Kowloonese

Peudonym does suggest that you're one of about six million people. Vicki Rosenzweig

Have you considered renaming & reuploading "squids.jpg"? I think the files are all going in one folder, and you may have erased a picture of, say, squids. Or perhaps your kites shaped like squids will later be erased by a picture of, um, squids. Koyaanis Qatsi

Thanks for your corrections at Hotei, much appreciated. May you be well. Usedbook

Hello! I've noticed that you have the Japanese examples in palindrome to the section "Symmetric by sound". As far as I know, they are both symmetric by sound and by letters as each sound in Japanese could be represented by a letter. Therefore I believe that those examples should be put back to "by letters" and we can add a note saying that they are also "by sound" -- just like I do that for Chinese palindorms.

Of course, I know little Japanese so I am in no position to rewrite it. But if you agree with me, then please return it to my old edition. Wshun

I don't like ping-pong neither. That's why I ask if you would agree to revert palindrome to my previous version. Since you disagree, I just leave it as it is now. I am no palindrome expert, but I prefer to use poems which obey 平仄 or use well-known palindromes... I wish this kind of NPOV could be tolerated :P

Do you really live in Kowloon? Maybe later we can have a party for hk wikipedians. :)) Wshun

No, I no longer live in Kowloon. I live in the US. Kowloonese 09:10 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I was just thinking that you might add some of your knowledge in the revamped Kowloon articles (see the discussions also). olivier 08:30 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)

I have nothing to add. I like the rearrangement now. Kowloonese 09:10 17 Jul 2003 (UTC)

OK lah. olivier 02:07 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)

where about in Hong Kong do you live user Wshun user:wongdai

Thanks for the Japanese characters on the woodblock artists. Also, I agree with you about the "sentence per line" and the non-English names. Maybe one day things will change.... Noel 16:25, 20 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Some of the photos you have uploaded recently have large file sizes, larger than is probably justified by the size of the image. Have you considered altering the settings of your photo editor to make the JPEGs a little smaller? In my experience, the images thus produced are generally more than acceptable in quality, and more reasonable for modem users to download. --Robert Merkel 08:57, 30 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I don't have a good photo editing tool. The uploaded images were directly from my digital camera. If you have the right tool, please shrink them for me. Thanks Kowloonese 09:12, 30 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I will shrink them at some stage. As to an appropriate tool for photo editing, Have you tried GIMP? It's free, and there is a Windows version and a Mac version as well as the original Linux version. --Robert Merkel 10:33, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for putting a Chinese characters in Honda Toshiaki artcile but I think they are characters are wrong. Please see http://hikyaku.com/dico/histxtg13.html And about Chuo-ku and Higashi-ku. I don't mean to insult you. Probably my first article was too short so that simply it looks like explaning a common Japanese noun. I think the article now is fine. Let me know if you have any question or suggestion any time. -- Taku 06:47, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

The pronunciations matched though the wrong person. I have corrected the error. I still think Higashi-ku should be deleted or fleshed out. Kowloonese 07:27, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hi, those Japanese characters you added to '47 Ronin' - did you put in "ronin" or "samurai"? (I'm too lazy to look them up in my Japanese dictionary! :-) Noel 23:04, 24 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hi, Kowloonese. I would appreciate your opinion on the current Talk:Zhou Dynasty (1122 BC - 256 BC). Cheers, kt2 00:36, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Is it possible to replace the Chinese charecters where the official's name should be in Chinese characters of Empress Wu with an English transliteration?Vancouverguy 23:23, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hi, Kowloonese: regarding Karaoke, I was following the example of Go (board game), which I have never edited. I have not reverted your reversion, but there has to be some flexibility... --Sewing 00:27, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I have solved the problem (hopefully) by adding a separate paragraph on Noraebang with an internal link to a new article. Foreigners in Korea--as well as some Americans in areas with large Korean populations, I suspect--use the term Noraebang. --Sewing 00:56, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Well, I fixed the problem once again, as you already know...thanks for your comments on my talk page, where I have responded. --Sewing 01:34, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Hi, I think that putting Chinese characters into articles about people whose name are usually not written in Chinese is inappropriate. For example, you added Chinese characters into many articles about Vietnamese. This would be fine for people born before the 20th century, since the standard writing used today was not used then. But for people born after 1901, I think it'd be better to use the Vietnamese spelling for such names, since that is, by definition, the native spelling of their names. 4.42.64.80 00:20, 19 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Many American born Chinese only use their English name in public, but it does not mean they don't have a Chinese name known among other Chinese. The same is about Vietnamese and Korean names, they may not be written in Chinese characters usually, but it does not means the names weren't given in Chinese characters originally. The current generation of vietnamese may no longer use Chinese characters in their names, but I believe the older generation did. Given the large population of Chinese in Vietnam, you really need to prove that the Chinese text is not native to these people. Perhaps some vietnamese historians can comment on this practice.

I agree that most Vietnamese names are derived from Chinese words, since it's considered more eloquent and poetic. Many European names are derived from Semitic languages, but I don't see them written in their native scripts. If you go ask any Vietnamese person born after, say, 1940, how to write their name in Chinese, I doubt that you'll find many who can do so. (Those who can are probably Chinese-Vietnamese). The "large" number of the Chinese minority in Vietnam number less than 5% of the population. Given that an overwhelming 87% of people in Vietnam are ethnically Vietnamese and speak Vietnamese (a language unrelated to Chinese, might I add), I think it's moot to debate whether to add Chinese characters to names of people who can't even write it. As I said before, there are exceptions such as Ho Chi Minh, who used their Chinese names extensively. I think it is helpful to add the Chinese characters in those cases. See the Vietnamese language article for a description of a native writing system similar to Chinese before the widespread adoption of Quoc Ngu. I just recently discovered that my Vietnamese name can be written in Chinese, but so can George Bush's or George Washington's. 128.195.31.93 21:01, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

You may be right. I thought there were more counter-examples than just Ho Chi Minh. George Bush's name can be translated, but his name was given in English originally, so only English is native. Would you agree that if your mother gave your name in Chinese originally, then Chinese should be considered the native text and your Vietnamese name a transliteration? Likewise, I lived in the US almost all my life, but my identity here is just a transliteration of my Chinese name. Even though I exclusively use my English name in the US, it is never native.

If it is decided that these characters are not native text, they should be removed. I removed the Korean text from the Karaoke article for the same reason. Kowloonese 02:22, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Your philosophy of "native text" has an ambiguity with biographies of people. In what way is Michelle Kwan "native" to China, and thus deserving of adding her Chinese name prominently at the top of the article? May I suggest that "native" be limited to nationals (through birth or naturalization) of a country where the language is native. With respect to countries that historically used Chinese characters, if the name of a person or object/idea written natively in Korean/Japanese/Vietnamese is derived from Chinese words, the Chinese characters should not be included at the top of the article (immediately after the most common English/native name(s)). Instead, they can be included in an "Etymology" section. --Canadiano 08:33, 25 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I understand your point of view. However, my definition of native text on biographical entries is slightly different from other kinds of articles. For example, Sushi is Japanese and Yahweh is Hebrew. Those are native text no doubt. However, for persons such as Michelle Kwan, the reason for adding her Chinese name is "NOT" because she is native to China, but because her Chinese name is her alternate identity. I disagree with your argument regarding the use of nationality to decide what is native. Ethnicity and cultural background are important factors too. It may not be a common practice for an ethnic Greek American to have a Greek name. But it IS EXTREMELY common for a Chinese American to have a Chinese name and identity. That is a cultural difference that you cannot deny. Such cultural difference is independent of nationality. And alternate identities are encyclopedic info for biographical entries. Instead of saying Michelle Kwan's alternate identity is "KWAN WING SHAN" which is a transliteration, the native text i.e. the Chinese text (关颖珊) should be included. So the Chinese text is native to her Chinese name. That is where my philosophy on native text comes in, after the fact that her alternative identity is added to the article. She uses her Chinese name in all her Chinese PR despite she is an American. Therefore her Chinese name is independent of whether she is native to China or not, it is just her other name. Kowloonese 01:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your addition to Diao Chan. You marked it as a minor edit, which I don't think it was. Minor edits are supposed to be for small formatting changes, correcting spellings, linking words, and that kind of thing. Anything which adds new information, like you did, probably shouldn't be marked as a minor edit. Cheers, Onebyone 21:49, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hello, 九龙人. Take a look at Chinese wikipedia [1] if you haven't checked it out yet. Ktsquare (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

