Jump to content

User talk:Sameboat: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Line 303: Line 303:


:::::::::::: Can you read English? I've already told you that it was done to show you what you shouldn't have reverted. If you really know Wikipedia policies as you have claimed, the 3RR rule isn't violated by undoing simple vandalism. 09:24, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
:::::::::::: Can you read English? I've already told you that it was done to show you what you shouldn't have reverted. If you really know Wikipedia policies as you have claimed, the 3RR rule isn't violated by undoing simple vandalism. 09:24, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

::::::::::::: My action wasn't vandalism as you claim. Actually the one who protected the article doesn't express approval of either side, so stop being self-righteous. I won't repeaet it: I reverted them because you changed the ''Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link'' to ''Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link '''Hong Kong Section''''' at the start of the article (and almost proposed to move the article that I would never agree) and didn't provide citation to unsourced information. To sysops' perspective, it's merely an edit dispute. If they took the case seriously, '''both of us''' would be blocked for week or month, not only me. I stopped revert until your edit finally met my expectation. -- [[User:Sameboat|Sameboat - 同舟]] ([[User talk:Sameboat#top|talk]]) 10:43, 25 December 2009 (UTC)


Please stop vandalising the article. 11:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Please stop vandalising the article. 11:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 10:43, 25 December 2009

You can write in (modern) Chinese if you can speak it fluently. Or may consider leave the message in Chinese Wikipedia if you like. Thank you.

With regards to your latest edit on the Platform Screen Doors article

Dear Sameboat,

I would like to ask about the undoing of my edit on the article mentioned above. I would like to clarify these statements:

1. I was just indicating the manufacturer of the platform screen doors in the Singapore paragraph. 2. The Changi Airport Skytrain's previous batch of platform screen doors did feature train service buttons, but based on my previous experience with these doors I felt that these buttons were unnecessary (unless you were in a rush), and that was probably why the present batch of doors did not feature these buttons. 3. The Changi Airport Skytrain's previous batch of platform screen doors featured the Westinghouse Electric (1886) logo on the doors' edges, even though there is a huge difference between that and the Westnghouse Brake And Systems Co. Ltd..

I hope you provide a good reason for this edit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mbssbs (talkcontribs) 09:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Mbssbs, 23 Mar 2009

Copyright

Dear Sameboat, I feel that you are taking advantage of me when on Image:MTR_Stock_Merger, you have only noted yourself, making it seem that YOU were the uploader. You have also not requested for permission from me when uploading it to Commons. In any case, you may be in violation of Wikipedia rules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toyotaboy95 (talkcontribs) 08:12, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]


With regards to your latest post to the MTR talk page.

Dear Sameboat,

I would like to ask about your latest post on the MTR talk page. Who is it intended for?

Just would like to have things sorted out, with good faith.

Thanks in advance, --Kylohk 15:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course for user:Huaiwei. Assume good faith, yeah, but he(she) is the exception. I've just expressed the thought of every offended one in that discussion. -- Sameboat - 同舟 16:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Dear samboat,

I did not put anything that was not truthful. They were people not insects. They were MURDERED in cold blood. They were not killed as one kills a mosquito. These were human beings. I may not like people coming to my door and telling me to convert to Christianity either, but I am not going to MURDER them for it. It is blatantly wrong and people should denote it as so - at least out of respect for those who were unjustly murdered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.47.102.75 (talk) 21:50, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not make personal attacks. Wikipedia has a strict policy against personal attacks. Attack pages and images are not tolerated by Wikipedia and are speedily deleted. Users who continue to create or repost such pages and images in violation of our biographies of living persons policy will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Acroterion (talk) 02:41, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 HKCPPI

The article is more of a biography of living persons violation; speedy A10 applies there too. Such information concerning living persons must meet stringent criteria for references, with multiple, non-trivial coverage in major publications. A reference from a non-English-language source doesn't have much applicability for such an article on WP:EN, and certainly doesn't meet BLP criteria. Whether or not there's a consensus on ZH: is irrelevant: different wikis have different requirements, although I'd point out the BLP criteria are supposed to be applied equally across all Wikipedias. Acroterion (talk) 03:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Autoblock

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Autoblock of 222.166.160.138 lifted or expired.

