Misplaced Pages

main articles: Chinese Misplaced Pages and Blocking of Misplaced Pages in mainland China. feel free to add your part of contribution. SummerThunder 01:53, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Chinese in different parts of the world use some different chinese words, such as different translations for the same English words. It is similar to the differences between the American and British English, such as "soccer - football, flashlight - torch."

So currently, those moderators have three different pages for mainland chinese, for people from taiwan, for people from hong kong and macau, even though the contents are basically the same! and they ask people to vote to decide which pages they should add!!! how big is hongkong and macau?! and hk and macau are already a part of China. and those moderators made a special page just for those two tiny cities? Even people in beijing and shanghai don't use the same words.

I suggested that if the English page only has one page for all people who speak English whether they are from africa or europe or america. how come the chinese site needs to have so many different pages? And if people from hongkong and macau can have a page of their own, then maybe it is time to add more pages for the Chinese people from Sigapore, from thailand, vietnam, south america, etc, etc.

After I posted a message commenting their incapability of leading that site, they immediatly deleted my comment. That is how they are managing that page. I don't see any hope for those people and the Chinese site.

It is time for the wikipedia governing body to take control of the chinese page, ask them to stop making all those nonsense extra pages for different Chinese readers. There are plenty of softwares that can change all those necessary chinese fonts, etc. SummerThunder 12:07, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

How does this fall under the English Misplaced Pages's jurisdiction? Let the Chinese sort it out for themselves, or take it to metawiki. The English Misplaced Pages has no authority over the Chinese Misplaced Pages, they are sister projects on the same level within the Wikimedia organization. --tjstrf talk 10:14, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

OH. I don't know that. that is why i am writing it here. but you can see my point, right. however, those moderators are totally useless. they can't sort out anything. they can't even decide which page they should use. you know, i just checked on the talk page on meta, it seems that it doesn't have a lot of activities. SummerThunder 10:16, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Summer Thunder, please moderate the personal attacks. WP:NPA is official policy on the English Misplaced Pages, and you have repeatedly violated it. Stop, now. User:Zoe|(talk) 18:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

at least, you are not like those chinese moderators who deleted all my comments!!! and then banned me accusing me of "vandalism." If they think that they need to make pages for tiny cities Hongkong and macau, simply because they use slightly different Chinese, they obviously are not capable. This is clearly my personal opinion, it is not a "personal attack." I do not make personal attacks, but their disrespect of my freedom of speech make me very upset. Further, the way they are managing the chinese site is ruining its futuer for sure. SummerThunder 20:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

You're wasting your time. There is nothing we can do about your grievances on another project. I imagine the Chinese Misplaced Pages has a dispute resolution procedure. If you don't get an adaquate response there, your best bet is meta. --Tango 21:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

well, i did post it on meta discussion. and i was blocked due to "personal attack." I don't know what they are thinking. That is my personal opinion based of real facts. Just like when bush called those few countries axis of evil, no one banned him from the white house. at least, I am glad that no one deleted my comments opinions on here. and people from the world can read about it and make up their own mind. Unlike the chinese commnuist government which blocked many sites, they think that they can think for the people! SummerThunder 21:33, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

If your comments on meta were the same as they are here, I'm not surprised you were blocked for personal attacks. Please calm down. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:55, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I tried to voice my concerns about the serious problems that are happening on the Chinese page on the meta page, and the babel page. my comments have been deleted several times. AT the same time, someone wrote something in Korea, it was still there even though none of them can understand it. someone even told me that I have no evidence, and I need to show him or her the logs, etc. I have listed total of five examples. and you think that I have the time to record, take pics of what happened on the chinese site?! don't be ridiculous.

What is the freedom of speech? When Bush called those countries axis of evil, I didn't see anyone tried to ban him from talking again. And I was only expressing my own personal opinion, and concern, they just deleted them one after another. What is wrong with that meta site? SummerThunder 13:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages is privately owned, there is no freedom of speech here. You have two options - you can fork a version of Misplaced Pages on your own servers and attack other people as much as you want, or you can leave. However, if you continue with your bad mouthing of other people, zh Misplaced Pages, meta, or anywhere else, you will be blocked here. Consider this a last warning. User:Zoe|(talk) 16:49, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the government in Beijing has blocked Misplaced Pages. If I read your posts correctly, you contend that it follows by self-evident logic that this government also employs spies on the Chinese language Misplaced Pages whose main activities are to preserve overlapping articles about Hong Kong and Macau in slightly different versions of Chinese and to block you from participating. Well I suggest you send your complaint directly to Chinese state security because if I were a manager with that organization I'd chew out those jokers for wasting government resources and then transfer them to the important work of stealing United States military secrets. If you're absolutely right then it shouldn't take long before several mainland Chinese Misplaced Pages administrators disappear, at which point you could e-mail the others and get your editing privileges reinstated. Of course it might help if you provided a shred or two of evidence, but I wouldn't want to waste your time by being ridiculous. Durova 17:44, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

what is "personal attack", what is complain about someone, and what is constructive suggestions?! this is ridiculous, i thought that this site was better, but i was wrong. I had great hope for this english site, now I see that it is the same everywhere. I spent time writing, hoping to make the Chinese site a better, open place which welcome all people's ideas and contribution. and now you are saying that I am making personal attack? and there is no freedom of speech here? how sad. why do you call yourself "free and neutral" then? SummerThunder 20:54, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

And this is what happened to me when I tried to edit some articles in the Chinese site. you can be the judge for yourself.

1. I wrote a subtitle "house arrest until death" for Zhao ziyang in the chinese version, it was immediately deleted. however, the same thing that I wrote in the English page is still kept even today.

2. I added the Chinese Tibetan history after 1949. It was also immediatly deleted, and I was banned. And the links that I added which are from the current exile dalai lama, those links were also deleted. Isn't that ridiculous, how can they add my contribution without listing the references?! And strangely enough, somehow what I wrote now appeared all those Tibetan articles on the Chinese page so the moderators can say that they are not pro communists, even though the author - me is still banned because of what i wrote!

3. I added human rights and falun gong in the "people's republic of china" article, it was also immediately deleted, then it was put under protection. it has been over a month now. Even today, there is not single word about human rights or falun gong in that article.

4. the article about "two Chinas" which has been deleted twice in the month of November. Then one of the moderator claimed that it has never been deleted.

5. The chinese-russian border treaty, the entire article was also deleted not so long ago. now one of the moderator "ran" claimed that it was deleted due to "copyright" violation which is a total lie. it has several early versions, which has nothing to do with any sort of copyright violation at all. After my complain which was deleted, somehow now the same article reappeared with the same content.

6. the tiananmen square protest article, I added similar contents in both the Chinese and English version. The chinese moderator Louer immediatly deleted my contribution, and put that article under protection. AT the same time, whatever I wrote on the same subject in the English article did not got deleted at all. SummerThunder 20:57, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

On a more serious note I've left a link to Misplaced Pages:Adopt-a-user at your talk page. You look like you could use some help getting the hang of how Misplaced Pages works. I suspect a lot of the trouble you've seen has more to do with policy than content. A public forum at the English language edition can't resolve problems at other Wikimedia projects. Maybe once you become more adept at editing here the actions at the other projects will make more sense - and if you earn a good contribution history here the other projects might accept you back. Best wishes, Durova 21:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I was just thinking, how come people can call George w. bush the idiot openly, and I didn't see any FBI or police forces put them in jail, etc, when people on here can't make so-called "personal attack?" SummerThunder 01:49, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Several distinctions make the difference there. As I stated before I don't have time to mentor you. Join the program I recommended and you'll get someone to answer that sort of question. Durova 14:21, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Well.... isn't that conveniently unfalsifiable?:

• When we revert content and ban people for policy reasons, that's because "we're politically motivated" and are "communist spies", etc.;
• When we don't revert content and ban people because they haven't broken policy, that's because "we want to present a good face to the world";
• When people write articles that are clearly contrary to the Communist government, and these articles are successfully put up for DYK/Featured status, that's because "there are still people who think like SummerThunder and UponSnow around on the Chinese Misplaced Pages" (interestingly, these people aren't spamming the Village Pump and getting themselves banned";
• Any Mainlander on the Chinese Misplaced Pages is a spy. Obviously!!
• When non-Mainlanders revert SummerThunder, "that's because they're actually mainland spies in disguise".

That's great... I think we can also conclude that the English Misplaced Pages is a conspiracy of based on the same justifications. -- ran (talk) 22:34, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

But in any case, regarding the above claims:

• All of your edits were reverted on SIGHT because you were identified as a vandal, for tirelessly spamming the Village Pump, and eventually, random pages; for your confrontational attitude and general refusal to participate in any civil discussion; for your baseless accusations of other contributors of being "communist spies" and so forth.
• When sysops are facing 50+ spamming edits by one single user to various pages in the space of 10 minutes, they do not have the time or patience to look at the content of each edit;
• Since you complained, I've looked at and reinstated your edit to the Chinese Misplaced Pages article on the History of Tibet. This was some time ago (And strangely enough, somehow what I wrote now appeared all those Tibetan articles on the Chinese page so the moderators can say that they are not pro communists, even though the author - me is still banned because of what i wrote! -- perhaps this indicates that it was your confrontational behaviour and your personal attacks that got you banned, as opposed to your political views?)
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages article on the People's Republic of China already mentions China's human rights situation. If you feel strongly that the article needs to mention Falun Gong as an example, I've added that just now;
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages article on Two Chinas was created on Nov 19, 2004 by Formulax and never deleted. I've checked the log several times, including just now.
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages article on the Tiananmen Square Massacre already mentions in its intro that "the government gathered the military and violently suppressed resulting in several hundred to one thousand civilian casualties", plus a pretty long list of international reaction and condemnations, so I'm not sure what kind of political slant you are accusing the article of?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages article of Zhao Ziyang already mentions that he was kept under house arrest until death.
• Your edit to the Sino-Russian treaty was a POV piece ripped directly from the Epoch Times, based on fringe Chinese irredentist claims on all of Outer Manchuria (for those unfamiliar with the topic, fringe nationalist Chinese groups want to re-annex 1.6 million sq km of now-Russian territory, including cities like Vladivostok and Khabarovsk. This view has found its voice in dissenting papers like Epoch Times, which SummerThunder then copied verbatim into the Chinese Misplaced Pages.)

-- ran (talk) 23:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

SummerThunder is currently pushing POV into the articles Blocking of Misplaced Pages in mainland China and Chinese Misplaced Pages. The same user has already been permanently banned in the Chinese Misplaced Pages for aggressive POV-pushing and personal attacks.

Please come take a look if you're interested. -- ran (talk) 01:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

yea, don't you wish that you have the ability to "ban" me on here when I did nothing wrong? And why did you keep my part for the Tibet history when you banned me for writing it? --SummerThunder 01:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

What? I'm a sysop on the English Misplaced Pages too. But I'm not going to block you because of an edit war I'm involved in.

Also, like I already said, we did not "ban you for writing the part on the History of Tibet". We blocked your permanently for spamming, for personal attacks, for a confrontational attitude that precluded all civil discussion. After we did that, we decided to revert all edits coming from you, because you were spamming on a massive scale, and no sysop has time to look through all of your edits. Does this mean that we're assuming that all edits coming from you are bad, unless proven otherwise? Yes, we are, but that's because of your confrontational attitude, not your political views.

As for your contribution to the History of Tibet, it's because I read your complaint on the Chinese Misplaced Pages, read your contribution myself, and thought it was well-written. So I restored it.

-- ran (talk) 02:00, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Summer, you simply cannot go around accusing people of being spies and conspirators. That's ban-worthy regardless of which wiki you're on. Your vitriolic tone is so severe that your most recent rant actually set off an antivandalbot to revert you. If you aren't willing to realize this, then you will be banned here as well. --tjstrf talk 02:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

tjstrf, you simply SHOULD NOT delete my comments and my contributions which are BASED on facts. if you are not willing to realize this, then you will be banned on here as well. --SummerThunder 02:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I did NOT vandalize the chinese page, instead it was you and your kind moderators deleted ALL my comments, and votes. You even deleted some of my comments that have nothing to do with your so-called pov, etc. just like the Chinese government made Tiananmen square protests of 1989 disappeared from the Internet, None of my comment can be found on any of the Chinese pages now! that is a FACT!

And why did you keep my part for the Tibet history when you banned me for writing it? ONE MORE TIME, if moderators on the Chinese Misplaced Pages did NOT delete my contributions, did not delete my comments, did NOT delete my votes, why would I go there, and try to post the same thing again? and there are lots, lots of people who have the same complains about those chinese moderators just read above. --SummerThunder 02:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Facts must be relevant to warrant inclusion. I could go add "1+1=2" to every article on the wiki and it would be true, but it wouldn't be fitting to include it. Adding random demographical information about the Chinese admins to pages only peripherally related to the subject has no merit whatsoever outside of the context of your paranoid conspiratorial fantasies. --tjstrf talk 02:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Didn't I explain already why I restored your edit to the History of Tibet? We banned you for your confrontational attitude, and reverted all of your edits by default. When you complained (a lot, very loudly, and in random articles), I looked through some of your edits and liked the ones you made in the History of Tibet. So I restored them.

