User talk:Yunshui/Archive 7

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 ← Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10

Super Match

Thanks for protecting article, My editing is by K-League official records. I attahced references. But user Fetx2002 is editing by his taste. Because He supports Suwon Samsung. Please patroll Fetx2002 editing. In koea wikipedia, He edinted articles by his taste and He counterfeited refereces. Footwiks (talk) 13:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I happened to come across this comment in talking to Yunshui about another subject matter, but I can speculate that Yunshui did not lock the article to side with one argument. I think you've taken the lock to mean something it does not. He simply locked the article to stop the edit war. You and Fetx will need to reach a consensus on the changes you want to implement so when the article unlocks those changes can be made. Yunshui's lock of the article does not delegitimize Fetx's argument nor be an argument to not include his information. Mkdwtalk 23:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks Mkdw; you're spot on. Footwiks, I take no position as to the legitimacy of one version of the article or the other - I know less than nothing about Korean football - but the edit war between the two of you was disrupting the article. You need to visit the article talkpage and state your case there (Fetx2002 has already started discussing the matter on that page). When consensus is reached, a decision can be made to edit the article accordingly. Yunshui 雲‍水 06:47, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Re: CSD declined - Christian Santos

Please note that WP:NFOOTY explicitly excludes players who have signed but not played for a club: Note: A player who signs for a domestic team but has not played in any games is not deemed to have participated in a competition, and is therefore not generally regarded as being notable. Please take this into consideration when evaluating this article. Sir Sputnik (talk) 12:49, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Good call - he hasn't played any games for his new club, and so the arguments made at the deletion discussion still apply. My mistake; allow me to make up for it by going back to the article and G4ing it again... Yunshui 雲‍水 13:00, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Howard J Bluss

Hi. You recently G12ed Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Howard J. Buss. The article's creator doesn't appear to have been informed about the CSD, and is a bit upset. I'll assume you merely responded to a tag and decided it was valid, but could you have a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk#My article was deleted, I believe unfairly and see if you can add anything to the discussion? --Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:38, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Email

Hello, Yunshui. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Thine Antique Pen (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Dispute

Recently you have been involved in a dispute of mine. Here is what you said: Per WP:ELNO#11, we do not include external links to blogs or similar personal websites unless they are written by a recognised authority in the relevant field; in addition, such authorities are presumed to be notable by Wikipedia standards. High school teachers such as the author of New Books In Brief, unless notable for other reasons, do not qualify. Please do not re-add this link; if you do, you are likely to be blocked from editing. Yunshui 雲‍水 17:28, 8 September 2012 (UTC

The website in question is neither a blog nor a personal website (though it does use a platform that hosts many such websites--which appears to confuse people enormously). It would be nice for a website to be banned for inappropriate content rather than the profession of the author. Apparently you searched the website for something to incriminate it, but did not bother reading the article to see if it contained appropriate content or not. Why don't we open the issue up to the public, so it doesn't come down to your personal opinion?

Sincerely, Book Reporter — Preceding unsigned comment added by Book Reporter (talk • contribs) 00:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't come down to my personal opinion. My personal opinion is utterly irrelevant. It comes down to Wikipedia have a policy on external links which expressly prohibits personal websites (and despite your claims to the contrary, New Books In Brief fits that definition) by non-notable or unqualified commentators. Whether the content of the link is relevant to the article or not makes no difference; since the website has no third-party quality control or editorial oversight of its content, anything said there is unverifiable. I notice in addition that your only contributions to Wikipedia have been to add links to this site or attempt to defend its inclusion, which causes me to suspect that you are the site's author. Let me therefore make this crystal clear: I am going to go through your contributions and remove the link from those articles in which I find it; if you add it again, you are liable to be blocked. Your site is also likely to be blacklisted, meaning that no-one will be able to link to it from any Wikimedia site and it will potentially be penalised in search engine rankings. Yunshui 雲‍水 21:07, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

Service-Ability

Thanks Yunshui. This is a far better means of communicating. Thanks!

I have taken onboard the other means of commenting and communicating and thanks also for your advice in that.

I must say your approach and help is doing a lot to restore my confidence in what came over as a very aggressive environment at the beginning. It is very intimidating to be faced with the sort of stuff I have been getting whilst at the same time being hamstrung by not being being familiar with the mechanics of using the site. It feels like being in a fight with one arm tied.

Anyway, enough said.

I have studied your extremely helpful comments and in all honesty feel I am unable - at this stage - to meet the criteria with integrity. I know there are a number of book reviews pending, but even though the book is in all the online bookstores, they are taking advance orders because it will not be printed and available physically until 12th October 2012, clearly that will not happen for a few months yet.

It seems, therefore, that my entry was inadvertently premature, based on my immature understanding of the process and, rather than trying to make a case on uncertain grounds, it might be better to take the article down and live to fight another day, as it were. What do you think?

If you agree, how do I go about doing that?

Any other advice, of course, greatly welcomed.

