Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:48, 6 December 2006

Huaiwei is a member of the Law Enforcement WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of Law Enforcement. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Archived discussions : A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H

Barnstars of Honour

WikiVigils

1. On the SGpedian community's behalf, I thank you for the wonderful contributions you have made on Misplaced Pages for the past year. - Mailer Diablo 16:25, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
2. Come back, Teo!--Tdxiang 陈 鼎 翔 (Talk) Chat with Tdxiang on IRC! 09:52, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
3. Huaiwei, do come back. We really missed you and your significant contributions to Singapore-related articles. Without our notice board, I don't know what SGpedians' will be today. I value your contributions you've made during your stay here. It is your wish to come back or not. --Terence Ong 10:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
4. Do please come back to Misplaced Pages! --Andylkl 10:42, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
5. Your contributions are truly valued. --Sengkang 16:57, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
6. To my understanding, the Gurkha Contingent article was primarily of your work. Thankyou for a fantastic read; I enjoy many of the Singaporean contributions to Misplaced Pages. It is a shame to see an editor of your standing leave. michael 08:11, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3

A final decision has been made in the above Arbitration case and the case has been closed.

For the Arbitration committee. --Tony Sidaway 18:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Singapore MRT academic text

If you ever come back to Misplaced Pages. you could help me find a text you have added to the Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) article: Sock, Y.P. and Walder, Jay H. (1999) Singapore’s Public Transport. Thank you for your help! --Ghormax 13:07, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Return

Is there nothing that can make you come back? You are an asset to us. Please return! We'd love to see you work on articles!--Tdxiang 09:25, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The only thing that can make me come back is myself. Thanks for poking at me all these while...it wasent in vain now I suppose! :D--Huaiwei 15:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

There's so many new things you have missed. You will notice we have many articles on constituencies now, and I plan to do the 1955 election next. Hope all will be well soon. Elle _{vécut heureuse} (Be eudaimonic!) 15:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I do keep myself updated on affairs and development in this site however, and was kindof dissapointed by what happened to the Current Affairs in Malaysia and Singapore page, for example.--Huaiwei 15:56, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Glad to see you return after all this while. Good luck editing! :) --Terence Ong _{(Chat | Contribs)} 16:01, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I tot you left? ;)--Huaiwei 16:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't see you on MSN now, are you online? I will chat with you over there. --Terence Ong _{(Chat | Contribs)} 16:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I dont intend to switch on MSN now...otherwise I will never sleep. :D--Huaiwei 17:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Am I watching Superman Returns? :D --Vsion 16:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

lol...maybe that was another source of inspiration!--Huaiwei 17:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

excellent. SchmuckyTheCat 18:58, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Huaiwei, I need your help for the 1997 elections and I don't know much about elections before 2001. If you like to help, help me to expand the article. Thanks. --Terence Ong _{(Chat | Contribs)} 07:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

• Finally, you are back. Let's rebuild the Singapore community again. - Mailer Diablo 14:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
  • You make it sound as thou it was "destroyed" during my absence? ;) Hope it arent that bad, and in fact, it wont bode well for this site's future if its so dependent on a few wikipedians. Lets aspire to build up a team of sgpedians at the same time, shall we? :)--Huaiwei 15:01, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back/L/wangi 16:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. ;) I am kinda wondering why the Changi Airport page has remained largely stagnant even in my absence thou...sigh. --Huaiwei 16:52, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

welcome back...having been aroudn for quite some time i have always been for changi's page been tend by singaporeans. that filipino thinks he knows best....what the.

Heh...but er...whos the filipino you are refering to?--Huaiwei 10:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

• Hey, it's good to see you back! --Merovingian (T, C, @) 15:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the welcome. ;)--Huaiwei 15:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

huaiwei i was refering to eletrikblue that pinoy guy.....

Re: City of Singapore

Re - From materials I have cited and have on hand, it's pretty apparent that the Municipal Council, later the City Council, did not cover the entirety of the then crown colony. There was a Rural Board responsible for the rest of the crown colony. The Municipal Council was in fact established in the mid-19th century, long before Singapore became a crown colony of its own in 1946. The City Council definitely was not responsible for the Cocos or Keeling Islands and the Christmas Island, which were transferred to Australia in 1955 and 1957. In the 1948 Legislative Council election, there were four constituencies, two for Rural and two for Municipal. As it is a fact as shown by evidence, it's hardly my assertion. I've yet to see any evidence justifying your claim () that the pre-1963 City is the same as the modern state of Singapore.

Edits related to the pre-1963 City and City Council were not related to the page ban in the sense that the page ban was a result of disagreements over the city status of modern Singapore from the administration and legal point of view. There's nothing related to the fact that the pre-1963 City did not cover the entirety of the modern state of Singapore. — Instantnood 22:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Why is this whole text appearing in my talk page? Do you have an issue with me, or do you have an issue with the topic at hand?--Huaiwei 12:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

You directed the problem to my user talk page . As a responsible contributor I have the obligation to explain to users who dispute with actual facts, and to request them to provide necessary evidence. — Instantnood 18:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

My post was on the justifications behind the admin action against your behavior in wikipedia. Attempting to explain your factual inclinations in my talk page (or in anyone else's for that matter) does not vindicate your misbehavior even if it turns out that your POV is factually true. I find it of interest to note that even at this juncture, you still apparantly fail to distinguish between factual disputes and behaviorial problems. Is this also reflective of the fact that you have basically not changed nor learnt anything about your conduct after all these time? Very tragic indeed. (and you can dispense with that "As a responsible contributor I have the obligation to..." rheotic. That's pretty thickskin by Asian standards, and we arent fools when forming opinions about you.)--Huaiwei 15:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

You keep refuting actual facts with no justification, and it's behavioural problems to revert such edits of yours.. interesting. Is there anything to do with Asian standards? " That's pretty thickskin " - Neologism, huh? — Instantnood 18:20, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh really? Well firstly, define "actual facts", for what seems "factual" to you may not neccesary mean the same to others. I certainly do accept well-researched, well-documented factual information, thank you very much. Whether your "facts" meets these criteria is a concern you need to deal with, but not in my talkpage. Secondly, I am certainly shocked that you didnt know what my sentence in brackets mean based on your last two queries....seriously, you didnt know what thickskin means? It is an actual word in English, and there is an additional meaning in the Chinese context. Arent you Chinese enough to know it? "Anything to do with Asian standards"...well I am Asian, so it is relevant, even if it dosent apply to you. :D--Huaiwei 13:53, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

One's ethnic, cultural and nationality background is of no relevance to editing on Misplaced Pages. — Instantnood 16:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Overdone revert

Please kindly restore what you've overdone in your recent revert to culture of the People's Republic of China . Thanks in advance. — Instantnood 18:34, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Please kindly restore those to culture of China as well . — Instantnood 18:42, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Fine.. you simply ignored the request for the communist/PRC article. Not sure if you'd bother to respond to talk:culture of China, to explain what you've said in an edit summary . — Instantnood 19:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I simply didnt bother opening up this page when I note the last editor was by the name of instantnood. As stated in the summary, an "over-revert" dosent exist when ALL edits are rejected. End of discussion.--Huaiwei 15:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

" I simply didnt bother opening up this page when I note the last editor was by the name of instantnood. " - Does that mean you will revert my edit regardless of what changes I actually made? Does that mean you don't bother to explain why you "rejected" those changes? — Instantnood 18:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

