User talk:Difference engine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, Difference engine, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! -Phoenixrod 20:11, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you![edit]

Meissen-teacup pinkrose01.jpg Thanks for expanding Zu Dashou, it was great work! I've nominated it for DYK, see nomination page. Thanks for your contributions! Zanhe (talk) 02:22, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Zu Dashou[edit]

HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Battle of Dalinghe has been accepted[edit]

Battle of Dalinghe, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

MatthewVanitas (talk) 23:43, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Kong Youde[edit]

Hi Difference engine, thanks for yet another well-written article! I've submitted it for DYK. Please see Template:Did you know nominations/Kong Youde. -Zanhe (talk) 00:29, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Scale armor[edit]

Actually, now that I think about it, I believe the armor represented in the Terracotta Army falls not only into the category of lamellar, but also coat of plates.Pericles of AthensTalk 23:03, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

I'm not too familiar with the coat of plates, but the description from the article makes it sound like the plates have to be inside the garment (like brigandine), not visible on the outside like the typical Terracotta Army pictures. By the way, thanks for all the photos you've uploaded of Chinese historical artifacts. I've been looking through Gary Lee Todd's other photos and have finally found examples of some of the Chinese weapons that currently don't have good pictures on Wikipedia. Very useful. Difference engine (talk) 23:51, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Kong Youde[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Writers Barnstar Hires.png The Writer's Barnstar
Thanks for your sustained effort in creating quality articles, including most recently Kong Youde and Shanghai Jewish Refugees Museum. Keep up the great work! Zanhe (talk) 19:41, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
I've nominated Shanghai Jewish Refugees Museum for DYK. See nomination page. -Zanhe (talk) 19:42, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, Zanhe. I love when I add some new content and then there's a little flurry of activity on it as the more experienced editors go in and refine it. It's comforting. -Difference engine (talk) 18:27, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Shanghai Jewish Refugees Museum[edit]

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:21, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Choy Li Fut Page[edit]

Difference Engine,

The recent claims you have made against the Cailifo / Choy Li Fut page have been discussed at great length nearly four years ago and resolved by administrative level personnel at Wikipedia. You compare the CLF page to Wing Chin page and claim that the use of adjectives is "pea cocking". That is an absurd claim. This is one of the oldest Shaolin-based systems. It has vey complex moves and varied applications and techniques. You are using a straw man argument by claiming that a single book which was purposed to claim martial arts originated in India has debunked the Shaolin claims. The fact is that the Shaolin was one of the first MA systems developed in order to train many people over an extended period of time. The fact that you state this is an insignificant style of kung fu reveals that you have a limited understanding of and exposure to the martial arts. As a result of your statements it appears that you may have ulterior motives to damage this page and its contents.

I and collaborators spent nearly 3 years developing the page from a ridiculous rambling of sketchy claims to substantial fact-based information. Since that time others have tried to use the page in a variety of manners including, as a URL list farm, self-promotional with links to their own websites and altering information to serve their own purposes. As you should be able to appreciate, it is very difficult to maintain when there are those who do not do the proper research and see personal gain or recognition. This can be very frustrating.

