User talk:Gauge00

List of people of the Romance of the Three Kingdoms[edit]

I don't want to make an edit war out of this, but I should point out to you that this article is not meant to be "stabilised"; the Wikipedia consensus agreed that it should be merged into the fictional list and eventually deleted (since after merging, it will not be necessary). Furthermore, I don't see how having the list of battles or Kongming's northern campaigns helps in this process; if you want to add individuals from these battles who have been omitted, why not add them to the fictional or historical lists, rather than the doomed Romance list? All this does is make it more difficult to carry out the merge agreed upon. If you want to retain the list of battles and the northern campaigns, please do not do so on Wikipedia's article page; keep it, for example, in your userspace. Benjitheijneb (talk) 16:18, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Assassination plots in the Three Kingdoms for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Assassination plots in the Three Kingdoms 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/Assassination plots in the Three Kingdoms 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 template from the top of the article. I'd just like to make it clear that this is not an attack on you or your efforts; I simply do not feel that the article is appropriate for Wikipedia. If you would like to present a counterargument or if you have any further questions about the nomination, please post it on the discussion page. Benjitheijneb (talk) 01:00, 20 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for Image:Suh yunbok boston winner.gif[edit]

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Sohn keechung no japanese flag.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Sohn keechung no japanese flag.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 03:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Sohn at finish line at berlin olympics.jpg[edit]

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

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

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

WIkipewdia is not a howto and material should be verifiable[edit]

Please read WP:Verifiability about thge requirement to base articles on published sources and WP:NOTHOWTO about it not being a howto. The most imprortant is the verifiability requirement. See WP:5P about the basic principles on which wikipedia is built. Dmcq (talk) 22:17, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Gauge00[edit]

A tag has been placed on Gauge00 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content. You may wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. WWGB (talk) 11:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Methods of computing cubic roots[edit]

I have nominated Methods of computing cubic roots, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Methods of computing cubic roots. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. RDBury (talk) 16:17, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring at Householder's method[edit]

If you continue to edit war at this article, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia without further notice. Follow the steps of WP:Dispute resolution if you cannot reach agreement on the talk page. See {{uw-3rr}} for more about edit warring. EdJohnston (talk) 03:52, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See the result of a complaint about your edits here. Please try to work within the system we currently have in Wikipedia, and get used to the standards which are applied to math articles. If you continue to act like a bull in a china shop, you won't last much longer. EdJohnston (talk) 03:57, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I observe that 123.141.179.226 must be you, using an IP address. You are exploring yet another way of getting blocked (reverting a disputed article using more than one account), and I hope this is the last time it will happen. EdJohnston (talk) 04:12, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. I reverted forgetting login. I counted reversion at talk page of that page. good observation, then why I used two account, when I explained in detail in talk page?? I did said my reversion in detail at talk page.(Gauge00 (talk) 04:31, 18 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Explaining your changes is not enough. You must also get consensus that your changes are desirable for the article. EdJohnston (talk) 11:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours to prevent further disruption caused by your engagement in an edit war at Householder's method. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

EdJohnston (talk) 11:47, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Gauge00 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Visit the Householder's method, and check the last change I made. I did add a link, and that's all. I did not reverted to the previous version. I did not re-add the part that other editors wanted to delete. It is unfair for me that my last writing was counted reversion. I certainly you agree that I did not have the intention of doing edit warring in my last addition. Even in the case of my appeal will be approved, I want to be in the blocked state, for a given period; I think I need calm down time. (Gauge00 (talk) 13:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Decline reason:

Nope, I see you edit-warring over there (Undoing edits is the same as reverting them). I also suspect you were using 123.141.179.226 (talk · contribs) to continue the edit-war; am I not correct? —Jeremy ^{(v^_^v Dittobori)} 16:59, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

if you don't want to be unblocked, don't request unblock. Keep in mind that WP:3RR is simply one technical description of a specific kind of edit warring and that you can be blocked for edit warring whether you technically violated 3RR or not. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:01, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Privilege of the predecessors[edit]

I have nominated Privilege of the predecessors, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Privilege of the predecessors. 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. SnottyWong talk 18:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiquette alerts notice[edit]

Hello, Gauge00. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts regarding your recent posts at Householder's method and its talk page. Thank you. --Gandalf61 (talk) 09:11, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

June 2010[edit]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Gauge00. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Do not attack other editors on Wikipedia. Netalarm^talk 23:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Privilege of the predecessors[edit]

The article Privilege of the predecessors has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unverifiable through reliable sources

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:06, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Privilege of the predecessors[edit]

I have nominated Privilege of the predecessors, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Privilege of the predecessors (2nd nomination). 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.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 09:29, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

friendly advice[edit]

Hi there. I saw the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) and I felt like I just have to give you this advice. You seem like a reasonable person which wants his opinion to be heard. You have some ideas and some arguments. That is all very well. However, you may not be fully aware of this, but there is a lower chance that people will support an opinion expressed with bold characters. Like FULL CAPS this is considered shouting and barking. If you want to draw any support you should not use this form. Please only take this as a friendly advice, the way it is meant. Best Regards. --Muhandes (talk) 06:51, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hello[edit]

Regarding your recent change to the ramanujan article, I have reverted two statements of yours that I think merely added noise. However I certainly am prepared to admit that I may be wrong on this matter. Cheers, RogueTeddy (talk) 22:10, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problems with Japanese cannibalism at Mili Atoll[edit]

Hello. Concerning your contribution, Japanese cannibalism at Mili Atoll, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=040000&biid=2006102625438. As a copyright violation, Japanese cannibalism at Mili Atoll appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Japanese cannibalism at Mili Atoll has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message.