I am aware of the Chinese wikipedia. But I am afriend that I cannot contribute much there for two reasons. 1. I am a terrible typer in Chinese. I am okay with one or two characters here and there, but not good enough to write anything. 2. I don't know much simplified Chinese, I can guess my way through articles, but not good enough to make any changes. Kowloonese 22:40, 26 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

Don't worry too much. Traditional Chinese readers and editors are in need or you can just edit bits here and there. I am not that pushy anyway. :) Ktsquare (talk) 01:16, 27 May 2004 (UTC)Reply

Nice work on the collection of Picaso paintings. -- Solipsist 07:15, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Tried to do some color correcting on the tofu image, but, ahem... is yellow tofu now better than the blue one? I think it looks a bit better now (user CTRL-reload). Sorry, I have a cheap camera and even worse lights on my kitchen table. -- Chris 73 | Talk 00:55, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi again, Kowloonese: If you see me editing in, say, the next 3 days (let's say until Monday morning UTC), please revert my changes, send me a message, or give me a swift nudge in the ribs. Yours, Sewing - talk 15:19, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC) P.S.: Sorry for deleting the last thread, but what's said is said.

Hi again, Kowloonese: Okay, I made some minor edits today...but now you can enforce my Wikibreak.... ;) Please forgive me for my hopeless inability to stop editing! -Sewing - talk 01:48, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hi Kowloonese,

Xiaopo has started a new survey on Chinese naming conventions on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Chinese)#New survey. Please come and take a look. -- [[User:Ran|ran (talk)]] 16:52, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)

Oooh. Sorry for the mistake with the Nanao link. I've been changing many redlinks today, and I got careless. I'll be more careful, thanks! Joyous 02:05, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)

Hi Kowloonese:

You may be interested in this: Wikipedia:China-related topics notice board. Also read its talk page.

-- Felix Wan 22:39, 2004 Oct 30 (UTC)

Greetings:

It does appear that the articles should be merged. As this is a Western Wikipedia, and these are most commonly thought of in the West as lions, which seems consistent with the appearance of the Ming version, I suggest that the surviving article be IGL, not FD. As you are likely to be much better informed on the subject, I am soliciting your opinion on this change. i can integrate the two texts but wish to respect cultural sensitivities in this matter. Please answer here as I will watch. Thanks, and best wishes, Leonard G. 01:52, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Chinese call this beast the Chinese lion because its Chinese name Shi is also used to refer to the African lions. Obviously Chinese lions and African lions are quite different beasts. My preference is just use its native name Shi, followed by all possible English aliases and AKAs and redirects. (See my opinion on Chinese wordd in the English language in my user page Kowloonese. However, the English word "Fu Dog" seems to have quite a history in the English language. Not only it is a well known word, it is also in the dictionary. Apparently, the early European visitors to China had decided to give it a name regardless of how the Chinese called it. It is really mystereous how they came up with the name Fu Dog. In that regard, FD might be a more well known name than IGD. English is not my mother tongue, so I am really clueless on the etymology of many English words. For example, I've never figured out why Heller is called Greece in English. Kowloonese 02:24, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Actually, it is possible that the Chinese lion was ultimately based on the actual animal. Incidentally, lions are found not only in Africa, but in Asia, too (even now some are left in Gujarat). See http://www.wonder-okinawa.jp/011/english/roots/world/rw01/rw01.html and http://www.wonder-okinawa.jp/011/english/roots/world/rw02/rw02.html

Bathrobe 11:43, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sounds like you are saying that Lion is the correct reference. By extension, Imperial Guardian Lions refer to these specific forms of sculptural representations (not to the mythical beast itself), hence IGL should be the surviving titled article. Note also that English language users will use "Lion Dance" to look up that article, not "Shi Dance" or "Fu Dog Dance", so IGL is consistant with that also. I will merge FD into IGL tonight.

BTW, from your table Chinese English vs native Japanese - Japanese Kirin is not the same as Chinese Dragon, but is closer to the Chinese Qilin (I did extensive work on Qilin, to which Kirin now disambiguates (Kirin was the original article on this beast, but since the Japanese version is (culturally) descended from the Chinese version, that became the surviving article after extensive discussion). While on the topic, the article indicates two types of Qilin, which may need refinement. See the article and note the "unicorn(head)+lion(main, body and tail)+ox(hooves)" style and the "dragon(head)+fish(body)+ox(hooves and tail)" style. It seems to me that these should be separately named as they are so different in appearance. Feel free to put any comments in the Qilin article talk. -- Leonard G. 20:50, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Also - In English, the country name Greece comes from the Latin Graecia, rather than from any hellenic root. As you probably know, English is a mixture of languages, with elements of German, Latin, Greek, and French built upon older roots and with bits and pieces of other Nordic languages, and modern expansion from words from worldwide. Not only the root words, but the declensions and syntax are mixtures, with many irregularities and most native English speakers do not get it right all the time, not even the writers in our newspapers!. -- Leonard G. 21:48, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The listed entries in my talk page were not necessarily one to one mapping. For example, I was not trying to equate a Chinese Phoenix with Tanuki, nor Chinese American to Issei. I was definitely not trying to map Chinese Dragon with Kirin. I was only trying to illustrate how Kirin is well known word while Qilin is not. Probably more people rather call it a Chinese Unicorn than Qilin. That was the theme of my rant. Kowloonese 21:15, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I did some rewriting in the Qilin articles. The Chinese Unicorn appears to me to not be the Quilin, but rather the southern version of the Nian. See the retitled illustrations on the Qilin article.

I don't quite get your argument on your user page about this. It seems that you support the proliferation of Chinese loanwords for Chinese things, but oppose the same for Japanese loanwords. It seems you must either allow foreign loanwords into English for wikipedia (no matter where they come from, even if they're from Japan), or you must try to limit their use and resort to things such as Japanese rice wine in place of Sake and Chinese characters in place of hanzi or kanji. It doesn't seem like you can limit the latter only to Japanese loanwords...

-- Wulong 21:21, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I am not against one way or the other. I am just saying that there should be a balance. Do it only when it is necessary. For example, Lung is nothing like any western dragon, so Chinese dragon does not make sense because there is a conflict when you try to borrow an existing concept to represent another concept. However, there is basically no western rice wine, so Japanese rice wine is really as good as Sake. If Japanese wine is called sake, then why shouldn't Chinese wine called jiu. When I wrote an article about jiu, its title was changed immediately. It is the biased treatment of Japanese word vs Chinese word in the wikipedia that bothers me. I am just seeking consistency, I don't care one way or the other. Kowloonese 20:17, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That makes sense... I would agree that when the concepts under discussion involve both Chinese and Japanese maybe both terms should be mentioned, but only when appropriate... wulong 04:42, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I don't think wikipedia per se is biased towards Japanese terms. Do you know what the Chinese essay structure, 起承轉結, is called in English? Answer: it is called by its Japanese pronunciation, "kishotenketsu". English speakers simply are more familiar with Japanese terms, Chinese culture is very poorly understood, or simply because our differing transliteration schemes make English people prefer Japanese pronunciations. But then I have started to distrust wikipedia's official "neutral" stand. Everyone is biased; wikipedia shows its bias (which sometimes is a lot of bias) too, but it officially denies its existence. Wing 07:51, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

You brought up one good example that I hate so much on this Japanese invasion into the English language. That was part of the rant on my user page. Why is the word kishotenketsu introduced into the English language in the first place? Why can't someone just say the folowing:

The Japanese and Chinese writings follow a traditional structure which can be summarized in a four word idiom (起承轉結) which literally means StepOne, StepTwo, StepThree, StepFour.

