User talk:Nlu/archive23

Biographies of Kings of the Sixteen Kingdoms
Hello Nlu! With great interest I have read your entries about kings and queens of the Sixteen Kingdoms. They read like a novel (however sometimes a rather cruel one!). You describe them so to say in a very realistic way. On the period 220-581 AD the most detailed book in an European language, although dating from 1935, still is Geschichte des chinesischen Reiches (History of the Chinese Empire) by Otto Franke. It was the first history in an European language written completely from Chinese historical sources. He describes the military campaigns, intrigues and killings at the courts in the same way you did but far less detailed as you did. So I was wondering, what source or sources did you use? Since the biographies are all very consistent, your source must be also. I am just curious! Bye Guss2 17:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Mostly the Zizhi Tongjian (both the original as written by Sima Guang and as translated into modern Chinese by Bo Yang), supplemented with the official histories Book of Jin, Book of Song, and Book of Wei. Thanks for your comments.  --Nlu (talk) 04:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. I appear to have picked up a groupie vandal. Oh, well. =) -- Gogo Dodo 07:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * :-) No problem.  --Nlu (talk) 07:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Xavier Nady
I am at odds as to why you removed the trivia from Xavier Nady's page. I am specifically refering to the song the "Ballad of X." I can understand removing the link that was attached to the song, as I am sure it could probably be in violation of some Wikipedia rule regarding advertising and promotion, but the trivia bit itself should not be removed. If you google "Xavier Nady Song" or "Xavier Nady Tribute" or even just "Xavier Nady" several pages will come up referencing the "Ballad of X." Having read several Wikipedia articles also I know that the trivia section often includes references to songs, poems, movies, etc., regardless of how popular or unpopular those artistic expressions are. Immediately removing the trivia and labeling it as irrelevant is not fair to fans of Xavier Nady or Wikipedia readers. The song itself contains factual information concerning Nady's half a year with the New York Mets, and is actually an ode written in his honor. In the future, I'd suspect fans of Xavier Nady reading his Wikipedia entry would be delighted to learn that a song about him actually exists. Please provide me with an explanation as to why you tagged this trivia as irrelevant and thus removed it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.52.58.130 (talk • contribs)
 * I don't see how it is relevant to Nady as a player, particularly because his time in New York was short, and he's no longer a Met. If you disagree, please discuss on Talk:Xavier Nady and see if the consensus agrees with you.  --Nlu (talk) 16:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Nlu, I removed what I had previously written at the bottom of this page and posted it in the discussion of the Xavier Nady article. --Fatthand9 02:16, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Peter and Rosemary Grant
Would you please take another look at Articles for deletion/Peter and Rosemary Grant? I think that my recent changes to the article make it clear that Peter and Rosemary Grant are notable scientists. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 17:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've withdrawn the nomination in light of the rewrite.  --Nlu (talk) 20:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 20:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

82.119.123.26
Hi there,

This user is a consistent spammer. If you look at their record, you will see that thye have done nothing but put blatantly spamming links on sites over a period of months. Is this a case the should mean a permanent block, given that this individual has done nothing but spam?

--Bcnviajero 20:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
 * By policy, IPs are generally never to be blocked indefinitely unless they are shown to be open proxies. Thanks for keeping me informed about, however.  I'll keep an eye on it.  --Nlu (talk) 20:21, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

FTR
While I do at times act badly this troll has stalked me for weeks and has tried to intimidate me by posting my location multiple times even when I asked him not to, he also has made multiple personal attacks. 132.241.246.111 05:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * If you think that's the case (and I saw no clear evidence of that in his/her edit history), you should submit an request for comment and/or an request for arbitration, or ask for help from administrators. Behaving badly the way you have only causes you to lose credibility.  --Nlu (talk) 05:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Also, if you don't want your location to be known, don't edit anonymously, since a WHOIS gives away the location easily (and is public information). --Nlu (talk) 05:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

The stalkers ip address changes daily. 132.241.246.111 05:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You can mention that in any RfCs you file. --Nlu (talk) 05:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Esau sleiman
I would think that this may call for a longer term block. Ryūlóng 06:19, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I considered indefinite blocking, but I think the user has made some good faith edits. I think one last chance should be given.  Thanks for getting back to me on it.  --Nlu (talk) 06:40, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism of User talk:132.241.246.111
FYI:
 * User:132.241.246.111 has removed your notices from the top of User talk:132.241.246.111

