Lakshmix

Hello, Lakshmix, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

Greetings from WikiProject Korea!

Thank you for your recent contributions to South Korea. Given the interest you've expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Korea? It's a group dedicated to improving the overall quality of all Korea-related articles. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! Appletrees (talk) 20:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

South Korea GDP/capita in 2025

Hi. Can you show me where you're seeing it "clearly surpasses the mentioned countries by a signifcant margin by 2025"? I'm looking at the chart on page 9 that shows the four countries the same. Thanks ... richi (hello) 21:36, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Korea exceeds the income per capita of UK, France and Germany by 2025, in particular Germany - it shows a difference of almost 2000-4000USD, which translates to almost 200 billion USD in economy size, equivalant to that of several developing countries' total GDP. If you don't consider this significant, you still do not have the right to modify or change this fact and show a misleading statement in the article, which is clearly not valid according to the reference. By equal or equivalant, you are directly implying that their income per capita is arithmetically the same, which it is clearly not stated in the source. Whether the figures are signifcant or not, that is irrelevant - your POV does not comply with the source and the source clearly shows that Korea has a larger income per capita than those three countries. If you consider them "tiny", this is your opinion and should not be introduced into the article to modify and change it according to your POV. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place where you can take sources, modify it to your own will (i.e. claim that the three countries income per capita is EQUAL to the income per capita of Korea in 2025) without the authorization of the publisher, Goldman Sachs in this case, and state your own opinion in any of its articles. In other words, your claim is your POV and opinion, not a fact. This is for the benefit of all Wikipedia users and if you feel that there is any reason why you should object to this fact, please feel free to leave a comment below. Thank you.Lakshmix (talk) 21:45, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

No, that's not what I asked. You're clearly seeing different data to those that I can see in the reference. I'm asking you to tell me where you're seeing it. Sources must be WP:V ... richi (hello) 22:42, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry but I am referring to the source published by Goldman Sachs, page 9, the 2nd bottom diagram. This is the linked PDF report that is referenced in the statement in the introduction. The data you have been referring to is precisely this. Make sure that you verify the data and check the figures carefully, in particular for Germany. As clarified previously, however "tiny" (according to your opinion stated on the article revision history) any fact or figure may be, you cannot modify it according to WP:V. Lakshmix (talk) 23:02, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, your English is better than my Hangul! That's the same chart as I'm looking at. It shows that ROK, UK, and France's estimated GDP/capita for 2025 are indistinguishable. You are correct that Germany's is lower, perhaps significantly so. The point is that these are estimates, not facts -- estimates with a 20 year horizon. It's also complicated by the fact that the US$ has fluctuated significantly differently against these currencies since 2005. It's not reasonable for an encyclopedia to be so precise, given: the nature of estimates and these other variables -- and the fact that we're talking about 20 years.

    Do you have any training in statistics? Personally I often deal with situations like this, where quantitative data are "fuzzy" due to estimates or from survey data. From careful measurement of the bar charts, we're talking about a difference of less than one percent -- there is no doubt in my mind that this is statistically insignificant, given the nature of the data.

    BTW, there's no POV here -- I could care less whether ROK's GDP/capita exceeds that of the UK. My motivation is to help clean up an article that has become badly bogged down. If we can't reach consensus, we'll have to follow WP:FUTURE and remove the text altogether.

    Thanks for your time ... richi (hello) 23:30, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

If you can speak Hangul, are you Korean? I am currently mastering in Economics and Statistics at New York University and the Economy of South Korea is my specialty along with other East Asian economies. For you, this 1% might look insignificant. And I agree the great majority do. However, as a statistician, all data, including numbers to an infinite amount of significant figures or decimal points are valid. If you ignore these figure, however small or tiny they are, there will be chaos in the statistics world. One ranking of a country can be slipped or moved up by just 1%. If you simply ignore it, it breaks down the whole theory of statistics. While I agree this report is an estimate, there is no denial in the fact that it is an official report published by Goldman Sachs and hence it must be treated as a verifiable source according to WP:V. I would like this to be respected and more importantely, the acceptance that fact is fact - no more, no less. I appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia. Thank you. Lakshmix (talk) 23:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

