User talk:Nlu/archive27

User:Extreme Team
I know you meant well in removing User:Extreme Team's underconstruction page but since it is his userpage, we best leave it up to him if he wants to remove it or not. His origins section which it was under was also blank, which would mean it was still not complete. Mkdw talk 09:29, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Since he hadn't touched it for quite a while, a underconstruction flag is really inappropriate, and I don't think it's particularly appropriate for a user page anyway. Someone had previously suggesting deleting the page, in any case, as an inappropriate user page (since it seemed to be more or less trying to serve as a group page), which I won't do at the moment, but there is no reason for that tag to remain there.  --Nlu (talk) 09:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Very well. I reverted a couple of your construction tag removals. You may want to go back and make sure they're gone. Mkdw talk 09:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 09:43, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Wang Jian
I believe that we should be consistant. Abaoji is better known as Abaoji or Yelu Abaoji, not Taizu of Liao, but the posthumous title is used in the article nonetheless. It should be one way or the other. There is a redirect and mention of name in the article. Ludahai 10:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll make revisions, but tomorrow as it is getting late and I still have one more article to post before dinner.Ludahai 10:06, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * All right, thanks. I plan to add things myself if/when I ever get there, chronologically.  (I'm still in the middle of Southern and Northern Dynasties personalities.)  --Nlu (talk) 10:07, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, if we keep working, we will get these Chinese history articles in good shape. The Five Dynasties/Ten Kingdoms was in particularly bad shape.  Thanks for the Barnstar and not taking the Abaoji dispute personally.  I will rejoin that discussion when I get the Ten Kingdoms done (still a lot of work to do there), as I am sure you have tons to do with the Southern and Northern Dynasties. Ludahai 10:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, with the exception of the Southern Tang, personal names should be used, you are correct. I will make the changed tomorrow, with redirects from posthumous names where indicated. Ludahai 10:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I agree generally, and I'd say that for the final emperor of Southern Tang (but only for him), perhaps Li Yu rather than Li Houzhu or Houzhu of Southern Tang should be used, but that's a preliminary thought.  --Nlu (talk) 16:32, 5 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The Table for Chinese Monarchs specifically says Li Houzhu, so I have used that. The other Southern Tang rulers use the posthumous name convention.  I have made the changes.  If you notice any I missed, just drop me a note.  Ludahai 10:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. I think the issue should be discussed again when the article is to be expanded, and the talk page might be a good place to do that.  I do think that Li Houzhu, while popularly used, is not appropriate since it's not technically correct regardless of whether you're looking at him from a Song perspective or a Southern Tang perspective, but we'll discuss it when we need to.  --Nlu (talk) 10:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion
Keep the Archives links all in one small link. No one really cares about these archives. All they're doing is pushing more important stuff of today down to the bottom. Have a little "Archives" table on the right, thats my suggestion. --Matt57 17:51, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll think about it. Thanks.  --Nlu (talk) 23:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to my sandbox
Hi Nlu. Thanks for taking the template off the page. I didn't realise I had left it on it :) Thanks &mdash; D e on555talk 02:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No, no problem. Thanks.  --Nlu (talk) 02:39, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Nlu
I got a message from you accusing me of vandalism. If you consider CORRECTING ERRORS a form of vandalism, then I guess I am guilty. Please get your facts straight before you go around accusing people. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aronlevin (talk • contribs)
 * Your "corrections" introduced even more inaccuracies. --Nlu (talk) 17:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

