User talk:PericlesofAthens/Archive 4

Jingkang Incident RV

Hi there, please state your reasoning for the edit. I don't think it was wrong and I don't think it was funny. But I want to improve the article so please let me know where I got wrong (if I did). Thank you. TheAsianGURU (talk) 07:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

My mistake. I stand corrected. My invitation to you for contributing to the article still stands. Thanks. TheAsianGURU (talk) 08:23, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I just updated the article with Infobox Military Conflict. TheAsianGURU (talk) 19:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Clarify

(This is probably a stupid thing to do, but...) Ran across your recent run-in with Matisse. Just wanted to note that, contrary to what he/she keeps saying, I have not been in an active dispute with him/her since early November (see Talk:Caisson (Asian architecture), and in fact, I voted against the idea of arbitration because I had disengaged and the dispute was no longer active by that time.

Yeah, I know, Mattisse told me the dispute ended on January 16 or what not.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 14:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Just on the current issue, I find it a little disturbing that Mattisse keeps on dodging (/denying?) the issue of Caisson = Zaojing and has now "preserved" his/her favoured material about "zaojing" in the Ancient Chinese wooden architecture. I wish he/she would confront the issue and accept the outcome (that the two are the same - or, bring at least some evidence to show that the two are not the same). Sigh. Again, not trying to add fuel to the fire. Happy editing, --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Architecturally, it's the same concept; however, from what I understand, in China the "zaojing" carries a significant symbolism (geomantic?) that the coffer or caisson in the west has no parallel for. In any case, I have trouble understanding how the two of you could engage in such an asinine argument for months on end, literally.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 14:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I know - which is why the Caisson (Asian architecture) article is only about Chinese/Asian caissons, not the general structure. On the second point, I wonder the same thing. My fault was in insisting that there be only one article on the one topic. But I wish Mattisse would accept that the two are the same, and discuss about its proper naming, rather than creating one identical article or section after another. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 02:07, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Luzon Empire

Hi Pericles! I looked at the history of the Song Dynasty article and noticed that there is an article entitled Luzon Empire created by Ushiwaka. The article describes the historic chronicle of the Yuan Dynasty as fake, and that the last Song emperor Songdi Bing along with Zhang Shijie escaped to the Philippines and established the Luzong Empire or "Lesser Song Empire". Is this for real? I mean it just seem like alternative history to me. If indeed this was just a alternative theory, the article shouldn't even exist, and shouldn't be included as part of Song history.--Balthazarduju (talk) 19:14, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I knew there was something extremely fishy about it. Though I'm not claiming to be an academic expert, but the theory just sounds too absurd and "alternative" to me. Even if there are some established sources to support this "Luzon Empire" theory, it had to be at least well-known (or simply known) enough to have this kind of article written about it. If it is proven to be just a speculative theory and the article is full of original research, it should certainly be deleted.--Balthazarduju (talk) 01:46, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Ushiwaka's claim sounds like some conspiracy theory to me. Another editor questioned about the claim and he quoted 東西洋考, a book published during Ming Dynasty. (He later deleted the whole comment [1]). I read the relevant pages (the last 2 pages of volume 5; images 44 and 45) but they didn't mention anything about Luzon. But I have to admit the resolution wasn't very good and the text was written in classical Chinese. Hm... it's a pretty tricky business. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Josuechan (talk • contribs) 16:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Giovanni Villani FAC

Hi Pericles, I hope you noticed already, but there have been several comments left at the Giovanni Villani FAC. If you're intending to address the issues, you might want to leave a quick note on the page to let the FAC directors know so that they don't close the nom while you are in progress. Karanacs (talk) 17:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

I've reread the article and left more comments. Sorry it took me a bit to get back to it; I tend to do most of my editing during the week and not on the weekend. Karanacs (talk) 20:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for being so amenable to chop up your article at the whims of the FA reviewers ;) I think it reads a LOT more clearly now, and you've done a really good job overall on the article (plus you made me laugh at your FAC comments and that is always appreciated). I changed my vote to support. Karanacs (talk) 19:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I thought it was the Men in Black who specialized in memory removals? I'm grateful that you've called off the guys in suits/uniforms, regardless of who they are ;) I had moved the comments to the FAC talk page, but Sandy asked me to move them back. She showed me how to do the cute little hide box, so now they are back on the FAC nomination but are not so visible. Karanacs (talk) 19:57, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Beijing

