User talk:Jiang: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 23:04, 18 February 2005 editInstantnood (talk \| contribs)32,683 edits →Re: Template:Rename ← Previous edit		Revision as of 07:05, 19 February 2005 edit undoJiang (talk \| contribs)43,437 editsm archiveNext edit →
Line 9:		Line 9:

	----		----
	== "penkyamp" could be a general noun ==

	*'''Keep''': Fellow Wikipedians, please pause and think for a second: do you know the exact origin and meaning of "penkyamp" in the ]? Proper nouns(let's have no doubt that "Penkyamp" is indeed a proper name for the orthography), have varying degrees of SPECIFICITY. The fact that the name "penkyamp" does not automatically lead us to the origin of such system doesn't mean that such system wasn't in use under different names. Let's see: "penkyamp" as a GENERAL NOUN is inspired by Mandarin "]", which is itself both a proper name for a system and a general noun designating "phonetic script". As a result, "penkyamp" as a general noun has been in use among the Cantonese referring to any phonetic script since at least the birth of the Mandarin Pinyin. And "Penkyamp" as a proper noun for a specific system might not be in place well after this system was in use for many years, only until it was introduced to us as such. What if on-line records before 2003 has been mostly erased?
	Besides, the article started under the entry ] instead of ]. Maybe back then "Penkyamp" wasn't finalized as its only proper name. It could be "Lomazi" or "Zeuyamp". At least it's nothing as specific as "Jyutpin" (a name that is hightly stylized and specified as a "PINyin"--note: not a Cantonese pronunciation--- of the "Jyut"(Guangdong)-- nothing can get as specific as this, which will garantee to trace back to its origin as an officially sponsored scheme). But "penkyamp" is not as specific as this. It means "phonetic script", is spelled as is pronounced in Cantonese, and is in circulation among the Cantonese thanks to the already existing Mandarin "Pinyin". I urge you to think twice about our obsession with the specificity of the proper name of the entry: what you call "Penkyamp" is actually of secondary relevance. The question is, what kind of usage, or systems were in existence before this name was finalized, on Misplaced Pages?


	== Hi ==

	I've TA-ed both EE100 and EE40.
	Why don't you edit ] and ]?
	] 06:17, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	==Taiwan cession dispute==
	Hello, I am trying to see if we can conclude the dispute on ]. I fully agree that we should make the readers aware of the fact that it has yet become a position accepted by the majority. Please go ahead and make what you think necessary to make the article NPOV. Many thanks.] 08:14, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	== Image copyright ==

	Hi! Thanks for uploading ] and ]. I notice they currently don't
	have ]s.
	Could you add one to let us know their copyright status? (You can
	use <nowiki>{{gfdl}}</nowiki> if you release it under
	the ], or <nowiki>{{fairuse}}</nowiki> if you
	claim ], etc.) If you don't know
	what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images
	and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much, ] 22:06, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	==RFC pages on VfD==
	Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing ], ] and ] from ]. Each of them was listed by ]. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - ] 03:50, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)


	==Unverified images==
	Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

	*]

	I notice it currently doesn't have an ]. Could you add one to let us know its ] status? (You can use <nowiki>{{gfdl}}</nowiki> if you release it under the ], <nowiki>{{fairuse}}</nowiki> if you claim ], etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just ''let me know ]'' where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. ] (], ])]] 05:13, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

	P.S. You can help tag other images at ]. Thanks again.


	==Unverified images==
	Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

	*]

	I notice it currently doesn't have an ]. Could you add one to let us know its ] status? (You can use <nowiki>{{gfdl}}</nowiki> if you release it under the ], <nowiki>{{fairuse}}</nowiki> if you claim ], etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just ''let me know ]'' where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. ] (], ])]] 21:59, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)

	P.S. You can help tag other images at ]. Thanks again.

