User talk:Jim101

This user may have left Wikipedia. Jim101 has not edited Wikipedia since 1 April 2019. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Hello, Jim101! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! ~Kylu (u|t) 07:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Wikipedia tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images
Getting help
Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and guidelines
Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The community
Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Writing articles
Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review
Miscellaneous
User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

♠TomasBat (@)(Contribs)(Sign!) 02:14, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My Talk Archives

Archive1(Beginning - Feb. 8, 2010)

翻译[edit]

对不起，刚才没看见你的请求。如果是广告的话，在英文维基里是一点都不符合知名度条件。列表必须符合知名度条件才能保留，不过最好的办法还是把列表转成句子，然后在看转换完的东西有没有意义。Jim101 (talk) 21:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

没关系。可问题是这些商业广告代言的列表是在艺人的条目里面的内容，中文的关注度里只限制条目的建立没限制内容。--113.112.150.173 (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

在英文维基里知名度限制条目和内容，因为不合理的比重是关注度指引的一个部分。Jim101 (talk) 21:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[1]英文ｗｉｋｉ有这个吗？--113.112.184.63 (talk) 22:06, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

有，不过在一般情况下都没有人用，因为不合理的比重和合知名度是一回事，那就是内容和条目都必须靠可供查证方针给证明才能放在维基上。广告在条目里，即使没有被知名度盖住，你也必须用可靠来源来证明这些广告符合不合理的比重条件。Jim101 (talk) 22:18, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

在[2]和[3]中有无相关语句支持？--113.112.202.238 (talk) 19:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2说不违反不合理比重的东西才能放在列表上。3说列表必须"有意义"。 Jim101 (talk) 20:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

不过3不是一个好的标准，因为关键字是"有没有意义"。条件太松。Jim101 (talk) 20:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

不过最后还是得是做列表的人来证明自己的列表"有意义"。Jim101 (talk) 21:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

我在客栈发帖会后跟你说一声，英文维基的材料你可以准备一下，我知道那些艺人粉丝肯定会投反对票，他们有“死忠团”的优势，机会似乎只有一次，我们只能以理服人。麻烦了。--113.114.204.237 (talk) 15:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.114.204.237 (talk) 15:14, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

几天后有时间我来看一下这个问题。Jim101 (talk) 16:07, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

好，原本也没打算这样，有这些时间。--113.114.195.7 (talk) 01:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello JIM101[edit]

New to this, not sure if you will get this message or not, but will try anyway. Found your "title" while looking at the Korean War website, then the history revision section which said you were a "Korean War" historian. What is needed is for someone who knows about the types of tanks used by US Marine Corps Tank Battalions during the Korean War in the Wikipedia Websites "(USMC) 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and 6th Tank Battalions."

WWII, Vietnam, and Desert Storm are already filled in, mostly. But it seems, no one has filled in the Korean War tanks. In addition, no one seems to know what USMC Tank Battalions were in Korea.

For your information; It's believed 6 USMC Tank Battalions served in WWII and only 3 served in Vietnam. Those are known and already mentioned in the articles, not completely though.

In addition, the only US tanks used in Korea were the US M24 Chaffee light tank, M4 Sherman medium tank, M26 Pershing medium and M46 Patton medium tanks. However, there is a rumor floating around that the M41 Walker Bulldog light tank served there too, which is believed doubtful, as it is known that that was a Vietnam War tank used by the South Vietnamese Army. You're expertise would be able to clarify if the M41 light tank was used in the Korean War, and what tanks the USMC used in the Korean War.

One last thing, the USMC did NOT have tank divisions or brigades, they only had battalions (58 tanks per battalion give or take). Only the USA had tank divisions and brigades. If the Marines had the same thing as the army, then America would have had TWO ARMIES, and naturally congress would have had to disband one of them. Thanks in advance —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.196.47.106 (talk) 02:48, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your compliments, but I must humbly admit that I am not a Marine Corps historian, thus I am not familiar with Marine Corps organizations and equipments...may I redirect your query to Marine Corps experts such as User:Cla68, User:Looper5920 and User:bahamut0013. Jim101 (talk) 03:07, 24 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

细菌[edit]

新年好，[4]英文有这方面的吗？我准备很快推荐至中文首页“你知道吗？”，就快完工，不知有其他方面的说法？欢迎你编辑一下。--113.112.208.105 (talk) 20:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

拜年了。官方面来说，美国从来没有使用过细菌战。联合国军历史从来没有提起这个事。很多历史学家说这是共产党在撒谎。Jim101 (talk) 21:37, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

在朝鲜战争细菌战的条目已经弄好了，还是谢谢！

关于试行[5]，邀请投票，无论你的意见是什么。－－113.112.177.215 (talk) 22:00, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

在[6]的条目已经弄好了，还是谢谢！过年小红包[7]，祝早生小维基人。－－113.113.137.165 (talk) 20:26, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Unsan[edit]

Hello. I have copy-edited this article, and now I have nominated it for Good Article status and can help with the process. I haven't started working on Battle of the Ch'ongch'on River and it could be awhile before I get to that one. I would recommend you try to find someone else to edit it more thoroughly in the meantime. —Ed!^(talk) 20:38, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

巴祖卡[edit]

感谢您修正这个翻译错误。哎，我现在只有高中英语水平，把翻译想得太简单了，我差点误导了好多人。还是感谢您帮助我们纠正错误，祝您天天快乐。--思源如宁 (talk) 02:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding Zhang's book[edit]

You mentioned Zhang's Red Wings over Yalu at Zh-Wikipedia. His book is a good source with some flaws, just like other books in any fields. For example, the number of total Tu-2 lost in his book does not match the open sources from China. On the other hand, Russian authors also present their own source and research.