As for those "lots, lots of people who have the same complains" you mention, there is only one other complainer, Uponsnow, who was last sighted on the Chinese Misplaced Pages accusing a Wikipedian from Malaysia of having a "tropical IQ" so low that even "Malays and Tamils" didn't want him for a servant, and advising him to become a prostitute. Naturally, Uponsnow was banned for personal attacks. Other anti-communist Chinese Wikipedians (there are A LOT OF THEM, especially now that the Misplaced Pages is blocked; just look at the 6/0/0 vote that drove the Nangpa La killings article to DYK status) are integral members of our community, a few of them are sysops, and they are NOT spamming the Village Pump of multiple wikipedias. -- ran (talk) 02:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

why did "restore" my edit, you just called them "vandalism"! how strange. And if you restored those things, how come the author - me is still banned? And what happened to those editors who randomly deleted my content, did they do a good job? Should they apologize to me? and you even deleted a comment that one of the user who wrote to support my action. this is so ridiculous.

you are just like the chinese communist party, you already banned many many users. now you are telling us that there are not many who have complains about the chinese site?! how can they voice opinions on that site, you banned them, deleted their comments? And some of them do not speak English, so they can't participate the discussion on here. that doesn't mean that they don't exist. --SummerThunder 02:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

For the third time, you were blocked for your confrontational attitude, for your refusal to discuss, for your refusal to tone down the POV in your edits, for your refusal to stop original research, for your refusal to stop copyright infringements, for your refusal to engage in any kind of communication in general except conspiracy accusations.

As for banning "many many users"... yes, every Misplaced Pages has banned many many trolls and vandals, the Chinese Misplaced Pages likewise. But this is never because of political slant. If a nationalist arrives and starts trolling about nuking Taiwan and Japan, we would ban him just as we have banned you. -- ran (talk) 02:49, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

For the fourth time, if moderators on the Chinese Misplaced Pages did NOT delete many other users and my contributions, did not delete our comments, did NOT delete our votes, why would we go back and try to post the same thing again? yes, every Misplaced Pages has banned many many trolls and vandals, but none of them have disrespected other contributors, deleted contents, banned users like the chinese site did. I have edited many similar topics of articles on this English site, so far, I didn't see any moderators deleted my contents other than YOU! and none of the moderators on here has given me warnings for "copyright infringements." and how DARE you to accuse me doing all those nonsense, I dare you to give us examples of "copyright infringements!"

I am not the only one here, New York Times, International Heard Tribune have already openly published articles such as this one:"Chinese-language Misplaced Pages presents different view of history." You can not hide the truth. the world already knew!--SummerThunder 04:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Right.... here's an example of copyright infringement by you: . I believe this is you, trying to insert an article copied verbatim from the Epoch Times, advocating Chinese annexation of vast amounts of Russian territory.

And the NYT article has already been discussed and debunked to death in this very page.

And who's "we"? Who are these "many other users"? There are many anti-communist Chinese Wikipedians, some of whom are sysops. We have articles on the Tiananmen Massacre, etc. Have you tried asking yourself why it is you and not those other people who are banned? The six people who voted for Nangpa La Killings for DYK status -- why didn't we chase a few of them down and ban them too? At least one of them is a sysop, AFAIK. Those people who wrote our articles on the Republic of China on Taiwan, presenting its government, its people, its working democracy, why didn't we chase them down? The one who uploaded the picture of the Tank Man in Tiananmen, of pro-independence rallies in Taiwan, of pro-democracy rallies in Hong Kong, why didn't we chase them down? I emailed a notable Slovenian mountaineer for permission to use a photograph of a Tibetan nun being killed by Chinese border guards on Nangpa La, and put it up on the Chinese Misplaced Pages, why wasn't I chased down and banned, like you were? Why is that photo still there? -- ran (talk) 05:39, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Exactly, who are we? you are lying. you tried to add your personal comment in Chinese Misplaced Pages as :"2) There is no such thing called "self-censorship" at Chinese Misplaced Pages; indeed any intention for such practice at Chinese Misplaced Pages will be denounced by most Chinese Wikipedians."

1. who gave you the rights to represent all "Chinese wikipedians?" for one thing, I was a "Chinese wikipedian", I and user uponsnow certainly did not agree with your censorship. you have censored many of my articles. and I have publically denounced it many times. you deleted all my articles, deleted my comments, deleted my votes, then banned me. So it is not the truth at all.
2. on 21:57 12 December 2006, Chinese Misplaced Pages user Hillgentleman reverted all my comments, it was immediatly reverted back by the moderator Jasonzhoucn who constantly deleted my articles, comments and votes.
3. On 13:35 22 December 2006, another Chinese Misplaced Pages user - 民國九十五年 wrote a comment supporting my position, it was also immediatly deleted without a trace by moderator Jasonzhoucn.
4. many people felt the same way. user Uponsnow has already commented the same thing on this same page, just read what he wrote above.
5. talking about Tiananmen Square Protests of 1989, I added many things which can be found in the English version right now, however, your moderator Louer immediately deleted those things that I wrote, and put that article for protection for over a month now. --SummerThunder 06:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Please don't change the topic. Also, regarding your latest comment, I've already replied at Talk:Chinese Misplaced Pages. In short, I'm quoting someone else, and gave a source; it's not my personal comment. You were banned for spamming, Uponsnow was banned for racist personal attacks. You and Uponsnow constitute the entirety of this "many people" you mention. -- ran (talk) 06:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

To whom it may concern,

SummerThunder is just banned for his keeping adding duplicate POV content and accusation that Chinese Misplaced Pages is occupied by Chinese governmental spies into Chinese Misplaced Pages Village pump. He is a troll and the Chinese Misplaced Pages community decided to ban him infinitely. Please don't be misunderstood by him. Thanks. --Theodoranian 07:20, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

well, New York Times stood on my side, they also thought that it is strange that Chinese Misplaced Pages self-censoring lots of the sensitive matierals. you can't explain that. how dare you to call me a troll!!

For the fifth time, if moderators on the Chinese Misplaced Pages did NOT delete many other users and my contributions, did not delete our comments, did NOT delete our votes, why would we go back and try to post the same thing again? you are no different than the Chinese government!

you think that you have the power, therefore, you can say anything you want just like the chinese government. LIke i have said before, no moderators on here has EVER deleted any of my contributions which are all deleted on the same topics on the chinese site. you can't hide the truth. just like the chinese government can't represent the whole Chinese people, you can't represent the whole chinese wikipedia people, either. and so far, there are 4 of us who felt the same way, and all the comments made by us have been deleted by the Chinese moderators. there are more. --SummerThunder 07:33, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

You are identified as a vandlizer. All comments you made will be removed from Chinese Misplaced Pages.--Theodoranian 08:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

oh, how typical, why don't you call me a traitor, a spy, etc, then ask the Chinese government to put me in jail for "leaking out state secrets" just like what they did to a simply journalist Shi Tao or many other innocent Chinese people? you deleted all my comments, and you also deleted those comments made by other people who supported me. how do you explain that? --SummerThunder 08:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

It's not necessary to explain to you. You should apologize for all your misleading accusation first.--Theodoranian 09:50, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

It's necessary to explain to the wikipedia community, You should apologize for all your misleading accusations about me first. Most importantly, I am editing the same articles, and adding almost the same content, I didn't see any moderators deleted my contribs? how come most of my things were deleted in the Chinese site? so far, none of the moderators on here called me a 'vandalizer" other than you people in the Chinese wikipedia site. how strange, isn't it?--SummerThunder 10:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

why don't you call me a traitor, a spy, etc, then ask the Chinese government to put me in jail for "leaking out state secrets" -- I see you're putting words into other people's mouths again. A very unfortunate thing to accuse of someone who is a loyal citizen of the Republic of China (Taiwan), who has contributed extensively to ROC-related topics and to present the working democracy of ROC. I note that any attempt to explain the Republic of China as a legitimacy entity, much less a functioning democracy, would be politically dangerous in the People's Republic of China; so wouldn't it be the entirety of the Chinese Misplaced Pages that's in danger? But again, such a thing is blissfully ignored by you.

Oh yes, Jasonzhoucn did delete 民國九十五年's comments in support of you after you were permanently banned. Those comments, in addition to agreeing with your identification of people as "communist spies", advised you, a permanently banned vandal, to create sockpuppets -- "the more the better". Why am I not surprised?

I should also remind you that it took two to three weeks on the Chinese Misplaced Pages between your first edits and the summary permanent block. In the beginning, people were reverting some of your edits, refactoring others, trying to talk to you on various talk pages ane explain things to you -- in other words, exactly what we're trying to do on the English Misplaced Pages right now.

-- ran (talk) 14:29, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Ran deleted my comments once again

06:27, 30 December 2006 user Ran deleted this following part that I wrote which are all based on solid facts, and can be found on the Chinese site. so you can be the judge for yourself to see if I am lying or not.

1. on 21:57 12 December 2006, Chinese Misplaced Pages user Hillgentleman reverted all my comments, it was immediatly reverted back by the moderator Jasonzhoucn who constantly deleted my articles, comments and votes.
2. I was not alone. many people felt the same way. user Uponsnow has already commented the same thing, just read what he wrote above.
3. On 13:35 22 December 2006, another Chinese Misplaced Pages user - 民國九十五年 wrote a comment supporting my position, it was also immediatly deleted without a trace by moderator Jasonzhoucn. --SummerThunder 07:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I reverted your edit here because you removed my comment and replaced it with yours. -- ran (talk) 07:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

you are lying. anyone can click on "history" tab, then compare the one I made on 6:23 and yours on 6:27, the only thing was missing are the part that I just listed above. this is not the chinese wikipedia any more, you simply can't do it your way. you need to learn to respect others. --SummerThunder 08:54, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Just click on the link I gave above. The following comment I left was removed by you: Please don't change the topic. Also, regarding your latest comment, I've already replied at Talk:Chinese Misplaced Pages. In short, I'm quoting someone else, and gave a source; it's not my personal comment. You were banned for spamming, Uponsnow was banned for racist personal attacks. You and Uponsnow constitute the entirety of this "many people" you mention. That's why I reverted. -- ran (talk) 14:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Wow, 'racist personal attacks', that's quite serious allegation. You are completely out of context when quoting my remarks. Mine was a sarcastic response to the person who repeatedly insults Taiwanese with racial slurs. It's a in-your-face retort. Racism is against my value. Please keep your typical, good'ole Chinese communist tricks to yourself. --Uponsnow 16:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Do you want me to post your comments again?

Uponsnow posted comments like the following on the talk page of zh:User:真實事求是, and for this he was blocked for one week on the Chinese Misplaced Pages.

你儘管意淫，你這種熱帶智商，給馬來人、泰米爾人做奴才人家看不上，又想投靠中共混點「中國崛起」的殘羹冷炙，老實說現在中共也不稀罕，找100條純種狗有難度，找1000個失業的「南洋華僑」，不難！ Although you twist meanings, your tropical IQ is not enough to satisfy Malays and Tamils when you want to be their servants; and so you want to join the Chinese Communists to get some table scraps of "China's Rise". Honestly, the Chinese Communists aren't going to treat you as hard to find; it's somewhat hard to find 100 purebred dogs, but it's easy to find 1000 unemployed "Southeast Asian Chinese"!

不要把我教訓教訓你跟我反共扯在一起，以為你自己儼然就是共了，你別做夢。你的IQ，給共產黨提鞋都不配！你要入黨，可能要 。。。算了，沒指望，遺傳太差勁。其實你困在馬來西亞出不去也不是死路一條了，可以和從大陸來賣的競爭啊！只要你出價低，不愁沒有生意，好歹強過你在網上幫共產黨打手槍那麼無聊。有些事你也不要強求了，基因不好，你爹媽給的，否則怎麼會流落南蠻之地做二、三等公民呢！你要有自知之明的話，還是做體力活吧，不要上維基了，對維基有害處，你也不配。Don't link my chastisement of you with my anti-communist sentiments, you think you're a commie, stop dreaming! With your IQ, you aren't fit to carry shoes for the commies! If you want to join the party, maybe you need to ... never mind, forget it, your genes are too inferior. Actually it's not a dead end for you to be trapped in Malaysia, you can compete with those from Mainland China coming to sell!! As long as your prices are low, you don't need to worry about lack of business, it's a lot less boring than you helping commies j*rk off online! Some things you can't ask for, your genes are bad, but that's coz your parents gave them to you, otherwise why would you be in the Southern Barbarian lands as a second-, third-class citizen? If you truly know yourself, go do physical work, don't come to Misplaced Pages, it's bad for Misplaced Pages, and you don't deserve it!

-- ran (talk) 17:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

At least the former Iraqi dictator gets the tacit final salute from the 30+ zh.wiki sysops, who more than not just follow Beijing regime's tone. Saddam Hussein is now highlighted on the Chinese Wiki's home page as a 'passing away celebrity'.