	== the legislator election ==

	Hi, this is theodoranian @ zh.wiki. Today is the ROC. legislator election, and I have make all the tables. Hope it is helpful for you!! --]

	== National Banner Song ==

	Hi, during my RC patrol, someone edited ] and deleted some stuff. My Chinese isn't all that well, if you could, please check if it was a vandalism edit. --] ] 08:34, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	==Chinese parties==

	Could you give me the pinyin rendering of ]? I think all articles like this should give the Chinese name in the Roman alphabet (as in Guomindang). ] 23:50, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	I was wondering if you are at all familiar with this scene. If you aren't, input would still be greatly appreciated. I created this article about a month ago, but so far I've been the only one contributing to it. If you have any questions/comments, please leave them on ]. — ] 03:21, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	== Why did you remove edits on Tibet? ==

	Tibet is a soveriegn nation- it has a government (in exile), and is illegally occupied by China. Why did you remove it from the page on list of sovereign states?

	Also, as a non-disinterested party (being Chinese), why do you not recuse yourself from making edits on issues involving China.

	==]==
	Thanks for uploading ]. I notice it currently doesn't
	have an ].
	Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can
	use <nowiki>{{gfdl}}</nowiki> if you release it under
	the ], or <nowiki>{{fairuse}}</nowiki> if you
	claim ], etc.) If you don't know
	what any of this means, just let me know where you got the images
	and I'll tag them for you. Thanks. ] 00:36, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	==Country footers==
	Some months ago you played a central role in forging a consensus that the number of footer templates in country articles should be strictly limited. You also did a great deal of work in clearing the clutter from country pages. I strongly agree with limiting the number of templates and have occasionally been removing templates as they have been readded. Early today ] ] me for these actions. I would much appreciate if you could drop him a word that my actions were not in fact vandalism. - ] 05:11, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

	:Thank you, Jiang, for explaining about the consensus that I wasn't aware of. I should not have spoken so harshly to SimonP; I was just upset that I had to spend extra time on something I hadn't planned on doing - and by the fact that most of his edits were not even tagged with an appropriate summary. However, it was not fair of me to call his work "vandalism," and I have apologized to him for that. I am posting the following comment on the talk pages of all who have commented:

	:Anyway: Most of my fellow-New Zealanders - <u>including republicans</u> are passionate supporters of the Commonwealth, and consider our membership of it much more than a factoid. No matter how opposed to the monarchy they are, no matter how left-wing they are, <u>almost all</u> New Zealanders consider our Commonwealth membership to be of supreme importance. Symbolic, yes - but symbols have powerful meanings. By working as a group, for example, the commonwealth was able to force Fiji to restore the 1997 constitution after the 2000 coup. (Other joint ventures were less successful, but at least they tried - and did so together, as a united force). It influences our foreign relations, too: Commonwealth-member countries exchange High Commissioners, not Ambassadors. The distinction may seem trivial (and for practical purposes, it almost always is), but it is real nonetheless. ] 09:40, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	== First Taiwan Strait Crisis ==

	I've expanded the ] article. Feel free to review and modify as needed. ] 14:53, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	== COTW ==

	Congratulations, ] has been voted this week's ]. Please edit it to help raise it to featured article status.

	== Another unverified image ==
	First, I resized the ] on your homepage so that it doesn't block your notice board. If you want to enlarge it, etc, go see the ] section on images. Second, could you place a copyright tag on ]? Although the paintings themselves may be over hundreds of years old, it may be that the photo itself was taken recently and may be copyrighted. Check the list of ] and if you still need help, go to ]. --] (])]] 08:48, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

	==Unverified images==
	Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

	*]

	I notice it currently doesn't have an ]. Could you add one to let us know its ] status? (You can use <nowiki>{{gfdl}}</nowiki> if you release it under the ], <nowiki>{{PD-self}}</nowiki> if you wish to release your own work to the public domain, <nowiki>{{fairuse}}</nowiki> if you claim ], etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just ''let me know ]'' where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. ] (], ])]] 22:36, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)

	P.S. You can help tag other images at ]. Thanks again.

