User talk:Ohconfucius/archive07

Please click here to leave me a message.
I prefer to keep all discussions coherent, so I will reply on the same page where messages are left for me. Thanks for stopping by.

On the other hand, if you're here to award me a barnstar ;-), they are gratefully received here.

Image tagging for Image:WWH.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WWH.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:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Ma Lik

It was in couple chinese news paper like Apple Daily. They even have a satire comic written about that. The only problem is that I recycled my newspaper few days ago, but I'm sure that it's in A section (the main news section). OhanaUnited 14:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Fresh raspberries.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Fresh raspberries.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Student Television: GUST

Hello again. I wonder if you could possibly give your opinion in a new debate over the notability of Glasgow University Student Television. User:Sherzo wasn't sure about the article, and we've been in dire need of a third opinion. Given that you've discussed the page in the past, and I believe you recently contributed to the debate over LooSE TV, I thought you might be willing to throw your hat in the ring. Cheers. JMalky 09:37, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop

I've nominated Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Mak Man Kee Noodle Shop during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. —Gaff ^ταλκ 08:58, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

• Maybe I was a little too trigger happy on this one. You see enough junk and everything starts looking like the same. Nom is withdrawn. cheers. —Gaff ^ταλκ 09:40, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Hahhah I just noticed this AfD. Somebody did the same to the first article I ever started, and actually he tagged it for speedy deletion. Luckily an admin noticed that I was new and left me a note instead of deleting it. What I do now is that if I want to create a short stub-class article, I make sure that notability is asserted with English sources, or if I plan on creating anything more than a stub, I'll work on it in my userpage subspace first, and then moving it out to its own article space when it's near finished. For example - [1]. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 15:21, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks guys, and thanks for the advice! Ohconfucius 03:19, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Huang Ju

Hi, I see your point. I was unaware of these policies. Anyhow, the Chinese biography of Huang is actually very interesting, as it shows the official CCP version of Huang Ju's life in relative detail (and thus is considered the current official evaluation of his legacy), and thus is a very good alternative to the generally accepted views of Huang Ju. If you still see it as unnecessary, please post them up in the talk page so I can at least put it on the Chinese Wikipedia. Colipon+(T) 05:38, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

• thanks. I'll take a look and see if there is any information I can work into the article, and get rid of the EL. Ohconfucius 01:26, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Amvest.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Amvest.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 08:39, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

LSRfm.com

i believe engineering and web development are notable position, since a) its a student radio station and engieering is the 2nd most inportant element b) web dev - its a .com station so webmasters are also important, but since its the second removal by you, i shall leave it be

Barry Carlyon 16:24, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Radio stations

As things currently stand, the notability of a radio station is determined by whether that station holds a broadcast license from the appropriate federal broadcast regulator and directly originates at least a portion of its own programming. Apart from those two criteria, we don't care whether the station is commercial or student-owned or just broadcasts bingo games all day or used to meet the criteria but went bankrupt and stopped broadcasting five years ago — if those criteria are met, the station's in. Bearcat 08:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• thanks for the information. only on some of trhe articles, the fact that it has a license is not stated.... Ohconfucius 09:11, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
• Come to think of it, I have seen quite a few student radio and TV station articles deleted, and have decided to put one of your de-prodded articles to test your assertion. please see The Most FM Ohconfucius 10:27, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• The diffuculty being, where does one put the fact that one has a license, ppLSRfm.com]] - obvious since we have an FM Frequency
• What about pirate stations that currently operate, they dont have a license and some of them maybe be noteable.
• There have been quite a few students stations suffering deletion of late, somesones after increasing their edit count....

Barry Carlyon 12:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• The argument that having "a license" makes one notable may be fallacious, as it still depends on other factors. The fact that I have a driver's license does not make me notable, same goes for a license to practice medicine. A stock market quotation may imply notability for a company, but even then there are listed shell companies which nobody knows about. The notability conferred by any given license may even depend on the country. As for radio stations, a license to transmit on a 5W transmitter is not the same as one for a 30kW transmitter. But I think that this is moot nowadays, as anybody can broadcast over the internet. The only facts which push LSR over the bar of notability, IMHO, is the awards won. I inserted the tag as an encouragement to strengthen the article with stronger assertions and better quality references, which the article is in need of, IMHO. I would refrain from inserting anything which is should not be in an encyclopaedia (I know it's vague, but those are the policies and guidelines we should follow). All facts should be sourced, and that usually excludes self-references. Also, please be mindful of WP:COI in editing the LSRfm.com article, as you may inadvertently insert information which is not "public", "published", or otherwise verifiable. Ohconfucius 09:07, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

• I appreaciate and thank you for your assistance in making LSR's article a better wiki article. Im just aware of the fact a lot of student stations have been removed from the encyclopedia :-)

Barry Carlyon 10:59, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

French translation for the Board of Trustees election

Hi, I noticed that you wrote you were fluent in French. I have started translating the candidates interviews, and I was wondering if you were willing to give a hand, translating and/or polishing them. For now I am the only one working on these and I am afraid of not doing a perfect job on that occasion :). -- lucasbfr ^talk 15:40, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• Good work. I've touched it up a bit in my own style. There may still be errors, or errors I've introduced, though... I'll keep an eye on the pages for new hustings postings :-) Ohconfucius 03:02, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

That's great! You got a lot of mistakes, I'm ashamed. I'm stuck in a train for 7 hours this afternoon. I'll try to translate all those that magically appeared today. -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

• Nothing to be ashamed of. You did a pretty good job, honest. I noticed you picked up a few of mine too! I often go back on my own work and wonder why it seemed pretty good on first pass, but poor in reality. Ohconfucius 09:51, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
• Perhaps we should consider moving the page to fr:wikipédia. Where do you think it ought to go to get noticed? Ohconfucius 10:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Closing Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy Ried

The way I interpret Wikipedia:Deletion process#Non-administrators closing discussions, is that a non-admin may close a discussion if there's an obvious consensus. If there're four "keep" votes and only one "delete" vote, I think that would be a consensus. Also, the nominator rather clearly withdrew from that discussion, so I saw no point in keeping it open, regardless of that one "delete" vote. I may be ignoring all rules, but I at least know what I'm doing. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 17:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

• If you look carefully at the link you supplied, indeed advises against closing anything which is not a "WP:SNOWkeep". The fact is that you have prematurely terminated a discussion, which I have occasionally seen been turned by a late influential argument. OK, it can always be renominated for deletion by a dissenter, but I think you will have missed the point. WP:IAR does not give you carte blanche to do anything you like, you are still obliged to follow consensus. Since your failed RfA, a number of editors have been watching you, and giving you helpful advice, so I would not bite them. As you claim to know what you are doing, then fine, I'll shut up, but please bear in mind that I am not the only one to have given you friendly advice on the matter. Ohconfucius 01:44, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

LSRfm.com Logo

Why have you applied US law to it when its an english logo?