What does me opening up my talkpage has anything to do with reverting your edits, and on explaining those edits?--Huaiwei 13:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Re - Please explain why you overdid, especially for the latter one, in which you undid your own edit . — Instantnood 18:03, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Do I need to explain both edits in my talk page, when both edits were explained in the edit summaries, and both edits were not even reverts? And if you have an issue with those edits, why are you not bringing it to the two respective talkpages?--Huaiwei 13:58, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

; . — Instantnood 18:27, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I am pretty sure you can use the English language to tell me just what you really want. Those diffs mean absolutely nothing to me.--Huaiwei 18:39, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that's necessary since the links already tell, obviously enough. But since you've requested explicitly, I won't mind elaborating even it's that obvious. You claimed " both edits ere not even reverts ". That actually are reverts. In the latter case you've even skipped an edit of your own. — Instantnood 18:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I added content in one page and removed an entry in another. That is a revert, simply because there so happen to be one version which happens to tally with my latest edit? Well if you see that as a revert, in what way does my comment in the respective edit history not explain themselves to warrant another questioning here? Do you dispute both edits, or are you having nothing else to do this evening? And btw, what in the world does "skipped an edit of your own." mean??--Huaiwei 18:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The diff links are already telling those are actual revert. In this edit you reverted your own edit made less than an hour beforehand , and in this edit you removed the line on OAG and an interwiki link to Hebrew. What's that if it's not overdone? — Instantnood 16:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

- Do you actually know what exactly you've reverted? — Instantnood 21:33, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

The word country in English

Re - Please note that the word country in the English language, as used on Misplaced Pages, is not normally restricted to refer to sovereign states, c.f. list of countries (which is a featured list), entries under category:lists of countries, categories under category:categories by country, etc. — Instantnood 20:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Repeating your POV all over again for months on end does not advance the discussion. Do not waste real estate in this talkpage for such purposes. And may I further issue a strict reminder, that if you have an issue with a topic, bring it up in the talkpage of that topic instead of posting them in the talkpage of individual wikipedians. The reasons for this reminder is obvious, while your reasoning for your current conduct is not.--Huaiwei 15:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

That's not just my point of view. It is an established convention on Misplaced Pages - a reality you've failed to accept. It's hardly an issue with those individual entries. It's problems with your edits on Misplaced Pages. — Instantnood 18:27, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

An established convention on Misplaced Pages? That is a fantasy you choose to believe in. If the problem is not with the topic, but with me, then how do you explain the fact that you had to repeatedly remind all kinds of people about your POV? Considering the fact that I noticed you had a tendency of bringing content issues to people's talkpages, is it fair for me to conclude, that you have a strong believe that anyone who disagrees with you are inherently problemetic individuals? Dosent seem to reflect a mature, reconciliary, and open-minded individual who strives to build concensus, does it?--Huaiwei 14:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

It's more a fantasy that you refuse to accept it. — Instantnood 16:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Lame. Your failure to engage in my comments line by line above just shows how much of an empty vessel you actually are. You can continue claiming the existance of "established conventions" for all I care, but so long that you cant show any third-party evidence, you can expect to waste your time here.--Huaiwei 12:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

CIVIL and Wikiquette

Re - Please kindly stop confusing SARs with SARS. It's no joke. It cost several thousand lives. You've been reminded , yet you continue to do so. — Instantnood 18:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I consider it a joke when someone feels wikipedia can cost several thousand lives with a typo or two. Perhaps I misunderstood a sentence or two above, but seriously, I could not care less.--Huaiwei 16:01, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not a mere typo, but a bad joke. You consistently reminds people of the event, and keeps equating SARs with SARS. If it were mere a typo, you have been making the same typo again and again, e.g. . — Instantnood 18:17, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I find that hilarious. Are you recovering from an addiction to SARs? SchmuckyTheCat 19:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

lol! This isnt even a joke until he turned it into one. So "SARS" reminds one of "SARS"? Well so be it for those poor, insecure, and highly imaginative chaps. On hindsight, its about time some folks learn to accept negative aspects of life, and quit pretending it never existed.--Huaiwei 14:09, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Try put on a swastika visiting Israel. — Instantnood 16:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

So whats gonna happen if someone does that?--Huaiwei 11:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Who can tell. — Instantnood 11:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

"Who can tell"??? LOL!!! So why ask me to do something when you cant tell the result? And why ask me to stop doing something when you cant tell the result of doing something else? ROFL!!!--Huaiwei 11:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Try do so if you dare. — Instantnood 17:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Is that a threat now? Anyhow, why make that statement when you cant tell what the outcome will be given the above comments you made yourself? ;)--Huaiwei 17:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Re - Please stop. SARs ≠ SARS. — Instantnood 21:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Re - Please stop now. — Instantnood 21:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Stop what? SARS?--Huaiwei 23:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you invent a vaccine for that? SchmuckyTheCat 00:12, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

LOL!!!! --Huaiwei 12:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you? You'll need it if it's invented. — Instantnood 11:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not a joke. That's hardly a typo. — Instantnood 11:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

- Please stop now. — Instantnood 19:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Please grow up.--Huaiwei 11:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop, or else you are insulting yourself. — Instantnood 17:22, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. — Instantnood 17:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. — Instantnood 19:05, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

WIkipedia:Esperanza/User Page Award

Huaiwei, thanks for signing up for the Esperanza User Page Contest. The judges have received the fifteen entries, and are ready to start judging. The judges will take a week to complete the judging process, and they will contact all the participants when the judging is done.

Please drop by the contest page for contest updates and questions. Take care, and good luck! May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 10:11, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Now I cant believe how my humble little page can get nominated, but thanks anyhow and have fun! :D--Huaiwei 11:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Japanese name of Singapore Japanese School

In your 8 March 2005 edit to List of schools in Singapore, Singapore Japanese School was called "シンガポール日本人学校へようこそ". Actually, "へようこそ" just means "Welcome to...", and I've since removed "へようこそ", albiet only sixteen months later. It would help if you check with a speaker of a foreign language before adding text in that foreign language into articles. Thank you! —Goh wz 14:25, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Can I make you my default consultancy for my future usage of that language then? ;)--Huaiwei 14:58, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Proposal on Notability

Because you're a member of the Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians, I'm notifying you that the inclusionist proposa Misplaced Pages:Non-notabilityl is in progress to define the role of notability in articles. Please help us make this successful! Also note the proposal Misplaced Pages:Importance is a deletionist proposla that seeks to officially introduce notabiltiy for the first time. --Ephilei 04:45, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hooray!

Yes, Huaiwei, welcome back. I hope to work with you soon...so good luck! See you on MSN, too.--Tdxiang 10:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Absence

Well, true enough, it was rather sian without you...:(--Tdxiang 10:17, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Heh...sian meh. My return isnt exactly "splashingly exciting" either, I hope not? :D --Huaiwei 17:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thanks for moving back Current events in Hong Kong. --- Hong Qi Gong 16:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh no problem, although I regreted the move right after doing it coz I didnt notice that Talk:Current_events_in_Hong_Kong#Requested_move has commenced. Still, thanks for helping to salvage a domant project, and if possible, I may chip in a contribution or two as well over time! ;)--Huaiwei 17:49, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

WIkipedia:Esperanza/User Page Award

Greetings, Huaiwei. The judges would like to announce that the winner for the Esperanza User Page Contest has been chosen. Congratulations to Kylu for winning the contest. The winning entry can be found here.

