User talk:Rjanag/Archive7

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

The following is the archive of User talk:Rjanag for August to December 2009.

Most recent archive

1: August–October 2008
2: November 2008
3: December 2008
4: January–February 2009
5: March–April 2009
6: May–July 2009
7: August–December 2009
8: January–May 2010
9: June 2010 – present


tag, so when the browser sees it it thinks that's the end of the background-color thing and ends the archiving. I have also noticed this problem with embedded div tags on other pages; it's kind of annoying, so I'll leave a note at WP:VP/T to see if anything can be done about it. Anyway, in this case I thought the div tags in the template were doing nothing so I removed them to fix the AfD page, but didn't realize that would create other problems. For now I've just converted the quote template in the AfD to a <blockquote></blockquote>, which will work as a quick fix for most cases, but the better solution will be to figure out how to prevent div tags from interfering with one another, so I will look into that. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 01:11, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

That does seem like a pain in the butt. Hopefully a solution can be discovered in which the templates cannot interfere with each other. Anyway, thanks for (temporarily) fixing this. ;-) Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 01:25, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

re: b-day

Thx, and happy Friday 13th to you too. - Altenmann >t 16:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

External editing

Thanks for the heads-up on editing the source in an external editor. Is there some way to do this, however, as it's pretty difficult to find your way through pages and pages of mark-up without a search function? BarryNorton (talk) 19:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

If the page is long, I just use the search in my browser to find the specific comment I want to reply to after I click the "edit" button. If the markup is intimidating, the Wikipedia tutorial explains most of it. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 20:06, 13 November 2009 (UTC)


[65] - Ottava Rima (talk) 23:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice (it looks like now we're both having the experience of people digging up ancient, and questionably relevant, diffs in current disputes...). I may not respond immediately because I'm not sure yet exactly what to say, but long story short I don't agree with Voceditenore's and Moreschi's wording of this 'principle' or their interpretation of the civility policy, so once I've sorted out my thoughts I will try to leave a comment. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 01:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Ping. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 17:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you very much for your birthday greeting.

Disruptive behaviors by User:Monkh Naran and others

Hi, Rjanag, if you're active, could you look into this blatant violation of WP:Talk, WP:SOAPBOX and WP:NPA by new editors named Monkh Naran (talk · contribs) and Pertook15 (talk · contribs) as well as GenuineMongol (talk · contribs)'s gross incivility. I deleted some rant[66] that have nothing to do with the ongoing disputes on a map and content regarding 13th century Korean and Mongol relation. However, Monkh Naran (talk · contribs) reverted to include such offensive attacks including mocking ethnicity, and false labeling of "vandalism" with threats. I've been attacked by the users like this[67][68][69]. I warned them and tried to calm down[70], but well...I got this treatment.User_talk:Caspian_blue#Materials_from_User_talk:Gantuya_eng. Would you look into the situation? Thanks.--Caspian blue 17:03, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I also found out an odd thing. The user appeared to support to delete the article of Mongolia during Tang rule several month ago [71] when all Mongolian editors appeared to voice out the same view at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mongolia during Tang rule, and his other occasions are also similar. I think there must be off-forum or the account is an alternative one to avoid scrutiny or SPA. They disrupt Wikipedia by resorting to personal attacks and soapboxing.--Caspian blue 17:11, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