OK, let's take it to Talk:South Korea#3rd_highest_GDP.2Fcapita_by_2025 and try to gain consensus ... richi (hello) 23:52, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

May 2008

Hello. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary. Thank you. jonny-mt 01:15, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Ditto, though no harm done. Could you join us in the discussion at Talk:Samsung/Archive 1#Don't glamorize Samsung? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 12:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

So where is the permission?

I don't see any actual permission page except KIST website main page. Show me the real beef. Unless you can provide any email, or passage that the image is under cc-by by the institute, the image falls under fair use or non-free image criteria, or maybe likely be deleted.--Caspian blue (talk) 15:30, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Look, I'm Korean, so of course I can read the Korean statement that you moved from the website, which is not about the permission of the image copyleft. The page is about personal data policies. Even if I could not read Korean, google translation tool can provide the gist of the meaning for non-Korean speakers. Your attempt to save the image actually constitutes a violation to our copyright policy. The spurious tag and image rationale are called "bogus". You better remove the bogus permission on the image soon. I would not let this disruption last in Wikipedia.--Caspian blue (talk) 15:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Good job on the image issue, however I'm afraid to say that the image be removed from South Korea article regardless of the resolution. Because fair use images are not allowed for multiple image usage except the article dealing with the subject.--Caspian blue (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. If the photo can be only used on one page, then it should be the South Korea page, for which I contributed this effort, as it is the best example of Korean robotics. I will try to obtain another copyright free image from KIST for the Ever-1 page. Thank you. Lakshmix (talk) 16:49, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... no, the image can only be used in Ever-1 per Fair use policy. Unless the android is permanently exhibited in a public space (outer space, museum, etc), any images of the object taken by even you fall under fair use image. --Caspian blue (talk) 16:58, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The purpose of the photograph is to demonstrate an example of Korean robotics in the Robotics section of the South Korea article. I understand that its original purpose was to serve for the Ever-1 page, however, since the fair usage policy allows only one photo to be used per page, I would like my work to be used on the South Korea article. I will change the purpose description on the photo page as necessary. The Fair Usage Policy does not explicitly state on which article it must be used, provided it serves its purpose. Please provide me a citation where this is not valid. I would appreciate that. Otherwise, the image will be used on the South Korea page and the Ever-1 page will not contain an image while I will acquire another image with a permission from KIST for use in one of Wikipedia's licenses such as GNU/Creative Common License, which does not exhibit this restriction.Lakshmix (talk) 17:04, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, in fact, a better solution would be for me to get in touch with Mr Kim again and request direct permission for use in the Creative Common License. This will allow the image, regardless of the resolution, to be used in any Wikipedia page, including the Ever-1 and the South Korea page. I will edit the image page of Ever-1 as soon as I receive the permission from KIST. Thanks.Lakshmix (talk) 17:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

The android is one of results from Korean robotics technology and articles here are not owned by any editors. I appreciate your effort to South Korea article, but policy is policy and we have to follow it unless it is revised by consensus. The image usage is not selective one. It was also not uploaded by you. Hmm. I'm not a native English speaker like you, so I can't make you understand the fair use policy well. Why don't you ask User:Durova, also Commons administrator about your concern? The image can only be used for Ever-1, but unfortuately for South Korea, general article about South Korea. The robotics is also only a partial of the whole content. --Caspian blue (talk)

I am an English and Korean native speaker, you can talk to me in either language. If "policy is policy" as you claim, then please prove it by demonstrating me a clear citation or a source of this "policy" as otherwise, your "Fair Usage Policy" does not sound particularly convincing. No worries though, this is exactly why I am getting a Creative Common License from KIST so that the image can be used in any Wikipedia article. Yes, I will definitely get in touch with Durova to ask why a Creative Common Licensed medium can only be used on one article as you claim. Thanks. Lakshmix (talk) 17:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

