User talk:Yuje/archiveA

Here are some tips to help you get started:

Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

If you've noticed my recent edits to those pages, and the edits I made to the user's talk page, I have not only apologized for my past actions, but have also done factchecking and integrated the relevant bits into the relevant articles. --Golbez 15:28, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

Written Chinese[edit]

It's so great that you're writing the article. In the history section of your draft version you said Vernacular Chinese was created based on Standard Mandarin. But as far as I know this is quite the opposite. Kuo-yü, and later Putonghua, was created based on Beijing dialect, and standardised according to then contemporary Vernacular Chinese. Am I wrong about it? And by the way 俾 should be 畀. — Insta ntnood 07:09, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

You probably know more than me on this subject. I'm not a native Mandarin speaker, and when learning Mandarin, I noticed that the grammar and vocabulary was the same as the written form, so I always thought that the written form was based on Mandarin. I have a Hong Kong linguistics journal article that talks about the history of written Cantonese, but it didn't go into too much detail about standard written Chinese. --Yuje 10:48, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Let's put it in this way. Standard Written Chinese, or Vernacular Chinese, was created according to dialects of the Mandarin group. Kuo-yü (or later Putonghua) was a creation with syntax, grammar, sentence structure, etc. based on the then standardised Vernacular Chinese (and pronunciation based on Beijing dialect). — Insta ntnood 08:06, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)

I fixed this issue during my latest edits to the article. There's still quite a bit I want to do to it still. --Umofomia 21:18, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Requested move on WP:RM: I have added the Talk:Cantonese (linguistics) talk page to your request so there is somewhere to discuss the move. --Philip Baird Shearer 08:21, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Teochew[edit]

Hello, Yuje, it is a great pleasure in putting on some efforts to work on this article, and I would greatly appreciate if we can work hand in hand to work on it together. I'm Mr Tan, and it happens that I'm a Teochew speaker, although the anatyical tones seem to be a bit complicated, so I would be hapy if you were to offer some help in working on this article. By the way, are you a Teochew? Mr Tan 15:30, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cantonese romanisation[edit]

I just look up on the relevent articles on romanisation on Wikipedia, while sometimes I use Wiktionary. :-) I am not sure if those I added are entirely correct, tho there shouldn't be big mistakes. — Insta ntnood 16:13, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)

Taiwan Affairs Office and an ArbCom case[edit]

User:SchmuckyTheCat listed my edit to the article on Taiwan Affairs Office as an evidence to the ArbCom case that I'm involved, citing it as an example of my POV edit, and marking edit as minor without edit summary. In fact I did not change the meaning of the content of the article. I noticed that after User:Alassius reverted my edit, User:Jiang and you restored my edit ([1] [2]), similarly without edit summary and marked as minor. What would you suggest, in your opinion, we should do about what Schmucky has done? Thanks in advance. — Insta ntnood July 3, 2005 16:05 (UTC)

Han Chinese infobox[edit]

Just a little bit of comment to your draft of the infobox. As far as I know there is no separate statistics for different Chinese ethnic groups in Hong Kong and Macao. The figures refer to Chinese as a whole. :-) — Insta ntnood 20:14, July 9, 2005 (UTC)

There's no separate figures for different Chinese ethnic groups (but rather, there are figures for speakers of different spoken variants). Perhaps the ROC would have separate figures for Han and other ethnic groups, but the classification is not quite the same as the one of the PRC. — Insta ntnood 10:39, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

Hi I've founded something interesting at Christmas Island#People and have added Christmas Island to the Han Chinese infobox. Hope you won't mind. :-P — Insta ntnood 21:33, September 2, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome~ :-D Btw, Would you consider Singapore having a majority Han population too? — Insta ntnood 19:16, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

Don't know. As far as I remember the figure is always a >50% majority. :-) — Insta ntnood 17:51, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Re: Are HKers/Macau people overseas Chinese?[edit]

I'm not sure.. what I only know is people from Hong Kong and Macao were eligible for overseas Chinese status of the ROC before 1997/1999. — Insta ntnood 12:41, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

By the way.. it is true that the New Territories is leased. But at that time the 99-year period was largely seen as symbolic and implied perpetuity. Nobody would really have taken it seriously until the late 1970s. :-) — Insta ntnood 17:26, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Meaning of 屋企[edit]

Actually it can also mean "family". [3] :-D — Insta ntnood 19:53, July 11, 2005 (UTC)

