User talk:Jiang

Note: Unless you specify that you will be monitoring this page, I will respond to you on your talk page instead of mine. But if you want a speedier response or any response at all, answer on this page since I will probably forget to check yours.

POST A COMMENT

**Happy, Happy, Happy!!!! Everybody's Happy!**

Archived versions: 18VIII03 | 21X03 | 30XII03 | 21II04 | 17IV04 | 07VI04 | 28VII04 | 2X04 | 5XII04 | 18II05 | 14IV05 | 3IX05 | 12XII05 | 22III06

Hello

Hey Jiang, what's up?EKN 02:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)EKN[reply]

arbitration

i'm filing a arbitration, mayb Nlu already told u. but anyway juss for ur info

Image Tagging for Image:Clinton_and_jiang.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Clinton_and_jiang.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 10:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: E-Mail

Not too sure why it's not working. Please kindly check your mailbox. Thanks. — Insta ntnood 11:34, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for telling. I didn't even know the policy was changed. — Instantnood 01:27, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan ref

Some anonymous editor seems determined to remove the reference "Taiwan" from Template:Politics of the Republic of China, as well as a few others (Republic of China Air Force, Army, and Navy, respectively). Since you've edited the first, I thought you might have an opinion and were likely to reverse his/her edits. --Calton | Talk 06:56, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE:ROC textbook

OK, I tried to look up the president's website using archive.org, but it didn't work. Then I tried to find the Republic of China Yearbook, but apparently it's the Taiwan Yearbook now. >:( So yeah, if you could help find these stats it'd be much appreciated. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 05:19, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK got it. Thanks dude. -- Миборовский ^{U|T|C|M|E|Chugoku Banzai!} 08:20, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images at Yuan Tseh Lee article

Hello and greetings from HappyApple, first of all i want to apologice about the inconvinience i have caused to you by reverting your recent edits on Yuan Tseh Lee article. I am leaving you this message at your discussion page because i wish we can settle an agreement about the images; here my impressions

Image:Yuan T. Lee family.jpg and Image:Yuan T. Lee.jpg have been uploaded by you and i think the responsability whether these images should be keep or taken out from the article belongs to you. However i believe they should be kept because the first one fits perfectly under Personal life and awards subsection on the article and in fact adds information to this section by showing Yuan T. Lee beside his family, the second picture, adds a "visual concept", to the readers about how the molecular beams equipment which was used by Lee in 1980s look like. Most people not familiar with the sophisticated laboratory equipment used in chemical kinetics advanced research, and i think this picture helps to readers to understand this.
About the problem you have reported about Image:Yuan Tseh Lee Nobel Award.jpg i have uploaded the picture again, and i hope this can solve the corrupt image you see in your computer, however i advise you to clean your cache, delete spyware, and delete internet temps and trying again, but if you still is unable to see the picture, and you have done all of this before i hope my upload to wikipedia server to have solve your problem. (The image was restored).
Finally, i have used the expression Professor Yuan referring to Yuan Tseh Lee, however if you feel this is a mistake, please feel free to modify it, however i stated this based on Yuan Tseh lee is a physical chemistry professor at NTU as of 2006.

As i said i do not have any kind of intentions to be unpolite, i would ask you please leave me a message at my discussion page about what do you think about this.Best regards.--HappyApple 02:55, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Short block

I notice that it's getting more and more a problem that users and sysops are getting into trouble when dealing with trouble making users, that some of them were even brought to arbitration. Consequently, there's a growing tendency for sysops to avoid getting into trouble. If that's the way Wikipedia works, I'm sorry but I've to say I'm really disappointed. — Instantnood 17:03, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hong Kong Images

If you've found a watermark in the image, then please help me untag and remove it. However, I find the low-resolution picture interesting. That photo is possibly taken from a built-in camera of a mobile phone, which means:

The image can't be a copyvio
It reflects Hong Kong people's habit in taking pictures with a camera.

I'd suggest the low-resolution image be kept and the obvious copyvio be removed.

