User talk:Neo-Jay

This is Neo-Jay's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Archives

December 2005 – January 2007 2007 2008 January–October 2009 October 2009 – July 2012

Hi Pengyanan, I've moved your user and talk pages from Neo-Jay to Pengyanan because the title of the user page must correspond to the name of the user doing the contributions. There's no written policy stating this, but it's so engrained as a standard that it's de facto policy. Any other arrangement is completely non-standard and confuses users (as you've probably noticed) and computer programs. I've restored all the edits to the Pengyanan talk page, so all the history is still there. If you want your username changed to Neo-Jay, then ask at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations; the Neo-Jay account will probably be renamed to "Neo-Jay (usurped)" while the account you are using will be changed to Neo-Jay. Thanks. Graham87 08:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I've done this to all your subpages as well. In case you're wondering, I noticed your edit to Diving and that's how I found this situation. I checked through your talk page archives and I noticed that other users have mentioned it as well. If you want to start using the Neo-Jay account again, let me know and I (as an admin) can move your user and talk page and subpages back easily. However the username must match the title of the user page; no ifs, ands or buts about it. Graham87 08:45, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your moves. Although I can understand your concern, I don't think that moving my user pages without discussing with or even noticing me in advancce is appropriate. As you admitted, [t]here's no written policy stating that "the title of the user page must correspond to the name of the user doing the contributions". I thought that I followed the rules on legitimate uses of alternative accounts. I do have my personal reason to temporarily use an alternative account other than Neo-Jay. But since it has caused some confusions, I decide to restart using the account name Neo-Jay and stop using Pengyanan. Hope this can be OK to you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:53, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that sounds fine to me. I apologise for being too hasty in moving your user pages. Graham87 14:35, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's all right. --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How about User:Pengyanan/monobook.css and User:Pengyanan/monobook.js? Do you want to move them back as well? Graham87 14:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know this. Yes, please move them back. --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Graham87 01:28, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. One more thing. Is it possible to restore the page history of User:Pengyanan and User talk:Pengyanan? If yes, could you please restore them for me? Thanks! --Neo-Jay (talk) 01:38, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would, but unfortunately there's no deleted history at either of those locations. Graham87 02:17, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Pengyanan has a deletion log at 08:20, 2 August 2012 although User:Pengyanan does not. Please at least restore User talk:Pengyanan's page history. Thanks! --Neo-Jay (talk) 02:24, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I already did; see the entry in the deletion log you linked where I restored 6 revisions with the explanation "history merge". Unfortunately they're now in the Neo-Jay user talk page history, interleaved with the other edits. I *could* put them back at the "Pengyanan" page if you like, but that would not be an easy process. Graham87 02:37, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. It will be great if they can be put back at Pengyanan talk page. Please do me this favor when it is convenient to you. Thanks! --Neo-Jay (talk) 03:25, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's best if page history changes like that are done as soon as possible, so that's what I've done. I Hope it's all OK now! Graham87 03:58, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thank you so much! --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:10, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Neo-Jay. In 2009, you contributed actively to the Heilongjiang mine explosion article. I wonder if you may be interested also to contribute to the Xiaojiawan coal mine explosion article? Thank you. Beagel (talk) 17:26, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Beagel. Thanks for your notice. I have updated some information at Xiaojiawan coal mine disaster. Best regards. --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:46, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Neo-Jay. I've noticed the edits that you've made on some pages regarding proper naming of Chinese people that are influential to taijiquan. I'm interested in the improvement of the taijiquan article & it's related articles and would like to request that you please also look over and correct those of the individuals listed in this category. I would do it myself, but I'm not well versed enough with the naming conventions to argue my reasons for moves, if they're contested. Thanks. ~ InferKNOX (talk) 17:16, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, InferKNOX. Thanks for your message. According to the naming convention, those Chinese persons living in Taiwan, Hong Kong, or other countries may not use pinyin as their names. So I do not move those ones in Category:Chinese Tai Chi Chuan practitioners. I have moved all the articles that I can move in this category. But some people from Mainland China, who should be named in pinyin, cannot be moved because their proper pinyin titles have edit history (e.g. Yang Banhou for Yang Pan-hou, Yang Luchan for Yang Lu-ch'an). Wikipedia does not allow moving a page by cut and paste (see Wikipedia:Moving a page). If you want to move those pages, please follow the rules described at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Best wishes. --Neo-Jay (talk) 19:59, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I trust your assessment based on the edits I see you've made. What about the hyphens in the 1st names ~ InferKNOX (talk) 00:33, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Hyphens, there should be no hyphen or space inside a given name. --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:50, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That being the case, are you going to move pages such as Yang Pan-hou to Yang Panhou, Yang Lu-ch'an to Yang Luch'an, Ma Jiang Bao to Ma Jiangbao, Jwing-Ming Yang to Jwingming Yang, etc? ~ InferKNOX (talk) 19:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After reading Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Romanization of names, I see that Wade-Giles romanisations demand hyphens between the two syllables of the name. There is still the case of the latter two individuals (and others like them who I never mentioned), which seem to go against the Wikipedian naming principles, so the question I posed to you about them still stands. ~ InferKNOX (talk) 19:54, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are right that the no-hyphen-or-space principle only applies to pinyin. Therefore Yang Pan-hou and Yang Lu-ch'an, as Wade-Giles names, should not be moved to Yang Panhou and Yang Luch'an. As for the latter two persons, it seems that Ma Jiang Bao lives in Europe and Jwing-Ming Yang lives in the United States. According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Romanization of names, pinyin may not be used when the subject of the article is likely to prefer a non-pinyin romanization as is often the case with people from Taiwan, Hong Kong, and older overseas Chinese communities. Although the names Ma Jiang Bao and Jwing-Ming Yang are not standard pinyin or Wade-Giles, probably they are the names used in their respective local communities. So I don't know whether they should be renamed. Best wishes. --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:07, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ricoh Cup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Xie He (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) 11:50, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• OK. I fixed it, disambiguating Xie He to Xie He (Go). --Neo-Jay (talk) 13:16, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may be proposing that, but the page has a merge and not move tag. So please do consider your reading comprehension. T. trichiura Infect me 19:22, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What I reverted was your 2nd edit made at 19:13, 23 October 2012 at Talk:IPad mini, in which you moved your comment on the merge proposal to my move proposal section. It's clear that the merge proposal (added by someone else) is different from my move proposal. And according to Wikipedia:Requested moves, the move proposal should be placed as the article's talk page and a move tag does not need to be placed at the article page. I did not remove your comment. I just moved your comment back to its right place. So, please consider your reading comprehension. --Neo-Jay (talk) 19:43, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously I was responding to your comment and not objecting to moving things around. Since this is your talk page, I'll leave it to your imagination as to where you can put your unhelpful rhetoric. T. trichiura Infect me 19:47, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously your comment (strong oppose) was made on the merge proposal, not my move proposal. I am sorry I cannot understand why you moved that comment to my proposal section. If you insist that it be placed on the move proposal section, I can do it for you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 19:55, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, now I see that you placed a comment (Oppose) at my move proposal. It's fine although you did not provide any reason. But what I moved back was your another earlier comment, in which you said: "Strong Oppose - It's already customary for distinct products such as this to maintain their own pages. iPod mini is a good example of this." Obviously it was made for the merge proposal (to merge iPad mini with iPad (4th generation)), irrelevant to my move proposal (to move iPad mini to iPad Mini). Thanks. Best regards. --Neo-Jay (talk) 20:06, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

		Happy First Edit Day!
		In honour of the anniversary of your very first edit on Wikipedia, you've received a special present. Enjoy your Go set, and have a happy First Edit Day! --xanchester (t) 17:42, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! I didn't realize that it's the seventh anniversary of my first edit. Many thanks for your present! --Neo-Jay (talk) 19:15, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alibaba.com has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This is a copy of sections of Alibaba Group. Nothing notable to merge.

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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. W☯W ^t/c 19:53, 25 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As another editors said, copy of sectins of an article is not a reason for deletion, but perhaps for redirecting. I am glad that you withdrew your proposed deletion request. --Neo-Jay (talk) 07:42, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Wulian, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 06:07, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I created Wulian as a redirect page to Wulian County long time ago. Someone else changed it to an unambiguous advertising page for Nanjing IOT Sensor Technology (南京物联传感技术有限公司) recently. Thanks for your understanding. --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:00, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Milius may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[Jeronimas Milius]] ((born 1984), Lithuanian singer

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 08:53, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I fixed it.--Neo-Jay (talk) 14:37, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:42, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your notice. I have left my opinion at Talk:Dingcheng, Hainan. The county's name is Ding'an, and its county seat's name is Dingcheng. --Neo-Jay (talk) 22:16, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Neo=Jay

It was me who introduced the article about Stephen Bradbury, the artist and illustrator. I think the title of Bradbury's page should be Stephen Bradbury (artist). Although he is more involved with personal projects these days, he is always referred to in Google searches as Stephen Bradbury Artist. I notice the Google /Wiki box has stopped showing up in Stephen Bradbury Artist searches.. it only appears if painter is typed in. If you notice, the artist himself on his website welcome page has called it Stephen Bradbury Artist.

Bradbury is known for his illustration, book design, painting and stained glass. I think 'Artist' is a much better title. Also in the google search box it says he was born in Greater Manchester, he was actually born in Manchester, at Saint Mary's Hospital.

Could you please change painter to artist. Kind regards Spopland. Spopland (talk) 00:22, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Spopland. Thanks for your message. I agree with you on the move suggestion. But I cannot move Stephen Bradbury (painter) to Stephen Bradbury (artist) since Stephen Bradbury (artist) has its edit history. So I placed a move request at Talk:Stephen Bradbury (painter) for you. Sorry for my late response. --Neo-Jay (talk) 02:05, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you changed Lu's name to Lü which is actually incorrect. The Anglicization (i.e. how Lu's name appears in English) is in fact Lu, and not Lü. I posted some sources on the talk page which can be found here. Just wanted to let you know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Countdsb (talk • contribs) 03:06, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I may disagree with you on this naming issue. But I don't want to take time to argue. I just remind you of one thing: please do not rename a page by cut and paste (see Wikipedia:Moving a page). If you cannot move a page for it has its edit history, please go through the procedure prescribed at Wikipedia:Requested moves. I placed a request at Lu Xiaojun, asking to merge Lü Xiaojun's edit history to its. Sorry for my late response. --Neo-Jay (talk) 02:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, no worries. The naming convention is definitely debatable, but I think that conforming to way that even official Chinese publications spell it in English is probably the best course of action. Thanks for the info about cutting/pasting pages. I realized my mistake afterwards and wont do it again! DSB (talk) 13:34, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 03:17, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Fong Sai-yuk (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Totally redundant to Fong Sai-yuk page. Also, no other non-related topics exist.

