User talk:Pandacomics/Unfriendlies

Stats in disruptive encounters with editors
Wins: 6
Losses: 1
Ties: 3

Attempting to delete B.A.D. (which I eventually won)

B.A.D

I still have doubts:

1. I don't believe the awards are "major" enough.
2. No sources on whether they've charted
3. Or toured
4. Most of your sources appear to be trivial

-- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 05:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes well, thats all I was asking for, to fit the criteria. thanks -- Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 04:35, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Wrong Use of Revert

You reverted something that was not a revert candidate. Reverting is only for vandalism. The "importance" tag I added to B.A.D. was valid. No efforts have been made to improve the article, no extra sources have been added. As of now, that article is still very poor. They are notable, as proven in AFD, but the article is still poor. Until that article is improved, it can and probably will be tagged. Undeath (talk) 00:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

BAD

Hi, I deleted the article because it did not provide independent verifiable sources that it meets the notability guidelines. Although the AFD mentions Chinese language sources, no-one has added them. There is no objection to foreign language sources and there are even icons to use like (in Latin) (in German) (in Chinese) Jimfbleak (talk) 08:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, restored for now, but it does need those refs Jimfbleak (talk) 08:10, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Trying to prove that Lee-Hom Wang is gay (which I eventually won)

Calling someone gay is not defamatory. Only homophobic people think it's defamatory. It's a well-known fact that Wang Lee Hom is gay. Apparently, some people don't approve of the gay community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.191.144.230 (talk) 19:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

re 'Lee-Hom Wang is not gay'

I have explained the situation to the ip that was reported to AIV. However, unless you have a source or reference which has Lee-Hom Wang proclaiming his exclusive heterosexuality you cannot proclaim that he is not gay - WP:BLP cuts both ways, you must have the evidence before making such comments. LessHeard vanU (talk) 20:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough - there is a source for denial of being gay. Under the circumstances, should the ip repeat the allegation, you can use that quote when reporting the vandalism. Cheers. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:12, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Very good. I will site sources that indicate that he hides his homosexuality so as not to deter fans. But yes, one cannot assert that Lee Hom is "not gay" if he or she cannot provide evidence that he is certainly not homosexual. If anything, Lee Hom dodges questions when they ask him about his sexual preference. Kind of like Ricky Martin and Richard Simmons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.191.144.230 (talk) 02:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Damn. How often do you check Wang Lee Hom's page? You must be a jobless loser like me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.191.144.230 (talk) 02:32, 11 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.58.248.87 (talk)

Changing categories (a tie, because only half the categories were changed)

Depopulation of Category:Taiwanese Mandopop singer-songwriters

Please wait until the CfD is complete. Right now, your depopulation of the category will cause an incorrect perception that it is an entirely empty category. Please also see my rationale for creating it in the first place. You can wait to see if the CfD passes, in which case it will be automatically depopulated. --Nlu (talk) 04:44, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, please see WP:CAT in general. Large categories should be divided into subcategories, and articles should generally not belong to both a category and its parent category. (WP:SUBCAT.) There are times when deviating from the latter principle is necessary or helpful; I don't see that as the case here. --Nlu (talk) 04:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

One more thing; if the CfD was intended to cover the other categories, then please include those in the CfD. Please do not simply depopulate them without discussion, as it will create the perception that they were created as empty categories. They were not. --Nlu (talk) 04:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

It should be further noted that the Hong Kong categories are subcategories of the Chinese categories. As per WP:CAT, in general, articles should not belong to both a category and its parent category. --Nlu (talk) 05:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Trying to enforce pinyin in the lead of Cpop singers' articles (which I eventually won)

Your reverts of my edits

Dear Pandacomics, I am very unhappy with your unfriendly reversions of my edits. I am thinking of involving third parties to resolve our dispute or to discuss as you don't agree with my edits and I don't agree with actions. I can see that your dislike to my edits is more political and personal from your point of view (e.g. use of Hanyu Pinyin romanisation and alternative names) rather than anything else (e.g. style).

My edits you have reverted are not vandalism, and in my opinion are important. You assumed the role of an administrator and the owner of the articles you have reverted, which I can't accept. --Atitarev (talk) 03:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Trying to add unnecessary categories to the Cpop entertainer infobox (which I eventually won)

Infobox Chinese actor and singer

I refer to the template {{Infobox Chinese actor and singer}}.

I do agree with you that height, weight, religion and zodiacs may be trivial information. But I do feel that nationality, ethnicity, languages known, management company and imdb records aren't really that trivial.

