User talk:Thor's Axe

September 2018 2
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:   AGK  [•] 17:50, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Thor's Axe. I'm responding here to your comments on my talk page, as they're related to the above:

It would probably be easier if you were to stick with the one account. If you are considering operating an additional account, the policy at WP:SOCKLEGIT outlines the applicable rules.

I understand TA1, TA3, TA5, and Kapilitoo are not operated by yours. They were impersonating you – ie a joe job. There is a user, banned from Wikipedia, who seems to do that occasionally. As my colleagues above have said, I'm sorry for the confusion and hope it does not discourage you from contributing.

The software alerting you to the conflicting names – this may not be a feature. If it isn't, you could suggest it via a feature request. However, in this case it would not have helped; the impersonator accounts were created after yours were.

Finally, there may sometimes be such a temptation to become emotional or heated during a content dispute. Wikipedia has ample guidance for editors in these positions – including Dispute resolution and Consensus, which is really important basic reading.

Best regards, AGK  [•] 14:04, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Blocked
I have blocked this account indefinitely due to competency concerns, in particular the apparent inability to discuss coherently without bludgeoning discussions needlessly, in addition to continued slow edit warring while falsely making accusation of vandalism, and general tendentious editing with synthesis of sources. To appeal this block, please follow the instructions at Guide to appealing blocks. Alex Shih (talk) 03:09, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Edit to Transition.... page
My account is current blocked so I wish you can have a look at this. Though my previous manner of editing may be not appropriate, I do have valid reasons and ideas that I believe will contribute to the edit.

About my claim of Yoto's proposal: I have secondary source. In the same book written by Ding, the end of page 220 explicitly indicated that the policy being discussed is applied mainly to captured women. You may follow this link for the document. The original text listed some events about Hong Taiji offering wives to defected soldiers from all ethnic groups, and claimed "the events above applied to captured women". That section was then followed by a discussion about the treatment of Manchu women specifically. I still do not agree with the "mass marriage" part, and I think Ding's opinion ought to be considered. Thor&#39;s Axe (talk) 00:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

About the number of imperial princesses: "Whereas four Manchu princesses married Chinese during the first century manchu rule over China, none did so after 1750" So the number is confirmed here. This is on page 149 of book written by Anne Wathal. The same book was used multiple times already in the page. Link here Thor&#39;s Axe (talk) 00:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

About Shunzhi's proposal: I think it is not appropriate to only review part of the original proposal. Shun Zhi's decree was a policy that allows the intermarriage of two ethnic groups without a sexual duality. The current description created the impression that Manchu men were not allowed to marry Han Chinese, which was not the case. As a matter of fact, Manchu women faced more resistance than Han women in intermarriage, since manchus always need the approval and report the marriage, while Han women did not have to if they were not he daughters of officials. The full script can be found on page 221 of Ding's book. Thor&#39;s Axe (talk) 00:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

About the time range of official policy applied to intermarriage. In previous discussion I said it is not sure when the sexual duality in marriage policy was started. Now with further research I can confirm that almost throughout the Qing dynasty, and not restricted to KangXi era and after, Han Chinese civilian were NOT allowed to marry women from Banner. And marriage between Manchu men and Han women was not restricted. This may also impact the current interpretation of Shun Zhi's decree. Evidence here: "Non Banner Chinese men could not marry Manchu girls, but Manchu men might might marry the daughters of non-banner Chinese. In a patriarchal society this irregularity would again strengthen Manchu dominance. For two handred and fifty years the general ban on intermarriage remained in effect; it was only lifted a year after the boxing rebellion" Thor&#39;s Axe (talk) 00:21, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

About the military bride taking part: On page 75 to 81 of Ding's book I quoted there were detailed description an discussion about these events. In fact when I first inserted these materials I used Ding's book instead of the primary sources. I then switched to primary sources because I thought that might be reliable, which was shown as wrong by Wiki's policy. Thor&#39;s Axe (talk) 00:27, 10 October 2018 (UTC)