User page vandalism
No problem! Persistent little vandal; must be someone who took offense at being warned about vandalism on another account. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs)  17:56, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar!
I don't know what to do with those things...I really need to create an actual user page to stash them. -- Jim Douglas (talk) (contribs)  17:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Block of GEniusboyIII
Hi Nlu, User:GEniusboyIV (talk· contribs) is requesting a lifting of an autoblock. Could you please explain to him why GEniusboy* is inappropriate in a lot more detail because I certainly couldn't figure out why you blocked GEniusboyIII in the first place. Thanks. --  Netsnipe  ►  19:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, there. Trying to look into this user's current unblock request, and saw they're hit with an autoblock related to User:GEniusboyIII. They're pretty obviously the same person, but I'm trying to determine why the first account was blocked in the first place -- I assume there's something I should know about? Luna Santin 20:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The reason why I blocked GEniusboyIII -- I felt that the name was inappropriate in that it implies sockpuppetry and, I must say, felt like a name that a vandal would use. in addition, the edits on The Killers (band) looked suspicious, adding to my decision to block it for inappropriate user name.  --Nlu (talk) 05:00, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

64.235.107.101
I am lifting your block on and reinstituting a shorter block (I haven't decided yet how long the block's going to be). It's a shared IP, and I don't see any reason to block it indefinitely. If there is a reason to, please let me know. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 16:06, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * It was a soft block for a vandal-only editor. Editors using the IP address can still log in and contribute. (aeropagitica) 16:09, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * But even then, I don't think an indefinite block was called for. I put in a one-week block.  --Nlu (talk) 16:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

MyWikiBiz
I believe MyWikiBiz uses various IPs in the 72.94.0.0/16 range, so I can't predict what his next IP will be. Scob e ll302 04:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, in which case, if shows up again, please give WP:AIV that information, so that he can be range-blocked. --Nlu (talk) 04:41, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you message.
Hi, Nlu. I noticed that you always send other user(Who reverted vandalism on your user page, talk page) thanks you message in same world, did you just copy the same world Thanks you for reverting Vandalism from before. I'm just curious abour this. Cheers! Daniel5127 (Talk) 23:36, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I just type it each time. It's short enough that I don't think it needs to be actually canned. :-)  --Nlu (talk) 01:50, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Congrats!
You have recently been added to my Respect List. Clay4president 21:07, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --Nlu (talk) 21:10, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

AfD
Merge doesn't mean delete, it's basically a keep vote ("keep the content"). A merge can be done without an afd... just redirect and merge content over. --W.marsh 21:41, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