I am not saying Zhang's book is not good or should not be referenced to, just express my 2 cents that under current atmosphere, the best we can do to write articles regarding China is to provide reference from different sources with little judgment. Just my 2 cents. You can either reply here or to Zh's page. -Cobrachen (talk) 14:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I brought up the book, I meant use Zhang's book to provide the basic description/judgment on PLAAF in Korea, then use other sources to fill the number void. The reason why I proposed this is because Zhang's book is the only book that is accepted by western scholars in PLAAF research. It's not just as a matter of providing information, it is also a matter of assigning weight to each sources.

Anyway, on that article, my basic advice is just use US sources just to write US information, use Russian sources just to write Russian story, use Chinese source just to write Chinese story. Just rely on Chinese sources to write US/Russian story and vice versa is a huge bias that should be avoided. Jim101 (talk) 16:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. Zhang's book is the only one source in English so far with pretty good reference from various sources and he has some channels to get records from PLAAF. There are no other printed or on line sources are as solid as this book for now and it's a sad truth.

However, if some editing is going to remove sources like you mentioned (US source for US events, etc) and replaced something only from China, than hard to continue without dispute. Let's all hope we do not see tis happen ofter.-Cobrachen (talk) 15:57, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Korean War battles[edit]

Hi. I just thought I'd let you know that I've been working extensively on the Korean War battles beginning at the UN intervention phase. My goal is to move chronologically from the beginning of UN participation through the entire war, improving each battle article as much as I can. Right now Battle of Taejon is up for Featured Article review while Battle of Pyongtaek is up for A-class review. If there's anything you can do to help with these, it would be much appreciated. I will continue to try and help you as much as possible with your pages, and if there is anything you need with them, also let me know. Thanks! —Ed!^(talk) 16:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

第三次汉城战役[edit]

[8]"第三次汉城战役"等同于"抗美援朝战争第三次战役"吗?--121.33.247.74 (talk) 09:06, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

第三次汉城战役不等于抗美援朝战争第三次战役，因为朝鲜人民军在原州市的战斗也算抗美援朝战争第三次战役的一部分。第三次汉城战役是抗美援朝战争第三次战役西线。Jim101 (talk) 13:05, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

谢谢，之前你对于列表的翻译我也看到了。第三次汉城战役没跨语言链接？时间有错吗？－－113.113.204.0 (talk) 16:27, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

没有跨语言链接是因为没有人在英文维基写这个条目，中文维基没有错误。Jim101 (talk) 18:59, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

我的资料中的抗美援朝战争包括朝鲜人民军的参与。－－113.112.161.248 (talk) 19:47, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

《抗美援朝战争史（第二卷）》，第181页，第二段。朝鲜人民军第一军团在西线，朝鲜人民军第二军团在东线。Jim101 (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

加条目里。我不能担保我的书中没有排版笔误没加上去。另你有空修正一下那些错误的跨语言链接。--113.113.162.241 (talk) 20:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Human element[edit]

First of all, kudos for improving information on the Chinese side in the Korean War articles. I try to do the same thing with the Pacific War articles for Japan. Anyway, regarding the human element, if you look at the FA articles listed on my userpage, you'll see that in most of them I'll include a quote or two from one of the participants in the event. A quote or two is all that is necessary, because the article is supposed to be encyclopedic. The quote is just to give the reader a taste of what the event was like for the participants.

I notice that the Battle of the Ch'ongch'on River, which is looking good, by the way, has a lot of quotes in it. In my opinion, the quotes you have separated in the article should be in quoteboxes, like this. I think quoteboxes should be used to break up walls of text when not enough images are available. You appear to have enough images for that article, however, so one or two quoteboxes are probably all that you'll be able to find room for. Then, somewhere in the text, you might include one "I was there" quote in paragraph form from either a UN or Chinese soldier, or both, like I did here. That should do it. Cla68 (talk) 23:11, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

邀请投票[edit]

你好，在下第一次参选奖项，正在进行拓荒专家奖候选[9]，由于一些莫名其妙的票目前支持票可能还差一些且完结期已近，现邀请您投票，但无论您投的是什么票，如有不明欢迎给我留言，谢谢。－－113.113.134.221 (talk) 10:42, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For You[edit]

		The Barnstar of Diplomacy
		For proposing a compromise at the Battle of Taejon FAC. Without it, the article may not have become a Featured Article. Keep up the good work! —Ed!^(talk) 00:05, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. Jim101 (talk) 02:49, 10 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Urumchi riots[edit]

Would you care to comment on my suggestion at Talk:July 2009 Ürümqi riots#OhConfucius' edit? Thanks, rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found a copy of the book you were mentioning online here. I'll try to take a look at it to sometime soon. rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:21, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Letter at Talk:Battle of Osan to Reagan[edit]

Dear Jim, Thanks for the citation clean up. Sorry I took so long to get back, but I just could not find that magazine in the mess I call my files. There is a Volume and Issue number -- which I added -- but no ISBN for the magazine issue. Sorry. Also, sadly the official of the veterans of Task Force Smith, Bill McCarthy, has passed away. They sent that letter to anyone and everyone in the defense publication field. And only EAGLE printed it. Would it make it more professional if I were to scan the cover of that issue of EAGLE and the page with the letter? Also, I will check back in about five days. I have a long drive to Maryland my wife is dragging me to a wedding <GRIN>. Jack--Jackehammond (talk) 19:14, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of the Ch'ongch'on River[edit]