This treatment also reflects the mood widely expressed in Chinese cyberspace and by CCTV, the state-run TV network.

Just hope Chinese sysops can somehow get over their 'loss' and get back to work. Hussein is dead, no matter how those crazy guys want to call it. --Uponsnow 14:26, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Please don't play linguistic games. 逝世 (which you translate as "pass away") is used on the Chinese Misplaced Pages for ALL deaths. For example, the entire category of Category:2006 deaths is zh:Category:2006年逝世 in the Chinese Misplaced Pages. Hideki Tojo, the engineer of the Japanese invasion of China, is also filed under "1948年逝世" (passed away in 1948). -- ran (talk) 14:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Misplaced Pages is not under the jurisdiction of English Misplaced Pages, Uponsnow, just take back your empty useless appealing. --220.137.88.44 14:56, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

user 2220.137.88.44 is making a personal attack. we came to here to report this to the whole world, because the chinese site is strongly censored. they randomly deleted people's contribs, comments and votes. they won't allow many of us to post our comments freely in the chinese version of village pumps. we have left no choice, but to come to here. i am one of the victims. In the article of people's republic of China, there is not a single word about human rights and falun gong, when I tried to added those two, it was deleted. and that article has been put under for protection for more than a month. and the moderators from there called it "vandalism." yea, right. --SummerThunder 20:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Why can't they just die a simple death? Why can't they just die? For example, one Chinese sysop (he is a card-bearing Communist Youth member) insisted that Slobodan Milosevic 'passed away', not died, and therefore deleted my editing about Slobodan's death. Now his wish is granted (mine too): Saddam Hussein passed away (died). Win-Win? --Uponsnow 15:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Greetings, Uponsnow. We already know that you and your pal SummerThunder are just here to whine about the zh.wiki, so you can stop now. --tjstrf talk 15:22, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Greetings, tjstrf. first of all, stop reverting my contribs. people are already talking about you in the news section as the fed meatpuppets. and We already knew that you and your pal ran are just here to defend for Chinese Misplaced Pages as if it has no censorship at all, so you can stop now.--SummerThunder 20:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

• Yes, we lost the battle. It's true that I have neither time nor necessary networking to correct the sickness of zh.wiki. Now it perfectly reflects the ugly reality of Chinese world. You win, and it's sad for Misplaced Pages and its ideaology. --Uponsnow 15:41, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

We are not losing this battle for an unbiased Chinese wikipedia. Not every Chinese users on there are capable of communicating in English. That is why we need to continue to expose those wrong things the Chinese moderators are doing. Otherwise, it will never be changed. They are standing on the wrong side of the history. --SummerThunder 22:05, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Uponsnow... you just completely ignored my comment. ALL deaths on the Chinese Misplaced Pages are filed under 逝世 ("passed away") by default. For example, Hideki Tojo, engineer of the Japanese invasion of China, is filed under zh:Category:1948年逝世, "passed away in 1948", the equivalent of Category:1948 deaths. Iwate Matsui, responsible for the Nanking Massacre, is also filed under "passed away in 1948". -- ran (talk) 17:07, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

You haven't explained WHY the card-bearing Communist Youth member insisted that Slobodan Milosevic 'passed away', not died, and thereafter deleted my editing about Slobodan's death. --Uponsnow 06:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

For the nth time, every biographical article on the Chinese Misplaced Pages is, when applicable (i.e. nonliving persons), filed under categories using the word for "pass away" (逝世). All of the death-by-year categories are named using the word for "pass away" (逝世), and everyone is put into those categories, including Japanese generals involved in the WW2 invasion of China. The death notices page linked to from the main page also uses the word "pass away" (逝世), and there is no alternate death notice page for people who aren't somehow fit to use that word (that would be grossly POV). -- ran (talk) 06:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

How many more times should I remind you, that 'pass away'(逝世) is euphemism in English and Chinese respectively? None is supposed to have a place in Misplaced Pages. Please, 'die'. --Uponsnow 11:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps, but until and unless you convince the Chinese wikipedians to change their policy, changing one article is not a good idea. Also, this is clearly not really an NPOV issue or one of bias as you appear to be trying to make it out to be Nil Einne 13:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

This is like arguing against flat-earthers

Uponsnow and SummerThunder like to zero in on details (mostly their alleged mistreatment at the hands of Chinese Misplaced Pages sysops), and completely ignore (or choose to ignore) our vast and informative articles on topics that are taboo or controversial in Mainland China. This is just like arguing against flat-earthers, who like to point to weird details (the UN flag, no stars in the moon landing photos) and ignore other larger things, like the circumnavigation of the globe, gravity, electromagnetism, navigational technologies for the past 1000 years, or the Coriolis Effect.

I'd like to ask Uponsnow and SummerThunder to explain why:

• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has a whole series of articles on the Republic of China (Taiwan), presenting the Republic of China (Taiwan) as a separate, functioning democracy, with its own unique historical tract since 1949 ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has long articles dedicated to anti-communist and pro-sovereignty demonstrations in Taiwan , pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong , and annual commemorations of the Tiananmen Massacre in Hong Kong ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has a 91kb article on a topic that doesn't "exist" in mainland China, the Tiananmen Massacre , in which we present the picture of the Tank Man , a picture of anti-government graffiti , and a picture of a memorial in Wroclaw, Poland ? And why is the Tiananmen Massacre found in our list of massacres ? Why does the Chinese Misplaced Pages have an article on the Tiananmen Mothers and its founder, Ding Zilin ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on another incident that doesn't "exist" in mainland China, the 2005 Dongzhou Massacre , which is explained as an incident where "police used violent means against villagers, causing many deaths? And The Chinese Misplaced Pages has similar incidents that don't "exist" as well, like the 2006 Xiangyin Massacre or the 2005 Taishi Village Incident ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on the Falun Gong , in which all sides of the issue are explored, in which pro-Falun Gong external links are given before anti-Falun Gong external links; as well as Falun Gong's newspaper , and Falun Gong's scathing commentary on the Chinese Communist Party ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on Rebiya Kadeer , a famous Uyghur dissident and supporter of the East Turkestan sovereignty movement, who was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? (In this same article, everything that the Communist government said was put in scare quotes -- is that even NPOV?)
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on HH Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso , which follows his deeds after being exiled from Tibet, including his creation of a Tibetan Government-In-Exile in Dharamsala, his promotion of Tibetan education, and his proposals for peaceful coexistence with the People's Republic of China?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on Gedhun Choekyi Nyima , who was originally selected as the 11th Panchen Lama, but mysteriously disappeared after the Dalai Lama recognized him?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on the Nangpa La Massacre , the only wikipedia other than English to do so, complete with a picture of the Tibetan nun who was shot by Chinese border guards ?

-- ran (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Another thing: this is the Village Pump of the English Misplaced Pages. The English Misplaced Pages and the Chinese Misplaced Pages are parallel -- one does not have jurisdiction over the other. So to Uponsnow and SummerThunder: it's not productive to spam the English Village Pump with complaints about the Chinese Misplaced Pages. If you want to discuss the Chinese Misplaced Pages, it's better to go to the Chinese Misplaced Pages or to Meta.

SummerThunder: yes, you are banned at the Chinese Misplaced Pages right now, but if you post on the Chinese Village Pump and agree to the following:

• that you will stop spamming all of the pages of the Village Pump;
• that you agree to go over articles one at a time, and discuss civilly;
• that you agree to follow the neutral-point-of-view policy as it stands on the English and Chinese Wikipedias;
• that you stop accusing others of being "communist spies";

I'm pretty sure the Chinese Misplaced Pages will welcome you back. -- ran (talk) 18:36, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

do you have the evidence to prove that you and the rest chinese moderators are not "communist spies?" and i have asked this very simple question on the chinese site which was immediately deleted, that is "tell us, how those mainland chinese moderators are able to bypass China's strict internet censorhip, and continue to work on the BLOCKED Chinese wikipedia site?"

and stop accusing me things that are not based on the truth just as if you are working the chinese government. you think that you have the power on that site, therefore, you ban me, so people of the world will not be able to hear my side of the story? many of us are sick of your censorship. even today, there is not a word about human rights and falun gong in the PR China site. when I tried to add those two parts, they were deleted. after a month, the biased article still is under protection. isn't that typical. --SummerThunder 20:47, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe it's explained quite clearly in the Internet censorship in mainland China article that technically adept users are able to circumvent the block through various means. Also,.... it is YOU who're accusing people of being communist spies simply because of their geographical origin, or because of their login name (e.g. your accusation that Jasonzhoucn was a spy, because of the letters CN, which according to you can only stand for China, which according to you must mean that he is a spy). In short, YOU are the ones making accusations based on these ... evidence ... and yet you push the burden of proof to me?

How about I do give you some evidence? Please explain how the 29 links to 29 Chinese Misplaced Pages articles / photographs on the Tiananmen Massacre, Falun Gong, Tibet, and Taiwan could continue to exist if the Chinese Misplaced Pages were run by "government spies"?

Also, the Chinese Misplaced Pages article on the People's Republic of China has an entire paragraph on human rights, in which Falun Gong is mentioned as well: . Thus your claim is incorrect.

-- ran (talk) 21:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

You are lying again. you are a liar! On 22:50 2006-12-29, YOU YOURSELF added those three single word Falun Gong in the article And so far, there is still nothing about human rights. I tried to added falun gong and human rights on 2006-11-22 which was more than ONE MONTH AGO, it was immediately DELETED by the Chinese moderator Mongol. So clearly, you are LYING. this is just not right. someone should strip your rights of moderating. --SummerThunder 21:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I should be stripped of my sysop status, because I added Falun Gong as an example of an oppressed organization to the People's Republic of China article in the Chinese Misplaced Pages? Interesting logic there ... Also, I see that at least you're looking at the article now... that paragraph that you're looking at, the one that mentions Falun Gong, it is entirely about human rights. It also mentions Tibetan Independence as another oppressed movement in mainland China. -- ran (talk) 21:37, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, please keep the discussion civil. We need to restore civility in Chinese Misplaced Pages, so let's start from here. Lying is a serious allegation, and I hope we can all refrain from that. I would not call Ran a liar; he simply has not revealed his entire plan about zh.wiki. Sometimes it's just because of job security, which we can all understand. --Uponsnow 06:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

What are you implying here? What kind of accusations are these? What is my "plan" and what "job" are I trying to protect? -- ran (talk) 06:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Oops, I mean the job you are doing well now. --Uponsnow 11:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

POV problems on WIkipedia and State intervention in the US and China

From reading the many discussions I've seen brought up about China on various venues throughout Misplaced Pages it seems that China and the US share the same problem: state intervention in Misplaced Pages. This type of state intervention is anathema to the Wiki concept. Clearly a government the size of China and the United States can afford to devote endless resources to game the wiki system. It's a problem that the wiki concept as it stands now is defenseless against. I think SummerThunder raises some important issues on this.

Clearly any wiki is going to reflect the biases of the participants even if we follow the NPOV policy to a 'T'. However, what I think SummerThunder and ShoutToTheTop are raising is the issue of government intervention to even subvert the NPOV policies. If the government of the United States and China are hiring hundreds, dozens or even several full-time people to propagandize on a wiki, then there's not much normal editors can do to enforce the wiki's policies (such as NPOV). If those government agents also gain special privileges, they can abuse those privileges and even further control the Wiki. What's needed is a new set of policies to prohibit this sort of thing entirely. Perhaps we could make a contest of it: some friendly competition. Who can rid their Wiki of government authorities first: China or the United States. The first one gets a gold medal. And the second one gets a silver medal. --Stephen Bouchardi 20:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Incidentally, I'm surprised to see the China Misplaced Pages chastised for using the phrase 'passed away' when referring to the death of Sadaam Hussein rather than 'died'. Is that the extent of their government editorializing. Do we really want to chastise the Chinese Misplaced Pages for not being more callous and fascistic (these two concepts usually go hand in hand). If this is the extent of the Chinese government's editorializing, it looks like China already has the lead over the English language Misplaced Pages. --Stephen Bouchardi 20:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I am certainly glad that you understood those problems that I have presented here. mainland China has 29 moderators/administrators while the rest of the 13 billion Chinese cann't get connected to this site at all. It certainly makes one wonder why those moderators have the special ability and privilege to get on the Chinese site and moderate? and by now, I am sure that the government has every single one's personal information. why aren't they afraid of what they doing? in the capital city Beijing, there are total six of them.

And if there is nothing suspicious, why are the Chinese modrator "ran" and the other theod something continue to defend their positions? and why did they delete comments by other users who supporting me on the Chinese site? --SummerThunder 21:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Again.... for the SECOND TIME, on Internet censorship in mainland China it states clearly that technically adept people in mainland China can circumvent the block through many means. We have a page on the Chinese Misplaced Pages teaching people how to break through government censorship. As for the 29 sysops in mainland China, the government may or may not have their information, yes. They run a certain level of risk coming onto Misplaced Pages through illicit means, and it is their choice (a brave one, which I respect) to do it anyways.