Yes, the 4 word idiom should be included in its native text so that any scholar can research this tradition further by talking to another non-English-speaking expert via an interpreter. Without the native text, ambiguity and confusion will be introduced among the researcher-interpreter-expert trio. The pinyin or Japanese pronunciation can be added within the parenthesis optionally. Presenting it as an English word is absolutely unnecessary. This kind of practice kind of explains why historically so many Japanese words got into the English language. If you argue the English language did the same with Greek, Latin, French words, then stop changing my article from "Jiu" to "Chinese wine" because technically Jiu is not even a wine. It is an alcoholic beverage as unique as sake or champagne or whisky or Vodka, which could have been called Japanese wine, French wine, Scottish wine and Russian wine respectively. Why Chinese words are rejected from the English language historically and now in wikipedia? Kowloonese 19:22, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

While this may not be his/her intention, Kowloonese gives an unfortunate impression of ethnic chauvinism. The use of Japanese terms is due to historical circumstances. Why would someone object to this except for a sense of indignation that 'Chinese should have equal rights with Japanese!' Something akin to this point of view appears to be behind persistent efforts by what appear to be Chinese speakers to change the name of Tofu to 'doufu' (I am not accusing Kowloonese of doing this, but the idea that 'English should use the Chinese term' seems to be the motivation for these changes).

The end result is a regrettable impression of Sinocentrism, especially if this is combined with the aggressive insertion of Chinese words into articles. See, for instance, the entry for Red Panda where the Chinese name has been inserted as though this animal is somehow the 'property' of China. In fact, the Red Panda also occurs in Nepal and is the state animal of Sikkim! Similarly for the insertion of the Chinese name for the South China Sea, (also not Kowloonese's doing, by the way). Inserting the Chinese name, which means 'South Sea', is rather inappropriate when it considered that this sea is disputed among a number of countries, including Vietnam, which calls it the 'East Sea'.

Sorry if this reads like a rant, but the issue of Japanese and Chinese words in English as raised by Kowloonese is itself conducive to rants.

Bathrobe

I don't want to repeat myself. For part of you comments, I'll give the same response as I did on 22 Nov 2004 (UTC), just stroll up a few paragraphs. What we do today will become history years from now. So the historical circumstances are not an excuse to not to correct the bias in our grandchildren's history.

Regarding insertion of native text in wikipedia, it is an entirely independent issue from absorbing the loan words into the English language. My opinion on native text insertion was quite clearly stated in my user page. Your objection may be about when should a name be considered native. (see my talk page for my opinions.) If the Red Pandas are native animals in China, Nepal and Sikkim, the native text in these three languages would be helpful information for researchers. The inclusion of native text has another encyclopedic value in this Google-enabled era. I was reading the Chinese dragon article last night. I cut and pasted the names of the dragon's nine children into the image search in Google. I found how these mythical creatures look like. Any wikipedian can do the same with absolutely no knowledge of any Chinese. IMO, it would be appropriate to give all the names of the South China Sea. The vietnamese text for "East Sea" and the Chinese text for "South Sea" are encyclopedic information, though the literal translation into English is not. To English speaking people, it is known as South China Sea, not South Sea nor East Sea regardless of how the Chinese or Vietnamese calls it. The inclusion of these variations of names helps to disambiguate any mismatch in the reference to the same body of water. The next question is where to draw a line, e.g. water is found around the world, we cannot include native text for all languages because you cannot uniquely identify water as a native item for any particular country or culture. I appreciate your comments. Kowloonese 20:51, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC)

Looking back on this discussion, I think I may be oversensitive to what I saw as nationalistic undertones of Chinese vs Japanese. The fact is that some Chinese have an unfortunate tendency to claim historical primacy or greater historical legitimacy amongst the cultures of Asia, which raises hackles amongst its neighbours and spurs them to ridiculous efforts to validate their own cultures. In that sense, your taking up Japanese for comparison may not have been a good idea. If you were simply to lament that English has not been very receptive to Chinese terms I would not have felt any need to object.

There are, I think, several reasons why Chinese has not made many inroads into English. One is the fact that Chinese is not a very accessible language for English speakers. Because of its monosyllabic morphemes, the limited range of syllable shapes, and the tonal system, Chinese words just don't make an identifiable impression on the English-speaking ear. All Chinese just tends to sound the same, as seen in the vulgar 'Who Flung Dung' parody. In comparison, languages like Japanese, Korean, Malay, Indonesian, Tagalog, Hindi, etc. offer more 'user-friendly' shapes. 'Sake' or 'Arak' have vocal shapes that are easier to relate to than, say, 'jiu' in Chinese.

Pronunciation is a related difficulty. Chinese just has too many strange sounding vowels and consonants to make it amenable to foreign tongues. 'Kanji' is definitely easier to pronounce than 'hanzi'!

Another problem may lie in the nature of Chinese itself. Because of Chinese characters, isn't there a temptation to translate the meanings represented by those characters rather than use the sounds themselves? 'Sake' is 'sake' (or more accurately Nihonshu) and 'shochu' is 'shochu'in Japanese, but in Chinese you have baijiu, huangjiu, etc., which just cry out to be translated as 'white liquor', 'yellow liquor', etc. (This is a hypothetical rather than actual example. I think you understand the point I am getting at).

The use of pinyin may, ironically, be a hindrance rather than a help. Suited as it may be to the representation of Chinese in terms of Chinese itself, it is not easy for English speakers to relate to. To take our 'jiu' example, this is hard to read and pronounce properly in English. The pronunciation is closer to 'joe' than 'jiu'. In fact, English speakers who would suffer great contortions to get their mouth around 'bai jiu' could do a very good approximation if it were spelt 'Bye Joe!'

Despite what you say, a number of Chinese terms have entered English. However, the number is not very large. 'Cheongsam' (now being replaced by 'qipao'), 'fungshui', 'oolong', 'cumquat', 'yamen', and 'amah' spring to mind -- not to mention the thoroughly assimilated 'tea'. Interestingly, many of these words date back to the colonial era when there was more interchange between China and the world. 1949 represented a big cutting off from which China is only recently recovering.

I think we have cause to be optimistic. In my opinion, Chinese influence will start to grow as China interacts more and more with the rest of the world. This will happen naturally, however, not through some politically correct campaign to 'restore balance'. And I don't think we will ever be rid of the tendency to translate rather than bodily adopt Chinese expressions, which in my view is due to more fundamental reasons than a simple 'imbalance'.

Bathrobe 00:36, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for you comments. I probably know by now that the opinion expressed in my user page is nothing more than a rant. I am not trying to start any kind of movement to make a change. Though I agree with you some wikipedians do have the tendency to do so. I agree that pinyin is not as compatible as English, but Japanese is not either. Words like Karaoke, sake, Mitsubishi are all mispronounced in English, that does not stop those words going into the English language. You brought up a good point about the timing of the loan word adoption, which I believe may be a more acceptable cause of the phenomenon. English colonists made contacts with many Chinese words back when the British sold opium to Chinese and after they took over Hong Kong. I argue that most Japanese words got into the English language after American placed their military bases in Japan. Probably it was the British vs the American culture that made such a big difference. You seem to have studied a lot on the East Asian languages, I wonder why you are not interested in Korean also. CJKV always goes together in computing. It seems to be more complete to add K to CJV. Kowloonese 02:19, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

It's not that I'm not interested in Korean, it just wasn't humanly possible for me to include Korean as well!

Bathrobe 11:47, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Isn't the reason Japanese words have have been embedded in the English language more than Chinese ones simply because they were first popularised in the west by the Japanese? Anime vs. Chinese cartoon is a good example. I've seen plenty of Japanese cartoons, but no Chinese ones as of yet. You point out "kung-fu" is an exception. That's because in that case the term was first popularised by the likes of Bruce Lee. You say there should be more of a balance between the use of foreign words. I think more and more Chinese words will enter foreign languages as the Chinese themselves become a superpower. Much like English words are now prevalent in many different languages. It's clear China has a very rich culture, perhaps they have to find a better way of translating this culture to foreigners. This is one thing the Japanese excel in. Jacoplane 22:57, 11 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Just reading your comment in a similar thread above, I notice you feel that it is up to English translaters to translate culture. They don't understand the culture, so this is difficult to do. Again, the Japanese do this well. A good example is how Japanese video games dominate in the west. Where are all the Chinese games? But again, I feel China itself will develop the capability to do this by itself, not because of foreign translators. Jacoplane 23:02, 11 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you regarding the Anime and video games. But that is just a small part of the culture. You may be right about those extreme case. When you look at more common example, you will see the bias. My favorite is the introduction of issei, nisei etc. in the English language. They are really unnecessary when first generation, second generation etc. are better terms. Kowloonese 20:37, 12 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