BTW I've contributed a lot of photos (~30) to Wikipedia already. See Lam Tin and you'll see some of them. Last but not least, after the Hong Kong Time discussion and this one, I'd like to remind you that please try to listen to a Hongkonger's advice and viewpoints before you try to hold a debate concerning things about Hong Kong. Good luck. --D e ryc k C. 13:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add some more: I thought you've mistaken my meaning of retagging the image. I'm not tempuser007. I changed tag only because I assumed his / her good faith and believed that the image is really a PD one. It's just improperly tagged. --D e ryc k C. 15:37, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've put a {{GFDL-presumed}} onto the cell phone image, as the nosource template suggests. After taking a deep look into what you've lately written onto my talk page, your argument tells me that you didn't take a deep look into the images. It is because I actually take pictures from two different cameras instead of one, as in your claim. See Image:Lam Tin MTR Entrance.jpg this one for a counter-example.

More importantly, cell-phone photos tend not to have metadata (or EXIF) due to their small filesize. Moreover, what do you think if the picture is taken from a, say, film camera or instant-picture, and scanned into the computer? There would be absolutely no relevant EXIF. Therefore, I must argue that EXIF or metadata are not feasible ways for identifying picture-related copyvio. --D e ryc k C. 15:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If tempuser007 wants to violate copyright, he wouldn't have chosen such a private-styled image. He would've downloaded an image of the airport from the net. If you still think that we must delete this image, then go for an PUI arbitration. There is no direct evidence showing this image is a copyvio. The only possible "evidence" is that the uploader, tempuser007, has an unclean record. --D e ryc k C. 04:38, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

I am conducting a survey on Wikipedia and would like to invite you to participate in the study. I've posted a message on wikien-l, but here is the link again in case you are not subscribed to that list-serv. Thanks a lot for your time! --Mermes 01:33, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jiang = Shame!

you ain't down wit Freestyle king? cuz that nigga iz mo' than U so show respect fool,

Hu Jin Tao Picture

Hi Jiang - pardon my ignorance but could we perhaps find an official photo for Hu Jin Tao? Looking around other leaders - it is pretty strange to have such a casual/unofficial photo of a head of state...

Basiji use of roman salute

Hi, you added this to Salute. There's a picture showing Basijis giving this kind of salute, however, some editors dispute its authenticity. Do you have info on the subject? I'll monitor your talk page. --tickle me 17:23, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Freestyle.king

I have blocked Freestyle.king (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) indefinitely for disruption, personal attacks, and vandalism. —Guan aco 02:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Succession of Nobel laureates

Couldn't help but notice that you disapproved of my use of the succession box for noble laureates on User talk:Jtdirl (I was searching for my name because I was trying to find what I wrote there...). Just so you know, it wasn't my first choice. We do the same thing for Oscar winners if you are interested. I think its useful to have a box that shows the previous and subsequent award winner for annual awards, but I agree that it doesnt have to be a "succession" box per say. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 06:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I thought about that. It could work. One issue is that theres a whole lot of them. So it would be a big template. The "hide" button would be a solution to that (I'm not a member of the anti-huge template cabal) but it would take a lot of guess and check to get it looking good. I'll put it on my mental to do list, I guess. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 09:05, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Happy Happy

I see you're a regular on Bancroft as well. Attending Berkeley?

== NOTE TO USER:JIANG ==

USER:JIANG PLEASE STOP MAKING REDIRECTS TO MY NEW TALK PAGE AND USER PAGE OR CITE THE WIKIPEDIA REGULATIONS FOR DOING SO.--Freestyle.king 23:02, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfM

A mediation involving you is about to be filed. --Freestyle.king

Asian Tour

Could you please take a look at Asian Tour where User:ReeseM is pushing POV-naming. He/she ignores the wiki guidelines which I have repeatedly shown him/her: For organizations and international events, such as the Olympic Games or APEC, official terms should be used.

Its worth noting that even the homepage of Asian Tour itself uses Chinese Taipei, which is a neutral term accepted by all parties regarding sporting events.