—12.72.72.219 07:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Notice now restored by Admin:Tbeatty. —12.72.72.219 07:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, thanks.
 * Meanwhile, I recognize that I cannot force you to register, nor would I even if I can, but I think that this situation with you and Grazon is unproductive as far as both of you are concerned. He's claiming that you are stalking him and sockpuppeteering, where you (quite justifiably, I think, based on edits, although he has made productive edits as well) are claiming that he's POV-pushing.  To avoid the claims of sockpuppetry, you might want to register and stick to one account.  That also shows more accountability, I think.  --Nlu (talk) 07:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * You are right that it creates greater accountability, but another way of seeing that is that it makes one an easier target — unfortunately not only for admins but for edit gangs. Sorry, but Wikipedia is evolving qua a mobocracy. —12.72.68.190 08:25, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Page protection
I think the page at Gando might do with page protection as well. The same person who keeps on changing Balhae keeps on deleting stuff from Gando as well. There's a user using multiple aliases and IP addresses to try to keep pushing the same changes and deletions over and over again over the course of several weeks. Take a look at the page history and see if you agree. --Yuje 17:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. Let me take a look.  --Nlu (talk) 17:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Xavier Nady
Nlu, when did Wikipedia become the judge and jury as to what constitutes a notable band? There are several bands out there that neither myself nor you have probably ever heard of, yet this does not make them non notable. The song in question here was written by a Met fan whom I would suppose is also a big fan of Xavier Nady's. Xavier Nady, as you have pointed out before, only played as a Met for a short time, yet during that short time, 75 games to be exact, he managed to endear himself to Mets fans, who admired and respected him for his hard work and his laid back, easy going attitude. He was referred to as the X-Man by his manager, his teammates and New York Metropolitan fans. During his time in New York, he contributed several clutch hits which led to victories for the New York Mets. His trade was the result of a freak cab accident involving Duaner Sanchez, which Kuff and the Buttheads mention in the song, and the majority of Met fans were dismayed and upset by the trade. Xavier himself alluded to being frustrated with the trade in several interviews, having gone from a first place team headed to the playoffs to a last place team that has long occupied the cellar of the National league. The song echoes that frustration, and stands as an ode to Xavier's time with the Mets and his sad departure from the Mets. I understand removing the link to the song, as I am sure it probably violates some wikipedia rule, but removing the trivia itself does a grave disservice to fans of Baseball, Xavier Nady and loyal wikipedia readers worldwide.

In my last discussion with you, you said that you had removed the mention of the song because you didn't think it bore any relevance to Xavier Nady's baseball career. Why then is there mention of the song "Talkin Baseball" by an artist I have never heard of, because the song was most likely a one hit wonder, on Willie May's page? "Talkin BAseball", with Mickey, Willie and the Duke, certainly has no relevance to Willie's baseball career, yet it is allowed to stay on Willie's page.

Nlu, I have read through your credentials and I respect the efforts you have made to keep Wikipedia factual and free of vandalism, but I must say I think you have overstepped your boundaries by removing the mention of this song on Xavier Nady's page. In no way was the trivia a case of vandalism, and the song and the band are both factual entities, regardless of how notable you decide they are. While greatly exaggerated, the song itself is a factual record of Xavier Nady's involvement with the New York Mets, and I am sure that all Mets, Pirates, Baseball and Xavier Nady fans would be delighted to learn that a song about this slugging rightfielder exists. I ask that you rethink your judgements here, and let this addition remain on the Xavier Nady page, so that all visitors to the page can learn a piece of trivia they probably would have never known. Wikipedia will be a better place for it.

On another note, notability is a very arbitrary issue. Nothing becomes notable until someone believes it to be notable. For example, perhaps you have heard of Samuel Taylor Coleridge. He was a 19th century English poet who penned such works as "Kublai Kahn," with the famous opening line "In Xanadu did Kublai Khan, a stately pleasure dome decree," which Orson Welles uses as an epigram in the opening of his "Citizen Kane." His other famous poem, "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner" is today recognized as one of the finest poetic works every created--"Water, water everywhere/ And all the boards did shrink/ Water, water everywhere/ Nor any a drop to drink." What people do not know about Coleridge however, is that he achieved no success at all in his lifetime. During his lifetime he was known as an opium addict who had a crush on William Wordworth's sister and for trying to convince the English Parliament to ban the works of Shakespeare. It was not until the 1920's when a lowly Massachusett's math professor named John Livingston Lowes purchased his notebook at an auction and preceded to write "The Road to Xanadu" that literary experts around the world began to recognize Coleridge as a poetic genius, the predecessor to T.S. Eliot, Hart Crane and Ezra Pound. If it wasn't for Lowe's work, people like yourself would probably delete any Wikipedia mention of Samuel Taylor Coleridge, because it would not be considered notable. Just some food for thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fathand9 (talk • contribs)


