User talk:JanHop

Welcome!

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

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:47, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May 2011

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Brazil – People's Republic of China relations. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Your cited source does not support the material contained in your edits. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 14:38, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your cited source DOES NOT contain the information you are citing to it! And even if it did, it is a WP:PRIMARY source, so should not be used for the bulk of the article, per WP:PSTS. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 14:53, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The right citation was added, I was mistaken for another one. One could argue about some of the entries in the table, but is shows the slow process of diplomatic, and later on more economical relations. China is busy creating leverage in Latin America to secure natural resources. If my thesis is finished, I'll merge the most important (selected)part. 16:40, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Your "right citation" fails to verify most of the information as well. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 16:55, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As to the rest -- find a WP:SECONDARY source that states this conclusion, rather than expecting the reader to reach this conclusion from a mass of WP:INDISCRIMINATE WP:PRIMARY trivia. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 17:06, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for the behaviour of Hrafn. He really is rather rude and seems to make Wikipedia policy up as he goes along, with the intention of destroying other people's good work. Flying Fische (talk) 21:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Brazil – People's Republic of China relations has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 13:23, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The cited document does NOT contain any copyright, so it is an open source provided by the Brazilian government.JanHop (talk) 14:15, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unless the source is public domain or CC-BY-SA (or compatible) it cannot be used in Wikipedia. Regarding this PDF, I see no copyright, so it must be assumed. See WP:COPYPASTE for more information. A good place to look is the copyright status of the website you download it from. Also, see the paragraph here that is below the chart...regarding guidance on press releases. I removed the text, please no not re-add it.--NortyNort (Holla) 10:04, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right Citation

I'm working on the best citations, and my research is not yet fully complete. Within a moth or two I can cite the right scholars. But the conclusion I draw does not have to be anyone other's conclusion! However I think within the next year the Brazil-China relations will contest US hegemony in that region. (It allready does) When I have the right sources I'll put it online. Much more to come! Ideed, I merged previously present (disputed) information in the table, if you would like to propose to delete something, discussion would be possible. My I also refer to the text below.

A nice kitten

FeydHuxtable has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{subst:Kittynap}}

Word up Jan, thanks for your excellent contributions to our Brazil – People's Republic of China relations article. As you rightly say such historical information is essential to understanding a bilateral relationship, and I think the incidents you picked out were very well chosen. We can probably persuade Hrafn that the Miscellany tag can be removed, looking at their contribs they dont appear to be a specialist in IR. But they are within their rights to insist on tagging and ultimately removing contributions unless they are well paraphrased and fully verifiable. So you might have to do a bit more research if you want to be sure of your excellent contribution staying. Im not sure if you will consider it worth your time as it can take folk a while to get used to our editing norms even if they are proficient academics. But of course we'd very much like you to stay! Anyway sorry your welcome wasnt as friendly as it might have been, hope you like the kitten. FeydHuxtable (talk) 19:13, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your comment Feyd! I used Wikipedia for verifying if informtion I want to use and check what is available on the internet, and I want to help expanding knowledge into the world. As an IR scholar, I think primairy sources are much more valuable than secondary ones. Good citation is important, but my membership has not even been 24 hours and there's still a lot to learn. The Brazil-China relations are becoming more important and I would like to contribute more in the future. Thanks for the kitten, it really cheers up!

You're very welcome. Unfortuenatly on wiki its frowned on to use primary sources as often as you might in accademia. But they should still be fine as cites for non controversal information.

Yes youre right the China Brazil relationship will be become even more important once the worlds biggest offshore oil deposits come fully online with both China and the US competing to improve their relationship with Brazil as a result Its also going to be very interesting to see what happens when Xi Jinping takes over in 2012. No one seems to know what he's really like? Maybe Xi and Dilma will make the relationship a muscular force for good, using it to help achieve consensus at G20 for the various development initiatives being campaigned for. Or if as some fear Jinping pushes too aggressively for Chinas interests at the expense of others the relationship may fracture. Well you must know all this much better than me as its your speciality, but just though I would post you those FT links in case you havent seen them. Hope we see more of you! FeydHuxtable (talk) 17:31, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Feyd, indeed, Chinese-Brazilian relations are very interesting and current as well, with potentially influencing the international order. Thanks for the usefull links! For now, I don't have much time as the deadline of June first approaches, afterwards, more time for Wikipedia will be available. JanHop (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Jan, great to see you back. To be fair editors like Hrafn do help raise quality. If it was me I wouldnt argue with them instead wait until you have some time them do the paraphrasing / extra sourcing before you restore the history. Youre right the history info is crucial and the table is a great way of presenting it. But its not worth getting blocked by an admin or taking up too much of your time while you have a deadline. Hope you dont mind the free advice! FeydHuxtable (talk) 14:01, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, I could't let this one pass, I'll see to it.JanHop (talk) 14:07, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]