Thanks for rewriting the intro! It looks great. I look forward to your future edits on the article. Bonchygeez (talk) 18:07, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah will be there too! I'm attending all trade days and one of the public days. Bonchygeez (talk) 13:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Johannes Van Damme, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ApsbaMd2 (talk) 20:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You edited key dates. Please refrain from it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ApsbaMd2 (talk • contribs) 20:10, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I got a similar warning from this user for my goodfaith edits. I don't know what's going on, but it certainly does seem strange for a brand new account. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 20:24, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure... I posted a report Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#confusing_behavior_from_User_talk:ApsbaMd2 here. Maybe someone will look into it. - TheMightyQuill (talk) 20:37, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

fyi, I have asked for a 3rd opinion on this, given your reluctance to continue our discussion. Canadian Monkey (talk) 05:01, 15 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Purple Storm.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've filed a Wikiquette alert regarding your actions on the CISCO page. You can view it here. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 16:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule . Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

Oh, and this has to stop. You've been blocked over a dozen times; please begin minding the 3RR rule. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 01:50, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Master of Puppets. You can expect a very long block next time you violate 3RR. Stifle (talk) 13:41, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Huaiwei. Just wanted to be courteous and let you know I reverted your deletions of the CBD images of Singapore. I agree that they are not perfect, but I think they are defininately relevant to the pages, particularly the 2010 YOG page. When we are closer to the Games, or if a enthusiastic Singapore Wikipedian can get better pics, we can certainly update them.

Incidently, I noticed you have been having some conflict over the entry of Singapore in the Olympics Template. I made a specific template for the YOG a few days ago which is on all the relevant pages. Naturally, it is the only city listed right now. I hope that works as a compromise for you. Cheers--Cbradshaw (talk) 04:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, Huaiwei. Thanks for your comments. I'm sorry we disagree. I respectfully disagree that it's just "any picture", because this is the city that won the bid. Certainly, the image of Singapore is very valuable to me, but do what you wish.

As for the template, it is merely an adaptaion of the existing template, so if you find it poorly made, you're welcome to improve it. I will not merge it however, and I think the concensus I have read prefers a separate template. I do agree with you that the 2010 YOG should not be devalued "merely" because they are the Junior edition, but there was discussion at some length a few months ago that editors did not want the YOG cities listed on the main template. (Can't remember where though, maybe the Olympics project) If you have an issue with that, you may want to start another discussion. Cheers--Cbradshaw (talk) 05:41, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:38, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I am sorry I do not want to insult you! Please see here: Boxing at the 1964 Summer Olympics - Flyweight there is a boxer from Hong Kong named Lee and the link doesn't work. (HKG) does not connect to Hong Kong at the 1964 Summer Olympics... It would be great if you can fix it! Kind regards Doma-w (talk) 16:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are right reverting was not the right way, sorry again. I hope you will find a way to fix it! Kind regards Doma-w (talk) 17:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there! I'm trying to get this article back into a properly work edition as the "references" is in a complete mess now and I'm at a lost. I suspect that references No.30 might be the cause of it all although I can't really prove it or decipher it due to some much gibberish. -- Dave1185 (talk) 03:29, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finally! I got the page back working again and without all the gibberish at the bottom. Anyway, this is to inform you that whatever you had edited since your Revision, as of 13:16, 7 March 2008, on "Terminal 3: Date" , has been reverted. Thanks for reading and cheers. -- Dave1185 (talk) 03:49, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm editor of KLIA. Recently i've updated the Airlines & Destinations section with the table like SIN, which I think its better. I just want to seek your opinion whether this should be reverted back as per WP:Airports, because one of the editor seem doesnt agree with the new table and reverted back. Looking forward to get your opinions. Jannisri (talk) 14:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Free mp3/Free MP3. Please check this out. Those redirections are not valid in my opinion. -- 201.69.46.149 (talk) 09:47, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for uploading Image:Purple Storm.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image under "fair use" may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies for fair use. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a fair use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the fair use policy require both a copyright tag and a fair use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it might be deleted by adminstrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 14:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please consider taking another look at this case. Ultimately, we all want the same thing; a better article...I understand that you feel the consensus at MedCab does not need to be upheld regardless of circumstances (after all, consensus can change), but from what I've seen, other parties are willing to abide by consensus if you will do so. Please could you just give it a go? dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 06:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bump. And I'll go masturbate with my cheese grater now. Jpatokal (talk) 19:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know you could!--Huaiwei (talk) 21:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I've noted before, it's messy and painful, but rather more pleasant and productive than arguing with you... Jpatokal (talk) 03:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a reasonable deduction. The only issue is whether there is anything left to do it at all, if something was there to begin with...?--Huaiwei (talk) 15:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please consider the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Olympics/Archive 3#IOC designations, where we had consensus on the article names. The idea was to use the common name for nations where possible, especially where they match the main Wikipedia article name for the nation. Therefore, we have Libya at the 2004 Summer Olympics and not Libyan Arab Jamahiriya at the 2004 Summer Olympics and so on. In Hong Kong's case we agreed that simply using Hong Kong at the Olympics etc. was suitable, especially considering the main article for the territory is at Hong Kong. For now, I am going to re-rename the top-level article back to Hong Kong at the Olympics but keep the 2000-2006 article names unchanged, pending further discussion. Also, I do think your rename of Sports Federation and Olympic Committee of Hong Kong, China is entirely appropriate, so there is no need for discussion about that. Thanks — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also noticed your change to {{flagIOC}} to allow for variable country names, just as variable flag images are used. You did not make any changes to any of the other flagIOC templates — was that an oversight, or intentional? They should really all behave the same way. Also note that I had to undo part of your changes to flagIOC. You completely removed the name parameter, yet it is used quite a bit. Again, was that intentional, or an oversight? Thanks — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 22:19, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I noticed your changes to GHA and GUY — thanks for that! I think they are the only two historic nations that need that treatment. The other name changes (e.g. Ceylon→Sri Lanka, British Honduras→Belize, etc.) were also accompanied by code changes. Therefore, we already use CEY or SRI, or HBR or BIZ, depending on the year. Gold Coast and British Guiana pre-dated code usage, so that approach couldn't be used there. But thanks for taking care of that; one less thing for me to do today! — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiProject Films coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect five coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by March 28! Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There has been alot of vandalism on the 2008 Olympic page and i want to put a lock on it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hg robs (talk • contribs) 19:34, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Day of Spring!