Hi, I passed Battle of the Ch'ongch'on River as GA with pleasure. It enlightened me on many issues, beyond the topic of the article, that for me it is a seminal work. Thank you so much for writing it the way you did. Best wishes, Xtzou (Talk) 17:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

SAIC source for PLAAF aircraft[edit]

I've got no issues with your edits and I'll endorse them if it's any help. Vedant (talk) 02:56, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One thing though, for the Su-30MKK/MK2, the SAIC source states that the 127 is an amalgamation of PLAAF and PLANAF figures. Since these organizations are separate, I would appreciate if you could make that distinction. Vedant (talk) 03:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, I've no issues with the source provided at J-10 and unless a more up-to-date source exists for fleet size, will use the Janes estimate as the primary reference for any future PLAAF/PLANAF/ROCAF edits. Vedant (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for this, I was looking at my watchlist and accidentally hit the rollback option for this article. I have since corrected the error. Vedant (talk) 15:38, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are now a Reviewer[edit]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Karanacs (talk) 03:28, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Third Battle of Seoul[edit]

On July 12, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Third Battle of Seoul, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

Thank you for taking up the fight I started a year or so ago with Marine Corps Zelots. You have truely done a wonderful job rewriting this article. I still side with the men of 3Bn 7IN in that their forgotten task force (Dog) was part of the fight by freeing 1/1 Marines up to attack hill 1081 because My dad was there. I am a former Marine and Soldier but I believe in telling the history correctly and without bias. Thanks again. Meyerj (talk) 01:09, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Zhang Jihui[edit]

On July 23, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Zhang Jihui, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Milhist A-Class and Peer reviews Jan-Jun 2010[edit]

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Jan-Jun 2010, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Ian Rose (talk) 00:16, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply] Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste `{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}` to your user space

NK Division commanders[edit]

Hi, Jim. As you know, I've been working on the Battle of Pusan Perimeter project, and I have hit a problem finding the names of most of the ROK and NK division commanders for the battle. As I am adding them to their respective lists on the Battle of Pusan Perimeter order of battle page. I have the names of the NK 3rd, 4th, and 6th Divisions, but I can't find the names for the commanders of the NK 1st, 2nd, 5th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 12th, 13th and 15th divisions during the battle. Likewise for the ROK Capital, 6th and 8th divisions. Do you have any resources that could help me out? Thanks. —Ed!^(talk) 19:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Imjin River, etc[edit]

Look Jim, I need another argument like I need a hole in the head, but what you are proposing seems nonsense on stilts to me.
You seem to be saying (correct me if I’m wrong) that you are unhappy with the BotIR page because the American forces aren’t mentioned enough, so to remedy this you want to (a) move what is there now to a new page (BoGH) and (b) re-write BotIR to give the Americans a bigger role.
Is that actually what you want to do? Or have I misread it? Xyl 54 (talk) 16:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

about "中国第五次战役"[edit]

HI. You moved the title of this article to "中国第五次战役", according to the material of US Army. Could you provide a reliable source to me？ THX —Preceding unsigned comment added by Coekon (talk • contribs) 22:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Frozen Chosin Memorial[edit]

Jim, posting this note on your talk page as you seem to be the main contributor to the Korean War Chosin battle. Would it make sense to add a section at the bottom of the article about rememberence/memorials of this battle in the "forgotten war"? A new memorial in Forest Park, St Louis, MO for the battle was dedicated today. I have a great picture of living members of the "The Chosin Few" gathered around the memorial if that is of interest. Apparently I don't have privlidges to upload to wikipeida - but I'd be happy to e-mail to you if you are interested. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drherrick (talk • contribs) 01:35, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Something for you[edit]

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period 1 April-30 September 2010, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Roger Davies ^talk 08:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply] Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste `{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}` to your user space

DYK for Hero's Medal[edit]

On 14 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hero's Medal, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:04, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Meritorious Service Medal (China)[edit]

On 14 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Meritorious Service Medal (China), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

— Rlevse • Talk • 06:04, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hey thanks for tossing the extra sources on the Logistics at the Battle of Pusan Perimeter article. I don't know that an article of this type has ever been attempted and I appreciate all the extra sources I can get relating to it. —Ed!^(talk) 19:24, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for First and Second Battle of Wonju[edit]

On 16 November 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article First and Second Battle of Wonju, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the French Battalion's bayonet charges at the Battle of Wonju impressed General Ridgway to encourage all American units to conduct bayonet fighting during the Korean War? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

NK Division Commanders[edit]

Hi. I've been wanting to create some articles about the NK division commanders during the Korean War. They fall in the guidelines of notability on WP:MILPEOPLE but I can't seem to find a single image of any of them. Do you know any sources that might have images I could use? —Ed!^(talk) 16:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nominally I'd think Lee Kwon Mu is the one they'd have the most information on, but everyone who commanded the divisions in combat (on more than a temporary basis) would also work, so I'd also be interested in Pang Ho San, Lee Yong Ho, etc. —Ed!^(talk) 17:29, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I put together a little info for Lee Kwon Mu finally. I know you had a little info for me to add, if you know of anything else, feel free to throw it in there. What I have is about all I know, and I've got my hands full with other things anyway. —Ed!^(talk) 04:08, 1 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did the Korean War Actually end?[edit]

Hello Jim101 since you are one of the primary contributors to Korean War articles i thought you might be interested in joining the current discussion on the Korean War talk page regarding whether or not the Korean War has ended and whether or not the various incidents along the border since 1953 can be considered part of the Korean War. I would much value your opinion on the issue. The current discussion can be found here [[10]] Thanks!XavierGreen (talk) 20:34, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

你好[edit]

http://sinai.blog.163.com 我是中文维基百科的义sinai，以前你帮助过我，以上是我的博客

Battle of the Samichon River[edit]

