User talk:Mistakefinder

Please see response, in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps#China and Taiwan map in Cross Relations article.

If you do need more help with anything, please use the

-- Joren (talk) 10:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your approach has promise. For the moment, I'm going to change

I invite you to provide a reliable source and/or discuss it further. Thanks. --Hm2k (talk) 01:06, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, your edits clearly state Two Chinas, this POV is contradicted by both the "One China" and the "One China, One Taiwan" POVs.

On 23-May, you tagged

Thanks JLaTondre. I've completed the RFD listing. Mistakefinder (talk) 08:01, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, from here: [1], the convention states to "As a general rule of thumb, the official political terms "People's Republic of China" or "PRC" and "Republic of China" or "ROC" should be used in political contexts (that is, to describe the existing governments or regimes) rather than the imprecise and politically charged terms "China" and "Taiwan." For example, "Hu Jintao is the President of the People's Republic of China" is preferred over "Hu Jintao is the President of China." Likewise, one should write "one must be an ROC citizen to vote in the ROC presidential election" as opposed to "one must be a Taiwanese citizen to vote in the Taiwanese presidential election.""

Here, you linked the word 'fortnight' under the guise of "wikification'. The word has no salience to the subject of the article; all you are doing is supplying a potential dictionary definition. Please refer to

• • You're right. Thanks for the pointing to the guidelines. I'll revert it. I was thinking it wasn't a commonly used word (at least in the US). Perhaps it's much used in the British Commonwealth world? Mistakefinder (talk) 19:40, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That text is problematic for more reasons than its being unsourced. It is a total fringe position held by no one except some KMT extremists that China is under military occupation. (So I don't believe that you can find reliable sources saying that directly; otherwise I would have just slapped a {{

I'm glad you're no longer saying that Taiwan claims the mainland. However, you still don't have a source that says China considers Taiwan "occupied territory". Also, your last sentence about "Taiwanese [living] under long-term threat and fear of war" is still hyperbolic and not neutral.

talk) 00:47, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't think such feelings are necessary to mention at all. The article is supposed to be about

talk) 01:03, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

The text looks good now! Merry Christmas to you too.

talk) 20:44, 24 December 2011 (UTC)[reply

]

"Republic of China" redirects here. For other uses, see Republic of China (disambiguation).

"Republic of China" redirects here. Not to be confused with

People's Republic of China

.

Hence the combined generic {{hatnote}}, to avoid saying "Republic of China" redirects here twice. --Cybercobra (talk) 07:39, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, joining in because I've reverted your hatnote at Geography of Taiwan. The purpose of a hatnote is to help people who arrive at an article by mistake find the article they were really after. No-one is going to arrive at Geography of Taiwan when they're looking for the country (unless they've followed a misdirected link, in which case it's the link that needs fixing). Kanguole 08:23, 8 April 2012 (UTC) To Cybercobra and Kanguole,[reply]

• Is the island article being merged into the former ROC article? I didn't see the concensus on merge. Only saw that all island related entries [Island of Taiwan, Taiwan (island),etc.] redirected to Geography of Taiwan. So seems it's necessary to clarify it's on the Geog of Taiwan island, not Taiwan/ROC as a whole?

Cyber, I'll need to revert yours to restore my paragraph, then I'll keep your hatnote. Mistakefinder (talk) 08:39, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NAMB explains the issue. It's implausible that anyone looking for the country would go to "Geography of Taiwan", "Island of Taiwan" or "Taiwan (island)". Kanguole 09:08, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply

]

Regarding your addition to the lead in the Supreme Court of the United States: we used to have a mention of the SCOTUS abbreviation in the lead. After discussion it was decided to remove it. That's why I directed you to the archive. See also the more extensive discussion in the current talk page. First: you should not simply state that it is used "often" without references. Second: the press does not seem to use the abbreviation much, though it is somewhat common in Blogs aimed at professionals (but even such sites as SCOTUSBlog usually uses "The Court" when talking about it). Of the many things that the Supreme Court is called (e.g., "the High Court", "the Court", "the Supreme Court", "the Supremes") SCOTUS is just not that common outside a particularly narrow circle. I'm posting essentially this in the talk page, perhaps we can discuss it there. Magidin (talk) 03:16, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that disambiguating

What is it, precisely, that you want to add that you don't feel is adequately covered by the previous version? The history section has a much more detailed and nuanced explanation of the issue, and we already spend one paragraph in the lead talking about it...

Consider replying with what you're trying to say in Chinese? :/ Aside from generally finding it unnecessary, I'm also confused by what you're trying to say with your new paragraph. Thanks. wctaiwan (talk) 12:31, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

I was curious about the a couple of the edits you made to Waterloo; one was

• District
  battle

Though I appreciate that there are occasionally good reasons to go against the "one bluelink per line" and piping rules, I can't see that this is one of them; the battle is referenced elsewhere and I'm not sure what an obscured link to Napoleon Bonapart (rather than the battle itself) adds.

I also removed the link to "eponym" as the dab page isn't about that term and (IMHO) isn't something to be bluelinked.

I'm assuming that (as you've been around since 2009), you're probably familiar with the basic rules for disambiguation pages (and don't need a pointer to

But I'd be interested to hear if there was a reason behind the changes mentioned above.

All the best, Ubcule (talk) 18:08, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment. Ok I'm fine with your comment. I haven't actually fully reviewed MOSDAB so thanks for pointing it out. I'm not sure why you piped "District" for Napoleon and what that means, but your latest edit is fine. Thanks! Mistakefinder (talk) 08:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'd definitely recommend that you read MOSDAB then; I can't claim to know every word of it myself, but it helps to know the main points. There's also a short summary of the basic rules displayed every time you edit a disambiguation page.

