User talk:Ran/2006 (3)

territorial disputes
Any chance of you checking the dispute between Russia and the US over three islands in the Aleutian Group. The US State Dept. proposed giving them to Russia, but there was a blockage by Congress, and a signed 'backdoor' treaty has not been ratified by the Duma. This leaves the islands (Sea Otter and Copper being two) in a sort of international limbo. As the two governments have stalled on progress on this situation, it's disputed territory! My time on the net is even more limited these days, so please check an add. Thank you! RAYMI 1/9/06 80.68.39.212 09:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

1938 Yellow River flood
Hello, thanks for improving my writing on the 1938 Yellow River flood.

You added the <-- contrived? --> tag. As you know, the flood was caused by the Nationalist Government as they physically destructed part of the Yellow River dyke in Huayuankou. The other two disasters listed were also disaster caused by men, that's why I used the word "contrived".

AQu01rius 18:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Xiandai Hanyu changyong zibiao
Thanks for all your hard work on this page. --Arcadian 01:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism in Manchuria, Jurchen, and Jin Dynasty, 1115-1234 articles
The same old users has been vandalize these articles again, please keep an eye on this user, thanks. --Godardesque 20:56, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Identification_of_the_varieties_of_Chinese
Identification_of_the_varieties_of_Chinese reads like a mishmash of NPOV and.. ummm.. either uninformed or deliberately vague general shtuff. I hesitate even to dip a toe in the page, tho, fearing flame wars by people with purely political motivation.

Are there any actual linguists working on that page? Thanks --Ling.Nut 14:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Moving Standard Mandarin
I've started a thread to try to build proper consensus about whether to move Standard Mandarin to a more intuitive and perhaps neutral title or not. I've left this message at your talkpage because you've participated in previous discussions about a possible title change. Please feel free to contribute with your thoughts and arguments at Talk:Standard Mandarin.

Peter Isotalo 12:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Demographics of mainland China
Guess you'd be interested with the discussion at talk:demographics of mainland China, on the proposal to change the title of the article. :-) &mdash; Instantnood 15:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:ROC PRC comparison eng.jpg
Thanks for pointing those out.I double-checked with my Pan-Chinese Encyclopedia (from 1987, when Chiang Ching-kuo was still Prez) and you were right.It's all fixed!Best, Pryaltonian 06:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I hadn't realized that I forgot to add the colon and suddenly the whole image appeared.My bad. Pryaltonian 08:18, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

