User talk:Rastinition

Welcome!

Hi Rastinition! I noticed your contributions to People's Liberation Army and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Kleuske (talk) 10:35, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Talk pages

Please don’t restore content to a talk page after its been removed like you did here [1]. If you expect other editors to follow the rules you should as well. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:20, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

I don't know what to say, so be it,thanks. Rastinition (talk) 14:13, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Hi I’m the one who added the changes but the plot part was made by someone else not me. Supercaliokyo (talk) 02:42, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thank you very much, Rastinition, for defending the encyclopedia against the addition of unreliable, self-published, user-generated sources. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:13, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:05, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Rise of Central China Plan

Hi Rastinition. Could you please give a reason for deleting the edit on the historical process of the "Rise of Central China Plan"? If you look closely at the first withdrawal, you will see that the bot is only for the content from Baidu.com, the rest of the references are fine. Without the inclusion of this content, its chronological progression and breadth of content would never be extended.Thank you for the talk anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachels95 (talk • contribs) 22:59, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Rise of Central China Plan · sources

Hi Rastinition. About the sources I used, the vast majority of them were official Chinese government news website content, and many of them did not have direct English translations of the documents (I wasn't sure if this was a serious problem, so I asked someone more professional, who told me it was reasonable). If this doesn't actually make sense, I can live with it even if the page looks thin. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rachels95 (talk • contribs) 11:18, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Rastinition! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Edit filter log in Chen Yifa, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please . See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:02, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Crashes, edit filter and reliability of sources

Thank you for your contributions! I'd like to share a few things with you.

I noticed that on Talk:Qing dynasty coinage#About deleting part of the content you complained that editing a long page crashed your computer. I have no problem previewing an edited version of [2] (before the recent removals) so this is likely a problem on your end. Never remove content for this reason unless multiple experienced editors confirm the problem. It's extremely rare. Publishing an edit to a long page may take a little while as the Wikimedia servers sometimes need some time to process and parse the page, but this doesn't crash your browser. This is an issue for developers to deal with, not editors. Some articles simply are long because there's a lot to say about them. Splitting an article to make it easier to read/navigate is fine, but you should almost never do it for performance.

I also noticed that on for example [3] you reverted an edit citing Special:AbuseLog. In that case you were right, but please be aware that WP:Edit filter is far from infallible. It is completely automated and a log entry doesn't always mean there is a problem with an edit, only that further investigation may be needed. As a result, the edit filter entry isn't a good rationale in and of itself to revert an edit. If you want to find bad edits to counter vandalism, you may also want to try activating the "Very likely have problems" and "Likely have problems" filters in Special:RecentChanges.

Lastly I noticed you removed some unreliable sources - great work! However, be aware that the reliability of sources always depends on context. A verified social media account of a public figure (celebrities, journalists, politicians, etc) is absolutely fine as a primary source for facts about that person, for example their birthday. Statements relevant to their field are also generally reliable but should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis and not given undue weight. Most mainstream media also have social media accounts which are typically reliable as well. A store page (from a reputable store) can be a sufficient source for the existence of an item or basic characteristics, provided it's not controversial. As another example, [4] is a blog from Google itself. You removed it in [5] but it's a fine source to confirm the license. It's a primary source (Google made the font in collaboration with Adobe), but that's fine as a source for a factual statement. This has to be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, for example this line from the same source: "In addition, subtle triangular ornaments were added to the end of horizontal strokes to simulate Chinese Kai (楷体) calligraphy." would not be considered a reliable source as wood carving is not the field of software developers. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for activating the "Very likely have problems" and "Likely have problems" filters in Special:RecentChanges that you mentioned. I will try it if I need it. Rastinition (talk) 16:20, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Good, I hope it helps. I noticed you gave a user a block warning citing the edit filter. This is inappropriate. As I explained, the edit filter is automated. People only get blocked for bad edits, nobody gets blocked for triggering the edit filter. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 09:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