Hi, Rjanag. This user is constantly removing the sourced information from the articles Samad Behrangi and Turko-Persian tradition without any discussion. If you check the talk pages of these articles in which i contributed the most, you'll see that there is no comment from this user. However, he/she's blindly removing information and also stalking. Regards, E104421 (talk) 22:35, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Please ask another uninvolved administrator to look at this. I do not deal with Alefbe anymore and, frankly, I am never pleased when people come to me asking me to block their enemy just because I warned that person months ago. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 01:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
He/she's not my enemy but a blind reverter. I came to your page just because i thought you know his/her distruptive behaviour. Anyways, i'll take your comment into account. Best, E104421 (talk) 01:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
If he's blindly reverting then use the edit warring noticeboard. In the past people have come here before thinking "oh, Rjanag has scolded Alefbe before, so Rjanag will be the perfect way for me to exact my revenge!" and I refuse to act on requests like that. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 01:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Heh, my request is not like that. I'm against blocking people, since they're somehow coming back. For this reason, i'm in favor of forcing them to discuss their problems with the articles. If they do so, i have enough answers for them, but how to force them, that's the problem. That's the logic behind writing to you. Regards E104421 (talk) 01:47, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
A message to Alefbe or to the article's talk page would be a good thing to try before seeking administrative intervention. According to your contributions history, you haven't made an attempt to contact him other than with edit summaries. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 01:49, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Yes, you're right. It's better to contact directly rahter than the edit summaries. I'll do that next time. Thanx. E104421 (talk) 02:00, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Re: Mandarian

Nope nothing is automated with the Wiki Cleaner edits. Just my mistake. Thanks for catching it. Wiki Cleaner just gives a fast list of what needs to be disammed. It's more of an assistance tool than an editing tool. --User:Woohookitty Disamming fool! 22:25, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

One-child policy

Hi Rjanag,

I do a fair amount of writing/editing on WP but I don't know of any page that has such a constant stream of vandals as the One-Child Policy page. Virtually all of the vandals are unregistered users, and judging by the childishness of the entries, the vast majority are juveniles.

Would it be possible to restrict editing of that article to Registered Users? Of course many of us monitor those entries now, but it's a PITA to have to deal with those edits. If it is possible to place a restriction on editing, and you know how to request or create such a restriction, then I encourage you to do so.

Thanks a lot.

--Mack2 (talk) 20:40, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protecting it at least temporarily is definitely a good idea, given the level of vandalism; I could apply a several-months protection to it myself. Semi-protecting indefinitely, though, is a slightly bigger deal and it would probably be good to get more input before doing it—in some instances I wouldn't mind protecting indefinitely, but in this case it's a controversial article and is not even very good anyway (and I think it has some bias that would make some editors bitter anyway, although that's still not an excuse for the mostly sophomoric vandalism that takes place there). The best option might be to list it at Requests for page protection (requesting either indefinite semi-protection, or something like 3- or 6-month semi-protection) just so that a couple more eyes will see the request and be able to raise objections if there are problems. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 22:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Never mind the above; it looks like we were getting hit especially bad today, so I just went ahead and protected the page for 3 months. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 02:33, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Maybe when the schoolboys are less bored with school, they'll lay off.--Mack2 (talk) 16:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Rudolf Yanson

What do you think? I have a feeling you're going to go with delete. But I wonder if including an author/scholar of specialized work in this field doesn't make the encyclopedia just a little bit better? I actually like that it's very short and stubby without and fluff. I don't see how it can be merged to a broader topic. And it seems like a good way to have his books be included in some fashion in our comprehensive resource. Have I lost it completely? ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:53, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I agree with you that there is use in having articles like these (especially for if his work is cited in other articles, so there can be a bluelink in sentences like "According to Rudolf Yanson...."), but unfortunately I don't think usefulness can trump the notability criteria. The notability criteria themselves are not very good, I've come to think, but I don't think it would be right to try to tear them down from the inside by ignoring them in AfDs... I get frustrated, for example, at how WP:ATHLETE is so lax and WP:PROF, comparatively, much stricter, but making that argument during AfDs would be too much like crusading. So I think we have to go according to the current criteria until they are changed by some other means. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 22:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