Herbkr

Replied on your talkpage. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Grayhat551

User Grayhat551 is ignoring your 3RR warning and has settled into editing the article again. The editor is doing so without discussion and without leaving edit summaries. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:51, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

I am very disappointed in your lack of response. The editor is still adding unreferenced material and doing so without comment. Block the editor as was requested. This isn't an edit war as you incorrectly claimed, it's an editor being uncooperative. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:45, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Sorry to have disappointed you; sadly I can't be online 24 hours a day... I will look into this straight away. Yunshui 雲‍水 06:58, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
I have blocked User:Grayhat551 for 24 hours for edit warring after a 3RR warning. Technically you had also violated 3RR yesterday (before the warning I placed on your talkpage), and so I should really block you as well, but I prefer to avoid slapping blocks on folk if other avenues are available. I have added a couple of additional sources to support the information Grayhat551 has been adding to the Trinity Western University page, hopefully this can now be left alone. Further attempts on your part to remove it will be seen as a continuation of the edit war. I have also opposed your nomination of Redeemer Pacific College for deletion - given the dispute you have been involved with, it is very hard to view that as a good faith nomination. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:25, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:26, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Page Curation update

Hey all :). We've just deployed another set of features for Page Curation. They include flyouts from the icons in Special:NewPagesFeed, showing who reviewed an article and when, a listing of this in the "info" flyout, and a general re-jigging of the info flyout - we've also fixed the weird bug with page_titles_having_underscores_instead_of_spaces in messages sent to talkpages, and introduced CSD logging! As always, these features will need some work - but any feedback would be most welcome. Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 18:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2012

You have been busy moping up after me!

Thanks for all of the hard work. Cheers! Jim1138 (talk) 09:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raja Easa Saleh Al Gurg

Yunshui, could you have a look at the comment on my talk page please? I'm not sure what can be done (nor why the deleted article is still showing up in a Google search), but I thought you might know, or have another admin you can ask? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:00, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Replied on your talkpage. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:13, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, that's what I thought the result would be (just didn't want to give the impression of prejudicing your answer). Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:16, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

RfC - Lower Assam

Please be aware that User:Kurmaa has been blocked indefinitely diff, and his sock puppet IP has been blocked for a month (Special:Contributions/130.65.109.101). Chaipau (talk) 15:40, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Hadn't realised that when I filed the RfC; looks like it's probably for the best, though. His persistent and largely nonesensical ranting was starting to be seriously disruptive. Thanks for letting me know. I think it's still worth running the RfC to a conclusion, if only to get a few more eyes on the topic (and now that the talkpage is silvelocked, the sockflood should finally cease...). Once the RfC closes, at least there will be a definite consensus that can be used if such arguments arise in the future. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:33, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

RFPP

I know, we're so awesome. :) – Steel 12:45, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

High Five! Yunshui 雲‍水 12:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
And you can both have one of these as well (especially since I tried and failed to get some admin attention to it), very good work! Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:53, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Cheers, very nice of you. Good clerking, by the way; your comments were very helpful in suggesting what to look at when reviewing the page histories. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:54, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Senkaku Islands

Could you state what specific content dispute you see occurring there? If it's the name, that's not actually a legitimate target for full protection. The article is under Arbcom Sanctions, as a result of which an RfC on the name was held, which decided that the article would remain as "Senkaku Islands"; User:Nuclearwarfare said that no more naming discussions can be held until 2013. Thus, if anyone is attempting to change the name, or even discuss it, they should be given a single warning and then blocked. However, if it was something else I'm not noticing in the edit history, then perhaps the protection is warranted. Qwyrxian (talk) 13:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Well that was doubly stupid of me since I was aware of the ArbCom ruling. There appear to be multiple confirmed accounts dropping by to change the name (as a result of the recent news coverage), so semi-protection is insufficient, as is warning & blocking (although I'll go back to the history and do that too). I'll head over there now and change the protection reason to "vandalism", which it should have been originally; however if you feel that goldlocking is overly severe I have no problem with you changing the protection level - or asking me to do it. Thanks for pulling me up on this. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:11, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Oh, I'm the person who started the Arbcom proceedings last year, so I'm definitely way way too involved to act administratively there. I guess it won't hurt to have the gold lock on for a few days--most of the recent editing has been either inconsequential (in the sense that waiting a few days won't kill anyone) or the drive by name changes. And, in a certain sense, if the issue gets even hotter in the news, it would probably then be even more important to keep things on the talk page. My main concern is the one you've already taken care of--that each time someone does try to change the name, they're informed of the "it's decided for now, and you can't even discuss it until 2013" message. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:00, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Already on it, see this diff for the general wording that I'm using. Cheers, Yunshui 雲‍水 14:03, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Feedback protection