Hi Pericles, sorry to bother you. There is an user User:Nikkul who recently did a lot of editings to the Beijing article. He also removed the entire "tourism" section, claiming that it is not a travel page. The tourist section was a bit long and lacks proper format. However, I told him that he should instead write a summary about the historical sites/tourist attractions in Beijing, without deleting the whole thing and leave a blank spot. I was wondering if you have time, could you write a section for the article, and sort of expand on that? Thanks!--Balthazarduju (talk) 23:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking of something like a Cityscape, Sites, or Landmarks section in the Beijing main article (similar to Paris or Saint Petersburg article), and gave some subsections like monuments, parks, temples, etc. What do you think?--Balthazarduju (talk) 01:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Good work on the Mausoleum article btw.

I think the article Beijing probably needs a main section (==Places==) and then some paragraphs and subcategories about specific palaces, temples and parks and stuff (since the city has many well-known sites, it would be just to put up several paragraphs describing the city's locale and places).

I was looking at the online Britannica. However, since that encyclopedia is not free, I can't access to more than a few beginning sentences. Do you have any good references about Beijing in particular?--Balthazarduju (talk) 05:14, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Image adding

I like the image you added to History of Silk, but in future you should mention in your edit summary that you changed an image and you should not mark changing an image as a minor edit. Thanks, Oreo Priest 12:20, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

HuoLongJing

Sorry for the late reply, I was very busy for a pretty long while. I do not have the book with me, but I will look for it again when I have the time. Feel free to delete it for me. Gnip 1:59, 7 Feburary 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 7 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nuova Cronica, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Daniel Case (talk) 02:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

DYK nomination

I've nominated Qianling Mausoleum for DYK. Please see how you like the wording of the proposed hook and modify it if you wish. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 21:55, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! Giovanni Villani is an FA!

Congratulations!--Kiyarrllston 10:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Burial of Emperor Gaozong/Wu Zetian

It is not quite accurate the way that you worded it in the article for 706. I am revising it. As for the other articles, it's not as problematic, but feel free to modify in conformance thereof if you wish. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 06:34, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Qianling Mausoleum

On 15 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Qianling Mausoleum, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 16:59, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Revert or not?

Hi! I want to hear your judgment to select whose revision of Religion in China; Angelo or Saimdusan:

[2]

Thank you so much!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 09:44, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I Agree with You

I agree with you regarding the issue of medicine in China. Can you help us cleaning Christian POV pushings in articles about Christianity and Christianity in China? Please read this article and its talk page. --Esimal (talk) 19:35, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

DYK: Lingyan Temple, Pizhi Pagoda

On 18 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with facts from the articles Lingyan Temple, and Pizhi Pagoda, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK selectors gave me this note by mistake earlier today. This should be yours. BTW, good job on the two new articles. Cheers! --PFHLai (talk) 20:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Ming sex

I do confess I came across your dialog on the China History Forum and poked at the article to provoke a bit. I have mixed feelings about your intention to separate the material into a culture section. I would certainly suggest a bare mention in the article itself,something on the order that sexuality was commercialized and that males were particularly valued, with a link to a separate article, just so readers would have at least a hint of what awaited them.

As you probably noticed, there is some relevant material in the Pederasty#China article, including the illustration titled "The Way of the Academicians." Haiduc (talk) 01:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

How could it have been repugnant if it was the fashion of the upper class? Haiduc (talk) 23:51, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Qianling Mausoleum

The article Qianling Mausoleum you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Qianling Mausoleum for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 12:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

George Washington

Go ahead, I don't mind. I don't own any articles. Cheers, and good luck, Basketball110 _{what famous people say} ♣ 22:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Zhang Hongfan

Zhang Hongfan was never a general of Song Dynasty and surrendered. He was a general of the Yuan Dynasty from the beginning.--64.56.255.95 (talk) 03:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Painting in the Americas

Good catch, I started a section at History of Painting called Painting in the Americas it's after Western painting and before Islamic painting. Please work on it when you can, I will too. Modernist (talk) 14:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I think the Maya additions are great. I will continue to search for other imagery as well. I think we've launched a good new section. Congrats and Thanks, - Modernist (talk) 20:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Timeline edits