What an interesting conversation I've discovered! I'm glad it was fruitful for you, and that you eventually recognized the naive chauvinism of your page post. As for Issei, Nisei etc, the most logical answer is that's what Japanese-Americans called themselves in the U.S. There were no counterparts among Chinese-Americans because we don't use comparable terms in Chinese, and more importantly, unlike with the Japanese, early immigration was male-dominated and the population dwindled significantly. Issei and Nisei are also culturally significant in American history. Because U.S.-born children are automatically citizens, Nisei grew up thinking of themselves as Americans, but then were discriminated against during World War II, when they were interned in camps despite their citizenship - yet nonetheless they joined the military to fight for their country. Huangdi (talk) 12:29, 17 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Interesting. It is of note that the Chinese tends to incorporate foreign loanwords via meaning, whereas the Japanese instead tends to use phonetic transliteration (ie. katakana) to incorporate forieng loanwords. Maybe what you observed in English foreign loanwords is just the converse phenomenon. 24.16.32.174 05:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Just a random thought, unrelated to Wikipedia policy, really. I enjoyed reading your rant. I've several times been involved in conversations started with "It's strange that in China [or Japan], people have positive feelings about dragons, while in the West, people have negative feelings about them. Why is this?", and I've tried to make exactly the point that it is only an artifact of translation that we are saying that they are the same thing at all.

(This misunderstanding is related to the inane idea that East and West disagree on the typical length of human pregnancy — is it nine months or ten? It is roughly ten 28-day months or nine 30/31-day months.)

Anyway, regarding the names of Asian things in English, besides other influences, we should consider the differing theories of habits of translation in China and Japan. To take an example, consider the Japanese and Chinese names for some American plants:

Now, I'm a fool for using these examples, because I don't know any Japanese at all, but if we imagine that the Japanese kana sequences are sound borrowings, then we can see a pattern that nicely mirrors the pattern you observed in English — the Chinese translator tries to best use the resources of the target language to explain the new item, while the Japanese translator simply inserts the sounds of the source language.

It is easy to explain the Japanese habit as being learned by borrowing so much from Chinese in the past, but I'm not so sure about the Chinese habit. Perhaps it is the natural human thing to do if you haven't had the unnatural experience of borrowing so much from a foreign language in the past. Perhaps it is a belief that this way of translating is superior because it is easier for the reader.

(I don't believe that it is because Chinese people hold Native Americans in lower regard than do Japanese people, but it might be that an unintentional result would be to partially separate the thing from its past, if we supposed that Chinese people were less aware that the domestication of these plants is part of Native Americans' contribution to the world (an extremely speculative supposition).)

What do you think?

Pekinensis 18:40, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually, this was partly what I was getting at above when I wrote: "Another problem may lie in the nature of Chinese itself. Because of Chinese characters, isn't there a temptation to translate the meanings represented by those characters rather than use the sounds themselves? 'Sake' is 'sake' (or more accurately Nihonshu) and 'shochu' is 'shochu'in Japanese, but in Chinese you have baijiu, huangjiu, etc., which just cry out to be translated as 'white liquor', 'yellow liquor', etc." That is, Chinese tends to be more 'analytical' in its approach to word building.

Also, many of your Japanese examples don't exemplify your point. For instance, 'maize' is etymologically speaking 唐もろこし. 'Sweet potato' is 薩摩芋. 'Potato' is ジャガ芋 or ジャガ薯 (I'd have to check where 'jaga' comes from).

Bathrobe 23:47, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Well. My rant mainly blamed the English speaking people for translating Chinese terms and Japanese terms differently. I speculated it might be due to the difference between American translators in Japan after WWII vs. the British translators in colonial era. You actually pointed out another possibility that is quite valid. The bias could also be introduced by Chinese translators who provided these bad English translation in the first place. Your theory can be easily proven if you can find the same pattern in other languages. For example, if Japanese and Chinese terms are also called differently in French, Germen, Greek etc, then the cause of the problem is probably from China. When a forigner points to a picture of a Qilin, the Japanese translator would say Kirin in their own language, but a Chinese translator might try very hard to find a English word for it. Well, it has a single horn on the top of its head, why don't we call it a Chinese Unicorn? Of course, the Unicorn does not resemble the qilin at all. Kowloonese 22:52, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. Here's a revised table, incorporating finer Japanese information from Bathrobe and the Japanese Wikipedia articles:

(It seems that "jaga" comes from "Jakarta", and "kabocha" from Portuguese.)

Although we have uncovered more Japanese explanatory names than I first thought, I think this still supports the idea that Chinese has an overwhelming tendency to explain imported things using native words, while Japanese is more likely to borrow sounds or orthographic words. (I am guessing without hard evidence, but based on the likely times of introduction and the "feel" of the words, that 南瓜 and 仙人掌 are borrowed from Chinese into Japanese, rather than the other way around.) The fact that two of the four examples of Japanese explanatory names start with "唐" also raises the possibility that these translation were actually done by Chinese people.

'Saboten' is thought to be from Portuguese. The characters for 'saboten' and 'kabocha' may have been borrowed from Chinese but the words themselves have not. It is quite a common error to mistake the characters for the words. I doubt that words using 唐 were made up by Chinese. More likely they might have entered Japan from China and were thus so named by the Japanese.

To ジャガ芋 above you may also have to add 馬鈴薯 and ポテト as these are both used in Japanese.

Bathrobe 15:03, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Kowloonese, I disagree that using the native resources of the target language always results in a bad translation. "Chinese dragon", "Chinese unicorn", and "Chinese date" are poor translations, but likely were clever and practical inventions the first time they were used. On the other hand, "Chinese cabbage" "Chinese kale", "Chinese radish", "Chinese character", "Chinese chess", "Chinese opera", "Chinese animation", and so on I think are excellent translations. They are much easier on the non-expert reader, convey some quite important commonalities/starting points for understanding, and don't pollute the namespace. "Anime" is a ridiculous word and Chinese translators should receive credit for not doing things like that.

Pekinensis 17:43, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I choose to differ. Chinese cabbage, Chinese Kale, Chinese radish and Chinese chess are as bad translations as Chinese dragon and Chinese unicorn. I am not a botanist but as an eater, I can clearly tell that Chinese cabbage does not taste like any western cabbages at all. They deserve their own name e.g. nappa, bok choy look and taste different, why are they both called Chinese cabbage in wikipedia? If you don't care to distinguish different kinds of Chinese cabbages, then why do you want to distinguish Chinese cabbage from the western cabbages in the first place? The biased way that Chinese terms are singled out for bad translation is all my rant is about. Even the so called Chinese radish (lóbo) tastes quite different from daikon, and they look quite different too. Also shogi and xiangqi have nothing in common with chess except all are board games. How do you feel about Champagne? Sparkling French wine is more descriptive and convey some quite important commonalities too. Kowloonese 19:43, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

'Champagne' was used to describe Australian, Californian sparkling wine until the French decided to crack down. 'Australian champagne' is very descriptive but unfortunately has legal problems! Spain is lucky in having its own specific name 'cava'. Italian uses 'spumante'. The Americans and Australians just have to get by with 'sparkling wine' and it is a disadvantage for them.

Shōgi, Xiàngqí, and Chess are all known to be descendants of the same original game, as are Thai chess, Burmese chess, etc. So 'Chinese chess' and 'Japanese chess' are not actually misleading at all.

The 'Chinese dragon' and 'Chinese phoenix' are interesting. I agree they are misleading. But the reverse is true, as well. Chinese generally calls the Western dragon a 龙 (sometimes a 火龙) and the Western phoenix a 凤凰. It makes one wonder whether the problem may not have been started by the Chinese themselves. Japanese manages to partly avoid these problems. The Western dragon is known as the 龍 but the word ドラゴン is also used (in fact, the word ドラゴン can be used both for the Western and Chinese dragons, so it may not be a very good example!) The word 鳳凰 is used for the Chinese phoenix. The Western phoenix is called the 不死鳥. So by their receptiveness to foreign words they manage at least partly to avoid the mistake made by the Chinese.

Just a few thoughts to keep everyone hopping!