User talk:GraYoshi2x#Lamest edit warring

Hello, Rjanag, I hope my message to you is not ignored this time. :-) (my feeling was a little hurt). However, I can really not come up with any suitable admin for the matter because you know both GraYoshi2 and Badagnani, and your are an active member of WP:CHINA with experiences in editing food/Chinese culture-related articles. This tendentious edit warring between them has been going on for about 7 months. Regardless of the formed consensus at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_China/Archive/May_2009#Naming_convention_for_Chinese_foods_and_usages_of_Wikitionary, GraYoshi2x has been reverting to exclude the Wiktionary links even though he is the only one against the consensus. I think this long-term revert campaign is indeed spooky and disruptive.[72] (most of them are mere reverts of Badagnani's edit). I have agreed and disagreed with each of the both, but to me, GraYoshi2x wants to pick a fight, so Badagnani who has many block records to be blocked for a longer time. Would you take appropriate action; block or warning anything to stop this silliness. Thanks.--Caspian blue 22:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the intervention to the two users. The edit warring was stopped since then, so I hope this matter is resolved.Caspian blue 15:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Hardest language

I'm bringing another problem to your attention since your specialty is in linguistic study. User named Laws dr (talk · contribs · count · logs · page moves · block log · edit summaries) has been inserting WP:Original research to Hardest language over and over and even distorted contents from used books (he claimed he merely re-added somebody's edit). This was pointed out at here on Oct.31, but he recently added his personal opinion referenced with a chatting forum, insisting that his edit is justified. He sporadically edits Wikipedia, but as soon as his added content was deleted today, he appears. I think Law dr is a single purpose account, or alternative account with another account. Would you warn him for his repeated disruption and violations of WP:NOR and WP:SYNTHESIS, and WP:RS and if possible look into the account? Thanks.--Caspian blue 15:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

This user's disruptive behaviors are going nowhere; please check his/her contribution.--Caspian blue 18:24, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for the helpful info on my discussion page. I didn't know the zh-cp was deprecated. I'll make use of the new Chinese: s....

--Visik (talk) 05:51, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

谢谢 for your kind and thoughtful birthday wishes. Please have some kosher brownies from Israel. --Shuki (talk) 21:49, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Uyghur language

Hello. I am a native Russian speaker and linguist. What we have originally in the article is transliteration with mere elements of transcription (e.g. no vowel reduction is indicated). There is the pronouncing norm of standard Russian in Russia which roughly corresponds to Moscow speech. In this norm there are rules for vowel reduction which are in no way respected in the article. Voiced consanants always become devoiced (with few situational exceptions) at word ending. --Zumrasha (talk) 16:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Uyghur is different than Russian, and I am a Uyghur speaker. As for the article, the current consensus is to transcribe the underlying representations (the same as what is written in the word's spelling) rather than the pronunciation details which vary from one dialect to another. If you believe this should be changed, please start a discussion at the article's talk page.
I am traveling right now and might not be able to respond until Monday. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 16:20, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I really hope that when you have more time you will see that I am not at all trying to argue about the Uyghur language. I am interested in and like the language and even try to learn it a little but far be it from me to try to change anything written in the article concerning the Uyghur language before I have any solid data to support the correction. In other words I completely respect the work of all those more knowledgeable people who contibute to the article. If I find any new and proven data on the Uyghur language I will surely contribute but as of now it seems that the article is the most comprehensive one on the subject on the Internet.
The only thing I do not feel comfortable about is the way RUSSIAN words are transcribed in the table. In the said table each foreign word is given along with its native transcription and then follows the Uyghur variant of the loanword with its Uyghur transcription. I only tried to change the RUSSIAN part, i.e. the RUSSIAN transcription for the Russian words, not the Uyghur transcription of the words. And you, as far as I understand it now, think that I'm correcting the Uyghur pronunciation. Not in the least!
Because of this misunderstanding it looks like you are trying to convince me that my Russian transcription for the Russian words is wrong. Now I am not a stubborn man and I do not wish to engage in any kind of "undoing" tug-of-war. But I happen to know standard Russian as my native tongue and I have a linguistic background, so I guess I must know a little about how Russian words are transcribed in the Russian language.
I simply ask you to find some time and take a closer look at the issue. I hope this misunderstanding will soon be cleared. I am really looking forward to having a more fruitful discussion about the Uyghur language proper with you. --Zumrasha (talk) 17:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
I see. You are correct; I was misreading your edits earlier. Sorry about this misunderstanding. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 18:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