71.112.185.229
I noticed you added a final warning to this user back in October, he's back again and still spamming (Talk | contribs). I reverted his last edit but haven't warned him as I guess you'll just want to block him. Thanks. —B33R(talk • contribs) 00:42, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. It looks like  blocked him.  --Nlu (talk) 01:04, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Reporting for block
When is it too early to report a user for block? Can a user be blocked just one vandalism edit after bv (if so, I'm being too lenient)? Thanks. --nkayesmith 09:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * There's no hard and fast policy per se. Personally, I would not.  In fact, I don't like bv as a warning template myself, because I think it implies that some vandalism is more benign than others.  I personally go through all four levels first, and then, if the user vandalizes after a level four warning, block.  But that's just me.  --Nlu (talk) 10:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks - Just that I noticed a user requesting a block after one bv notice, with no vandalism afterwards. --nkayesmith 10:39, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Infobox background colour changer
User, keeps changing the background colours of infoboxes to really unsuitable colours. He's been warned about this twice but keeps changing them back again. Take a look at his most recent [Sheryl Crow] edit. It's almost impossible to read the text. Obviously I don't want to keep reverting it, he has already been warned and told to take it to the infobox template talk page to discuss any further colour changes, can anything else be done about this? Thanks —B33R(talk • contribs) 12:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I reverted a few of his changes, but I think this might be better discussed on WP:AN/I. If he violates 3RR, then take it to WP:AN/3RR.  --Nlu (talk) 17:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Private emails
Hi Nlu, I just saw your post on wp:an. In cases like this could you please consider removing the names, especially if it concerns private and personal information about minors? --Duk 07:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Since I don't believe the information is real, I don't believe that removing it is necessary, and there really isn't any private information there anyway. However, I do not object if you wish to remove it.  --Nlu (talk) 08:47, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure it's probably a hoax. If so, remove the names which might be real. If it's not a hoax and someone is coming to you in confidence for help as an administrator, don't betray them. Remove the names. --Duk 09:02, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It wasn't, however, in confidence. The person wanted an unblock, and I informed that person -- and that person agreed -- to have me ask the other administrators to put in their two cents.  It can't be confidential in that situation.  --Nlu (talk) 09:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Wonderful, so remove the names before posting. Also, considering it's probably a hoax, do you think it might be a good idea to remove names which might be real? --Duk 09:09, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I disagree as to the necessity of it. When a person voluntarily makes the information available in asking people for help, that person has given up confidentiality -- if any -- in the information.  I do not object to your doing it, but I do not believe I am under any obligation of doing so.  Further, I have exchanged e-mail with that person at that address several times.  If it's a hoax, then it's not Ms. Mercato's real address anyway.  No privacy issues.  --Nlu (talk) 09:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * If it's a hoax then the names, which might be real, should be removed. If it's not a hoax the names should also be removed. Who wants to google their own name (or their child's name) and see that kind of junk? --Duk 09:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have no desire to debate this with you any longer. I disagree with your conclusions and your reasoning, and my feeling is: if you want it removed, just go ahead and do so.  I do not plan to do so.  --Nlu (talk) 09:24, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hang on, let's think about this; on the one hand you say you have permission to post this persons name (which might be a real name, but forged), while on the other hand you say it's probable a hoax. Better to delete the names. --Duk 09:27, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As I wrote above, I am not going to. Either it's a hoax (in which case there is no private information revealed), or it's not (in which case the person validly waived confidentiality).  If you feel that strongly, you should do it.  --Nlu (talk) 09:30, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * How did you come to the conclusion that if the email is a hoax then there is no private information revealed? The names and circumstances might be real even if the signed name is forged. --Duk 09:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

