User talk:Huaiwei/Archive L

Torch Relay

Your suggestions is pretty good, but the images is clickable and can be enlarge. May be you can do it, because i'm not expert in croping the images. But is really in good shape now. Thank you. --Aleen f1 15:56, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Did you have wikimedia account? If have, please upload there because chinese Wikipedia also use my image (if not send via email to me). And can you answer who is making some table in 2006 Asian Games and put question mark inside? I'm notice this few times, and it is not reliable. Thank you. --Aleen f1 16:08, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, send it to me. Thank you for doing this. And i'm already revert to simple formar in bidding process and torch relay, and leave message already to HIM. The question shoule not be there because it invite the speculation only. Again thanks! --Aleen f1 16:27, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of Chinese cities

Please don't ignore useful changes to the article when you revert. - Privacy 16:36, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will ignore them when the edit summary makes no freaking mention that it includes usefull summaries of any kind. You seem to learn lots of dirty tricks from your master.--Huaiwei 16:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What master? You ignore useful changes no matter there are useful summaries or not. - Privacy 16:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Examples please?--Huaiwei 16:47, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

east asian names

hi huaiwei, thanks for your offer to help me with the names. well, actually, i'm having a hard time with chinese, taiwanese and korean names. if i saw a name, i can't tell exactly which is the first name and the last. but then again, the 2006 Asian Games website lists the last name first and capitalized so i didn't have much time to worry then. BUT since there was a discussion about names, i changed everything to first names first and removed the ALL CAPS format, now i'm having a problem which is which, well, you know, i can simply exchange the last one with the first, but i don't know exactly when, and how it should apply. Should i go change names for China, Chinese Taipei and Korea, and also i noticed there are boxers' bio articles of Koreans that has an en dash with it, another big problem with me as i need to edit out all 2006 boxing-related articles with Korean names in it. if you have time, please feel free to take a look at Boxing at the 2006 Asian Games. thanks again and more power! --RebSkii 17:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC

I have started an RfC against Huaiwei here Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Huaiwei_2 about his behaviour when discussing, mainly his constant ad hominem argumentation. Please add comments as desired on that page. --Regebro 14:10, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

Greetings! You are being contacted to be notified that a Request for Arbitration has opened and you were listed as an involved party. You can find the discussion and make a statement at Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration#Huaiwei and Singapore Changi Airport. Thank you for your cooperation. thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 20:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation of single-party state

Hi there, I've taken the mediation case for single-party state for the mediation committee. Please go here to start the mediation. Thanks. —Xyrael / 15:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. After speaking to a party of this case, I think it has pretty much faded into the background. For that reason, I will be closing the mediation soon unless you have any opposition to this. If so, please drop me a talk page note. Thanks. —Xyrael / 13:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help

greetings huaiwei i need your help —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.8.13 (talk • contribs) 13:39, 20 December 2006

Singapore Airlines Fleet

Please DO NOT edit the Singapore Airlines in the format you put it in. The correct layout is the former layout, which I have reverted to. Thank you for your edits, but some are unnecassary. Deal with the way the table is layed out because ALL airlines should be layed out this way.--Golich17 20:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but I do not see you being in the position to tell others what to do in this manner. Show me the proof that this is true for "All" airlines, and show me this format has been cast in stone. Till then, I am reverting it.--Huaiwei 22:59, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your fleet table provides information no one needs, or at least that does not need to be in a fleet table. American Airlines, United Airlines, Delta Air Line, Northwest Airlines, Continental Airlines, Lufthansa, British Airways, Qantas, etc. all use this table format, and as their are so many that do, this one should too. It is simple and clear and gets the point across for IMPORTANT information unlike the information you provided. Maybe telling you that all these MAJOR airlines use this table will get the point across to you.--Golich17 16:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration enforcement

I have brought your attempts of editwarring on Dominant-party system to the attention of the ArbCom here. --Regebro 20:31, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

Happy New Year!