Just wishing you a wonderful First Day of Spring {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}! ~~~~

If you live in the Southern Hemisphere and are entering the season of Autumn not Spring then I wish you a happy First Day of Autumn {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}!
To spread this message to others, add {{subst:First Day Of Spring}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

If you read WP:VANDALISM, you'll see it talk explicitly about content disputes not being vandalism. Your reversion of User:MRasco's edit, however, accused him of vandalism, when it's fairly clearly a content dispute, and even if it were borderline, it's not a far jump to assume good faith. Cheers, --Matt (talk) 22:39, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Matt (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I bring to your attention this image as Jannisri had uploaded it, seemed to me more like a posed shot for a MAS commercial ad than a self-work. Thus a copyvio might be in question here. -- Dave1185 (talk) 11:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I think with regards to the page of Singapore Airlines, Russavia has a valid point there as all the other airlines in Asia has that same kind of infobox added whether we like it or not. We can be bold and unique but we can also be conformative at times too. -- Dave1185 (talk) 21:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is not the infobox which is the issue...it is the entry for "parent company" which caused a huge conflict a few months back. It only died down when someone else simply deleted that field out right, so if he wants to add it in again, than he is simply asking for trouble.--Huaiwei (talk) 21:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The March 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:21, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huaiwei, your constant reverting of the verifiable parent company of Singapore Airlines being Temasek is unacceptable. I have addressed your revisions for the umpteenth time on the talk page, and for the umpteenth time you have chosen not to respond and have continued to ignore it, this is not acceptable, for none of us are about any of the WP policies. We use verifiable, reliable sources here on WP, we are not the unofficial PR organ for Singapore Airlines or Temasek or any other entity, whether they be Singaporean or non-Singaporean. I suggest that you check subsidiary and parent company, and learn what these terms mean, for when Singapore Airlines states in its annual report it is a subsidiary of Temasek, this can mean only one thing.....that Temasek is the parent company. Further reverting of this verifiable information will be reported and you can be sure that I will ensure that you will not be allowed to continue to operate like that. --Россавиа ^Диалог 08:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved? I think not Huaiwei. Unless by resolved you mean that you completely ignore anything and everything that anyone else has to say, refuse to recognise reliable sources, and flat out refuse to recognise policies on verifiability, and continue to assert your ownership in doing so, then yes, it has been resolved. However, this is not the SingaporeAirlinesPRpedia or TemasekPRpedia, and it does not matter if Temasek doesn't state that it is the parent company of Singapore Airlines (hell, they don't even have a complete list of companies and shareholdings), it does matter that a multitude of reliable sources state that it is, and incredulously, many of these same sources are already referenced within the article. Additionally, as the airline is listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange, this information is required to be disclosed, and this has been pointed out within various reports which have been referenced. Now one of two things is happening here. One, you don't know what the relationship between a subsidiary and parent company is, in which case, read those two articles, and if still not clear, then ask a wider audience for further assistance. Or two, you are doing this on purpose, whether that is to hide the fact that SIA is a government-controlled airline, being a subsidiary of Temasek Holdings, or whatever reason is not important, but if it turns out you are doing this on purpose, this has caused me over 9 months of headaches and sheer frustration, and I will ensure that this will be reported; remember it can be noted there are other Singapore editors who have even noted that this information was missing. The choice is yours Huaiwei, ask for further assistance at your Singapore project if need be, but this is not a NPOV dispute, but a dispute over providing relevant, verifiable information from reliable sources (me) and removing verifiable information on false pretences (claiming that reliable sources such as Forbes and IHT are not reliable, although there is of course evidence that they are more than reliable for our purposes. --Россавиа ^Диалог 09:37, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if you can look over the Samsui women page, and see if anything can be improved. I really hope that page can become a good (or even featured) article in the future. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 17:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good use of tables. Can you add the statistics for the other continents (ie not just Asia Pacific), or could be just stick to what was originally there (top 21 routes)? Thanks Kransky (talk) 12:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

