User talk:Arilang1234

Dalaser

I left u a message. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dalasder (talk • contribs) 11:32, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Tang Dynasty

I have engaged a procedure for amending Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty.

• See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Amendment#Request to amend prior case: Tang Dynasty.

Naturally, the process requires me to notify you. --Tenmei (talk) 00:59, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

DYK nom for 2009 Barack Obama visit to China

Hello! Your submission of 2009 Barack Obama visit to China at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:28, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

There are some problems again; could you have another look? Ucucha 00:25, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Deng Yujiao incident

I've read over the entire article today, and looked at its Chinese counterpart. There seems to be extreme divergence between the two articles. The Chinese Wiki page discusses three separate versions of the event as presented by police on three different days as the case unfolded, and I think this would be useful on the English wiki as well. Up for a bit of translating? Colipon+(Talk) 02:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you that the Chinese version is more comprehensive than the en:wiki, however, it is quite clear to any reader that the Chinese police do not enjoy any credibility in this case, and I do not agree with your comment "extreme divergence between the two articles". Arilang ^talk 15:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, but from the changes in the police position as the case unfolded it is more easily discernible just exactly how they chose to handle the case. Wikipedia isn't about the truth. It's about offering information from all sides of the spectrum, and police reports in this case, are more than relevant. Colipon+(Talk) 17:01, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

You may be interested in this followup article from Nanfang. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 06:18, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Request

Ever thought about doing an article for the Lin Jiaxiang incident, about the official who attempted to assault an 11-year-old girl in Shenzhen? Thought you would be interested. It also caused uproar to a scale similar to that of the Deng Yujiao incident, although it happened almost a year ago now. Colipon+(Talk) 23:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Colipon, thanks for your suggestion, but compare to Deng's case, the Lin Jiaxiang case just does not have that immense impact, and the outcome is different, in the way that the Chinese court was involved. I think the Lin Jiaxiang case had never made it to the court.

Talking about court case, the Jiang Zemin case is gaining momentum. Should we co-write a wiki on it? Looks like it is the Spain's monarch against the all mighty PRC? Arilang ^talk 01:14, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

My suggestion for the Jiang case is for us to write it into the body of that article under a new section called "post-presidency" or some such. Until it gains some more notability I would hesitate on creating a totally new article on it (if you notice "Barack Obama visit to China" is up for deletion). Jiang also seems to be a mortal enemy of Falun Gong and various other human rights groups, and that should receive its due coverage on the article. I would be happy to help along that vein.

Police rejected Lin Jiaxiang's "child molestation" charges, saying there was no direct evidence of "activities of a sexual nature". But the case in itself is rather interesting, not to mention inconclusive. But he was sacked. The reason for its notability is that it very publicly exposes what is a commonplace practice with Chinese officials - committing a crime and then flaunting his status, then when that doesn't work, offering a bribe, covering up the evidence etc. Colipon+(Talk) 01:49, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

To begin with, Lin Jiaxiang was allegded to have attack the child in some way, yes, he did do some nasty thing to the child; but exactly what he did was not clear, when compared to Deng Yujiao, she did cause a death, using a knife. I don't think the Lin Jiaxiang incident would pass a AfD. Arilang ^talk 17:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Huang Dejie was injured with knife wound when attacking Deng Yujiao.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Huang Dejie was injured with knife wound when attacking Deng Yujiao.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 06:12, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Comparison between Roman and Han Empires

You are invited to participate at the AFD [1]Teeninvestor (talk) 00:51, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Comparison between Roman and Han Empires

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Comparison between Roman and Han Empires. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison between Roman and Han Empires (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:16, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Weng'an riot5 crop.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Weng'an riot5 crop.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 12:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 12:24, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Li Shufan photo on her coffin.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Li Shufan photo on her coffin.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 12:26, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Angry students turning over police cars.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Angry students turning over police cars.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 12:27, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Zhou Shuguang(Zola) and Li Shufen's family.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Zhou Shuguang(Zola) and Li Shufen's family.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 12:29, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

File:Netizens show support on Tianya chat site.JPG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Netizens show support on Tianya chat site.JPG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ricky81682 (talk) 12:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Economic history of China

Hey Arilang add me as an email contact. Also, would you like to take a look at Economic history of China (pre-1911) FAC, which you worked on? Thanks.

Economic history of China (pre-1911) looks awesome, must have taken you a lot of time. However, currently I have spend more time on modern history such as Korean War etc.

My e-mail address:licolnwashington1234@hushmail.com. Arilang ^talk 23:20, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Files_for_deletion/2009_December_19

Hello, a user has gone ahead and deleted many photos despite the fact that all votes were "keep" or "strong keep." How shall we proceed? Badagnani (talk) 05:24, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Please contact a admin and ask for help. Arilang ^talk 05:37, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Killing Foriegners

Hi Arilang;

I found the original source for your great image -- it's a classic! But it turns out that it was published in 1861, so I'm wondering if there's a direct connection with the so-called Boxers. Should we take it down from that article? Cheers for the New Year. ch (talk) 18:56, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Happy New Year to you too. About the image, even though it was published in 1861, still it helps to show that the Manchus were very much anti-Westerners, hence Boxers(who were mainly of Han) were actually encouraged by the Manchus to kill the foreginers. The Pig and Goat in the picture also had further meanings. Pig is 猪, which sounds like 主, in 耶蘇救世主, as oppose to the Emperor, or 皇帝. Goat is 羊, same like 洋. So the picture helps to explain that the Manchus not only were anti-Westerners, they were also anti-Jesus. Arilang ^talk 23:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Arilang1234! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring this article up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 4 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:

1. Guo Guoting - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 06:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of War of Internet Addiction

Hello! Your submission of War of Internet Addiction at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Bradjamesbrown (talk) 03:19, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Xu Zhiyong on Esquire cover.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Xu Zhiyong on Esquire cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Damiens.rf 17:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK for War of Internet Addiction

On February 11, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article War of Internet Addiction, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Calmer Waters 06:01, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Five Constituencies Referendum

I find the "Post-resignation" section of the Five Constituencies Referendum fragmented and unorganized. There are currently 6 subsections under it which can be confusing to read. This structure is also unsustainable: if 100 politicans come out and comment on the referendum in the next 3 months, we will have over 100 subsections! I suggest placing "Respond from Donald Tsang" under "Response from Hong Kong government officials" and placing "Democracy gathering" and "Response from Alan Leong" into one subsection of "Actions and comments from the pro-democracy camp". This should make the article more organized. What do you think?Craddocktm (talk) 09:07, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you, please go ahead. Since the HK government's political stance is very clear(boycott of the by-election), may be the subsection can be re-named as such? Arilang ^talk 10:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

RfC/User on PCPP

Hello. Please be aware that I have opened an RfC about the conduct of PCPP (talk · contribs). --Asdfg12345 01:54, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

File:Ledo Burma Roads Assam-Burma-China.gif

Hi. Can you tell me the exact location of the magnificent zigzag road in this image you uploaded last year? Regards, JohnCD (talk) 15:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Chinese

I doubt that theory. I'm pretty sure that without the manchus' repression of science and liberalism in China, China would have developed the industrial revolution much faster than Europe. Until roughly 1700 the Chinese were still the most powerful, richest and advanced country.Teeninvestor (talk) 16:32, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Arilang! Nice to see you again after my very long Wiki break. As for this conversation, let's say hypothetically that the Manchus failed to invade China proper and the Ming or some other native Han dynasty remained until the 20th century. Then ask the question: was there any sign in late Ming society that would hint at the origin or development of an industrial revolution in China? In Ming China (and early Qing China before the introduction of Western-style factories and machinery), there was a wide variety of simple and sometimes complex devices used for commodity manufacturing and agriculture. To see many examples of this, look at the Tiangong Kaiwu (天工開物) published by Song Yingxing in 1637, which lists and explains a multitude of China's greatest technological advances up until that point. Despite this, however, heavy machinery remained in limited and marginal use by Chinese artisans and agriculturalists who continued to rely heavily on physical labor and manpower for production of commodities and agricultural produce. Why? Think about it: what is China's greatest resource? People. Centuries before the wonders of the industrial revolution, China was producing common and even luxury goods on a massive scale because it had the manpower to do it and very sizable consumer population which was relatively well-off by premodern standards. The only thing comparable in Europe during the Middle Ages and the early Renaissance was perhaps the workshops of northern Italy controlled by the rich maritime powers of Venice and Genoa (ancient Europe was a different story, considering the Roman Empire). In Early Modern Europe, where manpower was not always the greatest resource on hand, there was a real incentive to invent and create machines which could reduce labor costs as well as speed the rate of production rapidly. This is perhaps a really simplistic view, lacking nuance since I'm trying to make a quick point, but it is actually at the core of how the Industrial Revolution began in Western Europe.--Pericles of Athens^Talk 22:07, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

It is good to talk to you again, I hope you enjoy every minute of your time in China. Below is what I had posted at Teeninvestor's talk page:

http://wikilivres.info/wiki/%E6%9D%A8%E6%8C%AF%E5%AE%81%E6%8C%87%E7%82%B9%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD%E4%BC%A0%E7%BB%9F%E6%96%87%E5%8C%96%EF%BC%9A%E4%B8%AD%E5%8C%BB%E5%92%8C%E3%80%8A%E6%98%93%E7%BB%8F%E3%80%8B%E7%BB%93%E5%90%88%E6%B2%A1%E6%9C%89%E5%89%8D%E9%80%94

归纳与推演都是近代科学中不可缺少的思维方法。为说明此点让我们看一 下Maxwell（1831-1879） 创建Maxwell方程的历史。Maxwell是十九世纪最伟大的物理学家，他在十九世纪中叶写了3篇论文，奠定了电磁波的准确结构，从而改变了人类的历 史。二十世纪所发展出来的无线电、电视、网络通讯等等，统统都基于Maxwell方程式。Maxwell's equations

• 第一，《易经》影响了中华文化中的思维方式，而这个影响是近代科学没有在中国萌芽的重要原 因之一，这也是我之所以对于《易经》发生兴趣的原因。
• 第二，《易经》是汉语成为单音语言的原因之一。
• 第三，《易经》影响了中华文化的 审美观念。

Well, without ABC and 12345, there is no way the Chinese could ever develope the all important equations.

