Jump to content

User talk:YellowMonkey/Archive87

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chola Dynasty

[edit]

Thanks for all your help! I have fixed all the problems you've mentioned, assuming I didn't accidentally miss out any..! Please let me know if you see any other concerns.

I'm not the greatest copy-editor around, so if you believe changes are required, particularly, with respect to the subjective opinions/statements that you are concerned about, please go ahead and fix it if possible. Once again, thanks for your time.--Madhu (talk) 13:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'll look again. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Old A-class MILHIST review

[edit]

Per Talk:Gregory R. Ball#MILHIST A-review closed as out of scope, the WPMILHIST tag was removed because at the time the paragraph on military service was incidental. I recently found some military newspaper databases and performed a query and I was able to flesh out his service record in a bit more detail. If you have a chance to take a look, let me know what you think. Thanks. MrPrada (talk) 08:04, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess you can go for another A-class review, but you might want to ask for another opinion at WT:MHR. Personally I would be inclined to say no, because it he didn't become a businessman or politician, I don't htink he would be notable solely because of his military achievements. The additions seem to indicate that his commanding officer asked him to organise some fundraisers and outreach events. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:74.13.130.46

[edit]

Thanks for unblocking this IP. It was a mistake from my side. Usually we dont see activity on the DYK pages with IP address, I mistood it as a vandal blanking the page. I suspected it as I saw another user also reverting the edits by the IP. My bad ! Sorry :( -- TinuCherian (Wanna Talk?) - 09:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem at all. He's been here for at least six months under 74.13.x.x Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Barack Obama's mother's race

[edit]

Hello, you appear to be an admin or a mediator of some sort. I have added Barack Obama's mother's race to his entry, but someone keeps deleting it. What is the best way to resolve this dispute? Thanks. JackWilliams (talk) 02:26, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use the talk page I think. There's a lot of traffic on that page, so I would be surprised if this hadn't already been discussed. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Bradman in the dock"

[edit]

Do you mean FAC? Yes, as soon as it's had a copy-edit, as requested by Tony1. --Dweller (talk) 10:03, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.

[edit]
The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 23 2 June 2008 About the Signpost
Board elections open WikiWorld: "Facial Hair" 
Wikipedia in the News Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes 
Features and admins Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 
The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Good articles newsletter

[edit]

Delivered by the automated Giggabot (stop!) 01:14, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Addition to Paracel Islands

[edit]
  • Could you tell me the reason why you reverted edits by Yohan (China) (talk) to last version before you do it?
  • I got the reason from Chinese Wikipedia and then translate it to English. So I think the information reliable.
  • Before you convince me, I'll always be rollbacking it. So you'd better convince me first.

——Yohan (China) (talk) 03:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC) See this photo:[reply]

Qouted by Chinese Wikipedia. ——Yohan (China) (talk) 04:04, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've indicated in the edit summary. The lack of a source and the apparent OR is the first thing. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand Chinese, but it's Xinhua anyway. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • If still not reliable source, why?
Well Xinhua is not a reliable source because it is govt-owned and is not allowed to do anything except tow the PRC line, which in this case is soveriengty over the PAracel islands. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • What do you mean by "an object doesn't mean they inhabited as opposed to passed by" and "OR"? Is "OR" "or"? Do you mean that Chinese can make a house on it but never go/pass by there?
No I meant WP:OR as in "original research".Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, I didn't get the relations between "doesn't mean they inhabited as opposed to passed by" and "There's a US flag on the moon". Could you please explain more to me?
I was meaning that the presence of bodies, objects in a certain place does not necesarrily prove that there was long term habitation there, eg, they could have made a brief stop there and disposed of dead sailors or whatever, much like how the US flag is on the moon but there is no long-term habitation of the moon by the US. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(I mean, it's too short so that I can't get the meaning. If you didn't reply, I'll redo the (Undid revision 214085459 by Blnguyen (talk)))

  • Thanks.

