User talk:Neo-Jay

Welcome!

Hello Neo-Jay, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Scott Ritchie 05:41, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Many thanks for your warm words. :) --Neo-Jay 05:51, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Go related

I was thinking of combining them into one page, but I like your idea better. Can 00:36, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

This might be a little late, but I'd like to thank you alot for all your help on all these Go pages. Can 02:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome! It is I that should say thank you. You provide the main contribution. I just add some links and original-character names. And best wishes for your dream to become a profesional Go player. I hope that someday I can add your name into the List. --Neo-Jay 02:22, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Yeah but those original character names are really useful, and thanks. I hope so too :) It'll be pretty hard though :P Can 02:27, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Re:the Chinese characters in Greater China SHOULD BE UNICODIFIED

Sorry, I didn't realize you were dealing with the code. I only saw you removing the template. Now Ive restored the template with the code intact.--Jiang 08:06, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

OK. Understand. Thanks for your contribution. --Neo-Jay 08:10, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: Why Did You Revert My Edit in Jay??

Sorry, my error - I rolled back your edit due to a hopefully temporary mental aberration, and restored what you had correctly deleted, jimfbleak 10:53, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

That's all right. Thanks for your reply. Best regards. --Neo-Jay 18:58, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Go

Hello. Thank you for your many new contributions to Category:Go. I have been working to improve these articles in several ways. Please don't be offended at any changes you may disagree with. Leave me a note on my Talk page and we can discuss any problems. Charles Matthews 16:09, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --Neo-Jay 17:43, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

about China proper

I perfectly agree - the early Qing had 15 provinces, and Kiang-nan/Jiangnan was their new name superseding Nanzhili. Thank you so much for adding the paragraph about this. --Holger Finken 20:10, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. Thank you for your contributions. --Neo-Jay 20:11, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

William H. Whyte

Neo-Jay, I re-inserted "Holly" in William Whyte's name because that's how his friends and colleagues knew him, and that's how he was commonly refered to. Among many other references, a quick Google yields a New York Times obit (at http://www.writing.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/whyte-obit.html) and Paul Goldberger's eulogy (at http://www.paulgoldberger.com/speeches.php?speech=whyteeulogy1999). Cheers. --Lockley 15:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. After I read the sources you provid, it seems to me that "Holly" is just another expression of "Hollingsworth", Whyte's middle name. Correct? Is so, it is not accute to write his name as William Hollingsworth "Holly" Whyte. And we can discuss at the Talk Page of Whyte. Thanks. --Neo-Jay 05:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Go vs go

This is an old discussion. But there is really no need to make it Go. That is not standard usage in any major part of the literature. Charles Matthews 18:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your information. Are you talking about List of Go (go) organizations? Please feel free to move it back. --Neo-Jay 00:38, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I was referring to that. Given what you said about Stephen Streater's interest, this might be the pretext to set up WikiProject Go; so there is a forum to discuss such issues. It is overdue to do something about that. Charles Matthews 19:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Good idea. Best wishes. --Neo-Jay 12:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing up the difference between Furen/Fu Jen in China University of Political Science and Law

All the non-Romanized languages have the issue of spelling conflicts when they get translated. For example, I got "Furen University" from a website on the University of Minnesota. Maybe there should be some new redirects created so that people looking up Furen University to take them to Fu Jen Catholic University. Since I assume you see these mistakes clearer than someone like me, don't hestite to correct the spelling differences with redirects. I will go ahead and make one for Furen University. Happy editing. -- Bobak 20:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. And thanks for your contributions. --Neo-Jay 00:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

thx

thx for contributing to The Balkans since 1453. If you like, you could also have a look at Mark Mazower -- Greece666

You are welcome. I am glad to work together with you. --Neo-Jay 02:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

about the deletion in Idealism

Thanks for pointing that out that I had deleted part of the content in this article. Wasn't deliberate. Have had the occasional trouble with only the first part of some articles loading. I presume only the first part loaded and I didn't notice because the edit was at the top of the page. Thanks for fixing it. --MarkS (talk) 20:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. Thank you for your contributions. --Neo-Jay 20:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Masao Kato

"This article introduces a "Japanese person". "Kato" is the family name, which should be in front of given name according to the order of Japanese name. The name order issue was discussed so long ago. It seems clear that this article should be moved to "Kato Masao". Why is it still here?? --Neo-Jay 08:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)"

ACTUALLY, according to the manual of style, his name should be "Masao Kato" - since he was born after 18-something... WhisperToMe 02:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(Japan-related_articles) WhisperToMe 02:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

"For a modern figure (a person born from the first year of Meiji (1868) onward), always use the Western order of given name + family name. For example:

   Junichiro Koizumi (小泉 純一郎 Koizumi Jun'ichirō, born January 8, 1942) is a Japanese politician …

Macron usage in the name of a modern figure should adhere to the following, in order of preference:

      1. Use the official trade name if available in English/Latin alphabet;
      2. Use the form found in a dictionary entry from a generally-accepted English dictionary;
      3. Use the form publicly used on behalf of the person in the English-speaking world;
      4. Use the form publicly used on behalf of the person in any other popular Latin-alphabet-using language (French, Spanish, Italian, Portuguese, German, and Dutch, or variations); or
      5. If none of the above is available, use the macronned form."

His trade name is Masao Kato since that is the name he uses in the book. So... Masao Kato it is! WhisperToMe 02:06, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your information. It's fine for me. I raised that question on 16 January 2006. The "given + family name" rule for modern Japanese figure was established at 21:59, 13 February 2006. Before then, it was stated that for the title for modern figures, there is not yet an agreement on the name order. Since there is clear rule now, I follow. Thank you. --Neo-Jay 02:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

FIFA 2006

These articles could do with a Nav-Box in my opinion. I'm to my bed, any chance you might whip one up? Rich Farmbrough 23:26 15 June 2006 (GMT).

Hi, are you talking to me? I don't understand. --Neo-Jay 23:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I meant something like this:

Template:Fb end I saw you were active on the world cup pages, and thought you might do it. I was too tired last night, but I've put a rough ad ready one together this morning. Rich Farmbrough 09:33 16 June 2006 (GMT).

Oh, I see. Many thanks. I have added this template to the rest of the group articles. --Neo-Jay 13:58, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Alumni listings

Thanks for your note about the order of the alumni categories. I actually did change them to be arranged specifically alphabetically (for instance, placing University of Iowa under U, not I) after having some difficulty myself finding the categories. I tend to prefer them that way, but I conceed that it's more preference than science. MiamiDolphins3 19:46, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for your reply. I agree that the university alumni categories can be placed under "U" in alumni by university categories. I only changed them to be placed under "A" in specific university categories. For example, Category:University of Miami alumni can still be placed under "U" in Category:Alumni by university in the United States, but are better to be placed under "A" in Category:University of Miami. Thank you. --Neo-Jay 20:11, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Greater China - definitions

Hi there, Neo-Jay. The reason I restored those bits is because (1) the statement does say that these are *rare* usage, and (2) the fact that User:RevolverOcelotX seems to think Greater China connotes these regions seems to suggest that there are people out there who use that term in that way. But I don't feel particularly strong about it. If you still think they should be left off, that's fine. Personally, I'm sceptical about the whole term Greater China, and also about some of User:REvolverOcelotX's edits in general. --Sumple (Talk) 05:30, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for your reply. --Neo-Jay 06:44, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia

Nice to know you, I agree with you and already made the change based on your suggestion. -- Farmanesh

Many thanks. --Neo-Jay 21:13, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Your edit on Frivolous litigation

Hi Neo Jay,

You might want to rewrite the opening line you contributed. Part of the problem is the term "frivolous litigation" is awkward. A frivolous litigation is awkward sentence structure. May I suggest you change it to something like:

In law frivolous litigation refers to a claim or defense...

or

Frivolous litigation refers to when a claim or defense in a lawsuit...

or

Litigation is considered frivolous when a claim or defense to a claim is presented in spite of the fact that both the party and the party's attorney...

I would edit it myself, but I don't want to step on your contribution. --Gfwesq 02:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

You are so great! I just changed the sentence. Please let me know whether it is OK. Thank you so much. --Neo-Jay 18:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Neo Jay. Yes, I also am rather partial to Gfwesq. You are a law student? The standard for what consitutes frivolous (for sanctions) is not just that both parties knew it had no basis in fact, but also that the attorney failed to do his ;due dilignece' in investigating the claim before signing on to it. That is an important distinction. It would probably be helpful to read the FRCP RUle 11 on that. Again, like Greg, I don't want to step on your contribution. And I think you can rewrite it just a little and make it more accurate.  ;-) Also look at the defintion in 'Tort Reform' (an article I think should be deleted as non-encyclopedic but that is my opinion). "Frivolous lawsuit" is properly defined there as "one that cannot reasonably be supported under existing legal precedent or under a good-faith argument for a change in the law, or one that has no basis in fact." Sanctions depend on whether or not the client and the lawyer knew or that the lawyer did not do his due diligence in investigating the merits. A good faith belief without investigation is not sufficient to absolve the attorney from liability from sanction.

It would be good to look for a citation (I have one on the tort reform article), and a citation for the sanction standard (which would be Fed Rules Civ Procedure.jgwlaw 05:12, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, jgwlaw. Thank you so much for your information. I am a law student, but not very familiar with Frivolous litigation. Please feel free to "step on" my edits. That's the very nature of Wikipedia: a free encyclopedia that everyone can edit. Thank you for your contributions. --Neo-Jay 11:27, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

As an aside, a mathematician friend of mine introduced me to go, and it was fascinating. I let it drop, though, and now don't remember how to play it. I admire go players because it takes focus and logic and a quick mind to play it well.jgwlaw 05:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I am glad that you also like go. Hope you can enjoy it. --Neo-Jay 11:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

about Chen Guangcheng

Hi Neo-Jay,

I appreciate your comment on my talk page . I won't put the "Chinese name" template back on Chen Guangcheng's page just yet, but I hope I can persuade you to agree to leave it there.

As you know, of course, in the English language (an in fact in all Indo-European lnaguages that I am aware of) we put our family names last and given names first. What you may not know (I don't know whether you've ever been to the States), is that many, many, many Americans (especially high school students) do not know that some Asian cultures reverse that order. I have personally explained this about Yao Ming's name to some Americans. They were sincerely surprised when I explained the word order difference. They said, "You mean his name is really Ming Yao?". You see the cultural blindspot here.

In my opinion, every Asian whose name is given in family-name-first order should have a similar template atop their Wikipedia page in the English-language Wikipedia. The English-language Wikipedia is surfed daily by countless numbers of high school students etc. in America, and this is a useful (if small) piece of information.

I know that many Chinese pages do not have this template, although many others do. In fact, my goal is to *add* that template to all such pages.

Many thanks, Ling.Nut 18:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I can understand your concerns. But that statement in the head of the article does not look so good. Probably we may add family name to Template:Chinesename and use it, instead of using Template:Chinese name. For the articles like Jiang Jieshi and Mao Zedong, in which the family name has been clarified in the table, we do not need to add Template:Chinese name. --Neo-Jay 19:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Please continue this discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (China-related articles). There are better ways to do this, such as is done for the Japan-related articles. I really don't see the need for this template at unabiguous cases such as Mao Zedong.--Jiang 19:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Neo-Jay, expect a long response at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (China-related articles). I plan to copy/paste our previous remarks, plus additional ones, below Jiang's remarks in the topic he created for this question. So I won't be discussing this any further on either of our talk pages.

Thanks, Ling.Nut 23:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Very well. Many thanks for your concerns. --Neo-Jay 06:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

military people

My original proposal was to move all "military personnel" to "military people." But quite a few people spoke up and said they specifically did not want the kind of broadness you're proposing. It was much more popular to have the scope limited to actual servicemen. So go ahead and nominate it if you like, but be aware you'll be facing an uphill battle.--Mike Selinker 22:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for your reply. If it had been pointed out that there were already categories such as Category:Military writers and Category:Military engineers, which are Military people and not necessarily Military personnel, probably they may have agreed to keep Category:Military people. I will try to reestablish the categorys of Militory people when I have time. Let's wait and see what will happen. --Neo-Jay 20:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the jurisdiction category!