The Law Enforcement Wikiproject wishes all it's members a happy New Year! SGGH 09:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore Airlines

In case you did not notice, there is now an article for the holding company with a section on the Singapore Airlines Group. This should allow some of the material to be moved out so the size of the airline article can be reduced and better focused. Vegaswikian 22:16, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you show any reference stating that Singapore Airlines Limited is a holding company, and that it is seperate from the airline itself?--Huaiwei 04:38, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Preview

I would like to thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. However, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thanks again. --Oden 08:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore Airlines

Your edits are against policy. According to Wikipedia:WikiProject Airlines, you must layout in this way until stated otherwise, this is the way it is and you must deal with it. If you continue to revert my edits, it will be treated like vandalism.--Golich17 02:32, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that you respond to the above comment where I posed the message. I am clearly not the only one reverting your advances.--Huaiwei 13:26, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know what, it's policy and you HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT. Even if others are making these changes, I am following the guidelines and abiding by them. You are obviously to reluctant to listening to RULES, obviously you do not know what they are. I have explained myself many times and I am being very patient with you. Your layout is in the incorrect order and you have things that are in an incorrect format, therefore I have EVERY RIGHT to change them. I will no longer warn you.--Golich17 00:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I dont exactly enjoy dealing with individuals who shout at others. If you insist it is your right, then I am obviously challenging it. There is no rule to follow, and you have a flawed understanding of just what a guideline in wikipedia is. So deal with that first yourself before thinking you have the moral authority to lecture others.--Huaiwei 12:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on the Mediation cabal listing here would be appreciated.--Shakujo 02:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC) Your comments regarding the specifics of the Singapore Airlines article would be more useful and constructive then a reminder that any agreements are non-binding. Please present your case for keeping the article as it is.--Shakujo 05:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Proper Order

For your information, no page on Wikipedia is perfect. Your attitude towards using this website is completely wrong. If you think your page is perfect, YOU'RE WRONG! AND BY THE WAY, NO ONE OWN'S A PAGE. I can make edits that I believe are reasonable, and so far, you have absolutely no evidence that my edits are against policy. Even if no one follows the policy, start now and get ahead of the game. Eventually, all pages should be integrated to look the same and have the same features.--Golich17 00:56, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh sure I agree. No page in wikipedia is perfect, including the one you are insisting on reverting to. You insist that you own the right to revert it your way. So just who is claiming ownership over articles now? If you are truly interested in "integrating pages", mind keeping your own backyard in order first before lambasting others? Or shall I have the honour to do it for you?--Huaiwei 12:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I am following policy by reverting your edits... as they are incorrect! I dont want to argue about this one-hundred times, but your making me do so. Until you start following policy, I HAVE "EVERY RIGHT" to revert your edits. I am not "claiming ownership" on any article. I comprehensively edit certain articles more than others. So your ideas about me are completely incorrect.--Golich17 22:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Golich17, you really do need to start being a bit more civil and grasp that the layout advice at WP:AIRPORTS is just a guideline and that you need to work with other editors to achieve consensus. Otherwise you're going to foul of WP:CIVIL, WP:3RR and other things which are policies you you'll find yourself banned! Take care/wangi 23:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorism in country categories

I saw you created the Terrorism in Singapore category a while back. A new user is upset by the use of the word terrorism and is removing categories from pages at random. I would appreciate it if you would take a look at, and consider reverting the user's edits to, East Turkestan Islamic Movement, Grey Wolves, and Kurdistan Workers Party. Thanks, KazakhPol 02:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Huaiwei! (Re: Countries...)

I thought you might be interested in the fact that I've listed the template at WP:RFC/HIST. May we find a solution that works! -Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 09:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification and initiative! ;)--Huaiwei 12:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Canton

I don't know if you are interested in this, but User:Lonewolf BC keeps editing the disambiguous page Canton to take out text mentioning that Canton is an older term, and taking out the wikilink directly to Guangzhou and Guangdong. He's basically pushing his POV over at that article that "Canton" should be used instead of "Guangzhou". Please keep an eye on that article if you are interested. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tiger Airways

Hey, thanks for contributing to the article on Tiger Airways. Just a quick hint for the future, but make sure to check the referencing method used within an article when adding links to information. More information on this can be found at WP:CITE, and the specific referencing model that has been applied to the Tiger Airways article at WP:FN. Cheers. thewinchester 00:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Singapore general election, 2006

I am unprotecting Singapore general election, 2006. Before editing content related to the ongoing dispute, please either message the talk page User:Terence Ong, or myself. The conflict must be settled, and everyone wants it promoted to a good article, right? Teke^(talk) 03:16, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's of no use introducing a section without content, it violates the manual of style. You could ask for assistance on the talk page in creating content in the section as a collaborative work. Teke^(talk) 03:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but could you point out which section am I introducing which is "emtpy"? Secondly, just which part of the manual of style am I violating by my edit?--Huaiwei 17:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Warning regarding your probation and Singapore Changi Airport