Yunshui, could you please turn the feedback off for the Justin Bieber article, there have been a lot of bad posts for a long period of time, with not a lot of useful stuff. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:57, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. Hiding feedback I can do, but unless you know and would care to share, I don't know how I'd go about turning the feedback off entirely. Give me a bit of time to look into it; if it's do-able, I'll see about getting it done. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:04, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
It's a very new feature, currently this is the only mention. Should be an option on the normal protection page. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
On reflection (still haven't figured it out, incidentally; the above link doesn't mention an off switch) I'm not sure this would be a good idea - there's a lot of dross, but there have been some recent pieces of feedback making valid suggestions and requests, which would be lost of the tool wasn't available. The Feedback Tool's still in beta at the moment, I think, so it would be prudent to let the trial run its course so as to obtain as much information about the tool as possible, including the fact that a lot of people use it for nonsense. You could ask Oliver about turning it off; I've always found him to be a jolly helpful chap, and it's his baby, after all. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:16, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I have been talking to him about it (it's a patch until AFTv6 is brought out; and Justin Bieber was suppose to have been turned off), out of interest does the option to turn feedback off, appear on the protection page? I'll talk to him about Justin Bieber next time we're online together. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:35, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Aha, there it is! I usually protect with Twinkle, rather than the Protection drop-down, so I've only ever seen that menu once or twice. Okay, now I know how to turn it off, and since it should have been done anyway, just give me a moment... Yunshui 雲‍水 14:38, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 Done Autoconfirmed users can still leave feedback, but the IP fan-hordes now no longer have that option. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:41, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, what are the options you have for it (eg equivalent of semi/full; time frame)? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:45, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Basically it appears to be the same as regular protection: you can limit it by permissions (admin only, autoconfirmed only, logged-in only, everyone) and set an expiry time up to indefinite. Interestingly, it doesn't seem that the feedback protection level can exceed the page protection (so on a silverlocked page like Bieber's, you can't set the feedback protection to "admin-only"). Yunshui 雲‍水 14:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Extending that, on an unprotected page you can't set any feedback protection? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
I haven't tried, but logically that would seem to be the case. Not ideal; it isn't hard to envision a situation where turning feedback off on an unprotected article might be desirable. Yunshui 雲‍水 15:00, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that, I've quoted your explaination to WT:FRG (since most of us can't see it; hope you don't mind). Yeah I seem to remember Oliver saying it was unavoidable, unfortunately. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 15:06, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
No worries. Thanks for teaching me a new trick! Yunshui 雲‍水 15:13, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
And for teaching me :)! Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 15:26, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your help. Keep up the good work! 77.166.70.218 (talk) 12:46, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. For the record, there's no immediate reason I can see that you couldn't have added that information to the article yourself (even with only a YouTube reference; it's a start...); the article's not protected from editing, and editors are encouraged to be bold! Feel free to edit the article directly if you want to. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
I see you already are! (For the record, I was unsure about whether to include the word "abandoned" myself, since it didn't seem to be in the sources I had access to) Yunshui 雲‍水 13:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
For the record, I seem to use the phrase, "for the record" too often... I'll go and do something productive now... Yunshui 雲‍水 13:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Further suspicious acounts

Hi Yunshui, I think you've already blocked several socks of this account [1], and this may be another meriting a look: [2]. Thanks, 76.248.149.47 (talk) 16:47, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Another duck bagged and tagged. Keep an eye out for more; I've left a stern warning on the puppetmaster's talkpage, but that's never stopped him in the past... Yunshui 雲‍水 07:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, and cheers, 76.248.149.47 (talk) 19:01, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

WP:RFPP

Think you could help out, its majorly backlogged. Thanks, Dan653 (talk) 02:10, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Looks like Kudpung has performed his usual heroics over there while I was asleep, but I'll mop up the couple that are left. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:24, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
Lol, thanks, wish I could do it myself... Dan653 (talk) 14:53, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Yunshui. You have new messages at Diegesandclust's talk page.
Message added 01:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--I dream of horses If you reply here, please leave me a {{Talkback}} message on my talk page. @ 01:31, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for helping me to fix collapsing on my user page. Torreslfchero (talk) 09:34, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Any time. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

CSD of User:NB1998/sandbox

Good morning. When I tried to move the article to AFC since it had been submitted for review, I received the message that it couldn't be moved because the title was on the title blacklist. I could be wrong about Wikipedia not but my reasoning was that the article fell under either WP:NOT#Forum or WP:SOAP because it seemed to be an opinion piece on a current social issue without any references. It even asks a rhetorical question in the middle of it about what to do now and then provides the editor's opinion that schools be closed. There are no sources to verify the problem exists, that it is being discussed, that it is notable, and that there are opinions about solutions other than the editors own opinion. Those were my thoughts anyway. Thanks. --Snowysusan (talk) 10:08, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

How odd. I really can't find anything in the blacklist's regex that would prevent this title from going up, but I'm obviously missing something. Regrettably, there isn't a speedy deletion criterion that would cover this sort of thing, but I agree that deletion is required; there's no hope of that ever becoming an article. I will ask the user to {{db-userreq}} the page (which would make it a valid speedy candidate); failing that I'll put it through MfD. Thanks for the clarification. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Just looked again, and I think I've figured it out - if you tried to use the automatic move link, you would have been attempting to overwrite the AfC sandbox (located at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/sandbox). The blacklist obviously contains a script to prevent that happening. I've now moved the page to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/DENGUE-ROAD TO SUCCESS IN INDIAN SCHOOLS where it can be declined in the normal manner (in fact, I'll go and do that now to save sopmeone else the job). Yunshui 雲‍水 12:44, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello Yunshui

