User talk:TheLeopard/Archive 1

--TheLeopard (talk) 06:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)==Welcome==

Shang Dynasty
The finds at Anyang are well known, and there is a source listed, Keightley's Sources of Shang History which talks about the finds and inscriptions found on the oracle bones there. The nine rulers, principly Wuding to DiXin are found in the inscriptions by various ritualised names for the deceased rulers. In the inscriptions, the Shang warred with numerous opponents, took slaves for sacrifice and other mundane things. Shang inscriptions also mention the Zhou, a peoples which then took over Shang. Before the 1899 finds at Anyang, all we knew about the Shang mainly came from Shiji, the Historical Records, some of which are plainly mythical in origin (e.g. the time of Huangdi etc). The Shang royal house after conquest wasn't destroyed utterly, but during the beginning of the Zhou dynasty, the lands of the Shang were given over to Weizi Qi, the brother of the last Shang King, and made the State of Song. The state continued in existence until 286 BC when it was conquered by its neighbours. Other sources of information include some of the oldest Chinese literature including Shijing, The Books of Poetry, in which some of the poems/songs praise the ancestors of the Shang.

If you are editing an area with which you are unfamiliar, you may wish to use the 'citation needed' boilerplate, before cutting away huge swathes of text. Otherwise, your use of 'original research' as justification for cutting away stuff may be taken as vandalism. Dylanwhs 07:21, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Guqin
Absolutely the information you added back into the guqin article is very relevant, and should be there. I don't know how or why it got removed in the first place. Badagnani 01:55, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

template:country
Why do you keep adding and removing an empty line to template:country? ,, , , ,. This causes all transcluding pages to be cache-purged. --Ligulem 19:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Self-reversed edits to Golden Gate Bridge
Please refrain from making test edits in Wikipedia articles even if your ultimate intention is to revert them. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Ronbo76 01:49, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Editorial assistance
I apologize for not recognizing you earlier. I am just getting familiar with this type of userbox. You may want to place the following on your user page: TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 21:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

WHS Template
I believe the name of the sites should be listed as given in the UNESCO WHS website. Linking it to the correct pages is not an issue (I'd already done it in the change). Using different names creates ambiguity and I feel is simply not correct. I suggest we change it back to the 'full name' format. Your thoughts... --Natrajdr 10:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Etiquette
It probably wasn't necessary to append the comment "Show some demonstration of academic knowledge" when removing previously-added material from the List of monarchs of Korea article, per Etiquette. Omnedon 17:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * This user was adding materials that has never appeared on the article before and if you look at the contents he added, most likely you won't find it on any reference works. I probably should've just said the contents wasn't academic material though.--TheLeopard 18:42, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Kim Hambo
I have indeed read the article before. However, I've been too busy to do anything about it. I'm going to ask that members of Wikiproject China take a look it it. I'm sure they will find it interesting. --Ghostexorcist 07:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Zhou Tong (archer)
You seem to be interested in Chinese history. Although you may have seen it on the main page this past Sunday, I thought you would like to read an article I wrote on the military teacher of famous Song Dynasty General Yue Fei. --Ghostexorcist 22:05, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply
In fact, User:TheLeopard, I would be glad next time if you at least attempt a discussion with me before calling for the complete revert of my "massive new edits." I happened on this post only by chance and I percieve it as bad faith. I wrote the original "mainland China", and I agreed with the change to "China proper" by another user, so I don't see the dispute here. I don't see why "newly added materials" seem to equal to "unreliable materials" in your mind, but I'm pretty sure they are well-explained and referenced themselves, and if you really need further explanation, you could put it on my user talk page. Aran|heru|nar 09:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
 * China proper, I believe, is a geographic term. If it applied to the Qing dynasty, I don't see how it couldn't apply to the PRC or the ROC. I think it states that clearly in the China proper article.
 * I admit parts of the article China is not referenced well enough, and I would be glad if you could find one suitable for me because most of mine are in Chinese. However, I believe I have explained my edits well enough such that there is no dispute, and thus no need for citations. For example, my quote of the Records of the Grand Historian - I don't see the dispute for that. Since the China article is important and thus the etymology section could not be too long, I don't think we should focus too much on it. I have made a much larger edit to the Names of China article, and if there is any problem, I believe a reader could go to that article. Anyway, if you find any dispute, please state it and not just call for the revert of my edits simply because you see no reference. Aran|heru|nar 12:25, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * mainland China and China proper are two different things, and if you still have a problem with its usage, go ask the user who added it. It's frankly none of my business.
 * Please point out why it is messy and how I could improve it, with a few practical examples instead of just pointing fingers at my changes.
 * I don't feel my translations make it "more difficult" to read for English readers, and I don't see any problem with the prose. Again, please give me a few practical examples on how to improve it. Aran|heru|nar 06:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I've posted all of my responses to your comments and questions on your talk page. However since you are currently being blocked from editing (and your user talk page being protected), that prevents me from commenting furthur.--TheLeopard (talk) 07:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Tibet and South Asia
When editing Tibet you stated that you have dispute that it can be considered South Asian. There is a dispute over this in Talk:South Asia. The debate was instigated by an ip vandal 210.0.212.59, claiming the view is ultranationalistic propaganda providing no explanation why. So anyways, if you have the time can you please join this debate. Thank you. Sincerely, Thegreyanomaly (talk) 04:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