Ögedei Khan's photo[edit]

Please see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Ogadai.jpg, as I found simplified Chinese character on the picture. Can you make sure if this picture is really in Public Domain or not? -- 218.188.0.150 09:31, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chinese American writers[edit]

I noticed you have created category:Chinese American writers. This category was actually voted to deletion not long ago. :-| See also a similar recent nomination. — Insta ntnood 08:40, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Actually is there any procedure to revive a category which is voted to deletion? — Insta ntnood 11:39, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Agree.. Meanwhile don't forget to express your opinion at the nomination on African American categories. — Insta ntnood 20:41, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Ogadai.jpg[edit]

Image deletion warning

Image:Ogadai.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion.

This was originally listed on VfD, but there were no votes, and IfD is the correct process so I am moving the request there. -Splash 17:11, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Chinese terms, Mandarin terms, Cantonese terms[edit]

Sigh... see what's happening.. [4] :-\ — Insta ntnood 10:16, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Well frankly I'm pessimistic with such a possibility to work with her/him. If you take a look at our edit history you'd realise that she/he comes up with me with nearly every single of my edit. :-( — Insta ntnood 14:42, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Agree. But guess what.. Category:Korean terms is nominated to CFR. I wonder why she/he didn't start doing this with category:Japanese terms. — Insta ntnood 14:55, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

I cannot understand too, unless she/he's really trying to disrupt Wikipedia to make her/his point. Perhaps you can talk to him over this matter too.. You may also want to have a look at my conversation with him at user talk:Huaiwei#Category:Cantonese terms. — Insta ntnood 15:51, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Please join CFR discussion if possible.. :-) — Insta ntnood 10:18, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

I guess it's time to explore how they can be rearranged. :-) — Insta ntnood 20:06, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Chinese dialects in HK[edit]

Hello, I've noticed that u contributed much about Chinese dialects; and i am now working on languages of Hong Kong, could u use ur expert knowledge to help? especially about the Chinese dialects spoken in HK. Thanks. --K.C. Tang 10:04, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks in advance :P --K.C. Tang 22:12, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Cantonese[edit]

Guess you'd be interested in the ongoing debate at talk:standard Cantonese. :-) — Insta ntnood 12:23, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

re: content removal at Kaifeng Jews[edit]

Thanks for taking that stuff out. It sounded rather dubious to me as well. As for where it came from, this diff should be helpful... I copyedited most of it, and tried to remove some of the most obvious POV original research, but didn't know how much of it was crap and how much of it was just obscure fact. So, thanks again for your help w/ the article. :-) Tomer ^TALK 17:17, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Ice kachang / red bean fleecy[edit]

That's what I'm thinking in mind. Are they essentially the same thing other than the container, say, having the same or similar ingredients (except the ice cream on top), preparation method, density (say, liquid or paste-like), serve chill or hot, etc.? :-D — Insta ntnood 15:50, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

Then they're probably not the same thing.. :-) Thanks. — Insta ntnood 14:45, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Review[edit]

Hello Yuje perhaps you would be interested to take a look at my proposal to rewrite the mainland China article, at my sandbox, which was written based on user:Alassius' proposal and the discussion at talk:mainland China. Thanks. :-) — Insta ntnood 18:51, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

At your convenience. :-D — Insta ntnood 20:29, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks so much. Will change accordingly some time. :-D — Insta ntnood 16:54, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Sun Yat-sen[edit]

Can you take a look at the FAC nomination for Sun Yat-sen? I raised a bunch of objections and the nominators don't seem able to deal with them and are soliciting other opinions regarding their importance. --Ji ang 10:04, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Char siew rice and char siu[edit]

By the way Huaiwei has got a question for you at talk:dim sum. :-) — Insta ntnood 17:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese and Mandarin[edit]

Can you please take a look at talk:list of official languages by country (#Vernacular Chinese? and #Official Written Languages)? Thanks. — Insta ntnood 07:01, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. Your help is desperately needed at talk:list of official languages by country. User:Huaiwei and I are having some trouble to communicate. While the subject matter of the discussion is to determine if Chinese (as a written language shared by several Chinese spoken languages) and Standard Mandarin (Putonghua for the PRC, Kuo-yü for the ROC) shall both be listed, he kept talking about scripts, from simplified and traditional, all the way to Roman letters, Kanji and Jawi. Please help us, and voice your opinion. Thanks. — Insta ntnood 19:23, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kung hei fat choi[edit]

