User talk:罗放

Welcome!

Hello, 罗放, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! ——星耀晨曦 11:59, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Mechanized Brigade

A tag has been placed on Category:Mechanized Brigade indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Tank Brigade

A tag has been placed on Category:Tank Brigade indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Templates for military moldings Ukraine

A tag has been placed on Category:Templates for military moldings Ukraine indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

3rd Tank Brigade moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, 3rd Tank Brigade, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:19, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Collaborationist Ukrainian Army" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Collaborationist Ukrainian Army and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 7 § Collaborationist Ukrainian Army until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 01:36, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. HappyWith (talk) 22:02, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Grnrchst (talk) 07:42, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May 2023

Please do not create, maintain or restore hoaxes on Wikipedia, as you did at Bilhorod People's Republic. If you are interested to know how accurate Wikipedia is, a more constructive test method would be to try to find inaccurate statements already in Wikipedia – and, if possible, correct them. Please do not disrupt Wikipedia. Continued disruption will be met with sanctions, which could include a block from editing. Feel free to take a look at the five pillars of Wikipedia to learn more about this project and how you can contribute constructively. Thank you. Super Ψ Dro 10:58, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Daniel Case (talk) 17:49, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to Eastern Europe or the Balkans, a topic designated as contentious. This standard message is designed as an introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially-designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have special powers in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
follow editorial and behavioural best practice;
comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Mellk (talk) 07:28, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also you have <500 edits, which means you cannot edit articles with content about Russia-Ukraine war due to WP:GS/RUSUKR. Mellk (talk) 07:30, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are still making these edits, you are not extended-confirmed. If you continue, you may end up getting blocked. Mellk (talk) 19:12, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:3rd Tank Brigade

Hello, 罗放. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:3rd Tank Brigade, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 13:03, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is User:罗放 and WP:GS/RUSUKR. Thank you. Mellk (talk) 20:34, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop moving Krasnoperekopsk to Yani Kapu

Please stop moving Krasnoperekopsk to Yani Kapu. What Ukraine does officially doesn't really matter. What matters is what is the English speaking world using. You would need many many sources showing that in English everyone is now using Yani Kapu. At that point we would change things here at Wikipedia. Thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Food names

Food names do not, as a general rule, take capitals. The only exception is for particular words in food names that are the name of a person or a place (like oysters Rockefeller or peach Melba). "Fried Rice with Egg" is incorrect. "Fried rice with egg" is correct. There should never be any reason to capitalize "dish". Please be conscious of this in the future. Thanks. Julietdeltalima (talk) 23:54, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

thank u！ Fang Luo (talk) 23:55, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please don't unnecessarily capitalize the first letter in links. It was unnecessary and incorrect to capitalize Cracklings, for example. (It is also polite not to assume that fellow professionals want to be referred to as "u" instead of "you".) Thanks. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 00:08, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback, I will make the necessary adjustments. Fang Luo (talk) 00:31, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for obvious gaming the system.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Courcelles (talk) 14:59, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

罗放 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

since User:Courcelles have not given specific reasons, I assume he is referring to the edits made on making the Template:Guizhou cuisine and adding missing Categories to wheeled artillery. These edits are out of good faith and contributive, nobody is objecting these except one user has accused adding a specific weapon 2S22 Bohdana into Category:Six-wheeled vehicles violates WP:GS/RUSUKR, which is obviously not the case. no WP:Assume good faith seen here in the action of blocking. And making these constructive contributions is simply far from the definition of "obvious gaming the system" as accused by User:Courcelles. Fang Luo (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Block was perfectly justified, as the ANI discussion made clear: gaming the system to get to edit in contentious areas. Drmies (talk) 15:34, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

罗放 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Just to make it clear: gaining a specific privilege and trying to end an otherwise pointless dispute by making constructive edits should not be considered "Gaming the system". If these edits themselves have no problems, WP:Assume good faith should apply.

Template:Guizhou cuisine
Siwawa
Cui shao
and other constructive edits were made in regard of the accused event. If these edits are not controversial and obviously constructive, how can it be classified as gaming the system? everyone gained the EC privilege by making such contributions.