A little request
Hi!

I haved deleted all Islamic related articles in some articles of Chinese dynasties and Religion in China. I think Editingman (and look at his contributions) weren't a vandal but he could be an extremely Muslim because he was added his Islamic articles which all were superfluous and un-needed; it's just like promotion or advertising for his Islam!And I appreciate your neutral revisions!

Could you send a warning for his vandalism because you are one of the professional contributors in Chinese ralated articles!Thank so much and best wishes to you in 2008!!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 06:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Pollution in PRC
Hey,

How can you say Scientific American is a most trustworthy source than the world bank? I mean c'mon. The world bank is one of the few global institutions which has worldwide recognition. Cnn, Time, The Guardian, have all reported on the report by the world bank about the fact that 16 of the most polluted cities are in prc. I am not saying that scientific american is wrong about the top 10, but the report from the world bank is more credible and broader. Nikkul (talk) 20:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey, just wanted to let you know that I'm impressed with your patience and your diplomacy. If only all wiki editors were like you... Nikkul (talk) 22:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Revert or not?
Hi! I want to hear your judgment to select whose revision of Religion in China; Angelo or Saimdusan:



Thank you so much!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 09:41, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

You can see that saimdusan has deleted over 10 sources. I can not stand his perverse edits. He don't hear anyone because I were still keep his citation given! His contributions in Religion in China was very unrespectful!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 10:10, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment TheLeopard! I've requested admin to block that article (edit war); I've only reverted to the neutral version (as you can see)! I think you could edit it after 2 weeks (it will be soon). Don't worry! I will always appreciate your contributions! Thank you so much! Have a nice day! Angelo De La Paz (talk) 09:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Religion in China
Thanks for your message on my talk page. I am willing to make very general fixes to Religion in China while it is protected, however any changes to the content need to be brought up at Talk:Religion in China first for consensus building. Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 13:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Vandal fighting
Hi, TheLeopard. Thank you for fighting vandalism on the English Wikipedia. I want to take this opportunity to kindly remind you to always assume good faith when talking to other editors. Many editors are unaware of the wiki process and get easily frustrated. One particular editor that I'm dealing with now is User:FACT NEEDED. While replying to his comments on User talk:FACT NEEDED, I noticed one of your comments you used the word 'deplorable' to describe his contributions. While the newly added comment may have been that in your eyes, we encourage all skill sets of writers to contribute to Wikipedia. Please keep this in mind in the future and possibly look to offer solutions to these types of problems. You may give warnings to users you feel are vandalising the system or misusing it, but please proceed in a 'professional' manor. Thanks for your time, and see you around the counter-vandalism network! Mkdw talk 10:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

@TheLeopard, here is the link about Marco polo. http://books.google.com/books?id=xJsv-bJe27kC&pg=PA100&dq=The+Travels+of+Marco+Polo+turkistan&lr=&ei=7vDJR4muI4eqtgPd8ujRAw&sig=Sa28QpYYhX-adESnMDCEwuY4dDk FACT NEEDED (talk) 00:18, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

I want to hear your opinions!
Dear TheLeopard! Nice to see you again!

I know that you are contribtuting in many articles related to Chinese culture, Chinese history, etc...and I appreciate your contributions. In last days, in Religion in China has had controversies between me and Saimdusan (strong anti-Buddhism and Chinese religions). Please give us your opinions and let people know more about the truth of Asian culture. It's really needed!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Religion_in_China#The_heavy_influence_of_Buddhism_-_Chinese_religions_among_various_East_Asian_civilizations

Thank you so much!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 11:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

My message to Beijing 2008!


