User talk:Wanzhen

Hello Wanzhen, and welcome to Wikipedia! The first thing you should know is that we encourage you to be bold. Feel free to edit and improve articles, by clicking any 'edit' link.

If you'd like to test what Wikipedia can do, check out the sandbox - just type and save the page and your text will appear. That's the beauty of a Wiki.

For more information check out some of the important links below. If you really need help, just type {{helpme}} on your user page. It's that easy!

If you'd like to get involved with current projects, have a look at the Community Portal. There are always tasks for users to do, ranging from copyediting to expanding stubs.

I hope you'll enjoy your time here, but be warned, it can become addictive! Feel free to message me, I'm more than happy to help. As an added tip, sign any message you post so users know that you've said it. To do so is delightfully simple, just use the wikicode ~~~~.

Once again, welcome! Jfing ers88 04:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Chouhan.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Chouhan.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:05, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Metropolis Magazine

Sure, on my talk page. --Simonkoldyk 21:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dave's ESL Cafe

Hi, I'm glad someone finally took to writing an article about Dave's as it is definately worthy of having mention. I have edited the article this evening removing several statements that do not abide by the NPOV rules of Wikipedia. I think you have to becareful of making it look like your blaming the entire problem of schools breaking employment laws on the website.

Certainly we have all had our share of bad hagwons (I have for sure), but it's not the fault of the website nor moderators. I hope you will take this into consideration when looking at my changes. Davidpdx 11:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like to use the standard of a reasonable person which often gets lost when people start refering to Wikipedia rules. Someone actually told me that I could not write that the sky is blue unless I use a scientific reference! So, I am changing it back. Wanzhen 22:07, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with that is that showing extreme bias, as you are, does not let the reader themselves decide what to think about the article. Essentially you are injecting your opinion into the article. You might also take a look at WP:NOT and scroll down where it says Wikipedia is not a soapbox.

I have reverted the version back again and put a note on the talk page. At this point, things need to be discussed rather then simply reverting them. Davidpdx 22:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no opinion injected into the article. They are facts. (unsigned by User:Wanzhen

I have again reverted the article. Just to point out, neither of us can revert the article again because of the WP:3RR rule which states on the 4th revert with in 24 hours you can be banned from Wikipedia.

On the talk page of the article I have left a message again. I will copy/paste the three paragraphs that need to be worked on. If you will take a look at them and cite sources, then I'm happy to see then readded. As I said, I've made several changes to the article that you have reverted without even considering including rewriting the beginning.

Unfortunately at this point, if you revert again, I'm going to go to an administrator in terms of having your IP banned for 24 hours. This means you won't be able to access Wikipedia at all for a day. Alternatively, you can not revert it and respond on the talk page so we can talk about the three paragraphs we disagree on. It's your choice. Davidpdx 06:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Louis Carlet

An editor has nominated Louis Carlet, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louis Carlet and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 10:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speculating on user identities

Please note that speculating on user identities is not acceptable behaviour on Wikipedia. From WP:BP

Users who post what they believe are the personal details of other users without their consent may be blocked for any length of time, including indefinitely, depending on the severity of the incident, and whether the blocking admin feels the incident was isolated or is likely to be repeated. This applies whether or not the personal details are accurate.

See also WP:COI Conflict of interest in point of view disputes

Another case is within disputes relating to non-neutral points of view, where underlying conflicts of interest may aggravate editorial disagreements. In this scenario, it may be easy to make claims about conflict of interest. Don't do it. The existence of conflicts of interest does not mean that assume good faith is forgotten. Quite the opposite. Remember the basic rule: discuss the article, not the editor.

If you continue to do this, I will ask for an Admin to block you from Wikipedia. Sparkzilla 03:12, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFC/discussion of article National Union of General Workers

A request for comments has been filed about the use of anonymous sources in reliable publications. The RFC can be found by the article's name in this list, and the actual discussion can be found on Talk:National_Union_of_General_Workers#Request_for_Comment_-_Use_of_anonymous_sources_in_reliable_publications in case you wish to participate. Thank you for your contributions. Sparkzilla 06:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Metropolis (English magazine in Japan)/Crisscross Merger proposal

Talk:Crisscross#Merger_proposal. There is currently a discussion whether the articles Crisscross and Metropolis should be merged. As a contributor to one or both of these articles, your input would be valued. Heatedissuepuppet 11:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Baker (prisoner in Japan) Request for Comment

A RfC has been started regarding the use of sources (including Metropolis) as "exceptional claims" on the above article. As an previously interested party, your input would be most valued. Comment Talk:Nick_Baker_(prisoner_in_Japan)#Request_for_comments. Thank you. David Lyons 05:43, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

August 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Big Brother 8 (US), did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Rjd0060 00:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Big Brother 8

Just so you know I have replied to your comment on the Big Brother Talk Page. - Rjd0060 00:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]