(e/c)I'm checking the policy right now (I read it long ago and I'm telling you from my experiences at Commons) If possible, I would let you contact Durova for this. FYI, you should obtain images from the institute with either CC-BY or CC-BY-SA permissin. Otherwise, CC-BY-NC (no commercial use) is not acceptable. --Caspian blue (talk) 17:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, no problem, take your time. I would gladly talk to Durova about this. Yes, I will definitely obtain a CC_BY or CC_BY_SA license, I am fully aware that it is otherwise not acceptable.Lakshmix (talk) 17:42, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I found the relevant policy at Wikipedia:Fair_use_rationale_guideline#Necessary_components which says like the below

What purpose does the image serve in the article? If applicable:

• Is the image a logo, photograph, or box art for the main subject of the article?

-> The image in question is the main subject for Ever-1 not South Korea

• Is the image being used as the primary means of visual identification of the subject or topic? (e.g., a corporate logo or the box art of a DVD

-> For Ever-1, the answer is yes, but the other is not.

• Does it illustrate the topic of the article? (e.g., a screen shot from a movie)

-> The image is the main topic for Ever-1, but subtopic of sub entry for South Korea

I hope you understand what I'm trying to say to you. --Caspian blue (talk) 18:11, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

You are absolutely correct. The image will remain in the Ever-1 article. However, what I was trying to get across was that I will find and upload a replacement image soon, which will be different from this one and have a full license of either GNU or CCL. I have also some of my very own photograph I took of the android, which qualifies for the GNU License, as I am the sole copyright holder. Thanks Lakshmix (talk) 18:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

To settle down the image issue

Hey, I saw you upload another image to South Korea article, which is really a nice improvement. However, I let you know more requirements to prevent from the image being deleted by administrators at Commons. (how nice policy -_-) As I've been struggling today to obtain permissions from some photographers for other pages, I witnessed several images with an email permission were deleted. The reason for the deletion is that the uploader did not forward the permission email to Commons or OTRS. So to prevent this thing, you need to read Commons:Commons:OTRS throughly, and then send your received email from KIST to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. You also have to attach your original sent email as well. The point is that the Ever-2 image can be deletable at any time if a strict admin find it. I hope you follow the rule accordingly. Good luck--Caspian blue (talk) 01:09, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think I would need a "good luck" from you since this is genuine work but yeah, thanks for reminding me about it and I will definitely forward all e-mails right now to Commons and the administrators involved. I follow all rules of Wikipedia and I will forward all information that is required by Wikipedia Administrators and of course, I expect you to follow its rules as well, since you are an editor. Let me know if you have any more issues. Thanks Lakshmix (talk) 01:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Of course, I'm following the rule, that's why I have invested my time talking to you for the images since yesterday. Anyway, correct preparations are always good to avoid troublesome in the future. Have a nice weekend.--Caspian blue (talk)

Thanks, your active contributions to South Korean articles are very much appreciated. I hope we can continue to cooperate each other well in the future. Lakshmix (talk) 01:23, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

East Asian Tigers

Regarding the issue on Chinese influences in Korea, I'll just like to point out some things. I understand that you do not wish for the article to be too Sinocentrist, but I would think that "heavy Chinese influences" is appropriate as much of Korea's higher culture was based on Chinese higher culture. Korea was, for the most part of its history, a tributary state of China, and modelled all its institutions after Chinese ones. As I pointed out in the article talk page, I do not dispute the fact that Korean and Chinese culture are not the same. But if you do study the traditional cultures of China and Korea, you'll notice many similarities. Confucianism, which has defined much of Korean philosophical thought, originated in China, though the Koreans eventually became more Confucian than the Chinese themselves. And before World War II, Chinese characters were widely used in Korea, and they are still used today though very sparingly. Of course, at is core, they are different cultures, but I think using "some" is a little vague. Even Thai and Malay culture had "some" Chinese influences, but definitely not to the extent of Korean, Japanese or Vietnamese culture. I hope you'll understand that I'm not being Sinocentrist, but to deny the Chinese influences in Korean culture would also just be biased towards the Korean Ultranationalists.The dog2 (talk) 16:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

This is your personal opinion and your own analysis. Provide clear citations and sources as otherwise, this is against WP:N and WP:V. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place where you can place your own personal analysis or commentary. Without citations and references, your statement is not valid.