我不懂。我只是发牢骚一下,他就马上删除了。你可以告诉我原因吗?被删除的内容:[73]--俠刀行 (talk) 15:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

因为不知道上下文是什么样的,我也不太理解。不过,看来他是觉得你的留信没有constructive、要回复的内容,所以他干脆删除了。对我来说 这样有一点不礼貌,可是他有这个权利,你最好不理这件事,这不算大事,而且他就一个用户---不理他应该很容易!
此外,他给你的那个警告也没有道理,你不用着急。 rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 15:49, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • 那请麻烦你帮我问他,可不可以教我英语?他似乎不理解我的意思。--俠刀行 (talk) 15:59, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
    • 说实话,维基百科不是学英语的一个好地方。大部分的维基用户只写文章,不叫语言。。。他们可以帮你写文章可是不要提供英语课。我有一点同意 给你留过信的那个User:Plutonium27: 如果你的主要目的是学英语,也许你最好找其他的网站(如。我也是很愿意帮你做 和百科有关的事,可是不会当英语老师;RadioFan好像也是这个意思。 rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 16:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
  • 明白了。我也觉得维基有很多用词都非常艰深,不适合用在会话上,也许要学英语应该去其他网站。你有比较好的英语学习网站吗?最好有提升会话能力的。--俠刀行 (talk) 16:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
    • 嗯,维基有很多jargon啦!再说,叫语言不是维基的目的,创造百科才是,所以许多用户不愿交语言。
    • 说道教英语的网站。。。对我来说,网上学习不是个好办法,尤其是如果你要学会话英语的话。最好跟人直接交流。我知道在中国可能没有很多机会上有效的课程等等,可是如果你在大城市的话, 外国人很多。。。你如果叫外国朋友就可以很快地提高英语水平。 rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 16:27, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

User talk:俠刀行

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Rjanag. You have new messages at RadioFan's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.


the messages below relate to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 November 28#IPA_usage rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 16:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

If you can't win the argument, the next best thing is to be able to "hang up the phone", yes? :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

This argument has happened over and over again and your "side" has already lost it many times; see the very top of Talk:International Phonetic Alphabet. And as I said, it's not an appropriate argument for the reference desk anyway, as that's not a place for deciding policy. If the lazy users who complain about IPA really want to make a change, they are welcome to start the argument elsewhere. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 16:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
What I object to is having to learn a new language in order to read the English wikipedia. There's nothing wrong with the IPA stuff as such. It's the snobbery connected with its use that I object to. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 16:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Many could say that the 'snobbery' connected with the use of US dictionary pronunciation guides is just as objectionable. Given that no pronunciation standard is universal among the English-speaking population, why should we use one that you happen to like? Why not use the one that is, from an objective standpoint, the one that reflects the sounds of language the most accurately and is the most widely used in the world (and that's not snobbery, those are facts). IPA is not a "new language" and claiming that people need to learn a new language is an exaggeration; it uses almost all the same letters that are in our alphabet and can be learned in a day, just like the pronunciation guides that you are supporting (remember that when you were in school you had to learn them, too, at some point). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 18:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Archive search box

Here is an archive search box for your talk page. You can modify it and place it according to your preferences.