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. George Ho (talk) 05:32, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• See Wikipedia:Cut-and-paste-move repair holding pen#Rejected requests March 2014. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 22:54, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has requested for HTC One (2013) to be moved to HTC One (M7). Since you had some involvement with HTC One (2013), you might want to participate in the move discussion (if you have not already done so). Steel1943 (talk) 14:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please don' t forget to clear up after your page move. There are links intended for the activist, and others, now pointing to the dab page at Bolton Hall. PamD 05:48, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for you notice. I moved Bolton Hall to Bolton Hall (California) at 00:22, 4 April 2014‎ and have just updated all the incoming article links to the disambiguation page Bolton Hall. BTW, Bolton Hall originally referred to a building in California, and those incoming links intended for Bolton Hall (activist) had been already wrong even before Bolton Hall was turned into a disambiguation page. --Neo-Jay (talk) 07:44, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Asian Spirit Flight 321, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. Under the specified criteria, where an article has substantially identical content to that of an article deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. ...William 17:58, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	North Korean Fashion Watch Barnstar
	Gerald Shields, founder of the North Korean Fashion Watch, awards you the North Korean Fashion Watch Barnstar for your continuing efforts to add reliable and poignant discussions about North Korean topics, such as the 2014 comedy movie The Interview. Geraldshields11 (talk) 14:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome. I try to be phunny, professonal, and phashionable at the same time. Geraldshields11 (talk) 16:54, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Phantastic! :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 01:38, 4 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your self-assured arrogance bothers me.
There are NUMEROUS "Farmers Unions" and co-operatives on this planet.
Farmers Union (South Australia) is unambiguous. Yes, they use the trading name "Farmers Union".
However,

• is this a "brand"? (What is a "brand"?)
• is it unique / unambiguous?
• What is your justification for saying it is the "proper title"? What does "proper title" mean?

I can ASSURE you that National Foods, the current owners of Farmers Union, do not refer to the subsidiary as "Farmers Union (brand)". Please explain. Pdfpdf (talk) 14:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the lead section of this article states that "Farmers Union is a brand name" (emphasis added). And considering that it is owned by a Japanese company now, I think that "(South Australia)" is not a proper phrase for disambiguation purpose, and therefore I moved Farmers Union (South Australia) to Farmers Union (brand). If I am wrong, let me know. Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 14:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. You seem to have done quite a number of changes in this area.

"A little knowledge is a dangerous thing", and clearly, you have only "a little knowledge" (and a large amount of ... "self confidence").

How are you going to undo the errors you have created? Pdfpdf (talk) 14:31, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What errors are you referring to? Do you read what I explained above? --Neo-Jay (talk) 14:37, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your response causes me to apologise for accusing you of arrogance, and realise that you were acting in good faith.

Sorry. "Mea culpa".

the lead section of this article states that "Farmers Union is a brand name" - Hmmm. It does, doesn't it. Hmmm. ("Never believe what you read in the newspapers or on Wikipedia"??)

And considering that it is owned by a Japanese company now, I think that "(South Australia)" is not a proper phrase for disambiguation purpose - Hmmm. It's not that simple / not that "Black & White".

If I am wrong, let me know. - Again: Hmmm. It's not that simple / not that "Black & White".

Give me some time to think about it and come back to you with a more useful answer. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:46, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to confuse you.

Give me some time to think about it and come back to you with a more useful answer. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 14:52, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK. That's fine. Take your time. And I corrected the order of our discussion per timeline. Some confusions were caused by edit conflict.--Neo-Jay (talk) 15:04, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Pdfpdf (talk) 15:09, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Post-script): After considerable thought, I still haven't come to a conclusion. On the one hand, the South Australian Farmers' Union was a venerable organisation with a 100+ year's history. On the other hand, "Farmers Union" is now a brand used by National Foods.

Without doubt the article needs to reflect this, but as to the "correct title" of the article ... well ... I don't know. Until such time as you, I or someone else comes up with something reasonable / justifiable / whatever, the best least bad alternative I can think of is to leave things alone. (i.e. I'm not "happy", but a) I can't think of anything better, and b) I can't justify anything else.)

Best wishes, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:38, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply, and sorry for the inconvenience I caused (it would have been better if I had explained more clearly in the edit summary than just saying "proper title" when I moved that article). Best regards. --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:44, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting my mistaken edit. As I noted in my edit comment, the (beta) mobile version didn't show anything for that template— as far as I could tell. Now that I'm looking at the main web version I can see what it does. Thnidu (talk) 19:42, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Thnidu: Thanks for your explanation. Sorry for my rude comment at Tynwald's edit summary. Best regards. --Neo-Jay (talk) 07:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It is nice to see another Go (game)-player here on Wikipedia (WP). And you are doing a great job with your Go-related edits.