Moreover, I was trying to bring information that was available on the Chinese Wikipedia over to the English Wikipedia. I noted that the management companies for artistes such as Cyndi Wang are different from their record labels (c.f. zh:王心凌). Therefore I added them in as well.

I feel that it was rather rude of you to just undo the change wholesale.

Please refer to this template that I tried to follow - zh:Template:藝人

—Tjmj (talk) 10:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Lee-Hom Wang's origin (tie; I'd never admit defeat in keeping the NPOV name of Republic of China (Taiwan))

Wang Lihong and Edison Chen's origins

What does it matter where his profession is based with respect to origin? That's like saying Yao Ming's origin is Houston! Penser (talk) 06:47, 13 January 2008 (UTC)penser

Oops

I guess we were both wrong Pandacomics. In Wiki-speak, in the context of musicians, "origin" is neither the country where a person came from originally (my thought) nor the country where their career is based currently (as you implied).

It is:

"The city from which the singer or group originated (that is, the city where the group was founded; or the city where individual performers started their career, should it not match the location of their birth)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Infobox_Musical_artist

So Edison Chen's origin should be "Hong Kong" because there is no indication that he ever did any acting or singing before he started doing so in Hong Kong.

For Leehom Wang, it's a little trickier, because he studied music as a major in Williamstown, MA while a student at Williams College. That's arguably the start of his musical career. On the other hand, there's no record I'm aware of that he did much performing in Massachusetts, so arguably his career began in Taipei, the center of Taiwan's entertainment world. But he also has studios in New York and Taipei, I believe. He mostly performs outside of Taipei, but where does he mostly write his music? The bottom line, it's difficult to determine the origin of an artist who doesn't rise organically, performing small shows and then finally sign with a big label and travel the world, performing.

I say if we put Taipei for now, but if someone has information that he performed in Williamstown then we change it to the latter. Penser (talk) 21:34, 4 March 2008 (UTC)penser

Edison Chen

Pandacomics, I feel like we've had this discussion before... For Edison Chen, refer to the above point. Penser (talk) 20:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)penser

Common name vs. Formal name of Taiwan

Pandacomics,

What's the deal with reverting Taiwan to ROC? It is well established on Wikipedia that a country's name in common usage is preferred to its formal title. In pages of famous people from other countries you don't find "People's Republic of China" written; nor do you find "United Mexican States." "China" and "Mexico" are preferred. So what's the deal? Penser (talk) 07:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)penser

You replied:

"Because it's a Wikiproject-specific infobox. See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Chinese-language_entertainment/Templates#Infobox. That, and the name is NPOV so people from pro-TI and anti-TI camps are satisified by having both names there."

I reply:

If you insist upon putting the formal name in there as well, it most certainly shouldn't be the primary name. Two important reasons:

1. Origin in Wikipedia is about identifying a physical location where a celebrity got his or her start; it is not about political boundaries. For example, look up Ricky Martin. You won't find his origin listed as "The United States of America," even though Puerto Rico is governed by the US; you'll find "San Juan, Puerto Rico" written.

2. For all countries in the origin section, the common name is preferred to the formal and political name. Do a search on Google news for "Republic of China" and then do one for "Taiwan." The latter will come up more than 10 times as often. Virtually every major English language news organization uses the term "Taiwan" primarily. I don't see why wikipedia should be held captive to the juvenile nationalists on both sides of the straits (metaphorical and literal). Taiwan should be treated the same as other places. Penser (talk) 19:20, 16 June 2008 (UTC)penser

Pandacomics is being a moron as usual. Pro-TI and anti-TI? Political questions have nothing to do with this. It's about common usage.121.12.184.237 (talk) 12:47, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Trying to change the members of Cookies (which I won easily)

Cookies (group)

I don't know....the listing in the info box is misleading because it looks like there are 2 seperated teams ( Mini Cookies & Cookies) and their members are in either term but not both. However, the fact is, all members are in Cookies, not just Angela Au, Gloria Chan, Elaine Ho, Helena Ma, Serena Po, as the info box indicated.

Pls fix that problem, if you don't , I will. When I do, pls don't get into my way.

^^ --Da Vynci (talk) 16:57, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

_______________________________________________

LOL~

--Da Vynci (talk) 00:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Some edit war on either Dee or Barbie Hsu (ended up being resolved, so chalk that up as a win)

ASOS

We can undo each other's edits all day. Or you show me where it says "Abnormal Sisters of Shiu" = ASOS, then I will be happy to change all entries for you. TheAsianGURU (talk) 04:28, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. OK, but I DID find out what ASOS stands for and with Refs, now taken if you don't like Chinese Wiki nor Baidu, then find me better RS & I will be very happy to change all the entries for us. TheAsianGURU (talk) 04:33, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Point taken. TheAsianGURU (talk) 04:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Jay Chou origin (tie; wait until they haven't paid attention...)