If you'd like to participate in the contest again, check by the contest page in a few days and sign up. See you around. May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|)

RFC on Talk:Current events in Hong Kong

Hi Huaiwei! There appears to be a fair but real dispute on this article. I have opened an article RFC on the above talkpage (There were two talkpages to choose from, I selected which one by tossing a coin). Please comment if there are things you wish to add. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:11, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Austrian to SIN

Hi there Huaiwei, just noticed your edit to SIN. I agree that source says nothing at all about the service, however this service (and onto MEL) is due to terminate at the end of March 2007. Some news articles on it:

• http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2006/08/10/1154803023210.html
• http://www.etravelblackboard.com/index.asp?id=54225&nav=2
• http://atwonline.com/news/other.html?issueDate=8%2F2%2F2006
• http://www.airsider.com/files/2006/0706/004/aua_sydney.htm

and I think there was an article in the New Straits Times today, but without a subscription... Thanks/wangi 12:48, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

As per my latest edit, a termination of flights into Australia need not mean a termination of the entire route from Vienna. Singapore and Kuala Lumpur could very well remain as destinations, and unless the official source indicates their removal, I would think this is jumping the gun a little. Oh btw, Austrian seems to be trying to throw in their last trump card or something...two days after announcing their withdrawal from Australia, they launch the new Business class on the Vienna-KL-Sydney and soon, the Vienna-Singapore-Melbourne flights .--Huaiwei 14:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm personally not bothered either way - if it's a development of real note (which it probably is) then it needs to be part of the Austrian Airlines article. However a number of reliable news sources do report the KL and SIN flights are being dropped too. For example this one, witha quote from the country manager for Malaysia and Singapore:

• http://www.btimes.com.my/Current_News/BT/Friday/Nation/BT581031.txt/Article/

I'm amazed with the speed people add, tag and delete route info on the airport articles... Thanks/wangi 14:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I would personally wait to see it on Austrian Airline's official website before committing the change. Just as some folks has shown skepticism everytime possible new routes were added (even when sources were provided), I would expect the same when attempting to remove existing ones. Anyhow, I do note that the Kuala Lumpur International Airport article also specifies only the Australian leg as being the abandoned route.--Huaiwei 15:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Going off on a tangent here... I know we've had our moments on the article table/list at SIN in the past and it's now the much reduced "standard" format... But I can't help thinking that even these lists are largely a non-encyclopedic collection of indescriminate information. In an encyclopedia article surely the list of current destinations isn't important - it's the reason behind and for important routes being dropped and started that's important. Consider it from the view of WP:0.5, WP:1.0 and print versions - the content will be stale...

Oh, I don't know... This is really just a brain-dump — don't worry, i'm not going to get the hatchet out :) I'd I wager not many people, if any, think the same anyway! Thanks/wangi 15:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Skytrax

Thanks for adding the information.   " You know the answer, but since you are too lazy... " - No I don't. I am no expert in aviation stuffs. The original sentence was a general description, but the 2006 clause did not mention which award(s). It looked like all awards went to Changi in 2006. — Instantnood 19:04, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Its not anyone's fault that you are weak in basic English comprehension.--Huaiwei 19:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Seriously.. do you really think it was clear enough before your edits? — Instantnood 19:09, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Considering the fact that I was not the one who wrote that line and I knew exactly what it was refering to, I leave it to you to go do your research if you are that confused (which you didnt, choosing to hide the text instead). I mean, its not like you are as amaturish in this regard as you claim, as evidenced by your lively involvement in this article, including edits like .--Huaiwei 19:13, 19 August 2006 (UTC) (20:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC))

It was rewritten from some external sources that I got and verified by googling. — Instantnood 21:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh of course. I have always known you as a google replicator, and not an encyclopedia writer. Just how many full articles have you ever writtern in your thousands of edits (which isnt another list or stub)?--Huaiwei 21:09, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Is writing featured articles the only way to contribute to Misplaced Pages? What about those who get around and fix spelling errors but write no article, for instance? — Instantnood 19:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no problems with spellbug busters. I do have a problem with spellbug busters who come to my talkpage and start kicking up a fuss and questioning why my username is spelt as such. Utter waste of my time, as above. ;)--Huaiwei 11:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Country article

Take your discussion of Country to the article's talk page. You are close to violating 3RR. Joelito (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

The talk page just began to see some action. Thanks for the warning thou. ;)--Huaiwei 20:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

You were properly warned. You have been blocked for 48 hrs for edit warring on both Country and List of largest buildings in the world. Joelito (talk) 21:20, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It is obvious that things are clearly going out of hand, and I applaud your action. I apologise for any inconveniences caused.--Huaiwei 21:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

If I may respond to User_talk:Instantnood#Blocked in my talkpage:

The 3RR is there for a purpose, and that is to prevent revert warring. Having more than one revert in consecutively is disruptive, and it does not get any less so just because there are less than three rounds of reverts. I would think a lifting of the ban based on his reasoning would contribute nothing to the arbcom's efforts other than enforcing his believe that the 3RR ruling can be circumvented by sneaking other intermitent edits together with the disputed edits, and by timing his reverts to avoid breaching the 3RR. The 3RR specifically speaks against the gaming of the system for a reason, which is quite evident here in my books. Hope this view may be considered when evaluating his request. Thanks!--Huaiwei 21:44, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Current events in Southeast Asia

Hi. Thanks for converting the Current events in Southeast Asia to Portal:Southeast Asia/Current events. It's been long overdue. Are you familiar enough with portal coding to set up edit links for each date and the highlight box, like the Portal:Current events page? Again, as a frequent contributor to the SE Asia current events page, I appreciate your work. -Wisekwai 17:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh I was actually delibrating whether to use one page per day, given the fact that it will be crazy having so many articles later in our Current events categories, but if you are comfortable, I certainly do not mind going ahead. This should make editing less of a pain in general. Anyway its just a small contribution...I was afterall one of those who helped setup and run Current events in Malaysia and Singapore. :D--Huaiwei 17:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

As I see it, the advantage of having one page per day will make it easier to track back to the news reports using "what links here" to see the latest developments related to the article. However, I'm now completely confused as to how to proceed with the Portal:Southeast Asia/Current events. I've issued a call for assistance in coding on the talk page of the main World current events portal. I hope you do not mind. I realize this is a test and only a test. Now, if I can just figure out how it works, I'll be happy to continue making contributions. Again, I appreciate the work you're doing on this. --Wisekwai 12:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah I have already solved the problems. :D I changed the template and it should work pretty now. In the process of changing the formats for all earlier dates, so feel free to add news articles to the more recent dates. Cheers!--Huaiwei 12:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

DYK

On 22 August, 2006, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Police Coast Guard, which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Brilliant article and well written! Thanks for the contribution. -- Samir धर्म 22:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

alien2

i thot u got lost for good, so u came back..wel-come

More warring

Please stop. If you continue warring I will block you for a longer time. Joelito (talk) 00:14, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Tibet

HI I have recently seen that towns and villages in Tibet are practically uncovered, but the category, Cities in Tibet, I propose to become Category:Cities, towns and villages in Tibet. THis way it is far less confusing for the reader and I can go through all the places in Tibet in the same category. James Janderson 08:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar for categorising work

I recently realised the importance and usefulness of Category pages, and the excellent organisation and scope of Singapore-related categories. While your contribution in other areas are just as great, your categorising work should not go unnoticed. You deserve the Working Man's Barnstar. :D --Vsion 05:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Could you weigh in on this?

I'd like to bring forth a more definite agreement on what to do about archiving the current events article for Hong Kong. Could you join the discussion and vote?

