User talk:Monshuai

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hve you ever considered putting forth the same amount of effort in a real article? 74.62.6.84 00:03, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from creating inappropriate pages. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox.--Ed (Edgar181) 02:58, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Twirly-swirly.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Twirly-swirly.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright 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 Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries and signing comments

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 00:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as in England, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button Image:Wikisigbutton.png located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. ♦Tangerines♦·Talk 00:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Working together

I have the impression that you are rather upset with me after our discussions on the talk pages of Bulgaria and Gradeshnitsa tablets. We've been discussing matters for a few days now. I am not trying to make you upset; I am just trying to help improve these articles.

I realize I have removed and changed some text in these articles and that you disagree with my editing actions. This is a normal interaction on Wikipedia. Our task is now to work out our differences to our mutual satisfaction while retaining Wikipedia's encyclopedic neutral, encyclopedic point of view.

I wish to note that I was not the only editor who has removed your edits. From your comments, I do get the impression you think I am someone actively working against you. Working against you is not my intent - I am trying to work with you. I want to find the proper place, and way, to address your concerns in Wikipedia. I do not dispute the evidence for possible ancient writing in the region of present-day Bulgaria. I dispute that we have reached the proper place, and proper tone: I think we should not discuss this so prominently in the Bulgaria article without a lot more care.

Some of the work that resulted in part from this discussion was actually productive - there is now a Gradeshnitsa tablets article, and you have found some very useful academic articles about the matter of early writing in the region. We should definitely continue with this productive exercise and expand the Gradeshnitsa tablets article.

I am not sure though what your purpose is in mentioning that you contacted newspapers, your professor and the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences about my editing behavior on wikipedia. You may wish to read the Wikipedia:Civility to learn about more constructive ways of engaging in a dialog with people here. Martijn Faassen 01:58, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Some select quotes from Monshuai

This user needs to consult Wikipedia:Verifiability, WP:RS, Wikipedia:Citing_Sources, and most importantly, Wikipedia:Civility. When asked in a polite way to cite sources for claims like the following about Bulgaria:

The country's proto-modern statehood roots stem from the Thracian civilization, whilst further sculpted by the Greek and later the Roman worlds of antiquity. Indeed Bulgaria's civilized history dates back more than six millennia to a time and place within the heart of its territory that marks the birth of Europe's and possibly the world's first literary culture.[18] Though relatively small in terms of territory and population, Bulgaria's continuous historical wealth throughout prominent cyclical eras of growth, decline and medieval renaissance rivals that of the much larger and more populous countries of China, India and Egypt

the user engaged in a whirlwind of bluster and angry attacking on various talk pages. The user did come up with some sources, but any substance was surrounded with choice comments like:

From Talk:Bulgaria:

  • I will now contact various Wikipedia authorities and highlight everything that has transpired herein, along with the history of your transgressive behaviour and I will see to it that you are punished for what you have done to the Bulgaria section.
  • Your uneducated view about our connection to the past is indeed one of random observations, mostly gathered, I imagine, from your personal emotional and psychological likes/dislikes, while Bulgarians' connection to their past is one not only of archeological and anthropological evidence, but also one of traditions and lineage.
  • You cross the line when you make uneducated comments about the country and its people, particularly when our ancient history is of utmost importance to our national consciousness and the way that we express it through our continuous socio-cultural practices
  • From all that you have said, my impression is that you are a prejudiced person, who simply does not want a country that you feel is inferior to yours to present itself in a light that you may deem too good to be true. That's why you call our reality, "glorification." Unfortunately for you, I am not going to let you decide what is and isn't written about my country!
  • That wouldn’t surprise me one bit, as every public study and statistically valid survey done in Western Europe (ie: Holland) shows that people in that half of the continent believe themselves to be superior to those on the other half.
  • You should be ashamed of yourself for needing proof about what’s accepted academic/cultural knowledge that is discussed in many books on the subject that you could buy yourself. On top of this, what in the first place gives you the right to be suspicious of my culture and to question my traditions??? Shame! It’s almost as though you feel you have the authority to question everything Bulgarian. I never thought ignorance and a superiority complex could run so high!
  • Please refrain from calling yourself tirelessly polite. Questioning a country's traditions is not polite, even if you try to do so in a diplomatic tone. There is a difference between respecting the culture of a nation by educatiing yourself on related matters and questioning the credibility of that nation's continuous traditions without having even a beginner's base of knowledge regarding its culture.
  • BTW, again you show disrespect by saying, "Note that showing the antiquity of the Thracians is not enough to show a continuity of civilization in Bulgaria."
  • And once again, you are not polite when you question the traditons of a nation! What you are then is ethnocentric and disrespectful!