As for me and theodoranian defending our positions.... well, what did you expect? That we're going to sit back while you grossly misrepresent the Chinese Misplaced Pages to the English community? We didn't get ourselves banned by the Chinese government just so that you can badmouth us and accuse us of being 'with the Chinese government. -- ran (talk) 21:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Alright... thank you for these insights from this single-use account... (edit: this is in response to Stephen Bouchardi)

A few things:

• For the third time, the Chinese Misplaced Pages uses 逝世 (passed away) for everyone. As I have already pointed out above, this includes WW2-era Japanese leaders who conducted the invasion of China;
• If the government of the US or the PRC hires "hundreds of full-time people to propagandize on a wiki", they will be thrown out by the existing community, just as SummerThunder was thrown out of the Chinese Misplaced Pages.
• People who clearly and consistently ignore NPOV, NOR etc. will not "gain special privileges".
• Pray tell us what new set of policies you are proposing.

-- ran (talk) 21:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

what a lie. you can't represent the all users of Chinese wikipedia. just like the Chinese government can't represent all the people in China. tell us, why in the People's republic of China, there is not a single world of falun gong or human rights?--SummerThunder 21:21, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

For the third time, go read that article itself, it does have an entire paragraph on human rights, and gives Falun Gong as an example of an oppressed organization. -- ran (talk) 21:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

for the fourth time, You are lying again. you are a liar! On 22:50 2006-12-29, YOU YOURSELF added those three single word Falun Gong in the article And so far, there is still nothing about human rights. I tried to added falun gong and human rights on 2006-11-22 which was more than ONE MONTH AGO, it was immediately DELETED by the Chinese moderator Mongol. So clearly, you are LYING. this is just not right. someone should strip your rights of moderating. --SummerThunder 21:33, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Already responded above, but alright, I'll copy-paste:

I should be stripped of my sysop status, because I added Falun Gong as an example of an oppressed organization to the People's Republic of China article in the Chinese Misplaced Pages? Interesting logic there ... Also, I see that at least you're looking at the article now... that paragraph that you're looking at, the one that mentions Falun Gong, it is entirely about human rights. It also mentions Tibetan Independence as another oppressed movement in mainland China. -- ran (talk) 21:38, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Let me set this up more clearly for you:

• SummerThunder tried to insert information about human rights in China and the history of Tibet. He also spams the Village Pump with personal attacks; accuses all mainland Chinese sysops of being "communist spies"; and refuses civil discussion. He is banned by zh.wiki after 2 weeks of failed attempts at communication, and all his edits reverted.
• Ran tries to insert information about human rights in China. He also restores SummerThunder's edits on Tibet, and uploads a picture of a Tibetan nun being shot by Chinese border guards. Ran does not spam, he does not accuse anything of being a spy, and he tries to communicate with everyone, SummerThunder included. Ran is not banned by the Chinese Misplaced Pages, nor are his edits reverted.

In science, I would be called a control experiment. Do you notice the pattern here? Do you see why you were blocked on the Chinese Misplaced Pages? -- ran (talk) 21:44, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

1. what is wrong of "inserting information about human rights in China and the history of Tibet?"
2. And why did you "restores SummerThunder's edits on Tibet," and what is the punishment for the moderator who reverted my contribution incorrectly?
3. what is your explanation of you inserting falun gong yesterday, when I tried to add the same thing more than one month ago, it was immediatly deleted by the moderator mongol?
4. banning me, deleting my comments on the Chinese site, deleting the supporting comments that other users wrote for me, you call that "communicate with everyone?"
5. why 13 billion Chinese can't get on wikipedia, and 29 mainland Chinese moderators have no problems of using it?
6. whether you and other moderators are spies or Chinese government agents, only you know. but all the moderators suspicious actions are exposed on here for the whole world to judge. --SummerThunder 21:58, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Erm. Go read the comparison again. I said that I'm a control experiment, the control being that I too made edits about China's human rights situation and the history of Tibet, but was not banned or even stripped of sysop status.

1. There is nothing wrong. That's why I, a sysop of the Chinese Misplaced Pages, am doing it on Chinese Misplaced Pages with no problems.
2. I restored your edit because I liked it. There is nothing wrong with sysops reverting your edits en masse if you had already been identified as a spammer and were spamming at an alarming rate across the Chinese Misplaced Pages.
3. Because I'm a Wikipedian. You mentioned a flaw, I saw it, and I corrected it. I don't launch into tirades about everyone else being a spy after that, however.
4. We tried communicating you for two weeks. Over ten Wikipedians tried to talk to you on your talk page. You ignored or attacked them. Then we banned you.
5. For the third time, it's because they use other means like proxy servers.
6. Right. I'm sure that my uploading of a picture of a Tibetan nun killed by Chinese border guards is one of those suspicious actions you speak of. -- ran (talk) 22:04, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

A chart?

Self-explanatory, yes? -- ran (talk) 22:07, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Self-explanatory, yes? --SummerThunder 00:30, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you have made your inability to discuss things in a mature manner and lack of understanding quite clear. I'd also like to note that this entire thread of discussion should be blanked as trolling by banned user User:Cplot .--tjstrf talk 00:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you have made numerous attempt to revert the articles that i have editted without any proper reasons. And your inability to discuss things in a mature manner and lack of understanding is quite clear. you blindly defend for Ran as if you know him in person. Just by the fact that you even suggested that "this entire thread of discussion should be blanked as trolling by banned user," and the fact that you even reverted a comment I wrote on your talk page, you truly have no idea of how to carry on a proper conversation. --SummerThunder 02:55, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Misplaced Pages, PR China did not have the word Falun Gong until 12-29-2006 when this moderator Ran added, when I tried to add it more than a month, it was deleted immediately. Even as for now, the phrase "Human rights" is only mentioned ONCE in that entire article under the name of "Organization for Human rights". That is it. yes, you read it right. "Human Rights" only appeared once in that entire article. when I tried to added more information about human rights in the article on 11-22-2006, it was immediatly deleted by the moderator Mongol. Then I was banned from editing and that article was put under protection. Even today, there is still not a direct link to Human rights in the People's Republic of China on the Chinese site, either. while on the English site People's Republic of China, there is an entire paragraph about it, and a direct link to Human rights in the People's Republic of China. now is that site biased or not. you will be the judge yourself. --SummerThunder 22:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Even today, there is still not a direct link to Human rights in the People's Republic of China on the Chinese site, either. while on the English site People's Republic of China, there is an entire paragraph about it, and a direct link to Human rights in the People's Republic of China. now is that site biased or not. you will be the judge yourself. --SummerThunder 22:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your complaint. I have added a link to the zh.wiki article on Human rights in the People's Republic of China to the article on the People's Republic of China . There is already a paragraph on human rights in the zh article on the People's Republic of China, and while it mentions the exact words "human rights" (人權) once, the entire paragraph talks about 言論自由 (freedom of speech) as a basic 民主權利 (democratic right) according to the PRC Constitution, as well as criticisms that the PRC 壓制 (oppresses) this right in cases like Falun Gong and Tibetan Independence. But of course, the main article is Human Rights in the People's Republic of China, which mentions "human rights" (人權) exactly 12 times in the intro alone. The article begins by saying that the PRC's human rights record is controversial, and is widely condemned by governments, organizations, and individuals as below international norms. -- ran (talk) 22:17, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

this is not how you manage the site. there are thousands and thousands similar unbiased articles which are censored by the Chinese moderators which are still not being corrected. i have tried to add Human rights and falun gong in the same article MORE THAN ONE month ago. it is wrong to revert my original edition, then banned me for editing that article and put that article under protection for more than a month. Even now, the phrase "Human rights" are only used twice, and falun gong is only mentioned once in the entire Chinese article. and it is still not put under the religion section which I tried to add more than a month ago.

Everyone now knows that you and your moderator's so-called "vandalism" accusation against me is entirely incorrect.

It is lound and clear to the entire whole wikipedia community and the whole world that the Chinese Misplaced Pages site is very biased toward the Communist Party of China. Now it is upon the wikipedia foundation to do something about it. --SummerThunder 22:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I hate repeating myself but I suppose it can't be helped.

Please explain why:

• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has a whole series of articles on the Republic of China (Taiwan), presenting the Republic of China (Taiwan) as a separate, functioning democracy, with its own unique historical tract since 1949 ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has long articles dedicated to anti-communist and pro-sovereignty demonstrations in Taiwan , pro-democracy demonstrations in Hong Kong , and annual commemorations of the Tiananmen Massacre in Hong Kong ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has a 91kb article on a topic that doesn't "exist" in mainland China, the Tiananmen Massacre , in which we present the picture of the Tank Man , a picture of anti-government graffiti , and a picture of a memorial in Wroclaw, Poland ? And why is the Tiananmen Massacre found in our list of massacres ? Why does the Chinese Misplaced Pages have an article on the Tiananmen Mothers and its founder, Ding Zilin ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on another incident that doesn't "exist" in mainland China, the 2005 Dongzhou Massacre , which is explained as an incident where "police used violent means against villagers, causing many deaths? And The Chinese Misplaced Pages has similar incidents that don't "exist" as well, like the 2006 Xiangyin Massacre or the 2005 Taishi Village Incident ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on the human rights of the People's Republic of China , which begins by saying that the PRC's human rights record is controversial, and is widely condemned by governments, organizations, and individuals as below international norms?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on the Falun Gong , in which all sides of the issue are explored, in which pro-Falun Gong external links are given before anti-Falun Gong external links; as well as Falun Gong's newspaper , and Falun Gong's scathing commentary on the Chinese Communist Party ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on Rebiya Kadeer , a famous Uyghur dissident and supporter of the East Turkestan sovereignty movement, who was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize? (In this same article, everything that the Communist government said was put in scare quotes -- is that even NPOV?)
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on HH Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso , which follows his deeds after being exiled from Tibet, including his creation of a Tibetan Government-In-Exile in Dharamsala, his promotion of Tibetan education, and his proposals for peaceful coexistence with the People's Republic of China?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on Gedhun Choekyi Nyima , who was originally selected as the 11th Panchen Lama, but mysteriously disappeared after the Dalai Lama recognized him?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has an article on the Nangpa La Massacre , the only wikipedia other than English to do so, complete with a picture of the Tibetan nun who was shot by Chinese border guards ?
• The Chinese Misplaced Pages has a project page (not in article space) teaching people how to circumvent internet censorship?

-- ran (talk) 22:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

you can not do that, it would be too obvious. that would give away the true color of the Chinese moderators. however, just that one example is good enough. --SummerThunder 22:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Just one good example (which I prompted corrected) is better than the above 30+ high traffic examples I gave? -- ran (talk) 22:50, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

yes, there are more than 30+ high traffice examples that are still being censored. you and other chinese moderstators continue accusing me "vandalizing" the chinese site, yet you continue to revert my contributions. you obviously contract yourself all the time. --SummerThunder 23:23, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

What happened in Tibet in 1950 was 56 years ago.

However, on the chinese wikipedia, before 11-23, 2006, there was nothing about how china took over tibet in 1950. it was written as "in 1950, the pr china government signed "peaceful liberation treaty" with the tibetan government, under the condition of respecting Tibetan's system and life style, the liberation army was allowed to enter tibet." That was all they have on that part of the history.

So on 11-23, 2006, I added that part of the history according to I read from the Dalai lama's exile government web site. . my article and the links were immediately deleted by the chinese moderator Louer. I tried to add those once again on 12-6-2006, it was also immediately deleted by another Chinese moderator Jasonzhoucn. only on 12-11-2006, 56 years after what happened in Tibet, did the moderator Ran reverted my part of contribution. Before that day, those two moderators Louer and Jasonzhoucn accused my part of contribution as "vandalism," as they often call the contributions that i wrote on the Chinese site. very typical of them.

However, as for today, 12-30-2006, the link where I got my reference from is still not included in the article. This is just another good example to show you that how biased the Chinese site is, whethey they work for the Chinese communist government, you will be the judge for yourself. I am only listening the information here. --SummerThunder 23:14, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Please tell me, why have the Chinese Government blocked a site which works for them? (see Blocking of Misplaced Pages in mainland China) Barring that, what are we meant to do about this? It's a different project, and the vast majority of people reading your complaints here can't read contribute to zh.wiki because we can't read/write Chinese.

Anyway, the "propaganda" Chinese Misplaced Pages already exists, its called Baidu Baike, where all contributions are individually checked for compliance, see the article for more details. It is not part of the wikimedia foundation, it far exceeds zh.wiki in terms of size, and, largely because it is not blocked by the PRC, is far more visited. There's the conspiracy.

Now please, stop filling this page with your experiences at zh. We have said, again and again, that there is nothing we can do. Believe me, freedom of information in China is something that many people here are passionate about. Please do not take the reaction your appeals are receiving here as a sign of a lack of concern. It's a topic that you undoubtedly feel strongly about, but:

Misplaced Pages's articles are no place for strong views. Or rather, we feel about strong views the way that a natural history museum feels about tigers. We admire them and want our visitors to see how fierce and clever they are, so we stuff them and mount them for close inspection. We put up all sorts of carefully worded signs to get people to appreciate them as much as we do. But however much we adore tigers, a live tiger loose in the museum is seen as an urgent problem.