Regarding "I'm not sure why you piped "District" for Napoleon and what that means"... *I* didn't add it at all(!) The diff link shows that it was added by you, that's why I asked you about it(!!)

Weird! I guess it may have been on my paste clipboard by accident... thanks. Mistakefinder (talk) 20:24, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All the best, Ubcule (talk) 18:38, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Widefox; talk 08:39, 15 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transbay until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Widefox; talk 07:52, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and

Thanks. Addressed. Mistakefinder (talk) 22:15, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Widefox; talk 08:18, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a mess and needs deleting. You've been advised to read

WP:MOSDAB before. Did you? Here's some links. Although you may mean well, this may be perceived as disruptive editing or not listening to other editors despite clear violations of several guidelines / policies. Widefox; talk 08:32, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

I replied to you talk page. Please feel free to fix. I will try to get to it these few days. If it's unfixable and inappropriate, then perhaps deleting is OK. However, you didn't answer my question about

WP:PTM. Perhaps entries there need to be edited too? Mistakefinder (talk) 22:15, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

I did reply - see

Talk:Transbay. Widefox; talk 23:09, 24 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Shouldn't the word be pronounced like /suɾutʃ/, not [sɪŋt͡ʃi] which suggests a

That's how it sounds like here, so is the recording wrong? Mistakefinder (talk) 16:17, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I added the stress mark. --

talk) 16:29, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Hello, Mistakefinder. Voting in the

2018 Arbitration Committee elections

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

After having checked and found that only 105 main space articles reference

As someone who favors the singular 'they', rather than impose a pronoun on someone, I have no problem with the usage. However, in forcing the insertion of the explanatory link, it comes across as advocacy - or imposition - of the singular they. Simply by calling attention to this usage, this one word, in an article otherwise about a tragedy.

It would be similar to linking word succumbed. That would be calling attention to a particular word, but that in no way helps explain the subject of the article. Certainly doing so in the lede is a distraction. But anyway, the same later edit simplified that to 'died'. Shenme (talk) 03:59, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mistakefinder, thanks for your edit to Eswatini. I'm afraid you'll find that it will soon be reverted, if it hasn't been already, as there are a couple of editors there who are repeatedly reverting similar changes that have been made by numerous other editors. Just wanted to let you know that I agree with your edit. There's discussion, in case you're interested, at Talk:Eswatini#"formerly known as Swaziland", as well as some overlapping comments in Talk:Eswatini#Replacing mentions of "Swaziland" with "Eswatini" in all articles. The reason given in the edit summaries for the reverts is usually "discussed ad nauseum" or similar. It's true there has been a lot of discussion, but unless the discussion leads to consensus, which I don't think it has, that's not a valid reason... --IamNotU (talk) 11:00, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pointing me to the discussion. Mistakefinder (talk) 10:37, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For the time being I have moved it to

Draft:GOOD TV. Regards. Lectonar (talk) 07:25, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Good TV 2 logo.png

Thank you for uploading

image copyright tag

; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the

talk) 01:00, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply

]

Orphaned non-free image File:Good TV 2 logo.png

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently 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

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:29, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

POV-pushing(?) regarding the status of Taiwan in certain articles

There is currently a discussion at

Possible shared account/paid editing?

. 194.207.146.167 (talk) 12:53, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply ]

Political status of Taiwan --> Recognition of Taiwan as part of the PRC

You are absolutely correct. The majority of countries do not explicitly recognise Taiwan as part of the PRC. The way it actually works is that the PRC claims that Taiwan is part of China, and then none of the PRC's allies (anyone who recognises the PRC) are allowed to protest against this (aside from some of the great powers) out of fear of offending China and suffering from economic sanctions imposed by China. In fact, few countries explicitly recognise Taiwan as part of the PRC, despite the fact that they recognise the PRC in favour of the ROC, because they still want to do business with Taiwan under the table, and recognising Taiwan as part of the PRC will probably result in economic sanctions from Taiwan and the severance of unofficial diplomatic relations. The thing is, although Taiwan is a lot smaller than the PRC in terms of geography, population, economy, etc., Taiwan is still a very important member of the international community regarding culture, society, diplomacy, trade, industry, etc. Cutting off all ties to Taiwan (whether official or unofficial) is not in anyone's interests. The only countries that are willing to do this are tiny and/or poor countries such as the Solomon Islands since they can survive purely on whatever China (PRC) is willing to hand out to them for free (in exchange for recognising the PRC over the ROC). Jargo Nautilus (talk) 04:08, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Translation request Isabelle de Charrière

Hello Mistakefinder Could you write/translate the article of Isabelle de Charrière (Q123386) in Mandarin Chinese for Wikipedia? That would be appreciated. Boss-well63 (talk) 15:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Hsu Shu-hua (disambiguation)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read

the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard

to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on

section G14 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an orphaned

disambiguation page which either

• disambiguates only one extant Wikipedia page and whose title ends in "(disambiguation)" (i.e., there is a primary topic);
• disambiguates zero extant Wikipedia pages, regardless of its title; or
• is a redirect with a title ending in "(disambiguation)" that does not target a disambiguation page or page that has a disambiguation-like function.

Under the

see the disambiguation page guidelines for more information

.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. buidhe 04:13, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply ]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:21, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply ]

Disambiguation link notification for July 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gogoro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Scooter.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:20, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Translation request for Chinese Wikipedia: WiTricity

Hello! On behalf of WiTricity and as part of my work at Beutler Ink, I've shared a draft entry for Chinese Wikipedia, which is a translated version of the English Wikipedia article. I'm searching for an editor who is willing to review this draft and update the entry appropriately. Might you be willing to take a look? Thanks for your consideration. Inkian Jason (talk) 18:38, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A quick update to say that another editor has reviewed the draft. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:11, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message