Barry Carlyon 10:16, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

• From what I understand, wikipedia is subject to copyright laws of the united states. We use the US doctrine of fair use as a means of justifying the use of images such as corporate logos here in wikipedia, so although the logo is under UK copyright, we would be relying on a US disposition to display it legally. The other possibility of using the copyrighted logo would be to seek permission from the owners. Ohconfucius 09:03, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

• I am the current owner, but thanks for clearing it up, i appreaciate it is a slightly silly question

Barry Carlyon 09:43, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Image:Goma.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Goma.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)^(Talk) 06:31, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

OSCAR Radio

I notice that you have put my article up for deletion OSCAR Radio. Fair enough, but what is the procedure and what do I need to do to ensure that it is not in the future if we pass the relevant tests? I hope you do not mind me asking. A simple explanation would he helpful rather than being pushed to various sites, unless I am being totally dumb (which is quite plausible). Your help would be gratefully appreciated.

One other point, no a separate issue, as I am about to start at a new school soon, I notice that the new school's wiki page is being 'desecrated' with silly comments which are not appropriate, how can the Thomas Deacon Academy ensure that this is not the case in the future or reduce the chance of errors? I note that my old school Oundle School seems to have it sorted.

All responses of interest and experiences passed onto students.

Thanks

Dfcf 19:33, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

• I have made further comments in the AfD page which may answer some of your questions. In response to your other queries, I would say that at present, there is no easy way of stopping frivilous postings due to the open nature of wikipedia that modifications to certain articles being unrestricted. There is also no way to stop an article from being put under the deletion spotlight: AfD is one of the checks and balances of the system. Wikipedia's greatest strength is the open collaboration structure, but this is also the source of its major weakness because anybody can post anything they want, and ther are always those minority of individuals who have an agenda, or who do things irresponsibly. In the case of AfD, the best way is to ensure that your article "survives" is to make sure it is well-written, and properly sourced from reliable independent sources such as major news organisations. Featured articles and "The perfect article" are good places to start, as they are mean to reflect best practice in style, substance, and referencing. In the case of vandalism, your first course of action would be to put the article on your watch page, and revert any vandal edits you may detect as a result. Schools are frequent victims of vandal edits, as pupils have been known to post all kinds of opinionated and unverifiable comments, or attack edits, such as "Mr. Jones is a jerk", or "Joe Bloggs is cool". If vandalism is frequent (ie occur at least on a daily basis), you may request for semi-protection of the page. This will at least stop edits from unregistered editors, which usually is the bulk of vandalism. If further persistent vandalism is still occurring from the same registered user, you may then request he/she be blocked. You may be interested in creating a wikipedia group within the school to work on specific articles or project areas (preferably unrelated to the school itself, to ensure independence), as well as collectively watching an article on your school. Happy editing Ohconfucius 03:07, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your help on both counts. I am not sure what other references you need to OSCAR Radio. But having been the person running it for the past 10 years, I know all there is to tell, and perhaps you could help me overcome your problem with the article to ensure that it survives. There will be no reference to the BBC comment on the web, although it is a quote, and we did get a brilliant tour of Radio 1 from it. With more to come. Yes Sir Howard Stringer, Chairman of Sony is an OO, but he has put a lot of money into OSCAR Radio. Being a public school it is difficult for us to attract funding from local businesses, although we do advertise them on the station for a fee during the broadcasts. I also note that you are concerned about the short term RSL license as opposed to the long term ones that some schools have. There is a huge difference in these and it may be worth explaining them here. First of all, we could easily go for a MW low power (max 1W) long term radio licence from OFCOM, these are cheap, and only offer a range of the school grounds. However, when we decided on what to go for, we thought we wanted the best quality at the time (FM) and the most power allowed (25W). This is what we have done and achieved over the past 9 years. The investment in fees paid by the school to OFCOM and other licensing bodies is in excess of £10,000 pa or a total so far of £90,000. This as you can imagine is a big investment and the School has been happy to support it. We do operate an FM license (rare in schools) and we do it daily during the broadcast for 24 hours each day for the period (unusual in schools as the kit needed to run it properly is expensive), also the day to day running and monitoring is done by the students who take charge (unique in schools where adults tend to be in the studios monitoring what the students do and say - we do not do this, but have a duty student manager). The internet broadcast is online when we go on air, and an online archive is also available. For the FM frequency RSL we cannot go for longer as OFCOM only offer RSLs to schools and colleges in the UK. So we are at the max. We do get plenty of visits from other schools to see what we do and how we do it. Having been involved in the industry for 10 years, it is interesting to see it beginning to develop in the UK, and there is likely to be an explosion of school radio stations in the near future. In the schools environment we are seen by those who have looked to be an excellent example to those who are interested in joining our ranks. I am away on holiday in Nice for two weeks, but please feel free to comment and help point me in the right direction. This is my first Wikipedia article and I am keen to get it right. Wikipedia is one of my main sources of information, and as a teacher of ICT I do appreciate what you are achieving, also the help you have given and hopefully will give will be passed onto future generations of potential authors. Dfcf 15:07, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• David, I also genuinely appreciate what you are doing. You appear to confirm that OSCAR does not have the level of notability that is usually required for wikipedia. Although what you write is not controvertial, it is still insider's information, and so you would need to work on the sourcing. The article will still fail the verifiability test if push comes to shove (ie if it is subject to another AfD). I have seen a few University radio station articles deleted on similar grounds, so OSCAR is by no means "safe". I will leave the article alone in respect of what you have done for the project, and because of what bearcat said, but I consider it very weak "keep" argument. It's great that Stringer is prepared to put money into the project too, for the sake of his old school. Who knows, Stringer may be prepared to help with publicity, if he isn't doing so already. Perhaps you just need to be patient: you have put in a lot of foundation work, and its notability should increase beyond school project circles. What may not be ready for wikipedia today may be tomorrow, but to include an article in wikipedia in the hope of it achieving widespread notability may violate two other important parts of WP:NOT guidelines, specifically Wikipedia is not a soapbox and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Ohconfucius 02:07, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Antiquities and Monuments Office‎

