User talk:Yunfeng

The additional insults were noted and not appreciated. Please, just leave me alone if you're going to be the way you are. Billy Blythe 05:43, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Does your English translation of Catullus belong on Wikipedia? I think it probably does. I certainly found it to be an edifying read. Does your ridiculous, tacky, and frankly embarassingly bad translation of same poem into a vernacular that you do not understand belong in an encylcopedia? No, it belongs on your homepage, if anywhere. Unless you have some kind of legitimate criticism of me to make, I'm not interested in discussing this further, and I'm sure that other users, or your high school teachers, are more willing and better situated, to help you develop into a more mature person. I stand by my deletion of your "gangster rap" version of Catullus 16. Alexwoods

Your revert, or whatever, may well have been quite correct, but that is no excuse for failing to assume good faith, let alone for making personal attacks. Please deal in a civil way with colleagues, or you may be at the wrong end of a time-out block. Metamagician3000 14:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I feel somewhat victimized by Billy Blythe's accusations, but I realize that I share blame for my tone, so I'll drop it completely. Thank you. Alexwoods

Victimised? Please. Anybody who likes to hurl insults like you do needs to get a thicker skin. Victimised is what you call it when you're shackled in the back of a police car and the copper is crushing your trachea with his bare hands. I would have told you what I really thought in no uncertain terms if there weren't this utopian set of rules against telling someone what you really think of them. I'd be all for you saying what you think, if and only if I could tell you exactly what I thought too. We can't do that, though. I think I can feel your pain. It's no fun seeing your name on the admin noticeboard, and it does make you look bad, but what else could I do? You "dissed" me. Also, I agree, and I don't like seeing badly done media (written or oral or visual) in my native dialect, so I can understand your objections. I, however, am used to it, swallow my anger, and go on. I'll have you know that I've been listening to N.W.A. to try to "understand." I especially like "Fuck tha police" and that one in which Ice Cube threatens to kill a bunch of people with a sawed-off shotgun. I'm working on getting a copy of "Fear of a Black Planet," but I couldn't find it at any of the stores. I guess it's a bit out of date now? Billy Blythe 13:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

He said he'll drop it completely. There's no need for you to rub his nose in it (or for him to reply to your comment). Please leave it at that, both of you. What's done is done. You need to cooperate in the future, or avoid each other if that is not possible. Metamagician3000 11:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Robert Broughton

Since this article already went to Afd once, when you made this edit instead of opening up a new Afd, it simply presented the history of the old one. [1]. Since you've also prodded the article here its not really clear what you want to do. Do you want to send the article to WP:AFD or to WP:PROD it? I can help you fix the Afd if that is your intention. Cheers Dina 00:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

No problem, it's a bit complicated to do and nearly impossible not to screw up the first time. And discussion seems a like it's a good idea about this article. If you want to make an Afd again, my best advice is to go to WP:AFD, keep it open in another tab or window and just follow it step by step. It does make sense, after you go through it, but I totally messed up my first one too. Cheers. Dina 03:45, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Report of a suspected sock puppet

When you report in a suspected sock puppet, as you did for Prescottbush, please don't forget to create the evidence page Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Prescottbush. Eli Falk 06:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but it's irrelevant at this point, because he's made a tacit admission on the Wikiquette page. Alexwoods 03:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Coffee and tea work group

Thank you very much for recently joining the new coffee and tea work group. It is actually an old project which had fell into neglect which I am trying to revive. Please feel free to make any edits you see fit to any of the articles, and, if I can ever be of any assistance, please feel free to let me know. Thanks again for joining! Badbilltucker 17:42, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Re:vandalism reverts

The popups edit summary that mentioned your name was saying that I reverted back to your edit. You didn't do anything wrong. --tjstrf talk 16:38, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Wendi Deng

I've blocked Curvy babe for 24 hours. Let me know if she continues to insert defamatory material on the article. By the way, in such cases it's much preferable for you to seek outside help (as you did) rather than get into a revert war (as you also kinda did!). Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 22:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Mais de rien. Do let me know if she returns for more vandalism because I'm sort of having second thoughts on having blocked the account for a mere 24 hours. Her sole contributions are related to that very article. Pascal.Tesson 22:08, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I have semi-protected the page for a week. Hopefully, this will discourage further incidents (at least for the time being!) Pascal.Tesson 13:15, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia New York Meet-Up

