User talk:Anna Frodesiak/archive21

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60

Dog meat

Anna, be reassured that there's nothing fishy going on. My guess is that it's a lurker who knows my position on the issue and forgot to log in after noticing my recent edits perhaps? I have no idea. I do know however that there have been other dissenters during my absence. The sky is not going to fall if your image isn't up 24/7. Let's see if the anon logs in and contributes in talk page. In the meantime, please relax with the accusations, reversions and assume good faith.Melonbarmonster2 (talk) 10:41, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Noted. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Changing Lives Through Literature

Hey, I ran across a topic that might interest you and make for a good DYK. It is similar to the work we did with Faces of Meth, but far more productive in terms of actual results.[1]. I've only created a redirect at this point, but if you are inspired, you can turn it into a new article. Viriditas (talk) 20:54, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Some ideas for a stub:

Changing Lives Through Literature (CLTL) is an alternative sentencing program that teaches literature to criminals. The program was created in Massachusetts by professor Robert Waxler and judge Robert Kane in 1991 and is now found throughout the United States.
It looks good. I'll check it out. Thanks! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:56, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
I started a stub over at User:Viriditas/Changing Lives Through Literature. Viriditas (talk) 03:47, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

File:Hainan Island topographical.jpg

I just uploaded the new version for you, but I'm not sure this is the correct process. In this particular case, the procedure is to upload a derivative as a new file. Would you like me to fix this? Viriditas (talk) 02:41, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Derivative. Oh no. Is that a problem? I've done that before, but I think it involved more than just filling in the box with "derivative". I had to jump through commons-hoops. Let me know how I can help or what to do. Many thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:45, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
I'll leave it for now, but let me know if you want me to upload a new version (derivative) and leave the old one. This allows others to use the blank map if you so desire. Viriditas (talk) 03:02, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter: 22 April 2011



This is the fourth issue of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program Newsletter, with details about what's going on right now and where help is needed.


Delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 16:30, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Anna Frodesiak. You have new messages at Philg88's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I heard you were feeling a bit batty

The question is, how batty? This batty? :) Viriditas (talk) 04:06, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
Add one belfry and that's bang on. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:51, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

My bad

Resonded to your message on my talk page, but I can tell you're upset over my misunderstandng of our prior communication. I don't do this wikilove stuff much but please accept this as an apology. Best, StrPby (talk) 15:32, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Hello Anna Frodesiak, Strange Passerby has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Asking for help and advice

Hello, Anna:

We just finished the draft for Invasive Species in US article. Here is our sandbox. Could you give us some suggestions?Thanks

--TiMkOk (talk) 18:58, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Chinese herbology

"Thanks for the contributions, but at 20:05, 24 April 2011 I reverted your edits because the claims need to be sourced upon entry into the article. One can't simply make such claims as "...This herb is used to drain dampness and heat from the body...", mainly because, well, there's no evidence that it is true, or even makes sense scientifically. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:11, 24 April 2011 (UTC)"

"is an underground stem that is one of the bitterest herbs used in Chinese medicine. while bitter taste is thought to dispel heat, purge the bowels and get rid of dampness by drying them out."

This herb being one of the most bitter herbs (as stated in the article) will logically drain heat and dampness just as the flavor portion of the article above explains. It's also a rhizome by the way.

I have been talking about the use of the herb from Chinese medical perspective. Being a doctor of Chinese medicine I am educated and qualified to provide this position, and there are many current and ancient materia medica to draw upon for understanding the traditional usage, the information on the usage of the herbs should include its actual usage rather than western medical scientific data, which doesn't really determine its usage today. however i have added the supposition 'is used to...blah blah' not 'is scientifically proven to'.