Your guidance is appreciated. Thanks!

mainbody

Heads of state/government

Hello. Re: [1] - Could you please provide some examples of positions that cannot be clear cut, or point me to the relevant archived discussion? Thanks. — Insta ntnood 10:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Overdone reverts

It has come to my concern that user:SchmuckyTheCat has kept reverting everything, instead of reverting only what he disagrees [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. As per your comment [7], this kind of behaviour is " committing simple vandalism ". What we can do? — Insta ntnood 13:40, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I have left a reference to John Chiang on John Chang's article. Add any more references that you want, but please, out of courtesy, do not change the main article (it is for High School North's profile for its valedictorian John Chang).

Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Arbitration

An arbitration involving you has officially been filed.--Bonafide.hustla 20:11, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese naming conventions

I just made a new proposal on NPOV treatment of the different Chinese languages/dialects on the Chinese naming conventions. Please take a look and comment if you will. Thanks.--Yuje 19:27, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

East Asian Tigers

Hello again. Could you please help deal with user:Alanmak, regarding his edits to the East Asian Tigers article [8]. Thanks. — Insta ntnood 22:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much. — Insta ntnood 14:04, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And it happens again [9]. Is there anyone we can get him to discussion? — Insta ntnood 20:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Flag template

Thanks for stepping in, but I'm afraid that's not " minor formatting issue ". User:SchmuckyTheCat has been trying to edit everything according to he asserts - Hong Kong is an ordinary subnational entity. He replaces all instances of "Hong Kong" or "Hong Kong (People's Republic of China)" with "Hong Kong, China" or "Hong Kong, People's Republic of China", from templates, lists, to articles, and so on and so forth. And he only discusses after he has already made those changes. He never proposes before he amends the entries, like what he did to the naming conventions for Chinese-related NPOV issues. — Insta ntnood 07:21, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm already requesting user:SchmuckyTheCat to discuss before he actually amends the template, or to create another template for the format that satisfies his point of view. He declined with his actions. — Insta ntnood 08:28, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transition

Re [10] [11] - Excuse me for my ignorance, but when was there a transition from one political party to another in ROC history before 1945? — Insta ntnood 08:26, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

UN Article

Mind explaining to me why you reverted my edits to United Nations so that it looks abit neater than what you reverted it back to? I cannot understand what sort of attachment you have to an unorganized list like that.--293.xx.xxx.xx 05:35, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Hong Kong (PRC)

Re [12] - Yes and no. The article ban has effectively frozen the template with user:SchmuckyTheCat's point of view, and has made him stop discussing. If it has to be frozen, it should be done according to what it was like before the controversial edits. — Insta ntnood 20:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've requested user:SchmuckyTheCat to discuss, but still when there's no consensus, why should his changes be kept? He has the option to create another template for his own preference. — Insta ntnood 18:56, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't create POV forks. SchmuckyTheCat 22:23, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan

Are you biased against Taiwan? Because if you are, you need to change your attitude. Taiwan is a democratic country and has a right to be its own country. Just because it is not a communist country does not mean it is a bad country. Taiwan has a great economy.

Im not Taiwanese but Im just trying to say Chinese people shouldnt be biased against Taiwan. I don't see a reason.

Good friend100 21:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Sky and White Sun

You reverted my change to Order of Blue Sky and White Sun with Grand Cordon, saying that Blue Sky and White Sun is not a self-reference. Click on it and see where it takes you. If you are planning to make a page specifically about the design, please do so and then place the link into the articles you want. Thanks, Kafziel 01:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I automatically assumed that the Blue Sky and White Sun link led to the Blue Sky with a White Sun article without checking. problem fixed now--Jiang 01:50, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Reich

I have once again reverted your edits to Image:Rbreich.jpg. I have also posted comments to Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. Please stop vandalizing the page. Please answer here, and i will check your page. --evrik 04:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith and stop calling my actions vandalism. There is nothing in my 38000 edits over three years to suggest I am purposely trying to vandalize here.

