Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Cydevil (talk | contribs)
Line 64: Line 64:


Nlu is attempting to mediate the dispute in Goguryeo article, and I find many of his proposals biased and unacceptable. Also, I find it very unfair that Goguryeo article has to be distorted with a Chinese bias just because some Chinese extremists are engaging in edit warring. I think this requires some top priority attention from [[WP:KO]]. [[User:Cydevil|Cydevil]] 09:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Nlu is attempting to mediate the dispute in Goguryeo article, and I find many of his proposals biased and unacceptable. Also, I find it very unfair that Goguryeo article has to be distorted with a Chinese bias just because some Chinese extremists are engaging in edit warring. I think this requires some top priority attention from [[WP:KO]]. [[User:Cydevil|Cydevil]] 09:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

::The results are what I fear the most. Mediators' top priority is to stop the warring and stablize the article. I'm not trying to be rude to mediators but their knowledge of Goguryeo and its history is less than what we have. Most likely, they will simply conclude that "Goguryeo is neither Korean or Chinese" to stop the warring. This statement is obviously not true. Even the modern politics section in the Goguryeo article have prominent facts that Goguryeo is Korean. [[User:Good friend100|Good friend100]] 00:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


== [[Goguryeo]] mediation ==
== [[Goguryeo]] mediation ==

Revision as of 00:33, 13 March 2007

Template:Korean requires |hangul= parameter.

Hyundai

Can other people more knowledgeable than me help clean up Hyundai and all the related disambiguation pages, redlinks, templates, and plain wrong information? I worked on translating the main Hyundai template, and then noticed there were separate templates for different Hyundai groups, which need to be combined or organized somehow. I've worked on the Hyundai and Hyundai Group articles, which need more work. I think we can delete Hyundai Group (disambiguation) or redirect it to Hyundai Group. The article Hyundai should provide better guidance for readers who just typed Hyundai, probably looking for the car company or other specific Hyundai product. I'm not sure whether Hyundai or Hyundai Group should be the main article on the detailed history of the companies. It would be nice to have a complete chart of all the Hyundai companies, showing the histories and relationships. CronusXT 22:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to help, but I'm quite amazed at how uninformative the Hyundai article is. I am not an expert in Hyundai's history but I can do some research. Good friend100 00:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

JPOV Sockpupp

Hey guys, I'm really frustrated with sockpuppetting from both KPOV & JPOV accounts. We've lost several key WikiProject Korea editors who were found to be sockpuppets.

On the other hand, we've gathered evidence of JPOV Wikpidians mobilizing in forums such as 2ch.net. And they've been very smart in managing time, areas of interest, etc. so that the user accounts may not be tagged as sock puppets.

For example, when I submitted sockpuppet report for Opp2, I noticed that on his edit summary, he was virtually 24-hour working machine. I don't know how it's possible, but he has edited throughout all time zones. In other words, you don't even know in which time zone he lives. I believe that he's actually sock puppet controlled by several forum members at once.

Now, Opp2 is completely inactive. He's completely out of the Dokdo discussion. And guess what, new accounts pop up! They have absolutely 0 info on their user pages. They are the red accounts. Shroud00, SO, Yuje, etc. Hmm... Now that Opp2 has lost his credibility & disappeared, other accounts pop up around the same time! Suspicious?

Seriously, I have only few people I trust on Korean articles. So, GL HF! (Wikimachine 23:59, 2 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Calling all editors

One of my goals in Wikipedia is to bring the Japanese invasions of Korea (1592-1598) to a featured article status. I would greatly appreciate any help given on research, uploading useful maps and battles, or simply correcting grammer, etc. Good friend100 12:55, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goguryeo and the Northeast Project

I think an article on Northeast Project should be created to keep the Goguryeo article, as well as many other Korean kingdoms claimed by the Chinese government, clean from edit wars. By doing so, we can limit all the recent claims by the Chinese government within the Northeast Project article. We can also give readers proper context by providing explanations on other related historical distortions of the Chinese government, such as the Southwest Project(Tibet) and Northwest Project(East Turkestan). So, any suggestions?