New article idea
Hi Ran. I noticed that you are a major contributor to many articles related to China's administrative divisions, and some excellent maps, and have also shown some interest in editting articles related to China's border disputes and border treaties. Would you be interested in an article on the PRC modeled after this one? It could list the various administrative changes, as well as territorial disputes and changes since 1949. --Yuje 00:48, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that China's history is too long and detailed, so I propose limiting it in scope for now to just the PRC and/or ROC for now, to make the work managable. Even, then there will be some work to do, as the PRC had disputes with many of its neighbors. Some were resolved quite early (like with Burma and North Korea), and others resulted in wars, like with India. I think you did a brillian job with your PRC maps, labeling and coloring the various claims by country. If interested, I could start on a draft article on one of our user pages. --Yuje 01:13, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so going chronologically, here are some quick notes on the territorial changes with outside states, I'll add more links soon and I'll see if I can find some maps later. Most of these changes are minor, and probably too small to see on a map, but still worth mentioning.
 * 1949: PRC is established, territorial claims largely the same as the ROC's (except for maybe Mongolia), rapidly gains control of most of mainland.
 * 1950: PRC gains control of Hainan island from the ROC
 * 1950: PRC gains control of Tibet,
 * 1960: Sino-Burmese border treaty. The ROC and PRC claimed some areas of territory south of the Burmese section of the McMahon line. British administration of Burma directly administrated only ethnic Burmese areas, and indirectly governed other areas. As a result, the administrative borders were considerably south of the McMahon line, while ethnic groups in those areas often paid tribute to both China and Burma. In the 1960 treaty, the PRC largely abandoned such claims and largely accepted the Burmese McMahon line as the border, while Burma ceded three Kachin/Jingpo villages to the Chinese side and recieved a Chinese village. The territories exchanged (see Map No. 2) included Hpimaw-Gawlum-Kangfang (59 square miles) to China, the Namwan Assigned Tract (85 square miles) to Burma and the Panhung-Panlao tribal area (73 square miles) to China.
 * 1960: Border treaty with Nepal, with about 200 mi² disputed, with the PRC largely deferring to Nepali claims. Demarcation continues until 1963.
 * 1962: PRC-North Korea border treaty, which sets the previously undemarcated section of the Sino-Korean border along the Changbai mountains. No territorial disputes, however both sides had differeing maps shwing the Changbai mountains as theirs, the treaty set the boundary that divided the Changbai mountains and Lake Tianchi roughly in half between the PRC and DPRK.
 * 1962: China-Mongolia border treaty
 * 1962: Sino-Indian war, which resulted in the modern Line of Control.
 * 1963: Pakistan transfer control of the Trans-Karakoram Tract to China.
 * 1964: Demarcation of border with Mongolia finished.
 * 1969: Border treaty with Afghanistan. No territorial disputes, but the border was demarcated.
 * 1969: Sino-Soviet border clashes.
 * 1974: Battle of Hoang Sa, the PRC gains control of the Paracel Islands from South Vietnam
 * 1979: Sino-vietnamese war. No border changes.
 * 1991: Sino-Soviet border agreement, right before the collapse of the USSR. Demarcation work begins
 * 1992: China and Kyrgyzstan begin border negorations over five disputed former Qing areas.
 * 1994: China and Kazakhstan border agreement, two disputed areas remain.
 * 1996: Border agreement with Kyrgyzstan. Settles disputes in four disputed areas, dividing them up largely 50-50 for each side. Not sure of the details. One disputed border area remains.
 * 1997: Hong Kong made a Special Administrative Region.
 * 1998: Disputes with Kazakhstan settled. 940 km² of Kazakh-administered territory still remained disputed in the two areas of Shagan-Oba and Saryshilde. In the agreement, 56% of this disputed area was kept by Kazakhstan and 44% handed to China.
 * 1999: Macau made a Special Administrative Region.
 * 1999: Kyrgyz-China supplementary agreement. 950 km² remained disputed in the Bedel area. In the agreement, 70% of Bedel remained with Kyrgzstan while 950 km² went to China, and the border near Mt. Khantengri was demarcated.
 * 1999: By 1999, all changes in the negotiated 1991 Sino-Russian Border Agreement put into place. Complex agreement with hundreds of border islands changing sides (see article for details), but major changes include the transfer of Zhenbao Island and Mekeseli to China.
 * 1999: China and Tajikistan border agreement. Some disputed areas remain. Not sure of the exact details.
 * 1999: Border agreement with Vietnam, which demarcates both the land border and sea border. Details on the agreement haven't been released
 * 2002: Supplementary border agreement with Tajikistan. China had territorial claims on 28,000 km² of former Qing land in the Pamir mountains of Tajikistan, amounting to ~1/7 of Tajikistan's total land area. In the border agreement, about 1,000 km² is ceded to China in exchange for China relinquishing claims on the rest.
 * 2004: Supplementary Sino-Russian border agreement. Abagaitu and part of Heixiazi handed to China.

Maps: (Some are by the uS Dept of State, so they can be freely used)
 * China-USSR disputed territory maps:
 * China-Burma border maps:
 * Kyrgyzstan
 * No boundary changes, disputes, or treaties with Laos, whose shared border has stayed the same since 1895.
 * Not sure about the borders with Bhutan.