PoA, put it this way, serious "Science" is mathematic, which is about E=MC(square), formula, equations, two dimensions, three dimensions, and when Chinese did not develope ABC, abc, xyz, + -, it is naturally that Chinese could not develope "serious science". Arilang ^talk 22:42, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

PoA, let's talk a bit more on the point you raised:

let's say hypothetically that the Manchus failed to invade China proper and the Ming or some other native Han dynasty remained until the 20th century. Then ask the question: was there any sign in late Ming society that would hint at the origin or development of an industrial revolution in China?

My answer is NO. Even if the Ming, or Song, were given another 2000 years of evolution, as long as the Confucius system stay the same, the 漢字 stay the same, neither Renaissance, nor industrial revolution will begin in China. The main reasons:

• (1)仕農工商=(a)scholar-bureaucrats, (b)farmers, (c)handcraft man, (d)merchants. For thousands of years, "Merchants" stay at the bottom of the social class, because the Emperor, the Confucius system, would never let any merchants to become rich and powerful, in order to prevent any future challenger.
• (2)The Han language, is the language belongs to 皇權, or 君權. For example, the core of the Confucius system is 天地君親師 (a)天=Heaven, (b)地=earth, (c)君=ruler/emperor, (d)親=parents, (e)師=teacher. PoA, in the old times, even now, to some extent, a "good" Chinese must conform to the above FIVE powers. You can imagine how tough life can be. There is an old Chinese saying:一日為師,终身為父. Translation:The life-long respect a student would show to a teacher, should be same like his respect towards his father. In short, the human beings that come out of the Confucius system, would not be the same human beings you see in the ancient Greece, ancient Maya, ancient Indians, or ancient Phoenicians. So my conclusion:No Renaissance, no industrial revolution for the Chinese. Arilang ^talk 14:32, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Pericles, I doubt your argument. Up until around 1700, the machinery used by Chinese, although simplistic by modern standards, exceeded anything comparable in Europe. In fact, if you read the work of Joseph Needham (which I'm sure you have), much of what Europe had produced was copied from the classical world or ideas from China up til about 1500. In terms of population, I don't think labor was any more abundant in China than in Europe, (for example, Europe in 1300 had a population of 70-80 million, which was roughly equal to the population of early Ming China, despite a much lower technological level; it was not until roughly the late Ming that the population of China vastly exceeded that of Europe). And even if it were so, population density is important because without a huge, concentrated consumer market, no amount of manufacturing or any other complex economy would develop because of lack of markets, and the country would revert to self-sufficient farming. In order for heavy manufacturing to develop, there is, besides the existence of a market, also a need for a massive labor force that is not self-sufficient and looking for work, and a free society that allows capital accumulation and free exchange. A large labor force would not necessarily discourage machine improvements because the increased wealth of the workers would allow a bigger market for machinery, which drives innovation(in fact, the lack of a labor force would discourage it). There is always a strong desire to save on labor costs, as long as the economy is growing (Another key fact that supports this hypothesis is that the industrial revolution in Britain was preceded by a population explosion, which according the lack-of-labor hypothesis should have "stinted" growth). In this regard, Song and Ming China had all three of these pre-requisitates as their technology and markets had developed to a point where the self-sufficient economy was being displaced. However, with the conquest of the Manchus, a rigid class system developed along with a regime that discouraged technological advancement (in fact, one could say that Chinese civilization reached it's height in the early seventeenth century). In Europe, by contrast, up to around 1450 serfdom restricted the mobility of the labor force as well as the merchant class, and the development of the absolutist states (much more oppressive than in China) stinted development until around 1700. European Kings such as Louis XIV established oppressive state monopolies, guilds and protective tariffs (almost as oppressive as the modern regulatory state) that exceeded anything found in China, even under the Manchus. This stinted continental development. Only England, which after 1700 was relatively free of these oppressive statutes and which was also close to a key source of raw materials (coal), was capable of developing the industrial revolution. As for Arilang's argument, Chinese society did not repress able individuals or expropriate wealthy merchants and landowners, as had happened in the Ottoman Empire or 17th-century France; therefore, the conditions for success existed. Any society can and will develop to the point of industrial capitalism, as long as they are not stinted by terrible natural conditions that cause high time preference or oppressive institutions like feudalism or an overly large state.Teeninvestor (talk) 17:15, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

In Europe they developed the methods and philosophy of science. It has been argued that a belief in one god allowed science to look for a logical set of rules set down by that god rather than trying to describe the word based on which deity was winning or losing or which spirits were causing what. I don't know enough about ancient Chinese philosopies to comment, but I do ask the question: Did China have the philosophy of science and the scientific method? Did it include the sharing of discoveries across the empire simply for the sake of expanding knowledge (science for science's sake)? Readin (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

user:Readin, the root of the problem has to be the use of Sinograph instead of the alphabets.

1. In the old times(even now, to some extent), to be educated is a prestige, and an educated person has the chance to become a bureaucrat. Now an educated person needs to memorize 3000-4000 Sinograph, or pictogram. Now, a western person's brain needs to process the shuffling of 26 alphabets plus some ,.+-/<>1234567890, which are all abstract symbols, compare that to a Chinese brain that needs to shuffle 4000 pictograms, some of which have intricate and complicate structure, by then the Chinese wouldn't have too much energy to do any more "creative" activities.
2. As any science student would easily find out, the fundamental, the corner stone of modern science is mathematics, when in 4000 years Chinese had never develope +-/<>1234567890 and need to import them just about 100 years ago, it is no wonder that Chinese is so far behind the western in many ways.
3. In a bombshell, the thing that all the Chinese is so proud of, the Sinograph, is exactly the thousands years old spell that kept the Chinese in a perpetual vortex. Wouldn't you agree? Arilang ^talk 21:45, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

That's an interesting theory, that the focus on learning the language interfered with the ability to devote time to pure science. I have the impression from movies (admittedly a really bad source) that the civil service examinations were essay questions having to do with classic literature rather than science or math. Any idea if that is correct?

Not that it would discredit the theory, but from looking through Wikipedia articles trying to find information about science and math in ancient China, there are claims being made that China had a concept of positive and negative numbers, and the concetpt of zero, pretty early - about as early as western civilization anyway. Readin (talk) 02:07, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Burma flag in substitute for Blue Sky White Sun.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Burma flag in substitute for Blue Sky White Sun.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used once again.

• If you recieved this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to somewhere on your talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 06:53, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:WCG Project Gotham 3 winner Liu Yu-chien.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WCG Project Gotham 3 winner Liu Yu-chien.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore will not be able to answer your questions.

• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.

• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.

• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.

• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 20:26, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Created an article on Liu Wencai

Hi, I've created an article on Liu Wencai, feel free to add any other source you have.--PCPP (talk) 13:02, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

PCPP

There is a currently an RfC on PCPP. You may wish to contribute based on your experiences (positive or negative) editing with him.--Asdfg12345 06:48, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Quit canvassing, ok?--PCPP (talk) 12:15, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Unless you can substantiate your assertion that many people say he's a member of the 50 Cent Party, I suggest that you should withdraw it, it could loosely be construed as a personal attack. The only comment to that effect I have seen is from a dedicated Falun Gong SPA - one of the ones who filed the case - an unreliable figure, if you ask me. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 03:24, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

50c party

User Ohconfucius, people of 50 Cent Party just doing their job, there is nothing "Personal" about it, after all, they get paid in some ways. Consider there are probably 300,000 of them, I don't see anyone should be so shameful that they like to hide. There is nothing to be ashamed of. Arilang ^talk 03:47, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I think it's a reasonable speculation, given CCP'sPCPP's edit history. One of his early edits is "neutralising" the intro on Mao. With several hundred thousand puppets to send out into the internet wilderness, I'd just be surprised if it was only one that had arrived at wikipedia.--Asdfg12345 04:41, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

It is a well known fact that in Chinese Wikipedia, there are scores of them, deleting contents, and I wouldn't be surprised that a couple(may be more) of them would come over here. Like I said, they are just doing a job, nothing to be ashamed of. Arilang ^talk 08:46, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

• You didn't answer my question, nor did you substantiate. Instead, asdfg joined in that nonsense about people doing their jobs. Fine, but the two are so far unrelated. There IS a difference, and it's actually quite subtle: it has nothing to do about shame, nor has PCPP admitted that he is a member, therein lies the problem. You would be expressing a legitimate point of view if you had said he was a CPC point pusher, but you did not. You put 50c party there as if it was related, so that's what makes it potentially a personal attack. Anyway, I'm not here to pontificate. I like the fact that you go around building China articles, and just want to help out, without criticising. I've had it with Falun Gong and point pushers in general. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 01:39, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Ohconfucius, to me, this 50c thing is really not a big deal, and I just said "he might be", just like saying someone might be working for CIA, FBI, or something. Personal attack is something else, like saying he is too fat or too short. Another fact I mentioned is on the status of zh:wikipedia. You and me know that there are far too many 50c party from mainland China doing self censorship there.