Here is my gift for you. Please support Tibet and Tibetan people. Please share this image to your friends. Good luck!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 19:55, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Tibet during the Ming Dynasty
In your recent edit summary, you state this:

"Yo! Some of your edits are quite 'unprofessional', such as placing 'your comments' (original research?) behind cited statements from these authors."

No, it is not original research, I have read Wang and Nyima's book (it's available online at Google Books), and specifically, I have read this exact page where they do not disclose what the punishments were and how frequently they were meted out. Go read it for yourself before calling me "unprofessional". It is not "original research" to point out what a source does not entail or disclose in their argument.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 23:42, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

It is merely a matter of pointing out that the source provided did not elaborate on the subject being discussed. How in God's earth is that original research?-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 23:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

"What I meant was if you were responding to these author's statements, your responding statements needs to be 'outside' of their cited statement, as to clarify that it is not part of their original statement."

Oh. I see now what you are getting at.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 23:46, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

"Are you clear?"

That sounds a bit condescending, but sure, I am "clear".-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 23:51, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Good point. Also, I have amended the sentence a bit, since asking them to also disclose the "frequency" of punishments would border on original research on my part.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 23:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, please do tell me which other statements in the article might not represent the sources used and cited, since you've made the accusation.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 00:06, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

"Pal, use the full name please - The Leopard"

Once again, I'm sensing a bit of a condescending tone with the use of me being your "pal" at the beginning of your sentence.

Are you sure it is correct to spell out in each footnote citation the full book title after the ":" in the title? I say this because of what Kate L. Turabian lays out in A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations about how to construct proper footnotes. When you cite something in the footnote bibliographic style, you should actually spell out the entire source when it is first used, and then use short hand or compacted book or journal titles thereafter, and if citing the same page in a row you should use "Ibid" (unnecessary for Wikipedia, since they have the multiple letters to demark multiple uses of the same page). In an example of all this, the first footnote of any source should look like this if you cite something like page 26 as your first citation from that source:

Thomas Laird, The Story of Tibet: Conversations with the Dalai Lama (New York: Grove Press, 2006), 26.

And then it should look like this every time that you cite it afterwards:

Laird, The Story of Tibet, 27.

Etc., etc. See what I mean? If you don't mind, I'll revert your latest edit, but I do agree with you that when Laird is mentioned in the article, so should the full title of his book, The Story of Tibet: Conversations with the Dalai Lama, since Wang and Nyima's book title is mentioned and so that people can easily recognize both in the reference section.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 02:35, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Yuan Dynasty
Great! I was going to look for something along those lines, myself, since one cannot deny that the Yuan was at least a hybrid of the Chinese imperial system and Mongol khanate system. Morris Rossabi demonstrates this in Kublai Khan: His Life and Times, although he also demonstrates just how different a ruler Kublai was since he was a Mongol, who did not have the same constraints that a Han Chinese emperor would have, and as seen through the hierarchal socio-ethno-geographic caste system enforced by law, the southern Han Chinese in his realm were treated as fourth-class citizens. That hardly sounds like your average Han Chinese dynasty. Sure, Kublai made concessions to the Han Chinese, adopted Han Chinese court ceremonies, titles, allowed Chinese sedentary society to thrive alongside the nomadic structure (whereas beforehand the Mongols abused the Han Chinese and overtaxed the agricultural sector), and recognized Han Chinese history as a valuable precedent for his reign. But this was just one part of his balancing act, as he also had to appease the conservative Mongol nobility, who accused him of slipping in his ways by adopting too many things which were foreign and Han Chinese.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 18:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Could you also find a citation that asserts that Tibetologists (like Laird) in general and stereotypically paint the Yuan Dynasty as non-Chinese in all aspects? I'm sure it is true, but could you find a citation for something like that?-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 18:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, the statement by Laird should be sufficient I suppose. I have to run now, so I will not be able to edit the article for a while. Keep adding stuff where it is necessary to flesh out the article, although don't go overboard and add 10,000 KB of text or something. Lol. Cheers.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 18:45, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Panda
Re this edit. " 61st Cannes Film Festival" doesn't really lend itself to a timeframe. Is there a way to work in May 2008 in the lead? I'll leave it up to you. Williamhortner (talk) 20:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Movie Tab
A tag has been placed on Movie Tab requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 00:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Quick Question...
Is there any reason you removed the section "Four Great Ancient Civilizations" from the article "Cradle of Civilization.