Hello again Jim. I have left some comments on the talk page as I have found another source which supports you assertion that it was the 46th Army not the 47th (and have now made some changes to the article to reflect this). If possible can you please have a look and let me know what you think? Thanks again. Anotherclown (talk) 22:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist A-Class and Peer Reviews Oct–Dec 2010[edit]

		Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your good work helping with the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Oct–Dec 2010, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. AustralianRupert (talk) 06:42, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply] Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste `{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}` to your user space

For you[edit]

		The People's Republic of China Barnstar of National Merit
		For your relentless and extremely high quality contributions to articles relating to China during 2010, especially its military contributions to the Korean War. —Ed!^(talk) 07:01, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ed and Happy New Year! Jim101 (talk) 15:30, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Something for you[edit]

		The Original Barnstar
		Please accept this award in recognition of your excellent work on a large number of Korean War articles, including Battle of Kapyong, First Battle of Maryang San, Battle of the Samichon River and Battle of Chongju (1950). You have helped to ensure that they are balanced and accurate and have been a pleasure to work with. Thank you greatly for your assistance, especially for finding Chinese sources and images. Anotherclown (talk) 23:24, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks guys, if you need something for reference, just whistle. Jim101 (talk) 23:31, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

I read your edits at Lang Lang, I think this may develop into a political storm for Obama. Anyway, please have a look at User:Arilang1234/Sandbox/Battle on Shangganling Mountain, maybe you can add content to it and turn it into a wiki article? Just to let you know, on 郭兰英 there is a video file of the original movie soundtrack, maybe you can use it somewhere? Arilang ^talk 23:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uhm, there is already an article on Battle on Shangganling Mountain and My Motherland with the exact same content...what exactly are you trying to add? Jim101 (talk) 00:13, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your info, I did not know both articles had been created. Anyhow, about the term 豺狼, in My Motherland, the English translation is "Jackals", and in Lang Lang, it has become "Wolves". Do you think "Jackals" is a more suitable translation? Arilang ^talk 00:28, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't do direct translations if there is RS available, and the two sources I have on Chinese perception of US translate the word as "wolves". I'll replace the translation from the books then.

Oh, btw, I think that video clips may be a copyright violation... Jim101 (talk) 00:34, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The video file is from commons, if there is copyvio problem, it is commons problem, not wikipedia problem. Arilang ^talk 00:55, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look at this video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94NBsS9xCOE&feature=related

03袁腾飞讲朝鲜战争01：十七国联军.flv Arilang ^talk 04:44, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the fact that He called NKPA was full of Chinese (which is a racist remark against Korean refugees living in China from 1900s to 1945 or the South Koreans kidnapped into the army)...he is pretty much accurate. Although I would prefer more established books that already repeated the same ideas 15 years ago such as Chen, Jian (1996), China's Road to the Korean War: The Making of the Sino-American Confrontation, New York, NY: Columbia University Press, ISBN 9780231100250 and Goncharov, Sergeĭ Nikolaevich; Lewis, John Wilson; Xue, Litai (1993), Uncertain Partners: Stalin, Mao, and the Korean War, Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press, ISBN 9780804721158. Jim101 (talk) 05:09, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

From Chinese perspective, Korea had been part of China anyway. Since Ming Dynasty, Korea was a vassal state of the dynasty, and during Qing Dynasty, Yuan Shikai was the governor of Korea. When reading Chinese history, it is necessary to look back at least 500 years, unlike Western history. Arilang ^talk 05:23, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, one of the biggest criticism of China in Korean War history is the "Middle Kingdom" disease, and racism did played a part in Chinese thinking in the Korean War. Jim101 (talk) 05:32, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New article[edit]

Hi, please have a look: User:Arilang1234/Draft/The Korean War in Colour, I think it should turn out to be a good wiki article. Arilang ^talk 08:17, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May Offensive[edit]

Hello your contributions to Korean war are immense and thank you for that! I was going to start a new page on the Chinese May offensive but the sources as you say concentrate more on the April. The similarities between this and the German spring offensive in 1918 is quite surprising. Later I will start it off.Pfifer11 (talk) 09:24, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unit cohesion - who is "George"?[edit]

Nice edits, thanks much -- though it would lend some credibility to supply some other sources, either to establish the researcher consensus or (if consensus is doubtful) to balance with other POVs. My main concern for now, however, is that a simple "George" isn't much to go on. (Maybe for an expert in the Korean War, like you, it is, but this is a general encyclopedia article.) Could you supply some more detailed bibliographic data for this source? Yakushima (talk) 05:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, sorry -- Cancel that. I just now saw where Hrafn had edited out your otherwise-better citation style. Yakushima (talk) 06:49, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

unit cohesion - ideas about organization?[edit]

See [11]. Your thoughts much appreciated.