Why did you delete my text? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khant Zaw Naung (talk • contribs) 10:41, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Because you are creating articles about yourself, and you are not a notable person. Wikipedia is not a social networking site; only subjects worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia get a page here. You have your userpage to include (limited) information about yourself, as you have done; please do not try to create an article about yourself as well. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:48, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Rising sun flag

I've never seen a locked article that I couldn't edit. Could you please see my post on the talk page here [3] and unlock or at least partially unlock the page? Thanks! Ghostofnemo (talk) 12:37, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

I've replied at Talk:Rising Sun Flag. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:48, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
I've also replied on that page. It seems unreasonable to block all edits and demand consensus before unlocking. You should ban the edit warriors, not all Wikipedia users. Ghostofnemo (talk) 01:04, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
I've created a "Request for Comment" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Yunshui Ghostofnemo (talk) 01:22, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Request for your opinion

This looks like a pretty clear-cut deletion to me. General consensus is that WP:NSPORT only applies to competition matches. Mr. Alnwick has only played an unofficial friendly match. Young players, especially goalkeepers, will often play friendly matches like this long before there ever seriously considered for competitive matches, and in most cases will receive little to no coverage for it. Hope that helps. Sir Sputnik (talk) 13:56, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I thought that might be the case. Thanks for the second opinion. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:57, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

AFD for Rachana_Shah

Hello Mr Yunshi, again i need help from you please follow the AFD for Rachana_Shah here , the article was in story tone and also content was more of fantasy , so i deleted all the fluffery and took back the AFD proposal , now i guess i have agrivated the creator and some of interested parties please have a look and close this , (It is to be noted that I am little bit skeptical over the reference of newyork times and the independent cited, as it talks about the book and not the design cover or the designer ) Shrikanthv (talk) 14:05, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Closed, per your withdrawal. Rarely is it a good idea to remove substantial content from an article that you've recently nominated for AfD - whether your edit is right or not, it doesn't look good. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for closing that, I understand , next time it would be periodic improvement (not to horrify the creator or who are leaning towards the article) Shrikanthv (talk) 19:21, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Action requested – Deletion of redirect page

Hello Yunshui. Regarding your post on my talk page, it's been nine days since I nominated the deletion of the redirect page Secular morality so the contents of Morality without religion can be moved there. No one has responded to my request for comments/objections on the article's talk page in those nine days. With your concurrance, I think it's reasonable to go ahead at this time. Thanks! --Airborne84 (talk) 17:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Works for me.  Done Yunshui 雲‍水 04:59, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! --Airborne84 (talk) 05:50, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Adoption

Mr yunshui can you WP:ADOPT me , want to contribute better for wiki Shrikanthv (talk) 19:30, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Shrikanthv. I'd be glad to. Due to a small child crawling all over me at the present moment this is probably not the best time to craft a proper response, but I'll drop you a line on Monday when I've got a bit of uninterrupted wiki-time. Yunshui 雲‍水 05:01, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Possible unblock of User:RickWilliams75

Hello, Yunshui. I've replied to your message on my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:02, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


Thanks!

Thanks for the advice and information concerning speedy delete codes. I will use them more cautiously based on your guidance. Have a great day! --Snowysusan (talk) 10:10, 15 September 2012 (UTC)

Mentoring

FYI. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 02:36, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Rollback

Ok sir,I will put another request after doing 50 or more vandalism revert as you wish.Thanx.---zeeyanketu talk to me 17:38, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Dear Yun Shui

Good morning~May I know the purposes of wikipedia?Is it need to be notable?Can't I use this wikipedia? Thanks~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khant Zaw Naung (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia. Its purpose is to record and disseminate encyclopedic information. To achieve this, Wikipedia's content is limited by a number of policies and guidelines. Notability, being significant coverage in reliable, independent sources is the principal criterion for inclusion. Non-notable topics and individuals are not covered.
There are many things Wikipedia is not. It is not a social networking site, a CV database, or a personal webhost. If you are looking for any of these things, Wikipedia is not for you. However, if you are interested in building an encyclopedia, we would welcome your contributions. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:33, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

NPM

Sorry to disturb; needed just a quick review. POV was the only issue standing in the article which you pointed. Can you have a look just once and give me idea of the state of the article currently? Thanks! TheSpecialUser TSU 12:58, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

It's getting there. The sourcing generally looks pretty solid; certainly all the potentially contentious bits I checked were sufficiently backed up with citations. I'd reduce the use of the phrase "given a clean chit" in relation to Modhi; it's a rather archaic phrase in British English and has been used at least four times in the article. I'd also suggest you consider merging some of the content in the "Atrocities against women" section into other parts of the article; it's somewhat sensationalist as it stands. Overall, though, the article looks fairly balanced; you've covered the controversial elements of the massacre fairly neutrally, and have sourced everything that required it. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:48, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the review. Will act upon the suggestions. TheSpecialUser TSU 14:21, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Talk: Insurance Medicine