I've added in a source to support the claim. If you think that the source is not valid, I can go and search for more sources. However, I don't see why Westerners would be Sincocentrist so I doubt it is a biased source. I suggest you do read the book as it provides a good analysis on the culture of China and the influence China had on Vietnam, Korea and Japan, as well as the key differences between the three cultures and Chinese culture which have allowed them to retain a distinct identity. The similarities lie more in the traditional culture. In recent times, some customs you see in China are as a result of communist influences and the cultural revolution. I don't know what your ethnicity is but if you are ethnic Korean, I do understand your negative sentiments towards the idea that Korean culture has incorporated many traditional Chinese elements as it may be seen as a source of national shame, but if we look at it from an objective point of view, you can see how much historical influence China had on Korea, though of course, the notion that the Chinese "gave the Koreans their culture" which many Chinese suggest is also inaccurate. The dog2 (talk) 02:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Excessive images and OTRS

You have shown a WP:OWNership attitude on the article of South Korea. The excessive usage of images are already pointed out by two other editors at the talk page if you look into it. You're being rude. Besides, I don't need to get a permission to remove the dark and redundant image from the article. An image of LG displays shows the similar subject. Besides, why don't you keep your promise on the image of Ever-2? Did you even forward your email to OTRS? --Caspian blue (talk) 13:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

While this has no relevance with this subject, the e-mail has been forwarded the moment you have told me that I should do so. the e-mail has been directly forwarded to the head administrator of Wikipedia, to assure verfication. There is evidence suggesting that you have a WP:OWNership attitude to this article and I have seen several times you issuing warnings or claims that either exagerrate or not valid according to Wikipedia guidelines. As an editor, you should take responsibility of all your actions, including starting a discussion with a valid, evidential point. I agree with you that the LG displays a similar subject, and hence will remove it.

I am significantly contributing to this article - Do not confuse this with WP:OWN. If you think I am rude, think how you are treating other users, particularly new users. Directly saying to me that "You are rude" is rude on its own and degrades your credibility as an experienced editor. This is not how I came to expect fro you. I am strictly following Wikipedia guidelines and applying to any user, including you.

I hope this clarifies the situation. Lakshmix (talk) 20:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

You don't get the point. I frankly think that you're not a new user, given the timing, situation, your interest and knowledges of Wikipedia. I believe I once defended you in front of people because of your passion to the article. However, I don't like dishonesty, so have no intention to defend such people even if they're Koreans. You once tried to deceive me on the image, so you earn your distrust by yourself. The OTRS procedure generally takes less one week and your images still don't have OTRS confirmation "3 weeks" after that bogus permission. Your credibility is solely built up by yourself, so don't complaint about that. You was rude at your edit summary as if you're the only one to decide what image should be used or not. That is your ownership issue. Calling a rude behavior being "rude" is not rude. Don't confuse the civility policy. Judging by all cases, you strictly does not follow wikipedia guidelines. You insist on using the dark and plain image taken by "you" instead of the colorful image of a LG display. That is not a compromise or a consensus. If images make people to distract the main contents, anyone can take out from the article.--Caspian blue (talk) 21:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Winter Sonata South Korean Drama.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Winter Sonata South Korean Drama.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kusunose 01:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Userpage

I've removed the uw-warning and what you had written around it from your userpage, as it is aggressive and hostile, as well as implies you are an administrator. seresin ( ¡? )  04:13, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