	Also:
	* ] ] 20:17, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)
	* ] ] 20:46, Dec 23, 2004 (UTC)
	* ] ] 05:43, Dec 26, 2004 (UTC)
	* ] Thanks ] 01:06, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
	* ] (] 03:47, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC))

	==PRC==

	Thanks for the correction on RoC/KMT. Actually I was surprised that the article on the Taiwan government was called "Republic of China". The term is not in common use in my country and a reference to "Republic of China" would certainly be taken by British people to mean the People's Republic. For people like me who are not familiar with the terms, I thought the disambig line at the top of both articles would be useful. --]\|] 19:06, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	== Missing Image ==

	I noticed that ] is tagged, but has no image. I turned my firewall off to check if that was the problem. But I still didn't see the image. I am curious how I would go about getting this image deleted??

	] 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	== Image Tag question ==

	I tagged this image.
	Image:Sharpie.jpg

	With a pd-user tag. How can i get it to specify the user in the tag?
	] 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

	== VfD on Cantonese Romanization systems ==

	Please give your comments on the following two votes for deletion:
	*]
	*]
	You are invited because I have found you on Penkyamp's talk page and I believe that you can make a fair judgement.
	-- ] 19:43, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)

	==Yuan Dynasty names==
	It's not me but ] who changed the convention, and as far as I know, he did not gain consensus on that change. So I reverted ]. Anyway, it is not a proper place to dicide naming convensions for Mongol khans. --] 03:37, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== Thank you for your vote ==

	...on ]. (no reply necessary) -] 13:26, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== Thanks for reverting the boosterism at ] ==

	I am quite concerned with what I perceive to be a gradual intensification of academic boosterism in college and universities. (A recent flourish of cardinal-and-gray butt plumage in ] was justified by someone saying that they had taken the ] and ] articles as models... well, you see where '''that''' leads). I don't want to make a personal quest out of it. It's wearing enough on my nerves to try to keep the braggadocio in the MIT toned down to the "disgusting-but-not-actually-nauseating" level. I'm glad to see that others are keeping an eye on some of the other articles.

	I recently removed a phrase from the Dartmouth article, specifically "...and is regarded as one of the most prestigious colleges in the world." I pointed out that simply by identifying Dartmouth as a member of the Ivy League the article instantly established that it is presitigous, academically excellent, and historic (by U. S. standards). There's no need say more, certainly not in the opening paragraph. 95% of readers will know what the ] is and the rest can click the link. The anon reinserted it with the edit remark "(Added-prestigious--Cornell is a member of the ivy league and they are not prestigious)!" Yes, I realize the anon was probably trolling.

	A worse problem a few months back was a certain editor, not a troll, who did a big good-faith refactoring of the whole MIT article. However he had a penchant for removing anything that doesn't sound like PR material, i.e. anything that could possibly interpreted as critical of MIT in any way, with the result that the article got blander and blander and said fewer and fewer things that distinguish MIT from any other leading university. For example, MIT happens to have a library that is notabily and strikingly poor relative to the caliber of the institution by virtually any metric you care to apply. I don't remember the exact figures, but by various rankings of institutions you'd probably find MIT up in the top dozen in general top-notchery, academic studliness, and all-around superiority, whereas you'd be hard-pressed to concoct any ranking that could put MIT's library in the top fifty. I happen to think this is a specific MIT characteristic worth mentioning, but there is no way he is going to allow '''that''' to be said in the article. In general he seems to have eased up though.

	I'll watch this page should you decide to reply. ] ] 14:34, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	:Thank you for your response. I don't have much to say other than to agree with pretty much everything you've posted here. This should be written into the much-behind-and-disorganized ].--]]

	==Buddhism template==

	I noticed that you removed the Buddhism template from ], stating "rm inappropriate temp." To be honest, normally I would have just reverted this, but since I know you to be a competent and conscientious editor, I figured I would ask about your logic about it. I'm not really a huge fan of FGS myself, but I'm not sure who would dispute that they're Buddhists. - ]] 10:56, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC) - PS; I will monitor this page for your response.

