Welcome

Hi and welcome to wikipedia. I hope you like it and decide to stay. Here are some handy links for newcomers.

Also you can sign your name on talk pages and vote pages with three tildes like this ~~~, and your name with a time stamp with four like this ~~~~. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. Howabout1 ^{Talk to me!} 15:39, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

Xingyi

Thanks for your contributions... you may wish to add yourself to the Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by martial art

Interested in lineage

With your contributions to the xingyi page, its obvious that you know more about the art that the average punter - I'm interested in finding our what your style and branch of the xingyi family you sit in is ;) [Personally, I'm a Hebei stylist with lineage through Guo Yun Shen] --Medains 08:44, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I study Henan branch. Lineage unsure. This is somewhat embarassing because I have only been studying Xingyi for just over a week. I apologise for appearing proficient; my knowledge of the art accumulated doing internet research while finding a suitable teacher.

As you've probably noticed, the quality of information on the internet is dubious, partial and often badly written. So I created a text file on my computer where I consolidated all my research on Xingyiquan. Here, I was able to sift through the facts and streamline it into a digestable format. Soon, I had a decent summary of Xingyiquan's history and its basic principles. I noticed Wikipedia lacked a coherently-written history section for Xingyiquan (probably due to multiple authors chipping in over time) so I uploaded my work.

Again, I apologise for any deception my enthusiasm may have caused! I must admit that I am also afraid to ask my sifu about his lineage. He is a stern, humourless man and I don't want to appear as if I am distracted by academic (read: trivial, non-practical) matters! Tarkovsky

Ah, it might be considered rude to enquire about lineage after only a short practice time. But don't be afraid to ask questions (though the answer may involve being used as a demonstration dummy...) I've managed to get a lot of interesting stuff from my instructor - just by asking! --Medains 15:02, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, well it just happens that I was talking with my sifu yesterday when he mentioned that he teaches a system with ten animals. I asked if he meant Henan style which he confirmed with some degree of surprise. And yes, I was also used as a practice dummy later by one of the senior students, funny how things work out isn't it? Tarkovsky

Xingyiquan

Hey,

I like what you've been doing with the Xingyiquan article.

Just one thing: pinyin naming conventions render three-character names as Familyname Firstgivencharactersecondgivencharacter rather than Familyname Firstgivencharacter Secondgivencharacter.

JFD 13:56, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, ok! My apologies, I was wrong to edit it that way Tarkovsky

Wing Chun

Please stop edit warring at Wing Chun. It is an inappropriate method of editing an article. If you have concerns about the current structure and purpose of the article, or with edits being made by another editor, please discuss it at the Talk page instead. Large changes to an article are also best discussed (or at the very least announced) on the Talk page before beginning. Edit warring only serves to irritate any other editors who are trying to improve the article and who are not involved in your content dispute. — Saxifrage | ☎ 06:58, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's true that I've been editing the Wing Chun article for the past few weeks but I am unaware of any such 'edit war'. No one has messaged me specifically about the content of my edits. I have not received any messages from 'irritated' editors who are trying to improve the article...as far as I know I am the only one actually contributing to the article at the moment.

I have also proposed all major changes in the discussion section, which no one opposed or rarely commented on.

I didn't know these actions were considered 'war'-like by Wikipedia staff. If you could tell me specifically what I've done wrong and what part of my actions constitute 'edit-warring', I will strive to behave more appropriately in future Tarkovsky

Here I beg for forgiveness for mistaking the situation. I confused your edits with those of 58.105.156.122 (talk · contribs), whose editing history at Wing Chun is somewhat questionable. I'm not sure how I made that mistake, but I apologise profusely for my uncalled-for message above. I'm sorry, and thank you for your contributions to the article. (FYI, I'm not staff, just another editor looking out for the health of the project. My aim was just stupendously off that day.) — Saxifrage | ☎ 07:48, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No worries mate, we all have days like that! Tarkovsky

Boxing

Image:Ortiz-Petchkoom-2004.jpg has been listed as a possible copyright violation

An image that you uploaded, Image:Ortiz-Petchkoom-2004.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Image Tagging Image:Anthony_Mundine_Bust.jpg

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Anthony_Mundine_Bust.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --OrphanBot 12:25, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Cat_empire01.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Cat_empire01.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact Carnildo or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. Thank you.

Image Tagging Image:Louis-Marciano-1955-01.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Louis-Marciano-1955-01.jpg. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, contact Carnildo.

Confucianism

You introduced an unexplained and dubious distinction between ethics and morality, you changed the correct assertion that Confucianism is Asian to the incorrect, overly narrow implied claim that it's Chinese (and added the false claim that Confucianism is simply the system produced by Confucius), you changed the correct "up to" to the incorrect "until" (incorrect because it implies that the influence then stopped)... Part of the problem is that you seem to have misunderstood the nature of a summary; summaries do sometimes repeat what comes later.

Your edit summaries could also be more explanatory. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 13:12, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I'll respond to that here:

1. Morality is a system of values and ethics is the study of that system. Confucian texts address both, hence the distinction.

That isn't a universal nor generally accepted usage ("ethics" is frequently used to mean a system of values, as in codes of professional ethics, and "moral philosophy" is widely used in preference to "ethics" as a description of the study).

Fair enough. I don't study this field so my knowledge isn't up to scratch.

2. I haven't read 'Manufacturing Confucianism' which claims that European Jesuits 'invented' Confucianism for political purposes. Such a claim seems extraordinary and refutes the common claim of Chinese heritage. I do not want to maintain a 'status quo' here but such extraordinary claims should be sourced and affirmed by multiple authors before they are allowed to stand as 'truth'. Moreover, the article itself should reflect the assertion of 'East Asian' heritage. Presently, I only see Chinese names and origins mentioned.

Presently, 'Manufacturing Confucianism' is the only text cited to support the claim of European Jesuit invention. I propose that more texts be added before this is allowed to affect the entire article and the important opening paragraph which sets the tone for the article.

I wasn't referring to that thoery (indeed, saying that Confucianism is Asian is not to say that it was invented by Jesuits). rather, Confucianism, while originating in China, developed through contact with many other countries, most notably Korea and Japan.

Of course, but as the argument goes...despite many influences, Confucianism remains essentially Chinese. The texts certainly reflect this as its numerous analogies refer to Chinese political and social events. It's up for semantic debate but I won't pursue it further.

Obviously the article needs to flesh out Japanese/Korean aspects more as its fairly Chinese-centric presently.

3. "Up to" and "until" are interchangable in my opinion. "Up to" recalls limits and a cutting off of things eg "he filled the pool up to the brim with water", until seems more appropriate.

In the context of references to the present, "up to" simply refers to a period stretching to a certain time (as in "x has been true up to 21st century", which implies that x is still the case), while "until" implies a period that stops at a certain time ("x was true until the 21st century", which implies that x is no longer true).

I understand, thanks for clarifying that.

4. Lastly, my comment on repetition addressed repetitive aspects within the summary which defined Confucianism twice.

I'll look back at that.

Tarkovsky

Your account will be renamed

Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Tarkovsky. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Tarkovsky~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours,
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation

02:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed

This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk)

19:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:08, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]