• Talk:Current_events_in_Hong_Kong#Concerning_the_archives

Thanks. --- Hong Qi Gong 17:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Reverted List of Chinese dialects

Just wanted to add a word of explanation regarding my reversion of your change to List of Chinese dialects. Here's why I reverted:

• In addition to reverting the order, you also reverted a lot of hard work to fix the internal links. That was the main reason for my reversion. If we have to pick between correct internal links and a particular order, the links being fixed win.
• There was also a fair bit of work on wording that you reverted. I didn't see any NPOV text in it, so concluded that you just reverted instead of going through the changes more carefully and changing just the bits that you disagreed with.
• If I understand correctly, you think that the order of the language groups represents a particular point of view, and that you prefer a different order that, somehow, isn't subject to a claim of NPOV. While that's possible, I don't think you've obtained any consensus for your conclusion, and you really ought to do so in the talk page before imposing your view.

I know it's not fun when somebody reverts your edits, and I apologize if doing so offends you. I'd encourage you to use the talk page, and see if you can generate a consensus for the order that you prefer. Waitak 03:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

• Perhaps you may wish to realise, that the supposed "fixing" of links is itself a reversion, and is only valid with each renaming of the subcategories. A reversion to this current order will invariantly also result in the reversion of "fixed links". Your logic of "correct internal links" is thus entirely irrelevant.

• I would not expect that subcategories are renamed. In almost all articles, major sections are very stable, and I'd have every reason to expect them to be here as well.

• The POV issue is with the ordering of dialects based on the use of English names for some dialects, and the use of pinyin for others. This inconsistency asks for all viewers to actually know which Chinese dialect is better known by another name in English. The usage of common names may be preferred, but by this same definition, then, the word Chinese itself is also the most common name in reference to Mandarin, and Hokkien is often tought to refer to the entire Min dialect family, even if these associations are technically inaccurate. Why, then, should this list apply some cases of common usage, yet refuse to use others? A list which uses only one anglicisation system helps stamp out all contentions on common usage. Yout failure to find any POV issues in the main text itself is simply because you are looking at the wrong place.

• Yes, I read the discussion in the talk page before I responded to your changes. No, I did not see any evidence whatsoever of a consensus. Further, the discussion to which you're refering petered out sometime in July.

• And why are you looking at the wrong place? You claim there was no discussion in the talk page, when indeed there was, and it would explain to you in detail why this dispute takes place. As yet, no one there was successful in discouting the issue of POV, and hence it prevails here. If you disagree with this issue, you are most welcome to go participate in that article's talkpage as well instead of reverting and discussing only in my talkpage.

• I do. Seven of the last 50 changes to the talk page were mine.

• Thank you!--Huaiwei 11:00, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, all of this fuss is about two subcategory names - Cantonese and Mandarin. All of the remainder use pin yin romanization of the name of the dialect in spoken Putonghua/Guoyu, except Hakka, which gives preference for the name of the group in the group's principal dialect. Further, the only person that has given any evidence of being bothered by these names is yourself. I'd be happy to admit that this impression is mistaken, if you have evidence to the contrary. May I suggest that this isn't worth getting as worked up over as you seem to have gotten?

The reason for the note in the article's talk page was simple - I put a very clear request to discuss the issue in the edit summary. You ignored it and re-reverted it anyway, without a word. Not nice. Waitak 14:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

And your participation in this wikiwar is not helping to smoothen things out, if you are actually wondering otherwise. Even one exception is obviously not standardisation, so I fail to see why that should result in any less POV. Yes, I may be the sole person actively voicing out my concerns on POV, but that other editors did not attempt to revert them except for certain individuals who seem to share a certain common trait just goes to show that this cannot be merely seen as a process in democracy. It has been emphasized numerous times, that POV issues overide most other concerns, just as we use the ROC instead of China in appriopriate instances despite widespread global opposition. The same applies here.

As for me getting "worked up", it is hardly due to the revert warring. It is due to the unethical behavior in your conduct here. If you are reverting merely because you dont "feel good" that someone "ignored" your demands, then rest assures that it isnt going to have pretty results. May I just put it on record, that just as you think I ignored your request, you also apparantly ignored the fact that I pointed out past discussions did exist on this topic in that talkpage. Not a word? Proof it. Otherwise, I arent gonna feel sorry for you.--Huaiwei 14:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

List of Chinese dialects

Could I ask why you're consistently removing the links to internal sections of the article in favor of links to other articles on the same topics? I would have thought that the whole point of the links is to help people use the article more efficiently. Waitak 11:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to change them to internal links if you wish, for I have no heavy preference for either option. My earlier edits actually did include the use of internal links , but they were removed subsequently when other users claim they cause problems in linking (although I find no such problem on my machine).--Huaiwei 11:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Protection and block warning on Huaiwen Xu and Xu Huaiwen

If you two continue this copy and paste move war, I'll definitely protect both pages and consider blocking both of you for disruption. Resolve the differences rather than enforcing your views. Thank you. --WinHunter 10:30, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Walt Disney Parks and Resorts/Singapore

Since you immediately restored the content I removed from the Walt Disney Parks and Resorts article, here is my reason for the edit. This contribution appears to be unverifiable speculation as defined by WP:NOT:

The company CEO Robert Iger's description of impending "indoor, compact"-styled parks may be a hint in reference to the Singaporean proposal.

The cited reference says this:

This small scale, and Singapore's hot weather, could lead to Disney adopting a new generation of indoor theme parks that its CEO Robert Iger floated last year in a Wall Street Journal report. He said there were "three or four entities in the world, locations with money, that are looking for site-based entertainment" - full rides and shows within a building. "I'll call them theme parks but they won't necessarily be along the same lines as parks we've built before ... In the next year to two years ... we will commit to creating a new concept or some entity outside the US," he said then. Analysts pointed out he could be hinting at Singapore. (emphasis mine)

"Analysts pointed out he could be hinting at Singapore" is not a fact. There is no comment from Iger or Disney anywhere in the article about the location he was describing with his "site-based entertainment" remark. Saying that Iger's comment "may be a hint" is speculation by any reasonable definition. —Whoville 14:07, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

See my response in the article talkpage. Thanks for dropping a line here, but please bring content discussions to the article talkpage for input from the wider community.--Huaiwei 14:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Moving Standard Mandarin

I've started a thread to try to build proper consensus about whether to move Standard Mandarin to a more intuitive and perhaps neutral title or not. I've left this message at your talkpage because you've participated in previous discussions about a possible title change. Please feel free to contribute with your thoughts and arguments at Talk:Standard Mandarin#The move.

Peter 12:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Regional language

The discussion about Cantonese can be resolved by consulting User:Calgacus. He's an expert on such matters. 84.135.251.135 12:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three-revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future.

--WinHunter 14:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

This was my entry in the 3RR page which was to be posted until your imposed ban. Both users broke the 3RR rule.