	:Your idea of how to use this template is a little different than mine. I never thought of the Buddhism template as marking an article as being part of a series. Rather, it seems to me that it is more like an extension of a <nowiki>==See also==</nowiki> section -- a quick way to provide links to other relevant articles. Would you object to me putting a See Also section on ] listing out ], ], ], etc., individually? I don't see a reason not to include the template on any Buddhism-related article except for concerns about crowding. On the other hand, if you prefer the <nowiki>{{buddhism2}}</nowiki> template for aesthetic reasons, I have no objection. - ]] 10:52, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC) PS - I will again watch your page for responses.

	I don't object to either the see also section or the footer. I just think the series box is inappropriate, but I'll stay neutral on the footer.--]] 10:54, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== China-stub ==

	I agree on your decision for reverting the China-stub template. I would like to see the issue resolved on its ]. --] ] 10:17, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== australia ==

	you must have a realy poor browser.
	the pictures fit fine for me. ] 14:45, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== Hot pot ==

	I've been reviewing an article about hot pot, but too weird things crossed my mind. First, all the section headings do not correspond to the article text. Second, the article appears to have been taken from some sort of source. Should I place a copyright violation notice for that article? ] 02:45, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== Neil H. McElroy ==

	if you have some time, could you wikify and copyedit the data you inserted into ]? cheers. ] 22:22, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== COTW ==

	{{CurrentCOTW}}
	Congratulations, ] has been chosen as this week's ]. Please contribute to it to help bring it up to feature article standard.

	== hot pot ==

	Okay, I did a rewrite at hot pot/temp
	How does one lift the copyright violation notice? ] 19:43, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	==]==
	You seem to be knowledgable about Chinese topics (among other things). I was going to VfD this article, but I noticed you've editted ] since it was added, but didn't remove the link. Seems like a rather POV title. Maybe you didn't notice it? Do you agree it should be VfD'd, or is there a more appropriate title for it, or should it be merged somewhere, or ??? ? ] 01:25, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
	:OK. I VfD'd it. At the same time ] speedied it, then apparently had second thots and restored it and put a cleanup tag on it, but between what I saw skimming it, and what you found, I am still inclined to think it's unsalvagable.
	::And now he's speedied it again--no idea what speedy case would apply, but I'm not going to complain. ] 03:10, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== Calendar nonsense ==

	You need to use your brain, and not just slavishly follow guidelines. The author of the guideline is obviously talking about post-1582 dates, and dates before 1582 did not strike his/her mind it seems. Dates before 1582 are always written in Julian calendar, which was the calendar in use at the time. If we write all the Chinese dates in the proleptic Gregorian calendar, then we will have dates that it won't be possible to compare with dates of historical events in the Western world! ] 12:07, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== Zhou Enlai ==

	Is there a way to advocate for the much needed expansion of ]'s article that might actually receive some attention from other users? ]+(]) 02:23, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	I notice you reverted the redirects to point back to ]. I merely made those changes to avoid double-redirects; at the time the main article was entitled ].

	It was not me that chose the title ], nevertheless I believe this is the correct title, in accordance with the style guide for monarch's names in ]. Can you comment on why you prefer ]?

	-- ] 03:50, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	OK, fair enough if there was a previous discussion on this.

	-- ] 04:11, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== Dengist Reforms ==

	Hello, Jiang, I thought you might be the one to ask for a proper translation to 改革开放, right now i think ] might be too long. ]+(]) 22:08, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== zh-cn and zh-tw ==
	any discussion about the zh-cn and zh-tw interwikis? since the software is now able to translate between the two. wondering.... --] (]) 07:59, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

	:they are all changed? oh, that's good. --] (]) 13:17, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

	==Notice Board==
	Hello,

	I have started a ] in the hope that contributers on Taiwan related topics can have a place to discuss on different proposals.