--Yuje 10:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I think working backwards is a good idea. The further back, the more complicated it gets and the more changes you'll have to make on your base map. The most recent ones should be pretty easy to do, with China giving up most of its claims on Kyrgystan (an area larger than the Aksai Chin), and gaining the Hong Kong and Macau. As for which changes require maps, perhaps Hong Kong (	1,103 km²) can be used as a good starting benchmark. Any changes equal or larger in area should be definitely depicted on maps, while smaller changes aren't as visible and can be worked on later if desired. --Yuje 08:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

This map shows the territory in Kyrgystan and Tajikistan that China originally claimed. The Kyrgystan portion of it was about 28,000 km², but after settling the dispute, China withdrew the claims and got about 1,000 km² (about the size of Hong Kong SAR). Pg. 108-109 of this article gives a map of one of the three areas that China ended up getting, but I haven't found a map of the two areas. The areas China recieved are probably too small to show up as border changes, but China's previous claims should be highlighted on older maps as disputed territories, I think. --Yuje 12:45, 26 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Oops, you're right, the Kyrgystan border was relatively small. It was Tajikistan, not Kyrgyzstan, which had China's 28,000 km² claim. I got the two confused. Mea culpa! Sorry for the confusion. The bottom right corner of this map shows the area of the Pamir mountains (which lie in Kyrgystan and Tajikistan), which China had claims on.--Yuje 15:08, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

For borders which weren't demarcated but on which there was no real dispute, perhaps borders could be represented with a dotted or semi-solid line instead of a solid line to indicate an undemarcated but approximate de-facto border? Like this--Yuje 02:28, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Here's another useful reading which covers a pretty good background on the issue. The particular disputes over the Central Asian borders are described on pg. 14-21.--Yuje 05:32, 29 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe the Spratley islands as a whole should just be marked as disputed with a note that various islands are claimed and occupied by various countries. Since there's no dominant power or agreements between any of the countries involved, the current claiments' and occupants' hold on the islands is still tenuous and ephemeral. By the way, it does look like the claims on the western Soviet borders (Tajikistan, et al) were active claims, and not just disagreements from inaccurate maps. In most cases with other countries over disputed areas, they were solved by splitting the difference or by accepting the smaller portion. In some cases, like the Wakhan corridor in Afghanistan, they had basis for claiming a further border but chose to accept the defacto line. I found a few other well researched sources, which include details, maps, and in some cases statistics on the various border agreements, but their online access is restricted. I can either email them to you, or try finding some webspace to upload them. --Yuje 05:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * The Wikipedia email interface doesn't allow attachments, so I'm going to try finding some webspace to host them (PDF files and jpgs) instead. --Yuje 10:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Jurchens
I guess I am not always on the same page as you on certain topics, but this Jurchen/Korean prevert guy is almost amusing. It seems that everybody wants to claim Manchuria.--Niohe 04:27, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I know, it's kinda pathetic. But we can set things straight if we keep our heads cool. Did you see my little revert war on Shenyang earlier today? It was almost the same thing. I believe in keeping Wikipedia pluralistic.--Niohe 04:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Not just Manchuria and the Jurchens. The Buryat Mongols of Russia, ancient Sumerian civilization, American Indians, Japan, and the ancient dynasties of China were also Korean. This was one of the cited links for Baedalguk. --Yuje 05:46, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

The edits that you are making to various Manchuria-related topics have already been discussed to death on various talk pages. Yet you keep on inserting changes that have been established as false. Why? If you have issues with the content of articles, why not discuss them in talk pages?

Also, please be aware of the Three-revert rule. --69.216.19.9 04:40, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.216.19.9 (talk • contribs)

(For the record, I have not violated the 3RR. Rather, it is User:69.216.19.9 who reverted Gojoseon nine times, Three Gojoseon five times, Manchuria nine times, Jurchens eight times, all within the space of 90 minutes.) -- ran (talk) 04:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:PRC-2002.png
Regarding this map, would it be nice to include a small side map showing the South China Sea islands, or at least a short note like the current map? &mdash; Instantnood 22:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