Hello, Jim101. You have new messages at Talk:Battle of Kunuri.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Clarification[edit]

Good day, Arequest for clarification has been filed with Arbcom relative to a case in which you participated or might be affected by. Communikat (talk) 17:49, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Pakchon[edit]

Hello again Jim. I have been doing some offline development on the Battle of Pakchon article and was hoping you might be able to assist me please. The current article lists Wu Xingquan as the Chinese commander in the infobox (cited to Chinese Military Science Academy 2000, p. 359). As I don't have this source (or read Chinese) I cannot look it up myself so I was wondering if you knew if he was the commander of 117 Division or was he one of the higher formation commanders? I just want to be specific in how I include this information in the new article when it is finally completed. Also is there any chance you have some pictures of Chinese forces involved in this battle? It would be great to include something other than the usual pictures of PWs or casualties which unfortunately is all most Western sources have available to them. Many thanks in advance for your help. Anotherclown (talk) 01:42, 17 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

G'day. Great work again with your recent additions to this article BTW, I've just made a very minor change by removing the wikilink to company (military) as it was already wikilinked in one of the paragraphs above. Cheers. Anotherclown (talk) 21:48, 11 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of Korean War flying aces[edit]

Hello again. Just wanted to say thanks for your help on identifying the Chinese flying aces on this page. Incidentally, I was hoping to make this article a Featured list but the number of redlinks on it presents a problem. I was hoping to create as many article as I could but unfortunately I'm having a hard time finding reliable english sources on these pilots. Any way you can help would be appreciated. —Ed!^(talk) 00:18, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Jul-Sep 2011[edit]

		The Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured article reviews for the period Jul-Sept 2011, the Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Buggie111 (talk) 17:35, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Thunderbolt (1951)[edit]

Thanks for your work here. I stubbed it up a couple of days ago, but it's not really my field, I know almost nothing about it, and there's not much on the bookshelf to help. One of my old neighbours in Bristol until a couple of years back was a Glorious Gloster - I acquired his bookshelf. It was strange to see him, a chap who'd otherwise never left the SW of England, on Remembrance Day with comrades in arms from the Turkish Brigade (now living in England and running a kebab shop) - guys who otherwise had almost nothing in common, except through Korea. Good bloke - he and his wife used to go out dancing every week, right into their 80s. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:23, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese People's Volunteer Army order of battle[edit]

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Chinese People's Volunteer Army order of battle, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Chinese People's Volunteer Army order of battle. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 03:21, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Chinese People's Volunteer Army order of battle[edit]

On 13 January 2012, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chinese People's Volunteer Army order of battle, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that over three million Chinese military and civilian personnel served in Korea during the Korean War? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Chinese People's Volunteer Army order of battle.You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 13 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Oct-Dec 2011[edit]

		The Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured article reviews for the period October–December 2011, I am delighted to award you the Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Buggie111 (talk) 17:11, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

George A. Davis Jr.[edit]

Hey, Jim. I was wondering if you had any comments for the George Andrew Davis, Jr. FAC, since you've had some input for the article in the past. Thanks! —Ed!^(talk) 04:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

关于丹东是否遭受过美军的轰炸[edit]

诚然，美军无意轰炸丹东，因为美国不想将战争扩大化，更不想让中国牵扯进来。但是，事实就是事实，侮辱了中国的领空，即使是把丹东当作是朝鲜产生的误炸，也应被历史记载。

政府机构可能会编造谎言，但是老百姓不会。你看看丹东的老年市民是怎么说的，如果仍不相信，可以去一趟丹东，亲自问问人家。

60年过去了，中国已没有诋毁美国的动机，但是这样的采访仍然出现，说明不是谎言。--222.35.185.149 (talk) 17:16, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

另外，如果阁下坚持删除中·朝来源的参考文献，我也将删除一切美·韩来源的参考文献，并仿照阁下的消息留一条“Find a Chinese source to confirm it before I listen to this bullshit.”。--222.35.185.149 (talk) 17:21, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Read some (maybe 10) books from UK/South Korea/Australia/China and US, buy a brain and get some decent education. Stop this non-sense until you get some non-Chinese source to backup your claim. Jim101 (talk) 17:20, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please be civil. Instead of aimlessly attack, please point out your explaination. --222.35.185.149 (talk) 17:28, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, when "propaganda" and "stupid" are the only words to describe the situation, it is hard not to piss people off. Jim101 (talk) 17:45, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you evade the problem? Why don't you direct confront it. If you think all Chinese media lies, you may have an interview on Wang Dezhu, then citizen of Dandong, in yourself. If you do not believe those witnesses, I wonder what Dandong people will say to you. --222.35.185.149 (talk) 17:39, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't like aimlessly attack. --222.35.185.149 (talk) 17:53, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe the people of Dandong don't understand the concept of false flag operation? And the fact that I don't have to refute evidences presented by the Propaganda Department of the Communist Party of China? Jim101 (talk) 17:55, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, any source? At least I've given 2 source concerning US misbomb of Dandong, while you didn't present ANY source showing NK use a false flag to bomb Dandong. Plus, the second news was not written by the Propaganda Department. --222.35.185.149 (talk) 17:59, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You present two sources under the control of Propaganda Department of the Communist Party of China, and you believed that a organization famous for disinformation is presenting the truth. So either you are really stupid, or you are a troll. Jim101 (talk) 18:02, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All governments have controls of domestic media, only a matter of degree. Even the United States media made many disinformation. So either you're a troll for the UN Command or your brain is not able to understand grey (i.e. there's only black and white in your brain). --222.35.185.149 (talk) 18:08, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, at least US don't have a Propaganda Department of the US Government and 50 Cent Party. Either bring more source to the table or get out. At least I got this much more knowledge than you. Jim101 (talk) 18:16, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ELITE; and again WP:CIVIL. 222.35.185.149 (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, classic Wikipedia:Wikilawyering. But then again WP:CIVIL really shouldn't apply...unless you are a involved with 50 Cent Party and Propaganda Department of the Communist Party of China, otherwise how could you be so defensive (and on my talk page no less)? Jim101 (talk) 18:34, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

无语。。。Can you not be that WP:assume bad faith? --222.35.185.149 (talk) 18:36, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Only when you stop presenting the information released by Propaganda Department of the Communist Party of China as fact, and stop abusing WP:NPOV and WP:FRINGE. Otherwise, this is a waste of my time. Jim101 (talk) 18:43, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let me explain it this way:

I've list two source (though partially-controlled by government) showing that US have bombed Dandong. It didn't claim US do that contiously or by mistake.
You've not present any source showing that US have excellent pilot and coule never misbomb a bordering city.
Nor have you present any source showing NK attack Dandong by false flag.
Every government have control to their domestic media, though of different method and degree; the US controls its media looser, and China stronger, but both country have different degree of freedom of speech. Even press of North Korea have limited freedom of speech. (You might ignore the freedom in China and NK, since it seems you have a black-and-white brain and cannot understand grey)
Now the most important: there was a bomb in Dandong, NO MATTER COMMITTED BY KOREANS OR AMERICANS, there were victims, so Dandong must be listed in loc-of-war. If you believe NK commit false flag operation, you may write it in the article, but Dandong is still a loc-of-war. 222.35.185.149 (talk) 18:59, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let me explain it my way

Propaganda Department of the Communist Party of China controls ALL forms of information released to mass/public media, and it is their job to carry out the "War to Resist American and Aid Korea" propaganda campaign to make Chinese hate American invaders in the 1950s. Unless you are citing a internal government circulation on the issue, the information are controlled by them as part of the propaganda. The fact that you fail grasp this detail just shows how hopeless in arguing with you really is.
This is a pure violation of WP:SYN, and a violation of the concept "innocent until proven guilty". Maybe I should assert in Wikipedia that China is trying to conquer the world and make you to prove that ALL Chinese politicians have no ambition to do such thing.
You also did not present any evidence that US bombed Dandong from a non-Propaganda Department of the Communist Party of China controlled source. The point of contention is whether US bombed China or not, not whether there is a false flag operation.
Irrelevant, you just use this excuse to justify not finding a third party source to confirm Chinese claim. The world is not divided between West and China. Not even trying to finding a neutral party to confirm your finding while still trying to present it as truth is no better than you are lying through your teeth.
Then find a books that that defines China as a theater in the Korean War. Furthermore, WP:RS forbids on making outrageous assertion such as false flag operation or "covert bombings" without a high quality source. Jim101 (talk) 19:18, 2 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A request for help[edit]

Hello Jim. I see that you helped clarify some Chinese translations about LaRouche a few years ago. Would you be so kind as to translate these quotes and tell me something about the papers that published them? Thanks very much in advance. Waalkes (talk) 20:43, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

社论说，美林公司北美地区首席经济学家戴维·罗森堡在2006年底就指出，“美国房地产市场的暴跌将会是2007年经济展望中最大的风险”。民主党著名异议人士林登·拉鲁什也早就预言，以美国为代表的世界金融体系已经崩溃，如果政府不及时救市，后果将不堪设想。然而，美联储却没有采取应对措施。 http://gb.cri.cn/19224/2008/10/04/3365s2268021.htm CRI online Oct 4, 2008

美国著名经济学家、独立总统候选人林登·拉鲁什曾多次成功预言了巴西、俄罗斯和亚洲的金融危机。“参议院这种带着帝国主义气息的单方面对抗行为根本无助于问题的解决，是丧失理智的行为！” 拉鲁什以预言家的口吻告诉记者，要解决美国经济出现的问题，必须动大手术。他说，当今世界的金融和货币体系已病入膏肓，必须彻底重组，而不能仅仅是加以改革。http://world.people.com.cn/GB/41217/3317833.html Apr 13, 2005

Done, please check the talk:Lyndon LaRouche. Jim101 (talk) 22:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User:Buckshot06/List of divisions of the People's Liberation Army[edit]

I'm using some of your excellent preexisting work here. Please add and improve if you can. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 03:54, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your additions. Regarding the 36th and 37th Armies, I assume these units were used as manual labour only - they weren't specialised airfield construction engineers, surely? Thanks again, and please do add more if you get the chance. Also, do you know what happened to the 2nd - 10th Corps/Armies? Buckshot06 (talk) 05:21, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly know nothing of PLA outside of the Korean War, aside from some background knowledge on the unit lineage of some elite PLA units involved in the Korean War. Jim101 (talk) 22:29, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your artillery division additions Jim. The thing is about this article is that it's properly referenced to reliable sources, in contrast with many Chinese military articles - except for the artillery and railway engineer divisions. Would you mind please adding the sources? Cheers and thanks Buckshot06 (talk) 21:45, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Military history project membership[edit]

G'day Jim, I'm not sure if you are already a member or not, but if you aren't I'd like to encourage you to become an official member of the Military history project. Your work around the Korean War and topics relating to the Chinese military is of great benefit to the project. If you wish to join, you can do so by adding your name here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Members (apologies if I you are already signed up there). One of the benefits of signing up is that you will receive the project's monthly newsletter – The Bugle – and you can also vote in the project's current co-ordinator election. Of course, there is no requirement for you to sign up, and if you chose not to, your work will still be well received and you will still be able to access the project's infrastructure. Thanks for your contributions to the encyclopedia. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:27, 23 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 2[edit]

Make it easier and don't respond to every detail of whatever he comes up with. The main point is "no, we've been over this, end of story." Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 ^{> haneʼ} 00:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

CCP[edit]

Eh? So was the communist party also responsible for making the KMT settle thousands of Han refugees in Xinjiang before 1949? I also consider insinuations that I advocate for the communist party as a personal attack. If you want to know my orientation, I am pro KMT, and the KMT fought a war against Uyghur communist separatists after moving han refugees into Xinjiang. (I do not advocate for my political orientation while editing wikipedia). The KMT also cracked down on seperatists harder than the CCP and planned massive settlement of millions of Han into the Ili (Dzhungharia) region of Xinjiang, which is exactly what the CCP does.

go and read this uyghur separatist document. uyghur seperatists hate both the KMT and CCP, any kind of chinese government is evil to them, Chiang Kai-shek and the KMT (nationalists) are cursed even more than the CCP, just like mongolian protestors stated they wouldn't care less if China was democratic (not ruled by CCP), they would just hate any kind of chinese rule.