User:Yuje reported by User:Huaiwei (Result:)

Three revert rule violation on

National_dish (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Yuje (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log):

• Previous version reverted to:
• 1st revert: 04:59, 11 September 2006
• 2nd revert: 06:52, 11 September 2006
• 3rd revert: 13:19, 11 September 2006
• 4th revert: 13:57, 11 September 2006

Three revert rule warning diff from before this report was filed here (necessary only for new users) :

• DiffTime

Time report made: 14:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Comments: As above. I have noticed Yuje gaming the 3RR rules by previously stopping eveytime three reverts were made, but I suppose he couldn't control himself this time. Bringing in content disagreements into discussions here is also irrelevant, if he understands the basis for the 3RR in the first place. Misplaced Pages is not a democracy, and just because I was the minority in opposing his attempts to add inaccurate information (along with a whole bunch of like-minded individuals who have continously ganged up to oppose me) does not mean my comments are invalid or inaccurate. And to claim that I was singling him out to revert war is hardly any further from the truth. I act based on factual content, and not on the person. If the person chooses to continously add factual errors, then inevitably, it is his edits which will be constantly scrutinised, although far from the wikistalking ways of another famed user.--Huaiwei 14:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Gaming the rules? The revert war on National dish was a one-sided one. I was attempting to add in new evidence to appease your endless demands, only to have you summarily delete and revert everything, including my file, my summary, and later my attempts to add external links. As for three revert rule, keep in mind the 3RR's purpose is to stop revert wars, not for personal revenge. Only you seem to have a penchent for endless wikilawyering, stalling, and revert-warring. The mere fact that you have to go revert-warring against 5 or 6 different users is itself telling. "Misplaced Pages isn't a democracy"'s intended meaning is that everyone gain concensus, not an excuse for one person to ignore everyone else. --Yuje 15:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I don't even see how the first edit qualifies as a revert. I added in new material, including that picture and text, which was never previously in the article. How can I be reverting something that didn't exist before? And the 4th wasn't a revert either, but updating my entry with more external links. If you truly objected to my picture that much, why didn't you even bother even going to a talk page first before hitting that first, second, third, and fourth revert? Wikilawyering isn't an excuse for revert-warring.--Yuje 15:17, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Email

I previously was only able to find {{3RR3}} to notify the banned user, thus did not include the time of block in such notice. Thanks for your email, I have now found the suitable template of which I'll inform other 3RR blocked user with their blocked duration in the future.

As for blocking the other user involved, it would be only possible if you can establish that this first edit is a revert by comparing with a previous edit to show that he reverted your edits in whole in in part. If this is established I see no reason no to block the other user involved for 3RR. --WinHunter 23:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

It is my policy of not revealing my e-mail address to prevent spam from the users disagreeing with my decisiong, I apologize for any inconvenience caused. Further reviewing the previous edits I have come to the conclusion that, although it was a addition but also at the same time a partial revert, and thus concluding that the other user have also broke 3RR.

However, be warned that DO NOT continue on edit warring after the block expires, I'll not hesitate to block anyone for disruption even if they did not exactly break 3RR (3RR does not entitle you 3 reverts per day). Please talk instead of edit warring. Many thanks.--WinHunter 00:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

The length of the block is determined by the past history of violation. You block is much longer because: 1. Your previous 3RR violations, 2. The fact that you are on probation. Btw, I do not track everyone on Misplaced Pages, I just deal with the one that I see. You are more than welcome to report anyone you see who is edit warring or disruptive to Misplaced Pages to WP:AN/I or WP:AN/3RR etc. --WinHunter 03:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:RM

Re: , please kindly follow steps 2 and 3 as suggested at WP:RM. As for this time, I've done that for you. All you now need to do is to make those lines unhidden. Thanks. — Instantnood 20:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I find it strange why you manage to find the energy to add those invisible texts deemed neccesary, yet cannot find the energy to simply add them without the invisible taglines.--Huaiwei 06:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

It is your obligation to follow the instructions and guidelines to fulfill all those procedures. Other wikipedians can provide whatever sort of assistance as long as it's helpful and necessary, but nobody is in a position as suitable as you do to finish the procedures. Now all you need to do is to remove those taglines. — Instantnood 14:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

It may be my "obligation", whatever that means (I consider it my initiative, since I am the nominator (and which you obviously vehenently refuse to for certain reasons), and that gives me liberty in removing the nomination too at my pleasure) but anyone else who happens to notice lapses in procedures can very well help correct it, as you clearly did. Yet you stop yourself halfway, as thou you find it not in your capability to "assist" certain individuals, which is kinda interesting considering how enthusiastic you are in getting me to WP:RM it in the first place. Compare this to your over-the-top efforts to ensure no cut and paste moves (as well as in other selected wikiprocedures), and I am left wondering where your priorities are. What are you going to do if I refuse to remove those taglines?--Huaiwei 15:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Welcome

Hey thanks a lot for the welome message. I'm just a layman who's a fan of law enforcement... so I may be learning more from you instead. Just 2 let u know, my photos were captured on a Nokia 7610 phone... so quality a bit crappy...

Oh btw, do u happen to know anyone working in Yishun North NPC? I need some photos of the Mitusbishi Lancer Patrol Car for the Fast Response Car page, and since most of the SPF Lancers scrapped alredi, I need these done quick.... the last one i saw (last week) came frm Yishun North NPC... scared will scrap b4 i get a chance to take foto... Thanks a lot man. Seng Yew 00:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC +8)

Hah some photo better than no photo. ;) As for that car..hmm...I tomorrow go check out if my NPC got or not first lah haha. YN NPC I only know a few officers, but arent that close.--Huaiwei 17:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

How? Any luck yet? --Seng Yew 11:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC +8)

Hah none yesterday...unfortunately.--Huaiwei 06:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Alamak, too bad lor... Was hoping the other NPCs still had their Lancers, ah well what to do... Thanks 4 d help anyway, btw any chance on getting ur frens from YN to take a couple photos? 'cause so far i see the Mitsubishi FRC more tzai than the other police cars... will be a waste to let it scrap without a photoshoot. p.s. sorry 2 trouble u ah, I don't have friends in the Police force lah... some more my photos all 'illegal' (shot when the cops were not looking) one :-P --Seng Yew 17:30, 24 September 2006 (UTC +8)

Well I am not sure if they are our "favourite" vehicles to drive, but I am certainly happy to see old cars go for the sake of basic comfort. :D Not sure if I can contact those folks (I dont have their numbers), but will try lah. Anyway if you are serious about having pictorial archives, then a "proper" camera should be a wise investment for you. I doubt you want to have merely a phoneshot after all the trouble in finding obsolete vehicles!--Huaiwei 15:59, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey what's up man? Seen that a lot has been going on around here. Anyways, been digging up on Police patrol cars again, just realised that both Aetos and Cisco have their own police patrol cars... Any idea what are they used for? Since their ops are usually based on asset protection, why will they need patrol cars? Thought you may know... oh btw any luck on the YN FRCs? I think they have already scrapped... One more thing, do the NSFs (or any other officer) actually make use of the onboard computer in the FRC? What's its capabilities? I also seem to hear a lot about officers turning off the GPS so can go Jiat zhua? (my old friend last time police NS, had quite a lot of things to say abt the department that could easily lead to a P.R. disaster for the SPF...)

p.s. Cisco patrol cars are the only patrol cars that use rotating police lights (instead of the strobe ones used by SPF) --Seng Yew 13:10, edited 18 October 2006 (UTC +8)

Another warning

You are very close to earning yourself another block. Edit-warring (e.g. Country, Demographics of mainland China, Huaiwen Xu) either on the same day or over time is unacceptable behavior. Continue in this manner and you will be blocked. Joelito (talk) 18:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Tony Tan Keng Yam

Tony Tan Keng Yam is the way his name is said, so I reverted to that. Don't worry, though. I made sure readers know that Tan, not Yam, is the family name :) WhisperToMe 03:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

hello!

hey, glad to find another fellow Singaporean wikipedian... Could you teach me how you did those tables for your userpage (bottom)? Thanks! en-4 This user speaks English at a near-native level. zh-3 該用戶能以熟練的中文進行交流。 该用户能以熟练的中文进行交流。 en-sg-3 This user Singlish quite tzai leh

US dollars in Singapore?