Bathrobe 15:03, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

I don't understand this at all. If this is about the copyright of the photographs that I uploaded, then I don't really care one way or the other. I am no photographer, I never considered any of my unprofessional snapshot a piece of art. It is silly to hold the license of a snapshot if all I did was just click a button. However, if you are talking about the article licensing as the subsection header indicates, then I am lost. All articles in wikipedia are collaborations from tens of thousands of contributors. So what is the point to get the top 1000 contributors to release their contribution under a different licensing agreement. How does it help the article when the 1001st contributor doesn't agree? IMHO, if you propose to change article licensing, you need to do it at the top level to convince the wikipedia owner to use more than GFDL. Such grassroot movement that you are doing makes no sense to me at all. Kowloonese 20:13, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

See: Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Japan-related articles/Naming order - Some people think Wikipedia should use conventional English order while others think it should strictly conform to Japanese order. I want the English conventions kept. Whatever your opinions are, you should look at this page. WhisperToMe 01:10, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

IMHO, this issue is more hairy than the Chinese name convention. At least the Chinese government pushed for the Chinese naming order on all their publication and hence set up a de facto standard. The Japanese government and newspapers follow the Western convention by flipping their names when they are spelled in English. If the Japanese people are willing to modify their names, who are we to decide for them? I think this issue is best left to native Japanese wikipedians to decide. They know their own people's names better than anyone else. Nevertheless, I voted "Surname Given-name" order on the title with other orders redirect to the same title, ALL CAP SURNAME convention on the first line of the article, no editorial note needed. Kowloonese 01:57, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I hope I was right in moving this article to the broader encyclopedic category. Didn't seem to be any Discussion in progress... --Wetman 02:36, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Fine with me. The article was inspired by the liang version when I wrote it. But as I wrote more, the content turned out to be more on the generic version instead. I believe back then it was not as easy to move article as it is now. Thanks for the clean up. Kowloonese 10:25, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. --Wetman 10:29, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I totally agree with you that surnames in non-English positions should be in all caps, especially since it is not a Chinese/Japanese invention. I have read a book in my library that says the French does exactly the same thing because their names can be in "Chinese" order when used in very formal situations. -- Wing 07:32, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hispanic names often use double surname, e.g. GivenName FatherSurname MotherSurname should be addressed as Mr. FatherSurname. i.e. the concept of Last name does not work elsewhere except in English countries. Writing an encyclopedia about people around the world but with no provision to denote non-English name is just silly. Kowloonese 10:03, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps you could help keep an eye on Solar greenhouse (technical). It is becoming cumbersome to keep in line. — Cortonin | Talk 21:31, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I enjoy contributing to wikipedia, but I don't want to do it when it becomes a chore. Given the disagreement in this topic, it is fruitless to waste my time on it. I'll leave it to someone who has a PhD in physics to do it. Kowloonese 08:14, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

I completely understand. — Cortonin | Talk 00:28, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I just noticed you posted on the WMC RfC. Since no progress was made after the RfC, it progressed to a Request for arbitration, found here, with the evidence page here. This is the currently active component of the dispute resolution process. — Cortonin | Talk 00:27, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello Kowloonese, do yo have these photos in high resolution? If so, could you send them to me? Please answer on my German user talk – I do not frequently visit the English Wikipedia. Thanks, Rainer 19:34, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

What resolution do you consider high res? The pictures I posted in the English wikipedia was in 640x480 pixels. That is pretty high res for web page usage. All my digital pictures were shot with a 4.0 Mega pixel camera, so the original should be in 2500+ pixel on the long side. And the mpeg file is typically 1.4 to 1.9 Mbyte each. I have to check my file system to see if I have already thrown away the original. 67.117.82.2 02:37, 24. Mai 2005 (CEST)

Hi, I'd like to optimize the photos a little bit with less background. And photos might be also used in printed copies where Web resolution is too low. You may send the full resolution images to mail at rainerzenz.de if you like. Yours, Rainer 11:23, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

For some articles where you added native names (e.g. Roger Kwok,Simon Yam), it is not obvious what the article names should be. I assume that "Chun On" should be a redirect to the article named "Roger Kwok". Or is "Roger Kwok Chun On" his full name? Rl 06:41, 27 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Redirection is cheap. Just use as many as you wish. e.g. Roger Kwok is known to the local people as Kwok Chun On, just add that as a redirect. The full name can be a redirect too.

He added an English name Roger for himself. Note that Roger is most likely not a "given" name. This kind of name is often chosen by the person himself. All English rules about First name, Last name, Given name totally break down in any non-English culture. Kowloonese 19:47, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Personally I think that list can be a separate wikipedia article after slight modification. Answer your opinions onto my talk page if you find suitable. Deryck C. 08:21, 30 August 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hello!

I noticed you deleted my invitation at Cleanup_Taskforce about 9 hours after I posted it. I assumed this was accidental, but I could be wrong. If I should have done this differently, please contact me.

Please let me know the correct way to let Cleanup task force folks know about something that might interest them on another wiki.

Thanks

--SV Resolution(Talk) 14:45, 8 September 2005 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry for what happened. Sounds like a bug in wikipedia. I remembered getting an Edit conflict when I saved the page. Then I cancelled my edit, reloaded the page, clicked edit again, and added my changes from scratch. The second save didn't warn me about any conflict, though it silently overwrote your changes. Kowloonese 00:06, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

If you have a minute, could you take a look at the article Yuan (surname) - I've put it up for peer review (see Wikipedia:Peer review/Yuan (surname)/archive1). I hope to make it a model for expanding other Chinese surname articles. Since you've contributed to the Chinese surname article, I would really appreciate your suggestions. Yu Ninjie 21:57, 13 November 2005 (UTC)Reply

Hello, good work on Ng Chung-sok, and thanks for the contribution. However, you forgot to add any references to the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. From what websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to Ng Chung-sok? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? You can simply add links, or there are several different citation methods list at WP:CITET. Thanks! Lupin|talk|popups 20:45, 4 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Added link to the source document (in Chinese).

Hi I just wanted to inform you that User:Seibzehn has edited your post, as seen in edits like this:[2] Shawnc 22:51, 16 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for letting me know. I have no objection to what he did. He removed his name from the posting on January 7 and January 13 under two separate situations. He purposely omitted a signature to his own posting and later removed it when I added one for him. I guess everyone here has the right to remain anonymous. However, Wikipedia's revision history always reveals the author of each edit. You can always trace back to who posted what. This person may not want to stand behind of what he said and wants to erase the trace, though unsuccessfully. I think we should leave some room for him to retract silently without drawing too much attention. Why rub it in? His action says a lot about the worthiness of his opinion. I usually just ignore opinions that has no backing. Kowloonese 02:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for adding Chinese characters to the Chinese yuan article. I'm relieved to see I didn't get any wrong but wasn't sure about li as the character on the coins is very slim. Could I possibly ask you to look at some other currency articles and check/add Chinese, Japanese or Korean characters where appropriate? This would include Chinese wen, Japanese mon, Korean mun and Korean yang.
Dove1950 00:14, 9 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Can you please join discussion in Talk:List of English words of Chinese origin#Japanese words? Somebody wants to delete the following words from that list: kanji (漢字), ramen (拉麵), zen (禪), Yen (圓), bonsai (盆栽), Go (碁), gyoza (餃子), koan (公案). Thanks.--Endroit 17:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Dear Kowloonese,

I'd like to request permission to use the image Acridotheres_tristis1.jpg (common mynah) in the publication: Biology: A Course for 'O' Level Textbook (2nd edition). Details as follows: Image placement: inside page Image size: 1/8 A4

This is a price-controlled textbook produced by Marshall Cavendish International (Singapore) Private Limited, in collaboration with the Ministry of Education, Singapore.

Since this is an educational publication, we hope that you will consider granting use of the image. You would of course have full credit in the acknowledgements. Just let us know how you would like to be credited.

Thanks! Hope to hear from you soon. My email below.

Melanie Sim Editor Email: MelanieSim@sg.marshallcavendish.com

Go ahead, you have permission to use it in the textbook mentioned. Kowloonese 20:35, 7 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much!