The notice must stand until the listing period is over. If you disagree with the reasons for listing, then simply discuss why the image does not violate copyright and if there is consensus in your direction, the notice will be removed in due time. Please note that removing such notices, such as afd nominations, and repeatedly inserting copyrighted material is grounds for blocking. If you want something removed, ask for it to be done, and if you have good reason, it will be done. --Jiang 04:33, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would have been easier to assume good faith had you engaged in dialog prior to your posting it on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. --evrik 05:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made the reasons for tagging the image clear in the edit summary. Since you and I still dispute the status of the image, PUI is a good place to sort it out. There is nothing wrong with listing this there. The purpose if listing it to promote discussion with the community at large so we can get more input.

Can you be a bit more civil here? Suggesting that I don't live on planet Earth isn't a very civil thing to say.--Jiang 06:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be more civil when you stop being a bully. Do me favor. Stop posting to my talk page. We can hash this out elsewhere. --evrik 17:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, showing that you're mistaken on a particular matter is not being a bully. We are all wrong sometimes, and it's good social habit, here and elsewhere, to admit our mistakes rather than resorting to personal attacks.

Please stop reverting the notice. (Note the 3RR) Just because an image is tagged does not mean it will be deleted. The tag is meant to invite discussion. Regardless, unless you can find evidence that the img is a work of the Federal Government, it will be deleted.--Jiang 19:46, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The painting is owned by the goivernment. The image was given to wikipedia from the webpage of the artist. It is PD, and the guidelines say that it can be cahnged immeadiately. --evrik 20:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PUI tag removal

As stated before, PUI tags are intended for soliciting input on the copyright status of an image. A claim of PD cannot be used to justify its removal because the PD status itself is under dispute. Going around and removing these tags will only work against you: the image will be deleted regardless of whether the tag is there. It would help your case to convince us that the image is indeed PD instead. There's no point in edit warring over this matter. Reverting does not make an image PD. --Jiang 23:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Remember when I said you we're a bully? Expanding the disagreement to other pages just reinforces that. --evrik 23:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If I am a bully, then you're just a big crybaby.--Jiang 23:15, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just got done crying here at the Wikipedia:Village pump (assistance).--evrik 23:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Matter settled. I have added the text of the email from Mr Whitney on all pics. Geez. notafish }<';> 18:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice write on Human Rights in PRC

Keep up the good work :) Coconut99 99 06:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Massive spam on anything Chinese

[13]. Ugh, can you clean that up? SchmuckyTheCat 20:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

US government portraits on PUI

Hi Jiang. Pursuant to the recent discussion on WP:PUI, it seems unlikely that paintings of US government officials are in the public domain (at least, not if they were made since 1923). Accordingly, I have listed the following images for potential deletion unless a fair-use rationale can be found:

Image:Barbara Bush.jpg, Image:Betty Ford.gif, Image:Elizabeth Truman.gif, Image:Hillary WHportrait.jpg, Image:Lady Bird Johnson.gif, Image:Mamie eisenhower.gif, Image:Pat nixon.jpg

—Steven G. Johnson 23:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ju Ming

Noticed that you removed the Ju Ming sculpture from the ROC page. Aren't you familiar with Ju Ming? His work does represent much of the ROC. If you haven't done so, you should visit his museum near Jinshan in the northern coast.

Chen Shui-bian Biography: ROC presidential building picture

I checked Chen Shui-bian's biography on wiki and found a picture of a place inside the ROC presidential building with Chen Shui-bian's painting that replaced a picture of Chiang Kai-shek. So how did you get access to take pictures in the presidential building?? I will be watching your comment page.. Just reply here or mine. Thanks (Chiang Kai-shek 03:35, 23 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

the presidential building is now open to the public six times a year. i went and visited when they were open last august. the open house dates are posted here. --Jiang 06:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that is during the full open house dates..so you get to see the whole thing? and even take pictures of everything?? Are you an ROC citizen? please reply on your page or my talk page. your choice.(Chiang Kai-shek 23:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