Hello Yuje. You may be interested to take a look at a move request discussion on this phrase. Thanks. — Insta ntnood 18:19, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Three-revert rule[edit]

You have been blocked for 12 hours for a violation of the three revert rule on National dish (see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Yuje). Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. Izehar 17:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't really make any reverts. I'd note that few of my edits were actual reverts. Other users like Instantnood and Huaiwei made changes or additions to the page, and I incorporated them into my edits because I considered some of those edits made in good faith. --Yuje 03:39, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, never mind, I read the notice board. But to respond to Huaiwei if he feels that he wasn't treated fairly, I didn't make any straight out reverts. In addition, this is the third or fourth time he's been in violation of the 3RR rule, and even on his previous violation of the 3RR rule, he got off with nothing but a warning.--Yuje 03:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on Alanmak[edit]

Alanmak is kinda phobic about the IPA phonetics symbols, and he's trying to set them abay. His very reason to avoid others adding back the symbols is do not make any revert "until a concensus is formed" or "I've warned you". I don't this makes sense: from alpha to omega he is the only player of the devil's advocate. What say you? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 05:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, he's creating a pseudo consensus by himself. And he's the on who against the community's wish. Any way to do with him? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 09:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Newspaper category[edit]

I noticed your nomination of category:Chinese newspapers to CfD. I believe the right direction is to move it to category:newspapers of mainland China, and to create category:newspapers of the People's Republic of China as the parent category of the categories for the mainland, Hong Kong and Macau. Category:Chinese newspapers can be created as the parent category of the PRC and the ROC categories, and to group newspapers that were published before 1911 under it. Instantnood 09:06, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, {{cfr}} should be used for rename proposals. (I can't fix it for you since I'm banned from editing it. :-\ ) — Insta ntnood 09:08, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I've cast an oppose vote to your nomination. Would be nice if you can reconsider it. — Insta ntnood 19:27, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guess you'd be interested to look at the diff links I've provided there [5]. I still believe it's not very wise to make this nomination and let the not-quite-well informed community to decide when it's still a tremendously contentious issue. — Insta ntnood 17:49, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move of Nam Việt[edit]

You should vote on your proposed move at Talk:Nam Việt. LuiKhuntek 17:28, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Romanization for Bohai-related articles[edit]

I proposed to use Pinyin as the default romanization for Bohai-related articles (again). If you are interested, add your comments at Talk:Bohai. --Nanshu 10:27, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article 1991 Sino-Russian border agreement, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--Gurubrahma 03:05, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Endroit/Chinese_Romanization[edit]

Hello. Please check out User:Endroit/Chinese_Romanization, and make additions/corrections where necessary. I am asking Yuje, Ran, Visviva, Nanshu, Babelfisch, Kusunose, and Saintjust to check and modify this Chinese Romanization proposal within the next 5 days.
After that we should move this Chinese Romanization page to a Project Page, and then request formal Mediation/Arbitration. I would like to nominate Yuje or Ran to be the leader for this project. Or I can be leader also. Please let me know what you think. Thanks.--Endroit 09:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sinocentrism[edit]

Yesterday I added this comment but deleted it upon reflection. The reason is that I felt that it would be lost on a person who seemed unreasonably insistent on posting apologistic statements unchallenged. Having read your comments at my talk page, however, I find we are in uncanny agreement. I am reinstating my original post (with some changes). There is much more that I could add but it will have to wait until I have time.

Yuje, that paragraph that you reinstated is highly one-sided and doesn't say anything that actually addresses the issue of Sinocentrism. The original paragraph, as inserted into Anti-Japanese sentiment, read:

Critics of this theory point to China's generally passive role throughout its history: with rare exception, it never made any forceful attempts to colonize or make other civilization conform to its standards. Many of its neighbors - Korea and Japan included - willingly emulated China during these ancient times because they recognized China's civilization as being advanced. Also, many foreign scholars - such as the Koreans who invented movable type - were often given equal honors in Chinese courts, disproving the theory that "chauvinism" was everpresent. Another example is the treatment of Marco Polo and the early Jesuits who were treated with a great deal of respect and admiration for their skills despite having different personal beliefs. Based on this, the theory of "Sinocentrism" is generally dismissed as a poorly construed portrayal of China designed to incite anti-Chinese sentiment by China's current political rivals.

