In wkpd

Your submission at Articles for creation: a userspace draft-Icreated (February 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Liance was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:In wkpd/sandbox/a userspace draft-Icreated and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

-Liance^{talk/contribs} 14:26, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello! In wkpd, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! -Liancetalk/contribs 14:26, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Your draft article, User:In wkpd/sandbox/a userspace draft-Icreated

Hello, In wkpd. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "sandbox/a userspace draft-Icreated".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 08:44, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

File:Wikipedia article Taiwan shows up as 1st result of Google search calling Taiwan a country.png listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wikipedia article Taiwan shows up as 1st result of Google search calling Taiwan a country.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. --benlisquare_T•C•E 09:15, 28 November 2020 (UTC) --benlisquare_T•C•E 09:15, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Just a comment... Why is it significant that Wikipedia's Taiwan article shows up as the first result? This is true for many countries. I just tried it with France, Germany, Italy and China. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 10:16, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

What is this about? Irtapil (talk) 13:00, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@Irtapil: It was me being WikiBullied by Jargo Nautilus, and maybe people like her, I'd say. In wkpd (talk) 22:06, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@In wkpd: The main reason that I was opposing your edit suggestions was that you started off by pushing Nathan Rich as a viable source of information on Taiwan. I was incredibly annoyed because I actually saw his video before you did, and I had commented a short time earlier that his video was full of propaganda and couldn't possibly be trusted. In hindsight, it was somewhat inevitable that some rando would show up within days or even hours and start a Talk war whilst brandishing this video as the word of God, though I didn't see this coming at the time. Anyway, my view of you at the time was that you were a sheep, unable to think for yourself, though I understand that all people are more complex than that. I apologise for any harm caused to you personally. I just personally hate Nathan Rich and have for a long time, so I automatically attack anyone who propagates his views. It's nothing personal towards you. [1] [2] Note: After discovering that Nathan Rich has cancer, I became slightly less harsh on him, though I still think he is shameless for what he does. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 08:30, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Irtapil: The image has nothing to do with me. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 08:26, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

SPA

Please red wp:spa as you seem to have all but announced that is what you are.Slatersteven (talk) 12:44, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

This is interesting... Yes, I do believe that In wkpd's Wikipedia activity so far has been rather suspicious. Personally, I myself do have an agenda, of sorts, but I actually edit a range of different (albeit related) articles and I have diverse views. I am also not being paid by anyone to do any of my own edits, but I'm rather just interested in these topics. I'd happily explain my origins and the reasons for my edits... On the other hand, In wkpd seems intent on the idea that "the motivations of the editor are not important". If the motivations are not important, then why is he trying so hard to hide his motivations? If they're not important, then it should really not be an issue for him to divulge his intentions and the people whom he works for? Regards, Jargo Nautilus (talk) 14:03, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

i wish wiki had avatars, i can never keep track of who is who. Irtapil (talk) 20:11, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia does have custom signatures. I might make one. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 08:24, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Don't assume my gender

Don't assume my gender, mate. Jargo Nautilus (talk) 17:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

re User:Jargo Nautilus/sandbox3

That sandbox page seemed like the wing place for a discussion, so responding to your message here. Irtapil (talk) 20:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Re: this message

Looks like something from back when Jargo Nautilus was brought to ANI, they were blocked the same day as their last edit here for a random, blatant, and unforgivable act of outing mostly unrelated to the above discussion. I will note that in hindsight JN was right about In wkpd. Thats a sketchy account, I would have expected them to keep editing but they don’t appear to edit at all after JN’s block... It looks like they check ANI for a few more days and then go dark. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:09, 10 February 2021 (UTC) No, you are a sketchy account, very likely a Single-purpose account. It's very easy to tell from your user contributions. But I have no problem with what you're doing, since you're not hurting me, but the reputation of WP. There's no reason for me to keep editing WP. To me, WP is a place to learn rather than a propaganda tool, which you seem to have been using it as. Looking back, I think it was a mistake for me to get involved in the discussion of the Taiwan talk page. It was nothing but a waste of time. I overestimated the rationality and civility of Wikipedians, especially those active on the Taiwan talk page. I overestimated the Administrators' ability of maintaining a civil and functional environment wherein progress can actually be made. I overestimated the determination and quantity of Wikipedians (e.g. Irtapil) who are qualified and willing to protect the neutrality of WP. In wkpd (talk) 21:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC) @Irtapil: No need to ping Jargo Nautilus. She's currently blocked indefinitely. Yeah, only she. Horse Eye's Back was using singular they, in case you get mistaken. As for what this has to do with you, have you looked into the collapse template named "More details" here? Or you can just traverse through my tiny history of user contributions to see the whole story. And by the way, when I was on the ANI being accused of WP:NOTHERE by an admin, I pinged you but you didn't show up. Were you simply not getting the notification, or you just wanted to stay away? You might well suspect I was hired by CCP deep down in your heart, but don't you think I had always been pushing forward the neutrality of WP, which was totally fine to support? No matter what, I have decided not to get involved in these issues in the future. In wkpd (talk) 21:45, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