well one of us will have to complete the article (or some other writer). I was in Singapore from Monday to Wednesday - flew out to SYD on the A380. Kransky (talk) 13:33, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a friend, please allow me to say this. With regards to issues on Singapore Changi Airport and Singapore Airlines, I think you really need to chill down a bit because you are seriously putting off a lot of people here, that doesn't include me because I work here, it doesn't matter what is being discussed online when I have real life schedules to meet whenever aircraft on ground (AOG) and I got to turn them around in the shortest possible time. Meaning, I don't like to talk shop after work but I do enjoy editing and improving on other articles here on wikipedia. It's a joy I really enjoyed and I hope you have not forget that kind of feeling since joining wiki. Cheers. -- Dave1185 (talk) 06:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, I am not condemning nor accusing you of any wrongdoings. Sure, I know what you mean but sometimes ownership issues of article can get in our way of perception, no doubt it is a good thing that we as Singaporeans take pride in the achievements of our nation but there has got to be a line drawn somewhere as to how best follow the wikipedia guidelines with regards to how an article is being written and presented. Your passion for defending articles/issues related to Singapore is unquestionable and it isn't necessarily a bad thing. However, one should also take note of other editors/users on wikipedia who wish to contribute. Look at the articles of SAR-21 and Ultimax 100, you would see what I mean... I wanted to contribute but there are a few overzealous being who continuously shoot down whatever I wrote just because they edit those articles and would not allow others to edit it. It is times like these that I felt that I could bring my full weight of my experience in the SAF to bear but after some thoughts I just said, forget about it! I moved on to the next subject or project, just as what I did to 125 Squadron, Republic of Singapore Air Force, 140 Squadron, Republic of Singapore Air Force, RAF Chia Keng, Pandan Gardens, Pulau Sakeng and Toa Payoh Police Division. Above all, we are all here to enjoy the wiki experience and not to make enemies but if stepping on a few toes is what it takes to make our stand then so be it. Thank you for reading, sincere regards and cheers. --Dave1185 (talk) 01:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey, I'm just curious as to why Sempre & Butterfly these 2 cronies of Russavia have against you? Was it something you said? I find them serving the same 3RR notice to you by one minute apart, this is madness and doesn't that constitute bullying or pushing their view on you? Man, the nerve of these people and what is wrong with them? I'm going to bring this up to the attention of a certain administrator for follow up actions. --Dave1185 (talk) 07:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