Hey thanks for all those additions to the historical timeline. You pointed out a lot of stuff that I/most people probably didn't even know existed. You speeded up the progress probably by as many as a few years. Maybe even more. Benjwong (talk) 04:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh I definitely noticed all the changes. I am sure more readers will find it useful. Benjwong (talk) 06:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Re

Yes, I am stll around. -) Nice picture! I have put it in the article. Thanks a lot.--Mywood2004 (talk) 16:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Society of the Song Dynasty

Sorry, I didn't mean to mess with the article. The picture and poem looked fine on my screen, so I thought it was fine. I was also concerned about it interfering with the poem since it is so wide, but on my screen it was fine. Well I'm glad you like the new pic, but it seems nobody else does! Its not getting any votes... not enough resolution I guess. Tis a shame. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 20:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Missing image Image:Gu Hongzhong's Night Revels 1.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:Gu Hongzhong's Night Revels 1.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:Gu Hongzhong's Night Revels 1.jpg is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:Gu Hongzhong's Night Revels 1.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 03:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Name of Jingkang Zhi Luan

Hey, good found on the 3rd name. I went in and highlighted the English name & translated the Pinyin. TheAsianGURU (talk) 20:33, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Great contributions!

Hello Eric. How are you? I saw you name on Category:Humanist Wikipedians and I looked at your contributions. I think you have done a great job. We have few similarities. My 'English name' is Eric and I am a Humanist! I wish you all the best. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 03:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Adminship

Hello Eric. I would like to nominate you for adminship. I think you have done a great job as an editor. I think your RfA will easily pass. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact me to accept or decline the nomination. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 08:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Augustus

Looks interesting; but you will get the reaction: "work it into the article", as you should. The ancient stuff could be mixed with Vergil and Horace, who were probably sincere (and certainly paid for), into a section on Influence on literature; modern criticism should, I'm afraid, be centered on Syme. (Try inter-library loan; he's worth reading in any case.) I think you will find explicit comparison with the twentieth-century totalitarians. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:30, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

No Problem!

Hello Eric. You can easily become an admin. I must say, you are one of the best Wikipedians I have ever met. You have contributed to eight featured articles and made over 1000 edits to three articles. And, I have also seen the nasty fights between people here. I have also seen people trying everything to become an admin. It is so refreshing to met with a person like you. I wish you all the best. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 02:24, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Review of Nuova Cronica

Hi there,

I've left some notes on the talk page. Do you think a section like "importance" or "impact" or something would be appropriate? As in a section that validates the notability of the subject such as, "this chronicle is important b/c it was the first such-and-such, it helped do this, it contributed to this" etc.? Would there be enough content/material to merit a distinct section outside of the lead?

--Malachirality (talk) 09:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on the GA promotion of Nuova Cronica

Congratulations!

The hard work you put into this article clearly shows. It was a pleasure to read and review. Again, well done and congratulations! I don't know if you collect userboxes, but here is one for your troubles. Please pass it onto other significant editors of this article. --Malachirality (talk) 03:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

This user helped promote Nuova Cronica to good article status.

You rock

		The Golden Wiki Award
		Few editors write DYKs. Fewer write GAs. And fewer still write FAs. I myself have been an editor here for almost two years and I've only managed to write one GA and two or three DYKs. Many of our colleagues never even achieve that. But not only do you write all three types of articles, you do it on a regular basis, and in one of the most neglected sections of the encyclopedia. Your contributions are of a professional level of excellence, both comprehensive and concise, yet fascinating and engrossing. Your collection of Song Dynasty articles remains one of the most remarkable accomplishments in Wikipedia's history. Only the featured topic on the Solar system, crafted by many editors over a long stretch of time, rivals this feat. And yet you never lose your cool or your edge. Always friendly and diplomatic, you've proved refreshingly receptive and thoughtful towards suggestions for improvement and article critique. Your ability to consistently produce consistently fantastic content, escaping the drama and hubbub other prolific editors seem to find themselves in, while maintaining a level of scholarship that makes a fellow history major go "Damn...", you've become an example for other Wikipedians, including this one, to follow. I often hear people criticize Wikipedia's content - its systemic biases, its tragic imbalance towards video games and entertainment, its inaccuracies and mistakes. In these cases, I'm proud to be able to point to your contributions and prove them wrong. For this, not to mention everything else I've mentioned, you most clearly deserve this award. Hemlock Martinis (talk) 17:48, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 19 March, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Choe Bu, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Nice article! --Gatoclass (talk) 15:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

History of East Asia

You're right that the History of East Asia article is in rough shape. I also agree that the religion section should be integrated into the history, rather than discussed separately. Put the origin of Taoism or Shinto in context, while discuss the arrival of Buddhism rather than the beginning of Buddhism. That said, I know very little about this subject. But I'm willing to help out if you could help get the ball rolling. Organization is definitely an issue. 65.95.142.28 (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

My message to Beijing 2008!