There is something else I like to ask for your help. User:Arilang1234/Comparison between written English and written Chinese Draft is a draft I am working on. Please have a look, and if possible, give me some suggestion. Arilang ^talk 02:32, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Chinese Language

The Chinese language has thousands of years of history. I doubt a 200 year period of rule by a barbaric minority could influence the language of a 5000 year civilization.Teeninvestor (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, look at what the CCP has done in just 60 years. Or what happened during the Cultural Revolution in less than 10 years! --Asdfg12345 23:44, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Funny though, I used to think the romanization of Chinese language is bad, Pinyin is bad, the burning of old Chinese books during Cultural Revolution was bad. But ever since I read the articles by Hashimoto Mantaro and others, I sort of beginning to think otherwise. Maybe the Pinyin was a good start, though it has massive problems. Maybe the burning of books was good for the Chinese in the long run. Maybe the Sinograph would be abandoned one day, when alphabets are used instead. Maybe the anti-Confucius thing was good.

But no matter what, the Communism had brought endless miseries to China, that is for sure. Arilang ^talk 00:09, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Written language comparisons

Hi Arilang. Good work on the article draft! I have a few suggestions. Firstly, is the subject of the article really a comparison between written Chinese and written English? Or is it actually a comparison between Chinese and all languages that use Latin Script? Secondly, I wanted to suggest a new article title - "Comparison of written Chinese and Latin-based languages" or "Comparison of written Chinese and written English". Best wishes, Colipon+(Talk) 14:02, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Well, it is just a draft, really. I need all the inputs from everyone, especially editors who have linguistic knowledge, which I have to admit that I know very little. But I am willing to learn.

I think the second name is more appropriate, since we are seeing more and more Chinese World against English World. Editors with Japanese Kana knowledge are welcome to contribute, as Kana is sort of alphabets too. Arilang ^talk 23:56, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Just whizzed by and noticed your draft page. First off, Kana is a syllabic, not an alphabet, and Greek/Cyrillic/etc are not part of the Latin alphabet, so if you were after a page like that, you might call it "Comparison of written Chinese, syllabic and alphabetical languages" or something else. However, just to pre-warn you, I have noticed that in the past, "comparison"-type articles tend to get a lot of negative reception from other Wikipedians, and sometimes get deleted or reduced. For example, refer to User:Teeninvestor's comparison between Han and Rome. If you intend to start such a project, I'd advise you to be very careful so that you don't have to face a myriad AfDs. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 03:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

User Benlisquare, I sort of quite welcome any AfD, in fact, if an article can withstand the assult of many different styles of editors that an AfD would attract, at the end, that article would turn out to be a better one, don't you think? I still remember Hua-Yi Distinction's AfD, by which I get to interact with many more editors, and at the end, the article get to receive a much appreciated overhaul. Arilang ^talk 03:37, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Don't you find that a bit... er... dangerous? You might end up losing your article to deletion, there's always the chance. Rather than counting on AfD to improve an article, you could always mention it at an "Articles for Copyediting" page or something like that. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 03:41, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice, yes, Copyediting is a good idea. Well, if you know more about Japanse Hana, may be you can add some content when you have time? Arilang ^talk 03:50, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi Arilang! Sorry for not getting back to you immediately; I try to visit Wikipedia only on occasion. As for your article draft, I concur with User:Colipon that a focus on written English is simply too narrow, since the English language shares use of the Latin alphabet with many other Western languages. As for Benlisquare's assertion above that the Greek alphabet is not part of the Latin alphabet, this much is true, but ignores the fact that the Latin alphabet is derived directly from the Greek alphabet (specifically, the Cumae alphabet used in parts of ancient Greece and southern Italy). As for Benlisquare's suggestion that the article could focus on a comparison between the Chinese character system and all alphabetic systems, this would stretch far beyond the Greek and Latin alphabets to include everything from the Korean alphabet to the Phoenician alphabet. Such a comparison article would be far too broad in scope, and I can certainly see other editors calling for its deletion. You certainly want to avoid that after pouring so much time and hard work into this project! I would suggest writing a branch article for the main article Written Chinese, specifically for the section called "Literacy," since it introduces this very topic. I read Havelock's article (thanks for sharing!), and I think the article you are hoping to present is a case for using an alphabetical system for the Chinese language. If that be the case, then this does not need to be a simple "comparison" article, but rather a documentation of the various scholarly arguments that the Chinese language should be alphabetized. If that be the case, then you should certainly revise the draft title to suit this particular focus. Cheers!--Pericles of Athens^Talk 01:56, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for you extremely construtive comment PoA, indeed, "the Chinese language should be alphabetized" is one of the main topic. On Comparison between written English and written Chinese, most of the arguments centre around works done by Eric A. Havelock and Victor H. Mair, at least for the moment. But that is not all, further down the tract, I still like to add a bit more on topics such as:

1. Why Chinese did not started neither Renaissance nor Industrial Revolution, because of the 4000-5000 logographic scripts that need to be store in the brain(an educated Chinese need to memorize 4000-5000 words), and this massive storage hinder the brain's developement of logic, and imagination?
2. Chinese grammar VS English grammar. We all know that English's grammar is quite comprehensive, in the sense that rules like nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, past tense, present tense, any text that obey all this rules would be "readable", or at least the text would not be seen as a piece of rubbish. When we come to Chinese text, though there is a bit of grammar, but no where near as comprehensive as English grammar. What I am trying to say, is, after thousands of years of evolution, English speakers would tend to obey rules and regulations, because the training is intrincive in the everyday language. On the other hand, Chinese language(be it written, or spoken) just do not provide this kind of training. Instead, Chinese used 忠, 義, 仁, 爱 to make people behave. Now, whenever 忠, 義, 仁, 爱 breakdown, as was the case with the Chinese Cultural Revolution, the whole society would turn into total chaos.
3. By using alphabets, pius all the avaiable grapheme and the corresponding orthography, English speakers are able to develope Computer Science, and hence computer languages were born. We all know what computer languages did to our modern world. Chinese language's contribution towards computer languages? None.
4. Beside computer languages, serious science subjects such as Maths, Chemistry, Physics, Rockect Science, Genetics, just wouldn't be there without ENGLISH. Chinese language's contribution? None.

PoA, I hope you do see the differences. What might be a suitable new name for this new article? And if you could include some other scholar's works, it would be good. Arilang ^talk 05:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Comparison between written English and written Chinese

Hello! Your submission of Comparison between written English and written Chinese at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Nancy ^talk 08:57, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

List of political offences that attract jail terms in China

nice work on that. Decora (talk) 03:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Comparison between written English and written Chinese

There are some referencing issues in the above article. Crystal and Wardhaugh are referenced, yet lack full bibliographic details. A surname is not much use to the average reader, so I'd recommend including a bibliography section where you can list necessary details such as author, book title, publisher, year of publication etc. Nev1 (talk) 22:23, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

You are now a Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 04:52, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

I left a note on the counterrevolutionary page for you. Homunculus (duihua) 03:02, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Why China fell behind

I have just discovered a very interesting fact about the Qing Dynasty. During the reigns of the Manchus, they greatly prohibited commerce, even going as far as to prohibit mining completely (with the exception of Yunnan). You can't have an industrial revolution without coal and other minerals, no? I think this factor alone is enough to know why China stagnated under the Manchus. Teeninvestor (talk) 00:30, 3 July 2010 (UTC) Teen, good to hear from you. Please watch this video, then you will have more idea what went wrong in the past. It is more than Manchus.

http://video.soso.com/playvbox/商君书/?zd=0&start=0&ourl=http://v.blog.sohu.com/u/vw/2510616&title=鲍鹏山：专制制度最黑暗的理论内核&cid=td.v

Arilang ^talk 07:10, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, Arilang, European regimes prior to the era of classical liberalism (and after) were much worse than traditional china. Traditional China's taxes were like 5%, pre-liberal europe like 20%, liberal europe like 3%. 专制 is a term that should not apply to traditional china, because it means a state that controls everything; this which was not what Song and Ming was (for example, there was no government below the county level and vilagers governed themselves).I agree that 专制 is a term appropriate for the Mongols, Manchus, and the current regime (however western regimes are not much better).Teeninvestor (talk) 15:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

That was a wording error. The correct statement is that "new mines" were prohibited, not that all mines were prohibited. In contrast to Ming's policy of letting merchants open and operate mines where they went, Qing prohibited new mines and also closed down many old Ming mines.Teeninvestor (talk) 13:53, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Teen, I still think to focus on the mining activities is a wrong approach, and too specialise a topic. There are many topics that can be expanded, topics such as:

(1) 文字獄，there are many of them during Qing, and each one of them can be a good wiki.

(2) Manchu's slave master nature. There are many historical books deal with this topic.

(3) Restriction of foreign trade, hence the 海禁。There are tons and tons of historical research on this topic, though majority part of it is in Chinese. By the way, do you know the so called 四大发明 is kind of fake? Arilang ^talk 06:49, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

That's complete BS Arilang. And 四大发明 is not fake; in fact there are many more Chinese inventions than the 四大发明, as demonstrated by Joseph Needham. And I have to take issue with you Arilang; you have a very low view of traditional China, arguably the greatest civilization before pre-Enlightenment Europe, and think it is socialist dictatorship. Nothing could be further from the truth (except maybe during the rule of Wang Mang and the Mongols, who did nationalize every industry). The Han, Song, and Ming (especially Eastern Han and later Ming), all had very prosperous economies, in which merchants were allowed to operate freely and were not suppressed (for example, many officials during these dynasties were also merchants); in fact, most historians would agree that the beginnings of capitalism are in the Song Dynasty. The state usually had a very small role (5% to 8% taxes), and did not suppress merchants, as confucian doctrines did not want government to run the economy (in fact, confucianism supported a free market).