The person who entered this gave the following explanation:

As a Sinologist, I find the "sinocentric" theory to be an excellent example of bad scholarship. I admit it's probably a theory that some subscribe to, but it's worth adding in the reasons why it's such a bad mischaracterization of China during the medieval times. The current section almost makes it sound like this laughable concept actually has some truth to it, which is very far from reality

To be quite honest, I find the reasons given to be poor scholarship themselves. Treating foreigners with respect is no disproof of Sinocentrism. Putting this commment here without some comment on its essential irrelevance only trivialises the article. (It was also factually incorrect: Koreans were not the ones who invented movable type; they invented movable metal type.)

I feel there are much bigger problems with Sinocentrism than the (unsupported) comment that Chinese were respectful to certain educated foreigners. There are several avenues I would like to explore in the article, but find it difficult to because of the ban on 'original research' (I can't find any sources that I could work from). They include:

(1) the idea that Sinocentrism is a defence mechanism against intellectual attacks from other countries (including the West and Japan) and

(2) the fact that the Zhonghua Minzu ideology is at times identified as 'Sinocentrism' (and interestingly, why this would be so?).

Going further, I also feel that what people identify simply as Sinocentrism is a many-layered affair. That is, the original layer may (arguably) have been the Sinocentrism of the Central Plain, which regarded states like Chu (state) as semi-barbaric. Later, the concept of 'ethnically Chinese' dynasties was laid on top of this in order to deny legitimacy to barbarian dynasties even if they occupied the Central Plain. Then the Qing Empire added another overlay, a multi-ethnic state that was arguably different from that of previous dynasties. Zhonghua Minzu is in a sense an attempt to capture this new conception. Therefore, I think one of the problems with writing about Sinocentrism is that its nature changes as the nature of Chinese civilisation and the Chinese state changes. In one sense, older concepts of Sinocentrism have been superseded by Zhonghua Minzu ideology. In another sense, however, supremacy of "Hanzu" culture and other concepts are still lurking underneath. Look deeper still, and you will find that history is still being written from the Central Plains perspective -- although now, after 2,000 years there is finally a reappraisal of the high levels achieved by non-Central Plains cultures. (This is only possible because it is not politically threatening).

These, and many other aspects, are all things that would be interesting to cover. That is why I find it trivialising that a virtually irrelevant observation on "Chinese respect for educated foreigners" should be allowed to stay there without comment. I hope you understand where I am coming from.

I will take a moment to add a few extra comments.

I have been responsible for developing quite a bit of this article, which started out as a highly POV comment by a Japanese contributor, but I am certainly not satisfied with it.

However, I'm also not very happy to include overtly apologistic notions without some kind of challenge. For example, the view that 'China (meaning presumably Hanzu China) has virtually never invaded anyone'. This kind of apologism is dishonest, both in shifting the blame to non-Hanzu (a kind of Han chauvinism in disguise) and in not recording the tenacity with which these territories are then retained (we never really wanted them but now we've got them we'll never let go). I find it hard to take such apologistic statements seriously. Besides which, isn't this more an argument against 'Chinese imperialism' rather than 'Sinocentrism' (taking due note of your observation that everything seems to get thrown in as 'Sinocentrism'.

Another apologistic notion that is sometimes bandied about is that China has not 'invaded other nations' because the surrounding ethnic groups were too backward to be called 'nations'. This is an aspect of Sinocentrism :) that could be developed -- e.g., the nature of Chinese rule over less sophisticated groups, e.g. 土司. I am considering translating the article on 土司 into English when I have more time.

On the other side, I agree with your view that 'proving' Sinocentrism by appealing to the name 中国 or 中華 is not particularly interesting, even though anybody and everybody who talks about Sinocentrism likes to start with this kind of stuff. As you will have noticed, I am not exactly in a rush to add this content to the article.

Furthermore, I agree that the page as it stands is disjointed. In fact, I wanted to add a section on 'Cultural Sinocentrism'. This might cover things like the frequent appeal to the antiquity of Chinese culture (including common attitudes like 'the Chinese were doing (something sophisticated) when other people were swinging from the trees' and the tendency to hark back to ancient Chinese culture for antecedents rather than admit that something was borrowed from elsewhere). Likewise, the tendency to dismiss other Asian cultures as 'derivative' and thus devalue them next to Chinese culture. However, this kind of thing inevitably runs into highly subjective territory and would be hard to document academically. I would be quite loath to include them in Wikipedia without some kind of backing, even though I think they have some validity.