——Yohan (China) (talk) 09:55, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I know that Xinhua Net is govt-owned and is not allowed to do anything except tow the PRC line, and of course you don't understand Chinese. But I mean that:

  • About the first two questions:
    • "Can this VIDEO prove?" and "See this photo", you needn't to read some thing, just see the picture, and a exact relic over there is more powerful than a hundred treatises.
    • There is some limit in Xinhua Net, but the restriction affect things can't be in Xinhua Net not thing can be here. i.e. We can't say something doesn't exist because it's not on Xinhua Net but we can say something exist(or at least possible exist) because it's on Xinhua Net.
      • Still now, it's only possible exist. But we can say the thing almost exactly exist if no one can find any hole(leak/rip) in it. So you you can't find any hole(leak/rip) in it, it'll be almost exactly exist.
  • About the last two questions:
    • I got it. That bodies are undemanding is due to my word "since", and it is often used in present perfect.
    • So I'll change the word to "once stayed in Paracel Islands in Tang and Song".
    • And I what I want to say is the follows:
      • Time of Discovrery
        • Chinese:Tang Dynasty(circa 600~800) and Sung Dynasty(circa 1000~1200)
        • Vietnamese:1460 or before.
      • Time of Claim Owned
  • ——Yohan (China) (talk) 09:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well the raw film doesn't prove anything by itself, because a film is a primary source. It is up to the reporter or archaeologist statement to say something. Has this been published in a history journal anywhere? We would need an archaeologist to have done a dating job on the relic. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks

[edit]

Thank you! Oh don't remind me that :) - after several consecutive wins, they sign the IPL with such a defeat. But I don't really understand anything here... Is there a final winner now? Anyway, I'd rather think of her upcoming films, which I'm looking forward to. She has moved to art cinema, and has worked with directors like Rituparno Ghosh and Deepa Mehta (have you heard of them?), which is much more important to me and to PZ herself. Thanks again, Blnguyen. Shahid • Talk2me 11:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, no I hadn't heard of any of those things. Shane Warne and Rajasthan won. It would have been funnier if SRK and PZ acted as 12th man. I wonder if there is a rule against having females in a male team? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:52, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hahaha!! Just imagine her doing that LOL!! I don't really know of any such rules. The field is of course dominated by men, but I think it is permitted. In the film industry for example, although actresses are the main force in films today (considering the 80s were years of heroes and villains), actors are still paid four times better today. The ratio is clear and consistent. The problem with cricket is that women are just not interested in doing such things as owning a team (PZ is the first woman to own a team), let alone playing cricket huh. Regards, Shahid • Talk2me 09:36, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It'd be more interesting to see which Punjab players started fielding worse because they were watching PZ instead....LOLBlnguyen (bananabucket) 09:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
LOL definitely. When one of them says that he "had plastered her posters inside my wardrobe" [1] and another one says that she is his favourite [2] - there is a possibility that it is actually true :). Shahid • Talk2me 10:16, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's interesting, I suspected some of them might be interested but I didn't know that they would flaunt it. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

VNQDD

[edit]

Sorry, I'm really busy right now (as the cartoon on top of my talk page indicates). I wish I could help, but I gotta say no. Hopefully next time. – Scartol • Tok 02:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will do what I can - I read the article first and did not see many obvious problems, then read the FAC. I will see what I can do to make it a little smoother, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:51, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I changed to support and found a tiny typo that I fixed. Glad my edits and comments were of some use - looks good to me and good luck, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:09, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have not heard of Buu Hoi and am not an expert on cancer, but would be glad to look it over when it gets that far. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I doubt if I'm m going to be unable to help in time. I was aiming to start today but the day has just evaporated. I have a lot of building work going on at the house, which needs close supervision (and liaison between squabbling architects, builders, engineers etc) and I've had a constant stream of interruptions. Sorry, --ROGER DAVIES talk 18:07, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's alright, some kind fellows have stepped in without being solicited. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, --ROGER DAVIES talk 07:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! Just saw it was promoted to FA! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS

[edit]

This might interest you. If you want me to reply, leave me a note on my talk page saying so and I will. Should the edit be made or not? Cheers, Daniel (talk) 16:16, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just explicitly saying "he went to PAC" should be enough. I wonder what the population of Adelaide was in 1890 and how many schools that existed there at all. Adelaide High School was created in 1908 and Adelaide Technical High School in 1898 - these were the first public schools. So frankly I wouldn't be surprised if PAC, SPSC were the only Protestant schools in SA at the time and PAC the only Methodist boys school. SPSC is Anglican. Pembroke's two parts started in 1915 and 1923. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I just went and checked the cat for Adelaide schools and back in Hill's era there were no schools outside the modern CBD/Kent Town etc. Pulteney is Anglican, all the rest were Catholics like CBC, St Aloysius, St Mary's etc. So it seems like the only Methodist school at the time full stop. ATHS was the first public school in SA. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe I should carp on about us (a public school) beating PAC in Chess championship...the quintessential private school thing...as well as Science Olympiad. LOL. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
PAC beaten in Science competition by a monkey. LOL. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The school is linked, where interested readers can read all about the prestige etc. The source used to support the schooling states simply "Educated at Prince Alfred College ..." saying nothing about prestige. As for "local Methodist school", it is a simple statement of fact and I struggle to see anything derogatory in it. Catholic schools usually seem proud of being Catholic, same for Anglican and so on. As Blnguyen said, local referred to Adelaide and didn't mean it was a merely "local" school. The only reason I have mentioned the religious orientation of the school at all was as a tie-in to Henry Hill's prominence in the local Methodist community. However, I don't wish to offend so if an independent source stating the school was seen as prestigious in 1890, I am happy to add it—despite my misgivings about POV with such descriptions. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 08:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or we could just cut the religion part. But personally I wouldn't be too worried if got up the nose of any student from any school who gets too *ahem* ... precious... about their school. Or not do anything. It's just a pointless peacock anyway. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 09:21, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Let me just say that South Australian schools spend too much time prattling on about their heritage and admiring their noses like Douglas Jardine and the colonials and what not...instead of training/studying harder and letting the results do the talking. Rather than only getting 6-7 prizes in the Australian Mathematics Competition (less than my public school when I was in high school). James Ruse Agricultural High School got 150+. Ditto for the science Olympiads. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 09:27, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ANI thread

[edit]

It is possibly even more late and irrelevant now (read on and you will see what I mean), but a block discussion was started at ANI here, and as the history emerged I commented on the discussion between you and Scarian, so I'm now coming here to let you know, particularly as I said I wasn't happy with your dismissal of Scarian's question. It's hard to put this without possibly offending you, but do you think you could be a little less dismissive when an admin asks you about why you undid a block? Thanks. Carcharoth (talk) 15:03, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From Anup

[edit]

OF COURSE, its me. I have nothing to hide. I do not log in more than once a week, but am having to come to this site more on account of people like you.

On the Sachin Tendulkar page, you have referenced an article written by some crappy journalist claiming that its a 'Wisden rating'. One dog barking is not a rating. Its just his opinion. And even better you have passed that off as a citation for that Tendulkar was rated the best ODI batsman ever when ODIs never came into the picture in that article.

Mind your language towards the said journalist. Calling him a dog violates WP:BLP. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh really?! Thanks so much for the education. Now my points : 1) HOW is a single unknown trashy (I hope this is fine, even if not, please don't tell me, rather just answer the questions) journalist's opinion a 'Wisden rating'? 2) How is that in turn 'proof' for that Tendulkar was rated the best ODI batsman ever when all he is doing is comparing him with the Don?