I urge you to stop looking at issues in terms of "CCP says X", so I take the Y side against X.

Furthermore, the Uyghurs did not migrate voluntarily into Dzhungharia. Not that you give a crap, but just for FYI, after the Qing imperial government conquered and massacre the Dzunghars, they forcibly moved uyghurs from the tarim basin into dzhungharia to settle the land, along with han and other ethnic groups. I never implied that the uyghurs voluntarily took over other people's land. Both Han and uyghurs are immigrants who were deported into Dzhungharia by the Qing to safeguard it from Russia.

This comment is not a continuation of what should be added to the article, I'm not discussing that here trying to shift the venue, this is about your accusations to every user you perceive to be pro CCP.Rajmaan (talk) 03:35, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All I have say is this source, which you also cited the same author (Bovingdon) in your sandbox...noticed how you only mention that Uyghur defect to Soviet Union due to propaganda a noted in page 19 of the document, yet completely ignored page 18 about Xinjiang Production Corps, and page 23 to 28 on government mandated immigration on a draft article about the history of Xinjiang ethnic composition. So what else I can say to you? That you are just, fair and a good testament about the honest and truthful nature of human beings, and I am wrong to question your judgement? I'm done talking to you. Jim101 (talk) 03:51, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You also need to check the edit history of pages more closely. I let other people edit my sandbox if they constructively contribute. My focus was never on PRC migration, thats the very reason why I asked an experienced editor to contribute in that area. The only migrations I edited are about Qing and I never edited about Bovingdon. The only thing I know about the CCP's mandatory migration in Xinjiang is that they avoided settling han in uyghur land.

the PRC has migrated nearly the entire han population only to Dzhungaria and avoided settling Han in native Uyghur areas like Kashgar and Yarkand. Until all those millions of han actually start showing up in native uyghur land, then your personal political agenda of trying to pin an ultereior agenda is nonexistent. That you can say Uyghurs can claim Dzhungaria and forbid han from moving there is your personal opinion, and is neither objective in academia nor real life, which is why we don't say that here. The Qing, KMT and CCP were being very lenient to uyghurs in deliberately avoiding settling han on uyghur lands and only settling them in Dzhungaria, only people with political agendas try to portray otherwise. The fact China unified the uyghur lands (tarim basin) and dzhungaria allowed the uyghurs free acces and immigraion to Dzhungharia, which is why a certain person was born in Dzhungaria rather than her ancestral hometown in Khotan. Goodbye.

Rajmaan (talk) 04:32, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kapyong again[edit]

Thanks Jim [12]. I wasn't sure how many of the Chinese comds to remove. I'm pretty sure you may have suggested this a couple of years ago but I seem to have had a different opinion then! Have a good day. Anotherclown (talk) 07:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Korean War[edit]

Hi Jim,
Apologies for the misunderstanding on the Korean War page, I'm glad it's been satisfactorily sorted out. I just wondered, seeing as your interest seems to be in the Chinese side of the conflict whether you might be able to add anything about the Chinese involvement in two KW battle articles I've written (the battles at Haktang-ni and Chatkol)? I've only got the Belgian sources which give no mention at all to the Chinese except for the body count. Even if the army in the approximate sector could be added, that would be a major gain! All the best, --Brigade Piron (talk) 17:25, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help - particularly the picture! Access to Chinese sources is an excellent advantage! If I have some time (and when I have the books to hand), I'll take your advice and try to get it to GA standard. I'm a bit busy working through Belgian WWII topics at the moment. All best, ---Brigade Piron (talk) 15:45, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim

I regret that I've only just seen your comments on my talk page - for some reason, I didn't get notified. Anyway, you make some very good points! Ironically, the sort of historiography around the Belgian participation is incredibly micro - believe it or not, in the dozen-or-so publications I have focusing on the Belgian involvement, they don't so much as mention the operational context for Haktang-ni, nor the American supreme commander.

It seems to me that Haktang-ni was a sort of probing operation by the Americans - moving the Belgians to the other side of no-man's land seems to have had very little point (it would seem), other than to gauge the Chinese strength and forces there, testing the feasibility of a wider advance in the area. Unfortunately, since nothing says this I cannot cite it.

About Chatkol, it seems that the Chinese were conducting an equivalent of combat patrols directed at outposts, rather than determined all-out attacks on the front line. Obviously I don't have sources to support that either, but in fairness, it is hard to gauge the strategic aims of the enemy from a trench in front of them - Albert Crahay (I/C of the contingent) is my best source.

I'll keep my eyes open for sources on the Wonju article and see what I can do.

All the best & thanks again! Brigade Piron (talk) 08:14, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Contrib-zh1[edit]

Hello, Jim101. You have new messages at Template talk:Contrib-zh1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 17:14, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation[edit]

我观察到您曾在志愿军五次战役的条目编辑历史中有过贡献，特来邀请您前往zh:Talk:第五次战役_(志愿军入朝)#建议改名：“第五次战役 (志愿军入朝)”→“志愿军入朝作战第五次战役”页面参与讨论，希望您能给出意见，谢谢。
Noticing that you have made contributions in the pages about Chinese army in Korean war, I'd like to invite you to join the talk about moving the titles of these pages. This is the link. Sorry for my poor English, and thank you. 太虚乎 (talk) 12:44, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Korean War#Aftermath[edit]

Hi Jim, I hope that you are well.