November 2008

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on South Korea. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. -- IRP ☎ 18:49, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Global city

Please stop inserting the {{Outdated}} template in the 1999/2004 section of the Global city article. You have misinterpreted its use. The 1999/2004 section is historical data, and is noted as such. It is not "outdated" since it is not presented as representing the current state of global cities, but instead, as an assessment of the state at the time, using a specific set of criteria. As I gave in the example, we do not mark the article about the 1998 World Cup as "outdated" when the 2002 or 2006 World Cup is played. This is especially important since the 1999/2004 GaWC studies use different criteria from each other, and from the 2008 Foreign Policy study. --MCB (talk) 19:26, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Korean war crime

I think Korean war crime should be writen, also. What do you think?--Bukubku (talk) 03:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Recent reverts on the South Korea page

I would appreciate it if you joined in on the discussion page before making reverts. I have been asking/begging for discussion for the past few days and have many (40!) things there that can already be discussed, but it seems as if no one wishes to discuss changing the page, but instead treat it like their personal property. If items aren't discussed on the talk page, they are likely to get re-added, just due to the fact that no one can keep track of who made what change when and for what reason. Thanks. KieferFL (talk) 04:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Once again, please see the talk page and discuss things before you revert. A note in the edit summary is not discussion. KieferFL (talk) 07:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

You obviously have a feeling of ownership about this page, as you continue to revert edits that you have been invited to discuss on the talk page, but haven't. (Evidenced by the most recent reverts which undid the correcting a reference link to scientific literacy.) If you don't agree with the edits, then come join the discussion. KieferFL (talk) 21:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

3RR

you cannot make more than 3 reverts within a 24 hour period, or you are likely to be blocked from editing. be aware of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3rr

thanks

Sennen goroshi (talk) 07:56, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

POV

I'm trying to resolve this POV dispute. Please be aware that I am not being anti-Korea but only correcting erroneous statements and offering a more neutral depiction of the country. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.113.81.33 (talk) 23:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

While I always assume good faith, your past edits clearly suggest that you continued to make edits in Chinese related articles with high praise and have vandalized Korean related articles, with disputes with various Korean editors. You are vandalizing Wikipedia articles by removing valid, cited facts in Korean articles. 01:50, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Oh, please. Don't be ridiculous. I have no personal bias with either China or Korea - and you are the first Korean editor I have ever interacted with. My edits are based on authoritative sources and given the fact that South Korea is not even a good article and probably will not be one for a long time I think I have a point here. In reality, I couldn't care less about Korea. If there was one country in East Asia who I thought was a model of success if would be Japan and increasingly China. Korea does not plays a limited role in the calculus of power in East Asia. 130.113.81.33 (talk) 02:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

To 130.113.81.33, you may not know it, but your words DO reflect a favorable personal bias towards China (especially) and a negative one towards Korea. A visit to your page only confirms it. I'm sorry, but nobody asked you what your POINT OF VIEW was of whether South Korea is a model of success or not. Honestly, many people in both Asia & the West often consider South Korea an exemplary story of "rags to riches". Whether you think Japan and China are models of successes and Korea is not is totally your POINT OF VIEW/opinion and not a fact (plus, nobody asked what you thought but thanks for telling your POV anyway). Your willingness to downplay South Korea as inferior and less successful (to Japan/China) without anybody even asking you for an opinion clearly sounds like you have a (negative) bias against S. Korea. This is merely your POINT OF VIEW, and clearly you are full of them on Wikipedia. Ironic that you are calling others on POV. Speaking of POV, here's mine: Success does not necessarily equate to "calculus of power". Countries like Sweden & Norway are considered highly successful societies despite not having sizable economies while large economies like China and India are still considered poor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.185.68 (talk) 02:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Why not joining in the ongoing discussion?