See WP:TIGERS for a full explanation of this philosophy. LukeSurl 00:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Because that site is not completely controlled by the chinese government, therefore, they are still banning it. It is unlikely that the government will ever take control of the whole site. However, just like they can't control Taiwan, they send lots of spies to Taiwan. it is a common knowledge. If they can't control it, they at least want to keep the damage to minimum. Hence, those two perfect examples that I have just listed above. After all, Falun gong is a well known group even to people outside China, how can those moderators keep the PR China article free of that word?

Who appointed those Chinese moderators? And why are those 29 moderators from mainland China able to get on a government blocked site, and work freely without any harassment, surveillance from the government itself? --SummerThunder 00:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Because the Chinese internet block is pathetically easy to get around. Anyone with an internet connection and half a brain could do it, it's easier to circumvent than some of the censorship programs commercially available in the USA. --tjstrf talk 01:03, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

China spent over 8 billion US dollars on the Golden Shield Project, imported many sophisicated softwares, hardwares from many major US companies, and you are saying that it is "pathetically easy to get around," "Anyone with an internet connection and half a brain could do it." are you saying all those well educated US engineers and Chinese engineers know less than you do? --SummerThunder 01:42, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

As sophisticated as the software might be and as educated as those software engineers may be, getting around the Misplaced Pages block remains trivial. The amount of money spent on the project doesn't change the fact that they're using a blacklist, not a whitelist on communication with foreign IPs. I can set up a proxy on the computer I'm typing on currently, and a friend from China could connect to it over a heavily encrypted connection. In practice, this is not too greatly difficult, once you get past the language barrier. –Gunslinger47 01:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

That is what you think. if it is that easy, every Chinese would be using wikipedia by now. obviously, what you think is easy is not so to the 13 billion Chinese other than those 29 moderators.

China has blocked the site three times already. Clearly, that is a well known site to the Chinese government censors. My question is how come none of the mainland Chinese moderators ever, ever complained about being harassed by the Chinese police, under surveillance of the Chinese police, or had a talk with the government agents, etc? To those 29 people, it seems that nothing has ever happened. They actually held their first meeting right in Beijing one month after the first block. And there was no police present? is China really that free and open? Ask yourself, are you brave enough to do such a thing in a country like that? --SummerThunder 02:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

China is not yet to the level of surveillance and control seen in Nineteen Eighty-Four. A blacklist is the Internet equivillant of a rope barrier. It will stop more than 99% of those who encounter it, but it will not stop anyone with the will and determination to get past it.

As for why the moderators aren't being hauled off to Room 101, it's because they're not doing anything worth such individual attention. They're mostly involved with the technical moderation of a website that virtually 0% of the Chinese population will ever read and that ultimately doesn't contain very much objectional material anyway.

Oh, and if any of these moderators did have any trouble, they're not going to talk about it here. Misplaced Pages is not a blog. –Gunslinger47 02:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

"that ultimately doesn't contain very much objectional material anyway", then why did the government block it three times already? the chinese moderators are not just "involved with the technical moderation of a website," my Tibet and PR China's examples have showed everyone clearly that they are beyond just moderating, they are censoring the chinese site.

Oh, and if any of these moderators did have any connections with the government, they're not going to talk about it here, either. so you won't know for sure, either. but their actions speak loud than the words they put on here. --SummerThunder 03:36, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I think we got turned around a bit. I can't comment on that, since all I have are my assumptions. We were speaking about the feasibility of getting around the Misplaced Pages block. Yes, it's possible and relatively easy to edit the Chinese Misplaced Pages from within China if one were willing and had foreign contacts for aid. –Gunslinger47 03:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Given the relatively stubby nature of the article before November, it's not that surprising that the Tibet article didn't mention much about the history. I can't read Mandarin, so I can't comment on your assertation that the content you were adding should have been kept. However considering the IMHO relatively poor quality of your additions to the English wikipedia and the your continually personal attacks and insinuations of editors and admins on the Chinese wikipedia, it wouldn't surprise me if the removal of your content was justifiable. IMHO, if you would spend more time writing high quality, properly sourced content and less time attacking admins and others as being communist lackeys, you are more likely to improve the quality of the Chinese wikipedia and add stuff that is NPOV and accurately reports events in contrary to the policy of the government of China. Two wrongs don't make a right and the fact that the Tibet and other articles may have been lacking in some areas is no justification to keep poorly written, unsourced and other NPOV violating content to them. Nil Einne 12:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

What horrifying appeasers.

lots of issues | leave me a message 08:13, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I found the actual article Chinese Misplaced Pages and Blocking of Misplaced Pages in mainland China. feel free to add your part of contribution. SummerThunder 01:52, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

The consensus of zhwiki seems to be "what a horrifyingly bad article", for what it's worth... Shimgray | talk | 17:59, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Lets just condem communism in general, as a load of bullshit

†he Bread 08:40, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The IHT was inaccurate and misleading. We've been discussing it on the Chinese Misplaced Pages, and frankly most people are disappointed at this complete misrepresentation of what the Chinese Misplaced Pages really stands for. After all, we've been blocked three times by the Chinese government, but have never made any concessions to them. zh:User:R.O.C has sent an email to the foundation-l mailing list: , listing the inaccuracies in the IHT report. -- ran (talk) 23:09, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

The IHT did a poor job in research, which could have revealed more corrupted entries, more damning facts of zhwiki, and how it gets where it is. --Uponsnow 15:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

This can be partly due to zh.wiki's small number of active contributors. Not every wikipedia has the luck that en.wiki has enjoyed having so many contributor from all over the world (or, at least, most parts of the world) to make sure NPOV is achieved. On the contrary, zh.wiki does not enjoy such a luxury of a diverse backgrounds of contributors, especially since the PRC's been blocking zh.wiki for such a long time. In fact, only some very controversial articles (which IMO is very few) can receive adequate discussion/editing to achieve NPOV while the majority of articles are mainly done by one person. In that case, I think a certain degree of nonadherence to NPOV policy is expected since NO ONE can have absolute NPOV (IMHO, a person w/ NPOV does not exist), and no one can avoid that and thus are guilty of not adhering to NPOV to some degree. However, finding a non-NPOV point and not changing it is just as bad as writing something that's non-NPOV. In the end, a wikipedia won't be a wikipedia if its contributors which includes everyone, active members or just passers, stops caring about righting the wrong (or alleged non-NPOV, in this case).-- Nikopoley✪尼可波里 ✏Got Something on Ur Mind? 17:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

See also the blog entries by Chinese Misplaced Pages editor Roadrunner, who was interviewed and then found his remarks misrepresented: . -- ran (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

I suppose a picture wouldn't hurt. brought to you by the Chinese Misplaced Pages. -- ran (talk) 23:38, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Ran, you can still entertain other fellow wikipedians with this misleading report. Admirable. China (that's the PRC in the "western" context) contributes much more to the world than a reminiscence of the Tiananmen Square protests of 1989. :) Ktsquare (talk) 19:28, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

You bet. Now they even have African's blood on their hand, through Janjaweed militia - a fact you won't see in zhwiki (because of their editorial policy). Meanwhile, they insist Slobodan Milosevic never died, but 'passed away', to show their respect, in NPOV style (Chinese context).--Uponsnow 06:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Heh, what do you know about zh.wp's editorial policy? Saying "they" don't follow the standard NPOV is a serious accusation, and you better to have plenty of evidence on your hands to back yourself up (FYI the link is http://zh.wikipedia.org).

And who's this "they" anyway? Attributing one single opinion to all of the zh Wikipedians is so convenient. --Lorenzarius 13:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Uponsnow: what zh.wiki editorial policies are you talking about? Currently the Chinese Misplaced Pages is the only Misplaced Pages to have begun a translation of the Nangpa La killings article that you've been working on; does that conform to what you believe are zh.wiki's editorial policies? As for Darfur, if you or anyone else wants to write something on the zh.wiki, conforming to the same standards of NPOV as the English Misplaced Pages, please go ahead, no one will mind. -- ran (talk) 16:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Meh, I merely want to bring a point across. It's one thing for the IHT to publish a misleading article, which Slashdot promptly spun out of proportion in its discussions. At least you can say that they don't know how Misplaced Pages works. It's another thing for fellow Wikipedians to misunderstand our community as well. We're already been blocked for over a year, and yet we didn't yield... it's horrible to be accused of doing exactly what we've refused to do all this time. -- ran (talk) 20:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I think you folks already did a good job to appease Chinese Communists. Look at the entry "Hu Jintao": "His modesty impressed 2 Chinese leaders. ... After assuming the post of Secretary-in-general of the Communist Party politburo, Hu visits economically challenged central and west provinces for quite a many times, showing a more open minded and equal-footing image and more concerned with those have-not in reform era." What a eulogy! Need to read further? --Uponsnow 06:35, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Uponsnow, I believe u have misunderstood my point. I meant China becomes or is becoming a nation of global influence, not a global bloodaxe, which IMO your interpretation was. Ktsquare (talk) 13:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I wished your way, but reality beats me, squarely. --Uponsnow 15:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Uponsnow: If you want to NPOVize those please go ahead. -- ran (talk) 16:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, but no thanks. Leave it as is, as an epitome of Chinese Misplaced Pages under Shizhao and other fanatics in disguise of wikipedians. --Uponsnow 15:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

It's especially scary how Shizhao, being the crazy commie puppet that you think he is, would nominate a supporter of the Taiwanese Pan-Green Coalition for adminship. -- ran (talk) 00:27, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

To Uponsnow: Since you've translated and quoted the Hu JinTao article on zh.wiki so well, why didn't you just change the sentence where you consider it is not NPOV. Isn't it also one of wikipedia's basic function that EVERYONE CAN EDIT; therefore, if you didn't like it, you should've changed it or bring it up to its discussion page so that other people can change it. As of your comment on zh.wiki's NPOV policy, I can guarantee you that most people on zh.wiki adheres to this policy strictly. As a contributor to Chinese Misplaced Pages, I take this policy seriously whenever I'm editing an article. BTW, I have slightly changed those sentences in "Hu Jintao" article. Thank you for bringing it to my attention ALL THE WAY here at En.Wiki.-- Nikopoley✪尼可波里 ✏Got Something on Ur Mind? 15:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your attention. There are 2 reason: 1.Don't you think I have tried, not once, but twice? You just can't beat a determined oxymoron. 2. How many Chinese-speaking people would try to get to know who is Hu by reading Misplaced Pages? For readers it can result no harms. But it harms Misplaced Pages! In case you are really concerned. --Uponsnow 16:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

It's my pleasure to NPOVize it. First of all, I'm glad that you actually did try to change it , and it's unfortunate that you met a determined editor on zh.wiki. Nonetheless, it shouldn't have stopped you from NPOVize it. Changing it directly isn't the only way. There is always other routes, and you just need to give it a try. Second of all, I agree with you that non-NPOV can definitely harm Misplaced Pages, and that's why we need to change it. Misplaced Pages is about accumulating any knowledge that all people share. In this case, it does not matter the number of readers for Hu's article now, because, if not now, someday there will be someone who's unfamiliar with Hu JinTao and decided to find out some more about him. By then, that will be the true value of Misplaced Pages.-- Nikopoley✪尼可波里 ✏Got Something on Ur Mind? 17:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Nikopoley: Thanks for changing it.

Uponsnow: Please don't let one edit war mar your opinion of Misplaced Pages. Shizhao may come off as being confrontational sometimes, but he would never intentionally dig up the NPOV policy. Nor is zh.Misplaced Pages ruled by one person: out of 83 sysops, just 29 are from Mainland China, and a quick glance through their user pages reveal diverse political stances. As for the Hu Jintao article on the Chinese Misplaced Pages, I'll help keep an eye on it, if you prefer. -- ran (talk) 18:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Ran, I fear that you could be easily overloaded. For instance, Chinese Misplaced Pages claims that Tibet was peacefully liberated by Chinese in 50s. Yet the opinion of how peaceful it was from those on the receiving end of the liberation, is conspicuously missing, as a result of dodged edit war. Like in almost every time, the Russian-speaking Zhwiki Czar won the battle, by design. You can insist that Tibet was peacefully liberated, like your fellow Chinese do, but it's shame for silencing others who do not subscribe to your version of truth and still claim that Chinese Wiki adheres to high standard of NPOV. Shizhao cannot fool all the people all the time.
  --Uponsnow 18:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm surprised to see that you say:"Chinese Misplaced Pages claims that Tibet was peacefully liberated ". The only mentioning of word "peacefully liberated" 和平解放 in the article zh:西藏, is the title of the agreement signed by Chinese central government and Tibet Authority, which reads:"Seventeen Point Agreement for the Peaceful Liberation of Tibet ". About the military conflict prior to that agreement, comparing to the English version, Chinese version actually has lot more words to say :" 1950年10月7日，由军官王其美率领的解放军四万余人分八路向康区首府昌都发起进攻，很快就打败了只有八千余人的西藏军队。两天后攻克昌都。俘去多麦总管阿沛　阿旺晋美和其随行人员，打死四千余西藏军人。1950年10月7日，西藏政府呈交联合国秘书长的报告：“西藏人民已清楚无力阻当中国军队的前进，西藏人已应允与中国政府进行和谈。虽然长久热爱和平的西藏人民欲要战胜熟练于战争的中国军队的希望并不大，但是，我们相信在世界的任何地方，只要发生侵略行为，联合国是必定会帮助予以抗击的." Roughly translate as: Oct. 7, 1950, 40K PLA troops attacked Changdu, easily defeated 8000 Tibetan army, captured governor, killed 4000 Tibetan combatant. Oct 7 1950, Tibetan government submited a report to UN secretary general saying:"Tibetan people can no longer resist chinese troops' advance. Tibetan has agreed to hold peace negotiation with chinese goverment. although peace loving tibetan people is no rival with chinese army, we believe UN would step in to help once agression happens"." Other than this paragraph, there is no mentioning of peace/peaceful elsewhere in the article. I'm curious to understand how you came to you conclusion. - munford 19:38, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

---I ADDED THIS PART above, it was me who ADDED THAT PART!!!!! and now they are shamelessly using that part which was previously deleted by a moderator to prove that they are innocent?! This is sick!!!! I got that from this link. In the original article, there was NOTHING, absolutly NOTHING about how Chinese took over tibet. So I did a little search, and found that link. it was me who re-wrote the history after 1949 in that article. Even today, the actual reference link was DELETED by the chinnese spy moderators even though they actually somehow kept my part of contribution. how contradiction that is. how can they keep something without a reference?

And before that, after I added that part, It was immediatly deleted by true chinese communist spy moderater Louer who have constantly been deleting my part of articles, then put them into protection!!! for example, in the aricle of People's republic of China, there is not a single word about human rights or falun gong, i added those in, communist spy Louer immediatly deleted them. one month later, there is still no word about human rights or flg in that article, and that article is still in protection. Because of the things that i have added, those chinese spy moderatoers banned me forever, and deleted all my comments, accused me "vandalism!!!" they are totally no different than the chinese communist government themselves. this is totally making me very sick to see that now they are using this to prove that they are not on the communist side!!! this is no different as if the Chinese government using the same Tank man pic to prove how good they are. And even today, several of the links that I have added for that articles are still missing because they are deleted by those chinese communist spy moderators!!!! this is just too sick! how can they act like they are being fair and equal?!!!!

The article from that newspaper is not biased at all. that is indeed what is happening on the chinese site everyday! the moderators even constantly delete people's comments and votes in the same chinese version of "village pump."

SummerThunder 10:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

• BTW, I never suggest that the bias came from sysops' national origin. The most senior sysop from Taiwan once claims that Taiwan has 'no legal ground to be independent from China'(sic). That ends the story. He played a key role to delete dissenting views to ensure his interpretation of NPOV. You need to imagine what it is? --Uponsnow 18:00, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I went and read this discussion. Anyone who reads Chinese can read the same discussion here at zh:Talk:西藏问题. For those who can't read Chinese, here's a rough summary:

Shizhao: A lot of Chinese people feel that Tibet is the way it is only because it depends on the central government for financial support.

Theodoranian: So are you saying that since Taiwan doesn't depend on China for financial support, therefore it has the right to independence?

Theodoranian (the Taiwanese sysop you speak of) was using Reductio ad absurdum. He took Shizhao's point, extended it logically and arrived at a conclusion that Shizhao may not agree with, thereby showing the inconsistency in Shizhao's original point. In other words, Theodoranian was not arguing that Taiwan has no right to independence, in fact Theodoranian just rebutted one of the main reasons why people say Tibet can't be independent. In addition, his edits and comments elsewhere on Misplaced Pages show a consistent loyalty to his country, the Republic of China on Taiwan.

So not only have you twisted Theodoranian's point around, not only did you push away someone who was supporting your point of view (Tibetan Independence), you also insulted his loyalty to Taiwan. -- ran (talk) 19:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• You were so close to reveal the real mindset of Theodoranian! Yes, I was referring to the same quote of him. But you missed in how Reductio ad absurdum is employed in debate. The logic extention part is supposed to reach a conclusion which is obviously absurd to everyone! So Theodoranian, a Taiwanese, seems to think Taiwan's independence is absurd, and he thinks it's agreed by all. He is not alone (in Taiwan). He is certainly entitled to his belief, but he should not let this mindset unduely influence his edit decision. That's my concern. --Uponsnow 11:18, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

No, Theodoranian arrived at a conclusion that may be absurd to Shizhao. In other words, he presents Shizhao with a choice:

• Either continue to hold on to the link between independence and economic dependence, and admit that Taiwan can be independent;
• Or admit that there is no link between independence and economic dependence, and lose a major point in arguing against Tibetan Independence.

This does not mean that Theodoranian himself rejects Taiwanese independence, in fact his actions and words elsewhere speak strongly of his patriotism towards the Republic of China (Taiwan); all it means is that Theodoranian is showing Shizhao the contradiction in Shizhao's POV. After all, if Theodoranian were so hostile to independence movements, then why would he be arguing against Shizhao here? Why did Theodoranian begin his point by saying: "There is no link between independence and economic dependence?"

I also fail to see how pushing away Theodoranian, who is clearly arguing for Tibetan Independence here, helps you or the international Tibetan Independence movement. Not only did you deprive yourself of a potential ally in future debates, you're also depriving the Chinese Misplaced Pages of a potential advocate of Tibetan freedom.

Ever since you started insinuating on the Village Pump of the Chinese Misplaced Pages that Theodoranian is somehow a PRC lackey, Theodoranian has been asking for an apology from you, for publicly attacking his loyalty to his own country. I suggest that you apologize to him. -- ran (talk) 18:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Since this thread is still running, I'd just like to say how honored I felt the day I discovered that a Chinese language editor translated my work at Joan of Arc. Thank you. I'd love to see more Chinese biographies become featured articles in English. I'm an admirer of Chinese poetry (which must lose a great deal in the versions I'm able to read). I realize we're all volunteers, yet may I make a request for Li Bai? Regards, Durova 04:27, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, they did this in zh.wikipedia

• A photo depicting Chinese soldiers' killing of defenseless Tibetan refugees has been promptly deleted, after it was voted down out of 'copyright concerns', though it's properly credited under 'fair use' clause. A similar one from the same source stays fine in en.wikipedia. --Uponsnow 13:21, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

According to an Admin on Zh.wiki, this photo was deleted because it was submitted under "fair use" licensing and someone submitted it to vfd. Because no one voted to oppose deletion of the photo during the 7 days period of voting, it was deleted by an admin after 7 days. Everything was done according to procedure. If you believe it was a mistake, it will be nice if you upload it again, and vote to oppose deletion in case it's submited for vfd again. Btw, is the similar photo on en.wiki fair use also? or is it under free license? If it's under free license, why don't you upload it to commons. It's always nice to put free licnese stuff in commons.. :) -- Nikopoley✪尼可波里 ✏Got Something on Ur Mind? 17:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

As I've already explained on the Chinese Misplaced Pages, the sysops deleted the picture because it did not meet the requirements for fair use. They did not remove any wording from the article Nangpa La killings, nor did they remove any of the numerous links at the bottom of the article to various news reports, photos, and videos. In other words, the picture was deleted according to Misplaced Pages's copyright policies, not what you perceive to be politically motivated censorship. -- ran (talk) 18:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

For that matter, why is that picture there in the English version of Nangpa La killings? It might be nice for someone to email the photographer and ask for permission to use his Nangpa La-related pictures on all Wikimedia projects. This way you'll be able to upload to both English and Chinese Misplaced Pages. -- ran (talk) 18:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Gentlemen, we all know what's happening in Chinese Wiki. These selective enforcement of 'policy' can take many forms, and we all know what those sysops are really targeting. Since when those Chinese suddenly start to respect other's copyright? Come on, give me a break! You must be joking to yourself if you believe they are not trying to appease the Chinese communists. --Uponsnow 23:07, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

an extra comment.

the chinese communist moderators deleted my COMMENT on that same topic in the Chinese site!! they then somehow made that "deletion" totally disappeared as if I have never left a comment on that topic at all!!! that is what they are doing on that site everyday. the communist spies are obviously taking over the whole Chinese site. and it is making me VERY VERY SICK to know that those are the same moderators who now came to this site and trying to tell the whole english world that they are innocent, they are just doing their job. i had my doubts, but i firmly 100% believe that among those chinese moderators, many of them are the true chinese government spies or have been converted by the chinese government. all those things are not individual incidents, they are all linked one to another. SummerThunder 10:34, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

If the Chinese Misplaced Pages is trying to "appease the communists", then why haven't they tried to remove the entire article about the Nangpa La killings altogether? Why haven't they tried to remove the numerous links to eyewitness accounts, photographs, and videos found at the bottom of the article? What is wrong with deleting an image that violates the copyright policy shared by all versions of Misplaced Pages, English or Chinese? And doesn't the fact that I suggested a way to ask for permission from the original author to use the photo on Misplaced Pages, mean anything to you? Honestly, why do you look for motives when there is none?

--well, that site is still supposed to be free of the chinese government rules. so if you chinese spies delete every articles that are offensive to the PRC government, then it will be too obvious to the whole world. you obviously can't do that. therefore, you can only try to do those things secretly. you are trying to do the damage control as much as you can without being too obvious. That is how the Chinese communist spies worked before 1949. SummerThunder 10:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

We've always taken copyright just as seriously on the Chinese Misplaced Pages as the English Misplaced Pages. The Chinese Misplaced Pages is not a reflection of the government of the People's Republic of China, whether in copyright policy or political slant. -- ran (talk) 01:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

To Uponsnow:I don't think this photo has a correct license template. According to Explorersweb's policy, everything on its website should be All Rights Reserved. I don't konw who put the {{cc-by-2.0}} license there but it still does not make it OK to put it on wikipedia. Therefore, I think the Admins on zh.wiki did a legitimate deletion of the photo. Btw, I will submit this photo for deletion here, too, and this has nothing to do with the content. It's just because incorrectly licensed photo, especially unfree content, cannot be used on wikipedia. -- Nikopoley✪尼可波里 ✏Got Something on Ur Mind? 06:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I've asked for and received permission to use the photographs on the English and Chinese Wikipedias. The Chinese Misplaced Pages currently displays a photograph depicting the body of the Tibetan nun who was shot and killed by Chinese border guards. -- ran (talk) 17:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

A real article from the Chinese Misplaced Pages

This article alone is enough to get us blocked, forever, by the Chinese government. And it's merely one of many such articles. We have been blocked since October 2005. We have appealed to no effect. But we have not changed our policies in any way, unlike say Google or Yahoo.

From zh:囊帕拉槍殺事件

Intro

囊帕拉槍殺事件是指2006年9月30日中國邊防武警向企圖穿越西藏與尼泊爾邊境上的囊帕拉山口（海拔5700米，一譯朗喀巴山口）、出境前往尼泊爾的75名西藏逃亡者開槍射擊並至少打死兩人的流血事件。

The Nangpa La killings refer to a deadly incident on September 30, 2006, in which Chinese border military police fired on 75 Tibetan refugees attempting to cross Nangpa La Pass (altitude 5700m) between Tibet and Nepal and head to Nepal, killing at least two.

逃亡者中包括年幼的兒童和兩名帶路的嚮導。2006年9月30日，據目擊者和逃亡者稱，中國西藏邊防武警總隊日喀則大隊定日中隊在沒有預警的情況下，向這些試圖徒步穿越山口的藏人開槍射擊，17歲（有報導稱23歲）的Kelsang Namtso（女）被子彈當場擊中，在山口前死亡。另一名23歲藏人Kunsang Namgyal（男）被兩次擊中腿部後倒下，由武警帶走，事後中國當局承認Kunsang Namgyal死亡。

Among the refugees were young children and two guides. On Sept 30, 2006, the Tingri squadron of the Shigatse brigade of the Tibet border military police detachment, China, fired without any warning on these Tibetans who were attempting to cross the pass on foot, according to eyewitnesses and refugees. Kelsang Namtso, female, 17 (some reports say 23) was hit by gunfire, and died in front of the pass. Another 23-year-old Tibetan, Kunsang Namgyal (male) was hit on the leg twice and fell, and taken away by military police. The Chinese regime later admitted that Kunsang Namgyal had died.

中國當局聲稱，士兵開槍是出於「自衛」。這一聲稱與現場西方目擊者的陳詞有矛盾。事後，41名幸存者抵達位於尼泊爾首都加德滿都的「西藏難民中轉中心」。兩周以後，幸存者抵達目的地印度達蘭薩拉。

The Chinese regime claims that the soldiers fired out of "self-defense". This claim contradicts the testimony of Western witnesses at the scene. Afterwards, 41 survivors arrived at the "Tibetan Refugee Reception Center" in the Nepali capital Kathmandu. Two weeks later, the survivors arrived in Dharamsala, India.