Howdy! Please come to the First Annual New York Wikipedian Central Park Picnic. R.S.V.P. @ Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC --David Shankbone 21:22, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Tibet

Did you have a good reason for blanking the gallery at Tibet? Because you didn't give one. Unless I hear an explanation I'm reverting it as vandalism and notifying an admin. Alexwoods 20:39, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

It is usually against Wikipedia conventions to have large gallery in article space. Please refrain from labeling content disputes as vandalism. Please reply here. Thanks. LionheartX

What is he doing? A great part of Tibet is the scenic beauty and it really contributes to the article and I spent a substantial amount of time creating it. I've come across tens of articles with large galleries which are encyclopedic - Tutenkamen for one . IN this case it attempts to visualize important and notable aspects of the country. I'm tired of facing pretentious users who come up with all these WP:Policies. Who is going to look at that gallery and frown upon wikipedia?. Images are media which contribute to the article. WHat should I do? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 20:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Please see WP:MOS and WP:NOT#LINK. Wikipedia is neither a mirror nor a repository of links, images, or media files. All content added to Wikipedia may have to be edited mercilessly to be included in the encyclopedia. Please discuss in this at Talk:Tibet if you disagree. LionheartX

I disagree. Wikipedia should be what you what it to be- but as an encyclopedia it is a summary of the world we live in but within sensible confinements. ALl the images are annotated with the mouse. Perhaps it is a little too big the gallery for the article (a shame) but there should definately be a number of images .—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ernst Stavro Blofeld (talk • contribs).

I've narrowed it down to a few now but there's nothing wrong with it at all. Thanks for letting me know and your help anyway ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 21:04, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

From who though? I can't see how images which picture a country most of us have never been to or know little about is so bad, particularly when it is a country of such aesthetic beauty as Tibet . User:John Hill - a photgrapher who has visited countless countries and took many of the Tibetan photos has said the country is the most beautiful he has ever visited. Images are encyclopedic in this case. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 21:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The number of images in the article seems excessive. This is an encyclopedia, not a repository of images. However, you can re-add the gallery if you disagree. Please refrain from labeling content disputes as "act of vandalism". Please assume good faith and maintain civility at all times. Thanks. LionheartX

Perhaps the number of images was a little too excessive luckily I still have the full gallery in my user page. However I have cut it down to a handful -you can't have problem with this. But Lion. surely you can see that blanking a section without any explanation can be seen as vandalism?? You should have mentioned it is the talk page or at least given a reason first. So don't give a lecture on what wikipedia is when you missed one of the basic rules of editing ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you" Contribs} 21:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Please assume good faith and comment on the content

Per this edit [2] Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. Please provide diffs that support your accusations. Whether something is true or false will be decided solely your evidence, so solely stating your own claims without diff links for proof will not help. LionheartX

I stand by what I said. I don't think I'm failing to assume good faith here. You are making a lot of very POV changes and you vandalized Tibet. You have been blocked in the past for exactly what you are doing now. Maybe you should learn to stop it. Alexwoods 21:53, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Please provide proof of vandalism, in the form of diffs before making accusations about other editors. I have stated my reason for removing the gallery in the edit summary. This is a content dispute and not vandalism. See Wikipedia:Vandalism#What_vandalism_is_not. What I was blocked in the past for is irrelevant here. Comment on content, not on the contributor. As I noticed you're fairly new here, I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Vandalism before making accusations about other editor's works. And also please read Wikipedia:Civility. Please retract your rather uncivil accusations here. Note that policy does not prohibit users from removing comments from their own talk pages. Hope this helps. LionheartX

I clearly stated a reason in the edit summary when removing the gallery. Furthermore, none of my edits qualify as vandalism per Wikipedia:Vandalism. You have been consistently uncivil and fail to assume good faith here, here, and here. Please refrain from personal attacks. Once again, please retract your accusations here unless you can provide diffs that support your claims. Whether something is true or false will be decided solely your evidence, so solely stating your own accusations without diff links for proof will not help. Hope this helps. LionheartX