I created many of the articles to which you added the category - thanks for doing so! Please consider adding your name to Wikipedia:WikiProject Law, and adding some ideas for features to Portal:Law - and keep up the good work! bd2412 T 01:59, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. I had added the Userbox for WikiProject Law to my User page. And I just added my name to Wikipedia:WikiProject Law. Thanks for your contributions. --Neo-Jay 03:43, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Cathay

OK, so what’s 国泰 mean? I’ll totally concede it doesn’t mean “Cathay”—how can it mean what’s a Western version of a Chinese word in the first place?—but it seems to be how Cathay is rendered most commonly in company names with Chinese equivalents.

Standing corrected,
Wiki Wikardo

I just found that the English name of 國泰航空 is Cathay Pacific. Probably that's why you added zh:国泰 as the interwikilink to Cathay. But I still don't think that Cathay is the translation of 國泰 even for the company's name. Probably the company translates 國 as Cathay, and 泰 as Pacific. Anyway 國泰 is not an indepedent word in Chinese language. It means "Peaceful State" and is usually used in the phrase of 国泰民安 (state is peaceful and the people are safe). So we do not need to find a specific English word for 國泰. Thanks. --Neo-Jay 08:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

That makes sense, that 國 would represent “Cathay”—in fact, that was my initial thought. But whence 泰 for Pacific?? And we have 國泰航空 for Cathay Pacific, but then what about 國泰人壽 (“Cathay Life”), 國泰金控 (“Cathay Financial Holdings”) and 國泰銀行 (“Cathay Bank”)? In fact, do a search on 國泰 and let me know how you feel about it. I know, I know—國泰 for “Cathy” is a stretch, but say it out loud. I’m pretty sure that’s what it’s getting at. —鬼佬 13:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, many thanks for your information. I found that it was as early as 1921 when 国泰 was translated as Cathay (for a ship's name). Probably the other 国泰 companies just followed this translation. --Neo-Jay 14:33, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, good fuckin’ research, dude!—quick. Anyways, I had no idea about the saying “國泰民安,” and upon further googling, seeing companies like 國泰電腦, who are called, unimaginatively enough, KauTai Computer Corporation, I’ll agree that 國泰 isn’t meant to always, or even necessarily mostly, represent Cathay. You were right to remove the interwiki. I’m peace like that 15:32, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

You are right. Some, if not many, 國泰 companies do not use Cathay as their English names. I also had found that many, if not most, mainland China 国泰 companies use "Guotai" as the translation. See, e.g., 国泰基金, 上海市国泰电影院, 国泰君安证券研究所, and 江苏国泰国际集团. Thank YOU for your quesiton and research. --Neo-Jay 01:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

But you know, Guotai Film, in Shanghai, for example, is actually called "the Cathay Theatre" - says so right above the door.

It's probably right to say that "國泰" is the traditional translation of Cathay when used as a part of a proper noun. --Sumple (Talk) 02:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's possible. It will be great if we can know the origin of the translation. --Neo-Jay 03:27, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Go

I have started Wikipedia:WikiProject Go. Charles Matthews 16:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Hinduism

Welcome to WikiProject Hinduism

WikiProject Hinduism — a collaborative effort to improve articles about Hinduism Discussion board — a page for centralised Hinduism-related discussion Notice board — contains the latest Hinduism-related announcements Hindu Wikipedians — Wikipedians who have identified themselves as Hindus Portal — a portal linking to key Hinduism-related articles, images, and categories Workgroups — projects with a more specific scopes For more links, go to the project's navigation template.

--D-Boy 07:03, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi from Raychina

Hi, Thanks for your help.

You are welcome, Raychina. And please add four "~" as your signature in the future. --Neo-Jay 17:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Cheng Qiang

I noticed your debate with User:Ksyrie in both Chinese and English Wikipedia. He seems to have a very hazy idea what it means to be an editor. Have you seen his article on Chinese city walls, which he has named "Cheng Qiang"? The name is very confusing, and a soccer player called Chengt Qiang in Liaoning FC is linked to the article. We need to clean up this mess...--Niohe 18:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern with my debate with User:Ksyrie on China proper. It seems to me "Cheng Qiang" is an original translation for City wall. I think that it should be moved to "Chinese city wall" or "City wall in China". --Neo-Jay 18:45, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I will go ahead and do the relevant changes. This guy doesn't seem to be able to write in proper English...--Niohe 19:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions. --Neo-Jay 19:47, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

China Proper

User:Ksyrie is going rampant on both China proper and zh:中國本土, and he has already violated WP:3RR once. We need to deal with him together, because he is not going to stop.--Niohe 23:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Let's try. --Neo-Jay 02:02, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Great! Thanks for restoring the link on China Proper. I just had to do the same on zh:中國本土. This guy clearly invents his own rules as he pleases. He writes in the summary that he is proposing a split, but deletes the link at the same time! If that's not POV pushing, nothing is.

Besides, I haven't read the whole discussion on zh:Talk:中國本土, but it seems that most of it is based on a poor understanding of what "proper" in "China proper" means.--Niohe 12:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. Thanks for your contributions. --Neo-Jay 20:44, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Michel Foucault reading group

Hi Neo-Jay I noticed your article on The Archaeology of Knowledge and thought you might like to know that this is the chosen text for this months reading group over at the Michel Foucault reading group on Wikiverstiy. Hope you can drop by and help use out. Mystictim 20:58, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Xiaozhuang

Sorry, I just got tired of the tedious nature of the name, so I thought we'd unify Xiaozhuang with Cixi. Sorry if I did this in haste, but I see your point. If I were an admin I'd go and make the appropriate changes, but I'm not. More disccusion on the talk page. Colipon+(T) 00:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. A solution is to move Empress Dowager Xiaozhuang back to Xiao Zhuang Wen and then requet to move Xiaozhuangwen Grand Empress Dowager to Empress Dowager Xiaozhuang at Wikipedia:Requested moves. --Neo-Jay 20:39, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

New survey for your move proposal posted at Talk:Grand Empress Dowager Xiaozhuang. —  AjaxSmack  06:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help. --Neo-Jay 08:19, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Template categorization

Hello,

just to let you know, Category:Wikipedia templates is a kind of "abstract" category, which isn't supposed to directly contain any templates. If you don't know how to categorize a template, you should use Category:Uncategorized templates instead. Hairy Dude 20:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you talking about Template:Year nav? OK, I see. --Neo-Jay 08:23, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Harvard College alumni category

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. When I first looked, I did not see that this sub-cat of Category:Harvard University alumni existed. I checked it out -- it is only populated by five articles. The broader alumni category has several hundred, and there is no Radcliffe College category (which I find more surprising). So, yes, I think this category should be nominated for merging. Would you like to do the honors? --Vbd (talk) 04:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

No. On the contrary, if I had noticed that you asked to merge Category:Yale College alumni to Category:Yale University alumni at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 February 24#Category:Yale College alumni, I would have been opposed to this idea. I don't see any significant difference between Category:Yale College alumni and other Yale schools' alumni categories such as Category:Yale Divinity School alumni and Category:Yale School of Management alumni. --Neo-Jay 10:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

The difference is that the terms "Yale College" and "Yale University" are commonly used interchangeably to refer to the undergraduate institution. The university's graduate schools tend to stand on their own more obviously.--Vbd (talk) 20:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I was in Wikibreak and could not respond to you. I am wondering how you can say that Yale University is commonly used to only refer to the undergraduate institution?? Where is your reliable source??? Yale University includes both Yale College and many graduate and professioanl schools. Yale College stands on its own as obviously as the other schools! Use your common sense! --Neo-Jay 15:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Dude, chill. I don't appreciate your assertion that I am not using my common sense. It is rude. I am especially offended by it when you completely misconstrue my statements. I did not say that Yale University is "commonly used to only refer to the undergraduate institution" (your words, my emphasis added). Nor did I say that the College does not stand on its own as compared to the graduate and professional schools. Of course it does.

Let me try to explain this again. The distinction between Yale College, the undergraduate school, and Yale University, the broader institution, is often blurred, so that in common usage, graduates of Yale College end up being referred to as graduates of Yale University. That's why the Category:Yale University alumni was already heavily populated with undergraduate alumni, and Category:Yale College alumni was not. This blurring of the distinction is a reality, whether you like it or not (and no, I do not have a "reliable source" to point to for this proposition (granted, I haven't looked for one)); it just is what it is. We can debate this further, if you would like (and if you can be less rude), but in the grand scheme of things, I don't think it is worth getting bent out of shape about.--Vbd (talk) 18:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

OK, let us use our common sense. Less rude? All your arguments against Category:Yale College alumni are also applicable to the categories of other Yale graduate and professional school alumni. If you can say that the terms "Yale College" and "Yale University" are commonly used interchangeably to refer to the undergraduate institution, then I can also say that the terms of Yale Law School (or Yale Divinity School, Yale School of Management, etc.) and Yale University are also commonly used interchanable to refer to the law school (divinity school, school of management, etc), and I can also say that in common usage, graduates of Yale Law School (Yale Divinity School, Yale School of Management, etc.) also end up being referred to as graduates of Yale University. What is your reliable source to prove that alumni of Yale College are more commonly called as Yale University alumni than the alumni of graduate and professional schools are called as Yale University alumni? And how much "more" is "more enough" to delete only Category:Yale College alumni, not other alumni categories for Yale graduate and professional schools? --Neo-Jay 19:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Look. I do not dispute that Yale College is a distinct and separate division of Yale University, just as the professional schools and graduate program are. However, undergraduate alumni of Yale (or Harvard or any number of other schools) do not tend to use the specific term, "Yale College" when referring to their alma mater -- while graduates of professional schools do tend to self-identify with that particular school -- "I went to Yale Law School," or "I went to Harvard Business School." Do I have empirical data for this, or a reliable source? No. Do I have the time or inclination to look for one given this discussion? Not really. My assertion is based on experience and on the reality of the existing categorization scheme. The reality was that editors were fairly consistently categorising Yale College alumni in Category:Yale University alumni. As I noted before, Category:Yale University alumni was already heavily populated with undergraduate alumni, and Category:Yale College alumni was not; my nomination to merge the two was simply an effort to maintain consistency. Both this Cfm and the parallel Harvard College Cfm were successful. I am sorry you disagree with the results.

On a final note, just because I am annoyed, let me point out that, technically, one does not need to cite a reliable source in support of a Cfm. But thanks for linking the term (twice!), just in case I didn't know what it meant. --Vbd (talk) 20:08, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I see, you do not have any reliable source. The previous practice of Wikipedians is not a good reason to delete a new category. Those editors put the Yale College alumni to Category:Yale University alumni perhaps simply because they do not know Category:Yale College alumni exists. Just see how many articles are linked to Yale College and how many biography articles uses the phrase "graduated from Yale College" instead of "graduate from Yale University". You will find that "graduated from Yale College" are used very often and many Yale graduates also say "I went to Yale College". And if you have time, just check how much Category:Yale University alumni was also already populated with Yale Divinity School alumni or Yale School of Management alumni. Will this also cause you to ask to delete Category:Yale Divinity School alumni and Category:Yale School of Management alumni? And it's not true that Category:Harvard College alumni was successfully deleted. It is still there and was just changed to be a redirect. I will establish Category:Yale College alumni again and you may try to ask to change it to be a redirect. --Neo-Jay 20:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Amazingly, you still don't get it. I am not in favor of deleting such categories as Category:Yale Divinity School alumni and Category:Yale School of Management alumni. I have never said that I was. In fact, I am in favor of populating them. (Note, however, that individuals included in those categories should not also be categorised in Category:Yale University alumni -- that would be a classic example of the basic guideline that, "Articles should not usually be in both a category and its subcategory.")

