User talk:PalaceGuard008
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. |
 Archives |
Welcome to my talk page. Please leave a message by pressing the "+" button above.
I will generally respond on your talk page, unless:
- you ask me to respond elsewhere (e.g. article talk pages), or
- you are an anon user, in which case I will respond here.
As indicated by the template above, I will be away from Wikipedia periodically for days at a time.
Contents |
[edit] Talk:2008 Tibetan unrest
Hi. Why did you remove my comment? I wanted people to check the webcam because there appeared to be a demonstration at the time. The information might be useful to the article. Thanks. ~AH1(TCU) 17:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Could you come to the 2008 Tibetan unrest article and comment on a statement by User:Rédacteur Tibet. The source cited by Rédacteur Tibet on the statement is in the French-language. It is talking about how in an interview with Canadian journalists, according to the Dalai Lama, over 400 people were killed in the Tibetan unrest. However, I couldn't find any English-language sources to correlate with this statistics, including the Tibetan exile government's.--Sevilledade (talk) 20:55, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Please come to the 2008 Tibetan unrest talk page to comment on a dispute User:Yunfeng and I are having. Yunfeng insisting on placing links such as Chinese nationalism and Han chauvinism onto this article to empthasize that it is related to the Tibetan unrest. I haven’t seen any references cited in this article that covered these issues. Please come to the talk page and comment on the dispute. Thanks!--Sevilledade (talk) 23:25, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Protest image
I NPOV-ed the protest image again. Equally, there is no credible assertion of protester's sympathies. However, there is evidence to raise doubt about them.
See well documented and discussed photographic evidence of the related activists mingling and standing with Chinese demonstrators.
Personally, on the basis of that alone, the propagandic value and dubious license, I would pull the image straightaway but I suspect that would cause too much contention and so a neutral toning down is a fair compromise. Obviously there is a fairly well invested propaganda war happening on both side of the dispute. I think we should avoid taking sides if or until the facts come to light. --Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 10:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for your well reasoned and balanced response. Just out of interest, have you attended any of these rallies? --Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 13:41, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- I promise you, I am no Yellow Hat supporter, am under no illusion about the state of Tibet pre-WWII and abhor any form of rabid nationalism but I have to admit I am becoming fascinated by the brouhaha being brewed up around what is becoming an increasingly ridiculous torch ritual. And, for sure, olympic are political.
-
- So where do we read that this individual was "a self-professed Tibetan protester"? Presumably police charges were made. Have they been publicly reported yet? What was his name? I'd love to know.
-
- Personally, I do not think that any of the protestors have attacked the torch bearers. The target has been the torch itself. If they had wanted to whack the bearer, that would have been much more easily achieved. This is another perfect example of where the title was being hyped up to promote one side of the polemic.
-
- What makes it interesting is both that the Chinese photographer had such good access AND that the demonstrators were so clear photographed along side other Chinese supporters. I mean, the real life odds of that happening by accident are so miniscule that they reasonably raise suspicion. As the stories of the Chinese embassies funding the attendance of local student associations and encouraging Chambers of Commerce continue to come out, I'd want to see more definitive evidence before I accepted either POV. --Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 03:03, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- BTW, did you see the other photographs of the individual marching with Chinese protestors? They are scattered over the blogosphere and usual sources but I dare say I can find some links for you. --Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 03:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- To be honest, I am not getting involved in this one because it is not important enough but the photos I mentioned are also here (it happened to be the first copy I found on a google search this morning);
-
-
-
-
-
- I am not presenting this as the original source, nor a reliable source, nor getting involved in any pedantic wiki lawyering BUT the fact they exist creates sufficient doubt to require ANY assertion made to be backed up. If democratic protests have offended some Chinese people, I guess we can call that quits for the Tibetans being offended by having monks made to rape nuns, homes and monasteries razed to the ground, land being stolen and being made victims in their own land ... We really have to keep these topics away from all the kneejerking simplifications and not accept any propagandic material on face value. The truth is, "China" is not going to win in that area and no amount of government sponsored flag waving is going to hide the facts.