From Talk:Gradeshnitsa_tablets

  • I have already take measures regarding your transgressions and inappropriate and unwarranted editing and I have saved the entire history of what has tanspired herein and in the Bulgaria section. All of this has alreay been sent to the proper authorities and furthermore I will be showing this in my class tomorrow in order to point out the bias and denial that exists when a small nation that is insignificant in today's global dynamics showcases its contributions to times of a by-gone era.
  • I have also written to the editors at Standart, Novinite and other newspapers in Bulgaria and ask that they look at what you and others have done to the Bulgaria section, forcefully taking away academic information, in order to misguide and re-direct what you feel should be written about a country you know little about.
  • Further still, according to European Law, anyone who defaces the image of a EU country is liable to penalties under the premiliminary agreements in the European Parliament. I have asked my mentor, Professor Kiril Ivanov to write a letter to the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and in turn have them take the necessary action regarding this ufortunate sequence of events.

I have tried to work with this person, but he doesn't seem to be very interested in being polite, which makes it very difficult. Martijn Faassen 00:10, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grace in victory

From Talk:Bulgaria:

  • You evidently are incapable of toning down your bluster. Goodbye. Do with this article whatever you want. Martijn Faassen 00:19, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
  • And you are obviously incapable of admitting your mistakes, prejudice and ethnocentrism! I was certain you would leave once I had proven your uneducated doubts incorrect. Consequently, now that I have used English language sources, you have no choice but to leave as you are finding it ever more difficult to disregard the realities of Bulgaria's history, its people and cultural roots... I am very happy you will no longer be vandalizing the section of a country you disrespect. Please don't come back and try to do what you did here to a country section such as China! Wait and see how you'll be treated there if you try to pass your prejudiced views on them. I hope Wikipedia will evolve by not having uneducated people write their views about matters that they do not understand. In Wikipedia everyone can edit, but not everyone has the proper knowledge to do so. Mr. Faassen, you are a pompous human being, whose education on Bulgaria is minimal, yet you assumed the irresponsibility of omitting facts from Bulgaria's history. Again I say, never come back!

I'm going to leave him alone now, but the irony in describing me as pompous is so intense I just had to preserve this here. Martijn Faassen 01:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning your threats.

"I have placed many academic sources that prove the 6000+ year history of this land. If you continue to delete these academic sources and the facts that they prove, both based on anthropological and archeological studies, than I shall have to do with you what I have done to other vandals here on Wikipedia. Go to the discussion section of this article and read it carefully. I have already discussed this with the Wikipedia authorities and they do not look kindly on those that delete academic sources, be them articles and/or books. Others like yourself have already been punished for their vandalism."

If you believe you're treated unfairly, ask an admin to solve our little dispute. No threats, please. 3rdAlcove 11:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible connection to User:Lantonov

I found myself in a discussion with Monshuai, and a few day later I find user User:Lantonov take text I wrote in this discussion and use it in an entirely different context in another discussion altogether (see User talk:Lantonov for more I wrote on this). Both users are interested in POVs in connection to Bulgaria. Martijn Faassen (talk) 19:12, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NPoV

Regarding Atanasoff, I'm disappointed to see you say in your edit summary that I don't take neutral point of view "into account". Given the Wikipedia MoS guidlines about not emphasizing ethnicity in the lead unless it is relevant to a biographical subject's notability, the only neutral point of view is to follow the MoS--to list Atanasoff's nationality but not his (complicated) ethnicity. There is plenty of space elsewhere in the article to deal fully and encyclopedically with the Atanasoff-Bulgaria relationship. I have offered to assist you with fleshing out this part of the article. Despite my exhortation in the talk page, you apparently cannot be bothered to spend energy working on the article in earnest and would prefer to espouse a position which works solely to "claim" Atanasoff. This is not good article writing.

If you're going to edit war, I should think it's time for you to involve your administrator friends, as you offered on the Atanasoff talk page. I'll be glad to let them examine the evidence and determine whether Atanasoff's ethnicity is indeed relevant to his notability or whether undue weight placed on it by forcing it into the lead is not the boosterism of editors whose sole contributions to the encyclopedia are in Bulgaria-related articles. Robert K S (talk) 22:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Per MoS, a biographical subject's ethnicity should generally not be mentioned in the lead unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Yes, this applies for African-Americans, who shouldn't be presented as such in the leads of their articles unless being African-American is relevant to their notability. (For a number of notable African-Americans, it is.) I have said repeatedly that I think the Atanasoff article could benefit from a (properly sourced, encyclopedically-written) section detailing his 1970 Bulgarian recognition, and I have also offered to help you write this section. I never said Atanasoff's Bulgarian ancestry wasn't important. I've said it isn't relevant to his notability. The reason for Atanasoff's notability isn't because he had Bulgarian ancestry. If you still have questions about this, just ask on my talk page. Cheers and happy editing, Robert K S (talk) 11:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your name has been mentioned at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard

You are welcome to join the discussion there. EdJohnston (talk) 05:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)