You may be interested in these:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Go
• Wikipedia:WikiProject_Go#Members
• Wikipedia:WikiProject_Go#Userboxes

Thanks, Trafford09 (talk) 11:00, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your message. :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Trafford09 (talk) 18:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, you know your "Cho beating Fujisawa in Game 4 of the 1983 Kisei" on your user page ... It seems to show just an empty board. I was wondering if it's a work-in-progress, or whether you'd intended to animate it? There's an animated one on my user page, if you wanted to emulate or copy it (it's not my own doing!). Trafford09 (talk) 20:55, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Trafford09: Thanks for your notice. I removed the stones from the board at 13:50, 21 January 2006 and forgot to change its caption. Now I have re-added the stones to the board. Thank you! --Neo-Jay (talk) 21:55, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. The disambiguation page Modern UI has been put up for deletion. Since you were the one that created the disambiguation, I figured your input would be helpful. If you could comment at the AfD as to why this page was created and how the two entries relate to "Modern UI," I'm sure it would be helpful information. Thanks, Tavix |  Talk  02:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Tavix: Many thanks for your notice. I have left my explanation at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Modern UI. --Neo-Jay (talk) 05:34, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Lars Andersen (archer), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Zuchinni one (talk) 03:52, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Zuchinni one: Many thanks for your notice. My contested deletion opinion has been posted at Talk:Lars Andersen (archer). --Neo-Jay (talk) 07:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Jimfbleak. Have you read my opinion at its talk page? This article is based upon secondary independent sources and is not exclusively promotional. I have added the sources that argue some claimed facts in that video are false. "An article which describes its subject from a neutral point of view does not qualify for [the [G11 (Unambiguous advertising or promotion)] criterion". I deeply appreciate it if you could reconsider your speedy deletion decision and at least give it a chance to go through the AfD process. Many thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 08:10, 7 February 2015 (UTC) (quoted from User talk:Jimfbleak)

I have read your comments, and while I can't say that I accept your arguments, in fairness I will restore the article and AFD Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:14, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lars Andersen (archer) 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/Lars Andersen (archer) 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 notice from the top of the article. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:19, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak: Many thanks for your withdrawing the speedy deletion and put it to the AfD process! --Neo-Jay (talk) 08:22, 7 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

When you move an existing page to create a disambiguation page, as you recently did with Song Qian, please fix the incoming links so that they point to the appropriate article, and not to the disambiguation page. Please do this before you make any further moves. Cheers! bd2412 T 15:04, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your notice. But the huge amount of incoming links to Song Qian is caused by the server lag of Template:People of Eastern Wu, which I updated immediately after I changed Song Qian to a disambiguation page. I can do nothing now except for waiting. --Neo-Jay (talk) 20:04, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know - I do appreciate your addressing the template. Please make sure to check again after the server updates, in case there are any straggler direct links. Cheers! bd2412 T 20:07, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! --Neo-Jay (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi, BD2412. Today I found that there were still 96 incoming links to Song Qian at Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/May 2015 after I moved Song Qian to Song Qian (Eastern Wu) and changed it to a disambiguation page on 19 April 2015‎. It's unbelievable that the sever lag had not been solved for 11 days. It seems that, to update the links, those articles with Template:People of Eastern Wu have to be edited at least once for whatever reason. I just edited 86 articles with that template (such as this) and finally solved Song Qian's incoming-links issue. What's wrong with Wikipedia's server and why should we edit the articles with the template? I have not seen so serious lag before. --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:28, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

It is a great annoyance, and one for which I regretfully have no explanation. I just fire up AWB and make a blank save and that does it, but it really should happen automatically. bd2412 T 15:43, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 16:02, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

(quoted from User talk:BD2412)

Stop moving the page to Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, the long formal name is not used as a normal name convention on WP.. Its the Politburo Standing Committee, and not Standing Committee of the Political Bureau.. Its Prime Minister of Russia and not Chairman of the Government. Its General Secretary of the Communist Party and not General Secretary of the Central Committee of teh Communist Party, its Chairman of the National Assembly of Vietnam and not Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly.. I could go on forever. --TIAYN (talk) 10:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Trust Is All You Need: Your examples do not apply to this case. The Standing Committee of the National People's Congress and National People's Congress are different. It's technically incorrect to say that the Chairman of the Standing Committee is the Chairman of the NPC. If the article title is moved to a shorter version, it has to be proven that the shorter one is the more common usage. But there is no evidence to show that the shorter version is the more common name. Since Google is blocked in China, I use Bing search and find that "Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress" has 1,220,000 results while "Chairman of the National People's Congress" has only 3 results. Therefore the title should be Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress. And you are welcome to participate in the discussion at Talk:Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress#Title: Chairman of NPC or of its Standing Committee. --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No its not, those examples are very correct.. The official title is General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, but its titled General Secretary of the Communist Party of China.. The offical title is Standing Committee of the Political Bureau, but the article is titled Politburo Standing Committee.. The official name is Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, but its titled Politburo of the Communist Party of China.. The official title is Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National Assembly of Vietnam, but the article is titled Chairman of the National Assembly of Vietnam... Do you're homework. Stop this idiocy! .. Secondly, this is English WP and reflects English writing (not Chinese). --TIAYN (talk) 07:40, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Trust Is All You Need: Do your own homework, please! All the examples you provided above might be that the shorter name is the more commonly used one. But could you please show me the evidence that Chairman of the National People's Congress is more commonly used than Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress? I searched for these two terms in English by Bing search and found that they were 3 results vs. 1,220,000 results, and by Yahoo search, 136,000 vs. 1,210,000 (again, in English). According to Wikipedia:Article titles, Wikipedia prefers "the name that is most commonly used", not the name that is shorter. In this case, the longer and official name, Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, is the more commonly used name and should be used. --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:42, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I knew before I typed it in that "Tianjin explosion" was not the article but hoped that someone created the redirect. Your simple edit has helped thousands. --One Salient Oversight (talk) 02:39, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@One Salient Oversight: You are welcome! --Neo-Jay (talk) 14:45, 13 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