-
-
-
-
-
- Speaking personally, it looks more like a Han thing than a "Chinese" as a whole with the Uighurs, Mongolians and Taiwanese empathizing with the Tibetans and the Lais, Buyei etc keeping out of it thankful it is not them this time ... in fact, it appears to be more of a CPC thing with ordinary folk afraid to speak independently about the matters for fear of imprisonment or their families back home have to go into hiding.
-
-
-
-
-
- Re "mugging", you are not talking logical or precise sense and it is not good enough for the wiki. A theft is a separate crime from a physical assault. Somewhere in between you have aggravated robbery etc. It is all very specific. It is remarkable that none of the attackers actually went to harm the torch bearers. To have done so would have been a lot easier, and more successful, than grabbing the torch. A symbolic and politically motivated gesture without intent to harm.
-
-
-
-
-
- To be honest, is someone's headgear significant enough to denote their political stance or MO? ... No way, Jose! You need more than that too. In an exaggerated situation like this; a name, a police statement or some other identifying reference. You are jumping to a big and far too obvious conclusion too.
-
-
-
-
-
- Anyway, give it a few days and it will all be yesterdays news but the principles stand and are worth discussing. --03:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Oh, in case you ask, the actual "reliable sources" I have are for Tibetan nuns being raped with electric cattle prods ..., (monks being held, and tortured for 30 years for the crime of sticking up a poster). As these women are in effect, by that government's argument, Chinese, do the Chinese people not feel equally offended by that? --Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 03:23, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
[edit] Re: Bai Yang
First, we are discussing at Talk:Bo Yang and Talk:Li Na (daughter of Mao Zedong). Please continue to discuss there, not my talk page. Second, I have provided source from National Library of China to prove that Bai Yang is an alternative spelling. Please see Talk:Bo Yang. Thanks. --Neo-Jay (talk) 07:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Good edit
Hi.
Good edit, here [1]. I respect it when someone takes on board a difficult issue and incorporates in in their editing. Credit due where credit due, and criticism likewise. Personally, the exchange between the Han, Manchu and Mongol in the creation of modern China interest me a lot.
All the same, I am concerned about human rights. If it is true that TIbet is part of China, then those monks and nuns were still Chinese and any state persecution to that extent is a step too far and is of international concern.
My backyard is your backyard.
Best wishes --Lucyintheskywithdada (talk) 17:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] AfD nomination of Big Six law firms
I have nominated Big Six law firms, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big Six law firms. 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. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Damiens.rf 20:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Cantonese
You are absolutely right, and I apologize. I didn't really think about the fact that GZ and HK speak the same dialect. Yunfeng (talk) 21:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Karl Dönitz
Hello. I'd like to talk to you about this edit you did to the Karl Dönitz article. I disagree with your contention that his attendance was irrelevant to the paragraph and that it included weasel words, but I'd rather discuss with you rather than simply reverting. First, the note is entirely relevant to identifying whether he knew about Nazi plans to undertake a Final solution. That is worthwhile on its own merits, I think, and balances his assertions later in our paragraph that he "knew nothing" about the situation. Second, I can't identify any weasel words in the excised text; claims are cited, people are identified, etc. You can reply here or on either my talk page or the article talk page. Matt Deres (talk) 10:50, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Carrying a Torch for China
Forgot you existed. How's London? I'm going to Taiwan for six months soon, got any recommendations? Here's an article you'll appreciate, I think: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/014/986himak.asp . Shalom.--Asdfg12345 04:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Society of the Song Dynasty
Thanks! I put a lot of work into that article, but it was really an entire year in the making. Since I've also bumped the articles for Tang Dynasty and Ming Dynasty up to featured status, I kind of wish I had the time to make six different Tang and six different Ming articles, but my real life responsibilities won't let me! Lol. Oh well, I'll leave that up to someone else. As for now, Han Dynasty needs major improvement. I've edited it in the past and added pretty much every inline citation that exists in that article, but it still needs major attention. Anyways, thanks for the compliment.--Pericles of AthensTalk 10:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Requested move of ume
You previously participated in a move request of ume. I have revived the request so please visit Talk:Ume#Requested move if you care to contribute. — AjaxSmack 16:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