Hi Huaiwei. I'm hear to warn you to avoid the kind the confrontation that you've recently had at Singapore Changi Airport. In the retrospect, I'm sure you'll admit, it would have been better to have taken it to the talk page a little earlier. But you did the right thing by apologizing, and that is part of the reason that I'm inclined to let this go with a caution. Happy editing, Bucketsofg 00:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CISCO

Is there a reason you removed my addition, regarding a CISCO officer, Loqmanul Hakim Buang, who shoplifted from a Sheng Shiong in Jurong? It was reported in ST, and the addition is properly referenced. I suppose you might have a good reason for this, so I'm not undoing that edit for the moment. But I can't think of what that might possibly be. --Rifleman 82 16:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That information is now at CISCO Security, because it happened after the statutory board was corporatised. Please differentiate between CISCO the statutory board and CISCO the company.--Huaiwei 17:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

calm down, you need peace

I know you love Singapore very much(well, maybe I dunno). You try to deliberately argue with everyone in everything. But don't you feel tried? actually academic people in universities or colleges pay very little attention on wikipedia, not to metnion Singaporean topic. Wikipedia is basically for Joe Bloggs(average people). Have you been to Oxford University in the UK? ask anyone who are studying there, who cares wikipedia? who cares Singapore; the place where they considered as a barbaric land? I don't think they would like to even open and read sometimes. Calm down, you do need peace in your mind. Guia Hill 00:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

lol. Thank you for reminding me that I live in a barbaric land. I forget that sometimes.--Huaiwei 12:28, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tan Kim Peng Clarence

Fyi, Tan Kim Peng Clarence is up for Afd. --Vsion 15:58, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip-off. The nominator's username looks kinda familiar. Hmm. ;)--Huaiwei 01:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation Cabal Request

Hello! I'm .V., a member of Wikipedia's mediation cabal. We provide informal and optional mediation to users in disputes so, hopefully, it can be resolved early instead of being taken to "official" channels (the Mediation Committee or Arbitration). A user has filed a mediation cabal request regarding a discussion on a page in which you are a participant. You can find a link to the mediation here.

Remember, this mediation is purely optional and the result is non-binding. The goal of this mediation is to hopefully resolve the matter peacably, fairly, and to the satisfaction of all parties involved. Thanks! .V. _[_Talk|Email] 23:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on the Singapore film list. Feel free to start missing films. CheersErnst Stavro Blofeld 21:18, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to access Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/List of films without article/List of missing Singaporean Films and add the full list of missing films from imdb if you can. I've been to Singapore four times now I think!! although mostly only briefly as a port of call in flying to Bali and Bintan and Malaysia. Very clean place!! Nice shopping too! Ernst Stavro Blofeld 21:22, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PD-China edit

Thanks for the correction, I don't know why I always get the spelling of Macau wrong! Physchim62 (talk) 15:49, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh its no problem at all. Anyway its not really a case of getting it "wrong", but a need for spelling consistency in the site. :)--Huaiwei 16:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

About Tan Kim Peng Clarence

You seem to be taking my comment far too seriously when all I said is "sometimes I wonder ....". I'm not the enemy. As for voting based on value of articles, that is precisely what I am doing as my actions have shown. You complain about my prejudiced judgements on the contributors when you are making far worse comments above about other contributors above. I don't know what my AFD comments have to do with showing prejudiced judgements on contributors beyond the fact that I disagree with your Keep. May I offer one advise? You seem to take any disagreement with you as a personal attack, it doesn't matter if the guy is Singaporean or not. Looking at your past record, I would suggest that you should take your own advise about derogatory comments since you definitely need it more than me. It would be a shame for you to be banned, since you are doing good work when you don't get involved in meaningless fights. Anyway, this is the last time I'm going to be involved with this side of Wikipedia for obvious reasons. Good Luck with your future edits. Aarontay 13:53, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you begin your statements with statements like "I'm not the enemy", I know instantly that I am probably wasting my time discussing this further. Wikipedia is not the place for such immature correspondance. Thank you.--Huaiwei 14:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Diaspora