Fang Luo (talk) 15:30, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your opinion is noted. However, your behavior is considered by the community to be gaming the system. What do you suppose is the purpose of the requirements for the privilege? --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:07, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

@Jpgordon:: If you wish so I'm happy to hear your explanations on the purpose of the requirements. But I'm sure it's not mean to trying to bite newcomers and accusing them of classifying a wheeled artillery into Category:Six-wheeled vehicles right? But unfortunately that's exactly one of the accusations I received this morning. The purpose of me making those edits is trying to end a dispute while remain in compliance of the current policy sets. And by making those constructive contributions to the community, nobody is harmed here and the content were benefited from these moves. Just curious, do you think it's reasonable to be banned for making these constructive contributions simply because it happened too fast? If the contents themselves have no problem, banning indefinitely sounds strange. All after all, the policies were created to promote enrichment of contents and avoid conflicts, but seems unfortunately it's not the case here.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

罗放 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

In brief, making Constructive edits does not constitute Gaming of permissions. WP:GAMING stated that Gaming of permissions is:
"Making unconstructive edits to raise one's user access level".
However： Currently no user has raised objections to question the constructiveness of these edits, and vast majorities of those edits made last night are the current version without any controversy, also no foreseeable opposition can be seen. Previous administers also haven't raised question on the constructiveness of the related edits. These includes creating new pages of:
Template:Guizhou cuisine
Chang-Wang noodles
Cui shao
Sour soup fish
improving classification of Category:Wheeled self-propelled howitzers, improvements on Guizhou and related pages, improved Pingtang County, Siwawa and Template:Guizhou topics etc, including enriching the contents and adding previously missing references. It's quite obvious these edits were made under good faith and are indeed constructive. However User:Courcelles had only said such edits is "obviously" gaming the system, banned my account and removed EC status, without even questioning the constructiveness of these pages created. Fang Luo (talk) 16:49, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It was quite obviously gaming, as the series of edits were prompted by that sudden need to reach that threshold, which you did. Also, you are misusing the unblock request procedure. These are not for back-and-forth arguing. Overall, there's a point in which WP:AGF gets superseded by WP:PACT, a point which I feel we have now reached. Talk page access revoked. El_C 06:14, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Reviewing admins: The food articles are not, on the whole, constructive. They are poorly proofread stubs. They seem to be a diversionary tactic and not "obvious[ly]... made [in] good faith". - Julietdeltalima (talk) 23:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Julietdeltalima: Hi Julietdeltalima, your assistance in improving those articles or selectively reverting certain edits would be greatly appreciated. However, it's important to note that possible grammar errors alone do not necessarily indicate that these edits were made with bad faith. Additionally, providing specific feedback on the issues observed is more constructive and polite. Thank you for your understanding.

As of now (20230629 0003Z), User Julietdeltalima has not pointed out any issues or made any corrections on the aforementioned pages, namely Template:Guizhou cuisine, Chang-Wang noodles, Cui shao, and Sour soup fish.

Also, I've heard an old discussion on stubs: Kill the Stub Pages.

It's not hard to find problems with the articles you created. Of the 3 you keep listing, Cui shao is by far the worst. It talks about how it's a snack and how the name comes from the sound with some description of the texture etc. It then goes on to how the name may be a misnomer. Yet it misses very basic information, like what it's made from and how it's cooked. If I click on the image I find it's deep fried pork yet this very basic information was never added to the article. Further the section on "哨/shao" and "臊/sao." is slightly interesting but mostly useless unless you understand Chinese. There is no translation of these characters or explanation why it may be a misnomer i.e. why is it that sao may be the correct character? Chang-Wang noodles is a bit better but still has obvious problems. It says "noodle soup made with intestines and blood as additional ingredient", but doesn't describe what type/s of noodles are normally used with the dish. Yes you were blocked when perhaps you were planning to still edit these articles, but the poor quality of these articles where you added a bunch of stuff but not the basics seems to reflect on the haphazard way they were created with your focus on improving your edit count rather than creating good content for Wikipedia. Frankly though, while your obvious gaming even with the creation of these articles wasn't good, I think your stub creation was much less concerning that when you started around with categories. This isn't that surprising since I'm sure you realised even creating stubs sufficient to survive AfD tends to be a fair amount of work. So unless you do something silly like take 100 edits to make a 2 paragraph stub, it's still going to take you quite a while to reach 5000 edits. Nil Einne (talk) 17:35, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page access revoked

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

(block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

El_C 06:14, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Foreign Volunteer Units

A tag has been placed on Category:Foreign Volunteer Units indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:14, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Infantry Battalion

A tag has been placed on Category:Infantry Battalion indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and removing the speedy deletion tag. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination for deletion of Template:DSNS

Template:DSNS has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. Primefac (talk) 10:23, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]