I am not about to conduct an empirical study of how many WP biographical articles link to Yale College versus Yale University. Knock yourself out if you want to. And it seems pointless to debate our individual personal experiences with whether people say "I went to Yale College" or "I went to Yale University" or "I went to Yale." You will think that you are right and I am wrong, and vice versa. But your assertion that "editors put the Yale College alumni [in]to Category:Yale University alumni perhaps simply because they do not know Category:Yale College alumni exist[ed]" is not particularly convincing (nor is it based on reliable sources). Perhaps editors categorized undergraduate alumni this way because most people think of the terms "Yale College" (or "Harvard College") and "Yale University" (or "Harvard University") interchangeably. I am not trying to legitimize the practice; I am simply suggesting that this is what occurs in common usage.

I have finally realized why we are engaged in this debate -- you created Category:Yale College alumni and you have taken personal offense at it being "messed with." I apologise for stepping on your toes. But please note that if you want to take issue with the deletion of Category:Yale College alumni, there is a process by which this should occur. See Wikipedia:Deletion review.--Vbd (talk) 22:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Amazingly, you still don't get it. Of course I know that you are not in favor of deleting such categories as Category:Yale Divinity School alumni. What I did was just using your logic to conclude that if you are against Category:Yale College alumni, then you should also be against other categories for Yale graduate and professional schools' alumni. But you are not against other categories for Yale graduate and professional schools' alumni, so your argument is not consistent. Got it?? Regarding why Wikipedians didn't put Yale College alumni into Category:Yale College alumni, you disagree with my assertion. But you yourself also only say that perhaps most people think of... interchangeably. Even if this is common useage, it does not follow that other editors should not populate a new reasonable and convenient category, just as you are also in favor of populating Category:Yale Divinity School alumni and Category:Yale School of Management alumni. --Neo-Jay 23:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

You know, this is pointless. You fail to grasp the distinction between undergraduate alumni and alumni of the professional/graduate schools. Or you simply disagree with the underpinnings of the distinction. Whatever. The reality is that, with respect to the similar Category:Harvard College alumni, from the time it was created to the time it was redirected in March 2007, it was populated with six (count them, 6) articles. Editors were not using the category! I do not know when you created Category:Yale College alumni, and I do not remember how many articles were in it, but I do know that I would not have brought it to Cfd if it had been meaningfully populated. Quite frankly, I am not opposed to the existence of the category -- if it is used! I think that it was not being used because, as I have already tried to explain, many people blur the distinction between Yale College, the undergraduate school, and Yale University, the broader institution, so that in common usage, graduates of Yale College end up being referred to as graduates of Yale University. That's why Category:Yale University alumni was already heavily populated with undergraduate alumni, and Category:Yale College alumni was not. You haven't offered an explanation for why the category was underutilized. If you want to re-create Category:Yale College alumni, then I suggest you go through the deletion review process, and if you are successful, populate the category properly so that other editors will follow suit. Clearly, that was not the case when you created the category before. (I guess it wasn't a "reasonable and convenient category" then.)--Vbd (talk) 01:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

True, editors were not using the category. But why? I have told you that your explanation is only your guess (you just said that ...perhaps...). And I have offered my explanation for why the category was underutilized. I don't want to repeat it. If you like, just go back to read my previous discussion (You yourself have said that my assertion... is not particularly convincing. This means that I have offered an explanation and just you don't agree). You also said that you are in favor of populating some categories. I belive that Category:Yale College alumni is only a category that needs to be populated, not be deleted! Thanks. I will consider whether I will place my request at Wikipedia:Deletion review. --Neo-Jay 16:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

I used the word "perhaps" to parallel your use of it. Your explanation is that "editors put the Yale College alumni to Category:Yale University alumni perhaps simply because they do not know Category:Yale College alumni exists." Now you suggest that editors will "populate a new reasonable and convenient category." Hmmm. They didn't use it the first time you created it; why are they more likely to populate it now? What will you do differently to make it a more "reasonable and convenient category"? What does that even mean?--Vbd (talk) 23:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

What do you even mean that you are in favor of populating some categories (such as Category:Yale Divinity School alumni and Category:Yale School of Management alumni)?? These categories are also underutilized! It always takes some time to let editors know and get familiar with some new categories! Are you ever going to stop discussing this issue here?? --Neo-Jay 11:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Moving pages

Thanks for the headup. But i prefer to ignore the rules (especially when they aren't even official policy) when 1. quality is upheld and 2. there is no ongoing dispute. Now please excuse me while i undo your changes. --Plastictv 17:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

But you can improve the quality and at the same time not ignore the rules especially when the rules are reasonable! It is very important for us to respect our previous editors and keep the entire edit history. If you respect other editors, other editors will also respect you. If I cut a page substantially edited by you and paste it to another page and then improve its quality, what do you think of it? I hope you can follow the rules in Wikipedia:How to rename (move) a page in the future and never rename a page by cut and paste. I have reverted your reversion at Devils on the Doorstep and Guizi lai le. Thanks. --Neo-Jay 17:51, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Because you have edited Devils on the Doorstep, now Guizi lai le cannot be moved there by ordinary editors. Therefore I just placed a request to move at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Please express whether you support the move at Talk:Guizi lai le. After moving, you can edit Devils on the Doorstep. Thank you for your patience. --Neo-Jay 18:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok i catch your drift. Keep up the good work. --Plastictv 20:23, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. --Neo-Jay 20:38, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi

I just got a message from which is much appreciated but just wondering what it was referring to or if it was juat a general welcoming message. Dommccas 15:13, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Dommccas, it was a general welcoming message. Wikipedians usually leave this message when they notice a new editor. Again, Welcome! --Neo-Jay 15:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Well thanks very much. Its nice to be noticed. Dommccas 15:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Neo-Jay

Just wondering, can you create a table for all the victims with photos. I am really bad with tables. Thanks Mercenary2k 02:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Your table looks perfect. I love to extend your table to all the other victims. But according to the discussion at its request for deletion page, List of victims of the Virginia Tech massacre will be very likely be deleted. Very sad. --Neo-Jay 02:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Ya, this page might get deleted. Thats why I was wondering if you could create a table for the rest of the victims and I will move it to the main page. Mercenary2k 02:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

All the student victims' pictures have disappearred. Use of the fair-use photos is restricted by Wikipedia's guideline. I even cannot use them in my sandbox (User:Jeffrey O. Gustafson reverted my tests). There is no need to use the table now. --Neo-Jay 05:52, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Cricket - Thanks

Thanks for removing the strange speedy deletion tag for Cricketer Steve Stuchbury, inexperienced editors do slap these on perfectly respectable first class cricketers sometimes and it gets very annoying, so thanks for removing this one! Nick mallory 06:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

You are welcome. Thank you for your contributions on Stephen Stuchbury. --Neo-Jay 07:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:A Home of Our Own (1993 film).jpg

Hello, Neo-Jay. An automated process has found and removed an image or media file tagged as nonfree media, and thus is being used under fair use that was in your userspace. The image (Image:A Home of Our Own (1993 film).jpg) was found at the following location: User:Neo-Jay. This image or media was attempted to be removed per criterion number 9 of our non-free content policy. The image or media was replaced with Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg , so your formatting of your userpage should be fine. Please find a free image or media to replace it with, and or remove the image from your userspace. User:Gnome (Bot)-talk 02:43, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I changed the image gallery on my user page to internal links. --Neo-Jay 15:52, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Edit warring

Re: [1]. The 3RR rule does not give you the right to 3 reverts in 24 hours. Edit warring is unacceptable. The matter is presently before ArbCom, I would advise better editorial conduct. Further revert warring may result in a block. WjBscribe 15:57, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

3 revert rule

The three revert rule is not an entitlement to 3 reverts each 24 hours. Following the intention of the rule, not the letter and because

# 15:52, 19 May 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qian Zhijun 3 
(Undid revision 132021201 by Phil Sandifer (talk), 2nd revert, I can still revert for another time in 24 hours)
# 15:47, 19 May 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qian Zhijun 3 
(Undid revision 132008322 by Doc glasgow (talk)The Consensus here is KEEP! not DELETE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) 

I'm blocking you per revert warring and WP:3RR -- drini ^[meta:] _[commons:] 15:58, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

See WP:3RR fifth paragraph. -- drini ^[meta:] _[commons:] 15:59, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFARB

I believe you are blocked at the moment, for edit warring but I have just added you as a party to the request for arbitration. Please feel free to make an optional statment here, and I will make sure an arbcom clerk watchlists your page and moves your statement over there. The case is to be found here. Thanks for your time. Viridae^Talk 16:03, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

The result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qian Zhijun 3 was 13 for Keep and just 9 for Delete or Merge. Nick ignored the community's consensus and closed the discussion on the ground of the two previous deletion discussions. If so, why do we need a third discussion at all? If he wants to challenge the decision of the deletion review, he may request for arbitration and should not abuse his administrator's power to block certain community consensus that he disagree.--Neo-Jay 17:42, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I've copied this statement over for you to the main requests for arbitration page. Regards --Ryan Postlethwaite 21:06, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

In response: 1) AfD is not a vote counting operation, see also for one Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion; 13 vs. 9 is not what is evaluated, the reasons on each side with reference to the encyclopedia and associated policies, such as Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Undue weight, Wikipedia:Notability, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, etc. are what is counted. 2) The third discussion was probably not needed, but anyway the reasons brought up in prior discussions are just as valid in the third one. If you want to look at it as a vote, the people who voted earlier have no less voice than the people who voted last. 3) Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration is not an appeals court for deletions, and the third AfD was not bound to come for its conclusion to come to whatever the opposite of the second discussion was. —Centrx→talk • 04:25, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

1) Who is the judge to count the reasons on each side? The Administrator? But the administrators still disagree with each other. And the point is that "Judge" Nick did not count the third discussion at all but totally based his judgment on previous discussion. 2) The reasons brought up in prior discussions are not as valid as those in the third one because the article Qian Zhijun was revised. I cannot see its old versions in the previous discussion. But the new version was apparently different from the old ones since Night Gyr said in the third discussion that "with some minor cleanup, (the article) refocus[ed] on the phenomenon rather than the kid". The reasons for deletion in the previous discussion may at least be changed to reasons for just renaming. 3) Who said that "Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration is an appeals court for deletions"? We are not complaining about the deletion decision itself, but an arbitrary abuse of administrator's power to close a community discussion. --Neo-Jay 06:03, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

The third discussion was needed because the community decided by way of DRV that the first was improperly closed. The second one last all of 45 minutes so another DRV determined that that too had been improperly closed. A third, balanced fair and open discussion was needed but unfortunately this was once again improperly closed - which just leaves us with an arbcom case. At no point should an admin over-rule or ignore a discussion because they don't like the outcome. Indeed, ignoring a current discussion is one of the deifinitions of wheel warring. Viridae^Talk 04:35, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Bai Yang vs. Bo Yang

As to wether the proper pronunciation of his name should be Bai or Bo, I think we should go with how his name is usually pronounced. I did a tiny bit of looking up and came to the following results: As Bai/Bo Yang resides in Taiwan, I feel we should follow the local usage. My 遠東簡明漢英辭典 (a standard dictionary on Taiwan) gives as first pronunciation for all meanings, including as a family name, bo. This confirms my personal experience, that the last name 柏 is regularly pronunced Bo by all Taiwanese I have met so far (as my own Chinese name is 柏 I constantly hear people pronounce it.)

Apart from that, a google search turns out the following results: "Bai Yang" 41.000, "Bai Yang" historian 557, "Bo Yang" 127.000, "Bo Yang" historian still 19.000. Even a PRC government website writes his name "Bo Yang" (http://www.gwytb.gov.cn:8088/detail.asp?table=Interactions&title=Cross-strait+Interactions+and+Exchanges&m_id=188).

