User talk:CaradhrasAiguo

/Stats

You may call me by my full screenname, "Caradhras" alone, or, rarely, "CA" and variants. Preferably not CA for obvious reasons, and definitely not "Aiguo". CaradhrasAiguo (talk) 03:42, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Babble

Accused of editing?

I received this message:

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Lintong District. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. CaradhrasAiguo

I have never edited a wikipage before, I have never seen that article before. What exactly did the edit supposedly say? --147.147.43.106 (talk) 16:54, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Translation

I've been looking for someone to improve zh:多爾縣 (威斯康辛州). The county has a sister city relationship with zh:景德镇市 and they are in the process of erecting some sort of public artwork recognizing this in 景德镇市. In 2019 dozens of students came over on the Summer Work Travel Program. If you would like to translate more of it, I am willing to help you out by doing some other task in return on the English or Spanish wikipedias. For example, I could expand Changzheng, Shanghai--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 17:06, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

As I have a deadline to fulfil, I won't get to expanding the ZH version of Door County, Wisconsin today, tomorrow perhaps. Hoping there is little struggle in finding Chinese transliterations for some of the smaller place names. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 19:33, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Here is a guide with tables and this site gives background into how Anglo place names have been rendered. Even if you botch a place name, Wisconsinites botched Algonquin place names a long time ago, and still are using the botched names today. Because of this, people from Wisconsin have no right to resent place name mistakes.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 03:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Since have not yet named an article you for me to improve in return, I improved (or so I thought), 16 Chinese location articles that you have made 10 or more edits to. I also fixed bifurcated wikidata entries for two Chinese locations, so all the languages show up in the list to the left. If you have any preferences as to a particular article you want to see improved, let me know.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 15:54, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

PLACEHOLDER TO PREVENT ARCHIVING CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 23:59, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

HDI of China

The previous edit with a description "Taiwan as separate political entity" was a longstanding version prior to July. I don'y know why you insist to remove that description as it's definitely not NPOV by having no explanation over that pic. Shall Taiwan be considered a part of China which is still under controversy and you try to disregard that fact.220.135.36.159 (talk) 17:22, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Buzhage county

Hello. Do you know where a "Buzhage county" [1] might be located, or what this may actually be referring to? Who would know more about this? I have initiated a translation request here: [2]. Thanks for any help. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:05, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

This may be a township in Hotan County. Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:06, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

The closest match I can find in Hotan City or Hotan County is a mis-spelling (Buzhake Xiang, Hotan County) or locally, the Mandarin dialect spoken actually pronounces 克 as "ge". It would be a wholesale violation of NPOV to only mention the AFP reports of "graveyard destruction" while obscuring the claim that the remains were relocated to, in some cases, more soundly constructed, graves. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 13:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Jiangwang Subdistrict, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hanjiang.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:10, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Native name in infobox settlement

|native_name parameters has been shown in "| module = "--Huangdan2060 (talk) 15:05, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Huangdan2060: Discuss your mass changes at WT:CHINA, then. It isn't much different without the inclusion of |module, such as at Changsha. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 15:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I wrote all these articles. Would I destroy them myself? --Huangdan2060 (talk) 15:16, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, retaining |native_name while adding the |module parameter works, but the above rhetorical question is nonsense. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 15:29, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Central Business District

Your attention is called to the addition of this display to the article on the Central Business District, Los Angeles (1880s-1890s). Do you have any feelings, for or against? Discussion should take place on that article's Talk page. Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 18:01, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

East Turkestan

Can I ask what you think of the examples on the Wiktionary page https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/East_Turkestan ? The Uyghurs that manage to escape call it East Turkestan, and these detainees probably had similar thoughts seeing as they weren't sent back. It's important to provide all viewpoints on Wikipedia, and it's not fringe to mention this term which is widely used among Uyghur community, like World Uyghur Congress etc and is a historical term. Geographyinitiative (talk) 15:29, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