List of administrative divisions of Yunnan
Hi, I gave this a shot because I want to use this page eventually, but it's hard!Could you or any other Wikipedian help get it in shape?I can't find good reference materials and the template is very difficult to figure out.Badagnani 23:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I'm in awe.How did you do that so fast?Badagnani 03:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

That's an official government source?Thank god the PRC is so well organized.:)I'm doing research on music of the various peoples of Yunnan, so this article is going to be really helpful to me, and I'm sure to thousands of others around the world.Your hard work in "getting this information out to the people" is really going to be appreciated.Badagnani 03:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Looks like the 5 or so provinces that haven't been done yet are the remotest and least trafficked.I guess the fact that you have a source means they'll all get done eventually.Badagnani 03:49, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Need your help!
Hello old friend. :-) I got into a conflict with Snle/Zhang Qiang/918 (all the same person) on three pages: Dalian, Harbin, and Shenyang. Aside from the sockpuppet factor, this user wants to remove the historical names from the intro on the pretext that these are "Chinese cities", but last time I checked, it's common pratice to hvae historical names at the top on WP articles. On the Shenyang page for example, he's removing "Shengjing" and "Mukden", the latter of which is extremely important to ignorant readers who perhaps have read about the Mukden Incident and when the type it in need to confirm whether Shenyang and Mukden are the same city. You see what I'm saying? I was hoping you could help aout by joining-in on the discussing. Thanks man. &mdash; Khoikhoi 22:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem—perhaps you could protect them (or semiprotect)? He's probably just going to come up with more sockpuppets. &mdash; Khoikhoi 23:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * He's probably just going to say that you're not Chinese. ;-) &mdash; Khoikhoi 23:52, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * LOL! :D &mdash; Khoikhoi 00:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

What is going on here?
Hi, I just want to thank you for your timely intervention on the naming-war in Manchuria. I'm starting to wonder what is going on here in Wikipedia, when ostensbily trivial China-related edits lead to edit wars in no time at all. And believe it or not, while doing some rearranging of paragrpahs in the Wangfujing article I have found myself in another naming-conflict on the "proper" naming of 大栅栏. I just coulnd't believe my eyes, but if this is not a joke, pronouning this name "Dazhalan" is offensive to some Beijingren. While this is a truly trivial matter, it would help if you just wrote a line or two on Talk:Wangfujing to bring some sense into the discussion.--Niohe 13:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Huaiyang cuisine
Hi, do you have any idea what part of China Huaiyang cuisine is from?The geographical areas are showing up as redlinks.Badagnani 05:41, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Advertising
Hello, I just want to alert you to the fact that User:Xue hanyu has started what appears to be a massive advertising campaign. I have reversed some of the edits and warned the user, but I don't have the time. Please advise.--Niohe 16:18, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Taipei City emblem.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Taipei City emblem.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images.If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days.If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot.For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 18:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Taipei City emblem.png)
Thanks for uploading Image:Taipei City emblem.png. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful.

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Durin 19:09, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Use of fair use images
The image is copyrighted and used under a claim of fair use on Wikipedia. As such, it can not be used on your userpage or on a template. Please see Fair use criteria item #9. I have reverted your re-insertion of this logo onto the template and also on your userpage. Please do not re-insert these fair use images, or any other fair use images, onto the template or your userpage. If you have any additional questions about this, I'd be happy to answer. Thanks, --Durin 19:33, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Re: and . That's great! It probably makes sense to do it that way anyways, since the Taipei infobox was used only in the article on Taipei. --Durin 19:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Postal System Pinyin
Hi, just wondering if you agree with what's just been done here, with the name change, etc.: Chinese Postal Map RomanizationBadagnani 23:56, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Muchas gracias