As almost all Western (and even mainland Chinese) references to him use Bo, and he seems to use this name to publish his books, furthermore in the area in which he lives this family name is usually pronounced Bo, I clearly feel we should give Bo as the primary prounciation of his last name. Laca 10:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, I accept that Bo is the primary pronunciation for 柏 in article Bo Yang and have made relevant change. FYI, in mainland China, where 柏杨 was born and grow up, the proper pronunciation for 柏 as a family name is Bai, not Bo. --Neo-Jay 11:38, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Baliqiao

It would not have been amiss to discuss the renaming on the discussion page before doing so. Also, please refrain from imposing American orthography on an article that began with English orthography. InfernoXV 13:32, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry that I did not realize that travelling is British English spelling. I just changed it by the automatic screen spell checking. Regarding the title of the article, I still think that Eight Mile Bridge should be renamed to Baliqiao and left my opinions at Talk:Eight Mile Bridge. You can go to talk there. Thanks.--Neo-Jay 14:58, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Zhou Tong redirect

I have reverted your recent redirect of the Zhou Tong page because those Zhou Tongs are two different people. --Ghostexorcist 07:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Of course I know that they are different people, but how can you say that Zhou Tong can only be redirected to Zhou Tong (Water Margin) and cannot refer to Zhou Tong (archer)? I changed that redirect page to disambiguation page do distinguish Zhou Tong (Water Margin) and Zhou Tong (archer). --Neo-Jay 08:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I never said it couldn't. You originally redirected Zhou Tong to Zhou Tong (archer) and deleted all of the Water Margin info. That is why I reverted the redirect. I don't think you had created the disambig page yet. The original Zhou Tong page was created well before the Zhou Tong (archer) page. --Ghostexorcist 08:22, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Please note that there is disambiguation info at the top of Zhou Tong (archer). If Zhou Tong is still a redirect page, then it is equally right or equally wrong to redirect it to Zhou Tong (Water Margin) or Zhou Tong (archer). The reason why I changed the redirect is, as I mentioned in the edit summary, that I thought Zhou Tong was more often referred to Zhou Tong (archer). A good reason that you can reverted should be that Zhou Tong (Water Margin) is the primary meaning for Zhou Tong (see Wikipedia:Disambiguation). But you only said that archer Zhou Tong and the Water Margin Zhou Tong are different people. This is not a good reason to revert. --Neo-Jay 08:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you have done it already, but you should probably drop by the Water Margin page to correct the redirect for any mentions of Zhou Tong's name. The same goes for any Water Margin character articles. I'm sure a person would be able to distinguish between the two on the disambig page, but it's a lot faster to go to the correct article. --Ghostexorcist 08:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I have changed Template:Water Margin characters to link Zhou Tong directly to Zhou Tong (Water Margin). --Neo-Jay 08:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I am just saying at the time of your switch, you had not created the disambig page yet. I know this because I clicked on "Zhou Tong" and it redirected to "Zhou Tong (archer)", of which I of the author. More people know of the Water Margin's Zhou than Yue's Zhou. --Ghostexorcist 09:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Even before the time of my switch, there was also no disambiguation page. The disambiguation information can be found at the top of both Zhou Tong (Water Margin) and Zhou Tong (archer). So it's fine to redirect Zhou Tong to either of them even without a disambiguation page. I can create a disambiguation page, but I don't have to do it. Anyway, Zhou Tong is now a disambiguation page. If you still think that it should be redirected to Zhou Tong (Water Margin), please provide evidence to prove that more people know the Water Margin's Zhou than Yue's Zhou. Otherwise, we may stop discussing about this. --Neo-Jay 14:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

You obviously aren't reading what I'm typing. I have no problem with the redirect page. I have even bolded the first instance of this from a previous post. I know there are redirects at the top of each page, that is because I added them there! For proof of who is known more, just go to google and type in "Zhou Tong". The Water Margin's Zhou's article is first and there is another webpage that mentions him. Yue's Zhou is secondary because it is referenced less. Also, refer to the portugese doctorial thesis (on each Zhou Tong article) that represents Yue's Zhou and the Water Margin's Zhou as the same person. Before I wrote "Zhou Tong (archer)" and it was on the main page, very few westerners outside of college settings or martial arts circles knew who he was. And the Chinese wikipedia article is based on my english version. There was already a Chinese article on the Water Margin's Zhou. --Ghostexorcist 19:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

You probably are not reading what you were typing. If you really have no problem with the redirect page, you should have not reverted my edit. If you yourself added the redirects at the top of each page, why not remember them? Why did you still keep complaining that I did not establish a disambiguation page (quote: 1. I don't think you had created the disambig page yet. 2. ...at the time of your switch, you had not created the disambig page yet)? That's the reason why I kept telling you that I do not need to establish a disambiguation page (although I later established one). Regarding the proof of who is known more, your evidence is obviously not enough. Go to Yahoo! Search, you will find that the archer Zhou Tong is the first one and the Water Margin Zhou Tong even does not appear in the whole first page. And you did not provide any evidence to prove that very few westerners outside of college settings or martial arts circles knew the archer Zhou Tong. Chinese wikipedia article is based on your English version? So What?? So the archer Zhou Tong is less popular than the Water Margin?? Obviously you need to do more research for your argument. There are 2,170 hits for "Zhou Tong" + "Yue Fei" at Google, and 2,090 for "Zhou Tong" + "Water Margin" at Google. In my view, there is no evidence to prove that the Water Magin guy is significantly more popular than the archer guy. Are you really seriously arguing to redirect Zhou Tong to Zhou Tong (Water Margin)? If so, you can continue to discuss this on Talk:Zhou Tong. If not, please stop.--Neo-Jay 20:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I remember exactly what I wrote. Your assumption that Yue's Zhou is more popular than the Water Margin's is horribly flawed. The disambig page issue was resolved a while ago, but you keep bringing it up. As far as I'm concerned, you are trolling. I will no longer reply to your messages. --Ghostexorcist 01:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Have you seriously read my words? I am not arguing that one is more popular than the other. My current position is that the Water Margin Zhou Tong is not significantly more popular than the archer Zhou Tong. That's why I changed Zhou Tong to a disambiguation page. It's you that still argue that the Water Margin Zhou is more popular than the archer Zhou (please remember what you wrote). This assumption is really horribly flawed. But it also seems that you do not disagree to make Zhou Tong a disambiguation page. So I cannot understand why you still keep annoying me. So I have to keep asking you to clarify your position and asking you to stop if you don't want to redirect Zhou Tong to the Water Margin guy. And what really made me uncomfortable was that you once reverted my edit and provided a very poor reason. I think that you need to learn how to present a rational, logical, coherent, and consistent argument. OK, Again (the 3rd time), don't reply if you don't want to change Zhou Tong to a redirecting page, Please. --Neo-Jay 08:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Aix-en-Provence

Please stop making minor cosmetic changes to this article which do not work. Your spacing solution did not work; I found a permanent BOT-proof solution myself. And your change to the V'Hello scheme overlooked the fact that the method of referring to Aix council notices by http links is used in all other places in the article. There is no reason to use a reference for an http website, since it is not a reference, it is a link. When you added the note, you left the description of the link in french with french punctuation: that is not a good idea. The french have their own WP page on Aix, which to some extent this page takes as its starting point and frame of reference. However, this article is primarily for an english-speaking, non-french, readership. --Mathsci 18:20, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't know what browser you are using. But your spacing solution does not work for major browsers including IE and Firefox. You added blank lines and makes the page look not good in my browser (remember that more spaces are as problematic as less spaces). If your solution does not work for my browsers (including IE and Firefox), and my solution does not work for your browser (what?), then whose solution is better? If you still insist on your solution, then do as you please. I am not interested in debating with you. Regarding the link to V'Hello, it's OK for you to change the description to English, but that link is an article, not a website. It's better to be a reference, not an external link. The proper external link for V'Hello is http://www.vhello.fr Again, if you don't like this idea, do as you please. --Neo-Jay 19:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I just checked with 3 browsers, IE (windows xp) and firefox/konqueror (linux). Your reverted format does not work and the council link is not dead at all. It works just fine. I am going to ask you 3 questions: (a) do you speak french; (b) do you know anything about Aix and the region; (c) are you just attempting artificially to create an edit war with no intention of making any material contribution to this encyclopedia article? It took a lot of searching to find the images of Mme Bechard's Calissons and the Door to the original university building opposite the entrance to the Cathedral. Are you trying to harrass me? --Mathsci 20:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about inadvertently and quite unintentionally removing your footnote, which is of course an excellent addition. With my current browser (IE under windows xp), none of the solutions to the spacing problem seem to work. You were quite right to point out that there was a problem and I think that it will be necessary to experiment with several OS /browsers /screen sizes before deciding on a final solution. It seems that including images on both sides creates huge problems on the WP. But I shall try to find a solution that works under as many systems as possible. This is usually what I do when creating web pages, but I don't do it with WP. I'm sorry about this misunderstanding; hopefully the display problem can eventually be solved so that it works on all systems. Cheers, Mathsci 20:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Regarding the link of http://www.ccel.org/fathers/NPNF2-06/letters/lette123.htm , in my browsers, it is automatically redirected to http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf206.toc.html , a table of contents for all the principal works of St. Jerome. The link I updated, http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf206.v.CXXIII.html , is from the same website and is the exact letter 123. I don't know why the link is not dead in your three browsers. And this should be a footnote, not just an external link. --Neo-Jay 20:53, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

As the 2nd note indicates, I misunderstood what you meant by reference and note: you had added a valuable historical note and, in my haste, I had thought we were still talking about velos. I now see that the image problem is actually a function of font size in the browser. In this IE / windows xp browser, the font is much smaller and so the images jar against the next section in every version of the page, after the introduction of images. I put the images there in the first place to improve the article; they had to be fished out of various non-english wp sites. It could be, as with the Marseille page, that sparser images plus a gallery at the end is the right solution. I will apply some thought to this, because there must be a good universal solution. Mathsci 21:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, I see. Now I have no dispute with you on the spacing issue. Wish you find the good solution. --Neo-Jay 21:26, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I've done a trial run by stacking the images, reducing the size of the thumbnails and making a new paragraph at one point in the text. How does it look on your computer? I've only checked it on IE / windows xp. Is it better? Thanks, Mathsci 21:39, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

It looks good in my IE and Firefox if I ignore the blank lines above the section Economy. But, again, if you like, you can leave those blank lines there. I am fine with them.--Neo-Jay 21:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I removed the lines and changed the stacking order of the images. It should be OK now. Phew! Regards, Mathsci 22:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Great! Thank you. --Neo-Jay 22:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Mount Liang

Don't forget that the Mount Liang article mentions a city called Liangshan (which we don't currently seem to have an article for). Badagnani 08:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your reminding. That city is Liangshan County. I have added the information to article Mount Liang. Considering that most incoming links to Liangshan refer to the Mount Liang, I moved Liangshan to Liangshan (disambiguation) and redirected Liangshan to Mount Liang. Thanks.--Neo-Jay 08:26, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Really? Funny how some cities are actually counties. It boggles the mind. Badagnani 08:57, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, in China, it's acceptable to call a county as a city. You may compare County (China) and County (United States). --Neo-Jay 09:03, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Protection of Tsinghua University

I have protected this page for 2 days. Please see Talk:Tsinghua University for further information. Thanks. —— Eagle101^{Need help?} 21:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much.--Neo-Jay 22:05, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

:-s peoples republic?