-- Wavelength (talk) 20:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

StarCraft articles and archive urls

Hello. I saw your post here and I was wondering if there is a list of StarCraft articles that need archive urls added? I wouldn't mind doing some manually.--Rockfang (talk) 06:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Any Starcraft article with links to transcripts from it looks like StarCraft, Characters of StarCraft, Species of StarCraft, Sarah Kerrigan, and Jim Raynor all have it. Probably over 100 links to correct, I think doing it by hand would be quite tedious. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 07:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
It may be tedious, but I'll still help. :) Rockfang (talk) 07:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Actually, wait a second.... before you start, I think there's an easier way to do this!
It looks like most of the links are actually from the same webpage: (archive), just different anchors on that page. So rather than having to look up every link, the majority of them could be fixed by simply concatenating to the front and not worrying about looking them up specifically. I could do this pretty easily on AWB, I think, once I sit down and work out the search terms.
There are a few links that are different; some seem to be at instead of the link above. But think I think those ones can be fixed in the same way (just with a different archiveurl stuck on the front). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 20:18, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Ok. I'll hold off doing them manually by hand. Please let me know if your idea ends up working. Thank you.--Rockfang (talk) 20:23, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the kind birthday wish J04n(talk page) 15:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Cite video

Are you aware <date> is for some reason a deprecated field? Rich Farmbrough, 21:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC).

Yes, but at least one template was using it, and I assume many more are (given that "date2" is an extremely unintuitive name for the field). All templates with |date= and not |date2= were broken; the easier fix by far seemed to be to add date to the template, rather than making text changes to however many articles have the template transcluded. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 00:04, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
I dug around, and it is yet another thing that arises from the date mess. I put my proposals on Template talk:Cite video seems like people have been meaning to get around to this for some time. I have a list of articles using date2 and I will probably start by replacing that with date. Rgds, Rich Farmbrough, 00:09, 4 December 2009 (UTC).


I don't quite understand what you are referring to. Which user is this? Why is there no further discussion on #linguistics? ...some questions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alinovic (talkcontribs) 12:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

What??? Where did this come from? I don't know what you're responding to. Context, please. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 13:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

You are so great


Thanks very much for fixing {{mountain index row}} !! —hike395 (talk) 16:26, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Viral Video page

Sorry for not stating that two other individuals and myself are adding to the Viral Video page for a class project @ UNC-CH. We ask that before any changes or extreme alterations are made to our edits or additions can anyone please contact us before. Thanks for acknowledging! (Mfantroy (talk) 23:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC))

Thanks for clarifying and sorry for the mishaps. Would it be alright if I post something brief about the future of Viral videos?
(Mfantroy (talk) 02:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC))
Okay I understand that because what I had posted was from an blog. Thanks!
(Mfantroy (talk) 02:29, 8 December 2009 (UTC))
Sorry for the questions. Is it possible to cite information from another Wikipedia article/page?
Mfantroy (talk) 02:37, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Okay that makes sense. Thank you so much!
Mfantroy (talk) 02:51, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Class Project

Yes, many articles that are being improved are for a class project. Instead of a final exam, we are required to improve or create a new page for a topic relevant to our class. Mjohnston13 (talk) 03:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Viral Video Additions

Hello. Yes, me and two other members are working on a class project. We are taking an information science course and one of the assignments was to create or help improve an existing Wiki page on a topic in the information science field.

Ebenj05 (talk) 14:44, 8 December 2009 (UTC) Ebenj05


OK. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 05:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)


Hmm... -- I agree that the wording of this addition was completely POV and you were certainly right in reverting; on the other hand, I find it somewhat odd that for a geographical area that is (maybe only currently) such a hot-spot of ethnic tensions, there isn't a single word of it mentioned in the intro. Am I making sense? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 05:28, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I agree, the intro isn't really a good summary of the article right now. I would just like to see the summary written better (for example, something like what you said above would be perfect, just mentioning that there are ethnic tensions--we don't need to go into detail on sides). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 05:32, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I gave it a start and got reverted w/o explanation, twice. Is this borderline-vandalism? Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 06:27, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

You are so great

You are a great guy! Thanks for being so excellent and telling me it was my WikiBirthday. I had absolutely no idea. ^_^ Clem (talk) 04:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)


Actually, glottal stops can occur at the end of words as well; so we're looking for

IF <(not apostrophe)+'> OR <'+(not apostrophe)> THEN ʼ

(that's to avoid replacing italics and bold-markings. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 02:37, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Or wait, that's probably junk as well... hmmm....maybe
IF <(not apostrophe)+'+(not apostrophe)> THEN ʼ
Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 02:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Minority language place names in China