Do street vendors in Singapore take US dollars? SchmuckyTheCat 00:51, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

In general, no, unless it is some poshy high-end touristy place. Only the bruineian dollar is universally acceptable besides S$. :D

Not that Universally. I tried using some in a major international brand shop in Plaza Singapura and was told that no foreign currency accepted. Taxi drivers will accept the notes with some reservation and will not accept coins. Most hawker centers would also not accept Brunei dollars. The trick is to buy something small in a large department store (Robinsons, Isetan, whatever), get them to break a large Brunei note (typically $100) and then use the Singapore dollars elsewhere. --Novelty 17:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

But that is more to do with ignorance mah. The Bruneian dollar is customary tender anywhere in Singapore, and merchants who dont accept it are as good as turning money (and business) away. This isnt quite the same as rejecting the US dollar which isnt customary tender here.--Huaiwei 17:12, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

It's not legal tender though, so they have a right to refuse it. As you said, they are just turning good money and business away. --202.160.44.201 01:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

fyi

Misplaced Pages:Requests for bureaucratship/Mailer diablo

RfB With A Smile :)

Splitting Turkey

No, I don't intend to split Turkey into two. But politically, Turkey is in Europe. No wonder they are trying to join the EU. By the way, look at Korean Air's destinations article. Vladivostok is listed under Europe, even though it is in Asia. And even Aeroflot's own destination list has all the Asian cities under Europe. Elektrik Blue 82 13:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Politics isnt the only indicator of where a country belongs to. How about assigning the Philippines to North America then? In most pages, we list destinations in one country based on which continent they are most associated with, so you dont have to tell me Russia is being classified in whole in Europe. In fact, I should be asking you why it is so, since you appear to be keen to make such a split.--Huaiwei 13:19, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

I am not keen in making the split. But according to your statement above, you say that Vladivostok is more associated with Europe, that's why they are listed as a European destination, even though it is at the very end of Asia? My idea is, why not base the classification solely on geographi location, and if we need to be specific, the geographic location of the airport? Because your criteria of listing destinations in one country on which continent they are most associated with, is rather hard to measure. How can you tell? Politics isn't the only indicator, it is one indicator. What other indicators are out there? Tell me how you measure it then. Elektrik Blue 82 14:45, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

If you are not keen to effect the split, mind explaining your rationale for a revert by saying the "airport is in the European side"? Can I then say that an airport on the Asian side should be classified under Asia, a direct implication that you are asking for a split? Note that you did not mention classification by country, but by the specific location of the airport.

I am quite sure I refered to countries rather than individual cities, so please tell me when I mentioned Vladivostok?

Your proposal may sound rosy from the surface, but it is obviously not tenable. Turkish Airlines shall have Istanbul in both Europe and Asia thanks to it flying to an airport on both sides of the Bosphorus but still serving the same city. How logical is that? And how do you expect the international community to react when Russia gets split this way? And you must be thinking continental definitions are distinct, when they arent. Try convincing Indonesians that Gurada's flights to Irian Jaya are classified under Oceania, for instance?

You appear to believe that only in politics are things definitive, while my comment about "association" (which actually includes politics) needs an explaination. Do your own homework. Surely you arent ignorant to the fact that there are opposition towards Turkish ascention to the EU on geographical, cultural, racial, and linguistic grounds? What is the basis for this discriminatory behavior towards the Turks? By chance?--Huaiwei 15:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

By saying "airport is in the European side" I was simply basing the revert on its geographic location. For Qatar Airways, that does not matter. I wasn't thinking of airlines flying on both sides, I only started thinking of these cases when you persistently reverted it back.

Fine, I'll give you credit for the Vladivostok argument. But one question for this is: how come Turkey is more Asian, and Russia (who happens to have a significant land mass in Asia) is more European?

And now that this issue has been brought up, basing it on geographic location alone is a rather transparent criterion on how to categorize the destinations. It is more transparent than the criteria you propose (which up to now you haven't elaborated on). Tell me how Russians would react on the split. I don't think there is nothing wrong in splitting the destinations, as long as there is a clear line of where Europe ends and Asia begins. In the case of Turkey, there is, the Bosporus. And since TK flies to both European and Asian airports, why not list them separately? In this way, the categorization is transparent and apolitical. By listing the airports on geographic grounds ALONE, then we therefore avoid dealing with other issues, issues that are illustrated by the opposition towards Turkish EU ascention.

I do not believe that only in politics are things definitive. I lost faith in politics a long time ago. And why should I do my own homework when you're the one who initiated the move? The burden of explanation lies on you.

And yes, by this time, I am keen on making the split, for the sake of transparency. Elektrik Blue 82 16:45, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

So by classifying an airport based on its "geograhical location", you are ignoring which country they happen to belong in, and hence is asking for a continental split for transcontinental countries. I suppose sometimes one fails to reflect deeper before reverting, a problem common with habitual reverters.

As for that question on Russia vis-a-vis Turkey, would you mind asking yourself which continent would you culturally classify them under? Read Transcontinental country for elaborations on the status of Russia in particular, and why it is often seen as European despite having more landmass in Asia. I tought this was stuff taught in secondary school geography?

Mind defining "transparency" here. Isnt it clear, that even geography itself isnt cast in stone? The boundary between Asia and Europe is not universally defined particularly across Russian territory, so mind telling in what way is it more "transparent"? How is it "transparent and apolitical" if you split up countries only where the continental divide is geographically consistent (arguably so), but not for others? Is geography apolitical? I have problems accepting a number of your assumptions here, most of which will be debunked by theoratical logic.

I asked you to do your "homework" simply because you are asking the obvious (at least in my books). I refuse to waste time answering someone asking me if the Earth rotates round the Moon or the Sun. He can go check it up himself.--Huaiwei 17:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

What's wrong with a continental split? Is there a rule saying that a country should belong only in one continent?

Again, why should I classify them culturally? Isn't the destination list after all a geographic classification, not a cultural classification? I wonder why you prefer to classify things based on subjective criteria.

True, even geography itself is not cast in stone. But it is relatively clearer than culture.

Even if I am asking the obvious, for reasons of clarification, repetition doesn't hurt right? So would you elaborate on the criteria you are classifying the destinations? After all, it's your way of classifying things. I do not read minds. Elektrik Blue 82 17:06, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

What's wrong with keeping a sensible-looking list with countries listed where they are most likely expected to be at? Is there a rule saying that there must be a rule saying that a country should belong only in one continent?

In what way is culture distinct from geography? How, then, do you explain the field called Cultural geography? I find it ridiculous that you say its "classified by geography" and not "culturally" when culture and geography are intertwined, and that you impled that "culture is subjective" when geography is not any less subjective too, especially in the realms of human geography, within which resides political faultlines as well as continental divides not based on geology.

I dont know if I should bother commenting on your statement about "clarity". Comments like that would probably earn an immediate F grade even in pre-university classes.

You may enjoy repeatition, but I do not, and I am quite sure I have the liberty in abstaining from wasting too much time on unproductive behavior. May I remind, that it is hardly "my way" of classifying things. The issue of classifying transcontinental countries isnt something new, and isnt something defined solely by me. You are too kind.--Huaiwei 17:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

If the list is based on where the cities are located, then why the opposition to classify them based on geography? I wonder what is it that is not sensible in that idea.

I didn't say anything about the distinctiveness of culture from geography. I am aware that they intersect, but culture has more to it than geography alone. If you classify it by culture, maybe we should classify the cities based on the religion that is most common in the area then, since religion is also part of culture.