well said. Sox23 21:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Effective immediately, for your direct responses to my comments on any article, I'm going to start striking out the parts that address me as opposed to the issue at hand. You are hereby invited to do the same to my responses. Jpatokal (talk) 15:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know why the word Mainland was removed completely from the article. It appears extensively on the official website http://torchrelay.beijing2008.cn/, and the BOCOG itself considers the Hong Kong and Macau legs to be international http://torchrelay.beijing2008.cn/upload/c/guoji.swf . Taipei was also planned to be one of the legs on the international route. The Mainland route begins in Sanya. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/olympics/2008-03/20/content_6553393.htm http://www.china.com.cn/zhibo/2008-03/19/content_13031191.htm http://en.beijing2008.cn/news/official/preparation/n214273725.shtml Fanqing!! (talk) 14:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from repeatedly undoing other people's edits, as you are doing in 2008 Summer Olympics torch relay. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. The three-revert rule (3RR) prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, please discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Dusti^{talk to me} 19:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:AD2000screenshot1.png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 18:10, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Sorry, I can't approve you just now because you have not only a long record of blocks, but some of them are recent. I suggest you apply again when the gap after your February block is a little longer. Cheers. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 20:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I can't speak for other Admins; opinions vary. Personally, I'd like to see three months free of blocks to be more certain that you wouldn't misuse AWB. Some Admins less, some more, some maybe never. Not very helpful, I know, but you could try again next week. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 20:27, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, on the basis of your explanation, I'll approve you. I know one of these editors, and can see how you might have ended up in an edit-war! Give me a few minutes. Cheers. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 21:15, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huaiwei, I think we can merged Changi Air Base (West) back with Changi Air Base and sub section the (West) part in there for better reference, I know it might look a wee bit confusing but once you read the header and sub section, it is pretty clear and precise. I mean, the base hasn't moved anywhere although it just had a change of name so I think we can better reflect it within the sub section part. Right? Please don't let me down on this. --Dave1185 (talk) 13:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you know if Shell Station is an official term for a station that is built but unused? If so, I'd like to make an article for it. Do you know of any other such stations in the world? DaronDierkes (talk) 05:10, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested to hear your thoughts in changing this in the Arniston article as this name came from the ship's log. i.e. Is there any reason why we should be using the old name or the modern name here? Socrates2008 (Talk) 14:24, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious to know why Macau should be used in place of Macao. I use Macau, but I also know that Macao is the word used on the cover of their passports. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fanqing (talk • contribs) 20:07, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What you did was simply nonsense. Fanqing!! 21:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Testaa SchmuckyTheCat (talk)

The April 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:AD2000screenshot1.png. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 10:25, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you had been notified about the problem above, in this edit. I'm glad you have since fixed the image and the rationale looks good. (ESkog)^(Talk) 13:56, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--Mifter (talk) 20:31, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Category:Singapore law enforcement agencies, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Category:Singapore law enforcement agencies has been empty for at least four days, and its only content has been links to parent categories. (CSD C1).

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Category:Singapore law enforcement agencies, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 00:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know, if you are not interested in seeking out more opinions from other editors, and wish to go ahead to make the changes despite no consensus from anywhere, and reason using biased/WP policies/bordering on WP:OWN etc.etc., and I quote your friend above: "you are seriously putting off a lot of people here", then go ahead and do what you deem fit; because you are seriously putting me off. (Before you go accuse me of doing the same when I made the initial changes, please assume good faith that I had genuinely expected that to be the correct name; thus the edits. As such you are free to revert them if you wish so; even if either name has yet to be proven to be the official one.) Any responses to this or in fact anywhere else, where I feel it redundant / useless to give you any form of reply, I will not be doing so. For that matter, do not expect any more responses from me about this issue. Last word: you would do better to prevent and be less involved in content disputes, 3RRs and editwars around WP. WP will be a better place without tons of such issues plaguing it. Best wishes - oahiyeel ^talk 15:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The minor incident to the Singapore Airlines A380 (being pushed onto some grass by a tug) is not notable per WP:AIRPORTS guidelines, which state that:

Accidents or incidents should only be included if:

• The accident was fatal to either the aircraft occupants or persons on the ground.
• The accident involved hull loss or serious damage to the aircraft or airport.
• The accident invoked a change in procedures, regulations or process that had a wide effect on other airports or airlines or the aircraft industry.