	I also made a page ] so that we can keep track on the topics by category. I hope this would be useful for us. And also please generously give us some opinions and advice.
	] 07:28, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	An anonymous user just labeled all the "Smaller cities and towns" on the list as Taiwanese, Mainland Chinese, or Chinese Vietnamese. While the Chinese American population found in those cities may be predominantly composed of the groups labeled, I'm not sure if it's an appropriate label. — ] 22:57, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

	==1992 Consensus==
	Jiang, I have to say that your edit makes it sound like a consensus was reached where both side agreed to be part of China. Your edit neglects the fact that ROC side's depositions: no consensus ever being reached. I felt like reading People's daily. :( In this way, I am afraid, the article would not be neutral. ] 03:20, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	One more trivial thing, PRC side called the meeting as Wang-Koo meeting; whereas ROC side calls it Koo-Wang meeting. Just for your information. ] 03:29, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	==Province of China==
	I thought only states would have political division as and power to exert its sovereignty.
	However, I have noticed that the ] has fused two political entities and list their

	Countries as the geographical areas would definitely have no provinces. Therefore I wonder if this is correct and neutral to list PRC and ROC's political divisions together under ]. I have posted same question in the ], in case you feel like to discuss in that board. ] 06:40, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	== 1992 consensus ==

	對此，九二年親身參與香港會談的許惠祐接受訪問時做上述表示，他並強調兩岸從未有過九二共識，他怎可能呼籲政府去接受。許惠祐表示，九二年兩岸曾在香港就一個中國問題有過討論，但雙方未能獲致共識，即使我方後來電傳大陸建議對此問題「各說各話」，對方也僅以傳真回覆表示「尊重」，而尊重和「同意」、「承認」有相當距離，更何況，九二年之後，大陸也從未公開承認「一個中國、各自表述」。 (http://www.epochtimes.com/b5/1/11/6/n147260.htm)
	:Shu Huei-yuo, who attended the 92 meeting in Hong Kong, emphasizes that because the two sides never had a consensus, he couldn't have encouraged the government to accept (the consensus?). He also said that the two sides had discussed the one china problem, but did not reach a consensus. Even though we (Taiwan) called maindland China and suggested to "each side speaks each own opinion" (各說各話), mainland China only faxed the reply showing that they "respect" (尊重) this suggestion. Respect is pretty far off from agreement (同意) and recognition (承認). Since after 92, mainland China has never public recognized "one china, each side speaks its own opinion" (一個中國、各自表述).


	台灣日報【台灣論壇】(2003/04/23) 　四月十六日，海基會董事長辜振甫在日本早稻田大學接受榮譽博士典禮上發表演說《新時代日台與兩岸關係展望》。辜老明確指出— 當時（一九九二）「一個中國」問題雙方意見分歧，香港會議並無共識。真正在政治爭論打上休止符的，並不是香港會議所達成，而是會後對方接受我方提議，站在相互尊重、對等協商的原則下繼續交往。所以是「相互諒解」，應該用Accord比較貼切，而不是「共識」。
	:April 16th, Koo 辜振甫 in some japanese university gave the 新時代日台與兩岸關係展望 (new era taiwan-japan two-strait relationship outlook) talk. Koo (I dunno the pinyin) pointed out that the two sides had different opinions on the 1992 One China question, so a consensus was not reached in the Hong Kong meeting. The only thing conclusive in this politically charged argument is that the two sides, at the request of Taiwan, would respect each other (相互尊重), and negotiate as equals (對等協商). So, acccord (諒解) is a better term than consensus (共識).

	比如說，唐樹備就曾經在1997年7月表示，「一段時期以來，台灣方面把海協與海基會就兩會事務性商談中『海峽兩岸均堅持一個中國之原則』達成口頭共識，歸結為所謂『一個中國，各自表述』，這顯然不符合當時的情況」(引自李銘義 2001，2)。
	:for exampole, in July 1997 Tang (唐樹備) said "for some time, Taiwan came to the conclusion of "one china, each side speaks its own opinion" (一個中國，各自表述). This conclusion came from the unwritten consensus that "the two sides both support the one china principle" (海峽兩岸均堅持一個中國之原則), and this doesnt fit with the situation. (I'm assuming that Tang is saying that Taiwan's 一個中國，各自表述 conclusion is a non-sequitor from the 海峽兩岸均堅持一個中國之原則 principle reached in 1992).