This is in contrast to pre-enlightenment europe in which the government monopolized all sectors of the economy with guilds and 100000 regulations (except England, thats why there is industrial revolution there). France or Spain, for example, suppressed merchants way worse than China ever did (excpet maybe under the Manchus and Mongols).Do you really think that Mao zedong's collectivist despotism is the norm for Chinese history? That is completely wrong; you should know that traditional Chinese society was autonomous and often settled disputes without government courts, referring to local elites such as landowners.Teeninvestor (talk) 13:26, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Teen, a serious historian, I hope one day you might become one, like PoA, would not focus on one spot only, like the way you focus on "pre-enlightenment europe", which I feel, is not a very healthy habit, to say the least. To be an historian, one needs to look at all the ancient civilisations, like ancient Indian, ancient Persian, ancient Greek, ancient Phoenician, etc, and study the connection and influence these ancient civilisations on the current life. Being a high school kid(if you are still one), you have achieved a lot, you need to be congratulated, but please spend more effort and time, and focus on various achievements by other civilisations. For example, Muslim civilisation was once powerful and prosperous, we should keep them in mind too. I hope you would mature into a great scholar, one day you look back on this small chat, you might agree to some of my points. Best of luck to your study. Arilang ^talk 01:43, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I have no plan to become a historian, as my interest is in business and stocks (I plan to attend an ivy league school). However, I am using the example of preenlightenment europe as an example to illustrate your thoughts about premodern china as incorrect. You seem to think that Han, Tang, Song, and Ming were absolute dictatorships that routinely took over merchants' property and suppressed them; this is simply not true at all (in fact China was the best country except during Manchu and Mongols for capitalism). Other civilizations, such as pre-enlightenment europe and the Muslims, had a more hostile altitude towards merchants; for example, the ottomans routinely executed merchants and took their property, while Louis XIV of France monopolized every industry with guilds, monopoly grants and 1000+ regulations, and crippled French business. These actions would be inconceivable in China.Teeninvestor (talk) 02:03, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Teen, like I have said before, you are a great kid, there is no doubt about it, I bet your dad is mighty proud of you. That said, you are still just a child, though a very ambitious child, who dare to tackle complex historical topic such as Ming/Qing history. Have you ever thought that this topic is too "big" and too complex for your age? No offence, what I really mean, is, it is a damn good thing if 50% or 70% of all the Chinese high school kids are as serious as you are, can you imagine what might be the outcome?

OK, points I agree with you:

• (1) Manchu Qing was the worst thing ever happen to China.

• (2) Main stream Chinese history need to be rewritten, to reflect the truth on what Manchu did to Han Chinese in 230 years.

Points I do not agree with you:

• (1) Without the Manchu invasion, "Industrial Revolution" might begin in China. My answer is a flat No. The reason being: Industrial Revolution will not happen without serious Science, and serious Science need serious Mathematics. For thousands of years, Chinese were very poor on Mathematics, so without Math, no Industrial Revolution. It is that simple. Arilang ^talk 02:55, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, China's mathematics was much more advanced than Europe until the Manchus. For example, Europeans did not calculate Pi to the 7th digit until 1300's, while Chinese had done so in the 400's. The Matrix and other advanced mathematical concepts also originated in China. Also, Manchus were not the worst thing to happen to China; that honor (or disgrace) belongs to Mao the Tyrant.Teeninvestor (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

What about this

You like this photo? Arilang ^talk 04:30, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Teen, look at the way he wears his cap, and look at his evil looking eyes. Arilang ^talk 04:34, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

四大发明?

Teen, please read this article:http://24414145.qzone.qq.com/blog/1270478862

“四大文明古国”、“四大发明”质疑 Arilang ^talk 13:46, 9 July 2010 (UTC) Teen, the following is a very long article, please take some time to read it.

而某些中国人津津乐道的所谓“中国文明是唯一延续下来的古文明，其他文明都已经消失了，种族已经灭绝了”的可笑说法，也是颇能迷惑人的一种荒谬论调。这种荒谬可笑的调子现在该是彻底澄清的时候了。 文章提交者：光照的果子 那么我们来看看其他文明是否已经消失了，种族是否已经灭绝了。　

首先说希腊，希腊最早的文明──米诺斯文明，开始于公元前2500年，距今四千多年。最初见于《荷马史诗》的记载。十九世纪末在希腊克里特等地发现了它的大量遗迹。考古依据：早期的象形文字，以及中期的线形文字A；成熟的青铜冶炼术，及出土的大量冶炼的青铜器；早期的城堡，中期的克诺索斯等地的王宫，尤其是后者，其优美华丽，在各早期文明中可以说达到了一个登峰造极的地步。 　 　 （注意：中国的历史书上是把米诺斯文明从公元前2000年开始算起的，但是国外的历史书上都是从公元前2500年算起的，谁是谁非自己判断吧。）　

=================================

紧随其后的是希腊南部的迈锡尼文明，开始于公元前1600年，距今3600年，《荷马史诗》记叙的主要就是这一时期的历史。十九世纪在希腊迈锡尼，泰林斯等地发现了它的很多城市遗迹，大量青铜器，还有线形文字B。　

　 然后是两百年的荷马时代，这时候希腊开始进入铁器时代，武器和工具都普遍使用铁制，而中国直到将近一千年后的汉代才开始正式进入铁器时代（我并没有夸张，其他诸文明地区比我们中国地区早一千年左右进入铁器时代是个历史常识，原因也很简单，因为冶铁术起源于地中海一带的赫梯文明，然后陆续传入远近各个文明，中国地区距离最远，所以传入最晚）。　

　 再接下来就是我们熟知的以雅典为代表的古典文明时代了。

===================================

创造米诺斯文明的皮拉斯基人，不是希腊语族，中国某些流氓文人抓住这一点大做文，刻意强调米诺斯文明的创造者跟创造迈锡尼文明的希腊人不是同一民族，想要贬低希腊文明的原创性。实际上，皮拉斯基人只是非希腊语族而已，但是与希腊人同为印欧种族，或者称之为雅利安语族。而且他们从米诺斯文明早期开始就逐渐与创造迈锡尼文明的希腊族阿开亚人融合了，其文明是一脉相承的。在阿提卡等地的皮拉斯基人也早就与当地的阿开亚人融合而共同创造出了后来的古典文明，其文化艺术的世俗主义，自然主义特徵，在几个古代文明中是绝无仅有的。跟后来希腊古典文明同出一源。　

==================================

就算从正宗的希腊人，阿开亚人的迈锡尼文明时代算起，也早于中国最早的商文明。不知道“四大文明古国”怎么会算到中国头上去的？　

更何况，中国的两个早期文明：商，周，都是西方迁来的游牧民族创造的，周灭商之后，商民族即已消亡，今天有谁敢说自己是“商人”的后裔？要说“正宗”的“中国人”──汉人，那是到了秦汉才形成的，是否也应该说“中国的早期文明都已经消失了，种族已经灭绝了”？　

==================================

公元前1000年以后的希腊古典文明则是南下的与阿开亚人同族的多利安人与前两者共同创造的；而再后来统一希腊并建立了亚历山大帝国的马其顿人也是希腊族人，并开创了希腊化文明时代；罗马兼并了希腊之后更是成为希腊文明的直接继承者；而西罗马帝国灭亡后，东罗马帝国（拜占庭帝国）继续延续了一千年之久，其核心民族仍然是希腊人，使用希腊语。直到十五世纪东罗马帝国被奥斯曼土耳其帝国灭亡，希腊人经历了四百年亡国时期，到十九世纪初又重新独立。今希腊共和国的版图，即是古代希腊的主要区域，其人口绝大多数仍然是希腊族，希腊语为国语。这个地区自古以来民族成份就没有大的改变过，何来的“种族消失了”？　

==================================

希腊罗马文明只不过中途又接受了基督教的成份，而且是希腊化的基督教。基督教从一开始产生就可以说是希腊文明与犹太文明的混合产物，基督教经典《新约》从一开始就是用希腊语创造出来的，主要的传播者也是罗马帝国中的希腊人，只奉《旧约》的犹太教是严禁偶像崇拜的，而基督教各流派都可以绘画雕刻圣像，这就是其希腊化的典型特徵。

===================================

对于希腊文明，怎么评价都不过份。可以说：如果没有希腊文明，就几乎没有我们今天现代社会的一切。现代的许多科学学科，技术发明，以及民主制度，早在古希腊时代就已经产生出了其雏形。古希腊文明更是直接催生了中世纪欧洲的文艺复兴，导致近代科学的产生，民主制度的萌芽。这是对今天整个人类世界作出了最重要最关键的贡献的一个文明。这一点，我们以前是认识得太不够深入了。

===================================

我们又反过来看看中国的民族构成，前面说了，商，周，本是外来民族，商灭周后，商民族即已消亡。秦汉时第一次民族大融合才形成所谓“汉人”，这一点跟其他国家地区的民族演化并无什么不同。汉代时人口最多时达到五千多万，但是经过汉末动乱，到了三国时人口仅剩下七百万，其中蜀国人口最多时仅有九十多万（所以不难理解蜀国的基本战略非联吴抗魏无以自保）。而曹操诗中“白骨露于野，千里无鸡鸣”的描写并不是文学夸张，而是对当时十室九空的人口灭绝情况的真实记录。这样巨大的人口真空靠什么来填补？靠的是北方蛮族的大量南迁来填补的。而紧接其后短暂的西晋（不到一代人的时间），北方汉人又大量南迁至长江以南，然后就是长达两百多年的“五胡乱华”时期，黄河流域一带已经基本被换了血了。　