"I reverted again. Sorry again. If you want to add the species names, etc. please do. But again, the content you are adding about the effects on the body of these substances is not fact. Statements like "...increases urination because the herb goes to the bladder channel and it clears heat as a result of the cold quality..." just make no sense. Qualifying the statement with the disclaimer: "...traditional beliefs hold that..." two sentences earlier, just isn't good enough. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:37, 24 April 2011 (UTC)"

Being that this is an article about chinese herbs and their usage, shouldn't information on how they are actually used by practitioners today be included? The actual 'how' of chinese herbs is rather poorly explained. Chinese herbology and the usage of the herbs as medicine through this medical system rely heavily on the 5 flavors, 4 natures and the interactions with the channels to explain the functions of the herbs. Also knowledge of basic theory (5 pathogens, internal and external causes of disease, channel and organ associations, organ functions) would help enable understanding of the how and why of chinese herbs.

Ginger has been proven through western medical research over and over to be a nausea treatment, but in china it was known for much longer because of the herbal information available. This is historical knowledge combined modern research to form what is almost common knowledge today, most women who go to an 'alternative' practitioner for morning sickness are given some form of ginger for treatment, ect. I find this article to be somewhat crude and i would dearly like to improve it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wren19 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

In my materia medica its just panax ginseng for the asian variety. Also wikipedia's article on ginseng shows the asian variety to be under the heading 'panax ginseng'. its the Araliaceae family but its not used in the nomenclature that i can see anywhere.

here is a quote from the ginseng wiki page: "Panax ginseng Asian ginseng (root)

According to Traditional Chinese Medicine, Panax ginseng promotes yang energy, improves circulation, increases blood supply, revitalizes and aids recovery from weakness after illness, and stimulates the body. It is available in four forms:" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wren19 (talk • contribs) 22:33, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

"Salvia can be taken alone or consumed with other herbs, teas or pills" this is absolutely irrelevent and not specific to salvia, pretty much all herbs can be taken in this fashion. Deleting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wren19 (talk • contribs) 22:35, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

The Meridians

The meridians refer to which organs the herb acts upon. For example, traditional beliefs hold that menthol is pungent, cool and is linked with the lungs and the liver, and since the lungs are the organ which protects the body from invasion from cold and influenza, menthol can help purge coldness in the lungs and invading heat toxins caused by hot "wind.""

The how the meridians are used in chinese herbal medicine is more than just the organs that they act upon. Meridians have skin pathways, internal pathways and specific organ mechanisms. Its not so cut and dry as so say that the meridian's involvement in directly related to the organ that the meridian coorsponds with.

Sorry there is no such thing as hot 'wind' in chinese medicine, its called a wind-heat invasion. Bad translation that someone must have refereed to. This is also a poor example, and actually incorrect. Menthol cannot purge coldness from the lungs because it is a cold herb, it will only make the lungs more cold with its cooling function. And the lungs protect the body from invasion of more than just cold, its wind, cold and heat, those are the 3 exterior conditions that the lung qi (wei gi) wards off. Better to say it wards of colds, because the invastions that the lung qi wards off are actually what we would see as the 'common cold' just different differentiations of it(All external invasions are considered instigated by wind, more feverish and sore throat = heat, more chills and achey= cold, runny nose = dampness). Changing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wren19 (talk • contribs) 22:44, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

I would like to paste this over at Talk:Chinese herbology and continue the thread there. Many thanks for the thoughtful comments. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:25, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

My wiki article

Hi Anna! I saw your posting on my entry. So glad you like it, it took me HOURS to finish it. :) Thank you so much for following up on it. I greatly apologize for not keeping in touch. I was actually able to refer to your pages you posted earlier in the semester for help. Let me know how it reads, I've been told I could skim back a little. Thanks! Football1502 (talk) 12:51, 25 April 2011 (UTC) Football1502

I just posted my comments on your talk. Good job! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:29, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Somov Sea

Hi Anna, there are a few listings of Somov Sea in Google Books. I haven't looked through all of them, but the first one should be sufficient. By the way, I am in the process of completing the marginal seas in different WPs (mainly German and English, since the French one appears complete meanwhile with 14 marginal seas of the Southern Ocean). The English WP still has four missing, I had added Cosmonaut Sea and Cooperation Sea recently. Greetings,--Ratzer (talk) 15:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm so sorry to revert. I looked high an low. I checked you contribs and knew you weren't making it up. I actually started Levantine Sea and I think somebody screamed hoax. I can't quite remember. Please add it back. Best wishes and no offence intended. Double smiles. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
No offense taken (smiles returned). I didn't know about the Levantine Sea. We learn from each other, one nice thing about WP. Greetings,--Ratzer (talk) 16:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK

Just an FYI, but I nominated Jihadi tourism for Did You Know. I think that you've gotten it into pretty good shape over the past couple of days. Feel free to suggest an alternative hook. Qrsdogg (talk) 17:02, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Good plan. And to think it was up for speedy. Thanks for challenging that. My guess is that in a couple of years, the article will have some meat to it.