6th millennium BCE in North American history seems to have been moved to the current BCE name against policy with this. I noticed that you fixed some of the results of this mistake. Do you have time to look at this as well? --A D Monroe III (talk) 21:25, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@A D Monroe III: It seems that all the "? millennium BC in North American history" articles have been moved to BCE style. According to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (numbers and dates), the relevant article's title should be "BC", not "BCE". Please feel free to move them back to BC titles, or ask an administrator to help. Best regards.--Neo-Jay (talk) 07:36, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 16:41, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi- we really should explain technical terms. I know that baculum is linked, but it seems just confusing to check the article to see what Zevit is referring to and find that humans don't have one. Doug Weller talk 10:43, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. Since men have no missing ribs I was thinking this is analogous, but we still should explain the term. Doug Weller talk 10:53, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller: Yes, just because Adam's baculum was used to make Eve, humans don't have one today. :) And thanks for your edits on Ziony Zevit. --Neo-Jay (talk) 11:55, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Lushi requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Edward321 (talk) 19:40, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Edward321: I believe that you have realized that Lushi was vandalized by someone else and should not be speedily deleted since you withdrew your speedy deletion request and reverted the article to its previous version. Thanks for your notice anyway. --Neo-Jay (talk) 01:47, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is correct on all points. Sorry to have bothered you. Edward321 (talk) 05:12, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully I'm not making an incorrect assumption here, forgive me if I am, but given your edits I'm guessing you're fluent (at least to some degree) in Chinese. If so, could you change 2016年1月北半球寒流 to only relate to the East Asian cold? The US blizzard is unrelated and was not associated with a cold wave and including it is misleading to readers. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 06:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Cyclonebiskit: Sorry that I cannot access Chinese Wikipedia. I am in mainland China and blocked by GFW. That issue is totally up to the Chinese Wikipeidan community, which I cannot participate in. --Neo-Jay (talk) 06:31, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, shame. Thanks for the reply regardless! ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 06:34, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you for your work to create this page and the kifus. I used them in huwiki article. What do you think, is it possible to get permision to use images from gogameguru.com? --Rlevente (talk) 15:02, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Rlevente: Thanks for your creating huwiki article for the great Go match. Sorry that I don't know whether we can use those images. It depends on their copyright status and it's a complicated issue. Maybe you can ask some Wikimedia Commons editors for help. All the best. --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:42, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I saw that you reverted my edit in which i changed the order of moves 80-83. I am no Go expert, but if you watch the recording it seems to me that my order was correct. Maybe the kifu is wrong? I have no idea what to do. :) --Linus Pogo (talk) 14:22, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Linus Pogo: Many thanks for your message! I checked Youtube's original live video and found that you were right. I just reverted my revering of your correct edit. It seems that all the kifus of Game One I find on the Internet are wrong on the order of moves 180 to 183 (80 to 83 in kifu moves 100-186). Thank you so much for your finding this mistake!--Neo-Jay (talk) 18:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Section header. Since you had some involvement with the Section header redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@GeoffreyT2000: Thanks for your notice. I explained why Section header should be kept as a redirect page to Radical (Chinese characters) at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 April 7. --Neo-Jay (talk) 01:44, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious, how did you choose which article to redirect? Your edit summary gives the creation time of your preferred version, which I believe was simultaneous with the creation time of my preferred version. Geogene (talk) 03:53, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Geogene: I redirected EgyptAir Flight MS804 to EgyptAir Flight 804 because I thought that most flights only use number as their names (see, e.g., EgyptAir Flight 181, and articles in, e.g., Category:Aviation accidents and incidents in 2016). If you disagree, you may discuss this issue at Talk:EgyptAir Flight 804. Thanks.--Neo-Jay (talk) 04:01, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I knew that before I created the article, but I called it MS804 regardless because the most sources are calling it MS804, which I understand to be the correct procedure. It wouldn't surprise me if they're all calling it Flight 804 tomorrow though. As long as the edit history gets concentrated in one page it doesn't matter. Geogene (talk) 04:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Geogene: I am sorry that I redirected the page without discussion. Thanks for your contributions. --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:38, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to section G10 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. 08251985 07:07, 27 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmhuang (talk • contribs) 07:07, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mmhuang: Are you talking about the page User talk:Osplace? I created that user talk page at 02:14, 18 December 2008‎ by just adding a Template:Welcome! On what ground do you think that my creating that page is an attack, threat, or disparaging?? And by the way, if you like to warn a user, please also add a link to the page you are talking about, which you didn't add for this time. Thank you!--Neo-Jay (talk) 12:43, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think User talk:Osplace is personally attacking me by proposing deletion on all the pages that I created. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mmhuang (talk • contribs) 13:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Mmhuang: You misunderstand Wikipedia:Attack page and your requesting speedy deletion of User talk:Osplace has been reverted by administrator GB fan. --Neo-Jay (talk) 13:54, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the moves that I made (the two countries that have duplicate articles) are the tail end in a series of moves to align titles in the WikiProject Earthquake series of articles. All of that started over a year and a half ago. Dawnseeker2000 00:18, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dawnseeker2000: The discussion at Talk:List of earthquakes in Germany in March 2015 was for moving, not merging. And just three editors (including you) participated in it. That discussion, in my view, cannot justify your merging Earthquakes in New Zealand into List of earthquakes in New Zealand and merging Earthquakes in Japan into List of earthquakes in Japan. However, although your argument does not make sense to me, I am not interested in starting a tedious and maybe endless discussion on it. Do as you please until someone else brings this issue up again in the future. --Neo-Jay (talk) 00:50, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to argue either, but if you'll let me expand a bit on what I tried to convey in the edit summary and the link to the Germany list, it may ease your mind. I know you're looking out for the integrity, usability, and general presentability of the encyclopedia. I'll be brief:

• The small discussion at the Germany list was about the move to include the list prefix on not just that list. You can see my argument included the entire scope of WikiProject Earthquake lists. I've done many of these moves to align articles for uniformity. I think that's important and linking to it was meant to indicate the breadth of alignment moves that have been made.
• I've been writing, expanding, improving section layouts, and more on WikiProject Earthquakes articles, lists, templates, categories—obsessively at times, and on a near-daily basis—for a few years. I started on them in early December 2011, so we're coming up on the five-year mark. There are not many other editors that have the free time, energy, or enthusiasm that I've had, and I think it just takes someone that's pretty nerdy and that doesn't have a life to care about the overall scheme of articles in a Wikipedia WikiProject like I have. I think about these things when I'm away from the computer. I wouldn't expect an editor like you to see things the way I do, but aligning these articles is the right thing to do.
• Content: I just want to mention the content that's in the "new" list articles. Not the list of earthquakes; the paragraphs on top. It's not all that good. I'd even say it's kind of crappy. It's definitely not interesting, exciting, or informative. Especially the New Zealand list; there's nothing at all about tectonics. I think it's safe to say that these lists need some pruning and some proper content added to preface the list (each list should have an intro that includes a tectonic setting section, not boring or uninteresting content like "Public education" or "Societal effects". We can do better on content than a government agency pamphlet.

OK, that's all for now. I apologize for the reverts. We are on the same team. Take care, Dawnseeker2000 02:12, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dawnseeker2000: I don't think that all the earthquake articles should be moved to, or merged into, their "list-of" articles. Again, your argument does not make sense to me, but I am still not interested in participating in this (very likely) endless discussion. Let someone else, if any, argue with you in the future. It will be great if you could post your ideas on this issue at somewhere else, not my user talk page. Thanks.--Neo-Jay (talk) 02:54, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Anti-Trump. Since you had some involvement with the Anti-Trump redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 22:52, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your notice. I have posted my opinion on this issue. --Neo-Jay (talk) 23:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jamie Curtis has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:GNG: BEFORE did not produce significant coverage in demonstrably independent and reliable sources.

While all constructive 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} 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 {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —swpb^T 18:53, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Swpb: Thanks for your notice. But I created Jamie Curtis on 7 December 2008‎ as a redirect page redirecting Jamie Lee Curtis. It's Neddyseagoon who changed it to a main article on 9 January 2009. It would be more appropriate if you place this notice at Neddyseagoon's user talk page. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 00:51, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Dujiangyan (disambiguation) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G6 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates two or fewer extant Wikipedia pages and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic); or
• disambiguates no (zero) extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time. Please see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Boleyn (talk) 08:38, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Boleyn: Thanks for your notice. I have contested this speedy deletion nomination and requested moving Dujiangyan (disambiguation) to Dujiangyan. --Neo-Jay (talk) 13:23, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, and for your work on this page. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 13:58, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your "not one column" comment at List of Go games, and intrigued to learn that (perhaps since I last read the documentation) {reflist} defaults to 30 em columns (if more than 10 refs). Now I tend to prefer 24 em columns, but then I use a lot of short refs. I was wondering if you have any thoughts about this. ~ J. Johnson (JJ) (talk) 21:08, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@J. Johnson: Thanks for your message. I also agree that more than one column is better if there are many references. As for 30em and 24em, both are fine for me. I even might not notice the difference. :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 07:30, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey could you help me out? I can't figure out what's wrong with the citation I put in. It's not the Baidu reference, it's a new one. Here's what it looks like:

(it won't directly display on the page here, look at it in the editing page)

<ref> <ref name="jsrmzf">{{cite web |url =http://www.jingshan.gov.cn/zjjs/bdgk/xzqh.html |title = 京山县人民政府 行政区划 (Jingshan County People’s Government Administrative Districts) |accessdate = December 5, 2017 |author = |last = |first = |authorlink = |coauthors = |date = |year = |month = |work = |publisher = |pages = |doi = |archiveurl = |archivedate = |quote =永漋镇（村委会30个、居委会2个、村民小组190个）村委会：同益、青龙庵、青年、张家岭、满天星、卢相台、公益、张常台、红旗、群力、贾家口、刘家榨、石板巷、罾口、石女山、古城口、陶家岭、马家岭、杨家浲、黎家岭、高湖街、黎家垸、绿化、上陈桥、红光、新河口、樊家巷、下陈桥、严家墩、聂畈 居委会：永隆社区居委会、杨浲社区居委会 }} </ref>

It says:

Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).