File:Beijing2008.gif

Here is my gift for you. Please support Tibet and Tibetan people. Please share this image to your friends. Good luck!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 20:06, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope that one day Tibetans regain control of their own homeland and govern it apart from the rule of the PRC. However, the random violence and killings in Lhasa against many innocent people of various ethnicities that are not Tibetan is no way to solve any issue of independence and simply ruins people's lives to no good end. I know to some it might seem the only way to vent frustration with PRC rule, but simply rioting in China does not gain one independence or liberty. We've all seen what happens to regionally isolated rioters in China; best to wait when the moment is ripe for a massive, widespread, unchallengeable revolution...which might or might not happen.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:19, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

• First, I am really appreciate your reply. Ya! You talked right!

Although I am an Asian mix (dominant Cantonese) and I am proud of my Chinese descent but I am really anti the rule of Chinese Communist Party because we Chinese know that they are worse than Nazi party. I pray for the sins of my Chinese people and pray for World Peace and the freedom of Tibet, East Turkestan, Taiwan with many other countries (such as Vietnam, Burma, Laos, Mongolia, etc) because Chinese Communism is a new colonialism, new fascism, etc...Once again, thanks for our comment. Best wishes to you and your family! Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:42, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't go as far as to say the CCP is worse than the Nazi Party, but the PRC sure has an ugly side to its history. There's no whitewashing that.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 01:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Communist China is waste matter

Wonderful, I also support for Tibet and Tibetan people. Because China is a stealer of land, culture, history and resource. Immediately, I want dirty Communist China recognizes independence of Tibet, and returns all the territory that China has stolen from Mongolia, Korea, Vietnam, and India from centuries ago. And I command that China must withdraw from both Paracel and Spratly Islands. JacquesNguyen (talk) 01:33, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Those aren't my exact sentiments, but sure, I support Tibetan people.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 01:38, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Congrats

On technology of the Song Dynasty making front page! --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 05:05, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Translation

I saw some your great articles about Chinese history. Could I translate some on Serbian wikipedia?--Vojvodaen (talk) 15:37, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Technology History

Hi! I was greatly impressed by the article that you wrote on the Song Dynasty. I was wondering if you'd be willing to join the Technology History Wikiproject? Redmarkviolinist ^{Drop me a line} 16:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Anything on this list here.

Redmarkviolinist ^{Drop me a line} 16:37, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry

I sort of messed up your userpage a little when I gave you an award. I may have put it in the wrong place. I hopy you can fix it.

Sincerely, --RayquazaDialgaWeird2210 (talk) 16:56, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Cursory Review

Hey Pericles,

I took a look at the various Song Dynasty articles that you have created/authored/edited. I would say in general that they are all o.k., but that they all suffer from the same primary flaw of relying on long summaries from limited sources, in many instances from the same sources. Many entries contain a litany of facts, a long recitation of individual instances culled from a single source, but these facts don't illustrate the significant trends and issues that played a formative role during the Song Dynasty. I'm making some comments in the Economy of Song Talk page, take a look for some examples of what I mean.

Best of luck

Aas217 (talk) 07:38, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Congrats on Song tech and an unrelated question

I was happy to see that it was on the main page the other day. Great job! On an unrelated note, do you happen to have any specialists of (specifically 12th century) Islamic history at your university? If so, I need to get in contact with them regarding Nizari massacres in Isfahan and Baghdad in 1101. I've corresponded with other specialists, but the recommended sources have turned up nothing. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 01:13, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I do not need it for a school project or anything. It's just for a historical-fiction novel I am writing. Basically, I need to know more about the following event:

In Western Persia and Iraq Berkyaruq made no real effort to attack the centres of Ismaili power. Instead, he tried to appear the anger of his officers and of the populace by permitting or encouraging a massacre of Ismaili sympathizers in Isfahan. Soldiers and citizens joined in the hunt for suspects, who were rounded up, taken to the great square, and killed. A simple accusation was enough, and many innocents, say Ibn al-Athir, died by private vengeance on that day. From Isfahan, the anti-Ismaili action was extended to Iraq, where Ismailis were killed in the camp at Baghdad, and Ismaili books burnt. (The Assassins: A Radical Sect in Islam, pg. 52)

I wrote the author, Bernard Lewis, and he suggested The Ismailis: Their History and doctines (Farhad Daftary, 1990) as the only English language book that might have more info on the event, but it turned up nothing. It was no more descriptive than Lewis' book. It reads:

At any event, the growing power of the Nizaris finally forced Barkiyaruq to move against them. Under such circumstances, Barkiyaruq in western Persia and Sanjar in Khurasan agreed in 494/1101 to take combined action against the Nizaris, who were now posting a serious threat to Saljuqid power in general. Accordingly, Barkiyaruq sanctioned the massacres of Nizaris in Isfahan and Baghdad, as well as many of the Saljuq officers in Quhistan. (pp. 355-56)

--Ghostexorcist (talk) 04:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Is Prof. Hamdani from George Mason University the person I am looking for? The reason I ask is because I've found several similarly name professors of Islamic history online (I don't know what school you attend). I am waiting for a reply from Prof. Daftary as well. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 19:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Ling.Nut/Funerary art

Hi Pericles,

If you could help with the "Ancient China" section of User:Ling.Nut/Funerary art, I'd be deeply in your debt. later! Ling.Nut (talk) 02:33, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The refs alread in use are from JSTOR, but if you find more, then please do run with it! Thanks! Ling.Nut (talk) 04:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

The Featured Article Medal

		The Featured Article Medal
		I award the prestigious Featured Article Medal to Eric for promoting several articles to the Featured Article status. Masterpiece2000 (talk) 14:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Eric. Thank you for appreciating the award. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 06:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Ming Dynasty

Due to the dispute, the article has been locked. Further information is here, I have offered to mediate the content dispute. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk to me) 14:37, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Message on my talk page. Read and heed. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 17:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Who do you suspect they are a sock puppet of? Steve Crossin (talk to me) 17:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Careful....

Comments like these, such as "Hahahahaha! Dude, every single point in that quotation describes LaGrandefr completely! Oh, I am on to you, buddy.", "I see only one person creating mischief here, and it certainly isn't User:Yaan", and "Bravo, Mr. History! Well, I guess dumbing down everything into one sentence proves it alright" are very close to uncivil. Whether they are a sock puppet or not, everyone on Wikipedia, bar proven banned users evading there bans (their edits can be reverted on sight, per WP:BAN), all users are entitled to due process, and are innocent until proven guilty. I'd ask that you watch your comments, and remain civil. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 18:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Beijing

Hey PericlesofAthens/Archive 4! I'm currently planning the launch of the WikiProject Beijing, depending on if enough other editors would be interested in such a project. I saw you have edited the main Beijing page recently or in several times in the past and therefor might be interested. If you are, please sign: User:Poeloq/WikiProject_Beijing. As I am posting this to quite a few editors, I am not watching your page and would ask you to reply with any comment or questions on my talk page. Cheers, Poeloq (talk) 21:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Caution

I've been reading the dispute. Many of your comments have not been civil. I spoke to you before about this, however you continued. I cannot do anything about it, just to ask you to watch how you say things, and remain civil. Incivility is something I cannot tolerate as a mediator. And, yes, I will be notifying the other person of the exact same issue. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk to me) 17:41, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• Things like "Hahahahaha! Dude, every single point in that quotation describes LaGrandefr completely! Oh, I am on to you, buddy.", "Do I smell a previously banned wiki account, or worse, sock puppetry?", "Drop this "I'm an innocent little kid with a lolly-pop" act, it's not fooling anyone", and "Your argument is so lame that I don't even think you're trying anymore to make sense at all. Please, go edit an article that does not require much from scholarly input. I know! You can bring Pee-wee's Playhouse up to featured article status! That would be the perfect article for someone with your level of "professionalism"". Need I continue? As an editor, you should know not to bite newcomers, even if they've been on other wikis. If you think they're a sock puppet, well the board is that a way --->WP:SSP, and for a checkuser, its --->WP:RFCU. You also aren't assuming good faith. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 17:58, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• Here's another one- "Bravo, Mr. History! Well, I guess dumbing down everything into one sentence proves it alright;". Can you see the issue here? Steve Crossin (talk to me) 18:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I guess dumbing down everything into one sentence proves it alright