Request handled by: krimpet 14:42, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please wait as I contact the blocking admin. Sandstein (talk) 14:25, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:About MTR station article (User talk:TheBigGap)

What is the limit of sizes and number of images in articles? TheBigGap (talk) 11:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added back the image of the plaque - not much point removing it. If you insist on having it taken please explain why. --Deryck C. 10:21, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image doesn't override the entire article unless you use a 1600*1200 superwide screen (or above) in full-screen mode... I think it's a bit too paranoid to remove the image. Furthermore, I added the image as requested by another editor about two years ago - apparently there are more unimportant images to remove, especially one or two of them that are present in other articles. I'll wait till you reply, or three days' time if there is no reply, to act. --Deryck C. 14:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the calligraphy to the Lam Tin article - I think calligraphy on the platform is rather less important. Few other stations have plaques but nearly every one has calligraphy. --Deryck C. 14:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's pray the same. Happy working =) --Deryck C. 14:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Railway system graph

Do you mean the new style as in Image:Hong Kong Railway Route Map en.svg? I guess that's better too, since the East TST - Hung Hom section previously was really confusing. – PeterCX&Talk 05:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine for me and I am not against it – PeterCX&Talk 11:16, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Power plant icon

Needless to say, your image of a coal plant is not an appropriate icon for almost all of the energy templates which it was added to, and has been removed. 199.125.109.136 (talk) 21:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

KBFa/e

To the majority of editors and viewers, KBFa/e and KBFa/e2 are the same icons and serve the same function. It would be difficult to manage if we make another similar variation. Also, in de: discussion, only two users gave comments: one agree, one waiting for other comments after knowing the situation. After waiting for a few day and have no more replies, I feel that it's quite safe to do the change. – PeterCX&Talk 03:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(replying WT:RDT/C)I guess so, "So I would agree with the suggested change" – PeterCX&Talk 11:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sameboat (block logactive blocksglobal blockscontribsdeleted contribsfilter logcreation logchange block settingsunblockcheckuser (log))


Request reason:

unblock-ip 222.166.160.129 blocked proxy

Decline reason:

Wikipedia does not permit editing with open proxies Ѕandahl 18:24, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Odinsphere attic.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Odinsphere attic.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Odinsphere boss.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Odinsphere boss.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Odinsphere drama.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Odinsphere drama.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Odinsphere phozon.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Odinsphere phozon.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Odinsphere plant.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Odinsphere plant.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Odinsphere psypher.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Odinsphere psypher.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Odinsphere shdaowknight.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Odinsphere shdaowknight.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Odinsphere worldmap.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Odinsphere worldmap.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:55, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know that the issue with Template:Railway line header has been sorted - thanks for checking it out. →Ollie (talkcontribs) 22:37, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your fixing the BS collapsing problem

Thanks very much for your quick response to my posting and for your creating a collapsible BS7 and for your hunting down my page with the problem and for then tweaking it to show what I wanted. Oops! sorry that's only four, not your asked-for five, but they are sincere "Thank you"s. A trouble throughout the BS-business is that everthing seems to have developed ad hoc, not systematically, e.g. some BS#s have a collapsible twin, some don't; the explanatory articles are bashed from German into a sort of English and it would seem that once someone has got to "Oh! that's what it means" later users are left to make the same voyage of discovery; there are several lists of icons.--SilasW (talk) 14:43, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks for fixing the collapsing problem with {{Bergensbanen}}. It is much appreciated, and can now go into the article :) Arsenikk (talk) 08:59, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Route diagram template/Catalog of pictograms