Thanks for merging Antiquities and Monuments Office into another article. But I have to point out that it is not a department but an office of LCSD(Leisure and Cultural Service Department. Also, the Job Duties of the Office is quite different from the Antiquities Advisory Board. Please don't mix them up.(Please read the webpage http://www.amo.gov.hk/en/antiquities.php and http://www.amo.gov.hk/en/about.php for reference).

Usually, the Wikipedians add the merge tags on the page before merging the pages and then we shall discuss if it is suitable to merge the pages into one. I think you can try to do so.

Shrimp wong 14:53, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for pointing out the confusion on my part. It certainly doesn't help that the two, which have such similar names and created at about the same time. ;-) I don't quite see where they fit... I note the AAB has a brief paragraph in the AMO website. Should the AAB article perhaps be merged into the AMO article? Ohconfucius 01:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Your AFD Nominations

I think it would be much easier to people to comment on if all the entires were grouped together as it says over here. Its not fun to leave the same comment in five different entires Corpx 07:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for your comment. I know there are opposing schools of thought about the nominations, and it would have been simpler for me too. However, many people hate batched nominations, especially for biographies. I thought it would be the best way to avoid a train wreck. Ohconfucius 07:49, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Lexicon genetics

Lexicon genetics (Ref:User talk:Scottishancestry) has been recreated by User:Sensia25. Is it a major company or should it be nominated for deletion? Aeons | Talk 13:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

你好

I just saw your long posts on the Falun Gong talk page. I don't think you should stop editing the articles. I don't know what much of that was referring to though, about your edits not being appreciated and stuff--I could not check them all out. For my part, earlier on I just wanted to say something gently about deleting, but maybe I should have put aside some time and looked more fully into the edits and made some more sophisticated remarks in a friendlier and rather more engaging way.

At the least, I don't think a wholesale revert of good faith edits is ever appropriate, as happened to you in this case. I have not found a large amount of time these days to spend on the articles. They are all in bad shape and most of what you write on the talk page is true. The to-do list is very old. I don't even know who is seriously and conscientiously editing the pages now--no one I suppose. If you would like to collaborate, it would give me some motivation for spending a regular amount of time (like a set amount of hours on a weekly basis) in researching and writing and editing. I guess the first step would be to come up with a new to-do list for every page, then systematically work through them. This would accommodate different schedules and time constraints. I might do this anyway, and work on these things kind of slowly and steadily, but if you want to share ideas and things I think that would be a good idea and I would like it. It would be far better than doing it by myself.

What I thought would be great in such a crazy case like this is to follow the wiki manual of style "religiously", and make an extremely rule-abiding and even maybe boring set of articles. I would like to see these articles as featured, since to me the topic is extraordinary enough to deserve it. It would be great to have a month with nothing else to do but create the wiki articles from the bottom up. By the way, check out this top paragraph, like just to note, I think the writing about the claims and things is quite neutral and good, even though the content is obviously about the persecution etc.-- just pointing out this part as an example of what I think is quite okay.

As a side note, I have found that practitioners are an extremely eclectic mix of people with sometimes very different perceptions, attitudes and understandings. I quickly browsed through the history and can see what you mean with the good faith comment. I don't like to see those kind of accusations and unwelcoming comments either. I don't know from whither comes the paranoia. Maybe it is a combination of zealotry and the recent experience with Mr Luo and his companion--I am guilty of both these to some extent, too. You are very right when you ask where is the 真 善 認 --in looking through the edit summaries I had to ask myself the same question. Anyway, I think it would be a shame if you did not edit the articles anymore for some small incident of this nature. With this note I am also saying that if you want to make some kind of commitment to bettering the articles, that would be great, and that we could work collaboratively on a complete restructure of all the articles. As a downgraded version of this, if you do not want to make this a semi-longterm thing, may I request that I seek your advice on certain matters in the process of redoing the articles? It would be better if you wanted to invest yourself in the project, but for starters in either case, I would want to know about how you think the main article should be structured, in terms of sections, length, etc... Okay a really long post, so I will stop for now and look forward to what you have to say.--Asdfg12345 00:46, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. I am glad to have your feedback. I am saddened to see the article in the same dire need of work as was highlighted in the to-do list a year ago. It certainly does not help that the articles are the subject of edit wars like what I experienced, where people do not look and just revert because something was missing from where they put it. I did note what you said in your addendum last time that I should continue to make changes, and was encouraged to make some changes until they too were reverted with some paranoid claim of "vandalism", and then further being falsely accused by the same paranoid user. Perhaps the battles with Samuel Luo has left scars, but I would advise other FG supporters to chill out a bit more, maybe go and see a movie, or get a girlfriend. ;-) I am happy to continue working on articles where I am not made to feel unwelcome, and I sincerely thank you for taking so much time to engage me. I will pop in from time to time, provided that the rottweilers are put on a tight leash. In that vein, if you believe that I have been acting in good faith, it would be extremely helpful if you had a word with the editor who has been making groundless accusations against me. An apology is all I am after, to allow us to move on. Ohconfucius 01:57, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Okay, for myself I will try to establish a regular kind of schedule when I edit the pages. I can only sigh when I see a lot of this stuff. I guess the key is to just be steady and methodical, one piece of the puzzle at a time. I don't know what's with the accusations and overreaction. Maybe just a defensive mentality left from Samuel and Tomananda's longterm destruction campaign. Good faith editors making edits that are in line with wikipolicies should not meet with this kind of thing. Anyway, I will just try to do my own little bit and be more 堂堂正正. The first thing on my hitlist is that summary of the persecution on the main page. Related to this a bit, I think one kind of major thing is to standardise the main page's sections with how they relate to their respective daughter articles, and also make sure every daughter article is represented equally on the main page. Then just plod through the rest one step at a time.--Asdfg12345 09:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