===================================

隋唐时又是一次全国范围的大混血，而这个所谓“最辉煌”的唐朝，本身就是一个部份汉化的鲜卑人政权（李世民与其家族是汉化的鲜卑人并不是什么秘密），并保留着大量蛮族陋习，如兄死父死子弟续娶其妻，这就是所谓一脉相承的“华夏文明”吗？

至于辽，金，蒙元，满清时期，那就更不用说了，被混血不说，而且整个就是亡国奴时期。胡人汉化，汉人也胡化，留起鞭子，穿起旗装，这就是所谓一脉相承的“华夏文明”吗？　

=================================

还不得不说的是，今天生活在中国地区的南方人和北方人，不仅在构成“民族”这个概念的基本特徵──共同心理素质上差异甚大，而且在种族的生理特徵上都是有很大差异的。总的来说，北方人是比较纯粹的蒙古人种，而南方人则比较复杂，混有大量马来人种的成份。这种情况有两方面的原因：一是当初中国地区的人种从中亚，南亚等地迁移而来时就形成了这种格局，即黄河流域一带以中亚迁徙来的蒙古人种为主，而长江以南则是南亚迁居来的马来人种，二是在后来几千年的历史演变，民族迁徙中，北方的蒙古人种又大量南下与长江以南的百越等民族融和混血而成。（这也是一个人种学上的常识问题，读者可以向你身边这方面的专家咨询一下，就知道我说的没有夸张。）　

=================================

种族都是如此，文化就更不用说了。说“中华文明是唯一延续下来的文明”，那到底延续下来了些什么呢？举个例子：其他国家民族往往都有自己的民族服装，中国人（汉族）有自己的民族服装吗？（不要告诉我中山装是民族服装，那是用日本人的学生装改制的）。经过一千多年特别是最近几百年以来历史车轮的无情碾压，所谓的“华夏文明”剩下的也不过就是一些碎片而已，而且是些四不象的碎片。日本人的文化都比现在中国的本土文化更近汉唐文化。　

==================================

很多国人喜欢自以为是地吹嘘什么“世界上唯一延续下来的文字就是汉字，其他语言文字都断绝了”，实际上那是很可笑的说法。以英语为例，学英语专业的应该知道，英语虽然词汇数量巨大多达数百万，但是除了一小部份基础词汇以外，绝大多数的词汇都是由数量有限的希腊词根和拉丁词根以及前后缀组合而成的（而拉丁词根又源于希腊词根），特别是数量巨大的科技词汇基本上都是由希□词根构成的。很多人觉得英语词汇的构成好像就是胡乱把一些字母拚接在一起，毫无规律，其实那只是不了解英语的希腊词根构词法而已。（有些网络混混喜欢宣扬什么“汉语词汇的组成是规律的，英语词汇的组成没有规律，汉语优于英语”这种谬论，简直无知得可笑。）

==================================

你会发现在西方国家的各种语言中，很多词汇都是很相近的，就是因为它们都是用同样的拉丁词根和希腊词根构成的原因。例如“地理”这个词，英语是geography”，德语是“geo”，因为都是由表示“土地”意思的希腊词根“geo-”构成的原因。 　 从语言上来说，西方国家各语言间的差别并不比中国各地区方言之间的差别更大，在西方国家一个人同时会说几种西方语言的情况是很平常的事情，就像在中国一个做生意的人同时会说普通话，四川话，广东话一样。　

==================================

从文字上来说，英语的字母是拉丁字母，拉丁字母源于希腊字母，希腊字母又源于腓尼基字母，而腓尼基字母最早的源头又可以追溯到埃及文字。同样的，汉字也可以追溯到苏美尔文明的楔形文字。　 不仅在印欧语系（或者又称雅利安语）内部是这样，印欧语系与中东一带的闪米特语系也是渊源很深，腓尼基字母产生的另一个分支──阿拉米亚字母，又发展出今天的阿拉伯字母，维吾尔字母等。

==================================

我们又来看看汉字。不错，甲骨文是今天汉字的直接起源，但是如果是一个没有受过古文训练的人，根本看不懂古代的甲骨文字，也分不清甲骨文，金文，小篆，大篆等的区别。从文字上来说是这样，从语言上来说，今天使用欧化语法的现代汉语的人如果没有经过古文训练也根本看不懂先秦时代的文献。　

然后我们又来看看埃及文明，埃及文明正式开始于公元前3500年（涅伽达文明时期），这时期出现了象形文字，数十个城市国家，冶炼铜器。（实际上在公元前4500年已进入铜器时代）。并发明了纸草纸。　

然后在公元前3100年时，美尼斯统一了上下埃及各城邦，进入早王朝时期。第三王朝时开始大规模修建金字塔。埃及大大小小的金字塔建立起来一千多年后，中国才开始进入文明时代。　

==================================

再来看埃及的种族：埃及最初的居民是含米特人，然后与西亚进入的闪米特人逐渐融合，创造埃及文明的就是这种闪含混和民族。而闪米特人都起源于阿拉伯半岛，阿拉伯人，犹太人都是闪米特人。今天生活在中东北非的大部份居民，不过就是阿拉伯化的古代闪米特人的后裔。古埃及虽然在其本土政权延续了三千年之久后又陆续经历了亚述人，波斯人，希□人，罗马人，阿拉伯人的统治，但是其种族本身从法老时期一直到今天并没有大的改变，今天生活在尼罗河两岸的居民其体貌特徵跟古埃及时期的雕刻和绘画上的形像仍然非常相似。

埃及人只不过中途又接受了伊斯兰教的成份，这种情况跟古希腊罗马接受了基督教的情况非常类似，也类似于中国人接受了佛教文化一样。只不过伊斯兰教基督教这种一神教的同化作用更为彻底一点，而伊斯兰教本来就是中东闪米特人土生的宗教。　

再来看印度文明。印度文明开始于公元前2500年（哈拉巴文明时期），地点在今印度河流域一带，以哈拉巴和摩亨佐两地发掘出来的完整的砖砌城市遗迹为代表，以及象形文字，青铜器。

==================================

创造最早的哈拉巴文明的是达罗毗荼人，他们与后来进入印度的雅利安人逐渐融合构成了今天印度的主要居民，今天印度的人种混杂局面就是这种历史原因造成的。而雅利安人在公元前1500年进入印度后，就继承了达罗毗荼人的文化，其宗教，哲学都深受前者影响。

至于印度后来受到蒙古莫卧尔王朝的统治，本质上跟中国地区被蒙元满清统治时期一样，而且在殖民化程度和奴役程度上要轻得多。　

今天印度人口的绝大多数都仍然是古代达罗毗荼人和雅利安人等民族的后裔，其信奉的印度教也是从古代就一脉相承下来的，其创造的佛教也深刻影响了整个东亚地区，何来的“文明消失”了？

实际上，通过对比上述几个文明，我们可以发现，恰恰消亡得最多的就是中国地区的文明，除了仍然在使用汉字这一点以外，我没有看出今天的中国还从古代继承下来了些什么。　

其实，在学界有一种不便于启齿的看法就是：真正的古华夏文明，从宋代以后就已经消亡了。今天的中国不是昨天的中国。　

===================================

我们又来看看中东的两河流域文明，它正式开始于公元前3500年的苏美尔文明时期（实际上在公元前4300年已经进入铜器时代，出现了城市，国家的萌芽），这时候出现了象形文字，及稍后的楔形文字，冶炼铜器，以及乌尔，乌鲁克，尼普尔等数十个城邦。

创造最早的苏美尔文明的苏美尔人，可能是含米特人，他们很快就与后来进入的闪米特人融合了。而后继承苏美尔文明而起的阿卡德文明（公元前2371年），巴比伦文明（公元前1894年），都是闪米特人创造的；创造亚述文明，腓尼基文明，犹太文明的也是古代闪米特人；创造伊斯兰文明的阿拉伯人也是闪米特人。今天生活在中东地区的大部份居民仍然是这些古代闪米特的后裔。信奉的宗教仍然是从古代闪米特人原始宗教发展而来的伊斯兰教，使用的文字仍然是从楔形文字和埃及象形文字中提取元素而产生的腓尼基字母文字发展而来的阿拉伯文字。　

==================================

至于中国官方宣传的“四大文明古国”中的那个巴比伦，不过是两河地区最早的文明出现近两千年之后才出现的一个晚期文明，中国官方把这个拿来列在所谓的“四大文明古国”中，给人一种错觉，似乎中国地区的文明跟早于自己两千多年的两河文明是在同一个时间层面上似的。　

==================================

闪米特人的另外一个文明：亚述文明，大约开始于公元前2000年左右，发源地在两河上游一带。这个文明最突出的特点在于他的军事技术上的成就，它建立了当时世界上兵种最为齐全，战斗力最为强悍的一个军事体系，后来其军事技术体制被波斯所继承。

闪米特人在地中海沿岸一带的另一个文明：腓尼基文明，也大约开始于公元前2000年左右，著名的城邦有推罗等。范围就相当于今天黎巴嫩的版图（另外，著名的迦太基古国，也是腓尼基的殖民地）。这个文明最突出的特点，就是其航海及商业上的成就。早在埃及尼科二世时期（公元前611年），腓尼基人已经实现了环航非洲，这是人类航海史上与麦哲伦环球航行，哥伦布发现美洲并列的航海壮举。　

==================================

犹太文明，如果从公元前1000年扫罗建国算起的话，是三千年历史。但实际上，作为一个民族，犹太人的历史还更为悠久。早在公元前2000年以前，居住在这里的迦南人（闪米特语族），已经进入铜器时代，建立了城市，后来与进入这里的犹太人融合。　

