User talk:Wareware

Re:zhonghua minzu

We probably can't replace the current article entirely with a translation because that would carry a pro-ROC POV and have copyright issues. My Chinese isn't good enough to understand all of that written in there, but I say please give it a try - insert some alternative viewpoints and other factoids into the article. The current zhonghua minzu article was written by User:Nanshu, who carries a pro-Japan and anti-China bias and is too blind to see it to follow NPOV. --Jiang 11:51, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Chinese military rank during WW II

Army

• 陸軍上將 Lu Chun Shang Chiang = General
• 陸軍中將 Lu Chun Chung Chiang = Lieutenant-General
• 陸軍少將 Lu Chung Shao Chiang = Major-General
• 陸軍上校 Lu Chun Shan Hsiao = Colonel
• 陸軍中校 Lu Chun Chung Hsiao = Lieutenant-Colonel
• 陸軍少校 Lu Chun Shao Hsiao = Major
• 陸軍上尉 Lu Chun Shang Wei = Captain
• 陸軍中尉 Lu Chun Chung Wei = First-Lieutenant
• 陸軍少尉 Lu Chun Shao Wei = Second-Lieutenant
• 陸軍准尉 Lu Chun Chun Wei = Warrant Officer
• 陸軍上士 Lu Chun Shang Shih = Master Sergeant
• 陸軍中士 Lu Chun Chung Shih = Sergeant
• 陸軍下士 Lu Chun Hsia Shiah = Corporal
• 上等兵 Shang Teng Ping = Private, First Class
• 一等兵 Yi Teng Ping = Private, Second Class
• 二等兵 Erh Teng Ping = Private, Third Class

Air Force

• 空軍上將 Kung Chun Shang Chiang = Air General
• 空軍中將 Kung Chun Chung Chiang = Air Lieutenant-General
• 空軍少將 Kung Chun Shao Chiang = Air Major-General
• 空軍上校 Kung Chun Shang Hsiao = Air Colonel
• 空軍中校 Kung Chun Chung Hsiao = Air Lieutenant-Colonel
• 空軍少校 Kung Chun Shao Hsiao = Air Major
• 空軍上尉Kung Chun Shang Wei = Air Captain
• 空軍中尉 Kung Chun Chung Wei = Air First-Lieutenant
• 空軍少尉 Kung Chun Shao Wei = Air Second-Lieutenant

Navy

• 海軍一級上將 Hai Chun yi Chi Shang Chiang = Admiral of the Fleet
• 海軍上將 Hai Chun Shang Chiang = Admiral
• 海軍中將 Hai Chun Chung Chiang = Vice-Admiral
• 海軍少將 Hai Chun Shao-Chiang = Rear-Admiral
• 海軍大將 Hai Chun Tai Chiang = Commodore
• 海軍上校 Hai Chun Shang Hsiao = Captain
• 海軍中校 Hai Chun Chung Hsiao = Commander
• 海軍少校 Hai Chun Shao Hsiao = Lieutenant-Commander
• 海軍上尉 Hai Chun Shan Wei = Lieutenant
• 海軍中尉 Hai Chun Chung Wei = Junior-Lieutenant
• 海軍少尉 Hai Chun Shao Wei = Sub-Lieutenant

Wareware 03:21, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure either but the Navy ranks look very similar to the US ranking system and should correspond. For the Army/AF (which are identical), are you sure there's no 一級上將? This page has the current ranking, if that helps at all: [1] (http://www.rankinsignia.info/show.php?podkategorie=Army&stat=Taiwan&id=1006). --Jiang 04:21, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Bombing_of_Chungking_in_World_War_II

Please see Talk:Bombing_of_Chungking_in_World_War_II -- Leonard G. 04:38, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Assistance

You might be interested in what's going on here. I'm a bit too short on time to clean up right away there. If you're also interested, help is needed at ROC legislative election, 2004. A list of candidates, etc. cannot be found in English and my Chinese isnt good enough. Cheers, --Jiang 06:05, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Race

Don't waste your time arguing with deeceevoice - he makes his definitions of black, included Beyonce is it, and then gets abusive when you disagree with him. Don't waste your time debating trolls. Guettarda 22:05, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Beyonce is "African American", but she probably has a lot more white than I am (I'm half white)...all I mean is, if you consider anyone with a trace of black to be black, then you define yourself into the positon where you call Egyptians "black". Not that it matters one way or the other - Cleopatra was a Greek like all the other Ptolomeys, and Greeks will probably care about things liek that. I find it strange that afrocentrists and white racists come up with the same ideas about white racial purity - anyone with the least drop of black is black. Anyway, I find him especially annoying, although he did one good thing, by encouraging me to get Spencer Wells' book on the Y-chromosome-based migration of humans (which contradicted deeceevoice, but never mind). When he "proved" that Buddha was black, and then went on to quote a series of racist websites... One day when I have the time I will correct some of the garbage he said, not to answer him, but for the sake of the "record". Guettarda 23:01, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Unverified image

First, it's good to see another UCLA alum here. Second, thanks for uploading Image:Alienskull.gif. I noticed that it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. Ricky81682 (talk) 08:20, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)

You said, I believe it was taken from a website on purported alien skulls. Do you remember the site, by any chance? --Ricky81682 (talk) 22:19, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)