• Maybe you can enlighten me: you removed a paragraph on your last pass. I know it has been removed previously, but cannot honestly see anything wrong with it. What is more, it seems to fit into the article, as it seems to explain some of the more fantastic things alluded to in the article. Ohconfucius 13:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

oh yeah no problem, you are talking about that Li Hongzhi one which first introduces the fantastic things like invisibility etc.? I imagine you are talking about that. I just took it out cause the same stuff was repeated a bit further down. I don't see any point repeating the same thing. It also seems a rather odd way to introduce the practice, if you know what I mean. I guess there are two issues here, and I will say them in their order of importance. The first is just about the repetitive thing, I don't think there's any point saying that stuff twice, and I thought i put in the edit summary like, it can be here or there, but just pick somewhere. The other thing is that I wanted to say earlier, you know, these articles and the contents of them are so extra ordinary, maybe it is hard to figure out a non partisan way of approaching them, or a neutral way, a way that does not already acknowledge or give priority to certain assumptions or worldviews or whatever. I think starting things off with the theoretical backgrounds section is a good idea. I wanted to suggest that one way of getting around this is to make the writing appear quite bland and very deliberately non-sensational. Li Hongzhi has said a large number of things that may easily be subject to a kind of sensationalism. I think maybe part of the challenge here is to present them without that element, at least deliberately. Listen, I won't write much more cause this is getting too long again. The bottom line is that I actually don't care if the invisibility and magic stuff goes there or not. If that section is functioning as an introduction of sorts (it is called "origins", right?) though it obviously has to present a more multifaceted understanding. The whole point behind it is morality anyway, the reason all these things exist, so there is some kind of need to be sensitive to the context of this and present things intelligently, taking those factors into account. Practically I would propose expanding that little section and giving a kind of account of the general metaphysical system Li Hongzhi is presenting, what he has said about higher dimensions etc.. This is not really present anywhere. It would be good to do this, at the same time being careful not to breach original research. I think the lectures have spelled the ideas out in a clear and concrete way enough though that it should be simple to avoid this. Okay, for now about that paragraph I am not too concerned. I would like to look at things with a more long term view, so I am just giving you an idea what I mean. If it is part of the "origins" then the origins would need to include a deeper account of things somehow for it to make sense to put that there. At the same time, if it goes there, I don't see why it should also be below, just like anything else. I trust your judgement for now anyway. Sorry to write so much. --Asdfg12345 14:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

quiero decir unas cosas

Pensé que seria mas divertida si escrito en castellano, y así puedo practicar tambien. Igual esperes muchos errores porque mi castellano ya es mal todavia. Quiero decirte que no debes formar malas pensamientos sobre Dafa por los malos actos de un practicante. Ya te mencioné que no hay una forma singular por practicantes de Dafa, y no son iguales. Tienen muchos distintos ideas, entendimientos y maneras de expresarse. No hay organisación o nada formal, así que cualquier persona puede representarse como un practicante; si hagas los ejercicios y leas los libros, significa que es un practicante? Realmente lo que me ha enseñado Dafa son solamente cosas buenas. Ya no bebo alcohol todo el tiempo, ni toma muchas drogas. Estoy tratando de sacar pensamientos negativos en todo sus aspectos, y sea responsable por mi propio vida. Este es algo muy serio y maravilloso. Si un practicante no se comporta bien, significa que todos los practicantes son así? Significa que Dafa en si mismo es así? No se muestra nada mas que el practicante en si mismo, y tambien que no se ha cultivado suficientemente, y tiene apegos en su corazon todavia? De hecho, ¿has leido los libros?, y has tratado de entender realmente lo que se enseña Falun Dafa? Es also serio y profundo. No estoy predicando por nada, porque este viene del corazon de uno. No debes pensar que Dafa es mal sobre el base de unos actos de un practicante singular--ni te mueves tu corazon por el. Dafa es algo completamente pacifica, abierta, libre y buena. Ves que estoy tratando de sacar las cosas malas que dicen la gente? Ya se lo que es Dafa, y para mi no se hace ningun diferencia lo que dicen ellos. Tampoco quiero dañar el wikipedia y tratar a promover y poner mis propios opinions. Parami, pienso que sobre todo lo mejor sería que estas paginas son completemente vacio de fallas, falsificaciónes, y que se siguen muy bien las políticas del wikipedia. Porque yo sé que es obvio al final del dia, sobre todo, que Dafa no es mal, es pacifica, y el persecución es un injusticia obvio y grande. Unas practicantes tienen sus propias problemas y apegos, pero no lo dejas que entiendes mal sobre Dafa, porque no es verdad, y la majoria no hagan cosas así y no se comportan así. Espero que entiendes lo que quiero decir. --Asdfg12345 01:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

my hat off to you! Indeed it was amusing to find you had written in Spanish I had to do a double take - my wikipedia screen was playing up this morning, and I pressed the refresh button just to make sure ;-). mi espanol no es si bueno que tu, entonces, para la expediencia, escrito en inglese. I do take your point that the behaviour of one editor should not reflect on the collective and one should persevere. We both agree that this needs to be a collaboration to make it a better article. But so far, it has been a frustrating journey, and I think you know most if not all the story. I would be concerned that while the good FG practitioners are busy making themselves into better people and are probably too busy to edit wikipedia, the bad ones wear a persecution complex so severe that they have to go charging around banishing all criticism of FG, and giving the rest a bad name. In terms of personal growth, we become better people by accepting our own faults and then working on our strengths. We go nowhere if we deny their existence.

From the articles' edit history, it is clear these skirmishes have been going on since the articles' creation, and is likely to continue indefinitely in my view unless FG or wikipedia collective do something to break the deadlock. The person in question appears not to abide by any of the principles of wikipedia, and should have the grace to leave of his own accord before he is expelled. I am quite sad that many a 'good' wikipedian have been hounded out because of the behaviour of just these minority. I have tried talking to him on the article's talk, and also on his own page, but he is ignoring me. Maybe I have been saying it wrong, but I have no wish to engage in edit warring with a few persistent POV pushers as two wrongs don't make one right, so I am at a loss as to what else I can do. Obviously I could escalate this within wikipedia, but I don't want to spend my time generating negative vibes and stress for myself. Wikipedia is big enough for us not to cross paths, so if I can enjoy myself working on other articles where the particular individual does not frequent, there is little reason why I should hang around here.

Maybe I will still further investigate the teachings of FG, which is what I would have naturally done in the spirit of writing a better article, had I not been so majorly put off. For me, it seems like the sensible thing to do. I thank you for making me think for a minute, and bring ing me back last time. I have enjoyed talking to you, at least you are normal and have a sense of humour, but please do not take this as anything personal. I will try not to hold my disappointing experience against FG. Ohconfucius 02:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

de nada, nos vemos amigo.--Asdfg12345 10:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Regarding your messages.

Friend,

I was very busy these few days with my internship in Microsoft R&D and several other things. I could hardly find time to read through the messages you had left on my talk page. And I sincerely apologize if I offended you in anyway. We have been facing till very recently a lot of vandalism and removal of very relevant material on the Falun Gong pages.

I would request you to please go through the following book.. http://www.falundafa.org/book/eng/pdf/flg_2006.pdf

and the nine lecture videos here.. http://www.falundafa.org/eng/media.htm#GUANGZHOU

All of the teachings are covered here. Please go through them and decide for yourself what Falun Gong is. I have been practicing Falun Gong for around 2 years and I can tell you, from my own experience, that Falun Gong is very good.

The CCP has spread a lot of mis-information and lies on Falun Gong and has tortured to death many innocent Chinese people and their families. I feel every good natured Chinese person must stand up against such cruelties being committed against their own fellowmen. What if our own family members were going through this, merely for striving to be good people and cultivate Zen-Shan-Ren?

As for the Epochtimes.. I live in India and have never read Epochtimes.. As far as I know, the newspaper was established by a group of Falun Gong practitioners who wanted to let others know the truth about Falun Gong and the brutal persecution.. when repeated requests were met with only increased persecution they were left with no choice. How can anybody with a conscience stand and watch as innocent good natured people are being tortured to death?

I hadnt read your messages on my talk page and I apologize again if I offended you. I'll put you a more detailed reply soon.. I just came back from my intern work and its already pretty late here.

Dilip rajeev 17:54, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Also wanted to tell you that I had done a revert again beore I read messages on my talk page and the article's talk page. We have been facing a lot of sock puppetry from a couple of users recently banned.

And am terribly sorry for the way I phrased my edit summaries.

Am now adding back that "quote farm" tag. But I do feel those statements from US HR and AI are very relevant... anyway revert back if you feel its inappropriate.. we can work from there..

Dilip rajeev 18:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

And I sincerely want to request you to go through the teachings of Falun Gong.. That way you can truly decide for yourself what Falun Gong is..

I have complied links to the nine lectures I mentioned in the previous post here, they form the central part of the teachings..

Lecture 1: http://media2.minghui.org/media/dafa/rm-en/L1.rm

Lecture 2: http://media2.minghui.org/media/dafa/rm-en/L2.rm

Lecture 3: http://media2.minghui.org/media/dafa/rm-en/L3.rm

Lecture 4: http://media2.minghui.org/media/dafa/rm-en/L4.rm

Lecture 5: http://media2.minghui.org/media/dafa/rm-en/L5.rm

Lecture 6: http://media2.minghui.org/media/dafa/rm-en/L6.rm

Lecture 7: http://media2.minghui.org/media/dafa/rm-en/L7.rm

Lecture 8: http://media2.minghui.org/media/dafa/rm-en/L8.rm

Lecture 9: http://media2.minghui.org/media/dafa/rm-en/L9.rm

Also please do go through the lectures and books here... http://www.falundafa.org/eng/books.htm . .. You may start with the book Falun Gong ( http://www.falundafa.org/book/eng/pdf/flg_2006.pdf ).. and the two lectures here..

http://www.falundafa.org/book/eng/sf1996.htm

http://www.falundafa.org/book/eng/pdf/europe1998a.pdf

"Of course, I imparted this Fa using the form of qigong, but in fact what’s included in it is huge. They are things that no one in history has ever talked about, and yet I reveal them. If you are able to earnestly read the book, Zhuan Falun( http://www.falundafa.org/book/eng/pdf/zfl_new.pdf ), you will find that it is incredibly precious. There are many, many secrets revealed in it, and even just a quick, superficial read through will bring a person remarkable benefits. The person will know in general terms how to be a human being. People who don’t want to do cultivation, however, will not see Zhuan Falun’s inner meaning nor its higher truths. But, what is inside it is simply huge, and can enable a person to cultivate to Consummation. And it is about more than achieving Consummation..."

- Excerpted from The First Fa Teaching Given in the United States ( http://www.falundafa.org/book/eng/sf1996.htm )

"The spread of this Fa in China has resulted in up to 100 million people studying and practicing it. The number of people in regions outside of China is also quite large. Why is that so, and why is it that the education level of those who are learning this Fa is relatively high? Many are noted individuals in intellectual circles. In many regions of China as well as other places there are people of relatively high social standing who are practicing. Of course, when ordinary qigong was first introduced to the public in China, most of its practitioners were older people and people with illnesses. So people regarded it as a type of physical exercise and something to help keep them healthy. Of course, qigong did discuss some supernormal phenomena that aren’t easily seen in ordinary human society, and this gave qigong an air of mystery, but that’s all it was.

Many people aren’t able to completely understand what qigong is about. Since the time Dafa was made public, I have unveiled some inexplicable phenomena in qigong as well as things that hadn’t been explained in the qigong community. But this isn’t the reason why so many people are studying Dafa. It’s because our Fa can truly enable people to Consummate, truly save people, and allow you to truly ascend to high levels in the process of cultivation. Whether it’s your realm of mind or the physical quality of your body, the Fa truly enables you to reach the standards of different levels. It absolutely can assume this role.

I just mentioned that many people are studying the Fa. People who are well educated are clearheaded and generally won’t learn something blindly. These people are usually rather steadfast once they learn the Fa because they know its preciousness..."

- Excerpted from Teaching the Fa at the Conference in Europe ( http://www.falundafa.org/book/eng/europe1998a.htm )

Dilip rajeev 18:26, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. It now seems to be a great misunderstanding caused by your schedule and quick visits to wikipedia when you had a spare minute. I do note the persistent vandalism, which certainly did not help matters. Indeed, most of us have day jobs. Thanks for the links, and I will find some time to look into the teachings. Ohconfucius 05:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I did that revert before I saw your messages and I am really sorry about it. I can only request you to be understanding. I have made an apology on the article's talk page too. Dilip rajeev 04:06, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

on Tsui Po-ko

I think this article is very close to B-Class. really my only suggestion would be to place an info box in the article

{{Infobox Criminal Organization
| name                =
| image               =
| caption             =
| founded on          =
| founding location   =
| founded by          =
| years active        =
| territory           =
| ethnic makeup       =
| membership est      =
| criminal activities =
| allies              =
| rivals              =
}}

I really should have rated this article a B to start with. Right now we are trying to play catch up with are rating system. As a preliminary rating many times we go by the Bio Projects ratings unfortunately these are not always up to date. I have gone ahead and re-rated this article a B. Thanks and keep up the good work. Jmm6f488 02:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, I have now inserted an infobox. Any other comments would be gratefully received. Ohconfucius 05:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Wahaha Danone

Hi! Thanks for contacting me. I will definitely help you with that article - if it's something to do with the economy of China, then it interests me :) I will copyedit the article and try to make any improvements. You can also get a broader range of feedback by listing it for a Wikipedia:Peer review. Cheers, Ronline ✉ 08:21, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks

TBN/Alaska radio TX's redirections

I have reverted all of these from redirects to TBN TV and Alaska radio translators back to their original articles. Each station, despite only being a TBN or radio network translator, has its own local significance and technical details, and WP:TVS (along with WP:WPRS for the radio stations) has encouraged a detailed writeup about every station no matter how small it might be, its use, and affiliation. If you have any concerns, please bring them up on the talk page of WP:TVS and we'll try to address it with you. Thank you. Nate 05:39, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

As for radio station translators, keep an eye on WT:WPRS#Alaska public radio networks to see what is decided. JPG-GR 06:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Questions

Hi,

I am an Assistant Professor of Information Systems at Boston College, and I am researching the development of the Wikipedia article on the Virginia Tech Massacre. You were among the top 2% of editors for that article, and I was wondering if you’d be willing to answer a few questions by email. Please also indicate at the bottom if you’d be willing to participate in a short follow-up phone/Skype interview as well.

All of your responses and your participation will be confidential. Please cut and paste the below questions and respond by email to gerald.kane@bc.edu to ensure confidentiality.

I appreciate your help on this project, and please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Please also let me know if you are interested in receiving a copy of the paper when it is finished.

Thank You, Gerald C (Jerry) Kane, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Information Systems Carroll School of Management Boston College 140 Commonwealth Ave 326 Fulton Hall Chestnut Hill, MA 02478

Questions: 1) On average, how many hours per week do you spend editing articles on Wikipedia? 2) Why do you contribute your time and energy to developing Wikipedia articles? 3) What types of articles to which do you typically contribute? 4) Why did you choose to become involved in the Wikipedia article on the Virginia Tech Massacre? 5) What was your primary role in the process of creating the article on the Virginia Tech Massacre (e.g. copy editing, fighting vandalism, contributing news, managing a particular section, etc?) 6) How was your experience with this article similar to or different than other Wikipedia articles to which you have contributed? 7) What were some of the most challenging issues facing the successful development of this particular article on the Virginia Tech Massacre? 8) What do you think were some of the primary reasons that this article was successful (i.e. cited in the press, nominated as a “featured article.”) 9) Is there anything else I should know about the Wikipedia article on the VT massacre? 10) Would you be willing to participate in a short phone/Skype interview to talk more about your experience with the article (if yes, I will follow up later by email to arrange it).

Alaskan Translators

If you need any help transfering the information from the translator pages to the parent station page, please let me know. Also, please check out my edits on the WNRN page for an alternative way to add the translators. Take Care...NeutralHomer ^T:C 08:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for your offer. Ohconfucius 08:38, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Tranlator merging

Man, you rock. Way to get those cleaned up so quickly!

Not sure if you've read, but I'm working on a nice standardized table template to handle translators in "home" radio station articles. Hopefully, this new method can get implemented into our WP:WPRS manual of style and prevent this craziness in the future. Take care. JPG-GR 16:59, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

• I was able to do it quickly thanks to Popup. I had already done the redirects once, so it was a question of finding the relevant version in the history, and revert to it. Ohconfucius 02:00, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Check out the template at work at WSAE. JPG-GR 17:21, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

• That's great work. I was thinking about such a table myself to consolidate the info, and when I had heard through someone's edit summary that some stations have maybe in excess of 200 repeaters, it got me thinking more deeply as to how and what should be presented in the main article. Whilst it is nice to have the detailed info, I was thinking that having the location power and the wavelength would probably be sufficient. Don't get me wrong, I think the table is excellent. However, don't mind me saying that two things concern me slightly: 1/ that the heading "call sign" should perhaps be modified to "identifier" or somesuch, because is the name ever broadcast? I don't think anyone in Battle Creek knows W222BB, but they will know WSAE from Spring Arbor; 2/I believe that the links in the table would tend to violate WP:EL in that a very large number of external links would be in the body of the article. We should consider if they could feasibly be replaced by one link "higher up" in the website's hierarchy, but in the 'External links' section as per the guideline? Cheers, Ohconfucius 01:58, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Ohconfucius! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. ^∆ 22:52, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

The Concordia Beacon

Ohconfucius, the The Concordia Beacon page may be deleted at your leisure. Thank you.