I wondered if you might be able to take a look at the Aftermath section of the article and see if you can substitute the POV content on Chinese memory of the Korean War with something a bit more neutral and well sourced? There's been a discussion on the talk page about the now-rephrased first sentence of it, but in my opinion, the whole paragraph is problematic. Brigade Piron (talk) 08:19, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Sun Shenlu PLAAF.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Sun Shenlu PLAAF.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:05, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:China capture Seoul.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:China capture Seoul.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:25, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:China Crosses Yalu.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:China Crosses Yalu.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:25, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Chinese 47th Army Korea.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Chinese 47th Army Korea.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:26, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Chinese 79th Division at Chosin.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Chinese 79th Division at Chosin.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:26, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Chinese Air Force Korean War.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Chinese Air Force Korean War.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:26, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Zhao Baotong PLAAF.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Zhao Baotong PLAAF.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:42, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Wang Hai PLAAF.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Wang Hai PLAAF.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Li Han PLAAF.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Li Han PLAAF.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Fan Wanzhang PLAAF.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Fan Wanzhang PLAAF.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:43, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Chinese at Chosin.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Chinese at Chosin.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:06, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Chinese at Kapyong.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Chinese at Kapyong.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:06, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Chinese defend Maryang San.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Chinese defend Maryang San.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:06, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Cooper Force tank.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Cooper Force tank.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:07, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:Korean War at China border.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Korean War at China border.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:23, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:US POW Kunuri.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:US POW Kunuri.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 01:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:US POW Kunuri.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:US POW Kunuri.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:08, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Korean War at China border.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Korean War at China border.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:11, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2014 Kunming attack[edit]

Hi there, I'm writing to you because of your past involvement with the Urumqi riots in 2009. There was a major knife attack in Kunming. Death toll somewhere between 29 and 34, about 140 injuries as of most recent reports. It's looking likely that the attack is associated with the Uyghur independence movement although the situation is obviously cloudy. Editors with experience working on Han / Uyghur conflict would be appreciated to make sure we stick to WP:RS and avoid WP:RECENTISM while this situation unfolds. Simonm223 (talk) 16:52, 2 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Hill Eerie[edit]

Since you know quite a fair bit about the Korean War, do you think this article can be improved with reliable sources? Currently it's full of uncited claims, and relies on a limited number of sources. --benlisquare_T•C•E 13:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What seems to stand out for me are the strength and casualty figures, which are presently uncited within the box. I'm not sure whether they're valid figures, but someone's just forgotten to leave a reference, or if it's something that's just put up there. --benlisquare_T•C•E 03:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Korean War infobox death figures... again[edit]

This seems to be a recurring theme, but over at Outpost Harry, I noticed that the article claimed, without citations, that 500 to 700 US and Greek troops managed to kill 4,500 PVA. Finding these numbers suspicious, I had a look at the article history, to find that it was inserted by a random IP in 2011. Are any parts of this article actually verifiable? I'd say 80% of the entire page is unsourced. --benlisquare_T•C•E 18:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Spring Offensive[edit]

Hello Jim101. Not sure if you have seen it yet but another editor has recently created an article for the Chinese Spring Offensive. Overall, my impression is this is a valid article and a good addition, although I found quite a few errors and I'm a little concerned I may have missed others. Given your knowledge of this area is there any chance you might be able to run your eyes over the article to fact check it at some stage? All the best. Anotherclown (talk) 10:27, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Imjin River Casualties[edit]

Hi Jim. Sorry for the confusion but the excerpt in your own source reads:

"This is the estimated casualties suffered by the Chinese 63rd Army alone. Chinese 19th Army Group's total casualties may be significantly higher."

So 10,000 is not an estimate for the entire battle and the casualties suffered by the 19th 'may be significantly higher' than 10,000. So how unfair is it to say '20,000+' in total (10,000 + >10,000)? 23,000 has been claimed in several documentaries I've seen.Z07x10 (talk)

Thanks for getting back to me. So I take it the fact that the existing excerpt says 'may have been even more' instead of 'were estimated to be in excess of' causes the problem?Z07x10 (talk)

Disambiguation link notification for October 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kunu-dong, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Kunu-ri. 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) 09:01, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Battle of Sangju(1950)[edit]

Thanks for providing constructive criticism, unlike many editors, you provided ways the article can be improved. My edits were an unsourced mess, and as such should have been removed.

I will use the sources you mentioned next time to provide a more neutral and well sourced page, with sources that provide accounts of the war to replace appleman's, until then appleman's prejudiced accounts of the war will remain on the article, for the time being. Can't allow him to take away the honor of my grandfather and the men and women who served in the korean war just because of the color of their skin.

Cheers, and keep on fighting the good fight. Your doing an amazing job on wikipedia! also you may have noticed there was a double-post.....my bad.

BamakoEdit3 (talk) 04:59, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Wang Hai PLAAF.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Wang Hai PLAAF.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:02, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
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) 13:50, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Chinese Meritorious Service Medal 1.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Chinese Meritorious Service Medal 1.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Chinese Meritorious Service Medal 2.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Chinese Meritorious Service Medal 2.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:19, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Chinese Meritorious Service Medal 3.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Chinese Meritorious Service Medal 3.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:20, 14 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Hello, Jim101. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Li Han PLAAF.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Li Han PLAAF.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:18, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Heroes Medal 1.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Heroes Medal 1.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Heroes Medal 2.jpg[edit]

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Heroes Medal 2.jpg. 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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:31, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message[edit]

Hello, Jim101. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message[edit]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago[edit]

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:55, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]