User talk:Anpersonalaccount

List of Chinese inventions

Thanks. I was able to get the article up to Featured List Status, and I hope this current edit war will end soon, or else it will be grounds for it to lose its Featured Status on Wikipedia. That would truly be a shame, since I (and other editors) have put so much work into it.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 20:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't mind that at all, actually. Cheers.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 18:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

3RR block

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule at List of Chinese inventions. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

The duration of the block is 24 hours. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 15:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry! I did not meant it, please forgive me once! Anpersonalaccount (talk) 15:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Next time, be mindful that both the reporter and the reportee of reports on WP:AN/3RR can be blocked. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 15:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, but he did't stop, so.. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 15:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Given your familiarity with WP:3RR, you should know that your explanation is not a valid reason to circumvent policy. Block reduced to 24 hours since this is your first offense. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 15:48, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

I did read Wikipedia:Three-revert rule, but thats two days before Gun Powder Ma undid me! Anpersonalaccount (talk) 16:02, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

this is ㄏㄨㄤㄉㄧ, thank you for the link. also i am not a sockpuppet, this is just my regular ip, and im not abusing it so dont report me.162.83.135.213 (talk) 13:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Post Shang vs. Shang and later

Actually you know what? Hardly any items he added below belong to Shang; thus Post-Shang addition makes 100% sense. Lol

Actually, not quite. Consider the entry for dagger-axe, guqin, and a couple others. See?--Pericles of Athens^Talk 06:44, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

As written in the article, the oldest known use of the written character for the guqin dates to the Shang. Plus, the simple fact that dagger-axe is up there would at least be one Shang invention, no?--Pericles of Athens^Talk 06:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Also, you're forgetting chopsticks.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 06:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

You said:

Sure, but one example ain't gonna change everything and you know that

But this doesn't make sense. By my count, dagger-axe, guqin, and chopsticks make three inventions. Surely Shang deserves to be included.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 06:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, 3 notable inventions or "firsts" made during Shang really don't amount to much compared to the flurry of inventions made during the Warring States, Han and Song dynasties.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 07:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I don't mind, but what is wrong with quotes?--Pericles of Athens^Talk 07:07, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Fine by me. Look at the chemical warfare passage I just added. Awesome.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 07:22, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Moving the pi algorithm to List of Chinese discoveries makes no sense, since the List of Chinese discoveries article deals with aspects of the natural environment, human body, and solar system that the Chinese discovered (i.e., things that naturally occur or exist which were just waiting for human beings to discover them). Coming up with a mathematical algorithm of milu is an abstract idea that was invented by Zu Chongzhi.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 21:56, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your words of encouragement! Although at one point it was almost deleted as an article, List of Chinese inventions is here to stay and it will look as good as it does today for a very long time to come (let's hope). Cheers.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 19:55, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I recently added an entry on Song Dynasty archaeology. Enjoy.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 06:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

You still around?--Pericles of Athens^Talk 19:59, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Warnings

Your warning here doesn't seem entirely appropriate. I acknowledge the fact that an edit war is currently in process, but JSR's edits are not vandalism and at the time, he had only made two reverts. To address the issue at Sushruta, I intend on making a compromise proposal on the article's talk page, so please watchlist that page. Also note that making three reverts on each of the two articles is still grounds for blocking, even if it is not a violation of WP:3RR. Just keep that in mind for the future. Thanks, Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 21:08, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

See the second paragraph of WP:VAND: "Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism." I believe JSR's edits are a good faith attempt to improve the encyclopedia. See Talk:Sushruta, I've made my proposal there. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 21:18, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not exerting any bias towards anyone here. Note that I have already warned JSR in light of the comment he left you minutes ago on this page. Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 21:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow I been blocked

I had been blocked with no warning? Anpersonalaccount (talk) 06:50, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey Mr User:Kafziel, you do aware that user JSR has been doing edit warring right? And I had been blocked for no warnings at all! What are you doing anyway? Anpersonalaccount (talk) 06:54, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

You don't get a warning; since you were the one who posted the 3RR report, clearly you were aware of 3RR. You violated the policy with these reverts, all within a 24-hour span:

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4

Because this is not the first time you have been blocked for edit warring, the duration of the block is three days.

