User talk:Xiaoyu of Yuxi

quick note

Hi Xiaoyu, you left a comment in my talk page, and I replied, but I'm not sure if you received my reply, as I'm fairly new to all this and I don't know how to make sure people see my replies to their messages. Azylber (talk) 09:41, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

August 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Dalian. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. A source is required for claims like "Under Japanese rule (1905–1945), the city was renamed Dairen (大連 / だいれん) after the Chinese name for Dalian Bay (大連灣). During this period, the city was also called Dairen in English from the Japanese." LibStar (talk) 04:47, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Answered there !

User_talk:Yug#PRC_provincial_maps, cheer ! Yug (talk) 23:18, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

March of the Volunteers Editing

I'm sorry,Xiaoyu. I understand now. But I translation from Bing Translator and Google Translate. I know you are Chinese, are you? That you understand more Chinese than I do. Thank you. Sincerely, User:VicheaSounS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VicheaSounS (talk • contribs) 05:07, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So don't use Google Translate. No translation is preferred to many Google-done translations. —Xiaoyu: 聊天 (T) 和 贡献 (C) 05:16, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for repeatedly adding CSD G7 tags to articles in which you were involved, in spite of being requested to stop. If you wish to vanish, see the instructions at WP:VANISH. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:45, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

I was not warned (at 19:37) by Amatulic until 4 minutes after I added the last tag (at 19:33). Thus I was not directly notified in spite of what Amatulic claims. Lastly, I do not intend to resume editing after tonight, and, after Amatulic's notification, have realised what WP:VANISH does, so this sanction is not at all necessary to prevent any disruption, so to speak. —Xiaoyu: 聊天 (T) 和 贡献 (C) 20:18, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

My apologies. After I left the notice on your talk page, I saw you remove it and then I saw more articles you tagged in the speedy deletion queue, so I blocked you to prevent further tagging. Sorry for the misunderstanding. As I said earlier, if you want to WP:VANISH, a bureaucrat can facilitate this for you without deleting your articles. ~Amatulić (talk) 20:37, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Is it neccessary to have rollback to edit? I never said you weren't a valued contributor, I only said that you have problems interacting with other users and having rollback may cause disruption. Why don't you give it 6 months of editing? The point isnt to edit for 6 months, but to give you enough time to interact with more editors and demonstrate your improvement in dealing with conflict. You and Fastily obviously do not share a love, but you had to know your ANI was going to boomerang. You kind of fired the nukes after someone showed you a knife. You need to show more attempts to WP:LETITGO and WP:AGF. My favorite essay is WP:DGAF. Take it to heart. The idea isn't to ignore rules and not care, but rather to have detatchment from articles and Wikipedia so you dont get upset over things that don't go as you expected. Hope you decide to redact your retirement.--v/r - T P 23:29, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I still fail to see how in my case, personal conflicts with other users consistently affects the usage of rollback. Note that the only time my usage of the tool was ever questionable was the night of 8 December 2010, and I was dealing with a IP inserting a blatant lie that is at the core of perhaps the most potent flashpoint in the world. As I noted above, either some admins (I hope not you) are simply dying to voucher for IPs or otherwise downplay the disruptiveness of/give credence to such extreme viewpoints (e.g. Taiwan is a country). The only behavioural evidence that can be gleaned from that one-month period when I had rollback is again, from that night exactly 9 months ago. I learnt my lesson this spring on bombarding others' talk pages (by persistently re-adding removed posts), and have not done that since April.

Personal conflict or no, I have generally adhered to WP:BRD (on article or user talk), and have hardly ever left edit summaries blank during content disputes. This is truly the only determinant of whether a user is worthy of rollback. "I do not like you" is not at all an excuse.

Regarding "LETITGO", that can be exceedingly difficult when a person, especially an admin, continues the same repulsive behaviour he has shown in the past. —Xiaoyu: 聊天 (T) 和 贡献 (C) 01:16, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It also shows maturity and character if you can let it go despite whether or not he can. Give my comments another once over.--v/r - T P 01:21, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I wasn't there to see or to help with the recent drama. I'm not sure if you've formally vanished or not, but I won't tell you to keep on editing if it causes you so much suffering. I appreciate the work you did both on article creation and in vandalism-fighting, but don't feel too obligated to the latter, as there are many other people able and willing to do it just the same. Quigley (talk) 04:42, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

China templates

Please comment here.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:36, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This was damn childish. What are you playing at?? Why would you do something so selfish? Those articles ar ehighly valuable and I greatly thankyou for them and wish you would continue. But trying to delete them all is quite honestly appalling behaviour. Don't take your issues with people out on articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:37, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]