Hey Ran, thanks a lot for supporting me in my recent RfA. It succeeded, and I am very grateful to all of you. If you ever need help with anything, please don't hesitate to ask. Also, feel free point out any mistakes I make! Thanks again, &mdash; Khoikhoi 05:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:IFD for Image:Baekje power.jpg
I found another overexaggerated map Image:Baekje power.jpg, and it's up for deletion .This map shows overexaggerated borders for Baekje, similar to we saw on July 19.Please comment or vote for/against deletion there.Thank you.--Endroit 14:17, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Gojoseon, Nangnang et al.
I agree, and wish I had a bit more energy to put into shutting this silliness down.Unfortunately revert wars are not my cup of tea, so I've only been stepping in when the behavior has been really out of line...These periodic waves of nationalism make me feel very tired. :-)

Nangnang nationis not legit, as far as I can tell.Princess Nangnang should probably have her own article, but there doesn't seem to be much beyond onomastic coincidence to suggest that she might have been princess of Nangnang, or that taesu was some kind of royal title, or that this tiny hypothetical tribe had hereditary kingship.I wonder, though, if this claimmay have some support from North Korean historians, who have long argued that the traditional location of Lelang is too far south.If that's the case, then it would make sense to have an article on the subject, however speculative it may be. I'll see if I can find anything illuminating on my next library trip.

Hairwizard appears to be drawing heavily on the Joseon Sanggosa, which is a fringe text if ever there was one.However, to counter this effectively we need superior sources.My problem is that most of my sources only devote a paragraph or two to Gojoseon, since there's so little that any reputable historian can say on the subject.Faced with this bizarre surge in articles on various non-historical non-entities of prehistoric Korea, I've been at something of a loss.

Anyway, if you want to try to bring these articles back into some kind of alignment with WP:V and WP:NOR, I'll do my best to support that.Cheers, -- Visviva 15:54, 24 October 2006 (UTC)


 * That seems like a good idea.Unfortunately I'm not an expert either, but will try to hone my references. -- Visviva 04:12, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Please also check Baekje, particularly the edits by & .--Endroit 15:35, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for supporting my RfA
Thank you for supporting my RfA that I have passed with 73/2/1.--Jusjih 09:47, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Kprideboi
my bad, Ran. See, that's what happens when some non-wikipedian breaks the flow of true wikipedians like us. hahahaha. my bad. i'll readdress my loooooooong paragraphs. and i realli wasn't attacking u.. i was trying to discuss with u. haha. sorry bout that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kprideboi (talk • contribs)

who are u referring to at ur new section in the Goguryeo discussion area? is it me? cuz i don't recall saying that. I kno for a fact that the Three kingdoms of Korea sent tribute to several of the dynasties that were established on contemporary Chinese territory. --Kprideboi 23:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

By the way, who is this ABDCK watever his name is? --Kprideboi 23:18, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Young Pioneers of China
Thanks!I'm a primary school teacher in China now, and I have been pretty perplexed as to the system.ABart26 16:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

What do you think...
... about this one?The timeline of activity is a little odd -- no edits for months after being welcomed -- and the choice of topics seems a bit too familiar.However, I'm not much good at identifying sockpuppetry.-- Visviva 02:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

... Taiwan
RAN I AM QUITE SURPRISED BY YOU!ON YOUR USER PAGE YOU HAVE THE NATIONAL FLAG 🇹🇼 OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA (TAIWAN), BUT YET YOU SEEM TO BE DOING EVERYTHING YOU CAN TO REVERT ARTICLES AND PUT IN MATERIAL THAT IS SUPPORTIVE OF THE COMMUNIST AGENDA OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA.

IT WOULD SEEM THAT YOU ARE NOT LOYAL TO TAIWAN AND ARE A TRAITOR WHO WANTS TO GIVE UP THE ROC (TAIWAN) AND KISS THE BUTT OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND UNIFY WITH A COMMUNIST COUNTRY THAT SLAUGHTERED THEIR OWN COLLEGE STUDENTS AT TIANNENMAN SQUARE, THAT CREATED A FAMINE DURING THE CULTURAL REVOLUTION, STARTED BY THE BASTARD MAO, WHICH ENDED UP KILLING ACCORDING CIA ESTIMATES AROUND 100 MILLION INNOCENT CHINESE CIVILIANS.THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA (TAIWAN) ON THE OTHER HAND IS NOT PERFECT, BUT AT LEAST IT IS A DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY, AND THEIR TAIWANESE CITIZENS HAVE THE POWER TO CHANGE THINGS FOR THE BENEFIT OF TAIWANESE SOCIETY AS A WHOLE, UNLIKE COMMUNIST CHINA!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.51.199.173 (talk • contribs)

Bit of an emergency: V for Vendetta (film)
Would it be possible to obtain a translation of this article?