	The translation's pretty rough but hope it helps.
	] 12:56, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	Thank you wareware for the help in translation. Just for your information, ] is the university where Koo recieved his degree when he made the public testimony on the existence of the consensus.] 03:29, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	== ] ==

	I've nominated the ] article as the next Collaboration of the Week, as the article is pretty short considering that he saved a billion lives. Please vote for it at: ] --]] 17:58, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	==Heimdal==
	Hello Jiang. User Heimdal many times deleted my edits without any explenations and used very inappropriate language when referring to me. He also deleted my polite postings from his discussion page. I reposted them under 'Holocaust denial?', a section I started when the holocaust could not even be mentioned on the page because German partcipants removed it time and again. I see much of the same has happened in your interaction with him.

	I believe that my edits - many of them are still on the page - have really improved the article. As for the ones reverted over and over again, I do not care for nationalistic discussions and edit wars and have let it go. I moved on to other articles which I can improve. It is a pity I do not have more time or strength to pursue this, as one picture of the holocaust seems to me an absolute must, but perhaps you will be more successful in your efforts.

	I do not have time for wars and dislike such disrepect in a community project. There never has been an entity called Nazi Germany. Some German participants use many routes to remove or reduce the significance Holocaust and other German atrocities, including a wide discussion on the reasons for the Iraq war which is not very relevant on this page (it is elsewhere). I wish you strength and good luck in your efforts to make this page more objective and will keep following them every now and then. ] 20:03, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC) (I do watch your page for an answer...)

	:Thank you for the encouragement and bringing this to my attention. If I get mass reverted and/or personally attacked once more, I will start ] as part of the ] process, seeing that the prerequisites for having such a page have been completed. Your assistance then will be necessary. If you wish, you can start the page before I do (see ] for guidelines). --]] 23:16, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	Sorry, I try to keep away from these sorts of things. I am more active on the Dutch Misplaced Pages than here. However, I add my experience to whatever steps you are going to undertake. I am no expert on these and also am afraid that they will not do much good. For example, the person - this or another - who kept on deleting the holocaust altogether from this page was a totally new participant and active only on the page Germany against me adding the holocaust ('she' did add some other very German-specific details) called me a POV-pusher for thinking the holocaust should be in there. 'She' hasn't been spotted since. 'She' wrote on 'her' page that she is Maria from South Italy. For your information, in Germany it is against the law to deny the holocaust. It is very easy to just create another identity and to continue obstructing the community process here. You only need a strong nationalistic motivation. 00:57, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	== Germany ==

	The article you have requested for page protection has been protected. Best of wishes. --] ] 07:04, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
	: Heimdal has claimed that he/she has left the Misplaced Pages. Is it still necessary to protect the article? --] ] 12:17, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	], you succeeded in blocking the Germany article in order to impose on everyone your own version. That befits a true vandal like you. Never mind, in two weeks or so, your silly, biased protection request will expire anyway. See you until then.--] 17:56, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

	== ] ==
	The article seems to be nothing more than a list of links, despite going through COTW. Do you think it would be better to include one paragraph summaries and link the articles in sentences? --] ] 07:04, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
	==Re: Template:Rename==
	Thank you. I have replied at ]. — ]] 23:02, Feb 18 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:05, 19 February 2005

Note: Unless you specify that you will be monitoring this page, I will respond to you on your talk page instead of mine. But if you want a speedier response or any response at all, answer on this page since I will probably forget to check yours.

POST A COMMENT

Archived versions: 18VIII03 | 21X03 | 30XII03 | 21II04 | 17IV04 | 07VI04 | 28VII04 | 2X04 | 5XII04