As for the DYK, is it long enough? Which aspect? The museum or the terrorist training, or both somehow? Cheers, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

It's definitely long enough, the page size script I use is showing 2,754 characters and the minimum is 1,500. The hook that I proposed was "... that popular destinations for Jihadi tourism have included the Tourist Landmark of the Resistance and the Al-Quds Mosque Hamburg?" I guess there are a few different directions the hook could take, that was just the first that came to mind.
BTW, I really like your userpage, it reminds me a bit of Giano's page actually. Hopefully one day I'll have that kind of editing skill. Qrsdogg (talk) 02:24, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the compliment.
I like the dual definition hook. To avoid "...have included...", why not freak people out with "...and Somali terrorist training camps...".? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:29, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Actually, that one works pretty well. Qrsdogg (talk) 04:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


Which one?
I think "...Tourist Landmark of the Resistance..." will draw the eye away from the good stuff and won't make immediate sense. Can we swap in the shorter:
[[Tourist Landmark of the Resistance|a war museum]]
or
an [[Tourist Landmark of the Resistance|historical site]]
This would appear as:
"...that popular destinations for Jihadi tourism have included a war museum and Somali terrorist training sites?"
"...that popular destinations for Jihadi tourism have included an historical site and Somali terrorist training sites?"
Are we allowed to link that way?Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:45, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
It's short. It's got teeth. The blue links jump right out. Should bring big page hits. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:47, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
Good thinking there. I think the alt with the war museum would work best, piping other links in the hook is typically fine (I think). I'll add it to the DYK. Qrsdogg (talk) 04:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
I like it too. I hope the pipe is okay. Now we've got Jihadi, war, Somali, and terrorist all blue and visually dominant. Readers will be on it like ugly on an ape. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:02, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Anna Frodesiak. You have new messages at Puffin's talk page.
Message added 17:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Award

Wikipedia Ambassador Barnstar
For being an excellent mentor and sticking with your mentees from start to (near) finish, I award you the Wikipedia Ambassador Barnstar. Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 01:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. It's been a pleasure helping out. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The Sutton Place Hotel

Hi Anna, thank you, you really are very funny, made my evening. I'm sure I'll be touch sooner than you think. My facebook page is Nick Egan (obviously), you and OlEnglish and Ocaasi are more than welcome as friends, you'll just have to mention your wiki names when you request (of course you may not want to be my friend which is also cool - I think, if I can handle the rejection)

Enjoy the rest of Fucking Royal Wedding day

It was a pleasure to chat with you too. I looked you up on google images. Nice work indeed.
I live in China, so Facebook is blocked here. But, I work on Wikipedia here a lot. If you ever need a hand, just ask, and you can always drop in for a quick hello.
I'm very pleased this royal shindig isn't on TV here. It if were, well, it would be the end of that TV in about 30 seconds, and I'd have to buy a new one.
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Editing my article

Hi Anna, I've reviewing your comments and making the edits right now. When you say "shorten the lead" I'm not sure what that means. What's the lead? Thanks! Football1502 (talk) 13:11, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Football1502

I'm on IRC if you want. In my notes, I suggested shortening the lead last, very last. Remember, these are just my opinions. Your opinions count too. Generally, the lead should be a summary of the key points in the article. The lead, last time I looked, contained a lot more than that. I'll wait for you to see if you want to IRC, or if you want me to help with the edit. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Here's the IRC connection: http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#wikipedia
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:17, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Anna I'm trying to join, it seems to be booting me. Give me a few minutes. Football1502 (talk) 13:29, 29 April 2011 (UTC) Football1502
It might be overloaded. Try http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=#wikipedia-en-ambassadors
Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:34, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