What's the difference between the history of china and the history of the peoples republic of china? PhilB ~ ^T/_C 15:56, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Why not go to read History of China and History of the People's Republic of China? They are different articles. I think that it's also good to keep the section of History in Agriculture in China and the article History of agriculture in the People's Republic of China separate. Please go to Talk:History of agriculture in the People's Republic of China, not here, for discussion. Thanks. --Neo-Jay 15:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello, just wondering, why does the western go board omit "J" ? PhilB ~ ^T/_C 22:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I think this is to avoid the confusion between i and j. Some western go board omit i, not j.--Neo-Jay 22:43, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Hukou

Thanks for fixing the ref in the above. You drew attention that I damaged the reference. Guilty as charged M'lud, but was there really need to point the finger at me? After all, I did put most of the content there. ;-) BTW, no offense taken. Ohconfucius 06:07, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Really sorry. I disclosed the time of the mistake to help users easily compare the edit history. I knew that your edits were in good faith. In the future I will not disclose the good-faith user's name, but only point out the time when the mistake is made. Or I will clearly point out in edit summary that the mistake is made in good faith. Sorry again.--Neo-Jay 10:42, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Moving articles

Neo-Jay, I think, as a matter of courtesy, if you are going to move articles and create disambiguation pages -- like you did with Gao Yan (which I find unnecessary since there is currently no article for the PRC politician; we can cross the bridge when one is created) -- you should modify the links to the page so that they link to the right page. As it stands, given that there is no article for the PRC politician, I am inclined to move the article back (overwrite the disambiguation page) as unnecessary disambiguation, but I'd like to hear what you have to say. --Nlu (talk) 04:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. First, it's just a matter of time that the PRC politician Gao Yan, a high official at the governor level, is created. Second, even if the PRC Gao Yan will never be created, there are still two articles for persons named Gao Yan. Although the title of article Emperor Xiaozhao of Northern Qi does not mention his personal name, Gao Yan is the Emperor's name. Many users searching for Gao Yan may want to find the Northern Qi emperor, not the prince. They may be more familiar with the emperor's personal name, not his posthumous name. The title of the Chinese Wikipedia article is simply zh:高演. It's good to keep Gao Yan as a disambiguation page since Gao Yan (Northern Qi prince) is not so famous to be the main article. --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Move done

Move of Military History of Goguryeo to Military history of Goguryeo complete. IceKarmaॐ 10:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. But Talk:Military History of Goguryeo has not been moved to Talk:Military history of Goguryeo. Please also move it. --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Oops. Done now. IceKarmaॐ 10:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Li Na

See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E8%A8%A5

"訥 (simplified 讷, pinyin nà (na4), nè (ne4), Wade-Giles na4, *4)"

In this case Na is the correct reading. As I'm sure you know, it's common for less thorough dictionaries to omit some alternate readings. Thanks Quelcrime (talk) 18:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

If you want to confirm this, go to the Chinese Wikipedia page for Li Na, which gives the quotation from which both her and her half-sister's names were taken; then find a copy of the original work with pinyin or zhuyin fuhao annotation (eg Sanmin in Taiwan do the latter) and check the reading. It's a classical quotation, in classical Chinese characters often have variant readings. Quelcrime (talk) 18:41, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Further evidence, if you want it; Google "Li Ne" and Mao; 12,500 results, and many of those are not a name, just coincidental use of the words 'li ne'. Google "Li Na" and Mao; 134,000 results. I'm not guessing about this, by the way.

There's a problem now that, when creating the page I was careless and wrote 'Daughter' capitalised; you've created a page with 'daughter' so I can't move the article across. I'll have to get an admin to do it. Oh well.Quelcrime (talk) 00:48, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

First, please leave message at the bottom, not top, of a user's talk page. I have moved your message to the right place. Second, the daughter of Mao Zedong is obviously Li Ne, not Li Na. You have not provided any reliable source to prove the pinyin of 讷 is Na. Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. Wiktionary is obviously not a reliable source. Why not go to read a Chinese dictionary?? If you find any Chinese dictionary in which 讷 is pronounced as Ne, please present it to Talk:Li Na (daughter of Mao Zedong). For further discussion, please go to Talk:Li Na (daughter of Mao Zedong), not my user talk page. Thanks.--Neo-Jay (talk) 07:35, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Chinese politics

I was wondering if you were interested in creating specific pages for lists of CPC secretaries and governors in different provinces as per the template at Politics of Shanghai. Colipon+(T) 00:30, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your creating pages for the politics of China's administrative divisions such as Politics of Shanghai and Politics of Liaoning. I appreciate it if you can also create pages for other provinces. I have added lists of Governors and CPC Secretaries to all the province-level divisions except Tibet (I am in Mainland China and cannot open the page of Tibet in English Wikipedia because it's likely a sensitive word in China's blocking). You can move those lists to the separate articles. I may also help create some. Thank you.--Neo-Jay 08:01, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

You can just post the tibet list on my page. And I'll be happy to put it up on the Tibet Autonomous Region page. Colipon+(T) 21:22, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

The lists of Tibet leaders can be found at this Internet forum page. It also provides the leader lists for all China's province-level divisions and many prefecture-level cities. Although Internet forum is generally not a reliable source, these lists seem basically accurate and can be verified by other sources.--Neo-Jay 08:14, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Yu Yang (disambiguation)

You added there Yu Yang (swimmer) to the list. Are you sure, that it is another person than the already mentioned Yang Yu?

Best regards --Florentyna (talk) 09:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I think you are right. They are likely the same person. I have removed it from the list. And I just requested to move Yu Yang (disambiguation) to Yu Yang at Wikipedia:Requested moves as an uncontroversial proposal.--Neo-Jay (talk) 09:31, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Ta-Hia or Daxia?

Dear Neo-Jay: I am writing to let you know that I am planning to move the Ta-Hia page to Daxia and make adjustments throughout the article for the following reasons: Daxia is the proper spelling according to the Pinyin system of romanising Chinese - the system used by far more people today than any other - including just about everyone in mainland China and people studying Chinese today. It has also become the standard for articles in the Wikipedia (often with the Wade-Giles version included as an alternative). Ta-hsia is the name according to the Wade-Giles system which is an old English system still in use in Taiwan and by older Western scholars, while Ta-hia is from the French E.F.E.O. system and, therefore, not appropriate at all in an English-language article. Please let me know if you don't agree with my changes. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 21:54, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Dear John: I agree that Ta-Hia should be renamed to Daxia. The only issue is whether Daxia should be a main page or just a disambiguation page for this ancient state and Daxia River. I think that you can move Ta-Hia to Daxia (Bactria) or Daxia (state) and leave Daxia as a disambiguation page. --Neo-Jay (talk) 22:00, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi - thanks for the prompt reply! I am thinking of making Daxia the main page (a this will undoubtedly be the one most people are looking for) with a note at the top with a link to Daxia River. Hope this is O.K. with you. Cheers, John Hill (talk) 22:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's OK with me. You may place the request at Wikipedia:Requested moves. --Neo-Jay (talk) 22:17, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for another very quick reply! Yes, I have just placed the request at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Have a happy Christmas and best wishes for the New Year. John Hill (talk) 22:27, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for your greetings. Have a nice holiday! By the way, Wikipedia does not allow renaming a page by cut and paste (see Help:Moving a page). If we cannot move a page, placing a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves is the only thing we can do. I have supported your proposal at Talk:Ta-Hia. Thank you for your contributions. --Neo-Jay (talk) 22:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for your friendly support and help - I have just listed the article at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Best wishes, John Hill (talk) 00:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Tibet

That was a mistake. No need to waste time at requested moves when Samba county doesn't even exist. It is clearly saga county intended -I don't know how I made an error there -perhaps because it is called samba on french wikipedia -I don't know but it is fixed now -thanks for pointing it out ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 11:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I thought you may like to maintain the edit history of Samba County. Therefore I requested to move it to Saga County at Wikipedia:Requested moves. It's fine for me that you asked for speedy deletion of it. Thank you for your great contributions on Tibet-related articles. --Neo-Jay (talk) 11:57, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes I managed to get all the towns and villages in Tibet as well as counties up and running but I'm afraid many are stubs unlike articles such as History of European exploration in Tibet. I managed to get the infobox sorted for tibet with locators beginning with Alamdo. This will take a lot of time but I hope eventually the stubs will look a little more like Tingri and each district of Tibet becomes developed. Either way I feel it is important to cover it -I'm praying more info will become available on the districts as with other parts of china ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Good job! Best wishes. --Neo-Jay (talk) 17:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. One thing though if you are moving the pages to ...town as you do it e.g Baquen (town) rather than Baquen Town. Just the naming convention thats all. Kind regards ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 17:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I think you mean Baqên Town etc.. Well, according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese), the town's name should be XX Town, not XX (town). I just follow the rules. --Neo-Jay (talk) 17:27, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah OK I wasn't aware of the Chinese naming conventions just the other!! Either way I think its good to avoid confusion between the county and the town. Would you be interested in helping add the infoboxes. Also do you have a command of the Chinese language and the ability to add the Chinese titles of the places to the infoboxes? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 17:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

There we are! -see Baqên Town now ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 17:42, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Do you have the knowledge to add the Chinese transcriptions of places like Dêlêg? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 18:03, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

There is already Chinese name for Dêlêg in the infobox. I am wondering why the settlement type cannot be showed in the infobox.--Neo-Jay (talk) 18:19, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Mmm i don't know. Of course I can see Deleg already has the Chinese in it -I was using it as an example. I'll ask again. Do you have the knowledge to add the Chinese? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 18:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I am a Chinese and can help add the Chinese names to the infobox. The template in Zhengzhou can show the settlement type but those in Baqên Town and Dêlêg cannot. I am totally confused.--Neo-Jay (talk) 18:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Thats great news. I can request User:MC Detroit to look into adding the settlement type. Please see List of towns and villages in the Tibet Autonomous Region. It would be great if you could help add the chinese script beginning with Alamdo. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 18:35, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your asking MJCdetroit to help me. I am adding Chinese names and more information to the places in Tibet. It will take a long time to complete it. Thank you.--Neo-Jay (talk) 06:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Use |name= X with |settlement_type = XX instead of |official_name = X to force the blue bar with the settlement type under the name. This is a little known trick that was recently added by User:Kotniski. See the diff here to see how it changes the infobox at Dêlêg. Let me know if you have any other questions (as I won't be watching this page). Regards, —MJCdetroit (talk) 20:29, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow! Thank you so much! --Neo-Jay (talk) 20:35, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Your welcome. Of oourse it will take some time to do - but I am very glad you are intererested in working on them. Regards ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 11:01, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you are interested but I am begun working a lot on Hong Kong cinema and have recently started the lists by year. See Hong Kong films of 1971 etc -I set up the templates too. I have about 60 years to complete here and get the films started. Feel free to expand any!! 11:09, 19 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blofeld of SPECTRE (talk • contribs)

I like Hong Kong movies very much. But I am afraid that I do not have enough time to help. Best wishes and congratulations on your great work. --Neo-Jay (talk) 13:24, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh please move the villages to the correct prefectures. Admittedly I haven't any source unfortunately to affirm which it is in - -it is based on geographical observation (which in an encyclopedia it shouldn't be). I would be very grateful if you could make those corrections -if I had source I would of course do it myself. Regards ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 11:45, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

When creating disambiguation pages...

please use "*" not "#" for each entry, and if you are disambiguating two geographic entries use {{geodis}} to help sort the disambiguation pages. Thanks. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:02, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.--Neo-Jay (talk) 03:45, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Question

Thanks for welcoming me! I do actually have a question for you, but I don't know if its your area of expertise. On the Wikipedia fauna talk page, I posed a question about creating a new type of fauna. If you could answer my question there even partially, it'd be greatly appreciated.

Here's to working with you towards a better Wikipedia! (ApostleJoe (talk) 01:42, 21 December 2007 (UTC))

Welcome again, Dear ApostleJoe. Sorry that I had had no idea about Wikipedia fauna before you asked me this question. It seems to me that you can simply join in more than one fauna. And I think that it's OK for you to create a new fauna. You may also raise the question at Wikipedia:Help desk, or leave your question at your user talk page and add a {{helpme}} there. Some experts may come to help you. Best regards. --Neo-Jay (talk) 08:46, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Ah, okay, I didn't know any of that. I'll make sure to go to the help desk before doing anything major (I'm already a gnome!). Thanks for the help, and see you around the wiki, eh? (ApostleJoe (talk) 13:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC))

You are welcome! Please feel fee to let me know if you need any help in the future. --Neo-Jay (talk) 13:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

Batang Town

Merry Christmas and all the best for 2008 from the Bald One ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^Talk? 13:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Many thanks for your greetings! Merry Christmas to you! --Neo-Jay (talk) 14:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Neo-Jay! Sorry - you are just too quick for me! I am glad to see the article has been found already though, and that someone is interested! I had to stop at this point today because my wife came home from work and needed to have a chat and dinner. I am certainly planning to do more work on the article - although it may be difficult to find time for a couple of days as it will be Christmas eve tomorrow here and I have family commitments. However, here is some more info to help you find it: In Mayhew, Bradley and Kohn, Michael. (2005). Tibet. 6th Edition, p. 260. Lonely Planet. ISBN 1-74059-523-8, it says: "Lying 32 km from the Tibetan border and a 5½ bumpy hours down a dirt track from Litang, low-lying Batang is the closest town to Tibet that is open to foreigners." The Times Comprehensive Atlas of the World (2007). Twelfth Edition, ISBN 978-0-00-780150-3, gives Xiaqiong as an alternative name and it appears to be just east of the Jinsha or Yangtse River. The Contemporary Atlas of China (1988). Edited by Nathan Sivin, et al. Collins Publishers, London. Reprint: Sydney (1989), p. 26. ISBN 0-7322-0053-9, gives the Chinese name as 巴搪. This, and the fact that I gave the Pinyin incorrectly as Pātáng rather Bātáng is probably what has led you astray. I shall try to fix those problems now in the article and will try to do some more work on it soon (I have more accounts of the town in various books here to). Sorry you had those difficulties - but thanks for pointing them out to me so promptly. Anything you can add to the article would be most welcome. I also plan to do some more work on Litang (and separate the town from the county (but not tonight). Cheers, John Hill 10:28, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, John. Thanks for your reply. If Batang's alternative name is Xiaqiong, I think it is 夏邛镇, the seat of Batang County Government (see the complete list of the towns and townships in Batang County). This seems the same problem as we met in Keriya Town. Moreover, Batang is more likely spelled as 巴塘 (the county's name), not 巴搪. That's why I cannot find a single hit for 巴搪镇 in the Google search. Thank you. Merry Christmas! --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

history of Four Great Ancient Civilizations ??