I would definitely be very happy if someone (such as yourself) could further develop the page on Sinocentrism in a coherent manner. I've reached the limits of my ability to describe it. I'm not very happy with many elements in the article, including the initial definition (which is, however, much better than the original one). If you could develop it in an interesting manner, without resorting to hackneyed prejudices and generalisations, I think the result could be quite an insightful article.

Just by the way, I've always been interested in the depressing problem of Sino-Japanese relations, which is one of the things that has led me to this topic. Recently I've become more conscious of "pre-modern" developments that lie behind some of these modern attitudes and ideologies. For example, Japanese 国学 Kokugaku and its connections to modern Japanese attitudes (including Nihonjinron) and the critique of 中華思想. Another is the development of Neo-Confucianism and its spread through East Asia as an official ideology.

Anyway, please go ahead and add to the article! Sorry if the above is somewhat incoherent; I'm not in an environment to relax and take my time to organise my thoughts and put them in order.

Bathrobe 00:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I look forward to seeing your development of the article!

Just a couple of points: The tribute-trade system was perhaps the strongest expression of the Sinocentric world order. I'm wondering if the two can be fully equated. By which I mean, it would be possible to put the tribute-trade system in an article by itself and you could still have a separate article on Sinocentrism.

'Confucianism' may have been used as the moral justification for the system, but to what extent has Confucianism simply been put in service of the system. (I seem to remember debates somewhere about whether there was ever any conception of 'barbarian' during the age of Confucius himself).

Bathrobe 01:09, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:User yuje cantonese shanghai accent 02.ogg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:User yuje cantonese shanghai accent 02.ogg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Dethomas 22:11, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:User yuje cantonese shanghai accent 01.ogg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:User yuje cantonese shanghai accent 01.ogg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Dethomas 22:12, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly..[edit]

It ended up like this again - [6] :-( — Insta ntnood 17:50, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It got closed in this way, finally.. [7] — Insta ntnood 19:22, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:South Manchuria Railway.jpg[edit]

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:South Manchuria Railway.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' 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 "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Dethomas 20:29, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sinŭiju SAR[edit]

You seem to know a few details about this curious entity. Do you happen to know whether the region would get its own ISO code, akin to Hong Kong and Macau, once the laws are enacted? Thanks! —Nightst a llion (?) 12:57, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, but given that for all practical purposes the Sinuiju SAR doesn't exist yet, I would guess it doesn't have it's own ISO code. If the SAR were to exist, all the previous residents would be evicted save a handful of skilled workers to provide for the service industry, a mini-Berlin Wall would be built to keep native North Koreans out, the city would allow visa free entry to all foreigners, it would be a democracy ruled by a council of elected foreigners, and the courts would be staffed by imported European judges. None of this currently exists, and it's been a few years already, so it's possible that North Korea may have already abandoned the idea. --Yuje 07:34, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's likely that Korea will be reunified before that happens... Thanks, either way! —Nightst a llion (?) 07:35, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

about the diversity of chinese[edit]

Do you have any reasonable reason to justify the removal of this section?Ksyrie 01:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have examined all the page aboutjew,German people and turkic people, i found nothing more than 'ethnic division', while for chinese people,it becomes 'diversity'.Due to my limit in english, i just found the latter is more genetical, the former,more spacial.

I found on the webster online the definition of diversity

1 the quality or state of being composed of many different elements or types <a diversity of opinions on where the senior class should go for its end-of-the-year trip> -- see VARIETY 1 2 the quality or state of being different <there's considerable diversity in Jake's two choices for what he'd like to be someday: a clergyman or an acrobat>

and division

Entry Word: division Function: noun Text: 1 something that divides, separates, or marks off <we poked our heads over the division between the yards to see what the fuss was about> Synonyms divider, partition Related Words barrier, fence, wall; border, boundary, limit 2 a large unit of a governmental, business, or educational organization <the complaints division handled all of the calls from the angry townsfolk> Synonyms bureau, department, desk, office 3 one of the units into which a whole is divided on the basis of a common characteristic <one of the major divisions of birds> -- see CLASS 2 4 the act or process of a whole separating into two or more parts or pieces <the assembly line was a major development in the division of labor among workers> -- see SEPARATION 1 5 the act or process of giving out something to each member of a group <the person in charge of the division of the profits among the business partners> -- see DISTRIBUTION 1

where we can find diversity to emphasize the inherent difference while division means the the subsequent seperation.Ksyrie 01:56, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]