至于犹太文明及其民族独一无二的延续性，以及他们对人类的贡献，我想不需要我多说了。　

==================================

赫梯文明，这可能是一个雅利安语族的文明，也大致开始于公元前2000年左右。地点在小亚细亚一带。这个文明最大的成就就是发明了冶铁术（有可能更早在这之前的米坦尼王国已出现），并在公元前1400年左右率先进入铁器时代。而今天高加索一带的亚美尼亚，据称其居民就是古代赫梯人的后裔。

今天叙利亚的居民，则是建立以大马士革为中心的古代叙利亚文明的阿拉米人的后裔。

==================================

波斯文明，就是今天伊朗的前身，这是一个雅利安人的文明。如果从其最早的居民－－埃兰人建立的文明开始，是在公元前2500年左右，他们创造了伊朗最早的文字，国家。埃兰人与后来的米底人，波斯人同出一源。波斯帝国则建立于公元前550年，是第一个横跨欧亚非空前庞大的帝国。今天伊朗人的绝大多数，就是古代波斯人的后裔。　

==================================

顺便提一下罗马文明，如果从公元前754年罗马建国开始（另一说公元前575年），是两千多年历史，而实际上，早在公元前1800年特拉马拉文化时期意大利已进入青铜时代；公元前1000年维兰诺瓦文化时期已进入铁器时代。今天意大利的绝大部份居民，仍然是建立罗马文明的古代拉丁人的后裔。

至于美洲的玛雅，印加诸文明，由于出现时间稍晚，这里就不赘述了。

==================================

所谓“创造某个古代文明的民族已经灭绝了”这种说法纯属误导。没有任何一个民族能够被彻底地灭绝。不管是在战乱中遗存下来的人民，还是后来迁居而来逐渐融合了的外来成份，他们都会自然地依照共同的地域意识和文化心态，重新恢复古代的文明版图。读者如果把今天的世界地图与早期文明的分布图对比一下，就会发现，各早期古代文明所在的大致范围与今天建立在这些地区的现代国家版图基本上是相吻合的。以色列人流浪千年之后仍然要顽强地回到故土上去，并恢复了希伯莱语言文字；伊朗人（波斯人）近代独立以后马上就将阿拉伯文字从自己的文化体系中清除出去，并全力恢复古代波斯的文化传统，这已经很能说明问题了。　

==================================

还有很多国人喜欢夸夸其谈的一种荒谬可笑的论调“唐朝时中国是世界的中心”。事实上，中国从来就不是什么“世界的中心”，唐朝时世界上有阿拉伯帝国，拜占庭帝国，查理曼帝国。那时候世界的中心在君士坦丁堡，在巴格达；汉朝时有罗马帝国，安息帝国（波斯的继承者），贵霜帝国。那时候世界的中心在罗马，在亚历山大里亚，在巴比伦尼亚。这一点看看世界历史地图就很明了，中国地区一直都是远离文明的中心，在欧亚大陆最偏僻的角落里。　

===================================

某些人津津乐道什么唐朝多么多么开放，有很多外国人来中国做官。只是自己少见多怪而已，其他文明地区的这种开放的程度普遍的很，各个种族的人来来往往经商做官是家常便饭的事，例如罗马帝国时期，甚至有好几个皇帝都是阿拉伯人，腓尼基人，日尔曼人等外族人，而且是依照正常程序继承的皇位，而非象蒙元满清时代那种异族征服得来的皇位。　

地中海周边地区和中东地区，才是在整个人类历史的绝大部份时间里一直是世界的中心，文明的源头

===================================

中东文明可以说是整个人类文明的源泉，楔形文字与埃及象形文字是后来的西方字母文字的最早源头，中国地区的文字实际上也起源于楔形文字。青铜冶炼术，冶铁术，制陶术，车轮，驯养牛马，都是从中东最早发源并传播到世界其他地区的（也包括中国），这是国际学术界普遍的看法。当然中国的“历史学家”对很多事实是一概否认的。这个问题，就我个人来说，我当然是相信国际学术界也绝不会相信中国的这些所谓“历史学家”的，读者们则可以根据自己对中国“历史学家”德性的了解自行作出判断。　

=================================

最近几年，中国的某些无赖似的“历史学家”“考古学家”，据说对国际上不予承认中国有商前文明感到很恼火，乾脆一不做二不休，声称要单方面宣布中国为“六千年文明历史”，有人甚至提出要更进一步修改为“一万年文明史”，据说还是什么“考古学会”的“会长”。我并不相信这些白痴“学者”真有这种滑天下之大稽的胆量和脸皮去实施这个搞笑计划，我倒是担心他们虚张声势一场最后又不了了之，让我们失去了一个看国际笑话的机会。　

==================================

其实对付这些“历史学家”这种流氓手段的最好办法就是以其人之道还治其人之身。西方人是太厚道了，要像韩国朝鲜人那样。比如说，我在朝鲜的官方宣传资料上就看到：朝鲜人说他们是“六千年历史的文明古国”，好嘛，比我们中国还多吹出了一千年，现在中国的“历史学家”“考古学家”不是要修改中国的历史为“六千年文明”嘛，那么朝鲜就会把自己又改称为“七千年历史的文明古国”，反正始终保持比中国领先一千年，反正只需要改动一个字的功夫而已，何乐而不为呢？日本人就更离谱了，乾脆把文物自己埋到地下又自己挖出来做“证据”证明自己的“历史”（跟中国的“考古学家”有得一拚）。　

==================================

顺便说一句，如果要像中国官方那样将新石器时代的原始部落文化遗迹混淆为“文明时代”的话，那么日本根据其最早的新石器时代文化遗迹──绳纹式文化，也可以把自己说成是“一万年文明历史”。

中国要想把自己打扮成是“最古老的文明国家”这可不容易啊，首先连日本韩国朝鲜这一关都过不了，大家都在比赛谁修改教科书的功夫更厉害。中国，日本，韩国，朝鲜，如果要比谁是最无耻的国家的话，倒是有得一比。　

中国的某些“历史学家”，他们“做学问”的态度，就像是妓女对待嫖客一样的态度，随时可以为了政治的需要改换自己的态度和立场，换一个主子就又炮制出一种新的“理论”出来。　

===================================

而现在我们需要更进一步来比较一下石器时代的情况：在欧洲发现的不管是从旧石器时代早期的舍利文化，阿舍利文化，克拉克当文化，还是中期的穆斯特文化，晚期的奥瑞拉文化，索鲁特文化，马格德林文化，以及中石器时代的阿齐尔文化，塔登鲁尔文化，阿斯度尼亚文化，马莱姆斯文化，一直到新石器时代诸多文化，在谱系上都非常完整，不象中国地区有一个很大的断层。时间上也早得多。

就连日尔曼这种相对来说在欧洲算较为野蛮的地区，公元前一千年左右就已经进入了铁器时代了（武器和工具普遍使用铁制），比中国地区早了近一千年；英国地区早在五千年前其最早的居民皮克特人也已经开始建筑石头城殿；西班牙和法国尼奥岩洞等地，考古发现了数万年前的绘画作品（是世界上最早的绘画和艺术品。奥瑞拉文化时期）以及最早发明弓箭的考古证据。

而中国，即使是公元前1500年才开始的商王朝，也还是青铜器时代，夯土建筑，其主要覆盖范围也只不过就是河南的一小部份地区（注意我说的是主要），而古中国其他广大地区，基本上都还处在野蛮原始的部落文化状态。这到底是谁“还在树上”呢？这不是很明显的事情吗？　　

===============================

其实当很多中国人得意洋洋地吹嘘“我们的祖先比你们西方人辉煌灿烂”的时候，用心思考的人会发现，这句话所包含的潜台词其实就是“我爸爸比你有钱”。且不说这只是颠倒的事实，就这句话的潜意识来说，这样吹嘘本来是件可耻的事情，而不是什么光彩的事情。我们在日常生活中，如果有人用“我爸爸比你有钱”来炫耀自己，毫无疑问地都会遭到那怕是最势利最无廉耻的人的鄙视。可偏偏有一些中国人不以为耻，反倒以此为荣。也真是一大奇观阿。

讲经济，中国老百姓在封建帝王，贪官污吏，地主豪强等多重压迫下一直都是最穷困的，所谓“唐朝时一个马车夫都比欧洲贵族富有”之类的蠢话恐怕也只有白痴才说得出来；讲历史，中国不要说跟中东，埃及，欧洲，印度这些文明悠久的国家和地区相比，就连跟自己的邻居日本和朝鲜韩国等比，都没有多少可骄傲的资本.