The article of Four Great Ancient Civilizations doesn't make any sense Persia is greater than Egypt and China, what about Greek and Roma? any way how come they mentioned Egypt as a whole, China as a whole and India as a whole and they just mentioned Babylon and not Mesopotamia as a whole? In matter of fact Mesopotamia is older than Egypt if you account Sumer. how come Babylon is the cradle of civilization while Sumer is older than Babylon? Sumer is the cradle of civilization not Babylon and this is fact. And let's suppose we didn't account Sumer or Mesopotamia as a whole, China is older than Egypt..so we should sort it like this China then Egypt then Babylon.. you make no sense. Mussav (talk) 18:08, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Stay calm. I personally agree with you and also think that Four Great Ancient Civilizations does not make any sense. Please remember that it is not I that created this concept. It is a concept in Chinese historiography and is not widely accepted in the world. And it is under criticism even in China now.--Neo-Jay (talk) 19:29, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your replay and for Clarifying it. Mussav (talk) 19:40, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Something doesn't seem right

I noticed you added a number of "succession boxes" in various articles, for example Yan Huiqing. I commented in the Talk:Yan_Huiqing that there seems to be something not right. There seem to be logical gaps in the various precession/succession sequences. I noticed the same discrepancy in other articles. Is there something I am missing? --VanBurenen (talk) 09:37, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. Please check List of premiers of China, which I just added to Premier of the Republic of China. The Premiers of China in Beiyang Government did change very frequently. --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:23, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

HanBoN

Thanks for the nice welcome. 谢谢。HanBoN (talk) 22:42, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

You are very welcome. :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:12, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Just wondering, are you an admin? HanBoN (talk) 01:24, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

No, I am not. :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Yecheng/Kargilik County

It looks like there is no opposition for your proposal to merge Yecheng to Kargilik County. Do you want to do it? --Nlu (talk) 17:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. John Hill, the creator of the article Yecheng, still edited it today. I don't know whether he agrees with this merge. --Neo-Jay (talk) 16:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

External link to Shanghai (上海)

It looks like you removed the external link about Shanghai from ChinaTravelGuide.com. And you listed the reason as spam. However, after looked at the site, I don't think it's a spam. It's a legitimate commercial-free wiki site. I was curious about your reasoning. 209.159.64.4 (talk) 16:47, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. Spam is not necessarily a commercial website. Please read Wikipedia:Spam: "Adding external links to an article or user page for the purpose of promoting a website or a product is not allowed, and is considered to be spam." If ChinaTravelGuide.com can be added to the External links section, I believe that thousands of other websites' links can also be added. That's exactly what spam means. Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 05:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I think ChinaTravelGuide.com has additional data about Shanghai that can supplement this article, and additional info that other users can reference. That's the purpose of external link. I noticed that right beside ChinaTravelGuide.com in the original external link was wikitravel's Shanghai article. Can you tell me the reason why wikitravel's Shanghai article should be there while ChinaTravelGuide Shanghai article should not? 209.159.64.4 (talk) 17:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for your message. According to Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided, links to open wikis should be avoided, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors, and Wikis that meet this criteria might also be added to Meta:Interwiki map. Wikitravel is listed in Meta:Interwiki map, while ChinaTravelGuide is not. And please also note that according to Wikipedia:Spam, "inclusion of one spam link is not a reason to include another". Even if Wikitravel is also a spam, the fact that it has not been removed does not justify inclusion of ChinaTravelGuide. Thanks.--Neo-Jay (talk) 18:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your time. I think ChinaTravelGuide has a substantial history and editors (but that's a subjective matter and I don't think we should debate on that). The point is that the link provides a unique resource better than the Interwiki link (#1 reason for the link). The link is not pointing to the site in general, but a specific article, which provides lots of specific local info and knowledge (the site itself is also operated by local people, and is specific about areas in China. Most editors are local people, and the content is different from that from a generic catch-all Interwiki site). The ChinaTravelGuide site does not benefit from the link here because of "nofollow", the readers here can find a unique resource from the link. Put yourself in the readers' shoe, do you realy prefer not to know Shanghai as what local people tell you? The link is not spam. 209.159.64.4 (talk) 20:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment. However, it is impossible for us to conclude that ChinaTravelGuide 's contributors are local people. How do you know that? For example, the editors of its article Shanghai (上海) include several IP users and User:JayFang, who claims in his user page that he is a Los Angeles resident. Even he claims that he is from Shanghai in his user page, there is still no evidence to prove that. As you acknowledged, your description of this open wiki website is subjective. Adding external links to its specific articles is promoting this website. As long as it is not included in Meta:Interwiki map, I think it is still a spam. --Neo-Jay (talk) 03:58, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

fr:Comté de Zhongmu

Hi, Neo-Jay. Thanks for the information. I just renamed the article and fixed the various redirections to it. Croquant (talk) 18:59, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Have a nice weekend. --Neo-Jay (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Qing Dynasty empresses

I notice you have previously participated in discussions about the article titles for Qing empresses. I am interested in getting opinion on the correct location of the articles on Qing empresses which are almost all currently located at hideous violations of pinyin rules. I don't have opinions on the format or even the names themselves so I would like to get some consensus before proposing moves. (But please, no hyphens and no CamelCase.) The articles in question are every CamelCase or hyphenated name plus Empress Xiao Xian and Abahai at Category:Qing Dynasty empresses and Category:Qing Dynasty empress dowagers. If you are interested please discuss it here. Thanks. — AjaxSmack 03:07, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your notice. I support the move. There should be no hyphen or CamelCase according to the rules of pinyin. --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:00, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Luo River

Just curious, is the Luo River in Henan different from the one in Shaanxi?

Bathrobe (talk) 03:49, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes, they are different. If you can read Chinese, please see zh:洛河. Thank you.--Neo-Jay (talk) 03:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Beijing

Hey Neo-Jay! I'm currently planning the launch of the WikiProject Beijing, depending on if enough other editors would be interested in such a project. I saw you have edited the main Beijing page recently and therefor might be interested. If you are, please sign: User:Poeloq/WikiProject_Beijing. As I am posting this to quite a few editors, I am not watching your page and would ask you to reply with any comment or questions on my talk page. Cheers, Poeloq (talk) 20:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

April 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Audit storm, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I initially wanted to thank you for your reminding and will add references to the article Audit storm. But, after seeing your following warnings, I suspect that your messages to me are personal. Have I insulted you? --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add content without citing reliable sources, as you did to Jerome Frank. Before making potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources please take this opportunity to add references to the article. Contact me if you need assistance adding references. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Another five registered users, User:IslandGyrl, User:Catamorphism, User:PaulHanson, User:Jasperdoomen, and User:Uncle G, have edited the article Jerome Frank. Why not also warn them? What content I added do you think is "controversial"?? Please point it out. Otherwise your warning to me is offensive.--Neo-Jay (talk) 12:25, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did to Law and literature. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to use disruptive or hard to read formatting, as you did in Law and literature, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I am curious whether you really read Law and literature carefully. The content was added by Jonchatham at 18:51, 7 December 2006. I just cleaned it up from March 11 to March 12, 2007. Block me? Please try to be civil. Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The later messages were mistakenly given. I am sorry for that. Otolemur crassicaudatus (talk) 12:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

OK. That's fine. I created and edited Audit storm on 27 April 2006, and created and edited Jerome Frank on 14 February and 25 April 2006. It's very very long ago when I was still a newcomer. I will add references to them. But I suggest that in the future you add Template:Unreferenced to specific articles several days before you leave these warning notices to specific users, especially when there is no clear evidence against their good faith. Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 16:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Audit storm

Nicely done! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your adding Template:Unreferenced to Audit storm and Jerome Frank. --Neo-Jay (talk) 17:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

You don't have to thank me; it's my job! :-) - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

- CobaltBlueTony™ _talk has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

ROC/Taiwan

Hi, I just wanted you to know that I don't really mind that much what the article names for the ministry are, as long as there are enough explanations in the actual content. So I don't think I am going to start a new discussion on WP:NC-ZH. You can go ahead and move the ministry articles back if you want to. Thanks for you patience.

Also, thanks for noticing this vandalism. I'm surprised that I didn't catch that...--Jerrch 00:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your discussion at Talk:Ministry of Education (Republic of China). I am really neutral on the ROC/Taiwan issue and fully respect whatever consensus reached at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese). I just want to unify the standards and avoid potential disputes or endless edit war. Many thanks for your tolerance. --Neo-Jay (talk) 00:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

I didn't go and see the edit history, so I mistakely thought it was a technical error to see my edit disappear ;) I've add a source that says the name Ping'er suggests "太平"(Peace), Please go and see if my editing is ok. Thanks. 百家姓之四 (Lee) 討論 (Discussion) 11:23, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, thanks. But the source does not provide English translation. If you really want to translate 平儿 in Dream of the Red Chamber, Peacer is not an English word. Do you mean Peacemaker or simply Peace? I changed it to Peace. Hope that's fine to you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

It's very nice. Thank you! 百家姓之四 (Lee) 討論 (Discussion) 2008年04月9日10:40 (UTC)

Talk:Ministry of Education (Republic of China)

Actually yes, I am talking about the move request; for one thing, the category names and article names should line up, and for another, the deletion of the categories seems to have been way out of process (WP:CSD#G6???). Cheers, cab (talk) 03:21, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry. I reverted my edit. See my discussion at that talk page. --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Guiyang

Thanks for your comment re: the Guiyang school of Buddhism. For your information, 潙 or 沩 is a duoyinzi, and two of its pronounciations are gui, first and second tone. Look in a real dictionary, or here: http://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E6%B2%A9%E4%BB%B0%E5%AE%97&variant=zh-tw http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%A6%85#.E4.BA.94.E5.AE.B6.E4.B8.83.E5.AE.97.EF.BC.88.E3.81.94.E3.81.91.E3.81.97.E3.81.A1.E3.81.97.E3.82.85.E3.81.86.EF.BC.89 A polite question on my talk page would have been a more civil way to handle that. Alexwoods (talk) 15:36, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, thank you for your message. I didn't realize I offended you. If my message on your talk page made you uncomfortable, I apologize. But, the two links you provided here do not provide the pronunciation of 潙. Can you provide a on-line source for a real dictionary? Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't say it made me uncomfortable, but it was pretty rude. I unfortunately can't link to my good dictionary because it's not online, but even Wikitionary lists those pronounciations: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E6%BD%99 and here is a reputable source from Google Books indicating that it is pronounced gui in the context of the Guiyang School or of one of its founders, Guishan Linyu:http://books.google.com/books?id=qWrYGZG2yd4C&pg=PA290&dq=%22guiyang+school%22&lr=&sig=HspciVJHFocbGN635ovaKmQswoI