Hello Yunushi... You have deleted the additions I did for "Insurance Medicine" on the basis of copyright infringement. I am, however, an executive officer of the AMerican Academy of Insurance Medicine and provided these additions on behalf of this organization in an effort to correct the inaccuracies that had been previously placed on this page. What can either I or my organization do to have the page restored? Thank you, Bob Watson — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobwatson (talk • contribs) 14:02, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

If you own the copyright on the text in question, you can donate it to Wikipedia by following the instructions at Donating copyrighted material. Fundamentally, this means you will permit anyone to copy, modify, reuse and sell your material. If you do not agree to the terms (set out here), then this material cannot be included. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:16, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Dear Yun Shui

I am a little confused that why the word "User" exist in front of my name?(eg.User:Khant Zaw Naung).And I only want my name .Many wiki users names only contain name(eg.Yoon Chan).And how can I upload photos and how can I draw a table and also files ? Thanks.good luck sir~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khant Zaw Naung (talk • contribs) 15:02, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

The "User" tag in front of your username is there because the page is located in the User namespace (as opposed to article space, talk space or some other Wikipedia namespace). You cannot remove it. Yoon Chan is an article about a notable person (actually I'm not convinced he is notable, but that's beside the point), not a Wikipedia user.
Details of how to upload images are here, tables are explained here. However, I should caution you that you still appear, despite my warnings on your talkpage, to be treating Wikipedia as a social network. To date, all but two (minor) edits from your account have been to write about yourself, either on your userpage or in article space. If you do not intend to contribute beyond this, then I'm sorry, but you will not be welcome on the project. Please consider whether you are in fact here to build an encyclopedia or not; if not, please stop wasting our time. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:30, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 September 2012

Hello

Hello Yunshui! I'm just stopping by to let you know that Intelligentsium is a wonderful, kind, and patient mentor to me. While I was posting a message on Intell.'s talk page I happened to notice your post there inquiring his current interest in the adoption program. I can't speak for him regarding that, and I'm not his official adoptee - but I am new and sought him out thru the adoption page. He (I think "he") has been very generous with his time and extremely helpful and understanding. I am so appreciative of all the guidance I've received from him and others too! How pleasant to be able to contribute with all the support I've found! I just thought I'd let you know. Albeit27 (talk) 10:44, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

That's a very kind thing to say. I've let Intelligentsium know that his work is appreciated! Yunshui 雲‍水 12:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback on 23 August 2012

Hello, Yunshui. You have new messages at Titodutta's talk page.
Message added 10:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Tito Dutta ✉ 10:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Elaborate

Can you please elaborate on your closing rationale here: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Salutogenesis. Specifically, what countered the "lack of sources for NPOV argument" (which I made less than minute before your close), and my merge argument. And specifically what swayed you to keep versus no consensus/merge. IRWolfie- (talk) 12:57, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I've replied in part at User talk:TheSpecialUser, but here's a more comprehensive reply.

