User talk:HRW in 1899
Your edits
[edit]The problem with these sources you cited is not just it is in Chinese, but most of them are online articles/posts from forums and blogs and even game sites (many of them are also anonymous), which is completely inappropriate. You need to check the host of these sources before you cite them, to see if they have a reputable authorship or bibliography; if not, it makes even header for readers to verify the article. Another major problem is your citation style. You "can not" just cite a book's title (i.e. Shiji) and leave it at that. That is not appropriate English language citation. Imagine someone citing a book for a statement and only cites "The Logic of Scientific Discovery" and nothing else; the statement likely is going to get reverted. If you find sources from academic and scholarly journal, even if it is in a foreign language, then it wouldn't have any problems.--TheLeopard (talk) 21:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Please be aware that blogs and open wikis are not reliable sources, as per WP:RS. Thanks. --McGeddon (talk) 20:46, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- The blunt of my argument is that while it is true that he did kill a lot of people, that has nothing to do with the section you tried to put that information in, "Cultural references". Cao Cao is not known for being a mass murderer, he's known as a cunning warlord that uses whatever means to achieve his purpose, massacres just happens to be one of them in some cases. Also, we can't use today's standards to judge people in the past, since massacres, though unpopular with the people, were the norms of warfare. The second source did not support your statement that "none success", but I agree that there should be some information on how Communist writers tried to portray Cao Cao in a positive light again.
- Also, McGeddon, Wen Wei Po isn't a blog. _dk (talk) 22:40, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
July 2010
[edit]
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary for your edits. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit. It is also helpful to users reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. You must start using edit summaries and communicate with other editors, as this is a vital part of the collaborative process. Dougweller (talk) 19:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions. Please remember to mark your edits as "minor" only if they truly are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Again, you must stop marking edits as minor. If you aren't doing this yourself, it is a setting in your preferences. Click on preferences, then Editing, untick the box about marking edits as minor Dougweller (talk) 19:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)