Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Cantonese language, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Cantonese language was changed by Newzebras (u) (t) deleting 19033 characters on 2008-10-27T08:34:34+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 14:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to move the Chinese language articles, please bring them up for discussion. Calling the major branches of Chinese either 'languages' or 'dialects' is contentious, and there have been long discussions of this in the past. You might want to also read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese). kwami (talk) 17:43, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree with moving 'Cantonese' to either 'Canton dialect' or 'Guangzhou dialect'. However, this is something we need to discuss. Also, don't move pages by cutting and pasting. It destroys the article history. I've reverted all of your edits. If and when we agree to your proposal, one of us who can move the page properly will do so. kwami (talk) 18:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. I had already brought up discussion on the discussion page of Cantonese, and given my opinion there. But I found it disappeared this morning. I don't know why.

I suggest we move former standard Cantonese to Guangzhou dialect, and former Cantonese (linguistic) to Cantonese language. Let's leave Cantonese as a disambiguation page. English is a very good example in dealing with such kind of concepts. Let's discuss this in one place, on the talk page of Cantonese, ok? --Newzebras (talk) 08:12, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay.

I invited the two other users who commented on the move. I support two of your proposals. However, "Cantonese language" is not an acceptable title. There are many Chinese who object that the language is Chinese, and that Yue, Wu, Mandarin, etc. are dialects. This has been debated ad nauseum, and long-established consensus is that neither "language" nor "dialect" should be used for the primary branches of Chinese. ("Guangzhou dialect" is not a problem, as it clearly is a dialect.) As for "Yue", that is the normal term used in English when one wishes to dab the language from the dialect. This is true for Wu, Min, Gan, etc. etc. The main exceptions to Mandarin pronunciation are 'Hakka', 'Hokkien', and 'Mandarin' itself, all of which are established English usage. kwami (talk) 08:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Knock it off, NZ. You're edit warring and being disruptive. What, you can't get agreement on the talk page to move the article, so you decide to subvert the process by making the changes anyway? The title of the article is Yue Chinese, so the topic of the article should be Yue Chinese, not Cantonese. The primary meaning of "Cantonese" in English is Guangzhou dialect, as you very well know since we agreed with your proposal to move the Cantonese article there. As an encyclopedia, we need to avoid ambiguity. If you can get the community to agree that "Cantonese" no longer primarily means Guangzhouhua, but now means Yueyu, fine, but until that time edit warring will get you nowhere, and I will revert you for disruption. If you continue, I will also ask to have you blocked for disruption. kwami (talk) 06:27, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely WRONG. You are behaving like a dictator of Wikipedia. You are threatening people again. You're edit warring and being disruptive. You are pushing your personal biases on Cantonese and trying to forbid different sounds of truth. I've said many many times on the discussion page that Cantonese=Yue=Guangdong-associated-things, while you are blind to the fact and insisting pushing you biases. You must understand that banning ID CAN NOT plug up mouths of people with different opinions. You are such an opinionated guy that I gradually lose respect to you and get angry with you. --Newzebras (talk) 06:48, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Page-move from "Cantonese (linguistic)" to "Yue Chinese" is imprudent. Not only me who do not agree page-move from "Cantonese (linguistic)" to "Yue Chinese". "Yue Chinese" is really really a very terrible name. I've asked to move it back to "Cantonese (linguistic)" or "Cantonese (language topic)". See the discusson page. --Newzebras (talk) 06:52, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You do not make the decisions alone; this is a community project. Whether you get angry or disrespect me is utterly irrelevant. You hold a minority opinion, and although you may be correct, it is up to you to convince the community of that. If the community of editors decides that you are right and I am wrong, then I will respect that. You should do the same. Meanwhile, it is inappropriate to rename an article within the text just because you are not having your way in moving it to your preferred title. You haven't even given the issue time to be discussed. kwami (talk) 07:01, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's necessary to aware you that I KNOW we do not make decisions alone. And, "Cantonese=Yue=Guangdonghua" is a common sense, not a minority opinion. You are trying to limit the concept of Cantonese intentionally. --Newzebras (talk) 09:45, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NZ, assume good faith. I am trying to make the topic unambiguous. You don't appear to be familiar with how "Cantonese" used in English (you appear to be translating from Cantonese), nor why your suggested move is inappropriate (these things have been discussed many times). And no, "Yue" is not the same as Guangdonghua. In English, "Yue" is only used for Yueyu. This is the confusion I am trying to avoid, but which you insist on recreating. kwami (talk) 10:17, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Yue" is just a Mandarin-spelling-transition according to pinyin romanization scheme which is homonymous with 粵/Cantonese in English transcription. (You deleted this item on the disambiguation page of Cantonese, evidence: [1] . I don't know who wrote that item, but it IS the common sense.) You use a seldom used, confused term to "avoid" confusion? You are joking, aren't you? Distinctly, you are trying to rename the article to your personally preferred name. --Newzebras (talk) 14:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS. You parallel edit to Guangzhou dialect not only was POV pushing, but blacked large sections of the article. If you continue, that will be considered vandalism. kwami (talk) 07:06, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Those "large sections" have not been blanked. They have been merged into the main topic as they should be. --Newzebras (talk) 09:45, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. That wasn't in the edit summary. See below. kwami (talk) 10:17, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I have reported you to ANI. kwami (talk) 07:43, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do it. I don't think opening discussion everywhere is a good idea. One problem should be discussed in one place. --Newzebras (talk) 09:45, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. I didn't realize you had moved the section to Written Cantonese. I'd suggested we merge that section myself, but never added a merge tag like I should have. However, it's not specifically about Hong Kong Cantonese, and it needs to be merged into the article, not simply tacked onto the end. I moved it to the Talk page until someone can edit it properly. kwami (talk) 10:10, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. --Newzebras (talk) 10:13, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Newzebras,

I've reopened the discussion about moving Cantonese to Yue Chinese to see if a consensus can be reached (as we failed to do so the last time creating lengthy argument). As you showed considerable interest in the original discussion, I thought you may want to participate again this time around. You can see my proposal and comment here. Thank you!

Cheers, The Fiddly Leprechaun · Catch Me! 20:58, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Talk:Hakka Chinese has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Chevy Impala 2009 20:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Talk:Hakka Chinese. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Pakaran 20:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Hakka Malaysians, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hakka Malaysians. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Cnilep (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The AfD discussion also includes Hakka Taiwanese. Cnilep (talk) 14:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please post on talkpages using English, not Chinese. Kwami and Colipon and I can read your Chinese, but not all editors participating in the discussion can. This is English Wikipedia. Thank you, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 05:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you recently tried to give a page a different title by copying its content and pasting it into another page with a different name. This is known as a "cut and paste move", and it is undesirable because it splits the page history, which is needed for attribution and various other purposes. Instead, the software used by Wikipedia has a feature that allows pages to be moved to a new title together with their edit history.

In most cases, once your account is four days old and has ten edits, you should be able to move an article yourself using the "Move" tab at the top of the page. This both preserves the page history intact and automatically creates a redirect from the old title to the new. If you cannot perform a particular page move yourself this way (e.g. because a page already exists at the target title), please follow the instructions at requested moves to have it moved by someone else. Also, if there are any other articles that you moved by copying and pasting, even if it was a long time ago, please list them at Wikipedia:Cut and paste move repair holding pen. Thank you. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 06:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]