I have reverted that edit, but if you feel I am at fault feel free to revert back, I'm just a little curious. Thanks. ~ ''Arjun'  01:11, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Tibet during the Ming Dynasty
Yes, but what credible source (or any source for that matter) are you using to say that Tibetologists on a whole often say that the Yuan Dynasty was mostly a non-Chinese political entity? Forget Thomas Laird, he is just one Tibetologist. Where is this source you are using that says Tibetologists often say this? I want to see a full reference before you add that sentence back into the article. Otherwise, it's just a personal observation you yourself made and not some scholar writing a book explicitly stating "Tibetologists often disregard the Yuan as a Chinese political entity". Understand?-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 21:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, I'm glad that you fixed the statement from the University of Calgary in the Ming Dynasty article, quoting it as it should be. It looks and reads much better.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 21:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I would strongly prefer that you not use that painting of Wanli in a featured article, not because I don't think it is beautiful (which it is), but because it lacks a credible source, author, and license and someone down the road during a Featured Article Review will have full rights to complain about it and then strip Ming Dynasty of its featured status due to one stupid picture that is not properly sourced. Trust me, people at English Wikipedia have gotten this anal and precarious about the use of images in articles, especially featured ones. I would please ask that you remove that Wanli image, as I do not want to jeopardize a featured article, not after I have worked so hard to build it.-- Pericles of Athens  Talk 05:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Movie removal from the Hans Zimmer page.
Just thought I'd ask why you removed a film with the statement that he did not compose it when there are easily verifiable places to look that info up. --Stuthomas4 (talk) 01:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Because I checked on the IMDB and the film The Whole Wide World wasn't listed under his works.


 * Thanks for the response. IMDb is notoriously inaccurate. Good to check several sources for something like that. But in truth I would have probably made the same mistake. Cheers. --Stuthomas4 (talk) 16:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Taj Mahal
Hey Leopard. I didn't see the "disclaimer", otherwise I wouldn't make the changes prior to the discussion. However I left a note on Talk:World Heritage Site. Like to hear your opinon on this.

Many thanks --Kaaveh (talk) 17:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

About Beijing
Can you help to improve the transportation of Beijing?My english isn't very good,so I can't edit it just by myself.

"All lines of subway in Beijing has eight:line 1,2,5,8(a section),10,13,batong and Airport Line.The first line in China is Line 1(opened in Oct.1st,1969).

And there are many lines are building:Line 4,6,7,8(all line),9,14,15,Line Yizhuang,Line Daxing,Line Fangshan.

The first was built(not use) in July 1st,1969,and beijing is the first city which use subway in China(All China,not Mainland).the ticket price is 2RMB and it's the lowest price in all cities in China(all).(But Airport Line is 25RMB each one,only this line,about 3 USD.)

and now it's 4,000,000 people use the subway per day."

Can you change the style and make it more similar like true english instead of "chinglish"(chinese english). Nggsc (talk) 10:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Transportation of Beijing
As follow(But all of them are written in Chinese,I know its meaning,is right)

OK.About the number of all lines(using now):http://www.bjsubway.com/cns/zjdt/index.html

About the future of lines:http://www.bjsubway.com/cns/dtfz/index.html

About "how many people are using it"(per day):http://www.chinametro.net/Content/DisplayNews.aspx?id=14776

first built means just started to build,but "use" means people can travel with it. Nggsc (talk) 03:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

I hope you can add them to the article.Use a fluent style.The website are written in Chinese ,but I searched many websites ,there was not any write about the subway.

Nggsc (talk) 06:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Architecture
First of all,I think just words can't express the true meaning of Beijing's Architecture.And the second,I am not a English,my English is neither good nor smooth.

Gallery maybe is the best way to show Architecture.

Another thing,please help me to improve the transportation of Beijing,thank you very much.

Nggsc (talk) 06:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Britannica - Beijing
Hi - I think your material is valuable, but I can also understand why a quote from Britannica is making the other user uncomfortable: It is, afterall, another encyclopaedia. Perhaps paraphrasing or quoting only phrases, and with slightly less emphatic mention of Britannica would do the trick? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 00:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Kung Fu Panda
I believe that KFP is ready for a GA nomination, and looking through the history it seems that you have done the most work for the article. What is your opinion on the article? Would you like to nominate it? --Simpsons fan 66 05:15, 7 August 2008 (UTC)