Re [1] - Do you know the full title of the Sino-British Joint Declaration? — Insta ntnood 07:47, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go straight to the point.--Huaiwei 07:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't even know about its full title, based on what were you able to claim that " The point here is that the entity in question was China, and not specifically the PRC... And when the word "China" is in reference to a country, it is of no consequence just what government is installed to govern it... " [2]? — Insta ntnood 08:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And do you know in its content it reads " The Government of the People's Republic of China declares that to recover the Hong Kong area (including Hong Kong Island, Kowloon and the New Territories, hereinafter referred to as Hong Kong) is the common aspiration of the entire Chinese people, and that it has decided to resume the exercise of sovereignty over Hong Kong with effect from 1 July 1997. "? — Insta ntnood 08:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Go straight to the point.--Huaiwei 08:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Make no bold claim if you don't even know what the Joint Declaration is about, and if you don't even know about its content. — Insta ntnood 08:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And perhaps you should be rereading my statement and understanding it throughly before claiming I am making a bold claim.--Huaiwei 08:08, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you were not making reference to the Joint Declaration, then you were in effect equating China and the People's Republic of China in a Wikipedia article. By doing so you were not adhering to the official NPOV policy on Wikipedia. As I've mentioned earlier, Wikipedia should remain silence over whether or not China can be used meaning People's Republic of China. — Insta ntnood 08:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, you should be rereading my statement and understanding it throughly before claiming I am making a bold claim, and before making any kind of assumption on my comments. Your enthusiasim in nit-picking my comments to pick a fight and to use that as an excuse to revert war is becoming blatantly obvious.--Huaiwei 08:53, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. I am only serious with facts and adhering to official policies and guidelines. Please kindly refrain from making accusations and personal attacks against anybody, during discussions on disputed subject matters. — Insta ntnood 09:29, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thankfully, there is such a thing known as a mirror on planet Earth.--Huaiwei 05:41, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

S'pore article nominated in AfD

Just thought you might be interested in this, since you contribute to S'pore articles: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of common Chinese surnames in Singapore. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 08:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. ;)--Huaiwei 08:33, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RFAr, 4th go around

STC filed another RFAr case against Instantnood. Seeing that he's been reverting you (in which I haven't taken any sides), I figure that you'd be interested to know that. I added you to involved party because of it. Hope you don't mind. - Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 04:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names)

Re [3] - From point #3 it reads " The contents (this applies to all articles using the name in question): The same name as in title should be used consistently throughout the article. (note throughout the article, instead of throughout the site i.e. Wikipedia) ". Nevertheless in your edits to Ming Dynasty [4] [5], for instance, Macau/o occured only once in the article, still you changed the spelling from -o to -u. You have also disregarded the fact you were told in a previous discussion at talk:Macau [6] [7] that Macao was the spelling then used in English (and most European languages). According to #3, and assuming Macao is only historical name in English (as you prefer), in the Ming Dynasty article it should have been " Macao (Macau) ". — Insta ntnood 06:16, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And why am I not surprised it will come to this? Thank goodness I already preempted this. If you bother to read my original comment in full, you would have noticed I have already taken care of this. If you missed it, too bad. You dont have to make elaborate accusations in my talkpage. For the upteemth time, please keep the discussions in one place, unless you are demonstrating yet another attempt to fragment discussions for ulterior motives.--Huaiwei 14:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:NCGN. It says " throughout the article ", not " throughout Wikipedia ". " For the upteemth time, please keep the discussions in one place, unless you are demonstrating yet another attempt to fragment discussions for ulterior motives. " - Am I not keeping discussion concerning WP:NCGN at once place? Meanwhile, do you recognise it's as common a practice to response at others' user talk pages rather than one's own? — Insta ntnood 22:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read my comments in full before repeating yourself like a parrot (again). Tell that happens, you will be ignored.--Huaiwei 23:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None of your comments addresses the way and rationale you applied WP:NCGN. — Insta ntnood 23:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt I am accountable for your selective reading habits.--Huaiwei 04:48, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Show me where you had elaborated on your application of WP:NCGN? — Insta ntnood 09:41, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt I am accountable for the semi-blind either.--Huaiwei 16:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Show it if you did. Or else don't pretend you had done it already. — Insta ntnood 20:01, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have no motives for low-class pretentious acts, for why should I do that with someone who can actually cite from one part of my comment, ignore the rest, and then pretend the later are non existant? ;)--Huaiwei 12:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The only dialogue regarding your application of WP:NCGN is this section on your user talk page. You have never explained under this section. — Insta ntnood 19:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning my RFAR argument