You are aware that this statement is in criticism of a quotation from the Mingshi, not LaGrandefr specifically? Well, the "Bravo, Mr. History" was aimed at LaGrandefr, but not the following statement. Fine, I'll "assume good faith," but this guy has just about spent my patience and good faith with his arrogance and outright refusal to acknowledge (and even degrading of) the scholarly sources I have brought to the table. Not only that, he thinks he's some sort of qualified historian who can judge 300 year old texts! I'm sorry if I lost myself, but he pushed all the right buttons, as I myself am aiming to become a historian.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:05, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• Fair enough, we all can lose our cool every so often. I've done so myself before, and ever since, I strive to be civil, and to avoid all personal attacks. Additionally, I'm going to the State Library of Victoria, I will see what I can find myself. Don't think I'm only targeting you, per se, I'll be watching their behaviour. Right now, they could be accused of POV pushing. But I don't lay accusations. I mediate. Cheers, Steve Crossin (talk to me) 18:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• Read the talk page again. You're really pushing it you know. Steve Crossin (talk to me) 04:36, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Steve Crossin, editors should be civil with newcomers. I agree with you. However, I don't think experienced editors like Eric should be warned. I am removing the warning. Warning can demotivate editors. I hope you agree with me. Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 09:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Again

• Christianity in China
• Portal:Christianity in China

Wikipedia have an enormous problem with such kind of articles, full of false claims and sensationalisms of USA ultra-bushist-evangelicals. Please help me make articles and portal NPOV.

User Brian0234

This user is very problematic. He continues to revert my edits and vandalize my talkpage while deleting tags I leave on his. He's a very big problem for Wikipedia neutrality regarding arguments related to Christianity in China. We should open a request for help of administrators.

Christianity in China is a horrible propaganda article, full of false claims by anonymous evangelical authors. The article needs a complete cleanup.

Hello PericlesofAthens, I have appreciated your contributions to Christianity in China thus far. Another pair of eyes is always welcome.Brian0324 (talk) 21:29, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

ming dynasty

Hi! At first, I'm sorry for being late to revise a new map and I didn't finish your messages in the talk page of Ming Dynasty. Frankly, I really don't know where and how comes the conflict of this time. The color of Annam has been changed differently from Ming China proper, the issue of Tibet has also been resolved, and I also created 3 section in the article to explain the position of Tibet, Jurchens and Annam during Ming China. But some guys (maybe it's your buddies) are so willing to modify the article all the time. I'm fed up and I hope that you can persuade your buddies to be calm. The article has been locked once again, which is not what you and me want to do. So I wish we could find a solution as soon as possible. Regards. --LaGrandefr (talk) 12:32, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help on Tibet. --Slashem (talk) 22:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Three_Departments_and_Six_Ministries

Hello, please can you see Talk:Three_Departments_and_Six_Ministries : I have difficulty to understand one point. 220.135.4.212 (talk) 12:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for my last edit on your page :] 220.135.4.212 (talk) 14:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

4/24 DYK

On 24 April, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tibet during the Ming Dynasty, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Bedford 04:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Tibet during the Ming Dynasty for GA status

Hi Pericles, recently stumbled upon it under the "Did you know?" section from the Main Page today. I am not sure of what I did that is untimely, but I have just helped you to nominate your article above for good article status over here. Thanks. 219.95.205.65 (talk) 05:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Portal:History of Imperial China

Hey there, I just created a new portal: Portal:History of Imperial China. There seemed to be a gap in portal coverage of Chinese history :) You seem to be pretty knowledgable on the topic, considering that some of our best quality articles on Imperial China have been written by you, so I wondered if you'd pop by and consider helping expand it? Any improvements would be appreciated, especially in the area of images and biographies (of which we seem to have few of high quality :(). -- Naerii 00:34, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Sweet, I don't know how I missed those! I can see that I've got a lot of stuff to be adding :P Thanks. -- Naerii 00:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow, thanks a lot for the suggestions. I've been a bit busy with college lately so I slacked off on working on the Portal. But I'll go add those articles now :) -- Naerii 19:04, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Tibet during the Ming Dynasty