These criteria were established through consensus to avoid cluttering airline and airport pages with minor non-notable incidents such as this which happen regularly across the world. Remember verifiability does not necessarily mean notability. Thanks. SempreVolando (talk) 08:49, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(argument diverted from NcSchu's talk page) Yes, but what information is relevant? As people in the VS and VX AfDs have said, Wikipedia is not an aviation enthausiast site. You're indiscriminately adding information that lacks relevance or notability. It is not essential information. The amount of people that actually want to know information regarding airplane registrations and the history of those birds know what websites to go to, if people's posts on airliners.net is any indication. I don't see anything in the text part of that page that can't be presented in the main SQ page (which is need of serious clean-up, as there is too much information that doesn't need to be presented in that page, as well). If separate fleet pages and massive registration lists of current and previous aircraft was the norm, your "absolutely normal and essential argument" would work. But it isn't. And unless you can provide a reason why SQ is so special aside from your obsession with anything Singapore-related (something that your user page indicates), then you need to either back off or make similar pages for every airline in existence. Just as I have to either prove why VS and VX should have their fleet pages AfDs or AfD all such pages as other users have informed me, you need to do the same. Furthermore, until YOU start acting according to Wikipedia's policies, you are in no position to tell me what I'm not acting according to procedure (case in point: SQ's parent company). Butterfly0fdoom (talk) 16:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, here is a note from one of the SQ fleet AfDs: "The result of the debate was no consensus; keep. Standard disclaimer: This defaults to keep. Do not cite this alone as a reason to support/oppose a merge/redirect/whatever." In addition, in that same AfD, you talk about the feasibility of having similar pages for other airlines. You, being the main supporter of the SQ fleet page, have the main burden of seeing this feasibility through, just as I, being the main opposer of separate fleet pages, have the main burden of seeing that there are no exceptions, especially when WP:AIRLINES deems registrations irrelevant. Butterfly0fdoom (talk) 16:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, actually, looking at previous AfDs and your own track record, I feel this is an issue I need to take up with you first. It is clear that you have a significant amount of invested personal interested in these articles. However, if you cannot provide a justifications of why SQ ought to be the exception (as you have failed to make it the rule), then there is no justification for the existence of a separate fleet page. The AfDs failed because no consensus was ever reached, not because the votes swung in favor of keeping the page. Refrain from referencing the AfDs. I am referencing WP:AIRLINES, something far more definitive than your AfD citations. You constantly state the registrations are not irrelevant. WHY are the relevant? Sure, they pertain to the history of the airline, but, as people on the other AfDs have said, actual existing databases for such information already exist, and Wikipedia is not meant to be such a database. I have even provided such a website. Once again, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate repository of information. Butterfly0fdoom (talk) 18:07, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I actually have started a discussion. If you click on "discuss" in the merger proposal box, you'll be directed to the main SQ talk page where no one has responded. Butterfly0fdoom (talk) 20:24, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Singapore Airlines, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Anthøny 21:18, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

I saw your edits [1] and [2]. I also notice that the redirect from Light Rapid Transit (Singapore) has not been fixed. I'm happy to make the move if you need to, but I'm not sure which is right. A quick google shows two somewhat reliable sources which indicate either:

• http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_538_2005-01-05.html
• http://www.smrt.com.sg/trains/trains.asp

Can you clarify please? Thanks. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 19:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have violated the three-revert rule on Singapore Airlines. Any administrator may now choose to block your account. In the future, please make an effort to discuss your changes further, instead of edit warring. SempreVolando (talk) 21:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Singapore Airlines. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. If necessary, pursue dispute resolution. Butterfly0fdoom (talk) 21:44, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was weird: When I first clicked on them, neither of them worked. Honestly. One came up with "page not found" or something like that, the other said something in German (I think it was) and neither had any tables. Clicking on the links now, they seems to "work", though neither, at first glance, seem to have the detailed information catalogued Singapore_Airlines_fleet. Yilloslime (t)