An Honour

Wow Anna,

Did you bestow upon me the Order of the Wikipedian? I just noticed I had access to the 5 Lessons (or whatever they're called) Certainly a privilege, I promise to uphold the noble task of Wikipedian's everywhere. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nick Egan (talk • contribs) 14:42, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

I'll be watching you! :) :) P.S. I replied above too. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:55, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Weeds

Hello, Anna Frodesiak. You have new messages at talk:Weeds (TV series)#Edit warring.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hearfourmewesique (talk) 13:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Policies promoting wireless broadband

Unfortunately, references and wlinks were a mess, and neither AWB nor reflinks could fix that automatically, thus my changes were manual, and obviously I don't want to loose my work. I guess there is/was some offline copyediting going on, which was the reason for revert (?) Materialscientist (talk) 08:35, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

One of my mentees from the Ambassador program will continue to make copy edits for the next two days. The post-reference consolidation copy will be more difficult to for her to manage visually. If it took a lot of time to do, don't worry about it. Let it stand, and she can work through it. Cheers. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:40, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
I'd suggested she add
{{inuse}}
during an IRC, but it didn't happen. I didn't notice its absence. My mistake. No worries. Cheers. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
(ec)Ok. To clarify - I do value good copyedit more than all those formatting tweaks, and would revert if somebody have done off-line rewriting and their version was conflicting with mine. Otherwise, I would let it stay. Coding is lighter now. My reference naming can well be changed for easy recognition. Two minor points: (i) once an article is in the main space, edit conflicts are inevitable (I came there through DYK), sandboxing is one way to avoid that and complete personal edits (uninvited intrusions to a personal sandbox can be reverted at will); "inuse" is also a possibility, but it is usually limited to several hours; (ii) blind wikilinking, especially of common terms is not helpful - the article had 30 or so links to disambig pages, and most of those links were not necessary. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 08:49, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Of course let it stay. I thought at the time I reverted that you'd just run reflinks. I didn't know you spent all that time doing it manually.
About your points: (i) Agreed. It hit the mainspace before being quite ready. (ii) We did a 4 hour IRC and didn't get to blind wikilinking. It's on her to do list.
Anyway, no problem at all. We are grateful for your work on it. Thanks. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 09:11, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Anna Frodesiak. You have new messages at Football1502's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, Anna Frodesiak. You have new messages at Football1502's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Climatic Research Unit email controversy

Hi Anna, you deserve the thanks of everyone involved in that article for attempting to cut through the mess and clarify what is needed to resolve the existing issues. I'm only sorry that your efforts have been rewarded by many many more keystrokes that don't obviously appear to be getting us anywhere. As one of the silent watchers, I don't really want to risk my sanity by getting involved in the arguments - I've rarely found it a pleasant experience to take part in discussions on Wikipedia's climate pages. Mikenorton (talk) 13:45, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Well thank you! That's very nice of you to say. It is indeed a pity that it's still going on without apparent progress. I think they should either hash out a new lead, sentence by sentence on talk, or each agree to a max 20 words to spell out their side. Then at least others would know the positions and could weigh in. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Let me just add my thanks to those you have already received. Was very brave of you to poke your head into that particular hornets' nest. Your suggestion is a fine one too. Perhaps what they should do is write a highly condensed and inoffensive lead (say one or two sentences) and then add a sentence (or even a phrase) at a time only after it's agreed on the talk page. Best of luck if you do decide to venture back there. --Thepm (talk) 22:54, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
Thank you too! I like your suggestion. I would have been brave only had I gone in and tried to argue for one side or another.
Maybe another solution would be to get a group of high school students to write a new lead, and tell the current combatants that they have to sit there and only watch for a week. Of course, they would go insane and need sedatives. It would be as nerve-wracking for them as watching a group of chimpanzees play with a machine gun.
BTW, it's on its way to a half a million characters (361,074). If the average article contents is around 3,000 characters, then that's the equivalent of 120,000 articles. There must be a better way of coming to consensus. It's like that episode of Star Trek where the half-black-half-white guys are fighting for eternity. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:37, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
It was a good idea, wasn't it. Ah well. I like the idea of high school students too. Another idea is to impose a three month ban anyone who has any opinion on the matter at all. That way we could at least clean up some of the more egregious attacks upon the English language.
Anyway, I have now taken it off my watch list and decided to go and play quietly in some of the dustier recesses of wikipedia. It's very quiet there, but the dust does play merry hell with my hayfever. --Thepm (talk) 02:37, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