Jay Chou

Please do not revert other people's edit with no comment or "oh no" when the summary for the edit is fully explained. Please be WP:CIVIL. The changes I made was in compliance with Wikipedia's Chinese naming convention: When it is about a place, use Taiwan. The PRC has to be named "mainland China" when in comparison with Taiwan.

What are the reasons of your revert?--pyl (talk) 04:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Jay Chou. 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.

Chinese naming convention is not only for political articles. It is a naming convention for all Chinese-related articles. The fact is, he wasn't born in Matsu so your example doesn't work. If you have issues with the naming convention, you should address them in the convention page, not in an entertainer's article.

Your revert removed both issues that I have although you only responded to one issue. Calling the PRC "China" when in comparison with Taiwan is also not allowed. It must be called "mainland China". Otherwise, there is an implication that Taiwan is not part of China, or the Republic of China is not a representative for China. This implication is disputed, and Wikipedia takes a neutral position by not endorsing any positions.

I will not be reverting the article within the next 24 hours in order to avoid violating the no 3-RR rule. I invite you to adddress this issue with me before engaging in an edit war.--pyl (talk) 05:20, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

I find your comment on my page uncivil and I will refer this matter to the administrators. I reverted the page twice and therefore the warning is incorrectly given. Please refer to the history of the page.--pyl (talk) 05:24, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

For your reference, a report of the incivility has been filed at WP:WQA#User:_Pandacomics.--pyl (talk) 06:10, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Assume good faith

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. This edit accuses another editor of acting in bad faith, without justification. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 20:59, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Capricorn sales (a very, very, very unfortunate loss)

Why is it unfortunate when your errors are corrected? The more correct the info on Wikipedia is, the better.121.12.184.237 (talk) 12:44, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Jay Chou Capricorn

Hello, I'm just writing to tell you that your data for the album Capricorn (on the Jay Chou page, Discography section) is incorrect. The sales in Asia is NOT 0.8-0.9 million copies! This is only the amount pre-ordered in Asia before October 14th. After the album was released, within a week the sales have already reached 1 million. Jay's target is to reach 4 million. It is already a month or so and the sales are still unknown but it is increasing. It's just common sense, look at the previous albums, Still Fantasy sold over 3 million. How would Capricorn only sell 0.8-0.9? Please wait till the JVR Music announces the final numbers because the sales are still increasing. Please STOP editing and just leave the album sales section blank for now. Thank you, much appreciated. --Daisylistar (talk) 03:06, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Jay Chou Capricorn-

I'm just telling you politely that it is incorrect, no need to be rude. If you go to this website: http://music.ent.tom.com/2008-10-22/0009/08503091.html 唱片公司宣布周杰伦新碟总销量超过100万张，并颁赠盾牌给他。他表示其目标是卖出400万张，不过他没什么信心，觉得很难达到这个数目，是个挑战。 it shows Jay holding a shield that represents his album sales have already reached 1 million. The sales are still increasing, as I said before. Since it already has reached 1 million, why write 0.8-0.9? I know you might be angry and feel that you are right but it is incorrect. Please, just leave the section blank. No harm is made to you if you just leave it blank. Why start up a war? Why not just wait patiently for the total, final figures to come out? Also I'm not the only person that thinks you are incorrect, there have been other users changing your data. ~I'm not thinking that I am who, but just to try and persuade you. Why did I have to send you a message that would make you hate me? I could of just deleted it everytime I saw it. Please 一人让一步 and this world would be a better place. --Daisylistar (talk) 06:56, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Some douchebag who took issue to being warned for overlinking

Whatever

Your info don't make that much sense anyways. (Editor's note: apparently a notice was too hard for him to understand) EdmOilers023 (talk) 08:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Like I said, WHATEVER "boss". EdmOilers023 (talk) 15:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Oh, and maybe you should read the article about people who are so overprotective on wikipedia and think that they own it. I think that maybe, just maybe you classify into that category. Just a lil tip for ya, you're welcome! EdmOilers023 (talk) 15:59, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay there boss, why are you calling me that when you're acting like one? And excuse me but you TOTALLY fit into that category. I see all the other things you keep changing and undoing like you own the page. Maybe you should let go, people are only trying to help, so stop preying over it like a hawk. FYI, YOU DON'T OWN WIKIPEDIA. (in case ya didn't know).~~