I wanted to consult you on the romanization of minority (i.e. Tibetan, Uyghur, Mongolian) place names in China. Is there a system in place sanctioned by the PRC government on how to correctly name these places? The most obvious examples are Urumqi, Hohhot, and Lhasa, but I also refer to county names which are not romanized according to pinyin. Colipon+(Talk) 15:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure, it seems to vary from place to place and it seems to be more just habit than policy. For example, Kumul in Xinjiang is generally called Kumul by Uyghurs but Hami by Chinese, and most "official" stuff uses Hami (this is one of the relatively few instances where a place has a totally different name for Chinese, rather than just a transliteration); on the other hand, in places you point out like Lhasa and Hohhot, romanizations seem to use the native name more often rather than the Chinese transliteration. Some are less clear (for example, Turpan/Turfan/Tulufan, which someone started an edit war about a few months ago). But long story short, as far as I know there's no unified policy on how to romanize (or, at least, no unified policy that is really followed). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 15:42, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
I guess my question really is, how does Wikipedia decide on how to romanize and name things like this. Colipon+(Talk) 16:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Hm... that one also might just have to be case-by-case. I think each place's romanization is influenced by a bundle of factors including native word, most common name in English-language materials, and existing standards on WP:
"Native" name/spelling Pinyin of Chinese name Other romanizations
Ürümchi (Ürümqi) Wulumuqi Urumqi
Qaramay (K̡aramay) Kelamayi Karamay
Aqsu (Ak̡su) Akesu Aksu
Qumul (K̡umul) Hami Kumul
Xoten (Hotən) Hetian Hotan
Qeshqer (K̡əxk̡ər) Kashi Kashgar
Turpan Tulufan Turfan
Altay Aletai Altai?
The above table covers only the Uyghur names from the template (and only the ones I'm familiar with). From that sample, though, it becaomes pretty clear that most of the current names (which the exception of Hami) follow more or less the native name, albeit with variations on the romanization. A bit of background on Uyghur romanizations... the one written on the left is the Uyghur Latin Yéziqi that is more or less official among Uyghurs and is closely based on IPA (note the use of Q for uvular stops, X for velar fricatives, etc.), and the one on the right is an alternate (and I think somewhat older) alphabet which is more pinyin-based (note that Q and H are like they are in pinyin). Most of the names in this template seem to follow the pinyin-based romanization more closely (with some changes made to use letters that appear on a normal keyboard--ie, using K instead of K̡, a instead of ə, etc). I don't know if this is a good reflection or not of which spellings are actually more common in the outside world. There are a couple exceptions—for instance, Kashgar, which doesn't use either of the Uyghur romanizations, since it's a more well-known name (compare to how, until relatively recently, people still commonly referred to Guangdong as "Canton"...or to the use of romanizations like "Mao Tse-Tung" even though WG is more or less defunct by now).
It may be helpful to do a larger survey of the Xinjiang placenames on WP... what I've looked at so far is a bit limited, and some may be skewed because of my own influence (for example, "Turpan" breaks the pattern because I moved it away from "Turfan", and "Aksu" and some others almost ended up at "Akesu" and I had to fight with a Chinese nationalist to prevent that from happening). rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply! I've always had trouble deciding what to name these ethnic minority places and deciding which one is more "proper". I will consult you if I come across anything that I cannot figure out. Funny that only Mongolian, Tibetan, and Uyghur names are not Romanized according to pinyin, yet Zhuang and Korean names are. Colipon+(Talk) 21:04, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Xinjiang Riots update

Let me get back to you on this. I'm quite busy writing final papers now and I have some Ph.d applications I need to send off. I don't think the article needs a complete rewrite, but adding more information on what the Chinese government's views are would help. I'll write more about this over the holiday break. Take care. David Straub (talk) 03:18, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Shipbuilding not high-tech industry