No vandalism

Hi dear, you adressed me on my TP about one of my recent edits, it wouldn't have been 'constructive'. Please read my edit again and note that I removed a double notation. Also please remove your edit on my TP. Matthias92 (talk) 21:51, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello. The edit in question is this. You removed: "...Prime Minister Stoltenberg of Norway pledged $1 million USD dollars...." with no explanation in the edit summary. When you say "double notation", do you mean that it appears twice? It doesn't seem to.
My apologies in advance, but I don't understand why you removed it? Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to jump in but the Norwegian donation appeared at the top of the list then again half way down. This is what he means by "double notation". ► Philg88 ◄ talk 00:57, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Ha ha ha. You're right, all of you. I'm terribly sorry. I kept searching it and it didn't appear on the list. Chrome search has refuses to do it's thing sometimes, but not recently. I think I'm just losing my marbles. Time for me to check into the puzzle factory. Anyway, sorry for my mistake Matthias92. Thanks for restoring it Hearfourmewesique. And thanks for jumping in Philg88. :) :) :) Triple smiles. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:17, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

(It is possible that I was looked at the diff, saw one entry remain and said: "Gee. It's only there once. Not twice." According to my parents and the good folks at the special needs centre, I'm "actually that stupid.".) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Thx all ;) Matthias92 (talk) 11:15, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Death of Osama bin Laden conspiracy theories for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Death of Osama bin Laden conspiracy theories is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Osama bin Laden conspiracy theories until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. —Chris!c/t 04:27, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

hi FROM Suisse514

Hi. Thank you for your time to check my new entry. I hope you can provide me some advices to make it look more organized and better. Thanks again... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Suisse514 (talk • contribs) 20:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm happy to help. I'll take a look right now. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:56, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK

Your input would be welcome, someone put a hold on the Jihadi Tourism DYK. He notified me, but forgot to notify you for some reason. [2] Qrsdogg (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

I read the DYK concern. I'll need to think about that. At the moment I'm a bit preoccupied with the Ambassador program. I'll post over at DYK ASAP. Thanks for the heads-up. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:09, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Anna, I am sure your article will be kept and be suitable for DYK. I did have a concern though, which I expressed at the AfD, that the original meaning of "Jihadi tourism" (traveling to make contact with militant organizations and train for terrorism) is being inappropriately extended to smear a new nationalist museum in Lebanon, as if every expression of anti-Israel sentiment implied a wish to become a murderer. I realize that your work on the article is entirely based on sources (and admirably NPOV) but I think the two meanings deserve to be kept separate. In unrelated news, I tried to get those images you mention at the top of this page so I could upload them for you, but instead I got a message that the files don't exist. Could you check those links? Thanks for all the good work you do here on Wikipedia. 17:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University

Hi Anna,

My name is RoXjtlubmo and I work at XJTLU in the Brand and Marketing office. Over the past few months I have been restructuring and improving our own website www.xjtlu.edu.cn, in preperation for our International brand and marketing plans, which obviously includes Wikipedia.

However I am completely inexperienced in editing on this site and so please forgive any editing rules I seem to have already broken. Can I ask where your involvement lies with XJTLU and what interest you have in the university?