AIV report on 216.255.185.82
About my AIV report on  which you removed with the comment "only edit was two weeks ago", I wasn't late. Just caught by another admin. =) See Wiki Alf's recent deletions .  It's the pages labeled with spam.  Those are the ones the spambot created. -- Gogo Dodo 09:23, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, is that actually possible? Since this is an IP address, IP addresses can't create articles (spam or otherwise).  --Nlu (talk) 09:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have no idea how it happened, though it did. Bug in MediaWIki?  Since the articles got deleted, I can't check the history, but I'm pretty sure that the articles were newly created.  Maybe because they were Wikipedia Talk, that an IP could create it?  I'm pretty sure I wasn't seeing things. =) -- Gogo Dodo 09:35, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Good catch. That's exactly what happened...  --Nlu (talk) 09:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem. It's a very slow spambot that doesn't work very well.  Not that I'm complaining about it not working. =) -- Gogo Dodo 09:43, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Mike Mussina: th or th?
Hi there. I hope you don't mind if I ask you a favor as a third party of a small debate: would you share your opinion on an ongoing discussion about the use of numbers in words or Arabic numerals? It might be helpful for you to check on the history of the recent edits to see what part we are on about. Thanks, Vic226 18:08, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for inviting me, and I've made the comment. --Nlu (talk) 18:11, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Electoral Geography
Dear Nlu, I have received a couple of messages from you saying that I should not add my website www.electoralgeography.com to external links, but rather ask to add them on the discussion pages. I did that, it does not work. What if I feel that my website would be a useful source of information on the subject? This website is not commercial, I pay for hosting and maintance from my own pocket and spend my own free time to collect electoral results, create electoral maps and so on. So when I add my website to external links I have no commercial or spam purpose, but rather I sinserely want to share my work with other people who might be intersted. For example, I add my website to the same pages where I see Adam Carr's Election Archive, and the idea of our websites are similar (but with somewhat differect contents). Do you have any suggestions for me? Thank you, Alexander Kireev —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kireev (talk • contribs)
 * Please take a look at WP:EL and WP:SPAM. They do not only prohibit commercial sites, but prohibit edits in such a way as to promote your own site, which your edits effectively were doing.  I think that if you are willing to upload the maps to Wikipedia (and in the process, license Wikipedia to use it), you'd be free to add the maps themselves to the pages where relevant, but you should not use edits that have the sole effects of promoting your site.  --Nlu (talk) 06:13, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, I understand the part about the maps. But what if I want to share not just a maps, but for example, in the "Elections in Serbia" article in Wikipedia, I would want to share my website's section on elections in Serbia, which is one of the best on the internet? Don't the readers of Wikipedia have the right to find out about this wonderful peace of information in the external links section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kireev (talk • contribs)
 * This is an argumentative question on your part. if people want to find your site or more information on Serbian elections, they can use a search engine.  Wikipedia is not a search engine or a Web portal.  Follow WP:EL and WP:SPAM's guidelines.  If you believe that it is in fact in compliance with those guidelines, discuss the matter on the talk pages.  The community might view things differently than I do.  --Nlu (talk) 15:24, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Personal Information on Chinese Emperors
Dear Nlu, I am very impressed with your excellent and detailed development of articles on Chinese emperors, and look forward impatiently to your continued contributions. As a former Wikipedian I realize that this is not the only thing on your agenda either here or in life, so I thought I could add a request. This is intended both for the improvement of Wikipedia and for satisfying my own historical curiosity. Since you obviously have access to detailed resources (the dynastic histories?), I wonder if you can be persuaded to add (or otherwise convey) the explicit descent of the following monarchs ahead of the much more time-consuming general expansion/creation of the relevant articles. Such details are missing in the standard western-language works I have come across, including the disappointingly general Chronicle of Chinese Emperors (Paludan) and the much better but still limited Imperial China 900-1800 (Mote) and The Rulers of China, 221 BC-AD 1949 (Moule and Yetts), and they would be welcomed by anyone interested in more historical detail and genealogy. Basically I am suggesting something like the descent outlined in the Emperor_Xiaozong article (i.e., in a simplified form, something like Xiaozong son of Zhao Zicheng son of Zhao Linghua son of Zhao Shijiang son of Zhao Congyu son of Zhao Weixian son of Zhao Defang son of Taizu) for the following emperors:


 * I do have access to dynastic histories, but they are also available pretty much to anyone who knows Chinese, as they are online as well. A favorite resource of mine is the chronicle Zizhi Tongjian, written by Sima Guang (and I also use the modern translation by Bo Yang).  Sima's original is online, while Bo's version, still under copyright (and as Bo is still alive, will be for at least 90 more years), is not.  I personally own a copy of Bo's version, and it was what actually got me interested in Chinese history in the first place, back when I was in junior high.


 * Song Lizong (Zhao Guicheng, 1224-1264), descendant of Zhao Dezhao, a son of Taizu (960-976)


 * This can be a bit of difficult, as the Zizhi Tongjian was written in the Song Dynasty, and therefore does not include the Song Dynasty. Nevertheless, I hope to eventually get to it.


 * Jin Modi (Wanyan Chenglin, 1234), descendant (great-grandson) of Shizu (Holibo, d.1092)


 * Similar situation, but I also to hope eventually get to it.


 * Western Liao Dezong (Yelü Dashi, 1124-1143), descendant of Liao Taizu (Yelü Yi, Abaoji, 907-926)


 * Same, but even more problematic since the records about Western Liao are sparse.


 * Xi Xia Shenzong (li Zunxu, 1211-1223), son of Li Yan, son of (?), son of Chongzong (1087-1139)
 * Xi Xia Mowang (Li Xian, 1226-1227), son of (?, Prince of Qingping), son of Shenzong (1211-1223)


 * The sources on Western Xia are only slightly less sparse than the sources on Western Liao, but I also hope to get to them.