Melanie

Good call on the use of Chinese names, I don't understand what is the big problem with including a Chinese name since most overseas Chinese have both a English and a Chinese name. Interestingly enough, I have come across several instances where editors have unsucessfully proposed the removal of all Chinese names in English Wikipedia articles. Just asking should I put her Chinese name "Kwan Wing Shan" (Cantonese pronunciation) and the Putonghua pronunciation (Guān Yǐngshān) back up? Abstrakt 22:54, 14 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

I have expressed very clearly on my user page my opinion on using native text in the article. It does not matter which edition of wikipedia, you can add Japanese to an Arabic article if the article is about a Japanese topic. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and yes, there are some people who want to make en.wikipedia purely English because they only know English. These people simply ignore all the benefits of having the native text. Try copy Michelle's Chinese name and paste into google's image search, you may be able to locate some exclusive images that only appears in Chinese publications. It does not hurt to include native info, the more the better. However, I have no comment about adding pronounciation guide to the native text. I personally don't think it is important. Kowloonese 02:05, 15 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

I just made a new proposal on NPOV treatment of the different Chinese languages/dialects on the Chinese naming conventions. Please take a look and comment if you will. Thanks.--Yuje 19:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hi. From page histories, I've seen that you've added kanji equivalents to a lot of articles. I've recently made a bunch of stubs for Japanese ships, with more to follow. I haven't more than a clue what the right characters for their names are, though I presume they're listed on ja:大日本帝国海軍艦艇一覧. If you want to look them up, go to Category:Japan naval ship stubs. —wwoods 07:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Hello

I have somewhat modified http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_Chun_terms; if you have a moment to spare, I'd be grateful for your help in inserting the correct pinyin translations and the hanzi characters – I don't speak chinese, so it's impossible for me to be certain about the transliteration. Thanks.

Aeon

Hi. I was patrolling Special:Uncategorizedimages and I noticed that you had left a message on Image:Acridotheres tristis1.jpg. This image is actually stored at Commons and there is no media here. This causes two problems with adding comments: (1) they are only visible on enwiki and (2) because the page is uncategorized, it gets dumped into Special:Uncategorizedimages.

Would you consider moving your comments to the commons page (commons:Image:Acridotheres_tristis1.jpg) and tagging the page for deletion with {{db-author}}?

Thanks. BigDT 17:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Image:EyeToy.JPG is not a picture of a video game cover, but of video game hardware. If you are the person who took the screenshot I recommend that you change the licensing to a free software license of some kind. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for a full list. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 00:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

You can take a look of the history of that image. I put in the GFDL licensing and someone else change it. I believe that person saw that a game CD is visible inside the machine hence the picture may violate some kind of software cover license. I don't know what is the right thing to do. Perhaps someone should edit the picture to make the CD invisible. I start to wonder, if I take the picture of my car, do I have to block out the logo? This kind of licensing tag is very stupid in my opinion. Do whatever you want to restore my original setting as you see fit, I don't have time to go into an edit war with someone who have a different opinion. Kowloonese 19:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

I noticed you uploaded the image satelite.jpg locally on the english wikipedia in 2004, and later uploaded it to the Wikimedia Commons.There is a template called {{NCT}} you can use on local images that later has been uploaded to the Commons under the same name. This makes the moderators delete the local file on English Wikipedia so the one on Commons will be used instead, and everyone who checks out the image later wont try to dupe it on commons later. If you would be kind to add the {{NCT}} on your images who applies, that would be greatly appreciated. --84.48.91.112 20:38, 27 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I am not a user of the Commons. I don't even have an account there. You can be sure that none of the activities there traces back to me. I don't mind my uploads being moved to the Commons, but I won't be the one to do the move. So if I didn't do it, why should I clean it up? Please check the history of that file and identify the real culprit. Sorry I cannot help. Kowloonese 23:23, 27 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:DyingBull.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 04:34, 30 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I've added the "{{prod}}" template to the article Philanthropist, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, or, if you disagree with the notice, discuss the issues at Talk:Philanthropist. You may remove the deletion notice, and the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached, or if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria. — Sebastian (talk) 03:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Knowloonese,

What does this mean 余胤良? I noticed you added this to the Leland Yee page here:

Can you provide a translation and language. ThanksTalkAbout 19:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Kowloonese,

First, greetings. Now as to the chineese name...check the record, they did turn into boxes, prior to this they were working. If you would like to put them back please do. Now as to being selfish and self centered, I think not as I have family members that are chinese and are currently in China and I always try my best to seek a solution. So, let us start off on the right footing and please don't assume any thing. P.S. I do monitor this page as you can see for such things as the recent edits[3]. So, sorry for the mix up.

Just got off the phone (see the lengths I will go to, to smooth this over) with his campaign office and they confirmed the following as per the website you cited:余胤良博士 which is his name and Ph.D. So, you are correct! Please insert the Chinese translation with the five chinese characters as per his website, even though his official photos do not have these on the website... Best of Luck' and PEACETalkAbout 05:57, 7 November 2006 (UTC)Reply

In case you hadn't noticed, Chan Yu-gum has been proposed for deletion. NickelShoe (Talk) 23:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

There was no case made for notability. Wife of, son of really does not say much. I suggest you expand those articles as to why they are important in their own right. Are they? In any case I did not delete them - just proposed. I figure if they were important someone would step in. The pages were already taged as problems on the martialartsproject page.Peter Rehse 06:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I noticed in the history that you edited the Yue Fei page sometime ago. I wanted to invite you to read my article on Yue Fei's teacher Jow Tong. You might have already seen it, but I've made some HUGE changes to it and added more info, with even more to come. Tell me what you think on my talk page. (Ghostexorcist 20:54, 15 January 2007 (UTC))Reply

I made a stub titled List of Styles presently taught at the Shaolin Temple. I was told you might be knowledgeable with this. Please have a look at it for me. Much appreciated. Dessydes 14:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

On the Dutch Wikipedia they like to know if you have taken this picture by yourself. If so, please type this by the picture. Thank you in advance. User Rasbak of Dutch Wikipedia.16:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you for your kind cooperation. User Rasbak of Dutch Wikipedia.12:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, the discussion here says this is also eaten in Hong Kong. And a Google search shows it on menus in Taiwan. Any idea if the claim in the article, that it's only served in North America, is valid? Badagnani 19:13, 13 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:HopeDiamond2.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 02:00, 25 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I saw your cool photo and thought you might (might) have the answer to a friend-of-mine's question.
A friend of mine has a 2001 Prius and had bought an additional battery pack (I believe this is the whole group of modules) for just in case. Well, he's had some troubles with his Prius, and he's deciding whether to swap batteries, or just use it for some PV system... but it's been sitting. Bad bad. It has self-discharged. He'd like to charge it, but cannot find any marks anywhere to show which end is positive and which is negative.
I'm wondering if your Sunneyvale class showed you any idea how Toyota knows which is which? And yeah, I have to check back with him to find if he has a NiMH-specific charger, as I've found they're much pickier beasts than other nickel batteries. I know the NiMHs can tolerate a little bit of reverse-charging, but since he wouldn't know until it was too late, he'd rather not take the chance. Since I have a 2002 Prius and a (very mild and fading fast) electronics background, he asked me to also look for him. Your picture is at least one lead for me. Hope you can help, if not no biggie... Gaviidae 14:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hey thanks, I'd also run across his plug-in wiki after further searching... while I did find a schematic on his site, it seems I'd have to start at the ECM and work backwards through a HAL sensor... and that would be neg. But I'm glad you gave me the main site addy! Gaviidae 06:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I’m in my third year of college and I’m doing a speech on Fu Dogs, (or shi). I’ve been fascinated with them for most of my life. However I’ve never heard of a Nian and the only place I can find mention of them is here on Wikipedia. However, one of the pictures they have on their site looks A LOT like a Fu Dog to me.

The Nian site has a picture of a “Standing Ming Lion” other than the fact that it is standing and has it’s tail down, how is he different from a Fu Dog? What makes him a Nian instead of a Fu Dog?

Do you know about the legend of the Nian than what is listed on the site?

Thank you, Davidbowierox 00:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Try the reference desk. John Reaves (talk) 00:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

There are more references to Nian in Chinese than in English (google search shows 226,000 Chinese pages on 年獸, a narrowed search of "Nian Beast" shows 51,800 English pages). You may have better luck if you hire a translator to look them up for you.