Kind Regards,

Xjtlubmo (talk) 08:37, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello and welcome.
First, consider identifying yourself only as Xjtlubmo on Wikipedia, as it is a very public place. Many editors reveal their name, but most do not. I'm just making you aware.
Second, your username is (mostly) an acronym for the university's name, and so might not be entirely appropriate if you are here only to expand the university article, and considering your interest in that institution.
Third, please remember that this is an encyclopedia, and not a vehicle for promoting your school, regardless of the fact that the university is nonprofit. The fact that you wish to edit, and (likely already have edited) the article while working in the Brand and Marketing office may represent a conflict of interest.
Others will likely read this post and advise.
In the meantime, if you do continue to edit the Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University article, please do so in a neutral, encyclopedic, non-promotional manner.
I have no involvement with the university. My interest is only in the article, as a Wikipedian. I watch the page to ensure contributions conform to the policies of the project.
I am more than happy to assist you in editing. You are most welcome here at Wikipedia. I presume that you were editing as the IP earlier. Forgive my reversion of your edit. I did so because you had removed sourced content. Don't worry about that. Be bold. Reverting inappropriate edits is a simple matter of a single mouse click. Nobody will be upset.
Again, a warm welcome, and please let me know how I can help. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:44, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Clarification

Concerning your comment here: I'm not totally sure if your use of "you" refers to me or to Jack; just so I understand what you said, could you tell me? Heimstern Läufer (talk) 14:22, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry to be unclear. I meant that I totally agree with what you said. I'm glad you spoke up. "125"s "Phantom of the Wikipedia" thing is really disruptive.
The disturbing thing is that he seems to be making valid points. Too bad his edits show a strategy of vigilante wikiterrorism, where charm, the use of his brains, and finesse could really facilitate the change he's after. It's pretty obvious that he cares about Wikipedia. I wish he would fresh start as: "User:Jack Merritwo, Super Hero and Highly Effective Yet Polite Advocate of How Wikipedia Should Be." :) Wikilove and respect to you, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 14:50, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
fyi, I remove your post because I, too, was unsure about your meaning, and I didn't want a 'support' poll. I've been here for 7 years (making valid points;). Charm doesn't work all that well. There are game-players here and all the usual techniques fail in that contexts. The players get to re-write the rulz. The CIV policy is one of the most abused; it's usually a weapon the faux-polite use against the blunt speakers.
“Terror is nothing else than swift, severe, indomitable justice; it flows, then, from virtue.”  —Robespierre
125.162.150.88 (talk) 15:01, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
  • I too fear that Wikipedia is being hijacked. The outside world is an utterly corrupt place. Wikipedia is supposed to be a bastion of fairness -- what the world isn't. (Sorry about the dashes there. Wrong ones? :))
  • There's blunt and then there's nasty. Identify unfair tactics. Expose them, and prevent them, en masse, from using those modes. Blunt vs. charm? Remember honey vs. vinegar.
  • Robespierre was an utter knob.
  • You only ended up on my watchlist because you offended a good, non-political user unfairly. The masses (common folk) are working here, for free. Scrap with the generals. Don't kick the privates in the privates.
  • Use the power of your mind. There is an enourmously clever way for you to achieve what you want. Don't go Phantom on the situation. That's small-time. Plot big. Plan large. Devise wise.
  • Sorry if I'm not on point. I just had a large glass of not-so-good Chinese red wine (they're new at it). Anna Frodesiak (talk) 15:36, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
{replying to your reply to my original question; sorry about the delay; life's been busy} Well, thanks. I try to be the best writer and persuader that I possibly can; sadly, nothing I do seems to quiet down the general madhouse (not meant as an attack on present company or anyone else at all; just an indictment of Wikipedia at large).
By the way, concerning that Chinese wine: was it Great Wall wine? I don't drink, myself, but I see that stuff a lot. I think some people told me it wasn't too good. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 13:21, 8 May 2011 (UTC)


No problem with about the delay. That's the nice thing about WP, no time pressure.
Sometimes I don't know whether or not to speak up. Sometimes I think it is our responsibility. I'm glad you did.
Great Wall wine sold outside China? Jeez Louise! What's next? I personally don't buy that brand. There are dozens of grape wine brands here. Price has absolutely no connection to quality. Great Wall averages at around 4 Euros a bottle, and it's sewage. Some are sold in wooden boxes for 40 Euros, also sewage. Probably the same sewage. It's new here, and so a free-for-all for manufacturers. Chinese people are 100% sure that expensive means good. I go into the supermarket and try them on the spot. I start with the cheapest and go up. A 1.5 Euro bottle being better than a 40 Euro bottle is just as likely as the other way around.
Here's a predicton: One day Xinjiang province will produce some of the best wines on Earth. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:35, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Please help assess articles for Public Policy Initiative research