Hello! I'm glancing through the contents in this article, and some statements seems like "commentary" in my opinion, I don't know if these statement are meant to be part of the original sources you cited or you simply added to it to contradict the statement, but it would be best to not insert comments after a citation in which I think the original source clearly did not make mentions of it.--TheLeopard (talk) 23:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

What I meant was if you were responding to these author's statements, your responding statements needs to be "outside" of their cited statement, as to clarify that it is not part of their original statement.--TheLeopard (talk) 23:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

If you kept your response as part of their statement, it would give the illusion that it is part of the original source.--TheLeopard (talk) 23:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek.  ::--TheLeopard (talk) 23:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Ming Dynasty

I have replied to your commments on the Ming Dynasty talk page. Steve Crossin (talk) (review) 03:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Tibet during the Ming Dynasty

Hello Eric. You have contributed to so many FAs and Tibet during the Ming Dynasty is a very very good article. Great contributions! Your contributions are simply outstanding. I would like to work with you! Regards, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 10:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Eric, I just want to say that there are many good points raised on the Tibet during Ming Dynasty article. I personally haven't seen any convincing evidences on the account of Ming's absorption of Tibet, and I agree that there were definitely not much of sovereignty claim either. However, the content inserted on the article regarding the Yuan Dynasty (especially the way it described it) is slightly on the POV side in my opinion. I know that you did not write these statements, you simply inserted some of these author's opinions, but I think you should perhaps clarify these view points.

The matter of fact is, the Yuan Dynasty is in mainstream academics, often viewed as a "dynasty of China". I understand certain scholars tend to writes it off as sort non-Chinese, however, these view points often are only concentrated in a specialized area. If you read Encyclopedia Britannica, it would describe the Yuan as "Dynasty established in China by Mongol nomads. The Mongol dynasty, renamed the Yuan in 1271, proceeded to set up a Chinese-style administration." [3] Encyclopedias such as Encarta or Encyclopedia Americana (writes Mongols established "a Chinese-style Yüan dynasty" in the opening paragraph) would describe the Yuan Dynasty similarily. I think it is fair to say that the majority of references would state Yuan Dynasty as a "dynasty established by Mongols of China". So far, the sources cited on the article that liked to argue the "non-Chinese-ness of the Yuan Dynasty" were Tibetologist scholars'. And don't you think there were POV bias to their opinion as well?

I understand there are some users like to describe Yuan Dynasty as a "Chinese state", and that in my opinion, would be not entirely empirical and perhaps too wishy-washy. However, I think there are enough convincing prominent sources to back up the claim of Yuan being a dynasty of China, and I think most people wouldn't disagree with labeling the Yuan Dynasty as the "dynasty of China" or "mongol dynasty of China". What do you think?

Since I think the User:LaGrandefr hasn't been stirring up troubles in the Ming Dynasty article (I viewed the debate on the talk page), I think you should perhaps be a bit more objective on the issues. Your personal opinion would be welcoming.--TheLeopard (talk) 18:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm really not talking about "detail analysis" on the Yuan Dynasty and how Chinese it is or how not Chinese it is. I'm just saying, that according to "mainstream" history sources, Yuan dynasty, not founded by Han Chinese, is often viewed as a dynasty of China (I'm not even argue that it is a Chinese dynasty although many do). I think there is nothing controversial about it.

I'm just thinking that we should point out, the sources describing the Yuan as sort of a non-Chinese related dynasty were mainly from a specialized perspective.