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Singapore Airlines. For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 23:00, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I've noticed your continued attempts at adding a "name dispute" tag to the Burma article. Please do not. Consensus has been reached stating that the tag should not be there. Honestly, it's the correct thing to do considering the facts in my opinion. But it wasn't just me who decided this. See this talk page section if you have questions. Thanks a lot! Beam 01:27, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the repeated reverts you have made on Burma. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits. Beam 02:11, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I noted that you have an interest in Singapore articles. Since the 2008 ICJ case for Pedra Branca, South China Sea has been settled, would you consider moving it back to Pedra Branca, Singapore? --165.21.154.110 (talk) 13:32, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as the informal mediation in relation to the various issues regarding the Singapore Airlines article was not successful, I have now instigated a request for formal mediation on these issues at MedCom at this link. As you have been involved in editing this article in direct relation to the various disputed issues and/or have been active in discussion regarding these issues on WP:AIRLINES, previous dispute resolution attempts, or on the talk pages, I have added you to the involved parties list, so if you agree to participate, please sign your acceptance on that page. Thanks --Россавиа ^Диалог 21:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Singapore Airlines, and indicate whether you agree or disagree to mediation. If you are unfamiliar with mediation on Wikipedia, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. Please note there is a seven-day time limit on all parties responding to the request with their agreement or disagreement to mediation. Thanks, Anthøny 17:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The May 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:00, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huaiwei, I think it would be prudent for us to converse in a more private setting. Do you have email? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RomanceOfTravel (talk • contribs) 12:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had previously started a discussion on Talk:Airliners.net expressing concerns about the paragraph on competing websites. You may wish to take a look at it and add to the discussion there. -- Hawaiian717 (talk) 15:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is not that I'm lazy or couldn't be bothered to look it up, but rather that I have checked all 5 sources and haven't been able to find any info about when specific aircraft were delivered, withdrawn, etc. Can you hold my hand for just a minute and show me exactly where one of these sources says, for example, that 9V-SFB, a Boeing 747-412F powered by Pratt & Whitney PW-4056s, was delivered on September 29, 1994 and first flew on September 17, 1994? I've asked for this before and so far nobody has stepped up to the plate. Yilloslime (t) 03:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you are back. Care to answer the above question? Yilloslime (t) 16:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That you have chosen to edit war rather than address this question is sign of bad faith. Yilloslime (t) 19:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huaiwei, I could use your help in appraising this article as I have made much marked improvement to the page. Let me know if this would make it to beyond Start class as it is now. A or B class would be nice but I guess I'm pushing for it to reach GA or maybe FA (aren't I the ambitious one here?) if everything goes well. Similarly, please vet through it for me and let me know if anything else is perhaps required or help to make the necessary adjustment. Thank you. --Dave1185 (talk) 04:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The June 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:54, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have created Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation/Burma. I have added you along with added 18 other users (including myself) to the list of involved parties. The ones I have listed are ones who have commented recently, or who commented on the Mediation Cabal case (except if they solely made a neutral comment). If you disagree with me listing you there, remove yourself from it if you wish. If you feel someone else should be involved, add/ask them. I hope those I have added are alright though. I also hope this step is what finally ends this dispute! Deamon138 (talk) 00:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For you tireless efforts fixing links to Sydney Airport, it didn't go unnoticed! Mvjs (talk) 12:18, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Some time ago, you participated in a deletion discussion concerning Allegations of Chinese apartheid. I thought you might like to know that the parent article, Allegations of apartheid, was recently nominated for deletion. Given that many of the issues that have been raised are essentially the same as those on the article on which you commented earlier, you may have a view on whether Allegations of apartheid should be kept or deleted. If you wish to contribute to the discussion, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allegations of apartheid (fifth nomination). -- ChrisO (talk) 17:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, as previous attempts at gathering concensus in relation to the various issues regarding the Singapore Airlines article have not been successful, I have now instigated a further request for formal mediation on these issues at MedCom at this link. As you have been involved in editing this article in direct relation to the various disputed issues and/or have been active in discussion regarding these issues on WP:AIRLINES, previous dispute resolution attempts, or on the talk pages, I have added you to the involved parties list, so if you agree to participate, please sign your acceptance on that page. Thanks --Россавиа ^Диалог 00:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I provided the newspaper link- it satisfies to Wikiepdeia guidelines well enough to be enough sufficient for many others' similar references for their Wikiepdia articles. There are a huge quanta of documentation supporting these facts- including Indonesian arrest warrants and extradition applications. Perhaps we should co-author a new topic on widespread Singaporean banking and financial irregularities- there are vast numbers of theses devoted to these topics? Although, I understand if you are Singaporean based- it's risky to criticise the (well-documented) incumbent corrupt Lee Kwan Yew regime- perhaps we can find a non-Singaporean based author to co-write? Starstylers (talk) 06:56, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you misunderstood me- actually, I was inviting you to co-author a new article- interested?Starstylers (talk) 12:32, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Huaiwei, I'd like to refer you to this Wikipedia_talk:SGpedians'_notice_board#Proposal_to_put_Sompah_MRT_Station_up_for_AfD. The details are in the link, but in summary, a user has created a page for Sompah MRT Station, which obviously doesn't exist and is spelled wrongly anyway. Although props to him for designing the page so that it looks like the rest of the MRT pages. I don't know the AfD procedure - I've tried putting it up for speedy, but it was overturned by another user, citing that my reason does not fit the criteria. I would gladly appreciate it if you could help out, or at least refer it to someone who knows how to handle these kind of things. 리지강.wa.au _talk 18:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for starting to fill in the Category:Singapore at the Olympics articles! We need this kind of help for many nations. The best sources for this information are the official reports from each Games, downloadable here. You might also want to read "Singapore and Olympism" here, although that article is from 1980.

Note that in 1948, Lloyd Valberg was the lone competitor for Singapore (men's high jump) per the official report. Your source from the SNOC website shows four other names, but those are listed in the official report as all competing for China (ROC). Obviously, Singapore did not have complete teams in football and basketball.