[]

I'd like to include it into the V for Vendetta (film) article, which will go front page tomorrow, if there is any important information in it.Nothing fancy, just a summary would be great.Thank you.Hope you get this message.

--P-Chan 17:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you.--P-Chan 03:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Jan Wong
Would you look at and correct it if necessary. Fred Bauder 09:43, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Taichung
Can you please help me keep an eye on the recently returned vandals on this page.Ludahai 08:50, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Article about Wikipedia Users
Hello,

Wikipedia user David Badagnani directed me to your user page.I am a freelance writer working on an article about the wide array of people who make Wikipedia their life, their passion, their pastime.Wikipedia “addicts” if you will.I’m looking for people just willing to tell their story of how they got sucked into the intellectual whirlwind that is Wikipedia; how you got started editing, how the obsession grew, and what you spend your time focusing on these days?Do you write articles from scratch?Is your main push toward one particular type of article?Do you patrol for typos and errors, or spend your time diligently fixing vandalism?Do you take part in the “social aspects” of Wikipedia; engaging in animated discussions or decorating your user page with all sorts of internet memes?Have you ever forced yourself to take a “Wikipedia break”?If so, what’s your 20/20 hindsight on the obsession?Basically I’m just trying to get an idea of what it’s like for various Wikipedia “addicts.”If you are interested in participating, please email me at brianwrites@gmail.com

If anybody else, other than this user is interested in participating, feel free to email me as well.This article is intended to be a light informational piece, nothing too heavy or controversial, just merely introducing readers to a subculture that they likely had no idea existed.So please don’t email me with your conspiracy theories, or your grudge against the Wikipedia hierarchy… unless it directly applies to your overall experience with the site.This article is about the USERS, not about the pros and cons of the site itself.

Thanks,

Brian68.39.158.205 01:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Peoples Republic of China
Hello Ran, I'm kind of new to this and I don't know any other way to contact you. I see you keep changing the edits I made to the economy section of Peoples Republic of China and I keep wondering why. I even had to make an account just so it wouldn't happen but you still did. You do good work and all, I've seen some of the changes you've made on other pages but deleting the facts that I'm adding just doesn't make sense to me. All I said was "the trade imbalance between China and western countries exist due to the fact that highly advanced technological goods and military arms are not sold to China and the value of the yuan does not have that much to do with it". If you think my writing wasn't any good you can just edit it to your liking but to delete it all seems very strange. Anyways keep up the good work in the other areas. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oh Canada604 (talk • contribs)

=
Hey Ran, thanks for getting back to me. I really need to learn how to use this system. I don't know if this is the proper channel to reply you but here you go:

"The US trade deficit with China will greatly reduce if the US lifts high-tech-export restrictions to China" (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/HD01Cb05.html).

"The US reluctance to sell some high-tech products to China also greatly contributed to the bilateral trade imbalance. Policy-makers should not pretend they do not understand the facts..." (https://montgomery.portalvault.com/Default.aspx?pageMode=control&pageModeType=NewsArticleControl&pageModeParam=&storyId=100288624)

If you know about US and EU policy toward China you'll know that the US has a ban on high-tech items both lethal and non-lethal while the EU has a ban on high tech lethal items to China. Please add these changes if you wish or let me know and I will add them. It will give a more balanced view on the topic since the section makes it seem like it's the value of the yuan thats causing the trade imbalance but it's really not.