It's almost impossible, as I'm sure you are aware, to say with full conviction that a given Chinese character is *not* pronounced a certain way, which is why, when you think someone is wrong, it's better to ask than to angrily edit. Cheers. Alexwoods (talk) 15:58, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I apologize again. What's the name of your dictionary? Does it say that 溈 is pronounced as Gui in 溈山? There are 10 results in Google Book Search for the Zen's Guiyang School, 2 for Weiyang School. It seems that there are still disputes on its pronunciation. But as far as Gui is one of 溈's pronunciation, I am wrong. I will be more cautious in the future. Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 16:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The name of 溈仰宗 came form 溈山 and 仰山. I have not found direct source for the pronunciation of 溈 in 溈山. But, 溈山 is a mountain and the source of the river 溈水 (see a source here). And the pronunciation of 溈 in 溈水 is Wei, not Gui according to this online dictionary. It seems to me that 溈 in 溈山 should also be pronounced as Wei, not Gui. Of course I may be wrong. I will be glad if you can provide counter-evidence. Thank you.--Neo-Jay (talk) 16:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

That is a good point. I linked to Ferguson because that work is considered definitive. I note that the two 'Weiyang School' links are both dubious. One is a translation from a Korean work, which means that the translator could have just looked up the character and read it as Wei, which indeed is the more common modern reading (not that it is a common character), and the other is by someone who claims to have received transmission from that school, which is highly unlikely as it died out (absorbed into Linji) hundreds of years ago. Also the Korean and Onyomi readings point to an original pronunciation of gui (although that is OR). Alexwoods (talk) 18:00, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. There seems to be a difference between the dictionary pronunciation and the common usage. Could you check your dictionary whether 溈 in 溈水 is pronounced as Wei or Gui? I met another controversy on the pronunciation of 訥 in Li Na (daughter of Mao Zedong). Could you also do me a favor to check 訥's pronunciation in your dictionary? And, again, what's the name of your dictionary? Thank you.--Neo-Jay (talk) 18:12, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Does there? We're talking about a person's name, and the name of the river is hardly definitive. I would say the discrepancy is between the pronunciation of the river and the pronunciation of the name. I think the Ferguson cite is enough. Also, I use the Hanyu Da Zidian. I don't have it in front of me, but I bet it doesn't tell you how to pronounce Mao's daughter's name. Alexwoods (talk) 18:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I just found 溈's pronunciation in 溈水 in that online dictionary. So I guess that Hanyu Da Zidian may also give an example and possibly refer to this river's name. As for Li Na (daughter of Mao Zedong), I think that Ne is the only pronunciation of 訥 according to all the Chinese dictionaries I can find. Some other editors disagree, but cannot provide reliable sources. If you can find that 訥 can also be pronounced as Na in Hanyu Da Zidian, that will be great. For further information about that controversy, please see the edit history of Li Na (daughter of Mao Zedong) and its talk page. Never mind if you don't have time. Thank you again. --Neo-Jay (talk) 18:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

About Li Na, I have no idea, but na is most definitely a pronunciation for that character. Also I've done some more digging on Google Books, and the variant Weiyang is more common than I thought, so I'm going to mention it on the redirect page. Alexwoods (talk) 19:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. But I am afraid that Na is not the most definitely a pronunciation, at least in Chinese dictionaries, for that character 訥 if you read the discussion at Talk:Li Na (daughter of Mao Zedong). All the dictionaries available to me show that Ne is its only pronunciation. I have provided them in the footnote in that article. Again, never mind if you have no time to read them. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Na is *a* pronunciation of that character, which is what I said. I have no idea why you are trying to drag me into this. If she calls herself Li Na, and na is one of the pronunciations of that character, what more is there to say about it? She can't call herself that because it's not in your dictionary? That doesn't make much sense. Alexwoods (talk) 20:02, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to trouble you. I asked you for help because I don't have Hanyu Da Zidian, the most reliable dictionary. If you read the discussion on Talk:Li Na (daughter of Mao Zedong), you may find that we don't have dispute that Na is *a* pronunciation. I have accepted that that article should be titled as Li Na. Our dispute is whether Na is a pronunciation in Chinese dictionaries (please also see the edit history for that edit war of that article). Therefore I am just curious whether Hanyu Da Zidian can prove that Na is also a pronunciation in Chinese dictionary. Thank you for your patience. --Neo-Jay (talk) 20:09, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

OK sorry. I believe the Hanyu Da Zidian pronunciations are on Wikitionary and Unihan. Alexwoods (talk) 20:12, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.　Some editors also referred to Wiktionary, but it is not a reliable source. I can understand that you may not have time to look it up for me in Hanyu Da Zidian. I may find it by myself someday. Thank you. Sorry for the inconvenience I caused. --Neo-Jay (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't find either Wiktionary or UniHan unreliable, not that I use them that frequently. Chinese wikitionary is pretty clearly edited by Chinese professors - it even lists Kangxi entries. The only other place you're likely to find dictionary entries that comprehensive on the internet is bootleg Chinese sites and they are more likely to have mistakes in them, in my opinion. Alexwoods (talk) 20:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your information. I checked Kangxi Zidian p.649. The meaning of character 潙 clearly refers to 潙水. It seems that its pronunciation for this meaning is Wei. But I am not sure because I am not so familiar with Ancient Chinese. And the 潙 in Unihan lists three pronunciations but does not clarify which one is for the meaning of that river. I may continue to seek some paper-version dictionaries to check its pronunciation. Thanks for your help. Best wishes. Have a nice day. --Neo-Jay (talk) 00:19, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

need your help on Jin Jing

Hello, Neo-Jay, we want to push the article Jin Jing onto the "Did you know" on the main page, so many people will read the article on Jin Jing. Could you help us improve that article? My English is not good. Please help us improve the language and the materials. If it's a good article, could you please help us put this article onto the "Did you know"? The question could be '[Jin Jing|Who] is called the "Smiling Angel in Wheelchair" by Chinese people?' Thanks!--Supportjinjing (talk) 01:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, I can help edit it. But my English is also not good and I have no experience on the Did you know affairs. Best wishes. --Neo-Jay (talk) 01:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Shaun Tan edit

Hi Neo Jay,

I'm new to Wikipedia, so please excuse any ignorance or mistakes. I've read the policy on autobiography, yet contend that my edits are justified, in that I have removed information that is incorrect (eg. that I work for certain publications, information over a decade old). There is also a comment that is not quite correct about claims to being 'self-taught', taken out of context from another online article. I also prefer not to have my photograph reproduced here, for personal reasons, but understand if you ignore this. Aside from the photo, my main concern is that I've noticed teachers and librarians reproducing poor-quality Wikipedia information.

I've carefully avoided adding any new content or changing any opinions expressed in the article. But if the policy on 'autobiography' (a good one) overrides this, so be it; I'll just have to ask a friend to re-submit the same editing I guess :)

Cheers,

Shaun Tan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelostthing (talk • contribs) 09:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your message. The key point is not only Wikipedia's autobiography policy. You may claim that you just made a joke and are actually not the subject of this article. Or, as you noted, you may ask your friend or use IP address to edit it and easily avoid the autobiography difficulty. But your edit on Shaun Tan also potentially violated Wikipedia's verifiability policy and no-original-research policy. If you think that certain information is incorrect, especially when it has citations, you are highly suggested replacing it with reliable source, not just simply removing it. I agree that the quality of many Wikipedia's articles is low. That's why we are trying to improve it and take Wikipedia's policies seriously. And thanks for your understanding that the photos cannot be removed just because of the subject's own preference. Thank you. Best wishes. --Neo-Jay (talk) 18:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Presidency (disambiguation)

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Presidency (disambiguation), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Presidency (disambiguation). Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 16:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your withdrawing your deletion proposal. --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Tim jenkinson mistake

Dear Jay, thanks so much for your warm welcome and kind advice, I am deeply grateful for that. As a complete noob, I made a grave mistake in creating the entry "Tim jenkinson", of course, the title should have been "Tim Jenkinson" with the capital "J". I wonder if there is any way you can help me correct this mistake as Admin. Many thanks indeed! Yours ever, PhilosophyKing (talk) 02:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome, dear PhilosophyKing. Thanks for your message. You can hit the button move on the menu to rename an article. For further information, please read Help:Moving a page. By the way, I am just an ordinary editor like you, not an administrator. Hope you enjoy your time in Wikipedia. --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank You from a New Wikipedian

Thanks ever so much, what a fine gentleman and a great Wikipedian! My best gratitude and warm regards, PhilosophyKing (talk) 07:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

		Zhonghua Barnstar of Merit
		message For creating over 250 Wikipedia articles, for greatly adding China-related content, for your excellent contribution to the Wikipedia community!
		this WikiAward was given to Neo-Jay by PhilosophyKing (talk) on 08:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for the barnstar. It's the first one I have ever received. It's very nice of you.--Neo-Jay (talk) 21:40, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Shaun Tan

Hello Neo-Jay,

I guess that any policy will have limitations. I understand that I cannot delete incorrect information, such as a statement that I work for a newspaper that folded ten years ago, because I cannot find a citation anywhere that says 'Shaun Tan does not work for this paper' (unless I publish such a statement, which would be silly). The same is true of other information; there is no existing reference to say it is NOT accurate, or no longer current. So there is no way that I can correct anything on this page, so I will accept that position, and simply ask readers to avoid Wikipedia information about my history on my own website. Thanks for taking time to explain the policy, and responding quickly.

Cheers,

Shaun —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelostthing (talk • contribs) 03:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Thelostthing, if you are the subject of the article Shaun Tan, please understand that the purpose of these Wikipedia's policies is just to guarantee the correctness of information. Otherwise everyone can claim that he is the subject of this article and edit it arbitrarily. I am sorry that these policies may also cause some information lag. But they are generally good for you. By the way, please don't forget to sign your name after you leave a message. Adding "~~~~" will automatically create a signature for you. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:05, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

My edits

NeoJay,

Firstly, please note that the name of the naturalist is J. Arthur Thomson, (not John A. Thomson) that is he used Arthur as his first name, and used J. Arthur Thomson as his name on works he wrote.

Secondly, I am trying to split the human sex ratio article out of sex ratio because as explained per talk page, sex ratio applies to most sexual organisms, not just humans, and having too much human information confuses and biases it which is a major area of biological research. I will shortly remove most of material on human sex ratio from sex ratio, just leaving a summary there. That may I fear upset some people, who may not have considered sex ratios in anything other than humans, but that is why I am doing it slowly and carefully.

Thanks for your understanding I am not a dog (talk) 09:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I had reverted my edit on human sex ratio before you left the massage to me. And thanks for your information about J. Arthur Thomson. I am sorry. And I encourage you to use edit summary when you edit. It will avoid misunderstanding and confusion. Thank you. Best wishes. --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Bo Yang, Li Na

Hey, I've thought a bit more about these articles. My view, still, is that the article should record what they are actually called. Since Wikipedia only trusts reliable sources, this means we only record what they are actually called by reliable sources. Even if that pronunciation is "wrong" according to a character dictionary, or there is another pronunciation that should be equally valid according to a character dictionary, if there are no reliable sources backing up that usage as applied to this person, then it shouldn't be recorded.

So I can accept "Li Ne" being recorded in the Li Na article because it is represented by reliable sources, which, though fewer in number, are at least as reliable as the sources recording "Li Na".

By contrast, however, "Bai Yang" should not be recorded in the Bo Yang article in my view because I have not yet seen a reliable source that records this pronunciation for this subject. I'm not prepared to accept the CCTV video for several reasons. First, as generally accepted in the WP:RS context, television is less reliable than print media; Secondly, it is difficult to ascertain that it was not simply a careless or ignorant error. By contrast, something like Xinhua - or another newspaper source - is more reliable. If you can find some reliable print media sources that show "Bai Yang" being used, then I am prepared to accept that name being in the text of the article.

