless, but we are dependent on bringing enough people to the site to get it started. As such a link on Wikipedia is extremely important to the site's success. Thank you for your time and efforts in moderating this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drvelocity (talk • contribs)
 * I do not believe that the link to your site complies with WP:EL and WP:SPAM. If you believe that it does, please discuss on the appropriate talk page as to why it does.  --Nlu (talk) 19:01, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the quick response. I think the site qualifies for linkable material under number 5 - "Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as professional athlete statistics, screen credits, interviews, or online textbooks."  Have you had a chance to look over the site?  It is basically a wikipedia for Chinese content in and of itself.  I think it's certainly just as valid of a link as Chinese-forums.com, but ultimately the decision is in your hands.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drvelocity (talk • contribs)


 * Actually, the decision is not in my hands; it's open to discussion. I still do not believe it qualifies.  Again, if you wish, bring it up for discussion on the appropriate talk page.  --Nlu (talk) 19:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure where that talk page is, could you point it out for me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drvelocity (talk • contribs)


 * That depends on which article you think the link belongs to. If, just as an example, you think the link belongs in the article Pancake, then go to Talk:Pancake.  --Nlu (talk) 19:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Cookie

 * Thanks! --Nlu (talk) 19:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

External Links on Air Jordans
I fixed a on | Air Jordans link which was pointed towards http://www.techcomglobal.com which provided NO Air Jordan release Dates (and is a commercial site) and pointed the link to its original destination which was to NiceKicks.com's comprehensive list of Air Jordan Release Dates.

This link is not being added for commercial purposes but rather as supplimental information readers would be interested in. Since | Air Jordan Release Dates change very frequently as well as the details (Product ID, Price, Date, and official pictures) it would be much more efficient for the information to be updated in one place with confirmed information.
 * I still don't believe it complies with WP:SPAM and WP:EL. However, please discuss on Talk:Air Jordan.  --Nlu (talk) 17:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

please unblock this IP
Please see the IP's talk page for reasoning. --216.9.250.61 04:19, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't see any reasoning at all on that talk page. --Nlu (talk) 04:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The IP tagged itself with the tag, so of course, I'm taking a look. I agree that the IP needs to be blocked for all the vandalism coming out of it, but as a shared IP, perhaps a week might be too long. I don't own one, so I don't know for sure, but I would think that Blackberries don't allow cookies, which is necessary to log in to Wikipedia. I think if many Blackberry owners are affected by this, our blocks should actually be very short, for just an hour or so, maybe 24 at the most. What do you think? --Deathphoenix ʕ 01:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * That's reasonable. I still think that the block should stand, but I don't mind if you unblock.  --Nlu (talk) 01:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks, I'll unblock for now, I have no problems with shorter blocks if we get the slightest hint of vandalism coming out of it, though. Thanks, Deathphoenix ʕ 01:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

User:24.130.242.253
Hi Nlu! Since you blocked the repeat vandal, I wanted to see if you're aware of the other IPs the vandal has used, which you may want to consider blocking as well. I created an entry at WP:LTA about this user, whom I gave the unclever name "Disney/Barney vandal": WP:LTA. The IPs are and. (The last one was used just several hours ago.) All resolve to Comcast Internet services, apparently in the Los Angeles area (I'm illiterate when it comes to WHOIS reports). Thanks for your long but necessary block; I was really sick of dealing with that user's antics. szyslak (t, c,  e ) 07:23, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for informing me. --Nlu (talk) 07:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

?
What did I do?--EZ 07:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Your edit to your user page contained a personal attack, and also contained external links that constituted spam. Don't do it again.  --Nlu (talk) 07:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay i understand.--EZ 07:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Please consider lesser blocks on shared IPs
Hi there. I use a BlackBerry for work (like millions of other professionals) and as a result my websurfing is via RIM's IP address range; I tend to surf at night when I'm at home where I choose to have no online computer. Oddly enough, it seems that all providers (mine is T-Mobile) use RIM's IP range regardless of the ones they own. Now last night I saw an error in an article, and I decided to construct a comment on the discussion page to encourage someone with access to a regular keyboard (I use the model with a half/predictive keyboard so it's not very easy to type much). After typing a hundred words or so I found out the IP I was using was blocked, not just for a small amount of time but for a week. That was very frustrating and, honestly, the length did not make any sense given the random assignment of these IPs. Compounding the problem, BlackBerry do not have the "{" or "}" symbols so that I could even request an unblock. Now I see you've commented that I should've "registered", well I have but I choose not to but cookies on the limited memory of my BlackBerry. Please refrain from these excessive blocks and consider the limitation of those using the RIM IP addresses. --Bobak 16:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I understand your difficult situation, but I feel that the time it takes to log in shouldn't be much, balanced with the amount of vandalism that was coming from these IPs. --Nlu (talk) 21:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:Angham Mohammad Ali Suleiman

 * What do you mean? You didn't explain. I moved all the article without deleting anything.