I can't see what the problem is! Thanks for any help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geographyinitiative (talk • contribs) 09:28, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: There should be one <ref> and one </ref> for a reference. But there were two <ref> and one </ref> for the reference you added. It cannot be fixed by adding another </ref> as you did. And you have correctly fixed it by removing the redundant <ref>. Thanks for your contributions. --Neo-Jay (talk) 10:25, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, otherwise I would have kept citing Baidu Baike left and right

Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:41, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: It's so nice of you. Thank you. :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 13:29, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I recently expanded the Aqua Bassino article and was thinking of removing the stub label. Can you check it out? Thanks a lot. Diogo Pereira (talk) 05:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Diogo Pereira: Thanks for your great contributions! I have removed the stub tag from the article. For more information on when to remove stub tags, see How big is too big? and Removing stub status at Wikipedia:Stub. --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are a long-time editor on here. I'm doing some (what I consider) non-controversial groundwork on the subdistricts and townships of Wuhan and Hubei. I would appreciate any input you have on what I have done so far: List of township-level divisions of Hubei. Thanks!Geographyinitiative (talk) 04:28, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Looks great! I just fixed an error. Many thanks for your contributions! Happy new year!--Neo-Jay (talk) 12:15, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I couldn't figure out the problem with that one!! Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:11, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your work! It's difficult to find the horizontal tab character because it is invisible. I located it by counting to position 111 in that Template:Cite web's parameter "quote". :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 13:41, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason why you removed this template? Volunteer Marek (talk) 15:08, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Volunteer Marek: IMHO, enough references have been added to Fake News Awards to prove its notability. If you disagree, please feel free to re-add Template:Notability to that article and discuss this issue on Talk:Fake News Awards (not on my user talk page, thanks). And FYI, Kiteinthewind just re-added that template at 21:15, 18 January 2018. That's a good news for you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 22:07, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I re-added the template because I believe the "notability" it has is actually a violation of WP:NTEMP. Hope that clears things up. Kiteinthewind ^{Leave a message!} 22:25, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Kiteinthewind: Thanks for your message. But you really do not need to clarify this on my user talk page. Of course I believe that you re-added Template:Notability for some reason, and I am not interested in discussing it here. Again, that will be great if you discuss this issue on Talk:Fake News Awards, not on my user talk page, thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 22:35, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have noticed that in Special:diff/167240602 you said that there is no such a daily in China in the Edit Summary. However there is such a daily in Shanghai and it might be established before China Youth Daily. I think that you may want to notice this change, so I left this text. --云间守望 - (Talk with WQL) 15:51, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@WQL: Many thanks for your message, and sorry for my ignorance. --Neo-Jay (talk) 21:36, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work! Thanks. The Mighty Glen (talk) 08:22, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@The Mighty Glen: Thanks for your editing Tik Tok (app). --Neo-Jay (talk) 08:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I recently added sources for the administrative divisions of Xiaogan, Hubei and am planning to add sources for the administrative divisions of the counties and cities of Xiaogan in the coming weeks. Since last November, I have done about eighty-five of this type of edit. My goal is to give future readers a well-cited web link to authoritative secondary sources that will work without reference to archive.org over the course of the coming years. Right now, I'm doing 1)a link to a relevant page from a secondary source from the local government in charge of the administrative divisions, 2)a link to to a relevant page from a secondary source from the central government, and 3)a link to a to a relevant page from a secondary source that is not an explicitly government website. This way, the information in the articles becomes more checkable than it would be if we just give the information without any sourcing. You can see the evolution of my citation methodology on the List of township-level divisions of Hubei page. I have no doubt made a gigantic number of errors. If you have the time someday, I would appreciate further refinement of my methodology as it stands (Xiaogan). Geographyinitiative (talk) 21:45, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Great! Thank you so much for your contributions! I just made several minor edits to Xiaogan. --Neo-Jay (talk) 00:22, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help! Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:40, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect List of members of the National People's Congress. Since you had some involvement with the List of members of the National People's Congress redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Steel1943 (talk) 13:51, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Steel1943: Thanks for your message. I correctly moved List of members of the National People's Congress to List of members of the 11th National People's Congress on 9 October 2012, and I have participated in the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 April 4#List of members of the National People's Congress. --Neo-Jay (talk) 14:53, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can we add "|HighestPoint =" to Template:Infobox Province of China (PRC)? I have preliminarily added "|HighestPoint =Shennong Peak" to the Hubei page. I have not the faintest clue how to edit a template and I will mess it up for sure. I think we should have a note of the highest point in each province, just like we tell people the highest point in every US state. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:31, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Sorry that I am not familiar with editing templates. You may ask for help at Template talk:Infobox Province of China (PRC). --Neo-Jay (talk) 11:59, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Neo-Jay: I would do that, but I fear that no one will read it (kind of like the fossilized talk page at Portal:China. I'll do what you say, but I'm also going to look at the people who edited that page in the history and see if any of them are still alive and can help me change the template. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:07, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Yes, it's a good idea to check the edit history of Template:Infobox Province of China (PRC) to find active editors. And you may ask for help at their user talk pages. Best wishes. :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:15, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Neo-Jay: I will let you know what happens. It seems somewhat bizarre to me that this is not included in the Infobox. This is one of those standard geography things that you tell people. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:21, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Thank you for your effort! --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:27, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Neo-Jay: Thanks to User:Capankajsmilyo, now you can add the highest and lowest elevation to any province's infobox. I added the highest point of Hubei, Hunan and Henan to the infoboxes on the Hubei, Hunan and Henan pages. You can't add the name of the mountain yet- I put that in the geography section.

| elevation_max_m =

| elevation_max_ft =

| elevation_max_rank =

| elevation_min_m =

| elevation_min_ft =

| elevation_min_rank = Geographyinitiative (talk) 06:23, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Great! Thank you so much! --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:02, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the info for most of the provinces of Southern China now. Seems so strange this wasn't in the infobox before!! Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:04, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Good job! --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:14, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now I've done all the PRC provinces, but I can't add the info for Ningxia AR. I'll ask that user for help. Geographyinitiative (talk) 09:35, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Thank you! And by the way, when adding parameter elevation_max_m, you do not need to add {{{elevation_max_m| }}} for the number. Just the number is fine (like this). --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:40, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How do I add something to William Powell on Wikipedia? Thanx in advance to anyone who can help me. Wadeinfla (talk) 20:19, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Wadeinfla: Hi, for how to edit a page (such as William Powell), see Help:Editing. Best wishes. --Neo-Jay (talk) 20:52, 10 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have no clue how to edit or create a map, but I feel something needs to be brought up:

(Note: I tried to upload a changed map, failed twice. You can see my failed uploads at [1]. )

Here's the Hubei administrative divisions map on the Hubei page (Map 1):

Here's the administrative divisions map of Suizhou (Map 2):

Area 8 on the Hubei map (Map 1) is Suizhou. If you look closely, you'll see that although Zengdu District (the pink area in Map 2) is definitely big enough that it could be included on the Hubei map, it was apparently omitted. I think it should be added.

Here's a map of Suizhou's Zengdu District: http://www.xzqh.org/html/show/hb/15443.html

Here's a map of Suizhou: http://www.xzqh.org/html/show/hb/27550.html

1) Who can help me fix this?

2) If no one can help me fix it, how should I go about learning how to fix it myself?

(I have already made a comment at Talk:Hubei, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps and at User talk:Maggern87.)

Thanks for your time! Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:50, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well apparently it took a while for the new image to register in the system. Now you can see it. I just added a line by hand in ms paint; poor quality compared to the master work that Maggern87 orginally created. Anyway, at least now you can see Zengdu District. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:23, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Congratulations! You fixed it by yourself! Thank you for your work! --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:14, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The boundary between Zengdu District and Sui County of Suizhou was established in late 2009; this was about the same time that the wikipedia map was made. Apparently the (excellent) map Magger made was already outdated before it was posted!^[1] Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:44, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Your analysis is reasonable. And thank your for your updating the map! --Neo-Jay (talk) 18:50, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Neo-Jay:You have been so nice to me, and I really appreciate it. I know that the map I made in MS Paint is definitely sub-par, but I hope one day someone will see the change I made and go back and do a better map including that missing boundary line. Thanks for your relentless encouragement! Geographyinitiative (talk) 05:03, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Your map is really great. Frankly speaking, I cannot see any difference in quality between the current and previous versions of File:Hubei prfc map.png. Thank you! --Neo-Jay (talk) 11:46, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Neo-Jay: I am still unsatisfied with the map: I hope Maggern will re-do the map one day. Because I'm unfamiliar with the system, I made a mistake and added the same map (same picture file) twice. I have probably added more pictures to baidu baike, which seems to actively promote adding the urls of pictures, than to wikipedia/wiki commons. Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:37, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Geographyinitiative: Don't worry. You have done a very good job. None of Wikipedia editors is perfect. All of us have to learn from our past. And Wikipedia content can always be improved incrementally.  :) --Neo-Jay (talk) 14:23, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, if there're no Wikidata item, the correct way is to create a new one. Do not add interwiki link in the old way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.103.82.182 (talk) 15:39, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do create Wikidata items from time to time. But I don't want to create any new Wikidata item that I am not interested in creating. And I cannot find any Wikipedia policy that prohibits "adding inter-language links to an article that has no Wikidata item yet" (as I did to Kim Jong-un and Xi Jinping's meeting). I will continue my way of editing. Thanks for your concern. --Neo-Jay (talk) 17:10, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Zanhe: Thank you for leaving me this message, and many thanks for your contributions. --Neo-Jay (talk) 00:20, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Lars Andersen (archer) 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/Lars Andersen (archer) (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article. PepperBeast (talk) 20:14, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I think that Lars Andersen (archer) should be kept and have posted my opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lars Andersen (archer) (2nd nomination). --Neo-Jay (talk) 00:44, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Lu Kaidan. Since you had some involvement with the Lu Kaidan redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. B dash (talk) 02:10, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@B dash: Sorry. My mistake. Lu Kaidan, created by me as a redirect page to Ellen Joyce Loo (盧凱彤) at 06:22, 5 August 2018, is a misspelling of Lu Kaitong, and can be deleted. Thank you. --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:19, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Brussels bombing. Since you had some involvement with the Brussels bombing redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. B dash (talk) 12:34, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I think that Brussels bombing can be changed to a disambiguation page or redirected to Terrorist activity in Belgium if 2016 Brussels bombings is not its primary topic. And I have posted my opinion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 March 17#Brussels bombing. --Neo-Jay (talk) 15:57, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Shootdown. Since you had some involvement with the Shootdown redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:30, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. Unfortunately due to China's GFW I have been unable to access English Wikipedia since 22 April 2019 and therefore could not participate in the discussion (I support its result). Just now I happened to find that I could access English Wikipedia again. Best regards.--Neo-Jay (talk) 18:40, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Dari County. Since you had some involvement with the Dari County redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:13, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Shhhnotsoloud: Thanks for your message. My edit summary on 5 October 2009 clearly explains that "Dari is the pinyin of this county's name". Article Darlag County also has given hanyu pinyin "Dárì Xiàn" as a transcription in Template:Infobox Chinese on its page. And Darlag County's government website URL is dari.gov.cn. So Dari County is an alternative name of Darlag County and can be a redirect page. I have given my opinion on the discussion page. Best regards. --Neo-Jay (talk) 13:43, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Neo-Jay: thanks. Would you mind editing the article please. Regards, Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:45, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Shhhnotsoloud: I have added pinyin "Dárì Xiàn" to Darlag County's