Hi, I just wanted to point out that we can also put it under the main intro. I guess you have some valid points too regarding that as well. No problems. Alohahell (talk) 18:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a need to cram the picture in anywhere. The article is already full of unnecessary, decorative, unencyclopedic pictures—it looks more like a brochure than an encyclopedia article. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 23:01, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Your question

Hey. You asked whether I have any connection to ASDFGH, or some user like that. Nah, I don't know who that is or anything. Sorry. I'm back on wiki now, will be editing regularly. Along with the Falun Gong pages, I think I have some good contributions to make to pages on China and its governance generally.--Asdfg12345 23:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Holidays


Hey Rjanag... I just wanted to wish you a very good... "day" (now, I wouldn't really want to reveal any sensitive details here...) ;) Have a good one! -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 22:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much! And congratulations on the AST ;) rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 23:11, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Birthday!

75px Hey, Rjanag. Just stopping by to wish you a Happy Birthday from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day!
-- MisterWiki talk contribs 00:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for the wikibirthday wishes. --Kevlar (talkcontribs) 00:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Boiling Springs, PA

Hello Rjanag,

I am new to editing and decided to add some information to the entry on my home town. I deleted a reference to the estimated depth of the springs because the source I have (and the only published source as far as I know) did not mention who did that depth estimate.

You then changed it back faster than I could blink.

I then put in the missing documentation and left in the shaky claim, which appears to be local legend.

So, beginner that I am, please tell me how I should have handled that. Should I have just noted my reasoning in the notes for the changes, or should I have added a questionable reference with a caveat as I did? BotManPA (talk) 01:58, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Non-free images

No, I don't. I uploaded them thinking the intentions that the copyright was correct. I have no qualms with them being deleted. Thanks, --Jimbo[online] 15:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Hi, the same image has cropped up again at File:TheSaturdays2009Promoshot.jpg. Can you do the honours of deleting it? Thanks, --Jimbo[online] 23:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Tomb Raider: Underworld

That picture is back again if you hadn't noticed. --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 00:33, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I've removed it and warned the user again. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 00:39, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Talk page discussion has started (though he also added it back in one more time). --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 00:28, 22 December 2009 (UTC)


...because your signature appears as gibberish in blue and red on my browser as well. What kind of browser do you use? --Ⲗⲁⲛⲧⲉⲣⲛⲓⲝ[talk] 08:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

I must raise my hand for this one and note the same for you, Lanterix ;P -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 09:36, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Requests for adminship/Shubinator

Sorry about that, it appeared that it was transcluded, but that's my fault. Doc Quintana (talk) 19:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Oops...actually, it looks like someone had transcluded it and I just hadn't realized (it has since been un-transcluded). Anyway, I imagine it will be transcluded soon (we're waiting on a co-nom statement and then she or I will transclude it right away) and then you can re-post your comment. Sorry about the mix-up. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 19:09, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
No worries, no harm done. Thanks for the heads up.Doc Quintana (talk) 19:12, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Reply to message you left me

Hello rjanag, I received your message and hereby acknowledge it. Moreover, I checked out your claims and went over several articles you listed in your "good" list. I agree, they are good. You seem to be able to do an article right. I'm impressed. As for the several other admins on the page you say have similar records, I didn't go hunting and don't plan to, so I cannot verify that. However, there is no reason not to take your word for it. You have quite an interesting list of good articles there; I think you can be justly proud of them. I note your interest in the military. I'm interested somewhat in it myself.

In my experience, however, not all sysadmins have the same emphasis on quality. My skepticism derives from a considerable number of negative experiences, where a sysadm (who should have known better) pulled rank to insist on lower-quality material, some totally inaccurate. Some sysadmins have insisted even on doing things in a way inconsistent with WP policy. Basically I was told to shut up with the hinted threat of being blocked. That is the source of my cynicism. You know, I've considered requesting adm status to give me some clout - I think I'm probably qualified at this point - but, actually working on articles appeals to me rather than police work. I suspect, once you get started with administration work, it probably takes a lot of your time. I notice you have had to spend a lot of time doing blocks and deletions and whatnot.