The nomination cited the essay-like structure (not in itself a reason for deletion) and a lack of sources (which certainly is a reason to delete a page), and claimed that there was no "objective meaning" to the term. Hgilbert and Carrite pointed out that sources existed which used and discussed the term in sufficient detail to provide such meaning and to make it notable per WP:GNG. You yourself cited WP:NPOV, but whilst the article certainly has issues in this area, violation of this is not covered under the usual reasons for deletion - it should, in an ideal world, be addressed by editing. Per Hgilbert and Carrite's links, mainstream sources seem to have referenced the term sufficiently to satisfy WP:FRINGE's requirements for a dedicated article.
The "per Carrite & Hgilbert" !votes from Frankl and Lova Falk, whilst they added little to the discussion, do suffice to show that other editors have examined the issue and come to the same conclusion. Yours was, in fact, the only dissenting voice in the discussion, and even then you were suggesting a merge (effectively a Keep !vote, since it retains the content and history of the article) rather than proposing deletion. Hgilbert provided a counter-view to your argument by pointing out that Antonovsky's work had been developed by other practitioners, meaning that the concept was no longer unique to him. There's nothing to stop a merge being discussed in the usual manner on the article's talkpage, but waiting around for more "Merge" votes when the consensus had clearly developed as "Keep" would have been counterproductive.
I'm no holistic-hugging hippy, and frankly the concept sounds like utter tosh to me, but that doesn't change the fact that it's neither non-notable nor unencyclopedic. If you seriously think that I've misjudged the close here, please do feel free to file a case WP:DRV. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Several points; Read WP:FRINGE and the additional notability requirements it adds; it's not a standard argument as it's specific to fringe topics. If we can't cover a topic neutrally because the sources don't exist we delete it (or merge to an article where it is put into perspective), adequate sourcing is expected to exist to represent the mainstream position adequately and put fringe views into perspective. The me too votes don't show anything because francl spent 2 minutes between debates and we have little sign they really looked at it, they advanced no arguments, Lova Falk advanced the invalid "google combination X and you get hits". Hgilbert didn't show any sources that confirm what he says so I don't know why that would be given much weight. The article states "X is a term coined by Y" which should be setting off neologism alarm bells; Guy was correct when stating it reads like a dictionary definition because it is. See the similar Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Whole_medical_systems AfD. IRWolfie- (talk) 13:45, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
It seems we are experiencing a differnt reading of WP:FRINGE. I recognise that you're a regular contributor on fringe topics and so may have a better understanding of it than I do; please could you point out the additional notability requirements to which you refer? Re-reading it, I'm seeing a need for peer-reviewed sources and a careful avoidance of undue weight, but nothing which says something like, "in order to merit an article, a fringe theory must meet xxx as well as GNG." There are peer reviewed sources (I've just found a couple more on Highbeam) which discuss the theory sufficiently for notability to be met; per WP:FRINGE, a topic "is considered notable enough for a dedicated article if it has been referenced extensively, and in a serious and reliable manner, in at least one major publication that is independent of their promulgators and popularizers."
"Look, Googlehits!" isn't a good argument in AFD for showing something's notable, but that's not why Lova Falk was using it - s/he was pointing out that there are a large number of papers that mention salutogenesis without mentioning Antonovsky. As such, whilst some specific citations would have been helpful, her argument carries a degree of weight in establishing that the concept has been discussed independently of its creator.
As a final point, I'd note that this discussion, whilst interesting, is not going to achieve anything. If you are determined that the article should be merged, a more efficient approach would be to either propose such a merge on its talkpage, or request a deletion review to reopen the AfD. Whilst I'm happy to talk this out with you, I'm not entirely sure what outcome you're looking for here. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Going offline now, will be a while before I can respond to your reply. Yunshui 雲‍水 14:20, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
Read the WP:FRINGE nutshell: "when the subject of an article is the minority viewpoint itself, the proper contextual relationship between minority and majority viewpoints must be clear." Specifically " For a fringe theory to be considered notable, it is not sufficient that it has been discussed, positively or negatively, by groups or individuals, even if those groups are notable enough for a Wikipedia article. To be notable, secondary reliable sources must have commented on it, disparaged it, or discussed it. Otherwise it is not notable enough for a dedicated article in Wikipedia." It's the sources that give a detailed analysis of the topic which appear to be lacking. Most of the sources I have seen just provide the dictionary definition etc without an in depth discussion of the concept. IRWolfie- (talk) 14:38, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
I see where you're coming from with that, but my reading of the guideline doesn't suggest any amendments to the requirements for notability, only an additional requirement to avoid undue weight. In this particular case, the topic has been "discussed,.positively or negatively, etc...": [4], [5], [6], [7] and so on. In fact, on doing some further reading, there's a case to be made that the concept is actually part of mainstream health science, rather than a fringe theory; certainly there are serious health promotion projects, like the European Health Promotion Indicator Development programme, that make use of it. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
If it's also a mainstream term then the mentions of homeopathy, anthroposphical medicine and naturopathy are undue. (I'm moving off the topic of the AfD, but I may propose a merge at some point) IRWolfie- (talk) 13:48, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
I'd certainly have no problem with that. It does seem to be fairly uncontentious in mainstream health literature, so possibly it was simply the poor content of the original article that attracted the AfD. Rewriting to make less of the pseudoscience bollocks would be a good idea. Yunshui 雲‍水 13:56, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Yunshui. You have new messages at Nolelover's talk page.
Message added 14:08, 19 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nolelover Talk·Contribs 14:08, 19 September 2012 (UTC)


Mailing list

You might as well take this user off your mailing list. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:25, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. I've moved him off the active list at Adopt-a-user. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

AAU

Hey Yunshui, I am still active enough to be involved in AAU, and if I don't know something, I'm fairly certain one of my first Adopters will be able to help me/that person out. Thanks for letting me know! :) Libertarian=Truth? (talk) 18:10, 19 September 2012 (UTC)

Good stuff; I'll add you to the list. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

RickWilliams

You know, Adoption is generally not used as a route out of being blocked, mentoring is. Adoption cna be done by anyone with a little experience, whilst mentoring is generally considered to be more focussed and cannot be left without agreement. Having said that, there's no simple way to find a mentor - besides generally asking around. If you are to leave the adoption template up, might it be best to move it to the users talk page - in the section that explains that it's a requirement of unblocking? That at least should make things a bit more transparent. The category will still be added, and things should work as normal. WormTT(talk) 07:21, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Good idea, I'll do that. Perhaps as part of the Adopt-a-user revamp we should consider a sub-list of adopters who can also offer mentorship? Yunshui 雲‍水 07:31, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Oooh, I like that idea. I'll look into that. WormTT(talk) 07:35, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Yunshui. You have new messages at Mootros's talk page.
Message added 08:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mootros (talk) 08:29, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you!