--Meno25 22:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Use the "move" button rather than copy and paste the contents of the article. That causes the history of the article not to be carried along.

--Nlu (talk) 23:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Auto Convertion Tool
Hi, I think you might have accidently delete our link on your pinyin auto-convertion tool section: http://www.cozywebsite.com/dictionary/compose/

This is a free online tools that fits well with the auto-convertion tool section. Do you mind adding it back? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.226.243.178 (talk • contribs)
 * The removal is not accidental. In my opinion, the insertion of the link is not in compliance with WP:EL and WP:SPAM.  --Nlu (talk) 06:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I certainly respect your opinion. However, can you elaborate how the characteristics of this tool differ from others that are currently on the page? From what I understand, we are all providing the tools that meet the section spec and serve the community. If you don't mind take another look, I am sure you would change your mind. -Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.226.243.178 (talk • contribs)


 * That there are other sites on the page that may not be appropriate is not a good reason to include yet another site that is not appropriate. When I see pages that I think are containing spam I add cleanup-spam tags, but I do not have the time or the expertise to go through all pages and determine what is spam and what is not.  What I do believe is that your site does not comply with the guidelines for inclusion.  If you believe that other sites are also inappropriate, feel free to remove them.  --Nlu (talk) 04:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Uhm... In fact, I believe most of these sites are appropriate and should be considered as a candiate for the section labeled "Auto-Coverters". Many of them provide nice tools that would benefit the community. (I don't thinks that is what SPAM is defined) -My 2 cents  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.226.243.178 (talk • contribs)

Thanks
...for the help with that very strange vandal. He seems to be using open proxies because of the / / / but when I check them they come up negative. He always hits the same articles with a weird spam, or redirecting the main website of the news organization to Yahoo. I'm signing off for the night... maybe some of these pages need sprotection. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 05:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. Thanks for your dedication.  --Nlu (talk) 05:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry
Sorry for that one. My phone went through the wash and I was just really angry and needed someway to vent. I suppose I should find another way. Thanks for keeping wikipedia protected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by H4x (talk • contribs)

Chavez articles
Hi, Nlu. I've had limited internet access the last few days, and have just noticed the edits to Hugo Chavez and Criticism of Hugo Chavez by User:Joel23, and the escalated warning to him. In fact, the text he is inserting is very well-referenced, and the reverts are not justified, particularly considering he is a new editor. In fact, he is inserting text that has been discussed on the talk page as needing to be inserted, with a very long list of references provided. As a newcomer, rather than being welcomed, he has been bitten. I've left him a message, and when I have better internet access last week, I will try to better orient him, but I just wanted to leave a note to you that I thought the warnings severe for an editor who is NOT inserting personal opinion, NPOV or unreferenced text: he is inserting well-referenced and well-known fact. Considering the systemic bias in favor of Chavez on Wikipedia, it's sad that a new editor, attempting to insert correctly-referenced accurate fact has been warned and not welcomed. Regards, Sandy 14:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Joel23 is not a new user; he is a sockpuppet of the IP who has been inserting the same thing, who is in turn likely a sockpuppet of the vandal The Middle East Conflict man. Some of the things inserted may be sufficiently referenced to be inserted, but included is an unsupported claim that Chávez supported Al Qaeda -- and that is TMECM's modus operandi, to insert what appear to be good faith edits along with POV/unsupported claims.  Nothing sad about it other than the time wasted that has to be used to stop this vandal.  --Nlu (talk) 15:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Pristina
Why was the Pristina article reverted then locked. Why is the neutral version incorrect? RegardsTonycdp 16:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * As I explained, your version is not the "neutral version." Since you were the first violator of 3RR, I felt that I was giving you a break already by not blocking you.  When protecting, an admin is allowed to revert to the version less favored by the more culpable party.  Please watch yourself.  --Nlu (talk) 16:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)