Reorganization Agent of Korean History
I believe User:Hairwizard91 uploaded a fabricated image (again) and falsified information into the above mentioned page.The details are in the talk page.May I ask you and User:Nihonjoe for an opinion, and possibly comment in Talk:Reorganization Agent of Korean History?And will you please advise me if there is anything that can be done to prevent people from doing this kind on thing.Thank you.--Endroit 19:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Chinese surnames categories up for deletion
A new editor has just added a number of categories for Chinese surnames, which I believe to be very useful, particularly in grouping individuals with a common surname but who use various romanizations.As is usually the case at the Categories for Deletion area, the people who frequent that place generally try to delete every new category, regardless of whether they understand its use.In this case, they seem not to understand the utility of being able to have a category for everyone with the name "Liu," for example.Please voice your opinion here.Badagnani 03:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You might be also interested in this discussion: Articles_for_deletion/Lǐ_%28李%29_%28surname%29. Yao Ziyuan 04:14, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Taiwanese people
Hi Ran, I think you might be interested in this article. An anonymous user 71.106.x.x (a Taiwanese) insists Yueh people and therefore Hoklo and Hakka of Taiwan are ethnic Taiwanese, not ethnic Chinese. I noticed your edit in Demographics of Taiwan that you mentioned Yueh people were already sinicized before the 17th century migration to Taiwan. Would you care to add your views to the Talk:Taiwanese people? — Nrtm81 06:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Do you have any suggestions on how to deal with 71.106.x.x? He has admitted to pushing political view ("Taiwanese nationalism"). He doesn't even register an account nor participate in the WikiProject Taiwan. He's just become a nuisance who doesn't want to co-operate. — Nrtm81 00:17, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

The aborigines on Taiwan are being Sinicized as we speak. Are you also going to call them Han Chinese in 25 years when they've all forgotten their local tongue? 71.106.151.242 06:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Ran,

This Taiwanese People page is upsetting a lot of people due to the politicized nature of the topic. Much of the material is reliant on a particular political reading of ethnicity, history, culture, and linguistics. Other parts are POV. A couple sections mention purity, but I do not see any way we can conclude the authenticity or purity of people. If we continue a discussion using terms like "pure" or "pure-blood", we suggest there is conversely impure. I don't think any one here can demonstrate the purity of any group of people dating back to a primordial authenticity. This is page is using false logic. Then we have problems with defining Han and non-Han/ Chinese and non-Chinese. A lot of writers are treating Han as a genetic marker or a fixed identity. Most independent studies show this is false as Han relies on outward practice of Confucian culturalism. Traditionally, Han was used as a marker between levels of perceived "civilization" by the "civilized center". It was possible for all people, including Europeans, to become Han if they demonstrated the "hua" of being civilized or Han. Those who did not practice confucian culturalism were hence Fan or savage... not men. The concept of race did not even enter the Chinese lexicon until the late 19th century, borrowing the term "minzu" from the Japanese. "Race" was seen as essential by Chinese Nationalists to establishing the Chinese nation and if you look at the constitutions of both the PRC and the ROC, you can see the importance they placed on "minzu" and teaching "minzu" to the citizens of the nation. Without this education, "minzu" would not be imagined by the citizens. Then there is the problem of conflicting definitions of Han by both the PRC and the ROC. Regardless, it becomes a political question. Then there is the question of whether people who are being laimed as Han are still Han... If it has been shown that Han can be entered it can also be exited. In places around the world where the KMT did not set up a Hua Qiao office to promote Chineseness, thedescendents of Han immigrants have assimilated into local populations. I suggest the page on Taiwanese people be totally re-written. I suggest the following materials: Statecraft and Political Economy on the Taiwan Frontier-By John Shepherd, Is Taiwan Chinese-By Melissa Brown, Taiwan's Imagined Geography-By Emma Teng, Under an Imperial Sun-By Faye Yuan Kleeman, Chinatown Nomore-By Chen Hsiang-Shui, The Discourse of Race in Modern China-By Frank Dikotter, The Predicament of Culture-By James Clifford, A Translucent Mirror-By Pamela K. Crossley, History in Three Keys-By Paul A. Cohen, China Off Center b'''y ed. Susan D. Blum and Lionel M. Jenson, Becoming Japanese-By Leo T.S. Ching, Cultural Encounters on China's Ethnic Frontiers ed. Stevan Harrell, Ways of Being Ethnic in Southwest China- By Stevan Harrell, Contemporary Taiwanese Cultual Nationalism-By Hsiau A-chin, Culture, Self and Adaptation-By Hsu Mutsu, Collective Rights of Indigenous People-By Jolan Hsieh, Negotiating Ethnicities In China and Taiwan-ed. Melissa Brown, Taiwan In Perspective-ed. Wei-Chin Lee, Decolonizing Methodologies by Linda Tuhiiwai Smith, Orientalism-by Edward Said, Culture and Imperialism- By Edward Said, The Location of Culture -by Himi K. Bhabha, Imagined Communities-By Benedict Anderson'''... to name a few.