讲科学，我们对科学毫无贡献，唯一能够拿来吹嘘一下的就只有个子虚乌有的“四大发明”，还是李约瑟这个洋人帮着编造的（连编谎都得靠着外国人来编！李约瑟炮制的《中国科学技术史》里面那些胡编乱造的“中国古代科学发现”连稍有良知的中国人自己都不好意思拿到正式场合来炫耀，这里也就不多说了，具体可参考《从头审视所谓四大发明等说法的种种谬误》等文章。）

人种无优劣，但文明有高下。一种没有严密的逻辑论证和逻辑思维贯穿的文明，怎么可能产生现代意义上的科学、政治和工业文明？“有夏服（受）天命”、武王“受命于天”、“天子”以及儒家的一些胡话、鬼话被董仲舒（公元前179~104）推向了“天人感应”、“三纲五常”的极端。“绝学无忧”、“人生识字忧患始”被毛泽东发展为“知识越多越反动”，仇智、反智表现为大规模迫害知识分子的“反右”，劣等文明结出的恶果全面开花。

“凡是敌人反对的，我们都要拥护；凡是敌人拥护的，我们都要反对”，这种毫无逻辑、丧心病狂的观点一度被奉为金科玉律。敌人不做屎壳郎，你就去吃大便？敌人怕报应，你就甘当魔鬼？敌人搞市场经济，你就计划到底？ “与人斗，其乐无穷”，够不够变态？“发展才是硬道理”，硬在哪里？环境污染、血汗工厂让人们认识到科学发展。 Arilang ^talk 14:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, some more Minyun Bullshit. Thier talk makes the communists (under Deng) look good. They suffer from the reverse of the radical nationalists (fenqing); whatever the west does, is good. The claims they make in this article are completely absurd and completely refuted by even a shred of scholarship, even by western scholars. This article does not cite a single academic source to prove any of these claims. Arilang, please read some actual history and scholarship (both west and east) on this issue before commenting. Also see List of Chinese inventions.Teeninvestor (talk) 14:37, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Mercantilism

Arilang, please search this up. If you thought Song or Ming was too bad or socialist, please see this article about European pre liberal policies Mercantilism. 800 state monopolies, anyone?Teeninvestor (talk) 14:48, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

Translation and citation

Hi . I just came across the article on 'Revive China Society' . The article is very short and apparently there is no known source for the faith oath . That is really to bad ! There must be a source somewhere . I saw your translation on your userpage . Here is another version (from mdbg.net translate) : Expel the Dalu, reinstate Zhonghua, build a common government . Sechinsic (talk) 12:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

User:Sechinsic, the oath is well known in China, "Expel the Dalu, reinstate Zhonghua", where Dalu=Northern barbarians, nearly every Chinese(older, not the young one) knows this oath. Arilang ^talk 13:06, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I did not realise that . Still, it would be nice to have some sort of reference . By parallel : In The Cambridge History of Scandinavia there is the mention of King Erik Menved . In Denmark we all know he was a bad king, and that no one liked him.. but if you read the history book there is not much to go on . As kings come, his story is quite tragic, and the history does not mention any atrocities, only a couple of small wars, which is almost below average count . Sechinsic (talk) 15:27, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I Need this typed up in Traditional chinese

I have no software or program to type hanzi, so i need the characters in the image at this link [2] typed up so i can put it into this article The Hundred-word Eulogy. I know its from a blog, but i already have reliable sources proving that it exists.Дунгане (talk) 02:48, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

至聖百字讃

乾坤?始

天?注名

傳教大聖

降生西域

授受天經

三十部册

普化衆生

億兆君師

萬聖領袖

协助天運

保庇國民

五時祈祐

默祝太平

存心真主

加志窮民

拯救患難

洞徶幽冥

超拔靈魂

脱?罪?

仁覆天下

道冠古今

降邪歸一

教名清真

穆罕默德

至聖貴人

............

清真北寺

...................

This is the best I can do. The (?) means I am not sure what the real word is. Arilang ^talk 06:19, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Some of the English translation is plain wrong, though 99% is correct. I would to know who did the translation. Arilang ^talk 00:56, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Islam during the Yuan Dynasty

I created a new section on Mongol oppresion of muslims. I came up with several source, but i would like chinese language ones too. Since you have many source on Qing dynasty abuses i hope you study the yuan dynasty as well. Yuan Mongol Oppression of Muslims Дунгане (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I am rather busy in some Chinese forum, but I see what I can come up with. Yuan was fairly short when compared to Qing Dynasty, though equally brutal, but not as systematic as Qing was.

Arilang ^talk 00:49, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Chinese revolutionaries

Can you start articles on on these 3 guys Fang Shengdong方声洞 Yu Peilun喻培伦 Lin Juemin林觉民.

They already have articles on zh.wikipedia

I have photos and english sources to expand articles on them, i just need a stub articles for them on which to start editing. They were revolutionaries who fought against the Qing dynastyДунгане (talk) 03:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

As you can see on User:Дунгане/article i have stacked up google book and other sources on these guys at the bottom.Дунгане (talk) 03:18, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I am quite busy on Google Buzz right now, and my Buzz user name is Tangsan Daisong, if you have a Gmail account, you can post on Buzz, it is quite good here. The next article on planning is Debate between Cantonese and Mandarin. Arilang ^talk 03:57, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Your sandboxes

I was just looking through your various sandboxes on your main userpage, and noticed User:Arilang1234/Sandbox/Shang Shan Xia Xiang - I believe that this might be related to The Rusticated Youth of China and Down to the Countryside Movement, just to let you know. Regards, -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 11:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC) Thanks benlisquare, I think u are right, however, I am now writing an article on the most recent protests taken up by students in Guangzhou, and if you have time, maybe adding some contents?

Protests against suppression of Cantonese speaking tradition Arilang ^talk 11:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Protests against suppression of Cantonese speaking tradition

I have nominated Protests against suppression of Cantonese speaking tradition, 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/Protests against suppression of Cantonese speaking tradition. 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. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 11:18, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Not clear

It is not clear why you put a photo of another in the article on Vyshinsky. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.139.111.170 (talk) 11:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

pro japanese editor is deleting source info form Second Sino-Japanese War

i would like your input on the talk page of that article. Дунгане (talk) 23:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppet on Second Sino Japanese War

The sockpuppetry on this article is so obvious that its not even funnyДунгане (talk) 02:20, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

• This message or a similar one left on several editors' talk pages (see forex User talk:Nlu); Дунгане advised to collect hard evidence and take it to WP:SPI if the problem continues • Ling.Nut 03:41, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

PRC article/LXB

Actually, China 'made' this Nobel laureate, as it can be argued they turned him into a martyr by jailing him for such a petty crime. He wasn't a laureate when they put the man behind bars. Also, as can be seen from last year's prize, the whole NPP setup is pretty political, so shouldn't be taken all that seriously. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 07:43, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Ohconfucius for your comment.

(1) I understand your comment, and I also know that LXB is not what it seems on the surface, and I do believe in this conspiracy theory, and I do think LXB is a very cunning kind of guy.

(2) But still, it is quite good to put PRC under international spotlight for a change, don't you think ? Arilang ^talk 02:43, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

• Yes, Chinese democracy now has an icon. Unfortunately, Wen Jiabao speeches about political reform in China are just for show. All his speeches have to be pre-approved by the State Council, so you know that he is actually singing to the gallery. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:44, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Chinese Spirit possession

Thanks for contributing new article Chinese Spirit possession. However, one of Wikipedia's core policies is that material must be verifiable, by being clearly attributed to reliable sources. Please help by adding more sources to the article you created, and/or by clarifying how the sources already given support the material (see here for how to do inline referencing). Many thanks! PS If you need any help, you can look at Help:Contents/Editing Wikipedia or ask at Wikipedia:New contributors' help page, or just ask me. ErikHaugen (talk) 17:25, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Done, now the article Chinese Spirit possession has more information added with sources.Дунгане (talk) 19:35, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you sir. ErikHaugen (talk) 21:10, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Chen Xiaonan

The article Chen Xiaonan has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Epbr123 (talk) 09:19, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Boxer Rebellion, "undefined"

Some of your recent edits to Boxer Rebellion include many insertions of the word "undefined". I don't know what is causing this, but please be more careful. (Hohum ^@) 13:58, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Hohum, I think someone might have inserted some kind of malicious bug into my PC, otherwise I just cannot think of any other reasons. Arilang ^talk 22:37, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Until you fix it, I would suggest hitting "preview" and checking your edits before saving them. I also suggest using Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware to clean your system up, as well as an anti virus program such as AVG or Microsoft Security Essentials, assuming you are using Windows. (Hohum ^@) 23:30, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again Hohum, I see what I can do. Arilang ^talk 02:14, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

User Hohum, I have installed a fresh Window XP, and hope that nothing goes wrong again. If anything annoying happens again, please let me know. Thanks. Arilang ^talk 01:56, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Boxers?

Thanks for the heads up, Arilang. I've been a little under the weather and haven't had the energy to take on the Boxers. The whole article has become too long and wooly. My main change would be to tighten the lead section, making clear that this was not a "rebellion." The Allies chose to call it a "rebellion" in order let the Court off the hook because they didn't want the government to dissolve. The forged "Diary of Ching Shan" backed up this fabrication. But you know all this! Anyway, I will try to pull myself together and weigh in on the other questions. ch (talk)

Thank you very much for your support, CWH, Boxer Rebellion badly needs editor of your caliber, otherwise it will remain at this current miserable state, and within the foreseeable future, BR will remain a hard nut to crack.

Problems that editors will be facing:

• (1) "Rebellion" might be the wrong terminology, a more thorny issue is: Were Boxers Bandits, or Anti-Imperialist patriots? Or a bit of both?
• (2) Is it necessary to have that many images ?
• (3) Sensational language not suitable for encyclopedia, there are simply too many of those. Like "Western, white missionaries and Chinese christians used their imperialist powers to steal the lands and property of the Chinese peasants to give to the church, and made perverse demands, which the Chinese could not resist." and "China had an immediate danger of being divided by imperialists, in 1900. " , statements like these sounds like something coming out of Chinese Central Television.
• (4) Some section seems to be doing a bad public relation job for the "Muslim Kansu Braves", whoever they were.