• Chia Boon Leong - shown as "Chia, Boon-Leong"
• Chu Chee Seng - name not found as shown, but there is a "Chu, Wing-Keung" listed under China for football
• Ng Liang Chiang - shown as "Ng, Liang-Chian" for 400 m hurdles
• Chua Boon Lay - name not found as shown, but there is a "Chua, Bon-Hua" under China for basketball

So perhaps they were all Singapore-born but living in Taiwan? In any case, I don't think they should be listed on Singapore at the 1948 Summer Olympics in the same sense as Valberg. They should be removed, or perhaps listed under another section like "Singapore-born athletes competing for the Republic of China", or something. Thanks — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 18:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied to you on my talk page. — Andrwsc (talk · contribs) 16:18, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I offer my apologies for being immature and abrasive. I have no ill will against you or any fellow complainant- I fully support your freedom of speech, opinion and association- and though many others within SE Asia do not enjoy such intellectual liberties- I along with Voltaire feel it means allowing defending others' right to shout in your face what you find most offensive. I hope we may put this matter behind us, agree to disagree as civil gents and move on. Buddha was right- life is too short for bitching.

In all honesty- I was being sincere in inviting you and others to collaborate if in future I am involved in a future article concerning Indonesian-based white-collar fraud and money laundering in Singapore- it was not a backhanded disguised insult- I would value yours and others input and expert opinion (though I personally may vehemently disagree) to together create an indisputably neutral POV article.Starstylers (talk) 09:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The July 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Singapore Airlines. For the Mediation Committee, Daniel (talk) 11:30, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I'm Ryan, the mediator of the above request for mediation. Would it be possible for you to pop over to the link above so we can start the mediation properly? Regards, Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 01:47, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've edited nearly 1000 times in the past two weeks, surely you can find the time to chip in a paragraph at the mediation? Jpatokal (talk) 07:02, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First, I did not encounter the above page until Ryan posted the notice above. Documenting the proceedings of the Olympics is certainly a far more productive and interesting task to engage my limited time in. Second, as has always been the case, I will respond at a time which best fits my schedule and my editing priorities during my available editing time. You will do good respecting that and drop your persistently condescending attitude, for if anything, your taunts and rude interjections only serve to discourage a timely response from my part.--Huaiwei (talk) 13:16, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the time it took you to write that, you could have written your opening statement on the RFM already. (And it's remarkable how you can find condescension, taunts and rude interjections even in innocuous one-liners...) Jpatokal (talk) 16:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And perhaps you have not realised that you just helped me waste a sizeable chunk of that available time. ;) Meanwhile, I do believe everyone is fully entitled to deem any comment as welcoming or rude or not. However, I do not share certain values, in that I do not consider myself justified to be rude to anyone I deem as rude.--Huaiwei (talk) 17:34, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 04:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The August 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Huaiwei. We've been waiting for some time for your opening statement. I'm planning to start the mediation in 24 hours, even if we don't hear from you. You are of course entitled to rejoin at any stage you want. Best, Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 00:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bump! We're still waiting for your input. Jpatokal (talk) 16:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just saw your template {{16TeamBracket-Compact-Tennis7}} and I was wondering if you could make a template like that but with 32 Teams, just making the player name spaces smaller at {{32TeamBracket-Compact-Tennis7}}. Thanks. - Nick C (t·c) 21:57, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, it's done now. - Nick C (t·c) 20:02, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 20:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4145725/

The discussion is indeed frustrating when one side of the debate is full of fools who have no grasp of basic economics and business theory and take it upon themselves to divert the topic by discussing irrelevance and by attempting to discredit the other parties by various measures because they are unable to discredit the economics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RomanceOfTravel (talk • contribs) 18:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:True Files Lee Kim Lai 1.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Jpatokal (talk) 04:14, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think your fair use rationale is acceptable for List of Singapore police officers killed in the line of duty. See Image talk:True Files Lee Kim Lai 1.jpg. Jpatokal (talk) 16:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've noticed you've been editing dates on F1 GP races. Please do not continue.

• A Grand Prix is only on the Sunday of the weekend. The other two days are practice and qualifying. (For example, the 2008 Spanish Grand Prix was on April 27, not April 25-27).
• Date links are useful. Don't remove them.
• Finally, these pages have already established a pattern of month,date. Maintaining that on the page is best for continuity. It's hard for me too. I'm from Australia and here its date,month.