I did not say that geography is not subjective, only less subjective than culture.

I wonder what university you go to, but professors actually repeat stuff for clarity. By the way, in your case right now, you never even said it the first time. You assumed that other people share your knowledge. Teachers don't do that. They actually by saying what it is to be said, and sometimes, if needed, repeat it. Teachers don't assume that their students already know what is in the curriculum, just in case you didn't know.

And yes, I looked into the article on transcontinental countries. Even the first paragraph implies that the definitions can change based on purely geographical reasons. Elektrik Blue 82 17:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

If you are going to continue rambling on my talkpage, at least have the basic courtesy of keeping to the formatting and quit wasting my time having to reformat your comments for you.

Is the list based on their cities alone? If so, why are the countries, regions, and continents doing there? Seriously, do you need visual aids next, or do you need to be knocked out of your sense of denial?

You do not have to say something explicitely for others to glean what you are implying. You specifically questioned why classifying by "culture" is better than by "geography". What kind of logical statement is that? Is that not an attempt to make a distinction? Yes, religion is part of culture. God knows why you choose to use only one single aspect of culture to do your classification thou.

Geography is less subjective than culture? Proof it, especially in relation to this on-going discourse.

The university I graduated from, the University of Singapore, expects students to venture forth and do self-research for condusive and fruitful discussions during tutorials. Students who persist in asking questions on basic theory are quite likely to get an invitation for a personal one-to-one discussion outside office hours...if the professor has that patience. If not, they simply see their lack of initiative reflected on their results slips. There is a reason why Singapore's students do well in just about any other university on earth. I arent sure if the same can be said about you, although I suppose linguistics dosent force you to transcend too much into the realms of the social sciences. How lucky. (for your information, I took courses on European history, European political geography, and even introductory linguistics during my undergraduate days).

So if the article states that geography can change boundaries, mind telling me why you choose to insist that geography is reliabily stagnant enough for you to do your classification exercise?--Huaiwei 17:51, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Since you consistently avoid answering even my first question, I'll stop. At least, I found that destination lists should be modelled to a master list found here. I'll follow that, for the sake of avoiding your biases against geographical classification. And yes, I followed the format in your talk page this time. Elektrik Blue 82 17:54, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Your compliance is deeply appreciated. And who came up with that "Master list"? A bunch of white Christians who persist in thinking North America is more important than everyone else, and that the European realm of thought preceeds that of Africans and Asians? How much global consultation did it go through before formulation? Who gave them that authority? How qualified are they? And I find it innately disgusting that a fellow Southeast Asian chooses to be led by the nose just because he happens to be sponsored by them or something in his current academic pursuits? So much for a colour-blind world!--Huaiwei 17:59, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Vladivostok is clearly in Asia. Turkey is more Europe than Asia, except when we got to look at Anatolia based purely on geographical considerations. Based purely on geographical considerations, however, the airport serving Istanbul is entirely on European soil. — Instantnood 20:14, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

You are just stating your opinion (which we already know) without stating your reasoning (which we stil dont know, as usual). Turkey to me is Asian beyond geography, for I do not consider Islam more European than Asian, and I do not consider their social outlook more European either. I challenge you to show me in what way Turkey is "more Asian only due to geography".--Huaiwei 04:39, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm.. Seems you can't tell the differences between Islam in Turkey and the majority of the rest of the Islamic world. Anatolia is clearly in Asia from a purely geographical angle, yet the airport is geographically not on Anatolia. It is on European soil. — Instantnood 21:23, 20 October 2006 (UTC) (modified 20:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC))

Woah...mine sharing with us what is the "different kind of Islam" in Turkey, and if this form of Islam is European, and not Asian?--Huaiwei 14:33, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

What I mentioned is was the differences between Islam in Turkey and the majority of the rest of the Islamic world. "Different kind of Islam"? Are there many kinds of Islam? — Instantnood 14:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC) (modified 20:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC))

Answer the question, failing which it just shows how much of a liar you are. Or how about taking this topic to the Islam article and we shall see what others have to say about your interesting comment on "the difference between Islam in Turkey and the majority of the rest of the Islamic world"? I sure hope no one elses thinks you are implying a "Different kind of Islam", because what is exactly what I feel you are claiming (a claim which I hadent supported nor denied yet, if you didnt notice) And what does this gotta do with many kinds of Islam" Who implied "many"?--Huaiwei 20:05, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

That's your feeling. You can feel however you like. — Instantnood 20:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh yes I know that. And I know you cant answer the question. Liar.--Huaiwei 21:00, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Say whatever and feel however you like. — Instantnood 21:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

You have an issue with that?--Huaiwei 21:18, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Singaporean Mass-AfDs

There's a whole set of articles, in particular Singapore buildings going up for deletion, citing non-notability. I don't have as much time to look up for the sources as I have some real life things to deal with before they are wiped out, so some help would be appreciated. - Mailer Diablo 17:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Arh....I am particularly vexed when I see such nominators from obviously far flung places with no local knowledge at all attempting to claim non-notability. Reminds me of that mass nomination of bus interchanges and terminals!--Huaiwei 14:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Armenia

Please visit the Talk: Armenia and Talk: Armenians pages http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Armenia&action=edit&section=3 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Armenians&action=edit&section=36 please voice your view on the current discussion, there is a small minority that are promoting and point of view that Armenia is geographically in Europe and Armenians are a European people. It is best to serve the factual truth and your support is desperately needed.

Asia template

I appreciate you edit. You are completlely right about Tibet. Amoruso 09:04, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem, but I think we disagree over the inclusion of Palestine. I included my explaination in the edit summary. Feel free to discuss further in the article's talkpage. Thanks! ;)--Huaiwei 09:17, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't understand why you didn't include tibet and kept turkish cyprus etc. I think palestinian territories can be used but using the term West Bank and Gaza Strip... but I want to see Iraqi Kurdistan there too and Tibet... Amoruso 09:30, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Because Turkish Cyprus is de facto controlled by a distinct and independent entity from that of the rest of Cyprus, as opposed to the Tibetian administration which is subsumed under the Beijing government. I arent sure why you prefer West Bank and Gaza Strip over Palestinian territories? And why Iraqi Kurdistan? You may wish to discuss this in Template_talk:Asia#Consistency.--Huaiwei 09:37, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Because Palestinian territories is a WP:POV term. I see what you mean though , it should be Palestinian National Authority territories then. Amoruso 09:47, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Your bold claim

Re " Others have edited this list to promote political agendas in other similar templates " - Would you please kindly justify this claim? Thanks in advance. — Instantnood 21:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The justification isnt too far away: . Satisfied? ;)--Huaiwei 14:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Hmm.. She/he may perhaps be the person you were pointing at. What is her/his political agenda? — Instantnood 14:45, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Since when are related to ? I already stated the source of my comments. Who are you to define my comments for me?--Huaiwei 20:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

" Others have edited this list to promote political agendas in other similar templates " - Who are the " thers "? What had they done with template:Europe to " promote political agendas in other similar templates "? And which are the " other similar templates" ? — Instantnood 20:35, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Why do I need to answer a question I have already answered? Stop cluttering my talkpage with useless garbage.--Huaiwei 21:02, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Alright.. Although you've not answered in a direct manner, I assume I am one of the " thers " you consider to be " promot political agendas in other similar templates ". Which of my edits to template:Europe were " promot political agendas in other similar templates " (while I'd simply reverted the undiscussed removal/split of those that are not sovereign states)? Meanwhile, you've yet to tell what the " other similar templates " are, and what the " political agendas " are. — Instantnood 21:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Oh so you CAN talk directly after all? lol. Its fun imitating your "communication style". Which of the edits? Practically every single one which involves HK. There are so many its impossible to list them here, and you know it. You dont know what "similar templates" are? Do a search in your contribution page and you will see yourself even using it as a rational for a revert in one of those templates. As for your political agenda, only you yourself can best explain it to us.--Huaiwei 21:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Blocked