Character dictionary sources, in my view, can at best explain the discrepancy in pronunciation. Unless they contain a direct quote concerning the person in question, they cannot demonstrate a usage that is otherwise unattested by reliable sources. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 06:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

First, we are discussing at Talk:Bo Yang and Talk:Li Na (daughter of Mao Zedong). Please continue to discuss there, not my talk page. Second, I have provided source from National Library of China to prove that Bai Yang is an alternative spelling. Please see Talk:Bo Yang. Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 07:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Ngawa Tibetan and Qiang Autonomous Prefecture

Hi. I understand there should not be such a large white space, but now there's this huge gap between "Tibetan:..." and the rest of the text. Tibetan doesn't seem to show up on my computer, but is it possible to not break the text, while keeping the whole thing at the top of the article? It looks as if it was pressed enter, so is there a way to fix this without destroying the text which I can't see? Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 21:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I don't know how to fix it. I also cannot see the Tibetan name of this prefecture. It's just a blank line in my IE and a series of ????? in my Firefox. And we cannot fix this problem even when we add a {{-}}. Let's just leave it alone if we cannot find a solution. Anyway, a blank line or a series of ???? is still better than a huge white space.--Neo-Jay (talk) 21:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi. By the way, are there similar websites to the Deyang earthquake information on other cities as well? For example, there's a mianyang.gov.cn, do those have the earthquake information for the specific death toll and injuries counts, etc? Also, where is Sina getting the info from? Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 21:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Not all the cities' government websites provide their latest death toll in 2008 Sichuan earthquake. And even if they provide, they do not update everyday. I just try to find the latest information as much as possible. You may check these cities' official websites to see whether there is such information. Sina.com and Sohu only provide official death toll released by the State Council Information Office and the Sichuan Province Information Office, which hold news conference or disclose the information to Xinhua News Agency everyday. Sina and Sohu do not dare to report other information even if it is from a local government. sigh... --Neo-Jay (talk) 21:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

About Guanghua Temple

This is clearly a misunderstanding. There are two Guanghua Temples in China, one in Luoyang, Henan Province, close to Longmen stone cave; the other in Fujian Province. This post made a mistake and mixed them up from very beginning, and no one noticed it! Could you help mark it to draw more attention. Somebody has to correct it! 06:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Ramtears, thanks for your information. I have moved Guanghua Temple to Guanghua Temple (Putian). You may create other Guanghua Temples. Please add categories and, if applicable, interlanguage links when you create articles. For example, there are zh:北京广化寺 and zh:洛阳广化寺 at Chinese Wikipedia. Adding interlanguage links can help readers and editors check articles' different language versions. And If you want to rename a page, you can use the move function (see Help:Moving a page). In order to restore the edit history and respect the contributions of previous editors, Wikipedia does not allow moving a page by cut and paste. For the information on how to create disambiguation page, please see Wikipedia:Disambiguation. Thank you so much for your contributions. By the way, please don't forget to add your signature to your message. A four tilde "~~~~" will automatically add your signature and the time. There is a button for signature at the menu on the top of the page. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

So you're from Zhengzhou. No wonder you're so familiar with Chinese culture. I should avoid editing anything related to Henan Province.:) I found much could be improved in English Wiki concerning China. That's my primary reason to register here. It turned out even some information in Chinese Wiki was also meager. It's a shame. I hope someone could help edit my articles, for I merely translated them from Chinese resources. Cheers! Ramtears (talk) 07:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions. Hope you enjoy editing at Wikipedia. --Neo-Jay (talk) 08:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation Problem

Hello, a trivial issue bothered me. In the first paragraph of article West Lake, the Chinese character "堤" is labeled as "Ti", such as "Su Ti", "Bai Ti" and "Yanggong Ti". But in the "History" section, when "Bai Juyi" is mentioned, someone wrote "Bai Di Causeway". I don't have a Chinese dictionary at hand. Would you please check it to see if 堤 has a special pronunciation "Ti"? Assume it has only one pronunciation, then one of them must be corrected. It's a trivial question, but I just want to perfect it. Thanks! Ramtears (talk) 09:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. The proper pronunciation of 堤 is Dī, not Tī. See Kingsoft's online dictionary for 堤. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Title Misspelling

Hey, I have a trivial question again. I found the article title Sen'oku Hakkokan was misspelled. The correct version should be Sen-oku Hakuko Kan or at least Sen'oku Hakukokan. (Please check its official website.) So, if someone search for the correct version, he won't be able to retrieve the appropriate article. Should we move it to a new title? But I hope we could completely deleted the old title, because it doesn't exist at all. Please help solve this problem, for we want to keep information as precise as possible. Thanks! Ramtears (talk) 23:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, you can move it to Sen-oku Hakuko Kan per its official website. But we may also keep Sen'oku Hakkokan as a redirect. There are 166 hits for Sen'oku Hakkokan by Google Search, even more than Sen-oku Hakuko Kan's 122 hits and Sen'oku Hakukokan's 49 hits. I think that all the other alternative spellings can be created as redirects. Even if Sen'oku Hakkokan is wrong, it's OK to leave it alone. Wikipedian allows some wrong spellings to be redirects, for example, United Kindom. For further information, see Category:Redirects from misspellings. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 03:13, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that you created Zhang Yin (painter) and Zhang Yan (painter). Thanks for your contributions. But please add disambiguation information or create disambiguation page. Otherwise it will be very difficult for other readers to find the articles you created. I have changed Zhang Yin and Zhang Yan to be disambiguation pages. This is a common method for disambiguation. The other method is to create a special disambiguation page with the title "XXX (disambiguation)" if the title XXX has a primary use. For further information, see Wikipedia:Disambiguation. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't know how the disambiguation works. Thank you. Ramtears (talk) 12:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Tangjiashan

Sorry about that. What happened was that I saw the redirect and considered it inappropriate, because Tangjiashan is not Tangjiashan Lake, and your redirect was misleading in that it implied that Tangjiashan was Tangjiashan Lake, which is not true. I felt it was important that we have an article on the subject of Tangjiashan, and deleting the redirect creates a redlink that encourages someone else more knowledgeable about that mountain than me to go ahead and create an article on that subject.

Right after I did the deletion, I decided I might as well start that article so that someone else can expand it. Then I got distracted and simply forgot to undelete the original first edit. Sorry about that! I've restored your original redirect edit.

—Lowellian (reply) 07:54, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. But, as I said, Tangjiashan is the lake's name. It can refer to both the mountain and the lake just as Huangshan can refer to both Huangshan Mountains and Huangshan City (although Huangshan originally refers to the mountain and the city is named after the mountain). Yellowstone is also not Yellowstone Lake, but Yellowstone Lake appears in Yellowstone (disambiguation). That implies that readers often just search for the lake's name and omit the word Lake. Creating Tangjiashan as a redirect to Tangjiashan Lake is useful and not misleading especially when there is no other article under the same title. Even when Tangjiashan was established as a page for the mountain, it's still necessary to add disambiguation link to Tangjiashan Lake. More importantly, Tangjiashan is not the proper title for the mountain. As I pointed it out, this mountain should be titled as Mount Tangjia or Tangjia Mountains according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese). Shan (山) means mountain in Chinese language. Tangjiashan literally means a mountain named Tangjia. Accurately speaking, Tangjiashan is the lake's name and Tangjia is the mountain's name. Therefore the mountain should be moved to its proper title and Tangjiashan should be changed to a disambiguation page. Then I will create Tangjia as a redirect page to the mountain. Please don't delete it again on the ground that Tangjia (唐家) literally means Tang family and a redirect to the mountain is misleading in that it implies that Tangjia is Tangjia Mountain. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 21:42, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Sure, all this sounds fine to me. :) —Lowellian (reply) 21:57, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Another Pronunciation Puzzle

Hey, I need your help again. I was trying to create "Wubao County". It's in Shaanxi Province, and called 吴堡县 in Chinese. In English Wiki, it's called "Wubao" in the administrative table. While in Chinese Wiki where it has been created, it pronounces "Wubu". Then when I check its official web, it seems it's really called "Wubu". I never knew it had a second pronunciation. Could you double check it and help label the tones too? I wish it be confirmed before I create it. BTW, I never trust those online dictionaries, especially kingsoft. Most reliable source would be a hard-copy thick dictionary. Thanks. Ramtears (talk) 11:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have hard-copy dictionary. According to my personal knowledge, 堡 indeed has a second pronunciation Bǔ, usually used in Northwest China's place names such as Wayaobu (瓦窑堡). But I cannot give you any evidence since you never trust online dictionaries, especially Kingsoft. Then why not follow Wubu County Government's official website? Some Chinese place names have unusual pronunciations. For example, Hongdong County actually should be Hongtong County. 洞 in this case is not pronounced as Dòng, but as Tóng, a very unusual pronunciation. But I am tired of arguing and requesting to move. Hope someone can finally correct it someday. Best regards. --Neo-Jay (talk) 17:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for your swift reply. I'll follow your instruction. Ramtears (talk) 00:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, in the article you've created, 17th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, would 章沁生 be Zhang Qinsheng? I'm not sure it has a second pronuciation Xin. If you have solid reference, let me know. Best. Ramtears (talk) 06:54, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Also, on the same page, check 杜青林 please. Ramtears (talk) 06:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your reminding. You are right. Those were my mistakes and I just corrected them. Thank you so much.--Neo-Jay (talk) 10:33, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Jian River

You changed the Chinese in the article. I readily admit to not reading any Chinese but I am confused as 剑河 produces Jianhe when run through the Babel fish translator and User:Steewi claimed it was used: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#Jianhe River. Rmhermen (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. The link that translates Jian River as 剑河 is just an online forum and is not reliable. No reliable source refers to this river as 剑河. Most of Chinese reliable sources call it 湔江. But there are still many reliable Chinese sources calling it 涧河. By Google Search, there are 63,000 hits for "唐家山堰塞湖" + "湔江", and 1,500 for "唐家山堰塞湖" + "涧河". I have added a footnote to Jian River for this naming puzzle. I am also confused about it. Probably this river has two names? Many backgrounds of Tangjiashan Lake are still unclear, especially about Tangjiashan. I searched a lot of webpages, but cannot find much useful information about this mountain (if it's really a mountain). --Neo-Jay (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

A large number of sources are now refering to this as the "Tongkou River"[2]. I don't know which is correct (or even what this would be in Chinese characters. Rmhermen (talk) 15:20, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Tongkou River's Chinese name is 通口河. Its headwater stream is Jian River. See, e.g., this news report by Xinhua News Agency. I have added this information to Jian River. Thanks for your reminding. --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Disambiguation Mess

Hey, please help me resolve the mess I've created. I found the article Hong Qian about a former female Chinese swimmer, and wanted to move it to Qian Hong in order to abide by naming convention. But Qian Hong was already created for a three kingdom figure. So I created a disambiguation page for Qian Hong, and listed both under it. But when I moved Hong Qian, I accidentally renamed it Hong Qian (swimmer), not Qian Hong (swimmer). Thus the former became default page while the latter would be redirected as a ghost page. My intention is to completely delete Hong Qian (swimmer) and only keep Qian Hong (swimmer) and link it to the disambiguation page. Thanks. Ramtears (talk) 13:05, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your not moving the page by cut and paste. I have placed a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves to request moving Hong Qian (swimmer) to Qian Hong (swimmer). An administrator just moved it for us. Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 14:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I found another ambiguous issue. There're at least two Lu Hao's in today's China. One is party chief in Gansu, and the other is 1st secretary of Communist Youth League. We probably need a disambiguation page. But I hesitate to do it because the Youth League Lu Hao may probably become a prominent figure in future, (at least provincial head, I suppose). So how to name it bothers me. Could you think of appropriate names to distinguish them? Ramtears (talk) 15:02, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I had noticed this issue and also found the disambiguation difficult because their career backgrounds are so similar. Maybe we can temporarily move the current Lu Hao to Lu Hao (born 1947) for the Gansu Party Secretary and establish Lu Hao (born 1967) for the Communist Youth League Secretary. Is that OK? --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:22, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I can't think of a better way. So go ahead and do that. I can imagine more and more such issues will emerge hundreds of years later. Fortunately we won't live that long to worry about that. :) Ramtears (talk) 15:28, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I just moved Lu Hao to Lu Hao (born 1947). Thanks for your discussion. --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)