Obviously, you're the most resistant editor against almost every single edit of KieferFL. However, why don't you ever come to the discussion on the talk page of South Korea? The protection would be longer as long as you do not participate in the discussion, and if you resume edit wars with him. The admin promised to do so, so please visit the talk page. Thanks.--Caspian blue 03:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Please do not just randomly delete articles/sections - any changes should be justified and proven with sources.

more sources of information. PLS do not delete material or even pictures?! without substantiating..and referencing. My claim has been butrressed by the recent GLobal Financial Centres Index a report that is cited by many and regarded as a professional report.

GLobal Financial Centres Index 4 Sep 2008 “I think that the combination of Singapore and Hong Kong makes a third global financial centre to challenge New York and London”.New York-based hedge fund manager http://213.86.34.248/NR/rdonlyres/102CD2E5-FB72-4B9B-A30C-56FD592B5B61/0/BC_RS_GFCI4.pdf

Mr. Jignesh Shah, Vice Chairman of SMX, Chairman and Group CEO of Financial Technologies, said, 'Singapore ranks among the top three international financial centres in the world today along with New York and London with an established trading and commodity hub, open economy, robust regulatory framework under Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), a thriving port, business friendly environment, and its geographical location - making it an ideal destination to host an international commodity derivatives exchange like SMX. http://www.indiaprwire.com/pdf/pressrelease/2008071010973.pdf

While Hong Kong takes the lead in terms of funds raised through IPOs, Singapore has marginally larger international banking, derivatives and foreign exchange markets than Hong Kong. http://www.info.gov.hk/hkma/eng/public/qb200712/E_05_12.pdf

Like Singapore, Hong Kong has gradually evolved into an international financial center. http://www.nber.org/chapters/c8569.pdf

With more than 600 financial institutions serving investors around the world, Singapore is a leading international financial centre and a key forex trading centre over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives trading centre. Its global asset management business has recorded six consecutive years of double-digit growth in assets under management, expanding by 24% to almost S$900 billion in 2006. http://www.effectivinternet.com/contactsingapore/feb08/csip_08/EDM.html

As Singapore evorves as a key global financial centre, new challenges will be www.sfemc.org/annual_report/Tansformation_AR_1994-b_.pdf

As an international financial centre, Singapore is well placed to... www.bis.org/review/r051214a.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jyare6 (talk • contribs) 08:12, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

December 2008

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Please don't forget to provide an edit summary for your edits. Thank you. --Jklamo (talk) 23:04, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Lists etc

Lakshmix, please don't change these list/ranking articles. The point of them is to compare the cities. If you fool around changing one city or another, but not the rest, you make a dog's breakfast of the stats. While I know you are in good faith, we have a daily battle with IP editors who seek to make a porridge of our figures. If necessary, I will follow you around reverting your changes. Thanks, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:46, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

block evasion

this account, ziggymaster and wondergirls are all operated by the same editor. You cannot multiple accounts, and you certainly cannot use another account in order to get around the fact that your wondergirls account has been indefinitely blocked from editing.

If you want to continue editing, I suggest you use the wondergirls account to request an unblock.

Good luck with that.

カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 03:43, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Europe, size of economy

I saw you wanted to add an interesting piece of information to the Europe article. The data is unfortunately quite off the mark, so I had to revert, see my edit summary. I am looking forward to building up the required data with you and eventually add it to the article. A starting point for me would be to have a look at List of countries by GDP (nominal). Where did you get your information from? Tomeasy _{T C} 07:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

3 revert rule

1. I have reported you for breaching the three revert rule. 2. If you suspect that I have broken the three revert rule myself, then instead of complaining about it in edit summaries, report me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring

カンチョーSennen Goroshi ! (talk) 17:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Sock block

I reckon you're probably a sock, so I've indef blocked you. Complain here William M. Connolley (talk) 19:17, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ziggymaster ---Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Winter Sonata South Korean Drama.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Winter Sonata South Korean Drama.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 '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 non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 21:05, 9 April 2009 (UTC)