1. I believe the filter is reliable.So I hope anyone can explain the reason for the trigger on the talk page when anyone is warned by the filter.
2. This time he rolled back too much content, I can only put back the wordpress he has explained, and other parts that may trigger the filter I think he needs to explain one by one.
3. If he rolls back not much content, the inspection responsibility should be on the person who undoes, but he rolls back too much at a time.　If the inspection responsibility is on the person who undoes, there should be few people who can complete the inspection because there are too many content and it takes a lot of time, so the inspection responsibility should be on him not on the person who undoes.
4. Before he inserted the content, he already knew that there was a lot of content inserted and the system had warned him.So he has inserted these contents while being reminded or warned, then he should bear the burden of proof. Rastinition (talk) 11:16, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing for list articles and sections that refer to a main articles

Wikipedia has some list articles and sections within articles, for example Beyoncé#Discography which refers to Beyoncé discography. In those situations, sources don't have to be duplicated on the list article or within the section, the sources in the main article are sufficient. Sometimes sources are duplicated, especially in longer sections (like Beyoncé#1997–2002: Destiny's Child) but this is not required. If the main article doesn't have sufficient sources only the main article should be given problem tags like {{More citations needed}}. I moved List of counties in China back to article space. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 11:38, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

OK. I have no other ideas about this. Rastinition (talk) 11:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I did tag List of counties in China with {{Update}} as I agree that at least part of the information is outdated. It would be more efficient if list articles like those could be generated from a central source. A central source exists: Dongcheng District / 东城区 / 41.82 square kilometre / population 911,000. This is imported from d:Q394681. But on a list as long as List of counties in China this will likely result in hitting transclusion limits. We could consider deleting the article, deferring to articles that list the counties per province like List of administrative divisions of Hunan. We could also remove the "area" and "population" columns from List of counties in China as those are difficult to maintain with the current technology, but that would also make the list less useful. Draft isn't the answer as draftified articles are (paradoxically) less likely to get updated. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 13:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I don’t know the draft can’t improve the article.Anyway, it takes a lot of time, which is one of the reasons why I moved to the draft.Because there is too much content, the cost of maintaining this page is very expensive.I have copied the content to Microsoft Word and tried to improve it through editing few days ago, but because the content was too much and too complicated, I gave up after trying it for 4 hours.

I think your suggestion can reduce maintenance costs.But I still think it takes too much time, so I may not edit it for a long time. Rastinition (talk) 13:33, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

PS:Sometimes editing is worse than nothing, because some editing causes doubts.This feeling is more obvious on some nationalism, fanatics or religious-related pages.For example, I found that some Chinese nationalists like to add a lot of Chinese and use it as a dictionary.In order to prove that the Chinese characters are correct, many unnecessary sources are added, sometimes they refer to zh.wikipedia.Sometimes I can see that the entire paragraph is in Chinese instead of a single word, as if it is zh.wikipedia.Some pages look normal before editing, but after pressing edit, you will see a lot of Chinese, and it is difficult to find content other than reference.Because those Chinese are inserted through reference in large quantities, I think this also causes editing difficulties, especially some pages will insert multiple Chinese references in the same line, and I have even seen more than 8 Chinese references.I think that is a disaster.Too much HyperText Markup Language will also slow down loading or even crash.--Rastinition (talk) 22:05, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Yang Shao-hou

Hello, regarding your recent edits of the Yang Shao-hou page, when you chose to "delete books without ISBN" from the bibliography, you were actually deleting issues of a magazine that is well-known in relevant specialist circles. It was published for about three decades, without an ISBN of course because it was not a book, and also without ISSN registration which was not as common when it began publication. To research that article, I acquired the original issues on eBay. The article very much relies on citations of those magazine issues, and we must add them back to the bibliography. If you can recommend an alternative way to do that, I am all ears.

Also you deleted a citation containing a link to a scholarly website, Brennan Translation. That website is hosted on the Wordpress platform, and so it triggered a filter designed to tag links that may lead to personal blogs. But that tag does not mean such a link must always be deleted in every case, only that the content of the website must be reviewed. That particular website is not a personal blog. It in fact contains well-regarded translations of out-of-copyright Chinese books that are very relevant to the topic of this article. Any specialist qualified to edit that page can verify there is no violation here, and that we should add that citation back in.

And finally, the YouTube links you deleted were selected after much research to visually illustrate the different approaches taken by the branch lineages descending from Yang Shao-hou's original teaching, and include historic videos of past masters who have since died. Anyone with expertise in this area can verify those videos are presented in a way that supports that purpose rather than any type of promotion or entertainment, and are not in any way a violation, but if you disagree then I would welcome further discussion with you on this topic.