Excerpts

一些外國登山者向外界發佈了照片和視頻，私下或者公開提供了目擊者證詞。這些圖像包括中國士兵押送未能逃脫的幸存者（包括未成年的藏人）列隊經過卓奧友峰先頭大本營的情形。視頻片段包括武警戰士對正在遠去的非武裝藏人平民進行長距離狙擊式射擊。

Some foreign mountaineers sent their photos and videos to the outside world, and gave witness testimony either publicly or privately. These images include Chinese soldiers escorting under custody survivors who could not escape (including Tibetan children) in file through the Cho Oyo forward base camp. Videos depict military police sniping, at a great distance, unarmed Tibetan civilians moving away from them.

我看到一隊西藏人向山口進發，這是司空見慣的，因為每一年的這段時間是通商時節。然後，毫無預警地，槍聲大作，一輪，一輪，又一輪。隊伍開始朝山上逃散，這裡海拔是19000英尺。看起來，中國軍隊得到密報說有人逃亡，於是帶槍出現了。目睹隊伍在雪地上蜿蜒奔命，槍聲四起，我們注意到兩個人形仆倒。望遠鏡下就清楚了：兩人倒下，沒有再起來。

The above is a direction translation from anonymous testimony in English:
I saw a line of Tibetans heading towards the start of the pass - a common sight. Then, without warning, shots rang out. Over, and over and over. Then the line of people started to run uphill. Watching the line snake off through the snow, as the shots rang out, we saw two shapes fall. The binoculars confirmed it: two people were down, and they weren’t getting up.

Sergiu Matei對媒體表示：「我把他（槍擊幸存者）帶進帳篷，給了他極地保暖毯和一雙襪子。我沒拍下來，我不想再回去，只希望他穿越山口，不要成為那些嗜血的中國人的活靶子。我給了他一些牛奶和爆米花。然後我告訴他得儘快離開，因為中國軍人在搜捕兩名失蹤的藏人，很可能會搜查帳篷。我給他指了穿越冰川的捷徑，他就上路了。他穿越槽口的時間大約是凌晨兩點。」

The above is a direct translation from the English original of Sergiu Matei's testimony:
"I took him into our mess tent and gave him one polar fleece and a pair of socks that Cosmina had bought for me. I don't know why I didn't film the scene – I just didn’t seem relevant for me back then; all I could think of was to see that guy crossing Nangpa La without becoming a practice-target for the blood-thirsty Chinese boys. I went again in the tent and gave him some milk and cornflakes. Then I told him to leave as soon as possible, since the militia was on the prowl after two missing Tibetans and they might search the camps looking for him. Thirty minutes later I showed him the shortest way across the glacier, and off he went towards what they call their spiritual father. He crossed the col at around 2 am."

To Uponsnow (zh:User:澍子, who wrote this article and made it even more detailed than the English version, I express my gratitude and respect, for making the Chinese Misplaced Pages an avenue for freedom of expression. I also ask Uponsnow to reflect on the fact that to date, no sysop on the Chinese Misplaced Pages has tried to delete this article or compromise its truth or neutrality in any way. I understand that you're angry towards the policies of the Chinese government, censorship or worse, but this article alone should elucidate the fact that the Chinese Misplaced Pages is NO PART OF IT.

-- ran (talk) 02:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Maybe this is why Misplaced Pages HAS been blocked by PRC government for a long long time. But who cares about what PRC gov't thinks, keep up the good work!!;) -- Nikopoley✪尼可波里 ✏Got Something on Ur Mind? 06:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Update: this article is now in the "Did you know" box in the main page of the Chinese Misplaced Pages. -- ran (talk) 04:12, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Ran, I believe what Chinese Wiki needs most to restore its credibility is NOT such a stunt show with limited PR value, but rudimentary change of altitute. Currently its editing policy is carried out in a way hostile to contributors who dare to differ from Beijing regime. This saddens me most. --Uponsnow 11:05, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

obviously, there are many contributors on that chinese sites who felt the same way as uponsnow and I did. the chinese communist moderators are constantly deleting people's comments, votes, etc. and they then magically make all those comments disappearing as if they have never existed. This is just exactly the same thing what the Chinese government is doing in mainland China. What happened in the summer of 1989 on Tiananmen Square has completely disappeared from the entire Chinese web site, not even those articles which the government itself published! as of today, those several links that I have added to the tibet articles are still missing even though they kept my article which i got from those several deleted links. it is totally making me SICK to see this communist spy Ran constantly promoting the chinese wikipedia as if it is not pro communist or biased. that is not the truth. people across the world has felt the same way. otherwise, that international hearld won't have published that article about it. I am certainly glad that there are many users who felt the need to expose those shady chinese spies. SummerThunder 10:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

How is this "stunt show", so to speak, hostile to you? When you created the Nangpa La killings article on the Chinese Misplaced Pages, what hostility did you meet, other than the deletion of the image that you uploaded with no permission (and I should say that it is I who emailed the original author and obtained permission to use it on both the English and Chinese Wikipedias?) Why is it a user like 台灣少年, a declared Pan-Green supporter, can get nominated as sysop by none other than your scary commie bogeyman Shizhao (he would have been elected 9-0-0 had he not declined due to real life commitments)? The hostility you have met is the result of your own confrontational attitude, your own propensity for accusing people like Theodoranian of being PRC lackeys when nothing could be further from the truth, and not because of your political views. -- ran (talk) 18:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Let's take a typical, well-written Chinese Misplaced Pages article: History of Taiwan. Please tell me how this article, which claims the following things, panders to the Beijing Regime:

• As late as the Ming Dynasty, Taiwan was regarded as foreign territory;
• The Ming Dynasty did not object to the Dutch colonization of Taiwan, because it was foreign;
• The first time Taiwan became Chinese territory was in 1683, not the 3rd century as Chinese history books like to imply;
• The Qing Dynasty initially wanted to give up Taiwan after conquering it in 1683;
• Much of Taiwan's modernization can be attributed to Japanese colonization;
• The Republic of China continued to be the government of Taiwan after 1949 (and not the "Republic of China" with quotes, the "Kuomintang regime", the "Taiwan authority", or whatever other contrived name the People's Republic of China likes to use);
• That the Taiwanese population is generally hostile to the Anti-Secession Law passed by the PRC in 2005, and took to the streets to express their determination to protect Taiwanese sovereignty

-- ran (talk) 19:09, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

There are tons of entries written on the assumption that Taiwan is ALREADY a part of the People's Republic of China. Users advocating 'using force when necessary' to invade the island often receive nice treatment on zh.wiki. BTW, Ran, you blocked me for another week on Chinese Wiki so I cannot write about the Chinese-sanctioned genocide going on in Darfur region. My perception is that your action is highly politically motivated and arbitrary, which disappoints me very much. --Uponsnow 12:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I blocked you because you are using sockpuppets to circumvent an existing block placed on you. The existing block was for an extended campaign of bigoted personal attacks that you carried out on a user talk page. Also, if I have political motives, why did I email Mr. Pavle Kozjek for permission to upload the photos for the Nangpa La killings? Are you going to accuse me of a split personality next?

As for those "tons of entries" that assume that Taiwan is a part of the PRC, go change them yourself if you see any. The main, well-watched articles about Taiwan, such as the Chinese Misplaced Pages versions of the Republic of China, Taiwan, History of Taiwan, Political status of Taiwan, etc., certainly do not assume such a thing.

I see that you haven't answered my question about the History of Taiwan article, nor explained how a pro-Green Taiwanese could be nominated as sysop, nor apologized to Theodoranian for the rumours that you have spread about him. Instead you've begun to make bizarre accusations against me... well, whatever, say what you want. Any English Wikipedian interested in the topic can wade through this long discussion and come to their own conclusion about what's going on at the Chinese Misplaced Pages. -- ran (talk) 16:22, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

As a friend of Theodoranian and having a bi-weekly regular meeting with him, I can say that Theodoranian is not a PRC lackey. The rumor about him is not true and someone should give Theodoranian an apology.

Please, stop the rumor. I will let Theodoranian know what's going on here.--H.T. Chien / 眼鏡虎 (Discuss|Contributions) 18:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Dear, he himself is the one who spreads that 'rumor'. Read the referenced quote (Taiwan does not rely on China economically, but how can this become the basis of legitimacy of independence?) and ask him to explain. I hope he was out of his mind when he said that. --Uponsnow 18:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Poor translation. The original is:

許多中國人，包括我都認為，現在西藏都是政府每年大筆的財政支持才能由現在這個樣子的，也就是說，其實是中國在養著西藏，主要還是他的戰略地位太重要了。--百無一用是書生 (Talk) 03:19 2004年7月28日 (UTC)

Dear Shizhao，中國為西藏帶來了一定程度的進步，我想很多人都不能否認。但是誰養誰不代表(前)誰可以統治(後)誰，或是說誰靠誰養(前)誰就不可以獨立於(後)誰。如果照以上的邏輯，不靠中華人民共和國養的台灣，獨立的正當性是否就有了？--虎兒 03:58 2004年7月28日 (UTC)

Many Chinese, myself included, believe that Tibet can sustain itself only because of large financial support by the central government. In other words, China is sustaining Tibet, mainly because its strategic location is just too important. -- Shizhao

Dear Shizhao, China brought a certain level of progress to Tibet, I think many people can't deny this. But A sustaining B doesn't mean A can rule B, or in other words, B depending on A for sustenance doesn't mean B cannot be independent from A. If we go by the above logic, is it true that Taiwan, which doesn't depend on the People's Republic of China for sustenance, has the legitimacy to become independent? -- Theodoranian

As far as I can see, Theodoranian, a Taiwanese and avowed patriot to the Republic of China (Taiwan), not only rebutted Shizhao's justification for Chinese rule over Tibet, he also pushed, in a tongue-in-cheek way, for Shizhao to admit that yes, Taiwan can independent (either that, or concede the point about Tibet). -- ran (talk) 20:12, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

part 2

Yes, they did this. After a zh.wiki user added a few lines saying Zhao Ziyang was under house arrest, a well-known fact, he was not only permanently banned, but ALL his contributions deleted, by a majority vote of the Chinese sysops. You can imagine what kind of majority opinion will be. --Uponsnow 18:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I am very glad indeed! It was me!

I am very very glad that I found this page, and I was not being forgotten. Thank you, uponsnow!!! You are talking about me! Yes, that is right. It was me who put the subtitle "house arrest until death." I actually added same subtitle in the english version. even today, that title is still there! and I also added what he talked about on Tiananmen square on that fateful night on the Chinese version. however, that part was also immediatly DELETED by the chinese spy moderator Jasonzhoucn, then put that aritcle into protection. a month has passed now, there is still no change. After that, I added basically the same content in the English article. I translated his speech on that night. zhao ziyang still has everything that I contributed.

So it is clearly the chinese moderators are spies who are working for the chinese government now. there is simply no way that they can explain to me why they deleted my part of the article while the English version kept all of my contribution on the exact same subject. So far, I have chinese communist spies as "ran, louer, jasonzhoucn." Thank you very much, uponsnow, for talking about what I did! SummerThunder 11:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The Chinese Misplaced Pages article on Zhao Ziyang states: 趙紫陽一直是中國國內官方報道中忌諱的話題，網上的搜索引擎、社區、聊天軟體亦以此為「關鍵字」處理；但趙近況始終是歐美等西方媒體關注的焦點。趙紫陽下臺後一直被軟禁在家，軟禁的其中一個標誌是有公安站崗俯視向小巷的牆上和門前，但在後期官方對其行動的管制明顯放鬆，如偶爾打高爾夫球，甚至被允許在中國內陸省份旅行，但是被禁止進入容易被國際媒體曝光的沿海地區。"Zhao Ziyang was always a taboo article in official media in China, with search engines, online communities and chats treating his name as sensitive; but recently Zhao has always been the focus of Western media. After losing power Zhao was held under house arrest, one symbol of which being a police post looking over the walls and gates of the alley ; but in later years official control over his movement loosened, and he was able to play golf occasionally, and even travel through interior provinces in China, though he was banned from going to the coastal regions where there was greater risk of international exposure."