Oh, about the Tibetologist scholars paints Yuan Dynasty as non-Chinese. I think it is fairly obvious from the statements cited from these scholars, but I think an exact statement about them "paint the Yuan Dynasty as non-Chinese in all aspects" would be hard to find, since not many books are actually written about the Tibetology itself or the Western studies of this topic.--TheLeopard (talk) 18:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Regard, Masterpiece2000 (talk) 04:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:Wanli Emperor image

These are all copies of the official court potrait. An internet search of the emperor's name will come up with numerous sites displaying the same image.--Jiang (talk) 09:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Chen's book

Till now, I havev't lied. The arguments that I added exist really. Please see [4]. His original text which concern the article are:

• 1413年5月，明成祖派候显等人从京城出发进藏，以向乌思藏许多首领传达旨意，其中带去了命令帕竹第悉交出萨迦大殿给予原主萨迦派的诏书，12月侯显等人到达西藏，在颇章孜宣读诏书，萨迦派举行了十分隆重的庆典。此事反映出明朝中央对西藏政教势力之间的争执有决定处理的权力。
• 在藏历第七饶迥土鼠年（1408）六月，宗喀巴给明成祖写了一封回信，请明朝的使者带回。在这封回信里，宗喀巴对收到皇帝赐予的大量礼品表示衷心感谢，对皇帝的邀请则予以婉拒，“余非不知此是大地之大主宰为佛法着想之谕旨，亦非不遵不敬陛下之诏书，但我每与众人相会，便发生重病，故不能遵照圣旨而行，惟祈陛下如虚空广大之胸怀，不致不悦，实为幸甚！”
• 永乐五年三月丁已，明成祖封锝银协巴为“万行具足十方最胜圆觉妙智慈善普应佑国演教如来大宝法王西天大善自在佛”，命他领天下释教。

I don't know if you can read Chinese and please look for someone who can. Moreover, please persuade Bertport not to make the random undo, OK? PLEASE! I've spent hours' work edting the page. Regards.--LaGrandefr (talk) 16:13, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Tibet during the Ming Dynasty. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Rjd0060 (talk) 16:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Rjd0060 (talk) 16:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

PericlesofAthens (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

What the hell? I got your message loud and clear and did not revert any more of his edits. I merely corrected his grammar and moved the citations from the beginning of his paragraphs to the end. How is that a revert of his edit? This block of yours is unconstructive and completely unwarranted.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 17:08, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Per comment below — Daniel Case (talk) 17:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Please review WP:3RR and note that "A revert, in this context, means undoing, in whole or in part, the actions of another editor or of other editors". You reverted several parts of other edits, after your warning to stop. - Rjd0060 (talk) 17:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

{{unblock|In altering his recent edits, notice that I did not delete any of its content, I made no attempt to erase his material, and his sentences are entirely intact. I simply cleaned up his poor grammar and moved his inline citations to the end of the paragraphs. That should not be grounds for blocking someone and what you have done is totally uncalled for. Your strict interpretation of what an edit revert is certainly would make sense to a robot, but use your human brain for a second and realize I was making no provocation. I was merely improving the article's grammar. This whole block is therefore rather silly, in my opinion.--Pericles of AthensTalk 17:27, 2 May 2008 (UTC)}}

Could you please provide the relevant diffs in chronological order so that we may assess the nature of your edits? Sandstein (talk) 18:56, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

{{unblock|Sure. At about 16:40 today, I read your warning about reverting his edits, so I thought, fair enough. However, since this article is up for featured article status, I wasn't just going to sit around and accept spelling errors on his part and poor grammar structure of his sentences (he does not speak English very proficiently). If you look here, this is exactly what I did, along with moving his citations to the tail end of his paragraphs. Nothing changed besides that. If you look here, I merely changed "1000 household" and "10000 household" in the correct plural form of "1,000 households" and "10,000 households". If you look here, you will see that I merely corrected his grammar and changed the all-caps rendition of "HOU Xian" to "Hou Xian", as well as scrapping his use of "meanwhile", which makes no sense here. If you look here, I merely fixed his citation since he did not cite the internet source properly, or attribute the source where he gained the information from. I ask you, in what way did I delete his material or revert his edits? If anything, I cleaned up his poor grammar, spelling, and improper use of citations, like any damn good Wikipedian should. Therefore, I am quite offended that you sir would block me as some sort of hooligan who has been misbehaving. Look to the talk page of the article; everyone has tried to reason with this guy, but he doesn't listen, he's not here to cooperate or take feedback from other members, and worst of all, he refuses to fix his own mistakes and purposely waits on others to clean up after his mess. Thank you.--Pericles of AthensTalk 19:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)}}

You have? Somehow I still am unable to edit. Are you sure it worked?--Pericles of Athens^Talk 19:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

There was an autoblock on your account. It is now removed. Sorry -- I did check last night but I must have missed it. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 08:31, 3 May 2008 (UTC)