 * Tang Xiangwang (Li Yun, rival emperor 886-887), descendant (great-grandson) of Suzong (Li Yu, 756-762)


 * This I'll try to get to to the extent that the sources talk about him. I am not sure how much there is.


 * Eastern Liang Yongjiawang (Xiao Zhuang, 558-560), grandson (but through which son?) of Liang Yuandi (whose sons are listed in the relevant article)


 * This I will do when I come back from my trip, but I'm still going chronologically. Maybe in 2-3 weeks.


 * Northern Wei Jingdi (Yuan Yue, 530-531), son of Yuan Yi, son of (?), son of Yindi


 * This I don't plan to, as I don't see Yuan Yue as a sufficiently important figure. (Eventually, hypothetically, I will try to go back, but my hopes are still try to get articles in on important figures.)  Yuan Yue was never actually emperor, and his importance in history is not particularly high.  (And Yuan Yue was actually the son of Emperor Xiaowen.)


 * Northern Wei Houfeidi (Yuan Lang, 531-532), son of Yuan Rong, son of (?), son of Xianwendi


 * I've already got an article written on Yuan Lang, and there really isn't any more information about him in the dynastic histories.


 * Eastern Wei Xiaojingdi (Yuan Shanjian, 534-550), son of Yuan Tan (but how is he descended from other Northern Wei rulers?)


 * This I wrote in the personal information section for him already (see Emperor Xiaojing of Eastern Wei); Yuan Dan (not Tan, if I got it right) was the son of Yuan Yi the Prince of Qinghe, who was the son of Emperor Xiaowen.

The following imperial pretenders during the collapse of the Sui dynasty may be worth adding (perhaps you could verify the descent):
 * Sui Gongdi (Yang Tong, 618), brother (?) of Gongdi (Yang You, 617-618), son of Yang Zhao, son of Yangdi


 * This I plan to do, as he's really a "legitimate" emperor, but I'll do that when I get to Sui Dynasty.


 * Sui Qinwang (Yang Hao, 618), son (?) of Yang Jun (prince of Qin), son of Wendi


 * This I plan to do as well, but there's less available on him.

Additionally, do we happen to know the names of the fathers of any of the following:
 * Xi Chu Yi Huang (Huai Wang/Mi Xin, 207-206 BC)


 * No; I don't think there's any source that gives it. In fact, I am somewhat skeptical of the official history's version that he was grandson of the first Prince Huai of Chu (Mi Huai), as there were many rulers of Chu after Mi Huai's death, about 80 years earlier, making it unlikely that they were only two generations apart, although it is possible to gap 80 years with two generations, particularly since Mi Xin was an adult.


 * Han Genshi/Huaiyangwang (Liu Xuan, AD 23-25)


 * Not him either.


 * Ten Kingdoms/Wu Taizu (Yang Xingmi, 902-905)


 * I don't believe so -- at least it's not in either the Old or the New History of the Five Dynasties.


 * Ten Kingdoms/Qian Shu Gaozu (Wang Jian, 907-918)


 * Nope.


 * Ten Kingdoms/Hou Shu Gaozu (Meng Zhixiang, 926-934)


 * This one is known -- his father's name was Meng Dao (孟道) and was a general under Li Keyong.


 * Ten Kingdoms/Chu Wumudi (Ma Yin, 927-931)


 * Nope.


 * Five Dynasties/Later Tang Modi/Feidi (Li Congke, 934-937), the adopted son of Mingzong, but the biological fathr is Wang ...


 * Nope.