Whether Vivian Richards who faced the fastest and best bowlers ever on uncovered, fast, bouncy tracks, without even a helmet and averaged 48 in places like Australia including a strike-rate of 90+ in the greatest era ever, was better, or a flat-track bully like Tendulkar who averages an impressive 26 to 28 in places like Australia and South Africa in an era of tons of protective gear and bowler-crippling restrictions, is better is anybody's guess.

Pitches have been uncovered since the 1950s. Also WP:NOR and no personal commentary. I don't think SRT is better than IVAR. But you can't just add your own perrsonal analysis there. You need to find a commentator to say this for you. I don't think much of contemporary cricket, but unfortunately, not even Neil Harvey has commented on this specific case. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. Pitches have been uncovered from the late 1800s through the Bradman and Sobers eras up until the end-80s. Pitches getting covered and therefore more batsman-friendly, introduction of helmets and more protective gear, rules like the first 15-over restrictions (in ODIs) and one or two bouncers per over etc, ALL happened in 1988-90 and 1992 respectively. Ah, no wonder all this mess and bias in so many articles on Cricket and cricketers, with your level of knowledge of the game.
They were covered a in the 1950s. Yes to the helmets and bouncers. but you can't add that in and draw your own conclusion that SRT, Ponting, etc had it easier. Long live Neil Harvey. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I warn you Tendulkar fans to not try your cheap tricks on this page. I shall build up this page with the right references and articles. How dare you remove that paragraph about the Packer Series? Ever heard of it? Your scumbag Tendulkar would have averaged 00.0000 on those pitches without helmet etc facing Snow, Lillee, Thomson, Imran, Pascoe, Gilmour, Hogg, Ward, Willis, LeRoux, Procter, Hadlee etc. There Vivian Richards at a point averaged over 100. Has Tendulkar ever had to hook his entire career? He has never endured those conditions or bowlers. So restrict your existence to that utterly deplorable and cheapest article on this site, and let me do my work here. I shall not go to that dirty page ever again. And I repeat - I SHALL NOT SEE ANY MORE DIRT HERE FROM ANY TENDULKAR FAN. LET YOUR LAST ONE BE THE VERY LAST. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.83.179.37 (talk) 01:24, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a Tendulkar supporter. How can WSC have been the best of all time when only half of the best players in the world played in it. Yes, SRT used to hook in his younger days. A lot of batsmen when they become old, they get married and get more conservative and stop hooking. he's far from being the only one. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, so when 101 top journalists of the 70s and even today say the "Top 50" players (except those from India) in 1976 and after were playing in the WSC, you opine otherwise and so it becomes likewise? Tendulkar has not faced even one-tenth that level in the 90s or even one-hundredth this decade. And your answer about Tendulkar hooking either reinforces what I can see about your level of knowledge of the game, or your humor which is about the same level as your knowledge. Either way Tendulkar and just about everybody else from the 1990s till now had and have NEVER hooked their entire careers. The maximum they did was pull. I shall be back this weekend with my user-name and account to fulfill my promise on The KING's page with citations, articles and everything to the fullest. I shall begin to burst the myth, sham and PURE hype that Tendulkar is on this site. Ciao.69.141.29.179 (talk) 13:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Never played a hook? Go find a source. He's not the only one. The Waugh brothers used to hook before they were in their late 20s and then they stopped. I don't think anybody will agree with you. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

University of Nottingham Wikipedia Article.

[edit]

You mentioned a few months ago about various problems regarding the University of Nottingham article. I edited the whole article. You comments are welcome Omnis7 (talk) 03:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Any reason you chopped out a whole bunch of stuff? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:29, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Xuan Thuy

[edit]

Hi Blnguyen, I take it that you speak Vietnamese (judging from the sources you've used in some of your articles and from your userboxes). I was wondering if you could have a look at the Vietnamese page about Xuan Thuy and tell me whether the image on that page is free, whether it's sourced, etc. I'd like to add it to the English page. Thanks, --Carabinieri (talk) 02:53, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well the image is claimed as free under PD_VNgvot - apparently things from the VN govt website are free. It's from the image page that is linked. The first sentence is a description of his role as foreign minister followed the URL where they got the photo from, which is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. So yes, providing the copyright policy on vi-pedia is the same as here and they haven't broken anything, then yes. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

shane warne wiki

[edit]

Hi, are you admin for Shane Warne?