I went on and created the article anyway. I think it would be a good idea to reroute all the controversy in Goguryeo and other related article to that particular article. It gives better context. Cydevil 09:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very smart move. (Wikimachine 20:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Alert Wholesale Deletion of Material

User: 69.91.40.233 I am almost certain is Ming-Loyalist The slang term being "chinnazi" . Cydevil Might know who im talking about. He is deleting material on Yang Manchun and articles his edits are full of POV like "Goguryeo army was totally annilhated out by a mere 5,000 Chinese army" etc and added a controvesy section, he uses soley Chinese sources. As it is you guys will have to work this out I won't be able to sign in for a while. Jegal 02:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think he's Ming_Loyalist. He'd be a more extremist. However, there is a certain active Chinese nationalist who lives in Houston, Texas. Cydevil 23:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Citing controversial sources like Hwandan Gogi

From looking at many history-related Korean articles like Go Mosu, some Korean editors have taken the liberty of citing controversial sources like Hwandan Gogi. As much as I hope that those sources may someday be authenticated and verified as reliable sources to enrich Korean history, I must insist that as long as Wikipedia is a general encyclopedia, we should refrain from citing such sources to make what would be articles that contain very controversial material. Has there been any coherent policy on citing sources like Hwandan Gogi? Cydevil 06:24, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A respectable Wikipedian Nlu has resquested for Rfc on Korea history for KPOV. Could you guys comment on this? (Wikimachine 02:01, 10 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

This is just wrong. A bunch of Chinese extremists persistently vandalize the Goguryeo article, and Nlu is completely silent to those Chinese extremists even though some of them make blatant racist attacks. Also, speaking of "KPOV", he believes the current Goguryeo article is "anti-Chinese" despite the fact that the article is well up to the NPOV standards coherent with neutral sources of authority. Cydevil 10:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, how he's dealing with the matter matters for now. I also think that there's lots of KPOV, too, and CPOV & JPOV. But getting rid of one more POV would be better than nothing, and this is request for comments. What's so wrong about listening to outside opinions? (Wikimachine 13:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Are you talking about KPOV, CPOV, JPOV in general, or that Goguryeo is KPOV? If the latter is the case, then I'd strongly disagree. Anyways, as for many other articles, I'd definitely agree there's a lot of KPOV, especially those materials that cite Hwandan Gogi and other controversial texts as its source. Cydevil 18:06, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sort keys in categories

I would like to solicit discussion on whether to use "South Korea" or "Korea, South" as category sort keys at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Korea-related articles)#Sort keys for categories. YooChung 03:01, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I favor Korea, South or better yet, Korea, Republic(the most accurate). North Korea would be Korea, Democratic People's Republic, or Korea, North. I think those two are more suitable for readers because when there is a alphabetical list of countries, readers can just search for Korea and choose from either ROK or DPRK which are right next to eachother. Cydevil 13:30, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I love both of the alternatives. (Wikimachine 13:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Why not Republic of Korea (ROK), I like that alternative the best. Good friend100 04:40, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would appreciate it if comments were made at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Korea-related articles)#Sort keys for categories so as to keep the discussion in one place. TIA. YooChung 05:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goguryeo, yet again

Nlu is attempting to mediate the dispute in Goguryeo article, and I find many of his proposals biased and unacceptable. Also, I find it very unfair that Goguryeo article has to be distorted with a Chinese bias just because some Chinese extremists are engaging in edit warring. I think this requires some top priority attention from WP:KO. Cydevil 09:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The results are what I fear the most. Mediators' top priority is to stop the warring and stablize the article. I'm not trying to be rude to mediators but their knowledge of Goguryeo and its history is less than what we have. Most likely, they will simply conclude that "Goguryeo is neither Korean or Chinese" to stop the warring. This statement is obviously not true. Even the modern politics section in the Goguryeo article have prominent facts that Goguryeo is Korean. Good friend100 00:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goguryeo mediation

Request for mediation has been filed for Goguryeo, Balhae and Northeast Project. Those interested please join. Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Goguryeo Cydevil 23:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply