User talk:My Tibet/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hello and welcome! I created this page to expose the bias propagandist page on wikipedia about Tibet. The purpose of these writings is to bring light to the issue on Tibet. If you attack me in any personal way I will make sure you are reported for that. I will try to follow this internet pool of misinformation's rules but I will not be talked down to or intimidated by admins. If you want to contribute to the Tibet article feel free to contact me via my talk page. Me 23:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Could you please go through the Ladakh article? We are trying to get it featured. Your suggestions about any improvements will be very highly appreciated. deeptrivia (talk) 05:56, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will. Let me first post the Tibet article in dispute status. Me 05:59, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice article. Me 17:41, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

You do realize that screaming abuse at other users, as well as plastering unexplained POV tags all over the place, doesn't actually change anything? All it's going to do, eventually, is to get you banned for repeated disruption and personal attacks. Many of our contributors, Khoikhoi for example, are firm supporters of Tibetan independence. Perhaps you need to take a look at why they have been able to stay as contributors and valued members of our community, while you are being chased down by everyone, including them. -- ran (talk) 12:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You do realize that posting lies motivated by political bias doesn't actually change anything? Unless you are admin. Maybe I should question why are you admin when you clearly are not neutral or objectively thinking and editing? Me 17:46, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See my post below. NPOV is about writing for both yourself and the enemy. -- ran (talk) 20:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an enemy. I told you before, the article is not neutral. Me 19:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RAN

Hi Ran. You are not chasing only me. I see alot of other people were chased away. But then again that is a typical thickheaded nationalist that wants to see great empire china come together but doesn't even live there. I bet you do not like to live in china. You chose to live in the west where there is a place for tibetan exiles. So why do you feel wikishmedia is yours to CONTROL? I AM DISPUTING THE ARTICLE! DO NOT REMOVE MY DISPUTE TAGS! YOU DO NOT OWN THIS ARTICLE! Me 15:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where are you getting these ludicrous accusations from?! Stop trying to guess my political views for me and stop accusing me of opinions I don't hold or actions I didn't do. And no, I wasn't the one who removed your dispute tags either. -- ran (talk) 15:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed most of your contributions for the last 2 years on this website. It is very clear to me that you are chinese and have an opinion on Tibet. Now I have chinese friends and they all agree that Tibet is for the Tibetans and even support the Dalai Lama. Don't try to play games with me about your opinion. Thank you for not removing the dispute tag. Some other nucklehead did, now I have to edit it again. Me 17:24, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not playing games with my opinions with you. Wikipedia contributors, such as me and Khoikhoi, are always writing for the enemy. This is a completely normal and expected part of the NPOV policy. Over time all of us here have already learned that in order to follow NPOV, we must all be prepared to write about views that we would personally regard as irrational and ludicrous, if not completely repugnant. This is why you should not use the contents of our edits to infer what our views are.

As for your POV tags, it would be helpful if you could point out actual sentences or claims that you find objectionable. Once those are pinpointed, then we can solve those problems, by framing them in a more NPOV way, sourcing them, or removing them if neither of the above is possible. -- ran (talk) 20:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK I will point them out. Give me some time. For now I think the dispute should be there so people are aware of it. I will review in detail as soon as I can. Hopefully in the next few days. I also have issues with the Tibetan Autonomous Region article. Me 20:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be helping with the Tibet article.

I'm going to try to help out a bit with the Tibet article improvement. However, I'd like to ask you to practice what you preach, and refrain from personal attacks and blatant racism. Your actions are quite suprising, given your apparent dedication to neutral points of view. Most of this community has an honest desire for accurate and unbiased articles, and will work to help. However, screaming and personal attacks will drive these people (the ones who will help you) away. The problems you've been having so far aren't with 'admins', it's with regular users concerned about your erratic behavior, and reverting your spurious and unsupported edits. If you keep it up, you'll be asked not to return. Also, just to be clear, I'm not Chinese, I'm not Tibetan, I don't live in China or Tibet, I'm not a communist, I've never donated money to either cause, nor am I in their employ. I support the independence of Tibet, but I feel that Tibet's legitimate claims to the land will be exposed through information and honesty, not fist pounding and accusations. Don't bite the people who would come to improve the article, please. Phidauex 23:28, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't preach anything. In my real life I am very radical on the issue. But in order to change the article I will try to play by your rules. I understand that Tibet is part of China right now and because wikipedia claims to be fact providing website that is what it is. HOWEVER. The article on Historical Tibet is written with a certain TONE. I will show you exactly what I would like changed and I am not in no way planning on becoming a regular member here. I have way too many important things to do in my life. The reason I want the article changed is because due to the many daily edits and visits to Wikipedia.com it is listed as site #3 when you search with the major engines. I want when the people search on Tibet to be able to find an article that is not bias or with a chinese nationalistic tone. I know Ran is chinese I am not even sure who you are. When you have two nuns telling you in your face the stories of life in Chinese Tibet as a nun, all the rapes, the beatings, how they had to cross the mountains you will understand. I am not sure why or in what way you are able to write about Tibet. What are your sources and qualifications? Anyway. I was personaly attacked. I was called a separatist. This site has issues and I will not be scared off or told to leave just because I have first hand information on the whole issue. All the best to you and I will be posting the things I want to change in Tibet Discussion. I am not racist. I have plenty of Chinese friends who know the truth and agree with us. Me 03:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Errr --- what?! I am not User:219.79.228.11. What's with all of these weird accusations?! -- ran (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not and he is posting on your talk page in your defence and making edits on the Tibet page, you may want to tell him/her to register and not post/edit using just IPs, it looks like multiple edits but it is just one person out of Hong Kong:

219.78.173.41 - hong kong, 219.79.29.79 – hong kong, 219.79.228.11 – hong kong Me 18:57, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

funny, who said anon user cannot make comments on User's talkpage? Please dont make me look down on you TIers - 219.79.29.79 05:06, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no, not funny, unless you are a mentally challenged person. Why don't you find a better hobby where you don't post lies and offend the people of Tibet? Me 14:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cut the crab! If so then why dont you do something constructive like elaborating which edits made previously were lies? PLEASE! dont answer me with those nonsense like "my wife is Tibetan and I will point them out next week/month/year" - 219.79.29.79 18:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear smart chinese anon, I have made plenty of edits. Please feel free to read them. Wikipedia is not a place where you can jerk off. If you want to feel all powerfull and important go to the TAR page and post your chinese nationalistic craB there. The article I am disputing is the historic Tibet. So stop harrasing me, you troll! Me 18:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have never removed any well-sourced edits made by you. Once again, which sentence in the Tibet article is POV then? (kindly tell me if you got problems reading my question ok?)

Also read Wikipedia:Cite sources - 219.79.29.79 18:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, your English is quite simple so it is easy to understand. If you look at all my edits you will see what I am trying to do. Me 20:03, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of content

Please stop. If you continue to blank or remove content from Wikipedia, as you did to Tibet, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- ran (talk) 23:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear ran,I guess you are an admin? Please explain why are you trying to scare me off with a block, better have good reason acording to wikipedia's rules. Just because you are an admin in the chinese wikipedia that does not mean you can block anybody and not follow the rules. Explain yourself or I will question your admin status with the owner wikipedia and file a signed petition with 500 signatures of tibetan refugees who disagree with your article and edits. Have a nice day. Me 23:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blanking entire sections in the Tibet article in the following edits: [1] [2] [3]. Removal of content is considered vandalism, and vandalism is a blockable offense. -- ran (talk) 00:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have not done nothing of the sort. I am editig just like you are, buddy. Me 00:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As of today I am questioning your status as an admin on this article. I will be writing a letter to the owner followed by 500 signatures. Right now I am watching a special on PBS in Wisconsin about Tibetans in Wisconsin. Our Congressman has helped us and supported us. Mark my word. You are not dealing with a vandal but a grown, educated, influencial person. Make sure you are ready to deal with me. Do not treaten me. I told you your name article needs to be cut. It is too long and not related to topic. One personal advice. Look in your heart and check your actions, buddy. You have gone to the dark side. Me 00:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um.... and that must be the nth vague attack you've made on me, even though I do not hold and have not expressed a stance on the Tibet issue. It's especially interesting how Khoikhoi and Nat Krause, both of whom are firm supporters of TI, have ended up being attacked by you. But whatever. If you blank any more pages, I will block you as a vandal. -- ran (talk) 00:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IT IS NOT WHATEVER BUDDY. I AM NOT BLANKING. I AM EDITING! BLANKING WILL MEAN TO REMOVE THE ENTIRE CHINESE NAME CHAPTER. I HAVE EXPLAINED WHY I AM EDDITING YOU, JUST LIKE YOU ARE EDDITING ME! I AM REPORTING YOU TO THE OWNER AS A CHINESE NATIONALIST WITH A BIAST VIEW TO BE BLOCKED FOREVER.(until you get a new IP at least) YOU ARE NOT FIT TO BE A ADMIN IN THAT ARTICLE STOP PERSONALLY ATTACKING ME. AS FOR THE TWO PERSONS THAT I COMMENTED, NOT ATTACKED, DUH!, THEY ARE NOT DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THIS ISSUE AS WE ARE. THE GIRL IS NONCONSISTENT WITH HER ISSUES OR UNINFORMED OF THE CURRENT SITUATION, I DON'T KNOW, SHE IS NOT SOMEONE I CAN SAY IS FOR SURE A TRUTHFUL PERSON, MORE LIKE A DOUBLE FACED, WITH NO CLEAR IDEA OF WHAT SHE WANTS. THE OTHER GUY IS A VERY NICE GUY, TOO NICE TO DEAL WITH THIS ISSUE! HE IS A TRUE BUDDHIST, I AM AN ACTIVE BUDDHIST. LISTEN TO ME, LISTEN GOOD, MY KIDS ARE HALF TIBETAN AND HAVE TIBETAN NAMES. I AM NOT TIBETAN, I AM NOT PACIFIST LIKE MY SPOUSE. I KNOW PLENTY OF TIBETANS WHO THINK LIKE ME AND WILL FIGHT FOR TIBET AS LONG AS THEY LIVE BECAUSE THEY ARE TIBETAN. WHAT IS YOUR MOTIVATION?

So you actually think that Khoikhoi is... too dumb to understand what's going on, while Nat Krause actually hates me as much as you do and is just too nice to do anything about it? Now that's new... .and as for my motivation. My motivation is to edit Wikipedia in accordance with the policies of Wikipedia. My motivation is to stamp out nationalist POV-pushing wherever I see it, whether it be Chinese nationalism, Taiwanese nationalism, Japanese nationalism, Tibetan nationalism, Mongolian nationalism or any other kind of nationalism that newcomers decide to force into existing articles. Perhaps it is because you are nationalist, that is why everyone else seems nationalist and black-and-white to you. If you feel like fighting about it or whatever it is outside Wikipedia please go ahead, but as long as you are in Wikipedia, please abide by Wikipedia's policies. If you don't, if you insist on blanking pages, what else are admins supposed to do other than block you? -- ran (talk) 01:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually let me bold this thing you said:

THE GIRL IS NONCONSISTENT WITH HER ISSUES OR UNINFORMED OF THE CURRENT SITUATION, I DON'T KNOW, SHE IS NOT SOMEONE I CAN SAY IS FOR SURE A TRUTHFUL PERSON, MORE LIKE A DOUBLE FACED, WITH NO CLEAR IDEA OF WHAT SHE WANTS.

That's perfect. That's exactly how you're supposed to be on Wikipedia, when you're editing articles in accordance with NPOV. I feel happy for Khoikhoi and I think you should learn from her. -- ran (talk) 01:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see, the editor should not know what they want and be double faced?? Thats just plain stupid. I see your ideas very clearly so you are not in question. Her postings on Tibet are not solid because she doesn't cary a mission like you do. I do cary a mission. Only because the article is NOT NEUTRAL! When it becomes dry and neutral I will leave! I have kids and don't have time for this! Plus my spouse just told me I should just pray for you and try to forgive you.... Me 01:55, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ran, do not try to get me into fight with other Wikipedia members. That is vandalism and I will ask for your removal. I am not here to edit stuff that is proven. I am here to edit a certain "tone" of this article. You are chinese and therefore not neutral. Get it? What the heck is wrong with you?! Me 01:59, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removing content from talk pages

Please avoid removing content from talk pages. If you feel that your talk page is too long, consider archiving older content to a separate page instead. See Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines for more information. -- ran (talk) 03:00, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, master...Me 03:08, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

personal attacks from Ran, trying to scare me off with a block

Vandalism of the user pages of other users [4] is also a blockable offense. You have been warned. -- ran (talk) 04:50, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, master. But you are trolling me. Me 16:13, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what are you talking about, tool?! Show me! WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? YOU SHOULD NT BE AN ADMIN, YOU MENTALLY CHALLANGED PERSON! What a nerve you have! If you see me in my face you wouldn't dare speaking this way! I AM PROMISSING YOU! YOU WILL HAVE ISSUES WITH ME! ONCE AGAIN LOOK INTO YOUR HEART AND RETHINK YOUR ACTIONS! STOP TALKIG THIS WAY TO PEOPLE YOU DON'T KNOW! YOU DO NOT HAVE PROOF OF YOUR CHINESE NATIONALISTIC IDEAS! I WILL MAIL THE PETITION AND I MAY EVEN SUE YOU! DO NOT THINK YOU CAN HIDE BEHIND YOUR USER NAME! STOP TALKING DOWN TO ME AND TREATENING ME WITH YOUR VANDALISM! Me 04:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not engage in personal attacks against other editors, such as calling them mentally challenged and such. Legal threats, in particular, are very strongly discouraged. You could definitely be blocked for this sort of thing.—Nat Krause^(Talk!) 05:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have time to repeat my self 100 times a day. Read my edits on the Tibet article. Ran and another chinese guy keep deleting my edits. When I ask them why I get no answer. That shows some sort of mental issue with them. Again, read all my notes and edits. At this point I am going to get the petition with at least 500 signatures sent to the wikipedia owner to have some warning on the top of the article that the info is biast and can not be used as source on Tibet. That's all. Me 14:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User My Tibet, I like your views very much, and respect you for spending so much time on Wikipedia to help achieve something you believe which is not directly related to you.