I work for Shane, and want to add www.shanewarne.com (his new blog) onto his wiki. Can you do that for me?

thanks Gedwards (talk) 07:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well I am an admin, but I don't have executive editing powers over anyone else. Yes, you can add that website if it is his official site. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of people from Orissa

[edit]

I & some others are trying to prune the list by the usual WP standard: those who have WP articles or would be obviously entitled to them. And you keep adding them back. What's up. ? DGG (talk) 01:51, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe that my edits have been expanding the list. I've removed a stack of business cards for a pile of random doctors. But if I accidentally increased the size of the article by restoring junk then simply removing it. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looking closer, you're certainly right. Sorry. I read the edit history with insufficient care. DGG (talk) 14:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nom

[edit]

I was wondering what you though of Pete Smith (baseball). I nominated it on June 5 and I was just wondering what you thought about it. Thanks, RyRy5 (talk) 02:53, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks fine, apart from the borderline legnth, but it might meet the letter of the law already. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. The only problem is that I can't find a good hook. The current one is "... that the Atlanta Braves hoped Pete Smith would develop into an ace pitcher as John Smoltz and Tom Glavine were developing to be?". Is that good and interesting enough? --RyRy5 (talk) 04:05, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, speaking from a purist point of view, no, because all sports teams want their players to keep on improving. But given the expectations at SYK, it doesn't have to be interesting at all. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 04:30, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thanks for your opinions. Regards, RyRy5 (talk) 06:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

[edit]

DYK needs an update.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Once again it need an update.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:44, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for June 9, 2008.

[edit]
The Wikipedia Signpost
The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 4, Issue 24 9 June 2008 About the Signpost
Board elections continue WikiWorld: "Triskaidekaphobia" 
News and notes: Military media mention, milestones Wikipedia in the News 
Dispatches: Main page day Features and admins 
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation 
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:20, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


WikiProject India Newsletter Volume III, Issue no. 001 - June 2008

[edit]
Project News
  • Tag & Assess 2008, an assessment drive initiated by the assessment department began on June 7, 2008 and will be running until July 2008. Many Wikipedians have started contributing to this mammoth task. This housekeeping activity will help manage articles in better way. You can also get involved!
  • Bot Assisted Assessment was successfully done using Bot0612 in May 2008. 1744 articles (18.5%) of all India unassessed articles were marked if they had been assessed by some other project.
  • What's Featured and Good?
  • IPL was hot on Wikipedia too!!! During the tournament, the article was among the most frequently edited articles. It is currently the only Indian article in top 100, occupying 58th spot.
  • Do you know of an article that is currently underrated? If so, please nominate the article at the Assessment Department's request for assessment. This will allow our project to get a better idea of the quality of our articles.
Article statistics and to-do lists
Current proposals and discussions
From the Editors
  • If you've just joined, add your name to the Members section of Wikipedia:WikiProject India and also may choose to get this newsletter get it delivered as desired.
  • This is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 2 – July 2008). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
  • The last newsletter was more than a year ago and after feeling the pinch, we got together in working towards in renewing this feature for our members. Fresh pair of legs we are, and hence can greatly improve with your suggestions and ideas. Please feel free to let us know of your thoughts. We hope to release the newsletter on a monthly/bi-monthly basis as per our initial thoughts.
Contributors to this Issue
Did You Know?

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This newsletter is automatically delivered by TinucherianBot (talk) 06:05, 16 June 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:YellowMonkey/Archive87&oldid=1144891856"