Thank you for posting at my talk page. Indeed, I'm not able to give out exact diffs as evidence since I only recalled the incident out of my memory, which is basically in cold storage for more than a year and therefore I couldn't recall exact pagenames and dates. Again, my apologies if I really mistook your intention in following up my edits. I hope my comments would not cause rivalry or hatred between us. Hope we can work together in the future. Best regards. --Der yck C. 02:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

for Hong kong

just look at the sovereignty.Hong kong is not even a broad sense speaking Dependent territory.You guys always want it to be a country.Why not you guys catogerise all the Dependent territory as country? Dear sir or miss, I think wiki is field of civility ,equality and fairness.Dont try to make double standard for others ok?--Ksyrie 23:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hah I think you misunderstood. I, for one, do not call HK a country.--Huaiwei 23:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yet apparently that's not what the community on Wikipedia recognise. They don't equate country and sovereign state. — Insta ntnood 20:57, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And just who constitutes this "community" you speak off?--Huaiwei 12:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, the folks who decided or supported to create a list of countries and a list of sovereign states. — Insta ntnood 19:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of arbitration enforcement filing

Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement#User:Huaiwei and User:Instantnood. Alai 05:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are hereby page-banned under "probation" remedy for disruptive editing {{China-geo-stub}} and {{China-struct-stub}}. Alai 17:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template

The template does not give any additional information more than Category. It's only cluttering article. — Indon (reply) —

The discussion is now on my talk page. Thanks. — Indon (reply) — 12:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Demographics of mainland China move request...

You should make your support clear if you support this move. — AjaxSmack 10:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...and please read my comments...

...at Talk:Saint George's Church. — AjaxSmack 22:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits

Re [8] - Please note that using China in place of People's Republic of China is not NPOV, whereas using People's Republic of China in place of mainland China is effectively disregarding PRC's sovereignty over the two special administrative regions. As a matter of fact Hong Kong and Macao are constitutionally and practically part of the People's Republic of China. Read Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese)#Political NPOV for elaboration and examples. Regards. — Insta ntnood 19:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocks and Bans

Following a complaint at WP:AE documenting extensive edit warring between Instantnood and Huaiwei on various articles, the following remedies are enacted under the terms of their previous arbitration case. [9]

Instantnood (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned for one month for persistent edit warring, violating his 1RR parole, and wikistalking of Huaiwei's edits.
Instantnood is banned from editing any category page related to China, including but not limited to its history, culture, territories and disputed territories.
Instantnood is banned from adding or removing any category related to China from any article related to China. He may be blocked without further warning for up to a week for each violation.
Huaiwei (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is banned for one week for edit warring.
Huaiwei is also banned from editing any category page related to China, and from adding or removing any category related to China from any article related to China. Huaiwei may be blocked for up to one week per violation without further warning. Thatcher131 01:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign aids to China

Re [10] - Could you please kindly refer to the basic laws of Hong Kong and Macao, and the joint declarations (Sino-British and Sino-Portuguese)? On " Nongovernmental sources of aid sometimes list funds related to the special administrative regions of Hong Kong and Macau separately, however. ", as far as I know nobody includes Hong Kong and Macao in the figures listed for China or People's Republic of China. — Insta ntnood 11:50, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notice to administrators

I note with alarm User:Instantnood's continued disregard for the edit ban imposed on him as a result of the recent arbcom enforcement [11]. I have every intention to respect a similar ban imposed on me, and I will not respond in kind to Instantnood's continued participation in key discussions using another IP 203.218.218.167 during this period. I will, however, post my comments and views once this period is over, so I appeal to editors in these sections to await for my views before making any conclusive decisions. I hope comments are not swayed by an individual user bent on violating wikipedia policies, justified only by his perported respect for wikipedia guidelines.--Huaiwei 13:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Controversial edits

The total list of banks in List of banks in mainland China, List of banks in Hong Kong, & List of banks in Macao seems pretty long and it is reasonable to split them into three separate lists. If you want to argue about the proper names of List of banks in mainland China and List of banks in Macao, I'd suggest doing that on the article talk pages. If you cannot achieve resolution, then you should pursue dispute resolution. However, that doesn't invalidate breaking it into three separate lists with List of banks in mainland China being a dab page. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 23:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He wasn't requesting the article page be deleted. He was requesting the talk page be deleted as it was a redirect. Blanking the talk page satisfied the problem. The speedy tag, while unnecessary, was where he wanted it and you didn't need to move it. I don't have a stake in the names of these articles. If you disagree with his names, then follow the dispute resolution procedures. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 23:24, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:AN/I (Privacy/Secrecy)

Hi Huaiwei - seems likely that I owe you an apology for suspecting you of involvement in the current sockwar. Sorry - but hopefully you can understand why it looked plausible on the surface :) Grutness...wha? 11:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]