If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:

If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Japanese cannibalism at Mili Atoll and send an email with the message to permissions-enwikimedia.org. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Japanese cannibalism at Mili Atoll with a link to where we can find that note.
If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Japanese cannibalism at Mili Atoll.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 17:02, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Korean Grand Prix‎[edit]

For results specific to each race, there is 2010 Korean Grand Prix. Korean Grand Prix as an article is for an overview of the Korean Grand Prix, rather than coverage of indivdual races. --Falcadore (talk) 12:00, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate it takes time to write long and involved edits as these tables and that you might take it personally to have it reverted. I did not revert lightly. You are duplicating information already available on another more appropriate article. --Falcadore (talk) 12:03, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Yevgeny Rodionov and chechclear[edit]

I was asking for a link to the video of the exhumation, not the execution. I've seen the chechclear video. It's not Yevgeny Rodionov. See for yourself:

Rodionov http://silouanthompson.net/images/evgenyrodionov.png

chechclear victim http://www.thenausea.com/elements/Chechenya/C_throat.gif

It's not Yevgeny Rodionov, it's not Alexei Shcherbatykh and it's not Santa Clause. He is currently unidentified. PCLM (talk) 12:55, 5 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jeong Darae[edit]

The article Jeong Darae has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Kudpung (talk) 14:11, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Dawn of Gulf of Aden[edit]

You may be interested in this, regarding content you recently added. Cheers, C628 (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification[edit]

Hi. In Mokpo, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Ray (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:43, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiquette help for Records of the Three Kingdoms[edit]

Notice of Wikiquette Assistance discussion[edit]

Hello, Gauge00. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. siafu (talk) 02:21, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

June 2012[edit]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Sandstein#You deleted page "Assassination plots in the Three Kingdoms. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 16:25, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. Look, I know you are upset that the page was deleted, but this kind of comment is never acceptable on Wikipedia. Although I'm not an administrator myself, I can see that if you keep on attacking other editors like this you are very likely to get blocked. For your sake, it would be best to try and always comment on content, not on other contributors. Let me know if you have any questions about this. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 16:32, 29 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012[edit]

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Blocked for one week[edit]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for attempting to harass other users. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. JohnCD (talk) 11:20, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks like this and this are completely unacceptable. Comment on content, not on contributors. You do not own the page, others have a right to edit it, and any disagreements should be resolved by civil discussion on the talk page. To edit Wikipedia requires the ability to co-operate with others, and if after your block expires you continue this sort of conduct, your next block is likely to be indefinite. JohnCD (talk) 11:28, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Jayemd. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions because it didn't appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Gauge00, your recent Vandalism of Wikipedia is uncalled for and is really aggravating other users! Please! Enough with this horseplay! Jayemd (talk) 15:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just a[edit]

tracert 202.255.1.57

Tracing route to 202.255.1.57 over a maximum of 30 hops

\ 12    63 ms    71 ms    72 ms  cm-osa213.kddnet.ad.jp [118.155.199.54]
13   274 ms   212 ms   204 ms  125.29.30.126
14   162 ms   161 ms   161 ms  121.83.231.70
15   152 ms   153 ms   153 ms  58.191.151.26
16     *        *        *     Request timed out.
17

C:\Documents and Settings\ZIO PC CLUB>tracert 202.255.1.28

12    62 ms    55 ms    55 ms  cm-osa213.kddnet.ad.jp [118.155.199.50]
13   170 ms   168 ms   165 ms  125.29.30.126
14   161 ms   161 ms   161 ms  121.83.231.70
15   152 ms   157 ms   152 ms  58.191.151.26
16     *     ^C

C:\Documents and Settings\ZIO PC CLUB>tracert 202.255.1.85

Tracing route to 202.255.1.85 over a maximum of 30 hops

12    61 ms    71 ms    72 ms  cm-osa213.kddnet.ad.jp [118.155.199.54]
13   165 ms   165 ms   165 ms  125.29.30.126
14   165 ms   165 ms   165 ms  121.83.231.66
15   155 ms   155 ms   157 ms  58.191.151.14
16     *        *        *     Request timed out.
17

Book of Han[edit]

Gday mate, How come you undid your edits on this topic, they are quiet good and appropriate. Thankyou. Enlil Ninlil (talk) 06:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Out of frustration, I deleted it. I changed Book of Han rightbefore. And see the User_talk:Zanhe. And Book of Jin, Records of the Grand Historian, History of Ming, History of Yuan, History of Liao, History of Jin, New Book of Tang, Book of Tang, Book of Song, these are from Twenty-Four Histories. (Gauge00 (talk) 06:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC))[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 24[edit]

Hi. When you recently edited Li Sheng (Three Kingdoms), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Liu Jing (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:19, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 31[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Wei Feng (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Chen Yi and Zhang Xiu

Zizhi Tongjian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Jin Dynasty and Qi Dynasty

Chen Qun (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Tao Qian

Consort Tang (Tangji) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Li Jue

Fu Jia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Li Feng

Wang Shen (Three Kingdoms) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Wang Jun

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 17:09, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 8[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Eighteen History Books of Jin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jin Dynasty (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:46, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wang Chen/Shen[edit]

I am going to move the article Wang Shen (Three Kingdoms) article back to Wang Chen; please see Zizhi Tongjian, vol. 73 as to how he and his brother Wang Mo were named by their uncle Wang Chang (Three Kingdoms). As it would only make sense for the two of them to be named in that way if the character of 沈 is used in the expression 沈默, I think "Chen" is more appropriate. (I realize that we are imposing modern pronunciations on an ancient name, but the same would apply if we used "Shen.") --Nlu (talk) 23:16, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

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) 16:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]