User talk:Nlu
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives:
Contents |
[edit] 沓
Quote: "As to Korea history, his/her behavior is/was unacceptable. He/she doesn't discuss edits, rarely uses edit summaries, and when he/she does either does so with abusive language. Moreover, he/she freely removes uncontested improvements and inserts language that is horrendous in both style and grammar, just for POV-pushing purposes. I have had disagreements with many editors here, but those are genuine disagreements as to opinion. Korea history's edits were disruptive. --Nlu (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)"
- I see. By the way, Korea history is a man. I have to agree with the fact that his English skills are poor, which is the reason why he is trying to avoid using it. Because of this, he did not write any edit summaries (unacceptable), and wrote very briefly about his opinions. The poor level of English might have been or is viewed as abusive language. (Neutrality is usually possible with advanced levels of the language). Korea history was unacceptably abusing Wikipedia in the beginning. After hearing on your opinion, I agree with you also. Some non-English users (such as korean and japanese wikipedians) port over to the English Wikipedia to declare that their country is the "best". I assume that Korea History is one of them. I will try my best to "preach" him and make him purge himself. Since he was a newcommer (noob), why don't you consider giving him a second chance? And, please do not think of me as a POV-ish person. I am a Korean who lived in America long enough in order to realize that the planet Earth is just one, global world. Again, your consideration about Korea History is greatly appreciated. S'il vous plait, monsieur. Je suis un nationalist de Coree libre. Orthodoxy 21:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- P.S., I know that I am not part of the Goguryu (Go-goo-ryu) article, but I do think that Goguryu is neither Korean or Chinese, but a whole, new, seperate kingdom that vanished completely at the end. Maybe it was Korean, maybe it was Chinese. No one knows for now, so I do think that the argument should be stopped. The answer will come in the 22nd century when Time Machines will be invented. Until then, we should not argue and stay in peace. When the answer is told in the future, either Korea or China should admit that Goguryu is not their's. The Dokdo thing is another issue, so I will talk about that later. Orthodoxy 21:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I would appreciate any intervention you take. Meanwhile, he is already given a second chance; I only gave him, a couple weeks ago, a 24-hour block for 3RR violation, and I didn't block him for any other reason. His behavior seems to have gotten better, but is still not great. --Nlu (talk) 22:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, Nlu.
the Orthodoxy is say I have to agree with the fact that his English skills are poor, which is the reason why he is trying to avoid using it. Because of this, he did not write any edit summaries (unacceptable), and wrote very briefly about his opinions. it is true. therefore I am trying to overcome my weakness. and I make greater efforts. I'm going to use in Discussion page. Korea history13:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
-
- I appreciate that. Thanks for writing me. Meanwhile, I do think that when you get a chance, you should take a look at WP:5P (and/or its Korean equivalent, ko:위키백과:다섯_원칙). In particular, the concept of neutral point of view is paramount here. --Nlu (talk) 16:10, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Liu Heita
 |
On 4 April 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Liu Heita, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
--howcheng {chat} 06:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. --Nlu (talk) 06:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] not writers?
Hello Nlu. I'm puzzled by some of your recent edits involving categories. Lin Shu and Yan Fu were certainly writers. In the case of Lin Shu, we can even say that he was a writer before he was a translator (as he himself would've agreed). Indeed he was one of the more well-known classical Chinese stylists during the late Qing Dynasty. Also, both Yan Fu and Lin Shu wrote and published poems. In the case of Xu Fancheng, we can say that he was a writer of philosophical works (he didn't just translate). Cheers.--K.C. Tang 07:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- What I meant was that, at least from the articles alone, it is not clear that they wrote significant original works. If you know that they do, I would appreciate that you add back the category, but put him in a subcategory if possible to classify. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 16:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Please establish Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/He Jiuying
Please establish Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/He Jiuying to discuss whether He Jiuying should be deleted. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/He Li should be a page only for the discussion about He Li. Thanks. --Neo-Jay 09:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- WP:AFD permits nominations of multiple (related) articles in a nomination, although in this case perhaps I should have nominated He Jiuying from the beginning. I'll think about it. I may do what you ask and make a separate discussion. --Nlu (talk) 16:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reply. I know that related articles can be nominated for deletion together at one page. But it is not the case for He Jiuying and He Li. They are related only in the sense that they are father and son. I have provided and will provide more information and references to prove that they are notable enough to be in Wikipedia. Thanks. --Neo-Jay 16:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] (Inquiry from IP)
hey, what the hell? you wanna tell me what i vandalized before you go around banning me? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.227.193.210 (talk • contribs).