The Compassion Magazine

I just received a copy from a friend of mine. I felt there was a lot of information here you would find interesting. http://www.yousendit.com/download/elNMZGVWT01oMlUwTVE9PQ

Dilip rajeev 05:49, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Lim Por-yen.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thanks for uploading Image:Lim Por-yen.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 08:40, 25 July 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

• I only uploaded the file 30 seconds ago, and was preparing the rationale. I believe it is now covered. Ohconfucius 08:43, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks. David Mestel^(Talk) 08:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Wild Dogz

Your nomination of Wild Dogz for deletion has now been moved to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexis Y Fido. You may participate there. --Boricuaeddie 23:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Renaming & moving Columbia Records artists

I noticed that you moved and renamed this list.

Please be careful with such moves. It appears that you moved it without soliciting for editor community input. Also, the associated Talk Page and History from the previous version is missing. Dogru144 22:24, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

PS, this is the precise file I was referring to: Columbia Records artists. Dogru144 22:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

• My interpretation of the naming convention is that such a list should be named List of Columbia Records artists and not simply Columbia Records artists, which is why I redirected it to List of Columbia Records artists. I am not aware that I needed to solicit comments in order to follow official policy. Somebody moved it back, now we have two lists, one occupying each namespace. I am still unsure what the problem is, or that in fact I was part of it. I note from the talk page you favour a merger into List of Columbia Records artists, which is where the article would have been if my redirect had not been undone after I redirected it. Ohconfucius 01:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge protocol

Thank you for your reply. Really, I don't mean to sound snippy: Given that the wikipedia encyclopedia is a cooperative project, it is quite incumbent upon the contributor/editors to wait for a reasonable period, for other editors to chime in, before effecting name changes, removal of merge tags or effecting merges. On the other hand, I do appreciate that you left the List of Columbia Records artists intact. As I said on the Talk page, it looks more impressive in the table format. And by using the cut-and-paste-and modify method that I mentioned on the Talk page, you can add additional Col. recording artists.

True, it is not necessary to consult with other editors to follow wikipedia naming convention. However, it is important not to ignore previously existing articles that hold the same name that you wish to rename articles to. You can see, of course, that there was a quite large table of Col. artists in the previous/established article entitled List of Columbia Records artists. So, when you renamed a file with that name, you supplanted (in effect, deleted) another article.

It seemed, prior to this morning, that your edit/redirect had supplanted the existing table format. Again, no ill will intended, and I appreciate that you have left the established table form List in its established form. Sincerely, Dogru144 04:43, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

• I take your point, but would you kindly note that nothing was supplanted. There was nothing there at all before, but I had mistakenly referred to the page move effected in September 2006 as a "redirect", as a look at the page history will show it was moved to List of Columbia Records artists, history and all. As far as the last merge is concerned, I hope I have not missed copying over any names on the list now supplanted. I believe there's a slight problem as to whether, for example, Chuck D should be under D or C, but I'll let you guys thrash it out. Ohconfucius 04:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I would like to show my admiration for your tireless contributions to Hong Kong-related articles by giving you this Barnstar, which I hope you would kindly accept. Cheers. K.C. Tang 09:11, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

• Much appreciated, Thanks KC. Ohconfucius 10:05, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:Infobox hotel issue

Hey. Have taken a look at the issue and fixed it for you. It was a simple mistake of a field name mismatch in the documentation section, and you can see what I mean by looking at this diff. Cheers, Thewinchester ^(talk) 04:36, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

As a suggestion, take a look at Template:Infobox Airport to see how native names for locations are done on a different line. This will help improve your template even further. Thewinchester ^(talk) 04:41, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks very much indeed for your help. Ohconfucius 04:45, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

u seem like..

U seem like a really interesting person,can u leave me some link on my talk page..as i hope to maintain contact with you in the future (random i know) clcheung 06:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC) Wongdai

Re: Chungking Mansions

Hello Ohconfucius, to be truthful, I'd never even heard of Chungking Mansions until I came across your userpage and found it on your contributions to HK-related articles! Sounds like a pretty bad place. I am just a secondary school student, haven't been round this area or heard of it from my parents much! typhoonchaser 06:21, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

• It's a real dive, all right! I'm too scared to go in there. ;-) Ohconfucius 06:23, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

THANKS

thanks, I don't mind at all, on the contrary, I am happy,as I have been wanting to put some more links on my page,but haven't found the time.. clcheung 06:24, 11 August 2007 (UTC) Wongdai

Unspecified source for Image:HKArtsFest.png

Thanks for uploading Image:HKArtsFest.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 10:13, 11 August 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. OsamaK 10:13, 11 August 2007 (UTC)

Falun Gong articles

Ohconfucius, I wanted to ask your help in improving the articles.. there are a lot of issues that have been bothering people trying to work on the article.. for instance why is 3rd party opinion full of criticism and a disproportionate amount of the main page given to that? i apologize for conming to sudden conclusion but and please be careful not to work on vandalized versions.. the most obvious signs are changes to subtitles.. at other times.. CCP prpopoganda and carefully selected "soures" representing the samea re used to cover up critical information..I am requesting that the quotes from AI and US HR be kept on the persecution page to provide better context to readers. Organ harvesting happening in china is a horrible thing. I found it surprising that you would say Falun Gong practitioners are making "noise" about it? We are only asking good-natured people to help. How can anybody stand by and watch when such brutal crimes are being committed against innocent people? Dilip rajeev 10:04, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Many times the wiki articles have ended up as a mouth peice for CCP's lies.. i believe so many lives in China could have been saved only if we could make the articles here neutral and make them reflect the truth.. Rt now I was thinking of putting in some material from www.falsefire.com into the section on the tiananmenn incident... If you want to discuss anything it would be much more convenient to chat over messenger dilip_rajeev@msn.com .. I'd be really glad if I could have a conversation with you :).. at the moment my work is driving me nuts.. but do let me know if you can find time... Dilip rajeev 10:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC) Dilip rajeev 10:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