Oh, and I must add that the aforementioned user was banned for repeatedly spamming all pages of the Village Pump on the Chinese Misplaced Pages with personal attacks. In one attack, he accused Taiwanese Wikipedian Jasonzhuocn of being a commie spy, because "cn" means China (as opposed to, say, his initials). -- ran (talk) 19:55, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, they did this. Radio Free Asia is dismissed as a questionable source of news, before its affiliation with the state department. Xinhua News Agency, a Chinese government mouthpiece, however, is never questioned. In fact, on one day in this December, it was the sole source of wiki news. --Uponsnow 18:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

The Chinese Misplaced Pages article on RFA states: 自由亞洲電臺(Radio Free Asia,RFA)是根據1994年通過的美國國際廣播法案而在1996年由美國國會出資創建的一家非盈利性私營廣播電臺,它歸美國廣播理事會管轄.廣播委員會的職責是"向海外聽眾提供準確客觀公正的美國和世界新聞及相關信息廣播,以促進和加強自由民主事業". Radio Free Asia is a nonprofit private broadcasting station created in 1996 by the US Congress according to the 1994 International Broadcast Act. It is managed by the US Broadcasting Committee and its role is to "provide accurate, objective, and balanced US and world news to listeners overseas, and facilitate the development of freedom and democracy". The second external link on the page is a guide to bypassing governmental jamming of the station. -- ran (talk) 19:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, they can do this. BTW, if I had said any of the above in Chinese Misplaced Pages, I would have been banned for 3 days, for 7 days, for one week more, for 'violating wiki policy' and 'personal attack'. That's the ugly reality of Chinese Wiki. --Uponsnow 18:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Uponsnow was banned for making the following attacks on the user talk page of zh:User talk:真實事求是, a Chinese Malaysian. In these attacks, Uponsnow insulted 真實事求是's accent, intelligence, country of origin, and parents; made racist remarks about Malaysian Chinese, Malays, and Tamils; used traditional economic livelihoods of Malaysia as tools of personal attack; accused 真實事求是 of providing pornographic material online; and advised 真實事求是 to go into prostitution for a low price so that he "won't need to worry about lack of business":

華文學校的劣等品，中英文皆爛，講國語前後鼻韻不分翹不翹舌不懂，令人噁心，想投靠大陸找份工作根本不成。在大陸誰不知道最不講道德只講錢的華人就是這些天朝棄民？請不要再唧唧歪歪了（聽得懂嗎？） Inferior product of Chinese schools, you suck in both Chinese and English, your Mandarin doesn't distinguish final -n and -ng, or between alveolars and retroflexes; utterly disgusting, you want to find a job in Mainland China but you can't. But in Mainland China, who doesn't know that the most immoral, the most money-minded, are these abandoned people of the heavenly dynasty ? Please stop with your weird squeaking ( do you understand my words? )

你儘管意淫，你這種熱帶智商，給馬來人、泰米爾人做奴才人家看不上，又想投靠中共混點「中國崛起」的殘羹冷炙，老實說現在中共也不稀罕，找100條純種狗有難度，找1000個失業的「南洋華僑」，不難！ Although you twist meanings, your tropical IQ is not enough to satisfy Malays and Tamils when you want to be their servants; and so you want to join the Chinese Communists to get some table scraps of "China's Rise". Honestly, the Chinese Communists aren't going to treat you as hard to find; it's somewhat hard to find 100 purebred dogs, but it's easy to find 1000 unemployed "Southeast Asian Chinese"!

不要把我教訓教訓你跟我反共扯在一起，以為你自己儼然就是共了，你別做夢。你的IQ，給共產黨提鞋都不配！你要入黨，可能要 。。。算了，沒指望，遺傳太差勁。其實你困在馬來西亞出不去也不是死路一條了，可以和從大陸來賣的競爭啊！只要你出價低，不愁沒有生意，好歹強過你在網上幫共產黨打手槍那麼無聊。有些事你也不要強求了，基因不好，你爹媽給的，否則怎麼會流落南蠻之地做二、三等公民呢！你要有自知之明的話，還是做體力活吧，不要上維基了，對維基有害處，你也不配。Don't link my chastisement of you with my anti-communist sentiments, you think you're a commie, stop dreaming! With your IQ, you aren't fit to carry shoes for the commies! If you want to join the party, maybe you need to ... never mind, forget it, your genes are too inferior. Actually it's not a dead end for you to be trapped in Malaysia, you can compete with those from Mainland China coming to sell!! As long as your prices are low, you don't need to worry about lack of business, it's a lot less boring than you helping commies j*rk off online! Some things you can't ask for, your genes are bad, but that's coz your parents gave them to you, otherwise why would you be in the Southern Barbarian lands as a second-, third-class citizen? If you truly know yourself, go do physical work, don't come to Misplaced Pages, it's bad for Misplaced Pages, and you don't deserve it!

你連這都想不通，馬來人沒教你吧？不是印證了你的熱帶智商嗎？人不認命不行，再割兩代橡膠、伐兩代木頭，說不定能想明白，到那時再來維基不遲。 You can't even figure this out, I suppose the Malays didn't teach you? Doesn't it prove your tropical IQ? You have to recognize your fate, why don't you spend two generations tapping rubber trees, and two generations chopping wood, maybe then you'll understand, and it won't be too late to come to Misplaced Pages.

這麼大的人了，居然還到處娘娘腔地告狀，怎麼一點羞恥感也不懂？我這叫攻擊討論頁？這是免費教訓你！你不聽勸，算了，本來就不是我的職責。你這樣的人還真不少，管不過來。最後的忠告：以後別自稱中華民族了啊，中國人丟不起這個臉。You're so old already, and you actually go around telling on other people like a sissy , don't you understand shame? You call this attacking your talk page? I'm educating you for free! If you don't listen to my advince, forget it, it's not my job. People like you are numerous, it's hard to get them all. A final piece of advice: Don't call yourself Chinese in the future, ok, coz Chinese people can't afford to lose this kind of face.

Uponsnow was banned by Wing for one week for making the above attacks. According to Uponsnow, this was politically motivated. Uponsnow then began to, by his own admission, use a variety of anonymous IPs to circumvent the block. As a result, I extended the block for another week. Of course, according to Uponsnow this was again politically motivated.

-- ran (talk) 19:32, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

ya, right. you are a communist spy, ran. just admit it. you don't respect people's freedom of speech. you and the rest of the spy moderators constantly ban people, delete people's comments that you don't like to read, and you people have deleted many of my contributions. you should feel ashamed of yourself. how can you live your life with so many lies? you need to go find a better job. everyone should read what I just wrote above. it is so easy to figure it out that there are many of you who are working for the chinese communist government now. SummerThunder 11:06, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Case in point ... -- ran (talk) 21:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, they wrote this in zh.wikipedia

• Under zh:中国地质大学(China Geology University), zh.wikipedia goes: "In 1978 it restored its operation in Beijing on the approval of Comrade Deng Xiaoping... Its first president was Liu Xing, a Proletariat Revolutionary and Educator." --Uponsnow 13:27, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

That's why this article has a NPOV template on the top of it. Once again, Please edit it as you see anything that is incorrect, and suport it with reference. I believe you can find something like this happening on any wikipedia. Such a thing is part of wikipedia's nature while edit out wrong info as you see it is how we build wikipedia up.-- Nikopoley✪尼可波里 ✏Got Something on Ur Mind? 17:54, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

• Don't you think it's just the tip of the iceberg? Such unscrupulous propaganda inundates Chinese Wiki, though it's against stated policy even from language style point of view. That's why I call Howard French's poorly researched essay newsworthy - it at least raises a legitimate issue. --Uponsnow 22:59, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This "tip of the iceberg" is currently tagged with an NPOV tag, which is an indication that the Chinese Misplaced Pages community in general finds that article to be of an unacceptable quality. There are plenty of such flawed articles on every version of Misplaced Pages. If you feel strongly about it, you should take the time to change it yourself. -- ran (talk) 01:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

To Uponsnow: It is the tip of the iceberg, there are more out there that needs our attention, and they grow more and more everyday. Good thing someone has already smelled the iceberg by putting NPOV template on it; otherwise the wikiTANIC will soon hit the iceberg and sink. It is unfortunate that if wikiTANIC ever should sink, so many good people on it would die, too, just like poor Jack Dawson. It's always sad to see good people die.-- Nikopoley✪尼可波里 ✏Got Something on Ur Mind? 06:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

It is just so obvious that the Chinese site is almost under the control of the Chinese secret police or spies. I haven't seen anyone talking about any particular articles about pro taiwan indpendence articles at all. nothing. How can that be possible? most mainland chinese can't even read wiki. how come that chinese site is so pro chinese communist government? And there are SEVEN moderators who are from the capital city - beijing, total of 30 mainland chinese moderators!!! There are obviously more users from taiwan, but it only has 16 moderators. those moderators sold their souls to the chinese communist government. SummerThunder 12:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Is this the English Misplaced Pages's Village Pump, or have I wandered onto the Chinese Misplaced Pages by mistake? *Dan T.* 01:40, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

well, this is the english site. however, this is one of the few places where peole can express themselves freely without being banned. I tried to voice my opinions on the Chinese site many times, they deleted all my votes, comments, accused me of "vandalism." finally they banned me. People have no choice but to come to here to express their concerns about the abusive behaviors those chinese moderators are having. Until that day when people can talk freely on the Chinese site, this seems to be the only way. SummerThunder 02:35, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

We can't change anything about zh.wiki.

If you insist on calling other editors communist spies of course they're going to ban you for personal attacks. What do you expect? --tjstrf talk 02:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

At lease, people like me and uponsnow can have this place to express our concerns. I have listed plenty of evidence to support my idea. Most importantly, if they didn't delete every comments and votes that I have made, I certainly won't have called them the communist spies. SummerThunder 04:32, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm very pleased to see this discussion going on, because it will help to remind people that en.wiki is also rife with this stuff. There aren't as many topics affected (and the penalties for persistence only extend to loss of your health-care and beating up of your children at school), but there is rampant POV editting in favour of Israel. See: for one example, where really good editors, asking for minor (yet probably urgent under WP:BLP) changes are driven to distraction by the obstruction they get. PalestineRemembered 16:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

To their credit, Chinese sysops like Ran work efficiently and effectively through a sophisticated scheme, much more complex than just deleting something they don't like. It's teamwork, and it's carried out with a patiently executed, long-term agenda. Here are some of their techniques, though incomplete:

• Staffing: elect wikipedians with the same background to the admin postions;
  
• Role playing: some as agitator, some as arbitrator, work together to bombard and misled other;
  
• double standard: selectively enforcing copyright guideline to out materials they don't want;
  
• double standard: selectively demanding cites to kick out common sense
  
• quoting government sources as a credible, only information in written form
  
• Page protection only after their favored version in place
  

There are lot more. Only with first-hand life experience in China can land you on the conclusion that they are working for a ruthless regime to crush the dissents. I can smell it. --Uponsnow 15:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Please reply to my comment made below in the section "Arguing against flat-earthers", and explain how a Chinese Misplaced Pages filled with so many topics that fly in the face of the Communist government fits your description. -- ran (talk) 17:50, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

It's so easy. Why does your government retain some non-commie in 'national peoples congress'? It's just for show. You employed same tactic in zh.wiki. Just as one Chinese wiki editor suggested, in life-and-death (大是大非) issues, a 'Chinese stand'(read: communist stand) must be made. Enough? --Uponsnow 06:51, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

That statement, if it is indeed the way you put it, would fly in the face of the NPOV and non-Sinocentric policies maintained in the Chinese Misplaced Pages. Please provide a link.

Also, the PRC is not my government, nor is it the government of most Chinese Misplaced Pages sysops. NPC delegates are expected to rubber stamp government decisions, they're not supposed to, say, vote an article on the killing of Tibetan refugees by Chinese soldiers onto DYK status, 6/0/0. -- ran (talk) 07:02, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

What, you want to find out who had disclosed your code of conduct? Letting go the small stuff while making a 'Chinese stand' (read: communist stand) on life-and-death (大是大非) issues is exactly the strategy you sysops - an unholy alliance of Chinese communists and Pan-blue Taiwanese collaborators - are applying on daily basis. --Uponsnow 11:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Hint:it's right there on your own talk page. The guy even suggests freedom of speech should always be curtailed on the Chinese vital issues. I think that sums up zh.wiki nicely. --Uponsnow 12:16, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Remind: don't delete or alter your talk page in futile - I already made a screen shot. --Uponsnow 12:18, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh, lol.

zh:User:信陵使 once asked me on my talk page whether it's necessary to keep a Chinese POV in "important" or "life-or-death" issues like Taiwan or Tibet.

I responded, NO, DEFINITELY NOT. I wasn't aware of it at the time but I came up with something similar to WP:TIGERS. diff. I essentially said that Taiwan and Tibet are not life-and-death issues to historians 1,000 years from now, and we as Wikipedians should be historians 1,000 years from now. When he asked whether the freedom of speech should be curtailed in "life-and-death" topics, I said that "freedom of speech" on Misplaced Pages has nothing to do with what you think freedom of speech is in real life. You can think of freedom of speech as whatever you want it to be in real life, but on Misplaced Pages you follow Misplaced Pages's rules, i.e. NPOV and so forth.

I'm pretty proud of my explanation of the NPOV policy here actually, so why would I delete it? =P And even if I did, it's still in history, you don't have to take a screenshot. -- ran (talk) 16:48, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

This article was nominated for deletion on January 14, 2006. The result of the discussion was Speedy Keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

This article was nominated for deletion on January 14, 2006. The result of the discussion was Speedy Keep, ZOOOOOM. 8) An archived record of this discussion can be found here.