I had warned you repeatedly about edit warring be it on the same day or over time. As a result of your continued behavior you have been blocked for a week. Joelito (talk) 21:56, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Fast Response Car

Hey what's up man? Seen that a lot has been going on around here. Anyways, been digging up on Police patrol cars again, just realised that both Aetos and Cisco have their own police patrol cars... Any idea what are they used for? Since their ops are usually based on asset protection, why will they need patrol cars? Thought you may know... oh btw any luck on the YN FRCs? I think they have already scrapped... One more thing, do the NSFs (or any other officer) actually make use of the onboard computer in the FRC? What's its capabilities? I also seem to hear a lot about officers turning off the GPS so can go Jiat zhua? (my old friend last time police NS, had quite a lot of things to say abt the department that could easily lead to a P.R. disaster for the SPF...) p.s. Cisco patrol cars are the only patrol cars that use rotating police lights (instead of the strobe ones used by SPF) --Seng Yew 16:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC +8)

urm.... any luck yet? -Seng Yew 07:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Whoops forgot to reply once again hee. So far no cars in sight...--Huaiwei 16:39, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok la nvm, anywaes wat abt the question above? U know what's the deal wif 'e cisco cars? -Seng Yew 14:48, 8 November 2006 (UTC +8)

Just to let you know I hadent gotten round to replying to you coz I am wondering if it will infringe OSA...haha. If I could discuss these things, I most prob will just add the info to the article itself man.--Huaiwei 15:16, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Template:Countries of Africa

Actually, it appears that David Kernow's change was unilateral. There appears to have been no consensus to split the template. _└  / _talk  20:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

From my understanding, these regional templates were mostly based on Template:Europe, which did not include non-independent states from day one. Subsequent attempts to add such entities has led to a related fallout between various regional templates due to a lack concensus building, so I consider the inclusion of these as undiscussed, not their exclusion.--Huaiwei 13:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

FYI, — Instantnood 13:58, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions made on November 7 2006 to National dish

Re your mail. It looks like 3RR to me. Whether you are correct or not I don't know; but stay further away from 4R if you don't want to risk being blocked William M. Connolley 13:31, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Re your mail: That a bunch of individuals worked collectively to enforce their POV against mine means I am perpertually "disadvantage" in any revert war. Yes, thats how 3RR works: if you're in a minority, you can't win by reverting, you have to convince them by talking. So, don't try to win by reverting William M. Connolley 15:19, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Re your mail: What I am asking for here is a fairer way of dealing with this issue then you should take this up on the 3RR talk page, since you are asking for a change of policy. But I doubt you will convince anyone to change 3RR. Is there any reason why you don't want to discuss this openly on your talk page? William M. Connolley 17:14, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Meetup on 24 November

Hello, please confirm yourself for the meetup on the 24th by November 18. If you have any ideas or suggestions, please list them at the meetup page yourself. Thanks. --Terence Ong _{(C | R)} 04:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, just a reminder to confirm your attendance at the meetup soon. There are eight confirmed participants as of now. —Goh wz 04:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Wah thanks...but I scared I will get beaten up leh. :D--Huaiwei 05:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Why so? I won't beat you... --Terence Ong _{(C | R)} 12:40, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I shall take as you are not coming. You may still like to come at the eleventh hour, its at 1500. --Terence Ong _{(C | R)} 01:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Turn out I wasent able to. Kana "recall". ;)--Huaiwei 17:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

AfD Nomination: Star Awards

I've nominated the article Star Awards for deletion under the Articles for deletion process. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Star Awards satisfies Misplaced Pages's criteria for inclusion. I have explained why in the nomination space (see What Misplaced Pages is not and Deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Star Awards. Don't forget to add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of each of your comments to sign them. You are free to edit the content of Star Awards during the discussion, but please do not remove the "Articles for Deletion" template (the box at the top). Doing so will not end the discussion. --Lijnema 15:56, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I thought it would be a good idea to let you know. Since you are both creator and major contributor to the article, you probably know quite a bit about the awards, and also wanted to vote in the nomination. --Lijnema 18:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi! First of all, I hope you have no hard feelings about the nomination. I was wondering if there's anything I could do to help improve the articles. I probably won't, because of the language, but you never know. About the layout of things, personally I think it might be good to remove the statistics section, and have results on the individual pages, and just a general overview, perhaps some history and naming some who's won a lot of awards on the main page. Again, I'm not sure if I can help, but if there is anything, please let me know. --Lijnema 10:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Escalating discussion on Misplaced Pages talk:SGpedians' notice board

As an outside observer, I've seen many good things come out of the SGpedians group. Despite any differences, I know that everyone involved is only interested in making the project better and reaching consensus to resolve problems. Please just take this as a friendly reminder from a stranger to always assume good faith. Thanks for your hard work and good luck! Strom 06:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Consensus?

The status quo before the edit wars back a few weeks was to include these entities. So I'd say that the consensus-building process should start with an attempt to get consensus to remove the territories, not to get them re-added. _└  / _talk  01:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and "Let's try reverting again? Ridiculous." as an edit summary of your own revert is pretty damn ludicrous itself. _└  / _talk  01:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Puppets

There is a sock puppet request board if you think they are the same. I'd assume good faith first, but the knowledge of wiki-syntax, the subject matter, and the willingness to instantly engage in revert wars is... ominous. SchmuckyTheCat 02:19, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Your insults.

Your insults against me in Single-party state are against Misplaced Pages policy. Please refrain for further insults, thank you. --Regebro 17:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Regarding this edit and this one on Talk:Single-party state:

This is your last warning. If you continue to make personal attacks, you will be blocked for disruption. Kimchi.sg 02:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-18 Singapore Changi Airport

Hi there. A Mediation cabal case has been opened regarding the dispute at Changi Airport. The mediators, User:Hunterd and I, would like to hear everyone's stand on the dispute. Any input is very welcome at Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-18 Singapore Changi Airport#Discussion, could you please indicate your stand regarding the dispute, and why you think the names should stay/go? Thanks, – Chacor 02:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Warning of edit warring in China-related articles

I have noticed that you and User:Instantnood have resumed your old edit wars, please be warned that if this edit behavior continues that you may get yourself blocked, thanks. --WinHunter 14:42, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Whoops sorry I'll hold my horses there. This is becoming some kind of a routine weekend baptism of fire.--Huaiwei 14:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I wonder when will this edit war stop, it is almost two years since it started. Stop edit warring be at peace for one week. Terence Ong 14:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

RFM

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request here, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Misplaced Pages:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. WikieZach| talk 02:34, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi! It would be great if you could indicate if you agree to mediation or not, so we can get this over with. --Regebro 10:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, please sign off on the Medcom case. WikieZach| talk 22:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Why is category being removed?

Hello, I'm quite new to Misplaced Pages and I have a question. I added the category tag 'Religion in Singapore' to the article 'Methodist Church in Singapore', but it subsequently got removed by someone. I then reverted the edit, thinking the category was a relevant one, but you have now deleted it. Is there something I'm not realizing here about the types of categories that go with certain articles? Thanks. Jacklee 09:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)