Whatever, BR remains a very challenging job for editors. Arilang ^talk 01:34, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Chen Xiaonan

The article Chen Xiaonan has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Gigs (talk) 16:00, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Ming dynasty genocide of miao people

the Ming dynasty commited mass genocide on the Miao, Yao, and Bo people, who were native to southern China, during the Miao Rebellions (Ming Dynasty). They castrated thousands of Miao boys and killed thousands more. However, I don't see Miao people coming onto wikipedia, and calling us barbarian, tribal rulers.Дунгане (talk) 22:19, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, your are free to create new articles, as long as they survive AfD. I did read somewhere that 朱元章 and his wife were in fact Hui people, one of the arguments was: during Ming Dynasty, Muslim was all powerful and popular. May be you can check it up, and create some relevant articles? One friendly advice to you, please tidy up your English, there are a lot of errors, like spelling, grammar, and so forth. Arilang ^talk 22:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

New ANI thread open

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --Nlu (talk) 23:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd just say this: as I explained, I have insufficient energy to look into the entire situation right now, but I would urge that the use of such terms as "barbarians" be limited and qualified, due to Wikipedia's requirements of civility and neutrality. That's a personal view; hopefully, other editors will step in and discuss what they think on that issue. --Nlu (talk) 23:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Comparison between written English and written Chinese for deletion

A discussion has begun about whether the article Comparison between written English and written Chinese, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison between written English and written Chinese until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:46, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mao's Great Famine: The History of China's Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-62

Hello! Your submission of Mao's Great Famine: The History of China's Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-62 at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Wasted Time R (talk) 14:50, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Please see your nomination's entry again. You really need to be doing more work on this article if you wish to see it on the main page. Wasted Time R (talk) 14:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mao's Great Famine: The History of China's Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958-62

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Content from the Telegraph on PRC article

I've reverted it as it looks to be undue weight. Can you discuss on talk first please? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Ching Imperial Household Department

The article The Ching Imperial Household Department has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable book

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. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 05:43, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

propaganda strategy

Based on the Google translation of the sources, it did not seem like a hoax to me, so I declined the speedy; I do have some doubts about whether this is distinct enough for a separate article, and, if so, what the name should be . Good luck with it. DGG ( talk ) 06:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Grand External Propaganda Strategy may not be the precise name, but it is near enough, until someone come up with a better translation. I think it is a very important topic, look at it this way, the budget of 450 billion RMB is still a lot of money, even though it is not US Dollars. Arilang ^talk 06:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

I still do not see a WP:RS about these billions. Please try not to engage in discussions that are irrelevant to the subject of the article, like here. The article was about a book, hence discuss improvement of the article about the book and nothing else, otherwise you may be sanctioned for something like alleged personal attacks, alleged BLP violations or something else.Biophys (talk) 22:58, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

I strongly recommend you to stop commenting at ANI right now. You apologized and promised to behave well. There is nothing else to do. Look at my first block [3]. You do not want the same. Right? Biophys (talk) 04:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Biophys for your concern. But the "Barbarian" accusation is a false accusation, just read the Hua-Yi distinction created by me. I have never, ever, called a modern person "barbarian", I called Manchu people "barbarian", was all within the historical context. I am not in the wrong. Arilang ^talk 04:27, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I see it and agree with your argument: barbarians is a notable historical concept. You did well by not commenting in the beginning of ANI discussion. Just remember that when you make a comment next time, you might be considered as someone contributing to disruption, which needs to be stopped by issuing you a block. This is all. Biophys (talk) 04:58, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

You are getting closer to the block ("Believe me, top leaders in modern Beijing"). This is reference work. You do not have a political mission here.Biophys (talk) 15:51, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, I am just speaking the truth. Put it this way, this "Hua-Yi" concept has been there for the last 4000 years, and Modern China is only 100 years old,and this 4000 years old concept does not go away that easy. It might be political sensitive, but once you understand Hua-Yi distinction and it's manifestation, you will understand more about East Asia politic, especially the current North Korea/South Korea tension, and the current US naval force being displayed right now. Arilang ^talk 20:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Moreover, a combination of Tianxia and Hua-Yi distinction concept can be used to explain Second Sino-Japanese War and First Sino-Japanese War, when Japanese were trying to take over Tianxia. Arilang ^talk 20:53, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I can see that you are a knowledgeable contributor. But you should not discuss content issues with wikipedia administrators, especially on ANI. They do not rule on the content. It might be a good idea if you read this unless you read it already. Best regards, Biophys (talk) 00:12, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Looking at the harsh comment by NicholasTurnbull on ANI, I think a block will be issued soon, and he is right in doing so. Whatever happens, thanks a lot for your comments here. Arilang ^talk 00:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

This is very simple. The less you argue anywhere (and especially at ANI), the better for you. If you do not argue at all (for example by leaving articles to others and avoiding interactions with unfriendly people), you are invincible. Focus on content. Let others argue like that, and you will be safe.Biophys (talk) 04:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi Arilang, I'd second Biophys's suggestion. Although we've only briefly come into contact through our mutual work on Boxer Rebellion (which I have been neglecting as I've been on break). By all means keep up to date on what is occuring on ANI but it would be wise to refrain from adding anything to it which might inflame the discussion. As an aside, I am also able to read traditional and simplified chinese (being of chinese descent), probably not to the same degree as you can as I was educated in Australia and studied chinese rather than vice versa. I'd be happy to help in doing any translation work that you might have trouble with. --160.44.248.164 (talk) 11:50, 20 January 2011 (UTC) _{That comment was made by me, I forgot to sign in. Blackmane (talk) 11:54, 20 January 2011 (UTC)}

ANI Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.--PCPP (talk) 10:20, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Incident

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. This incident is different (but related) to the previous one that you were involved in.--hkr (talk) 10:59, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Some of the examples at ANI look as copyright violations to me. I have no idea if there are many more. Arilang, it would be great if you look at all such potential cases, not only those indicated by hkr, and fixed them right away. Of course if you think that everything was fine, and there is nothing to fix, this is entirely up to you. Best regards, Biophys (talk) 23:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Sincere thanks to your support Biophys, I will look into the copyvio issues and try to fix them as soon as possible. Arilang ^talk 23:21, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

I am really surprised that creation of articles about books was interpreted as WP:DE. If some sources are bad, let's find better sources. If there are NPOV problems, let's fix them too. If the subject does not fit notability criteria, let's AfD (but these books are notable). What a big deal? However copyright issues indeed must be fixed. Biophys (talk) 04:45, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your support again Biophys. As you can see, I have begun to clean up the mess quite a bit, slowly, the copyvio problems can be fixed. Yes, I do agree with you, how can the creating of articles about notable books be considered as "disrupting progress toward the fundamental project of building an encyclopedia" Wikipedia:Disruptive editing ? Arilang ^talk 04:57, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

The books are notable, but WP:N is not the problem. The problem is the content in the Wikipedia article (at least, the earliest version before the ANI), where you were clearly POV pushing, after being sternly warned not to do so. Compare what you wrote in this section with the actual article it's supposedly attributed to. The former is a negative assessment, the latter is a positive one, and yet both allegedly represent the opinions of the same person. This is a ridiculously egregious and disruptive way of misrepresenting the sources to promote your point of view. There are ways of being critical without violating WP:NPOV. This is not how you do it.--hkr (talk) 15:52, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Back to the subject. One easy way to fix copyright problems in many cases is to simply place the text in "..." and provide the reference to the original if you did not have one. This is it. Problem fixed (assuming that you quoted a short fragment of text).Biophys (talk) 00:51, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again Biophys for your timely suggestion. Arilang ^talk 02:18, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Also be sure to check your image uploads. Image search isn't considered an actual source. Some of the images may not be free.--hkr (talk) 18:45, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

There are two recent comments in this ANI thread you should look at. Keep in mind that massive copyright violations may result in indefinite block. I do not know if there are many of them. You should know better. Regards, Biophys (talk) 15:56, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your support again, I have indicated my willingness to remove any copyvios edit, I hope there shall not be a indefinite block. Arilang ^talk 21:18, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Then you should actually do it (especially if there is a lot of work to be done), without waiting for anyone's approval. If you can't fix it quickly, you might tag articles that require cleanup (see WP:fixit).Biophys (talk) 23:40, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion. Arilang ^talk 00:52, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Yonglong Hotel on fire2.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Yonglong Hotel on fire2.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hungry Ghost.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hungry Ghost.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:50, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Copyvio investigation

Hello, Arilang1234. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Contributor copyright investigations concerning your contributions in relation to Wikipedia's copyrights policy. The listing can be found here. For some suggestions on responding, please see Responding to a CCI case. Thank you. --hkr (talk) 15:59, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that the CCI is now opened, although an image list has not yet been generated. It can be found at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Arilang1234. Please watchlist it if you are interested in tracking its progress. Individual notices of problems located are unlikely to be supplied, in courtesy to you. If you have questions about how CCIs are handled, you are very welcome to stop by my talk page. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 17:46, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Moonriddengirl for the notice, just to let you know, I have begun working on the problem:

User:Arilang1234/Articles with copyright issues, and I will see to it that all the copyvios edit done by me shall be removed. Arilang ^talk 23:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Zhou Enlai the last perfect revolutionary.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Zhou Enlai the last perfect revolutionary.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude2 (talk) 21:00, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Moment in Peking.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Moment in Peking.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:34, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

wp:synthesis

from primary source materials users may not draw their own conclusions, and the communist party declaration is a primary source. see WP:PRIMARY and WP:SYNTHESIS. users on wikipedia are not allowed to interpret primary source information and put their interpretation into an article, only straightforward, descriptive statements about the primary source it self is allowed.Дунгане (talk) 01:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Quotation Дунгане::from Arilang1234 either cannot read what he himself added to the wikisource article, since he created it, or is just flat out not telling the truth. I don't accuse people of lying lightly, but it appears in this case that Arilang1234 deliberately misrepresented sources.Дунгане (talk) 20:58, 19 January 2011 (UTC)"

I do know primary source. WP:PRIMARY and WP:SYNTHESIS, but in the above quotation, you are short of calling me a lier, which isWP:No personal attacks, do you care to comment on it? Arilang ^talk 02:04, 21 January 2011 (UTC)