User talk:Winhunter/Archive-Apr06

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome!

Hello, Winhunter/Archive-Apr06, 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:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! — Instantnood 17:11, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Oklahoma City/Media

Sorry man, but I don't think reverting my changes was a correct decision. In an effort to include all the media sources, OKC Friday should be included. It's been around for 30+ years and is a legal paper of record, the only source of coverage for the north side of the city's high school sports, a key player in the city's social scene. Also, Southwestern Publishing's magazine is called "Quail Creek News," not "Quail Creek New" as you reverted it back to.


The following discussion is an archived debate with Instantnood about edits in Hong Kong, which he is now banned from the that Article thru 20 March, 2007. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made under a new topic in this talk page.

Overdone revert

Please kindly take a look at what you've reverted [1] [2], and restore what are not related to the disputed matter and have to be restored. Thank you. — Instantnood 13:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Re [3] - Thanks so much. But I'm afraid there're a lot more you've not yet restored. :-D — Instantnood 14:03, 29 April 2006 (UTC)


What were you referring to in this revert [4]? You were basically reverting everything. — Instantnood 15:07, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm interested to know what you're referring to in this particular revert. Thank you. — Instantnood 15:21, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
Let me put the question in this way.. In this particular revert, why do you think i) the official full name in Chinese should be two-part, with a space between "共和國" and "香港", ii) there's something wrong with the   between the words, which are inserted for better layout, iii) the Special administrative region article should be linked, instead of the Special administrative region (People's Republic of China), iv) why should A and R in "Special administrative region" be capitalised, v) the word "the" should be kept, when it's perfectly alright as point form-style to remove them for better layout, vi) March of the Volunteers is the anthem of Hong Kong, while Hong Kong has no anthem for its own, unlike flag and emblem, vii) "PR China" is better than "PRC", viii) the duplicated " id=Infobox_footnotes" cannot be removed, ix) "Putonghua" should be placed in round brackets, instead of "Mandarin", when the former is the natively used English name, x) "England" should be linked instead of "England and Wales", xi) "(such as La Salle College)" should be kept, xii) the figure on the number of Muslim should be removed, xiii) ", as well as supermarkets, convenience stores and fastfood restaurants." should be removed, xiv) the common name of the former airport is "Kai Tak International Airport" instead of "Kai Tak Airport", xv) there's an area known as "Kai Tak", xvi) the names of the newspapers should not be italicised, xvii) Hong Kong is not English-speaking, and, finally, xviii) the root category for Hong Kong should not be placed before other categories? If you cannot answer any one of these questions, the revert was already overdone. — Instantnood 20:45, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
  i) Why is it fine in either way?
ii)   make the several words being treated as one word, i.e. it wouldn't be broken into two lines. It helps keeping the layout of the infobox.
iii) Why is it a better destination?
iv) The letters A and R are capitalised only when it's part of a name. Cf. official translation of the 1982 Constitution of the PRC.
v) You've added the word "the" and turn the infobox much wider. The word "the" is not that necessary when the information is presented in an infobox-style.
vi) The anthem is not Hong Kong's anthem, but PRC's, and is used statewide. The footnote of the version you've reverted already tells it's the anthem used in Hong Kong.
vii) The full name "People's Republic of China" appears when readers point their cursors to the link.
viii) You readded the duplicated " id=Infobox_footnotes" that I've removed.
ix) The English name used natively in Hong Kong is Putonghua. The government calls it Putonghua, not Mandarin. The same is true for education institutions, and job ads on newspapers, for instance.
x) You replaced England and Wales with England in your edit.
xi) to xiv)    I'm afraid you have the obligations to revert only what you disagree.
xv) You reinstated the words saying the airport is "located in Kai Tak, Kowloon".
xvi) It's Wikipedia Manual of Style.
xvii) See what are categorised under category:English-speaking countries.
xviii) If it's not so important why you insist to revert it?
Thanks again for your responding. — Instantnood 17:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Winhunter/xsomeuser

I'm afraid you still have to tell the reasons why you reverted some materials that you don't disagree with. You should not have reverted them, and you have the obligations to keep them when you're reverting. — Instantnood 07:32, 7 May 2006 (UTC)


China/Chyna

Winhunter,

I disagree with your contention that "disambiguation page is not a page to clear up typing mistakes". One of the wonderful features of Wikipedia is that it is user-friendly. Anyone looking for information on the wrestler Chyna who spells the name "China" (and let's face it - anyone who is could) should be able to reach the desired page through disambiguation. That is what the word means, after all. It is obvious that you take a great interest in China, Taiwan, and the like, so I can understand you feeling adverse to the idea of including Chyna, but given the identical pronunciation and the function of a disambiguation page, I don't think exclusion really serves anyone's best interests. I hope, and am sure that, we will be able to come to a satisfactory compromise. --BDD 18:09, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

In my point of view this must not be the case, otherwise there are so many variations of mistakes for each word and we list them all? This is simply impossible and therefore we should only list the meaning of the word only. --Hunter 23:59, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
I thank you for your quick response. I see what you're saying and agree that we could never get all variations of every word onto disambiguation pages. But here's something to consider - Wikipedia will never be complete; we will never have all the information there is to know. Does that mean we should cease in our pursuit of that goal? Consider a half-life, moving ever closer to (but never reaching) zero, always short of its goal. I think Wikipedia should be like that. It's not like we're short on space or anything; if article economy were a concern, I wouldn't feel that this was worth adding. Also, I would never consider trying to add a footnote about Chyna onto any serious page, such as China's own. I still feel that the disambiguation page is an appropriate and inconspicuous place for a helpful addition such as this. --BDD 21:18, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

By the way, Winhunter, I have found another page that supports my argument. If you look on the article for Bill Kristol, you will see a note at the beginning (a short substitute for a disambiguation page) that provides a link to the page on actor/comedian Billy Crystal. I think you will agree that the one-letter difference in China and Chyna is even less significant. --BDD 00:54, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

For that page, I feel that it's because they pronounce the same, while China, Chyna seems to pronounce differently, and it's less likely that people would confuse the two name. --Hunter 02:44, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

China and Chyna are pronounced identically. Does that change your feelings on it? --BDD 00:32, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

People's Republic of China

Hi, I saw your edit. What do you think we should do about the Republic of China on Taiwan then? Would you support a change in the language there? The language must be symmetrical for NPOV.--160.39.195.91 00:15, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Hey I see your message but I am really busy now, perhaps I discuss with you a little bit later when I have time, thanks. --Hunter 00:26, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
I disagree the use of term "de facto" as there is absolutely no need to conform the style with that of ROC, as for the use of term "has never administered" would brings out controversy that should be avoided, therefore I'd say it's best to keep the original wording. For that "signals reconnaisance" part I have no objection, because it's the likely case judging from the model of the plane, finally, the language part, I'd say it's regarded as one language by the foreigners, rather than the Chinese. --219.78.15.99 12:12, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

The {twoversions} template is up for deletion again

FYI, the {twoversions} template is up for deletion again: Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Twoversions. zen master T 19:05, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Spelling

For future reference, hijacking is spelt without a "y". Thanks Dysprosia 12:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Wikimedia Conference 2006

All Hong Kong Wikipedians are cordially invited to come and help the preparation of Chinese Wikimedia Conference 2006 * Hong Kong Taskforce(In Chinese)! Will you join?

*Official name has not yet confirmed -- Alfred.Yeung 05:50, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: User:Sevenlinefeatures

His images are copyrighted. To verify go to his webpage. I am the web designer of his page, and to verify that view the source and you'll see my name. A little bit of research would have led you to this conclussion. Cadebro 13:54, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Image Re-Tagged

I re-tagged the image, if it gets re-tagged by someone else, you'll know that one of the users or administrators are using their editing powers to get my images deleted. Several Admins have it out for me anyway. EZZIE 15:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: your message concering the Kuzmin image

If the reason why you are deleting the picture is that I made a duplicate of a picture that is in Commons, I agree on your deletion. Please go ahead. When I uploaded it I was not still aware of Commons, which now I am. In case the reason was another one, please let me know which one. Best wishes. G.dallorto 18:27, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Winhunter/Archive-Apr06&oldid=84176526"