Much of the page is driven by emotional opinions or political thought without an underpinning of social theory, which, if we do not want to politicize our article, should provide the foundationsof the material.

Edits
Whether you intended to be POV or not, your original edits did delete a small but important piece of information. I re-organised your latest change a little bit - I think it's an overall improvement on the status of the article before you came along. John Smith&#39;s 15:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

the Jin language
Hi Ran, I read with interest that you wrote some Jin dialects make a three-way distinction in its demonstratives. Is it similar to the Japanese system? Could you write more on this? Thanks! Shingrila 04:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:&-20013;&-33775;&-27665;&-22283;&-20840;&-22294;.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:&-20013;&-33775;&-27665;&-22283;&-20840;&-22294;.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. —Angr 19:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

maps
Hi,

Some time ago we worked on translating the map of administrative divisions of the PRC into Hebrew. I need to make some changes there so I'd be happy if you could send me the .psd of that map and also that of the ethnic Tibetan autonomous entinties. Thanks UncleMatt 23:27, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

STOP REVERTING!
which part is NOT true?!

Moderators from mailand China

Even though Wikipedia is blocked in mainland China, it actually has the largest number of moderators for the Chinese Wikipedia.

The capital city - Beijing actually has 6, Shanghai has 6, Guangdong province has 6, Hunan province has 1, Jiangsu province has 3, Shanxi province has 1, Shandong province has 1, Zhejiang province has 1, Heilongjiang province has 1, Hubei has 1, other areas has 2. Total of 29.[12]

[edit] Controversies

According to International Herald Tribune Asia-Pacific:"on sensitive questions of China's modern history or on hot-button issues, the Chinese version diverges so dramatically from its English counterpart that it sometimes reads as if it were approved by the censors themselves." [13] —Preceding unsigned comment added by SummerThunder (talk • contribs)


 * So at what point do we stop repeating ourselves explaining that you can't call people government spies and just have him blocked for gross NPA violation? --tjstrf talk 02:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You are a sysop. If you feel you are too involved in the situation, there are a thousand others that could be consulted. I do not see any benefit to allowing Summer to continue his conspiracy flinging. --tjstrf talk 03:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

HDI Lists
I've noticed some HDI scores being averages of 2003 and 2004. If you can help me double check the true 2003 and 2004 scores that would be great. Thanks. ArchonMeld

STOP DELETING MY CONTENT AND STOP REVERTING WHAT I WROTE!
STOP DELETING MY CONTENT AND STOP REVERTING WHAT I WROTE! that includes Chinese Wikipedia and Blocking of Wikipedia in mainland China--SummerThunder 05:01, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

and why did you delete the list of the moderators on chinese wikipedia? why are you trying to hide the truth? --SummerThunder 05:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

what a lie.
you wrote: "indeed any intention for such practice at Chinese Wikipedia will be denounced by most Chinese Wikipedians." just read what I wrote. and what they wrote in village pump misc. --SummerThunder 05:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)