Hi Anna Frodesiak/archive21,

Your work as an Online Ambassador is making a big contribution to Wikipedia. Right now, we're trying to measure just how much student work improves the quality of Wikipedia. If you'd like contribute to this research and get a firsthand look at the quality improvement that is happening through the project, please sign up to assess articles. Assessment is happening now, just use the quantitative metric and start assessing! Your help would be hugely appreciated!

Thank you, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 17:10, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello?

I noticed a message on my talk page. Did I do something wrong?FusionChamber (talk) 20:25, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Not at all. It was a friendly welcome. To reiterate: "Welcome!" If you need anything, just ask. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:04, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Good Job. — Bryan Anderson (talk) 04:23, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

For me? I'm honoured. But why? I'm just a garden variety vandal fighter. Nonetheless, thank you kindly. :) :) :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 04:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok! — Bryan Anderson (talk) 04:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Please read the following

Hello, Anna Frodesiak. You have new messages at CHAK 001's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Anna Frodesiak. You have new messages at Sadads's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Great call!

Thanks for helping out with this problem with our rapid-fire stub creator. I saw what you were going to leave on his talk page and I happen to agree with you. Let's put the ball back in his court. Hopefully, he'll really start to expand these things. He managed to create an average of ten per minute, so he has his work cut out for him.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:58, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm a bit concerned about the state of the other political articles. They are quite rough. However, it might be best for him to allow others to merge/delete/fix those, while he's on the village stub case. Refs and coords would be a good place to start. Then, after that, I can help him get started with the maps, as coords are needed to geolocate. I hope this is a helpful solution. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:04, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I noticed those as well. That's why I stepped in. I can't thank you enough for doing likewise. I have to log off, but I'll pop by every so often to see how it's going and try to add some info myself. Might as well practice what I preach.  :) Anyway, thank you again. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 16:07, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm pleased to help. And thank you for being so diplomatic with such an enthusiastic new editor. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 16:19, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Anna Frodesiak. You have new messages at Neutralhomer's talk page.
Message added 22:48, 9 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Is deltion of somebody's talk subpage allowed

User talk:PMDrive1061 deleted my talk subpage User talk:Maheshkumaryadav/List of schools in districts of India. The page was not having any offensive contents, but was edited to perfection by me for three hours. The deletion of contents from 'main' domain can be understandable, but is deleting my subpage which i was planning to use fair. Has he violated any rules. Mahesh Kumar Yadav (talk) 18:18, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Now you want my advice? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:59, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Mahesh

What is weird about the last hour or so is that Mahesh announced his wikibreak within minutes of posting a report at AN/I about my conduct. That followed him questioning me on my talk page, where I explained (again) that he needed consensus. It would appear that I was the last straw. It is not a comfortable feeling. - Sitush (talk) 19:42, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Others who were not "kindly" complying with his will was the last straw for him. Please, feel very comfortable. You made the right decision.
This editor is not just "new, and in need a bit of guidance". He ignored community consensus, and numerous editors who were trying to help. He left a trail of debris for others to sweep up. This has been a highly disruptive experience that has cost us all many hours of work.
As far as I'm concerned, I don't want to see an asset run away. But are his contributions a net asset considering all the energy spent by others on this? Does he show willingness to work with the community? I don't see many signs of that.
My patience for coddling this editor who has run roughshod over us has come to an end. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the reassurance. - Sitush (talk) 20:16, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
You demonstrated good judgement and endless patience. Oh, and, he's not "new". I assumed he was, due to the near absence of communication and cooperation that we sometimes see with newcomers. I'm astonished to see such behaviour coming from an editor who's been around since Aug 2006. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:32, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Anna_Frodesiak/archive21"