As for JSR, his reverts were spaced out beyond 24 hours. Not necessarily okay, but in this case his edits (and his attempts at discussion) appear constructive. I suggest in the future you try to resolve content disputes through discussion (not threats). 3RR is not a way to win arguments. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 06:58, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Of course, I dont intend to "win" over the aricle. By the way, how come my block is 72hrs? And he gets nothing after series of reverting WITHOUT EDIT SUMMARYING NOR DISUCCSION ON TALK PAGE until much later? Anpersonalaccount (talk) 07:00, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

He also didn't provided a reason over edit summary during the first removal. So still thinks that this is purely a 3RR reverts? His edit are appear constructive on removing reference while I restore it? Anpersonalaccount (talk) 07:02, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure that user don't get warning when he is reporting? It didn't shown up on the 3RR page rule. I report it because I found it hard to deal with him. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 07:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

You get one 3RR warning for your whole life, just so we know you're aware of the rule. You've already been blocked for it once, so I know you know what it is. And you're not going to argue your way to a block for JSR, so don't waste your time. 3RR has nothing to do with edit summaries or talk page use. It has to do with reverts, period. Instead of arguing with me, use this time to think of a polite, constructive, non-threatening way to explain why you feel your changes are important. Then, after the block expires, begin discussing it with JSR without reverting at all. The change you want to make will not be instituted through edit warring. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 07:10, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

How can his edit be constructive at all, he was removing soemthing over the article, it appears that you're quite basied on this issue by saying someting about 3RR warning for your whole life. Everybody are aware of the rules if they wanted to report over the board. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 07:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with being constructive. It has nothing to do with references. It doesn't even matter who is right and who is wrong. All that matters is that you reverted 4 times in 24 hours and he did not. End of story. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 07:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Lol, you don't have to reply anymore, I can see how you argue over your justice on blocking other. I will takes sometime on thinking how the admin system actually work for these 3 days. Period. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 07:18, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

While you're at it, think about how Nishkid warned you about this very same thing a month ago. Kafziel ^{Complaint Department} 07:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

While this isn't the same on your block, so you know what I probably gonna say next. Anpersonalaccount (talk) 07:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Replied to here. Listen, things happen when someone jumps into Wiki too quickly. I spent one month here and there on Wiki (mostly my user page and the wp:sandbox before I started editing). Lets forget the past. I don't want any more souring of both our Wiki experiences by trivial unpleasantness. I will even go as far as to say that when you need help on some article on Chinese science than message me then I'll try and help you but make sure to be civil and talk before you edit (also focus on sources). JSR (talk) 08:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The source did not deal with medicine and that's when I asked you to quote and produce it. Anyway, water under the bridge now. I just want you to know that whatever happened is in the past. I'm here to help if you need my help on China articles (I hope you improve a lot of them and I will help in whatever way I can). I assure you that there are many people in India who are fascinated by China and its magnificent history. I will be happy to be of service to China articles. Thank you and regards [(working right now :-)], JSR (talk) 09:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, look on the main page!

My featured article on Augustus! Awesome.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 03:29, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

On Yang Shangshan

Hi Anpersonalaccount. Just a brief note, mostly to thank you for having noticed and reacted to my sandbox on the Taisu. I just added a lot of content to it, including a detailed (though still incomplete) discussion of the dates of Yang Shangshan. What you found on Googe and Baidu are probably remnants of a controversy that has now been solved. No time for more today! Cheers,--Madalibi (talk) 08:04, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Anpersonalaccount! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. 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 this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 941 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Li Shu-hua - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:51, 17 January 2010 (UTC)