The Admin's Barnstar
For coming to the aid of this editor not once, but twice, and doing so quickly and answering his questions/solving his problems. Thank you, Yunshui! Here's a token of my appreciation for your speed and good attitude. Paris1127 (talk) 10:39, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

My pleasure. Just call me Sir Jimmy... Yunshui 雲‍水 10:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Alyanna Mckellar

Hi Yunshui. I've re-added the {{db-hoax}} tag. Please, check the refs, Google, and also the article Danica McKellar. Let me know if you have any objections or disagree. Thanks. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 11:40, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough, maybe I made a mistake. I'll take another look. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:55, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Well, that didn't take long. Good call, I was utterly wrong. Speedied. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:57, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
And page creator blocked for sockpuppetry to boot. I'm glad you made me take a second look at this; thanks Vejvančický! Yunshui 雲‍水 12:05, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Yes, I've noticed the other account. All this looks rather childish. No problem ... thanks for your intervention. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 12:16, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

RE: Adoption offers

Thanks for the heads up, b ut doesnt he need to accept the offer first?Lihaas (talk) 11:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

When the offer's accepted, you need to change the template again, to {{Adopted}}. If he decides not to accept the adoption offer, either you or he can change the template back to {{Adopt me}}, thus relisting him for adoption. Yunshui 雲‍水 11:54, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Bettina Wulff

Glad to see it's you, Yunshui. Indeed, there is a little help required in this matter. I do not mean to enumerate all issues that have arisen but I would like to ask you to look at the talk pages. Moreover, I shall draw your attention to Salty Fingers (plant) which Mootros (talk) has AfD'ed, presumably not in good faith but as a result of the edit war in question. Regards, Akolyth (talk) 08:17, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

I took a look at that. Whilst the timing could have been better, it is a valid AfD nomination - personally I'm not going to comment on the actual discussion, but notability is certainly borderline. Since it's impossible to know Mootros' motivation, the appropriate thing to do is assume good faith and ascribe it to coincidence. I'm glad to see that both of you are participating in a talkpage discussion over Bettina Wulff, I'll head over there shortly and try and lend a hand. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:42, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
I've tried to summarize your suggestion for both issues on Talk:Bettina Wulff. Do you concur? Regards, Akolyth (talk) 07:53, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Just replied on that talkpage. Yes, you've pretty much summed up my position on both counts. Let's carry on the conversation there so that it's more visible to other editors. Cheers, Yunshui 雲‍水 07:55, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Deleting Diaoyu_Islands justifiable ?

Please enlighten me.

How is it justifiable to delete content other editors have put into Diaoyu_Islands ? Before I understand this part, I could not change my warning on Klilidiplomus.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starrage (talk • contribs) 10:43, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

As I pointed out on your talkpage, there is currently an ArbCom ruling that prohibits discussion of any potential change to the name of the article Senkaku Islands. This was arrived at after considerable deliberation and consideration by a panel of expert editors embodied with the trust of the Wikipedia community. As such, your arguments cannot be made on Wikipedia, and your continued attempts to pursue the matter are going to end in a block. If you want to continue editing here, drop the subject (at least until next year, when the current restrictions lapse) and concentrate on editing something else. I deleted the talkpage at Talk:Diaoyu because that talkpage is attached to an article that redirects to Senkaku Islands - which already has its own talkpage. In any case, the material you placed there was identical to that which you have inadvisably copy-pasted on a number of other pages, so no information was lost. Yunshui 雲‍水 10:51, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


Sorry Yunshui. I think you are confused. Your answer was not relevant to my question. --Starrage (talk) 03:25, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
If your question was: "How is the deletion of content placed at Diaoyu justified?" then my answer was "Read the ArbCom ruling," which is here. If you were asking something else, then please rephrase your question, and I'll try again to answer it. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:49, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

First course

Hello mr Yunshi , I am expecting my first lessons , hope you remeber this article Rachana shah I was little skeptical with the following edits

" Shah moved with her husband Tahir Shah to their new home called Dar Khalifa in Casablanca, Morocco and subsequently became a main character in her husband's two books that chronicled their adventures in Morocco: The Caliph's House and In Arabian Nights. Her endurance of the year-long ordeal of remodeling their previously abandoned house in Casablanca caused one blogger to marvel at her patience: "

I am concerned that wiki may turn in to a Fiction writing , so was against this , are the above statments allowed in wiki ??

specific "Writing article based on personnel point of view and experience is it a valid statements in wiki " ?

Hey congrats on your kid again Shrikanthv (talk) 15:41, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Shrikanthv. I'll take a look at the article - certainly her use as a fictional character, if unsourced, isn't appropriate (and unless the blogger is someone incredibly notable, their opinion definitely doesn't belong). I'll drop you a note a bit later with a more thorough analysis. Yunshui 雲‍水 06:51, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Sachin Adhikari

can you please help me with writing the content for Mr.SACHIN ADHIKARI then. I dont understand where am I going wrong.