I think I trust your article judgement all right, even though I may have a slightly different view. You don't seem to be exercising it much on the linguistics articles; there are quite a number of bad ones, many of them tagged. I presume that is not your main interest. I think that is how you managed to encounter me. I'm interested in getting some good linguistics articles, so that means I concentrate on the ones of interest that need the most work.

I understand your tone with me, which seems a little high-handed. However, I suppose I could be more civil. Whether I can work on the linguistics article with you - well, I'm not sure now. I note that in your articles you are quite detailed and so am I so I have no doubt we would be disagreeing on many details. The problem is, since you are the sysadm, I would always be losing, always be being reverted, without recourse. That is what I meant about power. I do my best work with a freer hand. Once in a while I get a suggestion from a peer, which I usually take. If I hear from a sysadm it is because I am not setting things up in the accepted way. I'm still learning even though I have thousands of edits now. You aren't presenting yourself to me as a peer. I do not know if that statement qualifies as something good or something bad so I'm choosing to put this under "other."

Well, I'm going on with my edits now. I do not yet know if I will take on helping to clean up the locked article. Let's see how it goes. If you were to take an interest in helping to fix the linguistics artcles that need the most work I think we would advance the cause of good articles in that area much faster. I you disagree with any of my edits be sure and speak up. I'm not going to edit war with you but I can let you know if I disagree. I think I trust your judgement - thanks for bringing it to my attention - but whether I can work in your proximity I think we will have to see. Ciao, and merry Christmas.Dave (talk) 18:16, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Uyghur language

Thanks for pointing that out, I didn't even see it there (more bad results from late-night editing). It's removed now. Otebig (talk) 05:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Can you point one or more errors on this?

I just copied this from our recent discussions. If you can point any errors and be able to provide the reasons, please try. And i am interested only in errors and their grammatical reasons, nothing else. Also, if you want, please delete this post onecs you read. Thank you.

In 1, the sentence needs a subject that can correspond the second clause, like--In order to be understood a speech, proper articulation and pronunciation are necessary.
In 6, the correlative conjunction lacks parallelism; needs a parallel NP, like--I was told that I could get both a degree in designing and a position to become a teacher.
The 8 have options on split infinitive, like--When we go to the lake on weekends, I have to sleep either in the car or in a broken down bed.
The 10 is vague in terms of its subordination. An options would be--I have often heard the saying that 'experience is the best teacher'. —Mihkaw napéw (talk) 21:18, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
You delete every message I leave at your talk page, with no response and with a rude edit summary, and now suddenly you expect me to help you with something? I have no interest in this. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 21:20, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


Thanks for getting the WP:100 listing.[74] I meant to do it along with my other closure stuff, but it slipped my mind (as I was also processing a WP:NOTNOW RfA). EVula // talk // // 00:01, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

No worries! I didn't even realize it was anyone's job in particular, so I just went ahead and did it. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 01:51, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
I don't think it falls directly under the purview of the closing 'crat, but I enjoy being rather thorough in my RfX closures. :) EVula // talk // // 03:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
And if EVula says it's his job, it must be true. Shubinator (talk) 03:18, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Mwuhaha, you're officially my favorite administrator that I've ever promoted this month. EVula // talk // // 03:42, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
Cool! *scratches head* Wait a second... Shubinator (talk) 03:50, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

NCFOM legacy

I don't feel strongly either way, but it's a pretty common practice on movies and other fiction articles to include a section where references to the work are mentioned. Is that what you're objecting to? --Ring Cinema (talk) 18:05, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

In that case, it might help to at least change the title of the section; a single reference in a TV show doesn't seem to constitute a "legacy", especially when the film has probably had a bigger (but less tangible) impact in other ways. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 18:10, 31 December 2009 (UTC)