yes, that was on a full open house date. nope, they don't let you go everywhere: you only get to go through the main entrance, through the main lobby and upstairs to see Jieshou tang (the room where i took that picture) and then you can peek into some other rooms with their doors open (but dot go inside) until you go downstairs to some exhibition rooms and the inner courtyards on the ground level. i'm not a roc citizen (at least i don't possess any documents to show this). they do ask for id, but anyone can enter as long as theyre not from mainland china. --Jiang

so you can bring a camera into the presidential building and take pictures, even film? it is allowed? where do you meet to go inside? is there a place? what country of citizenship are you, if you don't mind me asking? you seem to know a lot about Chinese history, and you're not from Mainland China. (Chiang Kai-shek 00:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

yes, you may bring cameras to photograph/film, but they have limitations on the size of bags you can bring and put lockers there for you to check your bags. i think the regulations are posted somewhere... on the day of the open house, they had a security checkpoint (which is not hard to miss) set out in the front of the building, so you enter from there. i hold a US passport (ABC...) --Jiang 03:30, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the information, Jiang. You are very helpful. Are you originally from the ROC or the PRC, even though you are an ABC? (Chiang Kai-shek 03:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

i am from us, my parents are from hk and tw.--Jiang 05:43, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

but why do you hate Taiwan so much then? (Chiang Kai-shek 00:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Possibly unfree Image:Grace Coolidge.gif

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Grace Coolidge.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. Please go to its page to provide the necessary information on the source or licensing of this image (if you have any), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

—Steven G. Johnson 21:10, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

page move

Hello Jiang, can you expedite my page move request here? Thanks. BlueShirts 16:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks Jiang I appreciate it. BlueShirts

Tagging all US commissioned photos

Does it really matter if the tag is there or not? There's a large discussion on the issue with its own page; make your arguments there. Considering that this is a discussion of copyright law, consensus decision making doesn't really apply; we're not going to break the law just because a consensus decides we should. I would suggest you stop edit warring and find a way to work with Evrik. I will suggest he do the same. If there continues to be edit warring over the issue, blocks will have to be handed out.

As a side note, I decided to check into the issue a bit myself. I spoke with my congressman, a curator at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and an archivist at the National Archives. Each of them assured me that official photographs and portraits of U.S. Presidents (and other government officials), while being done by non-govenment employees were contracted in such a manner that copyright was given to the U.S. government. In fact, since this had been questioned before, the NARA wrote a section into their regulations to cover the handling of Presidential records (NARA Regulations(36 CFR Chapter XII, subchapter E)) however, this only applies specifically to President Reagan and later. You can also easily look at the online websites of the presidential libraries of the pictures you're questioning and find that the libraries list these portraits as being in the public domain. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 19:19, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Barnstar!

Peace Offering

Can we set aside our difference and work together? --evrik 19:34, 26 May 2006 (UTC).[reply]

US Govt bureaucrat ranks

I've updated your question at WP:RD/H. Hopefully it helps. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 15:14, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:SchmuckyTheCat

Could you please take a look at this edit [14]? He's restoring the red links. Reverting useful edits is simple vandalism isn't it? Also take a look at this [15] if possible. Thanks. — Insta ntnood 01:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And this edit too [16]. Thank you very much. — Insta ntnood 07:20, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He's now trying to hide the red links he has restored by creating redirects.. [17] — Insta ntnood 09:06, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brackets

I noticed your preference [18]. Would you please kindly help explain why round brackets (or parentheses as many may prefer) is a good choice to list countries that are not sovereign states? — Insta ntnood 13:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's very true. Yet they'd carry on to argue that special administrative regions are administrative divisions or ordinary subnational entities (a claim with no constitutional or legal basis), with no evidence. They also argue "Hong Kong, China" and "Macao(or -u), China" are the official designations the two territories use. — Insta ntnood 12:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, could you please take some time and keep an eye on template:Hong Kong (PRC)? Thanks. — Insta ntnood 13:21, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Winhunter

Please take a look at the edits by user:Winhunter [19] if possible. Thanks. — Insta ntnood 13:18, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protected Template:Hong Kong (PRC)

Jiang, note that Instantnood is banned from editing that template? Instead of protecting it maybe you should support his page ban and revert him. As to MoS, we already have one. Chicago Manual of Style would never suggest that that is a correct use of parentheses. I've actually read it, I doubt 'nood has. SchmuckyTheCat 02:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The template is broken for the time being because of the extra line break.

E.g.

{{Hong Kong (PRC)}} - something something

becomes

Template:Hong Kong (PRC) - something something

--Hunter 04:45, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It used to be more specific that we supported Chicago as the default. Chicago is the first thing to check under "when all else fails" [20] and also in the first paragraph in MoS.

As to the "correctness" [21], that is the same reasoning. We use parens for a different purpose (common or alternative names); using a duplicate usage is potentially confusing to readers. Per any style guide commas are what is appropriate for locations in lesser to greater just as in San Jose, California, United States. Also, as specified by the HK and the PRC, the name "Hong Kong, China" is most appropriate with NGOs, sports, etc.

Parens are used on maps to note soveriengty, but this is not a map. Such usage is for any territory sufficiently distant from its parent country that noting its state is necessary to avoid confusion. It has nothing to do with any special status as Instantnood is attempting to do. I have maps of the Pacific Ocean that do specify (US) or UNITED STATES over Hawaii but specify nothing over Hong Kong. Again though, it's irrelevant as maps have entirely different uses for style than encyclopedias. SchmuckyTheCat 06:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've said the same thing on half a dozen talk pages. He's been banned, from pages and from the entire site, for this exact same edit, repeatedly. Time for talk is over. That particular page has two editors on the talk page that disagree, three in the history that disagree with the parens, and four that disagree with the png image. On the paren issue, I could probably find a dozen editors who have reverted across every article he has ever made that edit on. What part of "no consensus" is there to miss for him? When he gets banned for making a particular edit, what justifies him coming back a month later and making the exact same edit? SchmuckyTheCat 07:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And here is the important thing, Jiang. It's not about whether he is right or not. It's about the fact that he can't resolve editing disputes without disruptive tactics and revert warring. He will not accept no for an answer, no many how many people say he is wrong, until he gets banned from the article. He returns month after month to the same series of articles to make the same series of edits. He will get banned from Wikipedia if he keeps up the behavior, no matter how right or wrong he is. The next ban is likely to be much longer than a few days or weeks. If you want to help him out, don't sanction his behavior by pretending it's a wider dispute than it really is. It is all centered around him. If you think he is right, help him make consensus. If you have no opinion and just want to help then YOU can help teach him not to revert war, or it is a lost cause. It really is at that tipping point. SchmuckyTheCat 07:39, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Extra line break

Could you please replace

[[Image:Flag of Hong Kong SAR.png|22px|Hong Kong]] [[Hong Kong|Hong Kong]] ([[People's Republic of China|People's Republic of China]])

<noinclude>{{protected}}</noinclude>

with

[[Image:Flag of Hong Kong SAR.png|22px|Hong Kong]] [[Hong Kong|Hong Kong]] ([[People's Republic of China|People's Republic of China]])<noinclude>

{{protected}}</noinclude>

? Thanks. — Insta ntnood 05:28, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much. [22] — Insta ntnood 19:42, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Taiwan straits.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Taiwan straits.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Thuresson 11:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Shanghai day.jpg

Hi Jiang, I would like to move your picture to the commons. Can you maybe specify the source with an URL? Thanks in advance, --Flominator 12:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong, China

Please be informed there's currently a non-binding straw poll on whether an article specifically focuses on the designation (in other words, terminology) should exist, at talk:Hong Kong. — Insta ntnood 17:03, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Norm Coleman

Hi, I am sending this message to serious contributors who may be interested in articles related to U.S. politics. I believe I am receiving an unreasonable response-- and at times insulting and rude-- from the editors of Norm Coleman article, who refuse to remove a section that may offer some interesting trivia for Wikipeidia users, but is irrelevant to people interested in reading an encyclopedia article on a member of U.S. Senate. If you have time, please take a look at the article. Regards. 172 | Talk 03:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]