I realize this is a hefty request, but I hope you would think it worthwhile. If you could refer me to a western-language publication that could provide such details, that would work too. Thank you in advance and keep up the great work, Imladjov —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.189.254.32 (talk • contribs)


 * Thanks for your comment -- I'll try to respond to this tonight. --Nlu (talk) 00:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * My responses to your requests are now intersparsed above. Please take a look.  --Nlu (talk) 02:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the rapid and thorough response. I am updating my records with the information provided, and eagerly looking forward to the rest as you get to it.  Keep up the great work.  Best wishes, Imladjov.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.189.254.32 (talk • contribs)

Cleveland steamer
I thank you for your support of my proposal at WP:DRV. I'm glad someone has some common sense around here and wants to better the Wiki. You are a true defender of the Wiki. Thanks!. Mr Spunky Toffee 11:21, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * And thank you. --Nlu (talk) 17:46, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Job For a Cowboy
Excuse me, but why did you delete and protect the article Job For a Cowboy? They are a legitmate band, and have been mentioned in magazines such as Metal Hammer and Kerrang!. I know it has been deleted in the past but that article was pure rubbish and although my one was not to the best of my ability I did have to make it from scratch, using the little information I could find about the band. Please unblock it and if you could, revert it to how it was i would be very grateful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davard (talk • contribs)
 * If you want to see it undeleted, bring a deletion review. As it stands, it was deleted by consensus and should be kept deleted until that consensus was overturned.  --Nlu (talk) 17:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

User:I am your angel aa
Just to let you know, I unblocked this username block of yours, in order to reblock with the autoblock option off, since the user was evidently editing from a shared IP and there was some collateral damage. --bainer (talk) 15:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * All right. Thanks.  --Nlu (talk) 16:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Shared IP?
Just wondering why you think User talk:217.21.232.179 may be a shared IP. I know very little about looking in to DNS stuff, but it appears to me this IP is a part of a range belowing to Stokab (who are owned by the city of Stockholm) and operate a community fibre optic network (for residents of the city I believe). I'm guessing the IP is probably assigned to a user by Stokab. N.B. Sorry about my earlier edits. I had gone back to check something and then came back and hit submit only to realise I had previewed earlier I was submitting the wrong thing Nil Einne 17:40, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Stokab is owned by the City of Stockholm, apparently (as much as I can figure out the Swedish) as a municipal ISP. However, the net name given is SE-STADSLEDNINGSKONTORET-EDU; that's what made me believe, although not 100% clearly, that this particular IP is educational, and if it's educational, it must be shared.  --Nlu (talk) 17:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

MLB-related Controversy
Hi again. First of all, I hope you are having a good break this week. I really appreciate all of your tirelessly working as an administrator in Wikipedia.

It has come to my attention that there is an exploit that foreign country people could vote repeatedly in MLB sites, such as This Year in Baseball Awards.

My main concern is also rather major: I'm not sure if you have a Chinese interface, but when you type in keywords like "MLB 投票 .tw" in Google, there are numerous Taiwanese topics that teach people to evade the voting restrictions either by removing the ".tw" from the e-mail address or by using international e-mail accounts (e.g. Hotmail). There was one site that reports fans riling up the others, promoting the incorrect values of flooding all of the votes for Chien-Ming Wang (As far as I'm concerned, there was a vote for Player of the Month award, during which Chien-Ming Wang, grace a la Taiwanese baseball frenzy, came from behind and surpassed was-leading Jason Giambi by a significant difference. Luckily, to Taiwanese, nobody seems to notice it). Apparently, there is no US site (yet?) that has started to take note of the negative impact from the Taiwanese mania over the Yankee pitcher.

In which article would be appropriate to cite the source(s) about this controversy? And is it more appropriate to try to look for an English article rather than a Chinese one? Thanks, Vic226 05:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that the controversy is probably best noted in the particular award involved. However, remember that it should be sourced.  If it's just something that you're concerned about, I think it would be original research.  --Nlu (talk) 17:17, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

User: Chirag rana
Recently you blocked this user for violating the three-revert rule. Their block has expired and their making the same edits as before. Please block them again, or even consider banning them. Drake
 * I'm on a trip right now, and I can't really double-check things right now with 3RR. I'd suggest that you bring it to WP:AN/3RR.  Thanks.  --Nlu (talk) 23:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)