I would like to propose that you back off of the "suggestions" to remove or damage the page further. One of the persons who helped with the original effort has a full copy of the original page and it can be reinserted. This should remove 99% of the items you claim to be unfounded or something else. I would appreciate if you would allow us sometime to fix the page. Thank you. Clftruthseeking (talk) 19:33, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for replying, Clftruthseeking.
  • I provided examples from the article that were obviously peacock terms (I did not say "pea cocking", so I don't know why you have that in quotes -- do you know what quotation marks mean?). The phrase "like all great martial artists" is very much in the vein of the example given in WP:PEACOCK about Bob Dylan being "a brilliant songwriter". Do you not see the similarity? It is also clearly not WP:NPOV. This is an encyclopedia, not a personal blog. Our own opinions as editors should not be stated as facts. I listed the other articles (karate, wing chun, and silat) because they are all higher quality than this one. Note that those articles are rated C-class, and this one is rated start-class. It is good to look at better-written articles for guidance on how to improve our own work.
  • I do not doubt that it has complex moves and techniques. I never said otherwise. So why are you bringing that up at all? You seem to think I am attacking Choy Li Fut. I am not. I am criticizing the article. In fact, one of the things I said was that the article could use more information about the techniques. There is almost nothing about them in the article, which is mostly about lineage.
  • You say that it is "one of the oldest Shaolin-based systems". Again, why are you bringing this up? It has nothing to do with my criticisms.
  • I'm not sure what you're trying to say about "the Shaolin claims", or what you think I am saying about them. I'm sorry, but your English is poor and I'm having a hard time understanding you. At any rate, Shaolin was quite obviously not one of the first martial arts systems by any stretch of the imagination. Chinese martial arts are documented as far back as the Zhou dynasty. Martial arts training systems have existed for all of recorded human history. Did the swordsmen and archers of the Warring States not have martial arts? I guess everyone fought with no training system at all for thousands of years, and giant armies waged war with no techniques until Shaolin came along! Ridiculous.
  • I thank you and your collaborators for improving and expanding the page. I agree with you that protecting it from self-promotion is important. It also has nothing to do with my criticisms.
  • You have not addressed at all the seemingly fraudulent citations I pointed out in my comments on the talk page, nor my criticisms of the sources used for historical information in the article.
--Difference engine (talk) 02:23, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Ohel Rachel Synagogue[edit]

Hi! Thanks for editing this article. It's good to see these articles being edited in English. I am recently in Shanghai. As a matter of fact, I did upload a recent image of this synagogue a year ago which I can see you guys have already used in your article. Sadly, this synogogue is now used by an organisation which doesn't allow the public to take a tour in their compound. So I could not take a close shot at this synagogue back then. But I could ask the security whether I can get in for just a tick to take some pictures again now that you guys need it. --Livelikerw (talk) 13:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Oh, no worries. I knew you weren't. Actually, I know exactly how you feel. When I was editing article about architecture, I always wanted a clear and close shot of these buildings. But the sad thing is many of these buildings are not accessible to the public, like this synagogue. --Livelikerw (talk) 11:48, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Ohel Rachel Synagogue[edit]

Harrias talk 14:42, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Wudang Chuan[edit]

Friend, sorry to bother you, but I have been working on the Wudang Chuan page for 10 years. Although you do not believe Alibaba to be a credible source, the information in the Alibaba article is clearly taken from and is highly relevant to the WP article. I do not wish to enter a quarrel with you over this, and ask you to leave the article reference as it is. Clearly, the author is knowledgeable and credible, and the original article cannot be found. This is an area that I ask you to leave up to those with high knowledge of Wudang martial arts, such as me. Sincere thanks for your cooperation. TommyKirchhoff (talk) 20:12, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Tommy. Thanks for dropping by. The fact that is being referenced has plenty of other cites. I want to add that I do not disagree with the statement itself. However, the article is just a fluff piece for an event at the Shanghai Expo. It only briefly mentions the fact being cited. It also contradicts the wiki article by claiming that taijiquan came from Wudang. That's not adding to the credibility of the article. But if you're set on keeping it, I won't remove it again. --Difference engine (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Imperial hunt of the Qing dynasty[edit]

Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:06, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Imperial hunt of the Qing dynasty[edit]

That's a brilliant job on Imperial hunt of the Qing dynasty.Truly impressive.--Wetman (talk) 12:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I had actually originally planned to write a more general article summarizing Qing military rituals and ceremonies, but the imperial hunt on its own ended up being a richer topic than I expected. --Difference engine (talk) 19:34, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Macartney Embassy, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Grand Canal and Tongzhou District (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Lu Xun Park (Shanghai)[edit]

Thanks from me and the project Victuallers (talk) 20:46, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Day for night[edit]

Symbol question.svg Hello! Your submission of Day for night at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 20:33, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Day for night[edit]

Gatoclass (talk) 12:02, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)