--Jōkepedia (talk) 05:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

1. ISBN, 9787514901542, If the search results are correct, this should be 科學化的國術太極拳 's ISBN.
2. Search The Applications Frame of Yang Style, I only found mirror sites of Wikipedia.Your original research is useless if you can't prove those sources are existence and reliable.At least I can't find some of them.There are some references I can search for ISBNs like 杨氏太极拳大、中、小架的实践与认识 ISBN：9787565339325.If I can find it by searching, I don't believe you can't.
3. About Youtube I don't want to use my own words, so copy the words of other pages.

WP:YT

While there is no blanket ban on linking to YouTube or other user-submitted video sites, the links must abide by the guidelines on this page. (See § Restrictions on linking and § Links normally to be avoided.) Many videos hosted on YouTube or similar sites do not meet the standards for inclusion in External links sections, and copyright is of particular concern. Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows, or other content of interest to Wikipedia visitors are copyright violations and should not be linked, either in the article or in citations. Links should be evaluated for inclusion with due care on a case-by-case basis. Links to online videos should also identify additional software necessary for readers to view the content.

WP:VIDEOLINK

Anyone can create a website or video and then claim to be an expert in a certain field. For this reason, self-published media is often not acceptable as a source. Self-published videos may be used as sources of information about their creator if they meet the requirements seen at restrictions on using self-published sources. The community sometimes accepts videos from the official YouTube channels of subjects, but this is not a guarantee of approval with content being unduly self-serving being just one concern.

WP:ELNO

Except for a link to an official page of the article's subject, one should generally avoid providing external links to:

4.Links mainly intended to promote a website, including online petitions and crowdfunding pages. See Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming.

5.Individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to web pages with objectionable amounts of advertising. For example, the mobile phone article should not link to web pages that mostly promote or advertise cell-phone products or services.

6.Sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content, unless the site itself is the subject of the article, or the link is a convenience link to a citation. See § Sites requiring registration.

7.Sites that are inaccessible to a substantial number of users, such as sites that work only with a specific browser or in a specific country.

8.Direct links to documents that require external applications or plugins to view the content, unless the article is about such file formats. See § Rich media for more details.

9.Any search results pages, such as links to individual website searches, search engines, search aggregators, or RSS feeds.

10.Social networking sites (such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and Instagram), chat or discussion forums/groups (such as Facebook Groups), Usenet newsgroups or email lists.

11.Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites (negative ones included), except those written by a recognized authority. (This exception for blogs, etc., controlled by recognized authorities is meant to be very limited; as a minimum standard, recognized authorities who are individuals always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people.)

WP:OWNWORDS

Do not plagiarize or breach copyright when using sources. Summarize source material in your own words as much as possible; when quoting or closely paraphrasing a source, use an inline citation, and in-text attribution where appropriate.

Do not link to any source that violates the copyrights of others per contributors' rights and obligations. You can link to websites that display copyrighted works as long as the website has licensed the work or uses the work in a way compliant with fair use. Knowingly directing others to material that violates copyright may be considered contributory copyright infringement. If there is reason to think a source violates copyright, do not cite it. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as Scribd or YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material violating copyright. Rastinition (talk) 12:29, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Regarding the ISBN issue, again magazines do not have ISBNs, and only some have ISSNs. For the English-language publication "T'ai Chi", pleases enter "t'ai chi magazine" into any a US-based search engine such as Google and you will find many results including cover images, and for the Chinese-language publication 武魂 please search for "武魂杂志" and you will also find many results, proving the existence of these well-known publications.

The Brennan Translation website does not violate any of the rules you have listed, and is in fact a free publication by a recognized expert in the field who accepts no compensation for his work. The tag automatically applied when linking to sites hosted on Wordpress or similar platforms simply alerts us to do a careful review. I have done that. Please do that review yourself and I'm certain you will find no violation, or that you will leave further evaluation to others who are familiar with scholarly work in this area.

Similarly, as noted in the rules you copied here, YouTube is not under a blanket ban. Each link must instead be carefully reviewed for copyright, sales/advertising, and so on. I see no reason, for example, to delete a historically significant 1984 video of a 100 year-old man performing a form (a set pattern of movements) he designed in the 1920s. Other videos were selected to illustrate the history of these lineages. Please carefully review them one-by-one, or rely on review by others with expertise in this field.