 * You're here on Wikipedia, and you have to play by Wikipedia's rules. Whatever other communities, online or otherwise, might judge as notable or not notable, here on Wikipedia, the community of Wikipedians judge by Wikipedia's standards what's notable and what's not notable.  You don't get to dictate to us.  --Nlu (talk) 04:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I had removed over half of what I had written, feeling it was a little harsh. You must have reposted it, to try to make some point or whatever.  Nothing I have said has been judged by a community of Wikipedians.  It has only been judged by you and a girl who admittedly has no knowledge of baseball, and two Wikipedians, if I can call you that, does not a community make. Furthermore, Wikipedia's standards about notability, so far as I have read them, are very cloudy as to what exactly constitutes notability.  I was not trying to dictate anything to you, I was merely arguing my opinion, as a Wikipedian, as to why the song is notable. A song about Xavier Nady exists, and it includes factual information about his time with the Mets, while echoing the frustration of Mets fans at the trade of the X-Man.  Few songs exist about modern baseball players, and I just thought that the song is a nice little piece of trivia regarding Xavier Nady which could be included on his Wikipedia page--being that it expounds on, with some hubris, his talents as a ballplayer, and the connection he had with New York fans.  As I have already said, I agree that the link to the song deserves no space on Wikipedia, being that it is spam and vanity, but the mention of the song is not.  There are few mediums out there which could provide information such as this to everyday human beings, and I thought that Wikipedia was one of them.  However, because one Wikipedian does not share this view, the community of Wikipedians, which you refer to it as, will be deprived of learning anything rare or truly interesting regarding Xavier.  Thanks again for your consideration.Fatthand9 13:41, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * No, I did not "reposted it ... to make some point" -- you removed your entire message, which means that whoever is reading this would have no idea what this is about. While only I and another Wikipedian (and please don't call her a girl who admittedly has no knowledge of baseball" -- you have no evidence of that, and calling her that is disrespectful) have posted comments, the fact that there were not contrary opinions other than yours is a strong indication of how the community feels.  --Nlu (talk) 16:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Quoted verbatim from ImmortalGoddezz's User page "I've recently been pulled into fixing the Pittsburgh Pirates Baseball Player articles by a friend, despite the fact I have no knowledge of baseball. If I completely screw something up regarding any of them, please let me know nicely." I don't think that is being disrespectful, unless you are referring to my calling her a "girl." For that I apologize, and I will from now on refer to her as a "woman" or "lady." The fact that there were not contrary opinions other than mine is not so much a strong indication of how the community feels, as I have reason to believe that you are the so called "friend" she is referring to. I too can tell a bunch of people to check out the Xavier Nady page, and some of them would undoubtedly agree with me, while some, I will admit, may agree with you.  The lack of opinions contrary to yours is more a case of nobody checking out the Xavier Nady discussion, other than ImmortalGoddezz, whom I will assume was recommended by yourself.  Please do not call me disrespectful and tell me I have no evidence, until you check your facts.  I apologize for calling her "girl" and from now on I will refer to her by her user name. Fatthand9 16:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * First, I do not know her, so I'm not the "friend" she's referring to.
 * Meat puppetry (see WP:SOCK) will get you nowhere.
 * If you believe that the community at large will agree with you, file a WP:RFC. --Nlu (talk) 16:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I did not feel that a WP:RFC was necessary in this case because I have attempted to resolve this with you. I pulled my original post, before you responded to it, because I felt it was disrespectful and not civil, although I stand by the argument proposed in it. I posted a portion of it in the Xavier Nady discussion which I felt would be enough evidence for anyone reading this.  Other than that I feel that I have done nothing here but talk with you to try to see eye to eye.  You have not responded to my argument at all, other than labeling the post as "vanity and spam," which I agreed with in regards to the link, but not the mere mention of the song.  Otherwise you have done little more than belittle my argument in regards to the Wikipedia community, of which I am also a part, and tell me I have been disrespectful towards another user, despite the fact that I have shown evidence that what I said was true.  I have not attempted any meat puppetry, as you accuse me.  I was hoping to resolve this with you, but as of now I see that the only hope is to file a WP:RFC, which I think is a shame.Fatthand9 17:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I responded to your arguments; the fact that you don't like my arguments doesn't mean I didn't make them.
 * No, you have not engaged in meat puppetry or sock puppetry, but you threatened meat puppetry above. That's what i was writing about.
 * I think you should file an RFC. At least, let's get some more people into this.  --Nlu (talk) 17:29, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Posted WP:RFC at Talk:Xavier Nady. I was unsure exactly the format of how to post it, or if it is neutral enough, feel free to fix it if you please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fathand9 (talk • contribs)

Saw the RfC. Looks fine, and thank you for writing it in a neutral manner, which can often be difficult to do in an RfC. --Nlu (talk) 21:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Brisbane Grammar School
Sorry about that, i didnt realise i had gotten rid of the references. I'll take more note next time. Please, feel free to express your opinion into the Brisbane Grammar School page argument, its good to have more people's opinions. --Kiran90 08:40, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Nlu (talk) 16:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

HELP! 124.50.69.21 is vandalizing my talk page!
He's talking about flying dicks! I'm getting sick and tired of these punk and goth kids sent by Jeff Hardy & Bam Margera wrecking this 2-year-old page!

And by the way, look at his edits... --D.F. Williams 16:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Blocked. Thanks for letting me know.  --Nlu (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Spam
Hi there, you removed my site www.jacknicholson.org for being spam. I actually have had it listed there for a long time - on the talk page for the Jack Nicholson entry jacknicholson.org is cited about 3 times. We have considerably more info on Jack Nicholson than IMDB in our archive and in fact are the only online source of countless interviews from the 70's and 80's. I rewrote the factually incorrect personal life part of Jack Nicholson's entry but still had an editor overly bias the piece towards their particular take on Jack Nicholson's paternity, sad but true that everytime I tried to make it clear what was possible they would re-write it, I gave up. I did however make sure certain black and white quotes from Jack Nicholson remained and I left my link there so that people could come to my site and re-read a factual biography. I have put specific references only available via www.jacknicholson.org in the piece and am happy to leave it at that. I will leave it up to you whether you include our site in external links, however it is there as a useful resource and according to wikipedia rules - a few useful links per entry is not considered spam but is there to be of value to visitors - your call. For what it is worth though, our site is not spam, it is the largest resource for material pertaining to Jack Nicholson on the internet. --203.173.145.132 07:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I disagree. If you wish to have this discussed, however, please go to Talk:Jack Nicholson and discuss it there.  And please remember to sign your posts.  --Nlu (talk) 05:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

possible expansion???
hi just asking should be any expansion on the articles of Tuoba Shiyijian and Murong Hui? I'm also unsure about the relationship between Tuoba Shiyijian and Tuoba Gui, most sources I've read state that he is the grandfather of Tuoba Gui but some say that he is possibly Tuoba Gui's father. I know that on the Chinese wikipedia there is an article on Murong Hui, but I haven't had the time to translate it into English. By the way, great work you've been doing on the Chinese history articles!

Abstrakt 06:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I think expansion of Tuoba Shiyijian would be appropriate, and there should be an article for Murong Hui.  As to the relationship between Tuoba Shiyijian and Tuoba Gui, I think I wrote an explanation of the unclear nature of that relationship in Emperor Daowu of Northern Wei.  --Nlu (talk) 07:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify
I am a wiki user and i was showing a friend the ups and downs of the site. The intention was to vandalise and show him how fast it gets reverted. But don't worry we're done, and trust vandalism wasn't the only thing I showed him. 70.118.90.92 08:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Please don't do it. See WP:POINT.  --Nlu (talk) 08:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Rollback
Please don't use rollback to revert good-faith edits, even if they are poor edits. Those who know what it's for can be easily and unnecessarily put off by its use in these cases. If they don't know what it's for and are relatively new to Wikipedia, a more descriptive edit summary would probably be good to help them identify their mistake. If this wasn't rollback and was just a similar edit summary, then my mistake. Thanks, Karwynn (talk) 19:07, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess that happened a while ago, so never mind. Karwynn (talk) 19:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)