@In wkpd: Sorry, i probably just didn't notice the notification. My computer is perpetually trying to tell me about several hundred eMails, messages, etc. i tend to just mentally filter it all out in a - usually futile - attempt to stay focused.

Mainly i was baffled because it was on a sandbox page so there was a big wall of text and no context. Why didn't the blocked user just write that in their talk page? Though they are not currently blocked? did they appeal and get it changed back?

Re: "suspect I was hired by CCP deep down" - it hadn't occurred to me until you mentioned it. Though mentioning it did make some of the other comments - about "what you are" and such, make more sense. I wasn't thinking very emotively about what motivated the side of the argument wanting the article to reflect the UN stance.

Most of my emotional energy was focused on frustrated bafflement at what on earth the other side was trying to achieve. e.g. Supporters of the Palestinians of Gaza wouldn't describe Israel as "a neighbouring country on the East".

Irtapil (talk) 20:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@Irtapil: I wrote this segment on a sandbox page because I was told to draft up my responses before submitting them. I was blocked for "outing" someone, although my intentions were not malicious, and I was subsequently unblocked. In terms of "reflecting the UN stance", my family's connections to Taiwan date back to before the UN was even founded, so I don't care about the UN's stance. Ironically, one of my close family members was working for several years as an international lawyer for/with the UN (not relating to Taiwan, but as an Australian national based in Cambodia, on the Cambodian Genocide Tribunal), and I know through her just how incompetent and corrupt that organisation is. Note: I know exactly which relative I am talking about, but I can't reveal exactly who she is or else I might get blocked for outing again. I used to live with her as a young child but then she ran off to America and then later to France. [3] Jargo Nautilus (talk) 22:25, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

actually, i think i did see the notification, but when i got to the Taiwan Talk page i couldn't actually find the bit it referred to. The conversation had got so long and tangled. I didn't really have time or energy to work out what was going on.

I kind of gave up on the Taiwan page.

I really know nothing about the issue. Which is why i was on the wiki page to begin with. I was looking for a general overview. When the page seemed so weird, i tried to make it reflect the most mainstream sources i could find (e.g. United Nations), so it could give more realistic general info to the next reader, but everything got instantly reverted.

I tried just reordering the information that was already there, to better reflect relative importance to a clueless foreigner like myself, but that got reverted too.

so i gave up, i watched a couple of docos on Youtube [4][5] etc. for that general background, and figured i'd stick to editing topics that are less controversial, or at least controversies i understood.

Irtapil (talk) 02:57, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

The topic of Taiwan is very complex but that doesn't necessarily make the information in the introduction false. It might just be hard to understand for people with no background on the topic. I discovered my Taiwanese ancestry at the age of 15 and have spent hundreds of hours researching Taiwan, mostly on the internet though also in the real world too. It actually didn't take me too long to figure out what was going on in Taiwan since I contacted Taiwanese people on various websites and spoke to them directly. Though, I actually initially discovered my Taiwanese ancestry directly through the main article about Taiwan on Wikipedia. I am predominantly ethnic-Chinese but one-quarter of my ancestors were sent to an internment camp in Australia and labelled as "Japanese" during WWII. I initially believed that they had simply been Chinese mistaken for Japanese, but I realised after reading the Wikipedia article's introduction (from the brief history segment) that they were actually Taiwanese people (since Taiwan is mostly ethnic-Chinese and was colonised by the Empire of Japan for fifty years). [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] Jargo Nautilus (talk) 22:39, 4 April 2021 (UTC)