Sameboat, You with more skill seem to be trying what I would do, that is to get the explanation page for Route diagram templates and the Catalog of pictograms beaten in shape but it seems that the latest Catalog page (perhaps as a work in progress?) has lost most icons. I had to go to the version before your latest edits to untangle my es and exs and us. Among my many mad thoughts I wondered if the catalogue would be easier to read with collapsible sections, and a few more horizontal rows of the prefixes so that a row always appeared on or near the current screen to avoid long scrolls to find what prefix a column used.--SilasW (talk) 10:16, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Railway Line Template troubles continue

Do you remember that problem I had with the line template on the Template:Long Beach Branch of the Long Island Rail Road back in August and early September 2008? Well, unfortunatly, I'm still having the same problem with the Template:Oyster Bay Branch, and the advice that you offered me isn't helping. ----DanTD (talk) 00:28, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's just breaking up and not fitting in the infobox, and I'm afraid that it's going to scramble the whole infobox all up again, like the Long Beach Branch, the MBTA, and SEPTA-related infoboxes ended up back then. ----DanTD (talk) 03:55, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how to do what you're suggesting. I'm just glad I didn't delete it from my sandbox. ----DanTD (talk) 13:28, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I tried separating the line template before. That created a huge gap, so I cancelled that idea. ----DanTD (talk) 14:22, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BS templates in JAWP

Thank you for your report on BS templates modifications to JAWP. I replied in ja:Wikipedia‐ノート:経路図テンプレート there, and just have a look. Sorry for slow reply, but JA contributors such as the transplanter ja:User:Jms, and I also, are busy for their other activities. Maxima m (talk) 03:11, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Persona2 contact.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Persona2 contact.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Sameboat

Hi there. I've moved Template:Sameboat to User:Sameboat/Sandbox/Template. For future reference, you should always conduct editing tests within your userspace. Cheers! //roux   13:23, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I understand why you put the template into the template space, but templates work perfectly if you build them within your own user pages, which is what you should do if you're just testing how they work. //roux   14:06, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It works exactly the same, but instead of using {{Template:Sameboat}} you would use {{User:Sameboat/Sandbox/Template}}. All that a template does is copy code from one page to another. You could put {{User talk:Sameboat}} on User:Sameboat, for example, and your entire talkpage would show up on your userpage. //roux   14:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Réseau des Bains de Mer

Thanks for the improvement to the diagram. I've tweaked it a bit to show Lanchères-Pendé as still open. I've also redrawn the Chemin de Fer de la Baie de Somme diagram to match. How's your French? I had a go at redrawing the diagram on the French article but couldn't get it to work, so I left it unchanged. Mjroots (talk) 07:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The diagram is the route map on the fr:Chemins de fer départementaux de la Somme article. It is hidden on the French article, click on the "Dérouter" box to show it. Mjroots (talk) 09:50, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've not looked at the discussion yet. If you've accidentally created a prolem on fr:wp then revert the edit (if not already done by someone else) to how it was. Mjroots (talk) 15:26, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The following was left on my talk page, it is directed at you though! Mjroots (talk) 20:43, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sameboat, I left a message for you in the discussion thread you mentioned before (French Wikipedia).
ChrisJ (talk) 20:38, 5 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ip block 2008-12-06

BS collapsing error returned

Sameboat you quickly corrected this problem when I wrote to you some time ago. It seems to have re-appeared. Yesterday I was tweaking Template:North London Line in my Sandbox and the disruption caused by Showing the hidden comments returned. After thinking that perhaps I had got something wrong I looked at the real template and found that it was misbehaving the same way. Any help would be appreciated--SilasW (talk) 12:01, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Now, later the same day, the real NLL template, which you appear not to have altered, works properly as does your BS4-ed version of my sandbox.--SilasW (talk) 20:50, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Later still - it did not work (which I think you noted in my talk) and you may be busy trying to get icons well listed but -
  • This fix (no good for general use) seems always to work and may point to the cause. If the map is broken a click on Hide in the template title then one on the resulting Show sets the secondary Show/Hide to work properly.
  • Another thing I saw was that to open the link to an icon then back out of it sometimes stops Show and Hide from breaking the map.
  • Also if the word "hide" in the title jumps to the right when the cursor gets near it then the secondary Show will break the map.--SilasW (talk) 20:48, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Today that cure seems none too dependable. I have IE7 but I checked by phone with my tame MS expert who finds the same trouble occurs with IE8--SilasW (talk) 11:49, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
O Sameboat, you seem to say in Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template that it does not occur in IE7 but it does (see just above), perhaps I misunderstood you. What happened in the previous paragraph was that the Template code from my computer was run remotely in IE8 with failure as consistent as ever.--SilasW (talk) 16:50, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I do not know what your latest addition (overiding a collapsible's parameter) was to do but the breakage continues; as I think you've already said it seems as though OVER is involved.--SilasW (talk) 12:52, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

v . d . e |

I have posted similar on Template talk:BS-header

This revision has added a | after the v.d.e which is now appears to be a unique addition to the use of v.d.e, other templates do not appear to use this addition. I do not think it adds anything. Many articles with the RDT also have other v.d.e templates which do not have this addition (cf Clydesdale Junction Railway) and to my mind it does not look right. I would rather view to this rather than removing it myself.

It may be more prudent to keep any discussion on Template talk:BS-header --Stewart (talk | edits) 09:43, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TTC images

This is not a valid reason for speedy deletion. If you really have a problem with these images, take it to the relevant project or images for deletion to seek a consensus. the wub "?!" 10:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP block 1-27th-2009

IP block 2-19th-2009

Crocodile tears

In the Edison Chen photo scandal article, I notice that you replaced 'fake tears'. I had thought against using that term originally, for the reason that Cecilia used 'the cat crying over the mouse' (in cantonese). Basically we would be mixing animals in Chinese/English. Ohconfucius (talk) 05:22, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ip block 0308-2009

ip block 2009-4-16

A thought about icon lists

Sameboat, Recently you put the rail map icons into lists by type to shorten a very long article, with links in the shortened original article to your new lists. Now a template in all route maps calls up the shortened list and to find particular icons needs further clicking. Do you think it would be more convenient if the template that calls in the short "top" list were altered (or replaced by another) to show the links for the sub-lists (and similar lists) directly? All the current left-is-right, right-is-wrong, ----is-H, ----is q, what-is-3 chaos means one often has to consult a list. A very imperfect try at showing my thought is here.
Your reply would be valued.--SilasW (talk) 13:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ip block 2009-05-09

PRC talk page

I just saw your comment on the PRC just a while ago. "'are you just removing it due to the negative nature in which is depicts the PRC?"' this is assuming bad faith of Wmrwiki's removal, please avoid it later'. I must disagree with you. WP:AGF shows how one should not word it. I asked a question, which, imho, was not assuming bad faith, as I did not accuse him of having an ulterior motive in removing said picture. Thanks, Ono (talk) 22:25, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have absolutely no way of knowing my intentions, and I am angered that you jump to assumptions about my edits, especially when I have offered no reason for you to do so. You need to take your own advice and assume good faith that my comment was not wrong, until you can prove that I was not assuming good faith in reverting his edit, which did not have english in its edit summary, so a good portion of the readers cant tell what he said. Thanks, Ono (talk) 23:18, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:BS-Infobox and Template talk:BS-Infobox

Re Template talk:BS-Infobox#Units, rail gauge templates and conversion templates, please see my remarks there. Peter Horn 18:34, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find icons

Hi, I'm having difficulty constructing a diagram, I have written my full question at User talk:AlisonW#Can't find icons, but have not had a response - please see that page for details. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:41, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

October 2009

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Wu Kai Sha Station. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. (warning both parties) tedder (talk) 07:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

TESTING123 bug fixed

Please see my comment dated 08:05, 1 December 2009 (UTC) in Wikipedia talk:Route diagram template #Alt text in route diagrams. Eubulides (talk) 08:07, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IP block 2009-12-02

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

Block lifted.