I have an offline copy of the article as it existed before your changes, and can easily restore these references myself.

--Jōkepedia (talk) 14:09, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

My words is simple.

1. I have offered you ISBN to replace BLOG, but you insist on using BLOG to replace ISBN. If you don't know how to use ISBN ,you can read Template:Cite_book.If I have told you how to do, and given you enough information, but you insist, I will think you are malicious.
2. Copyright issue.You should use WP:ELOFFICIAL as source at least.You must identify who posted the video.You must identify the original publisher of the video.I read links to some videos and found that they should all be self-published. By the way, here is not WP:LINKFARM. Rastinition (talk) 22:47, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Removal of warnings

User talk:Ngancheekean (diff 1068421244)
Removal of warnings is allowed in most cases: Wikipedia:User pages#Removal of comments, notices, and warnings. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 20:25, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

Large removal of content in Invasion and rebellion of the Five Barbarians

Hi I noticed you removed large portions of content in Invasion and rebellion of the Five Barbarians citing copying from baike. However much of the content removed have citations from English sources published by reliable academic institutions. Do you have the original source that the deleted content was copied from? Qiushufang (talk) 23:30, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

See User_talk:Qiushufang#Re Rastinition (talk) 23:45, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Regarding WP:UGC website

I checked and it's true that there is user-generated content on the website, but that article seems posted by 芒果TV themselves. Is it possible to allow it? It seems like an accurate description of the award and I have tried hard to find another non-blog source, but only found videos. Solemn Penance (talk) 04:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't approve of adding WP:UGC in any way.

So I copy and paste WP:RSPRIMARY for you. Hope this can help you.

Primary sources are often difficult to use appropriately. Although they can be both reliable and useful in certain situations, they must be used with caution in order to avoid original research. Although specific facts may be taken from primary sources, secondary sources that present the same material are preferred. Large blocks of material based purely on primary sources should be avoided. All interpretive claims, analyses, or synthetic claims about primary sources must be referenced to a secondary source, rather than original analysis of the primary-source material by Wikipedia editors.

When editing articles in which the use of primary sources is a concern, in-line templates, such as {{primary source-inline}} and {{better source}}, or article templates, such as {{primary sources}} and {{refimprove science}}, may be used to mark areas of concern. Rastinition (talk) 05:20, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

But since the proof of an award is generally a secondary source reporting on the specific awards ceremony, which can't be found in this case, is it really not possible to make an exception for that article since it is witten by the host of the award? Otherwise the use of a video primary source can't be archived. Or is it preferable in this case to leave the award unreferenced and use WP:CITENEED? Solemn Penance (talk) 06:18, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

You can decide for yourself whether to insert {{citeneeded}}.

I decided to insert {{Third-party}} and {{Unreliable sources}}. {{Unreliable sources}} is related to filter 1081. Remind you not to trigger filter 1081 again. Rastinition (talk) 02:35, 6 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:51, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

List of temple names moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, List of temple names, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Schools in PRC for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Schools in PRC 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/Schools in PRC 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. As you severely cut the article off at the knees and attacked several editors in edit summaries, I think an explanation from you on the nomination is justified here, especially for moving it to a vague title so that nobody could find it.

Nate • (chatter) 01:07, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Related to this as I went through your edits; we don't do this, we move the sources. It's been undone and you're advised to stop removing sourced content under spurious grounds like this and 'we don't use APA citation style' (then convert it to a proper style. There are hundreds of cite converters online.). Nate • (chatter) 02:26, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Muting users

Hi Rastinition, the list of tools you see on every user's talk page contains a link to "Mute this user". You can open your preferences and make the setting global, too, so it applies to every Wikimedia wiki. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:53, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

I will try it, thanks.

I probably won't try Special:diff/1171547863 for a few days, but I'll warn him about harassment. Rastinition (talk) 20:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:List of temple names

Hello, Rastinition. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:List of temple names, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:04, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of temple names (October 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Taking Out The Trash was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:List of temple names and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Taking Out The Trash (talk) 22:58, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Rastinition! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Taking Out The Trash (talk) 22:58, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)