User talk:Amban

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Sinmiyangyo

Hi Amban, It looks like Sinmiyangyo will remain as is for the time being. I agree that a move would be reasonable, but the just-closed poll may have been run too soon given the staggering array of possible names. If you decide to revisit the issue some time in the future, I think it would help to hammer out a few alternatives first, then start the move request. --Reuben 00:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Amban, no need to apologize for not responding earlier. I hadn't understood your intention in clearing your talk page. My interest in the naming issue is peripheral, so I should probably just say that I don't object to the current title, and leave it at that. --Reuben 08:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sandbox

I have no-wikified your sandbox to take out the categories as well as the templates which belong in mainspace. Thanks. Miranda 18:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Treaty of Nanking

Please add your comments on the name to the article. It's not clear how many readers will need to know the Chinese name of the treaty; but it is interesting. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Liangguang

Since you know the original borders of Liangguang, can you help User:Croquant to make a map of it? Thank you, Badagnani 05:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

When superimposing ancient and present maps, the differences I can see between borders of Guangdong and Guangxi are slight, the only significant ones being along the internal dividing line. As it seems to be in contradiction with this remark of yours, I'd appreciate further details from you, in order for me to complete the map accurately. Thanks. Croquant 16:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Andreas Everardus van Braam Houckgeest‎

You may remember that you removed the "VOC" link in the following sentence:

"In 1757, van Braam joined the Dutch Navy as a midshipman, but soon left the navy for China in order to work for the Dutch East India Company (VOC)."

You observed (1) that the VOC was redundant as link directly following Dutch East India Company; and (2) that VOC led to a disambiguation page which redirected to Dutch East India Company. I appreciate the obvious -- and indeed, you do spell it out for me. However, even knowing this, I've been inclined to wikify the first VOC in any article so that I will alert readers that the acronym "V.O.C." will work equally well in the search box if the need arises to consult Dutch East India Company at some point in the future. I viewed this wikifying habit as one of those instances in which deliberate redundancy would be both prudent, helpful and conventional. Was I wrong? If so, why?

This reasoning would only apply in circumstances where the subject of a Wikipedia article and an associated acronym are conventionally presented one after the other -- as was the case in that van Braam article you stumbled across ....

There are other circumstances in which I would apply the same "deliberate redundancy" reasoning -- for example, with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Do you see my point? --Ooperhoofd 06:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please don't hate

In fact we should find the Mongolian name of the Dowager, as this is list is of notable Mongols. I don't know what's SOOOO wrong with the Manchu name VS Chinese. After all her husband was a Manchu. Gantuya eng 02:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit war

Amban. You appear to be engaged in an edit war in the article Mongolia during Qing. Further reversal may result in your being blocked from editing for a certain period.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gantuya eng (talk • contribs)

...and you are not engaged in an edit war and does not risk being blocked?--Amban 13:30, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
We are not obliged to include dowager in the list only because you created a page about her. The list isn't an advertisement of user-created pages. how will the article benefit from your link? What wrong did Mongolia do to you so that you are trying to insult her history? Gantuya eng 15:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I did not create that page, I linked to it because you included a reference to that queen on the list. I thought I was improving on an article. And I don't understand why you think that I want to insult Mongolia. Please be civil. --Amban 15:25, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your note

Hi Amban, it seems I blocked that editor for WP:3RR, whereas the current situation looks more like edit warring, WP:OWN and a general content dispute. I would pursue dispute resolution with him, and try to get more knowledgeable and/or neutral editors involved. Crum375 18:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Er, I don't really know how to pursue a dispute resolution with this editor. She doesn't respond to argument at all.--Amban 18:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
If you can show that you tried, and she refused, that would be important for the record. Also, it would be most helpful to enlist other users to comment on this issue. One possibility is via WP:RFC. Crum375 20:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I see your point, but nah, I have been through this some many times before and most people don't give a crap about RFCs. As usual, you are on your own and most people just look on. This is a simple question of an editor who doesn't understand Wikipedia policy, and if it is not worth your time, it's not worth my time either. The trolls rule anyway.--Amban 23:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't see this before. Who did you call a troll? Gantuya eng 02:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
See below. Crum375 01:43, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User page

Hi Amban. Where's your user page gone. If you're intending to leave WP due to our argument, please don't. I really didn't wanna offend you. Gantuya eng 00:44, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Amban, it sounds like Gantuya eng does care about you, and I suspect would also be willing to compromise. If the two of you (or more) want me to help as a neutral observer and admin, I'd be willing to do it. Crum375 01:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
(I can also bring back your old page if/when you want me to.) Crum375 01:45, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I deleted my user page because I was fed up with it, and I have not left Wikipedia. But I am a bit fed up with cyber-nationalism on Wikipedia, which leads to lengthy disputes, so I'm taking some time off. It would be too bad if Gantuya left the project, she obviously has a lot to contribute with, but she needs to familiarize her self more with how policies work here.--Amban 15:10, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, take some time off, and come back when you are up to it. I have also asked Gantuya to reconsider, and I hope she does. I think it's important for us to have nationalistic views, as they can give us a good insight on issues. But obviously WP:NPOV and WP:V rule, and we must abide by them. My offer to help stands, when you come back. Thanks for all your efforts, Crum375 16:09, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Chen Lifu

In the future, when you tag a page as a copyright violation, please be sure to blank the page, excepting the notice. DodgerOfZion

That you call other editors "trolls" is a personal attack. It's good you haven't left. But I did. Gantuya eng 04:53, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

I didn't call you a troll specifically, I was venting my anger over how things work at Wikipedia. And by that point you had heaped quite a lot of abuse and sarcasm on me already, so I guess I was a bit angry. Anyway, sorry to hear that you have left. Take a break instead and reconsider.--Amban 11:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] People's Liberation Army operations in Tibet (1950–1951)

Hi Amban, an editor has proposed a title move to "Invasion of Tibet". It'd be great to have your comments/vote. - MainBody (talk) 15:10, 12 April 2008 (UTC)