Request handled by: -- zzuuzz (talk) 12:39, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

I have forwarded your request to Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies/Unblock. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ping

Template_talk:BS-overlap#Alt_text_support_consensusTheDJ (talkcontribs) 13:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your revert

Please revert only what you disagree. Do not revert everything while you disagree with only part of an edit. 09:53, 24 December 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.118.130.101 (talk)

The article correspondes to the Chinese version which covers both sections. Considering the article length of the Chinese version, there's no sign of dividing. And your new edits are lacking of wp:reliable source and not following the wp:MOS. Since I'm not interested in your concepts, if your edits do not follow any Wikipedia guideline and policy, I will revert them immediately. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 10:19, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Do you speak English? It's hard to understand what you said. And I think everyone would agree with edits such as correcting the name of a newspaper, from its old name to its current name. There's no point to discredit my edits by accusing me for not providing reliable source or not following MOS. 10:44, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
You should create another article like Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link Hong Kong section rather than modify Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link which is intented to cover the whole network from Hong Kong to Guangzhou as it is in the Chinese version zh:廣深港高速鐵路. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 10:50, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop vandalising the article. Thanks. 11:03, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
And by the way as far as I know the MOS suggests to italicise names of newspapers. I don't think the MOS would have suggest to use an old name of a newspaper. 11:07, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I've created this article intented to cover both sections as in Chinese Wikipedia. Outnumbering by the content of of HK section doesn't justify the removal of Mainland section. You're the one vandaling. Once again, you should create another article rather than modify the existing one to your liking. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 11:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody owns any article on Wikipedia. And the editorial policy on the English-language version of Wikipedia is not determined by other versions. Do you actually speak English? I don't understand what you meant by "Outnumbering by the content..." and "vandaling". Most important of all, I did nothing to remove what is mentioned about the Mainland Section. I.e., I've kept everything in the article about the Mainland Section. 11:14, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't own the article, but that's not the reason to alternate the purpose of the article: to cover both sections. If you want an article to cover the HK section only, please create another one. And the reason to remove the Legislative Council debate is due to lack of wp:inline citation and the reliable source. The guideline Wikipedia:Spellchecking also requires editors to follow the dialect used in the first non-stub version of the article, so your change of English dialect is not rational. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 11:30, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't pretend. What you did was not merely singling out sentences without source. What you did was to revert everything, to the extent that you have kept replacing the current name of a newspaper with its an old name, and to undo clarifications to the construction timeframe mentioned in the article. English is the official language in Hong Kong, and British spellings are used here. Wikipedia policies suggest using the spelling of where the article talks about. 12:00, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Firstly, I stop revert your edit because you seem to treat both HK and Mainland sections equally. 2nd, I reverted the unsourced passage at once because you must learn youself how important the wp:reliable source and wp:citation are (if you want to provide the source later, just don't write in the information). As for the dialect, nowadays China doesn't particularily prefer British over American English, so the words should retain their original selves unless the spelling is indeed incorrect. You said I pretend, but I stopped reversion when you complied, so your accusation is pointless. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 12:31, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To repeat I have removed nothing about the Mainland Section. And, second, what I had done was to show you what you shouldn't have reverted. 19:02, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Then what's the point of this edition: [1]? You're self-contradictory. Initially you intented to change the article's subject to focus on the HK section only, but it seems that eventually you no longer insist on that Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link Hong Kong Section thing. Why is the change of mind? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 00:11, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can you read English? I've already told you that it was done to show you what you shouldn't have reverted. If you really know Wikipedia policies as you have claimed, the 3RR rule isn't violated by undoing simple vandalism. 09:24, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
My action wasn't vandalism as you claim. Actually the one who protected the article doesn't express approval of either side, so stop being self-righteous. I won't repeaet it: I reverted them because you changed the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link to Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link Hong Kong Section at the start of the article (and almost proposed to move the article that I would never agree) and didn't provide citation to unsourced information. To sysops' perspective, it's merely an edit dispute. If they took the case seriously, both of us would be blocked for week or month, not only me. I stopped revert until your edit finally met my expectation. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 10:43, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop vandalising the article. 11:10, 24 December 2009 (UTC)