Sameer.littlemagix (talk) 07:56, 21 September 2012 (UTC)Sameer

You have three main problems with the article as it stands (I'm basing this on the version currently in your sandbox):
In addition, it seems you have a conflict of interest on this subject (I assume Mr Adhikari is paying you for this service?) and so you should probably not be creating this article at all. I'm glad to see that you are finally attempting to get advice on working within Wikipedia's guidelines, but you may well find that Mr Adhikari simply does not currently meet our requirements for inclusion; if that's the case you should stop trying to get an article about him into the encyclopedia. Yunshui 雲‍水 08:09, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Yunshui. You have new messages at Seb az86556's talk page.
Message added 09:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:00, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Salty Fingers (plant)

As you are aware, the article in question was AfD'ed yesterday. In the meantime, the nominator has moved it from Salty Fingers (plant) to Salty Fingers (trademark). Albeit my objections as regards the usability for the reader (cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2012_September_20#Salty_Fingers_.28plant.29), this move causes a confusion with another product/trademark (http://www.alibaba.com/product-free/11077034/Salty_Fingers/showimage.html). Therefore, I wish to remove the page but I don't really know how to do this. Could you help? Regards, Akolyth (talk) 09:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

You could move it back, but given your recent history with this editor I'd strongly advise against it, certainly until the AfD is concluded. The naming conventions are a bit hazy here - what's wrong with simply calling it Salty Fingers? That would seem to be the common name. In any case, I definitely recommend leaving it until the AfD is concluded; you've left a note there so that the closing admin can see what's going on, and that's all you really need to do for now.
It would be a big help if someone could identify the plant's scientific name (I've tried and failed), although the Manual of style would tend to suggest that we'd still call it Salty Fingers. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:46, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
FYI - see my talk page. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Yunshui, I take your advice that we wait until the AfD is closed.However, even then I would require a little help unless the closing administrator does so. And as regrds your suggestion to simply name it Salty Fingers I should like to reply that my motivation was to distinguish the plant from the fingers of my hand. And now, that I am aware that there are biscuits and music bands of the same name, an appropriate disambiguation shall be considered even though the associated articles do not yet exist (However I fancy to write one dealing with a mixing phenonemon of viscid fluids). Regards, Akolyth (talk) 12:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
If they AfD closes as Keep, I'll move it back for you. Since there's at least one other trademark with the same name, WP:TITLE would suggest that Salty Fingers (plant) would be more appropriate. Yunshui 雲‍水 12:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
Alright. I'll keep fingers crossed. And thank you for your offer to help. Regards, Akolyth (talk) 12:42, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Adoption list

Hi Yunshui. Thanks for agreeing to stay on at Adopt-a-user. I've recently updated the list of adopters and I have included you, per your original comments on that page and your comments at User:Yunshui/Overhaul/Adopters staying on. You can see your new profile at the list of adopters. Why not update your profile with an image and maybe have another look at your description? You can also include a list of any adoptees you currently have. If you are also willing to mentor problematic users, possibly as part of a conditional unblock, please include "mentorship=yes" in your profile. Thanks again for all your help. WormTT(talk) 13:16, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback: Response to Mr.Adhikari

Dear Yunshui,

I have already taken care of the first point regarding the copyrighted material.

I would like you to check the article regarding Mr.Adhikari in my SANDBOX section and kindly let me know if the same qualifies the criterion.

Lastly would like to bring to your notice that I am not getting paid for creating this article but I have been one of the many people that he has influenced and brought about a big transformation in my life. Hence I am writing this article out of sheer respect for him.

I hope you take this in the right perspective and allow the addition of this article.

RegardsSameer.littlemagix (talk) 11:38, 23 September 2012 (UTC) Sameer

Fistweaver page

hello, I created the Fistweaver article located at en.wikipedia.com/wiki/Fistweaver, and then re-located the article to en.wikipedia.com/wiki/World_of_Warcraft:_Fistweaver. The artciel however was deleted because of the existence of the original article. Is there a way to delete the original article and progress to re-create the article in the more appropriate location as originally intended without it being deleted ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tmbbutler (talk • contribs) 15:23, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

I see you've already recreated it after Fistweaver was deleted. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:08, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Semi protection

  • Hi Yunshui, if it is possible, would you please help me to modify semi protection for the articles Mujeeb Zafar Anwar Hameedi and Hajra Masroor. There are some IP addresses remain removing and adding content without reliable sources or legitimate reasons. I see no other way than that.Thanks.Justice007 (talk) 08:08, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi Justice007. It looks like Steel has already sorted the protection on Mujeeb Zafar Anwar Hameedi, so that shouldn't be a problem for a while. Hajra Masroor is still unprotected, but it looks as though the vandalism there was coming from a single IP (since blocked) - page protection seems unnecessary at this time, but let me know if it starts up again.
Thanks, by the way, for keeping tabs on the Hameedi article; you've done some great work there, both in expanding the article and keeping it free of spam. I've looked in on it occasionally since dealing with Rafi al huq and his sock army; it's nice to see that it's in good hands. Yunshui 雲‍水 07:02, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Ok, and thanks.Justice007 (talk) 09:00, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

PhpFox

Greeting Yunshui! Can you userfy this to a subpage of mine: User:TheSpecialUser/P. I think that I can do some work on it to address the concerns. Cheers! TheSpecialUser TSU 14:11, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Given the arguments at the AfD I wouldn't hold out much hope, but for what it's worth, I've userfied the page for you. Best of luck! Yunshui 雲‍水 07:14, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Yunshui/Archive_7&oldid=1151042432"