• "Noise" was used figuratively. I apologise if you took it wrongly. I will try and pay attention to vandalism. However, I would say that I have found some (not all) of PCPP's edits do add something positive to the article, but all the articles are so polluted that it takes quite a bit of time to work through each one holistically, and not just bits. You will note that I have taken out quite a few repetitive sentences, which I have found when reading through the whole text or trying to group together related points. Ohconfucius 10:17, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Dilip, please read WP:NPOV and WP:V. You have repeatedly deleted sources critical of FLG. Regardless of your views, WP is not a place to spread your own opinions on FLG. Here at WP, verifibility comes before the truth.--PCPP 10:14, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

PCPP, `Notice the title changes you made in the main page. Why is it so similar to what Samuel was doing? And your arguments echo samuels! My edits dont violate any wikipedia policy regarding verifiability or NPOV. Things get quite funny when you start putting forward silly statements like "the word "persecution" is a POV". Could you take a look athe definition of the word in a good dictionary and let me know know what exactly you find "POV" about the word. Dilip rajeev 11:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Dilip, check my edit history. I joined in December 06, and my edits largely consists of non-FLG related edits. Samuel Luo was banned because of his refusal to discuss with other editors and use of sockpuppets, not because of his views. Your sledgehammer reverts of articles only contributes to the problem, and your deletion of pro-CCP sources only tiles the POV towards FLG. Please read WP:Assume good faith before you make judgments on others, and also read WP:Words to avoid. It's really up to the reader to judge whether the Chinese crackdown on FLG consists of a persecution. According to WP:WTA

""Example: an article title "Israeli terrorism" inherently implies that Wikipedia takes a view that Israel's actions are considered terrorism; similarly for "Islamic terrorism". By the way, both of these exist as of August 2006, and redirect to Zionist political violence and Islamist terrorism, respectively. In the former case, the actual article title does not include the word "terrorism"; in the latter case it does, and might better be retitled Islamic political violence.""--PCPP 02:56, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not about every users "views". Friend, do a search "persecution" on wikipedia. Your lawyer-like arguments are rather pitifully lacking in logic! "Terrorism" and "Persecution" are two very different words, friend! Get an oxford dictionary and look up the definition of the latter! 220.226.25.176 11:31, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Certainly, we may "talk" but not after the material is delted and replaced with OR.. Till now you through your, I believe u have been creating a pretty bad impression about yourself amon other editers.. I dont understand why you insist on labelling peer reviewed source "minority view", "POV" etc. Why do you replace entire paragraphs with filtered CCP propoganda? When the whole world and all HR organizations of repute on this planet and all major goverments agree this is a persecution.. Why do you insist on presenting propoganda directly sourced from the persecutors as "encyclopeadic"? Your statements like " Persecution of falun Gong refers to the ban of falun gong and "allegged" crackdown " in my opinion is far from what may be considered "encyclopaedic". This persecution is a fact. If you dont agree, you may take a small trip to china and try declaring yourself a Falun Gong practitioner. Falun Gong is very good and practitioners cultivate Zhen-Shan-Ren. Why do you chose to stand against good?? When we stand against what is truly good what are we turning ourselves into??

Please dont consider this a simple emotional issue where you felt offended that I reverted some edits of yours. For that matter, you have re-worked paragraphs and which were the product of months of work. What matters here is objectively presenting the truth. Not putting in muderers' propoganda, in such a manner that it may easily mislead the reader.

Since Falun Gong is very good when the truth is presented objectively things will naturally seem so. If you yourself can get out of the CCP propoganda framework and think, you will know it is true. I had asked you before and am a requesting you again to please go through the teachings... then you yourself will understand what Falun Gong is... And that way you will certainly come to see how decietful and poisonous the CCP propoganda is.Dilip rajeev 10:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Your reverts

Please do not insult me by saying I don't know how deceitful and poisonous CCP propaganda is. Please also try not to reason or infer what other FG editors think about me. I don't honestly give a xxxx what they think, what matters is the community at large. I believe what they will see is that I am trying to work cooperatively, and trying to adhere to WP and guidelines. You are the only one accusing me of wearing blinkers. I am not blindly pursuing a certain version of the truth, nor am I making pretty broad brush reverts to legitimate edits from others who are not (and by that I am deliberately ignoring the sockpuppet edits. Anyway, Wikipedia is not about disseminating the truth: "the neutral point of view is a point of view, not the absence or elimination of viewpoints." You said "Am sorry.. but nobody is obliged to figure out what exact changes you made and revert those alone when .. you do a few grammatical changes along with deletion/replace with OR of well sourced material", but no, you are not at all repentant from what I can tell from your attack above, so I feel that the "I'm sorry" was perhaps used disingenuously. You should try saying "with respect" next time, or simply "rubbish!" if you are in the mood to be more direct. I can see that you are gone past caring what I write, and will revert everything I do, but I am asking you to at least try.

I also believe you are completely missing the point of what I am trying to achieve, and your denial of what opponents of FG or CCP are saying is denying you wiki-enlightenment, and I won't even mention Zhen-Shan-Ren. Just because something is sourced does not mean it is relevant or deserves the column inches you may wich to give it. Wikipedia is not about being exhaustive about every point of view. Please refer to WP:LEAD to see the "correct" presentation of the opening paragraph. You may think I am soft-soaping the persecution by that introduction, but feel free to modify it, and do not revert it to a completely unorthodox text. I am not going to defend myself anymore about Porter, as I have already stated why don't think it has a place. Ohconfucius 12:33, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

I construe from your last edit revert of Persecution that you think we are done talking. Please don't cut off channels of communication. Ohconfucius 13:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Falun Gong and live organ harvesting

Hello, a quick question: where is the discussion ongoing for the deletion of page Falun Gong and live organ harvesting? Thank You, --HappyInGeneral 16:23, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Friend,please realize what you are removing is well sourced information!! Restoring it doesnt count as a "Revert". And statements such as "persecution refers to ban and "alleged" toruture" etc.. Isnt that OR?? where does that definition come from? The persecution of Falun Gong is an international issue and all international organizations of authority on ther issue, refer to it as a persecution. Further, in my opinion, it sounds like a high school essay start.. I dont understand what was wrong with the previous lead? I thought it was rather well written and providing good context! And why do you insist on putting on CCP propaganda statements without background or context into the lead? Isnt that again a violation of Wikipedia policies? Dilip rajeev 16:50, 16 August 2007 (UTC)