Removal of various links to database of homosexual history

Hello, You seem to have deleted a number of mostly long-standing links to original texts on the history of homosexuality, links which were related to the topics where they appeared. As the articles involved were all unrelated, and none of your edits was substantiated with any kind of argument as to its reason or validity, it is hard to avoid the appearance of some kind of animosity or anti-gay bias. Can you throw some light on these goings-on? Haiduc 06:38, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I am glad to see that you are engaged in scientific study, because from a sociological perspective your argument is debatable. You are drawing a distiction between one aspect of human experience and all other aspects of human experience which is untenable.
Having said that, I myself have learned a bit more about this project since adding those links, and it is possible that there may be some more relevant way of presenting that information (in-text links, etc). Finally, the fact that the information itself may not be welcomed by some is not something that should concern us as editors. It is not our job to privilege those who want to restrict their own exposure to a de-sexualized view of history, if for no other reason, because we are cheating the rest of the readership. Regards, Haiduc 13:55, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I certainly do not intend to drag you into a conversation you would prefer to avoid, but now I noticed that you have deleted the paragraph about same-sex marriage in China, with an explanation which does not make sense. This seems to fit into a pattern of censorship of information about same sex relationships in China and Japan. I am sorry if this stuff makes you uncomfortable, but neither you nor I is here to "pretty-up" the past. And at any right I do not find this stuff objectionable, and I present it with utmost respect for these remarkable civilizations. You do them a disfavor to project today's bourgeois morality upon people who were more dignifed than that. So, I will here mention that the information about same-sex marriage in China comes from Brett Hinsch's book, (I am not by my library but I think the title is "Passions of the Cut Sleeve") and the one about the love of the samurai from Watanabe's careful work (I forget the title right now.) Unless you can present some _scientific_ or _historical_ reason why this information should be purged from the articles you have changed (leaving a trail of deceptive edit comments) then I shall work on reverting what to me right now looks like a blatant effort at surreptitiously censoring information that by your own admittance you find disturbing.

Taiwan notice board

Hello,

I am comming to advertise the Wikipedia:Taiwan-related topics notice board that I have just created recently in the hope that contributers on Taiwan related topics can have a place to interact and discuss on different proposals. I wonder would you care for signing in as contributors? :) I hope this would be useful for us. Mababa 05:24, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

1992 Consensus

There's a content dispute at Talk:1992 Consensus. I would like to respond to everything Mababa has posted, but my Chinese isnt good enough for me to read it all. If you could take a look and respond...--Jiang 11:44, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thank you...yes it helps --Jiang 13:00, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Afrocentrism

You were right, the article suffered from severe NPOV issues that should have been much more evident to me, embarrassingly so. Please review the changes I made to see if they address your concerns. Sorry about that, I copyedited the article last night, then added the references section, and today added a section about the African civilizations of 1000-1800. And throughout all of that, I failed to actually read the article as closely as I should, which reflects rather poorly on myself. Argh, at my (pitiful) defence, English is not my native tongue (your user page suggests that the same might be true for you, so perhaps you can empathize), and sometimes I skim things mechanically when I should be noting them attentively (which is the point, after all), clearly an area I could see further improvements in. [Not to mention mistaking your link for a wikipedia clone.] Oy. El_C 04:00, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I very much appreciate your graceful response, Wareware, and am pleased you approve of the changes I made to NPOV the article. What I seem to have (among other things) largely overlooked were statements the article made which seemed to be espousing the position of Afrocentric shcolars without qualifying them as such. Also, criticims of it were rather understated (much like African history is in Western Academia – how's that for irony!). I have no excuse though (wait, no, I got another one, I am at the verge of exahustion lately, perpetually, it seems; perhaps you can empathize with that, too, with your upcoming midterms and all), but I hope you believe me when I tell you that I am almost always far more careful with my edits. Again, I don't really know that much about ethnography and ancient history. The only reason I came across this article was due to a somewhat-related fierce VfD which resulted in a wave of neo-Nazi visitors from the Stromfront website. I intended, therefore, to review the various -isms listed on Ethnocentrism alphabetically (next I was going to review Americentrism), not make a fool of myself. Thanks for bearing with me. I have written a more condensed response to your comment on my user talk page here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:El_C#npov_tag) El_C

Yuan Dynasty

Nice eye in catching that mistake about Yuan not being the shortest Dynasty to unite China. LG-犬夜叉 08:18, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration (RfA)

The Request for Comments (RfC) process I initiated against you is, as you know, a formal complaint citing your pattern of calculated and flagrantly racist attacks directed at me on Wikipedia. It has now been successfully completed. As of this writing, not a single Wikipedia member has endorsed your response. If there is a person (or persons) willing to do so, you should contact him or her and request they do so immediately. As required by Wikipedia policy, this communication is formal notification that filing of an RfA [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration) in this matter is now imminent. deeceevoice 07:17, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The abovementioned WP:RFAr has now been filed. [3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=0&oldid=13510858) [User:El C|El_C]] 12:02, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration Committee case opening

The request for arbitration involving you has officially been accepted. Please bring formal evidence to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Wareware/Evidence. Thank you. -- sannse (talk) 20:05, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

AMA

I suggest you request an AMA advocate to help you present some evidence. Sam Spade 15:36, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance#Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration.2FWareware. Cheers, Sam Spade 15:52, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Battle of Shanghai

I read a book about the Second Sino-Japanese War written in the 1940's by an American and his description of the battle is very similar to yours. I don't mean to accuse you of plagirising but this is a bit weird. Let me know. --TheAznSensation 06:08, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)