If you have compared the Chinese lion dances from the northern vs. the southern China, you may notice they are two different kind of animals. Northern "lions" look exactly like Fu Dogs. There are not many references to the Northern Lion Dance in English sources because it is not as well known to the Westerners. Cantonese (southern) lions (the kind that you will most likely see in overseas Chinese communities around Chinese new year, right about now) do not look like Fu Dogs at all. One obvious difference is the single horn on the top head of the Cantonese "lions". Many claim the Southern Lions match the description of the Nians.

Though both art forms are called "lion dances", they are quite different. The costumes, music, dance steps, are all unrelated. Search for "Chinese Lion Dance" on Google web search and you might be able to spot a few northern lions among countless southern lion pictures. If you do Google image search, you will find 3000+ pictures on "Chinese lion dance", but the matches drop to 34 when you add "+Northern" to your keywords. When I went through the 34 matches today, only 17 actually showed the northern lions. They are usually gold and red in color unlike the more multi-color southern lions. As you can see, Southern lions out-number the Northern lions 20 to 1. [4] shows the picture of three Northern lions. See also [5] for a picture of the Northern lions (the fourth from the top), all other pictures below that are the Cantonese lions. Kowloonese 01:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:DianaHound.JPG. The image is a derivative work, and the artist must give permission for publication. This image is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or send an email with copy of a written permission to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org).

Unless the permission information is given, the image may be speedy deleted after seven days. Thank you. Kjetil r 19:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading Image:BluePeriwinkle.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self-no-disclaimers}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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 files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 16:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 16:25, 24 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Take a deep breath and cool down mate, the reason I reverted you edit was because you randomly inserted her name in Chinese characters without even indicating what language it was, let alone that it was her name, I don't have the expertise to improve upon that particular contribution and so I removed it as it was not a helpful addition to the article without further clarification. I do apologise for not letting you know on your talk page but there is no need to assume bad faith on my behalf, if you look a little deeper into the discussions I have had you will find that I have very good relations with many long term Australian wikipedians and it is mostly short term vandals who have resented me reverting their rubbish that have left negative comments on my talk page. Anyway as a long term wikipeadian I hope you can assume good faith and in future make your contributions a little more clearer for the reader of an article. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 22:46, 24 May 2007 (UTC) (PS. I'm not really one to take offence easily, but please also note that it is against wikipedia policy to attack another user in the way you have on my talk page)Reply

Please also see my note at Talk:Penny Wong#Name in Chinese characters

I'm removing the reference to the Chinese translation of her name in 24 hours unless a reference has been provided that it is actually an alternative name for this person that is actually used. Cheers, WikiTownsvillian 13:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

  Thanks for uploading Image:BruceLeeTeen1.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 19:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Just to let you know, someone is trying to argue that Penny Wong's Chinese name should not be included. 210.56.73.142 09:17, 19 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

I feel for your frustration. Thanks for your many contributions to Wikipedia! (Btw: you from Hong Kong as well?) enochlau (talk) 05:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:Pavarotti.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --- RockMFR 22:08, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I attended this kite fest & flew many of my Dragon Kites. The pic Image:1O20.jpg looks like one of mine--do you know who the owner is?? If it's not mine, the owner designed/built one of the best Dragon kites I've seen! Thank You for the beautiful picture. Kite flying isn't just for kids.

 --1stJB (talk) 12:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)Reply      

Hi there. I was checking the information on http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:1O20.jpg and saw it was claimed you took it. I tried to find the original image name, but couldn't find that you had uploaded any images in 2002. Could you please check the image and see if you took it? Thanks, Fred-J 17:52, 16 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, thanks for the reply.

Seems that Image:1O20.jpg was uploaded by you but as you say the log for that was lost.

Fred-J 19:16, 18 September 2007 (UT

 

Thanks for uploading Image:LibertySculpture.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, 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 files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:33, 23 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 05:33, 23 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations! Your image Image:TrumpTower.JPG was the random picture of the day for October 3, 2007. It looked like this:

 Random picture of the day  

 

The Trump Tower in New York City

Image credit: Kowloonese (talk · contribs)

. Again, Congratulations! - Presidentman (talk) Random Picture of the Day 21:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

 

Thank you for uploading Image:DSC01278.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Alex Spade (talk) 14:20, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:DSC01278.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. east.718 at 22:44, December 21, 2007 22:44, 21 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Kowloonese, you made some comments over two years ago about the usage of qipao and cheongsam. I totally agree with your comments. I found the confusion among English (cheongsam) and Chinese (qipao, changshan) terms totally frustrating. As a result, I've made some radical edits to the articles on Qipao and Changshan. I don't know if everyone will be happy with them, but some kind of editorial focus needed to be brought in to clean up the complete mess caused by different editors with different understanding of the meaning of the terms.

I'd actually like to move the article to "Cheongsam", but that's not permitted without administrative intervention. The fact that the article was originally created at "Qipao" is a pity. Some people have suddenly discovered the qipao in China in the last 5-10 years have no idea that it was already known in the West -- just a few decades earlier, we're not talking ancient history here! -- under another name. Wikipedia is supposed to expand the sum of human knowledge, but in some cases it seems to be expanding the sum of human ignorance. (Sorry! Little rant there!) At any rate, the word "cheongsam" is not the result of foreigners' ignorance; in fact, the original Shanghainese name for the body-hugging dress was 长衫, so the English usage actually has some historical authenticity.

Anyway, I wonder if you could have a look at the article and see if it has major problems. I've tried to refocus the article so that it actually works from an English-language point of view. This includes drawing a distinction between the modern cheongsam and the traditional Manchurian qipao. Given that the two are so different, I think that it's a useful distinction that's lost in Mandarin.

Bathrobe (talk) 03:46, 26 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I don't agree that "cheongsam" refers to the male garment. Sure, 長衫 in Cantonese does refer to male and female garments. But the English word "cheongsam" refers only to the modern, tight-fitting female garment.

What I've done is keep the split between the male and female garments. The female garment is qipao, the male is changshan. I did that because I see problems using the English word "cheongsam" to refer to either the male garment or the old-style qipao. "Cheongsam" doesn't mean "men's garment" in English. Maybe 長衫 means a men's garment in Cantonese, but the article isn't about the Cantonese word, it's about English!

To give an example, looking at the photo at Chinese wikipedia of the Empress Dowager Cixi, to say she's wearing a "cheongsam" is ludicrous! What she's wearing is an old style qipao.

Similarly, men don't wear "cheongsams" in English. Sure, they wear 長衫. But that's a Chinese word.

If we are writing about the 長衫, we shouldn't be using the Cantonese word, anyway. We should be using Mandarin. (It's a peculiarly Chinese thing to equate words in different dialects by referring to Chinese characters. For a Cantonese speaker, it seems obvious that "cheongsam" and "changshan" are exactly the same thing, because they're both written 長衫. But you can't assume that in English, because English doesn't use Chinese characters!) That's why I've put the men's 長衫 in its own article under the name "Changshan".

Bathrobe (talk) 08:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you. I haven't looked at the article on dim sum, but in the case of cheongsam, a Chinese speaker had a very big hand in the confusion. The speaker in question was a Hong Kong Wikipedian who created a new article at cheongsam dealing with ONLY the male version, with the comment that he/she was correcting a major social faux pas. If native English speakers have a particular interpretation of a word, that should be the primary meaning, even if it's not the same as the meaning in the original language. (The example I use is 'crayon', which means 'lead pencil' in French. There's no reason for the English article on 'crayon' to deal with lead pencils). But some Chinese speakers seem to feel that the Chinese meaning is the correct one, and they force that meaning on English. The result is chaos and confusion.

If native English speakers start using the word 'cheongsam' for the male garment, then it's ok to have the article on 'cheongsam' deal with male cheongsams. But when the primary and almost universal meaning in English is the figure-hugging modern dress, then no one has the right to force the English-language article on 'cheongsam' to deal with the male 长衫.

What is worse is that Blind Man Walking (the creator of the article on the male 长衫) was technically and historically incorrect. The name 长衫 (although with a Shanghainese pronunciation) was the ORIGINAL name of the sexy modern style. This word entered English through Cantonese. The Mainland now uses 旗袍, which is a different name from the one originally given the garment by the Shanghainese tailors who created it. Hong Kong uses a kind of mixed approach where both 旗袍 and 长衫 are used. So even in that sense Blind Man Walking was wrong. He/she was trying to reimpose the Mandarin name on Cantonese, a dialect that had already adopted the Shanghainese name in common use, and then trying to tell English speakers that they should be following that usage. I'm sorry, but until English usage has actually moved in that direction, people like Blind Man Walking are totally in the wrong. If he/she wants to write an article on the correct meaning of 长衫, he/she can do so at Chinese Wikipedia. But he should stay right out of English.