The page on Guantanamo detainees isn't discussing the geographic region, thus any nomenclature discussion (especially on fringe names) is irrelevant. And the idea this fringe name is "widely used" among non-diasporic Uyghurs, who form the overwhelming majority of the population, gets a big {{citation needed}}. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 15:34, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Did you look at the page? These detainees were involved in the Uyghur exile community. What would they be likely to want written there? I think East Turkestan in paraentheses one time in the article is Wikipedia neutral and just outright appropriate given the widespread usage of the term especially in the exile community. Non-diasporic people with East Turkestan flags and symbols are subject to persecution as mentioned in the Washington Post article (on the Wiktionary page) and on the Qira County page, so I wouldn't look for mentions of the term on Tianshannet. China is rated at 10/100 for freedom by Freedom House (political rights are at negative one [3]) and Tibet is even lower, so I don't think you can say "I never saw this term on Xinhua News articles" and wash our hands of the term. But in fact, China state media do bring up the term when they refer to terror organizations, and these detainees were detained on suspicion of terror related activities. That's why I think a brief mention is appropriate. I don't think my edit is extremely important, but I do think it would make sense and help inform the readers about the background of these detainees. If you don't like it in the lead section, maybe once somewhere in parentheses in the article proper? Again, not a critical edit. Geographyinitiative (talk) 15:53, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't mean to hound you here, but could East Turkestan be a 'see also' on the page? The concept of East Turkestan is perhaps related in no small way to the accusations against them. At minimum, I would think this is a topic readers interested in the detainees could also be interested in. Geographyinitiative (talk) 00:11, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Not hounding by any means. That could be un-intrusive. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 00:48, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Adrian Zenz revert

Hi, Caradhras. You reverted this edit I made saying I removed text without giving "a valid reason" for doing so. I explained my action in the edit summary: the language I removed did not make sense. Here's the language I removed and you restored:

A german paper however noted that Adrian have used unconventional research methods to prove Chinese government's policies of repression on the Tibetans. The paper alleged that Adrian had analyzed job postings for security personnel in Tibet, compared them with data on self-immolation by Tibetans, and used that data to form his conclusions.

The "alleg[ation]" mentioned in the text has no apparent connection to the paragraph above summarizing Zenz's research, which doesn't mention repression of Tibetans, security personnel, or self-immolation. Nor is it clear even what is being alleged, as the text doesn't say how he analyzed anything, what comparisons he made, or what his conclusions were. The source is behind a paywall and the text in the Wikipedia article looks like a bad machine translation of the German in the first paragraph, but even in German the available section of the original doesn't clarify things. Could you explain why you think this section belongs in the article? 2601:18A:C680:1EB0:79A8:E11E:F8BD:C478 (talk)

The header is titled "Tibet", not "Education in Tibet" or "Languages of Tibet", and Herr Böge's article at FAZ.net is indeed on Zenz's Tibet research. There is no requirement that all paragraphs within a section have an immediate connection with one another. A tenet of WP:NPOV is to mention criticism from WP:RS, which the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, as a mainstream source in Germany, is. CaradhrasAiguo (leave language) 17:50, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Sure, but my point was that it doesn't make sense. I still have no idea what "Adrian had analyzed job postings for security personnel in Tibet, compared them with data on self-immolation by Tibetans, and used that data to form his conclusions" is supposed to mean. Do you? 2601:18A:C680:1EB0:79A8:E11E:F8BD:C478 (talk) 17:55, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

You may benefit from using RedWarn

Hello, CaradhrasAiguo! I'm Ed6767, a developer for RedWarn. I noticed you have been using Twinkle and was wondering if you'd like to try RedWarn, a new modern and user friendly tool specifically designed to improve your editing experience.

RedWarn is currently in use by over two hundred other Wikipedians, and feedback so far has been extremely positive. In fact, in a recent survey of RedWarn users, 90% of users said they would recommend RedWarn to another editor. If you're interested, please see the RedWarn tool page for more information on RedWarn's features and instructions on how to install it. Otherwise, feel free to remove this message from your talk page. If you have any further questions, please ping me or leave a message on RedWarn's talk page at WT:RW. Your feedback is much appreciated! Ed talk! 01:02, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charlotte, North Carolina, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page NWS.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi CaradhrasAiguo. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! Cabayi (talk) 08:50, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

ITN recognition for Wolfgang Uhlmann

On 28 August 2020, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Wolfgang Uhlmann, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Stephen 05:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Your recent editing history at Orlando International Airport shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Andrewgprout (talk) 19:12, 28 August 2020 (UTC)