Cheers. Apterygial (talk) 10:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huaiwei. As you surely aware of, I reversed all your edits regarding this (date) issue (besides the last one [and also the template that I don't want to mess with] to show you, that my intention is not to start an edit-war at all). I didn't meant to be rude at all doing so, just to clarify, but I want to ask you politely NOT to go ahead again making these bold edits since they are a major change that you might want to propose first and maybe file an RFC in that matter. This change would effect all entries back to the 1950 F-1 season. I'll give you more input on my thoughts about this tomorrow. On the side I would like to let you know that I'm personally used to both date settings, so my intention is not to make it all American no matter what. I think you have a good point for the change but we cannot just dismiss established long-term consensus with a "finger-snap". Regards, --Floridianed (talk) 02:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I'll post my comment also on user:Apterygial's talk-page to keep the discussion together. --Floridianed (talk) 02:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say I agree with you, Huaiwei, about F1 being predominantly european and hence date,month would seem the better course. But as Floridianed said that would be a lot of dates to change (right the way back to 1950). So at this stage (and probably forever) we just adhere to the MoS: Retaining the existing format: If an article has evolved using predominantly one format, the whole article should conform to it, unless there are reasons for changing it on the basis of strong national ties to the topic. In this case its about the whole F1 project. Thanks. Apterygial (talk) 03:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll post this comment on my talk page too. Apterygial (talk) 03:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Huaiwei, apologies. I thought that you added the date ranges, and clearly you didn't. I'll have to take that up with someone else. Apterygial (talk) 02:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on 1989 in Singapore requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. LAAFan^sign _review 23:07, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The September 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Please also note that after the roll call for active members, we've cleared the specialized delivery lists. Feel free to sign-up in the relevant sections again!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:27, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Dbs logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Uoblogo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading Image:Ocbclogo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huaiwei, I have a very bad news for you... this message is to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Your track record of fifteen 3RR incident and long list of impolite outburst (aka thinking out loud) will work against you in this case this time. My suggestion is for you to control yourself, failing which you might face the possibility of leaving Wikipedia on a long long vacation to cool down and think things through before you are allowed to return again to edit and contribute. Thus far, it has been a privilege to work with you on a few articles so I hope you would take heed of my advice and focus on the content instead of the contributors. Cheers! ...Dave1185 (talk) 05:18, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you got spare time, please go update the above article. Cheers~! ...Dave1185 (talk) 17:23, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated SGpedians' notice board (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 03:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The October 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have suggestions or comments related to the newsletter, please leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you and happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:01, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see you again Huawei. In regards to the lead of the SIA article, I linked to Wikipedia:LEAD#Relative_emphasis for a reason. Instead of picking out a few words, read the entire thing, and put it into perspective.

In general, the relative emphasis given to material in the lead should reflect its relative importance to the subject according to reliable sources. Significant information should not appear in the lead if it is not covered in the remainder of the article, although specific facts, such as birthdates, titles, or scientific designations will often appear in the lead only, as may certain quotations. This should not be taken to exclude information from the lead, but to include it in both the lead and body: in a well-constructed article, the relative emphasis given to information in the lead will be reflected in the rest of the text. Do not tease the reader by hinting at startling facts without describing them. Avoid lengthy paragraphs and over-specific descriptions, especially if they are not central to the article as a whole.

The statement that SIA is accredited with IOSA is not covered nor mentioned in the article at all, and its importance in the overall article is not reflected. It's something like one would see on the bottom of press release. Let me show you. This information is placed at the bottom of every Aeroflot press release:

Aeroflot – is one of the oldest air companies and one of the most famous commercial brands in the world. Company was founded in 1923, its headquarters in Moscow, in international airport of Sherem’etevo. In 2006 Aeroflot became the first Russian air company to be part of a global alliance SkyTeam. United destination network of the alliance consists of 728 destinations in 149 countries, which in turn offers to the passengers of Aeroflot limitless variety of choice. Clients of Aeroflot are also eligible for bonus programs of all partners of the alliance. Information of the advantages of participation in the alliance SkyTeam – on the website www.skyteam.com.

Aeroflot is the only certified operator of international aviation standards of operational safety IATA (International Air Travel Association) Operational Safety Audit in Russia.

On the website www.aeroflot.ru it is possible to purchase tickets for Aeroflot flights with the use of on-line payments, technology of electronic ticket, and to find out more about the air company.

You suggested that I take it to the talk page. Why on earth would I waste my time doing that? When I introduced only to have you remove, as another editor put it, one of the best sourced facts on Wikipedia. Why would this be any different?

But then, as now, I have an ever relevant policy for you to look at. And we'll throw in a couple of other guidelines, This and This, to boot, and hopefully you will take them in.

I'm off to things which are more stimulating than banging my head against a brick wall. Have a nice day. --Russavia ^{Dialogue Stalk me} 16:49, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted the removal of a dispute tag from the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Chinese) page, but did not provide any specifics as to what is still disputed. If no one knows what the dispute is about, we can't discuss it or ever hope to conclude. If you are disputing the article, please provide specifics on the discussion page. Readin (talk) 10:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The November 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. My apologies for the late delivery, and thanks go to both Wildroot and Erik for writing the newsletter. Remember that anyone can edit the newsletter, so feel free to help out! Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 08:29, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]