This is very directly related to me. I am married to a Tibetan and have children. My children have Tibetan names and we want them to be able to call Tibet their home and go spend time there and act like free Tibetans. As I have stated before in the mind of the Tibetans they were never part of any other country or "motherland". Also please try to read in history all my comments before you tell me it is not related to me. Me 13:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, no, sorry, it's obviously not related to you, because you know absolutely nothing about it. Aranherunar 13:52, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

However, your beliefs, for most of us, "nationalists" or not, are quite unrealistic. Also, your methods are somehow a bit extreme. Instead of shouting and screaming insults, continuely deleting contents (Which OTHER people find useful), etc. You should quietly discuss in talk pages and hope to achieve the sort of 'neutral' point of view that you deemed as such. Please note that if you continue to use such bold methods to 'free the Tibetans', you will only be noted as a vandal and will have nothing to please your friends with but a large BAN on your talk page, which will not make the PRC cede a province.

Therefore, I suggest that you first read on Wikipedia how to write a NPOV article, how to achieve harmony with other contributors, etc. I also advise you to find some sources, such as books, which will support your "Neutral-point-of-view", and cite them in your writings. Moreover, you should try to understand some basic virtues and thinkings that we Chinese held - a good website here: [5] Again, if you still want to create an independent Tibet yourself with your friends, please do it PEACEFULLY or we will have to spend some more precious time on Wikipedia writing about things like BATTLE OF MY TIBET, TIBETAN WAR OF INDEPENDENCE, FATHER OF TIBET and THE EARLY LIFE OF MY TIBET, HERO OF THE TIBETAN'S REPUBLIC OF TIBET, or THE LEGEND OF A MENTALLY DISABLED PERSON: A BIOGRAPHY etc. etc. I believe Gandhi, a highly-respected Indian, often emphasized on peaceful protests. Surely you could do the same? Herunar 14:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the chinese were peaceful Tibet would not be in the shape it is. These kinds of remarks on wikipedia make me so upset. You don't know me or my family. In my house I have every book written on Tibetan History but no matter what and how much I try to change the tone of the article or the useless chinese blah blah blah's on the article ment only to show how much of a chinese state Tibet really is (which you may believe simply for the lack of facts or lack of tibetan friends) you and a lot of your nationalistic chinese friends will keep changing it. I guess you don't have much else to do but to sit and delete everything I add. So have it your way. Unfortunatelly I do not have the time to argue with someone who is admin and can ban me for trying to edit. It is not a fare fight! I was with my Tibetan friends yesterday and again it was clear to me where they stand and what they are doing. They are peacefully trying to preserve their tradition. But deep inside if there was another powerful country to help them they will all go to fight for Tibet. If the chinese never invaded Tibet, never oppressed the love for HH (which is a PART OF the Tibetan Buddhist tradition), never raped and inprisoned nuns and monks, never showed such an aggressive and UNBuddhist behaivor you would not read such comments like mine. IN THE END CHINA WILL COLAPSE BECAUSE OF THE DICTATORSHIP AND THE COMMUNIST REGIME AND TIBET WILL BE FREE. MARK MY WORDS. EVEN IF IT TAKES 1000 YEARS TIBETANS WILL WAIT AND PRESERVE THE CULTURE WAITING FOR THE TIME TO GO BACK HOME. Me 13:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a nationalistic Chinese.

It spells 'meant'.

It spells 'unfortunately'.

Every book written on Tibetan History? That's so sad of you. I pity you. Is that why Qin Shi Huangdi burned the books and buried the scholars?

By the way, the ones arguing with you are not admins. They are merely contributors trying to understand you. Thank you for expressing your views so clearly.

It spells 'fair'.

If the Chinese never invaded Tibet. Oh, yeah, we'll have to go back to the Tang dynasty and tell them to give up Tibet. And I forgot they're all Buddhists too!

It spells 'behavior'.

It spells 'collapse'.

And PRC isn't a dictatorship. Hey, wake up, it's 2006.

Oh, wait, I forgot, it's actually in the Han dynasty that the Han Chinese acquired Tibet! So it's 2000 years already, not 1000 years. What a pity. How about 3000 years? Aranherunar 13:52, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]