Bathrobe (talk) 01:36, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading Image:BruceLeeTeen1.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

 

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Yuan Kay-shan, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Yuan Kay-shan. RogueNinja_talk 10:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have nominated Yuan Kay-shan, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuan Kay-shan. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. RogueNinja_talk 16:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I happen to see your name on the history page of 2008 Chinese milk scandal. Just drop by to say hello. I happen to bump into this article on the web: http://rconversation.blogs.com/rconversation/2008/10/jimmy-wales-mee.html I think that is an interesting article. What you think?Arilang1234 (talk) 04:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi there.

I've recently tagged several of your images of works by Pablo Picasso as copyright violation. They were licensed under the GFDL, but images of paintings are reproductions of someone else's artwork and cannot be licensed by you. If the image was published before 1923, it's available in the public domain, but anything after 1923 must follow Wikipedia's Non-free content criteria.

In addition, your images contained the frames, which are 3D, not 2D elements. Your images could be cropped to remove the frames and reuploaded, but I would advise against it, since there are many higher-quality images (without frames) already available on the internet that could be used instead.

Images tagged: Image:Picasso2.JPG, Image:ManWithLollipop.JPG, Image:TheScream.JPG, Image:StillLifeRum.JPG, Image:PicassoSelfPortrait.JPG, Image:GirlProfile.JPG, Image:GirlReading.JPG, Image:PicassoTheActor.JPG, Image:LeaningHarlequin.JPG, Image:NudeInArmchair.JPG, Image:BlindBreakfast.JPG

Thanks anyways for your effort and enthusiasm! Mr. Absurd (talk) 18:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Flower2176.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:OrangeTree.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Iris.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:56, 3 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading Image:ThreeMenWalkingII.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 20:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:ThreeMenWalkingII.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:46, 4 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading File:Tempura.JPG. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

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

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 07:13, 6 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:McDullKaraoke.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 20:25, 26 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Ng Chung-sok, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Article does not state awhy person is notable

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Passportguy (talk) 18:23, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is List of faux pas. 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(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of faux pas (third nomination). 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.

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. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:19, 25 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Kung Fu Hustle has recently gone through several improvements and is again nominated for a WP:FA. Any useful comments can be given. World Cinema Writer (talk • contributions) 13:26, 7 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I found your old user page while checking out some old edits. I have history merged it, so that all edits are in one place. Hope you don't mind. Graham87 13:33, 10 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. :-) Graham87 12:23, 15 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:TweetyDoll.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Powers ^T 17:12, 25 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:SanrioDolls.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:22, 31 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

  Hello Kowloonese! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 2 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 121 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

1. Xing Yu - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
2. Samuel Hui - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 11:52, 25 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Centuryegg1.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 05:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:Centuryegg3.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. FASTILY_sock^(TALK) 05:57, 6 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GingerPlant.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PlumBlossom.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Centuryegg1.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Centuryegg3.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

My family has never had a problem with eating Top Ramen but in one of today packets I found a rubberband camoflauged in it. What the heck was that about?I am disgusted and frankly extremely upset since my two year old could of choked on it! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.68.46.85 (talk) 22:34, 24 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:BluePeriwinkle.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:53, 4 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GuanYuStatue.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. --Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:05, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

 This talk page is becoming very long. Please consider archiving. Magog the Ogre (talk) 23:12, 29 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Please see:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of English words of Chinese origin Kitfoxxe (talk) 15:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

In the article there is the gung ho listing: "from Mandarin 工合, short for 工業合作社." Would that be, "gung something ho something something?" Please clarify this. I hope the article survives the AfD. - 67.224.51.189 (talk) 23:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Kowloonese! As per your request, I have just usurped ja:User:Kowloonese for you at Japanese Wikipedia. Cheers! --Kanjy (talk) 12:21, 23 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

 

Thank you for uploading File:RitcheyTelescope.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:19, 9 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:19, 9 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 21:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dear Kowloonese,

My name is Christine and I am a Rights Specialist for an educational textbook publisher, how are you today. I am currently working on an educational textbook titled and the editor of this text would like to use an image that is credited to you. I am writing to you today to request permission to use this image in our educational textbook.

Material being request: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NYSESecurity.JPG

It appears that this material is licensed under a Creative Commons license, but does not allow for commercial use without permission. I am writing to you today to request permission to use this image in our upcoming educational textbook. If permission is kindly granted for this use, if you could email back at Christine.myaskovsky@cengage.com and I will forward over a copy of our standard permission letter for your review.

All the best,

Christine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmyaskovsky (talk • contribs) 19:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:ShihKienWuXia.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:44, 23 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Stanford University, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Stanford University. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!

ralphamale (talk) 22:33, 17 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Dear PDH, we are looking for a picture of Jojoba, Simmondsia chinensis and found your picture here: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MacFlowers.JPG We are publishing a book about aromatherapy so we would appreciate your Permission to place this picture. Certainly we would mentioned your address in the appendix. Your actual license didn´t allow this as far as i can see.

Thank you very munch for your attention, your sincerely Thomas Stadelmann

Nesso 8 87487 Wiggensbach +49 (0)8370 - 1777 mobil_ 0163 - 341 00 00 email_ redaktion@stadelmann-verlag.de http://www.stadelmann-verlag.de — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas4312 (talk • contribs) 13:15, 16 January 2013 (UTC)Reply

wanted to say that I immediately thought of this section of your userpage when I read this article in the Asia Times. It may interest you. Shrigley (talk) 22:34, 16 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Chinese food therapy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chinese food therapy until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Guy (Help!) 21:03, 27 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

 

Thanks for uploading File:BluePeriwinkle.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 14:34, 6 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

 

An article that you have been involved in editing, Bixie, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. John Hill (talk) 01:05, 16 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

 

Thank you for uploading File:Marble02969.JPG.

This image is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such images would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a screenshot of a computer game or movie. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original image must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the image description page states the source and copyright status of the derivative work, it only names the creator of the original work without specifying the status of their copyright over the work.

Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the original image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other derivative works, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. Thanks again for your cooperation. Kelly ^hi! 10:49, 16 October 2014 (UTC)Reply

 

Thank you for uploading File:GertrudeStein.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 01:00, 7 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

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) 08:51, 23 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

 

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PorterGardenTelescope.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

Also:

• File:EquatorialSundial.JPG

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 23 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

 

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PorterGardenTelescope.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

Also:

• File:EquatorialSundial.JPG

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:50, 1 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

 

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ThreeMenWalkingII.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination.

ATTENTION: This is an automated, bot-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 23:55, 2 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi, This media was seemingly uploaded prior to current image polices,

However, due to changes in the copyright situation in some jurisdictions, there is a need to ensure media on English Wikipedia is correctly licensed and attributed. It would be appreciated if you were able to confirm that it was your own work, by marking it as {{own}}, Fully completeing the {{information}} block, and leaving an acknowledgement on the file description page to indicate that you've accepted the license shown (and updated the {{information}} accordingly. If you have other uploads, please consider "claiming" them in a similar manner, You can find a list of files you have created here.

If you don't want to keep your media on English Wikipedia, please nominate it for deletion under Criteria G7 of the Criteria for Speedy deletion ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 13:47, 13 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

The file File:RepastLion.JPG has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused, lower quality version of File:Rousseau theRepastOfTheLion.jpg.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. –Sonicwave ^talk 18:35, 23 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

 

The article Charles Corfield has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This BLP was created almost 20 years ago, and apart from entries in English "rich-lists", I can find zero RS (even struggling to find low-grade RS) on the subject. There is no sign of anything approaching SIGCOV from any decent RS (regional or national). Seems more like a ghost; there is no GNG-type notability here (unless being on a "rich list" is inherently notable, but I do not think that is the policy on WP).

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 9 January 2023 (UTC)Reply

 

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charles Corfield is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Corfield until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

scope_creep^Talk 00:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply