User talk:Kai3952/Archive 2

Do not tag me in an edit summary ever again

I don't like the numerous notifications a d plus those are wrong edit summaries. Artix Kreiger (talk) 19:12, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Re:File:Taipei Bus 045-U5 out of service 20131203.jpg

這張照片是位於在新北市板橋區新府路上拍的。--捷利 (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Monument for the Yoshino Immigrant Village in Ji'an.jpg

File:Monument for the Yoshino Immigrant Village in Ji'an.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: There is no freedom of panorama exception for anything other than buildings in Taiwan. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Ww2censor (talk) 22:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Monument for the Yoshino Immigrant Village in Ji'an.jpg

File:Monument for the Yoshino Immigrant Village in Ji'an.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Túrelio (talk) 18:20, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Re: Please STOP TRACKING my edits

You made an outrageous misunderstanding. I didn't track anyone's edits, What I really track are the categories about Taiwan. What I really care are the improvement and the adding of translations of the categories, it's not a matter of who the former editors are (that is, whether those are your edits or not, I'll do the same thing). Stop removing my translations to the page, which is a nonsense reversion because you are the one who tracks all my edits, no matter what I've added.--Howard61313 (talk) 23 April 2018 (Mon) 12:13 (UTC)

I know that you mean no harm on me, and that you didn't distort me deliberately. I appreciate that. But you still misunderstood me unintentionally. I hope my explanation will solve this.--Howard61313 (talk) 23 April 2018 (Mon) 13:16 (UTC)

I've been away from Wiki for some days in order to deal with something in my daily life. I'll make a full reply as soon as I can.--Howard61313 (talk) 11 May 2018 (Fri) 13:22 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:View of the south end of Zhiben Station taken from train.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:View of the south end of Zhiben Station taken from train.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:View of the south end of Zhiben Station taken from train.jpg]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Elisfkc (talk) 19:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Category:Categories_of_Taiwan_by_region

Category:Categories_of_Taiwan_by_region has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Auntof6 (talk) 05:04, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Please be careful of your indiscriminate and irrelevant edits

It is fine of you to claim the right usage about automobiles and buses in your edit summary, but what you have edited seems to be irrelevant since you removed ALL the former editions done by me INDISCRIMINATELY, like this one, you didn't change "automobiles" into "vehicles", what you have reverted has nothing to do with your edit summary AT ALL. What you should do is simply change the category for automobiles into vehicles, like what I did on this one. Please correct all the former edits likewise, instead of the wrong way you did.--Howard61313 (talk) 26 May 2018 (Sat) 02:13 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 14:11, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

My response goes as follows:

1. It is DISPENSABLE for a proper noun to add "的", and the adding of "的" sometimes makes itself MORE COLLOQUIAL than those without "的". For example, "交通部政務次長" and "交通部的政務次長", of course the latter is more colloquial, while the former is a proper noun. The reason why I took w:zh:Category:台灣交通 for example before is that the category is named in a LITERARY way as well, instead of a colloquial way.
2. Both "交通工具" and "運輸工具" are used by the Taiwanese MOTC (交通部), I agree that the changing of this kind of term can be hold up for a while.
3. I simply follow the usage on both en.wikipedia and zh.wikipedia. The corresponding category in English for w:zh:Category:台灣交通 is called w:en:Category:Transportation in Taiwan. It is not my call, it is an established practice (既有慣例).
4. There are no problems of the categories you mention here. Nobody says that categories can't be subdivided into small ones if only one kind of such category is contained. It's even fine for a category page to contain files only. I'm the one who should tell you to "stop unreasonable edits".
5. It's fine with me, but one suggestion here: it would be better for those round brackets in such category to be used in fullwidth forms (全形括號). For example, ( 注意：本類別「包括」地鐵站 ) may be replaced with （注意：本類別「包括」地鐵站）, like what I did on this one. The reason why to do this can be seen in the "Manual of Style" on zh.wikipedia (w:zh:Wikipedia:格式手册).
6. I'm the one who should tell you to "try to use your brain and to think what I said": MRT stations and THSR station are not within the NORMAL SCOPE of "火車站", just like buses, which are not within the normal scope "automobiles". Of course there are difference between "鐵路車站" and "火車站" when it comes to the range of usage. Since you mentioned the matter of "colloquialism", it is funny because you don't know that "火車站" is usually used in a colloquial way as well. In Taiwan, the term "火車站" is typically used for the TRA stations only. Your understanding of Chinese language may be insufficient to fully express, like the native speaker in Taiwan to understand in themselves.
7. It seems that your understanding of English may be insufficient to fully express as well. I didn't say that "train station" category does not include the MRT station, what I said is "火車站", which is only one of many ways to translate the term "train station".
8. The reason is simple and clear. Taking Collins English Dictionary for example, which defines the term as "the public organizations whose job is to take quick action to deal with emergencies when they occur, especially the fire brigade, the police, and the ambulance service.". Another version defines it as "a department within a bigger organization that deals with emergencies" Don't tell me that you don't understand the meaning of "orginizations" and "departments".

After all, it is you who cause me many problems because you keep removing my edits with FALSE reasons SINCE APRIL, and you even distorted my edits in your edit summary as I mentioned before ([1]). You claim that I insisted on not fixing the edits (concerning "buses" with "automobiles"), but the fact is that I've already stopped insisting on this and even started to fix it, just like another editing history I've mentioned before ([2]). Another problem you've caused is that you indiscriminately reverted all the edit I added, using the distorted irrelevant reason above. This is another good example showing that your understanding of English may be insufficient to fully express because you don't even understand what I've edited and removed them all, just like you did in [1]? This is Nonsense.

By the way, if there's so many problems, I have a suggestion that both of us stop editing on such categories, until further consensus is made on the way to improve them.--Howard61313 (talk) 27 May 2018 (Sun) 10:10 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 21:51, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

1. It is ironic that you kept telling me "not to confuse" in your reply, but what you put here shows that you're CONFUSING two irrelevant cases in one, what a double standard. The case concerning "的" has nothing to do with anyone's Chinese ability, because proper nouns without "的" are common-used practices in the grammar of Chinese language already. The cases doesn't show the problem exists with me, but your logic instead. You consider someone to be wrong on case A, which doesn't mean that he/her is wrong on case B, too.
2. It doesn't matter whether you were discuss MOTC/交通部 or not. The case is only an intention trying to explain that both "交通工具" and "運輸工具" are common used under this circumstance, so I'm not insisting on the option of "交通工具" anymore. You may choose between them as you like.
3. Stop pettifogging, of course it is established practice (既有慣例). Wikipedia is not the only examples showing that the term "XX交通" may fits those category named "Category:Transportation in XX" better than "運輸" when XX means a specific country or region, such as the solution to the Taiwanese Junior Civil Service Examination (「公務人員普通考試」解答), in which the term "交通" and "運輸" are defined as follows:
   **交通: "A system in which people, vehicles and roads interact" (人、車、路三者間互動運作之系統) [3], or "the relation between people, vehicles and roads"(人、車、路彼此間之關連), which contains "the state of movement of vehicles and pedestrians within a region or on a route, and the facilities related to such movement" (包含車輛或行人在一個地區或路線的運動狀態，及與此種運動有關的設施) [4]
   **運輸: An economic activity to convey people or goods from place A to place B in order to overcome space barriers (將人及貨物從甲地運至乙地，以克服空間阻隔的一種經濟活動) [5]
   It is obvious that, although "交通" is not the one to be translated as "transportation", it actually fits those categories named "Transportation in XX" better than "運輸" when talking about a specific country/region's transportation in Chinese, because it has a broader definition here. It is impossible for "Category:Transportation in XX" to contain "economic activity" only, the "system, the state of movement and the facilities" must be contained as well.
   After all, that's why I took "Category:台灣交通" and "Category:Transportation in Taiwan" for example here, they can work as counterparts for each other. It doesn't matter whether they're on Wikipedia, Commons or any other Wikimedia sister projects. "Don't confuse Wikimedia.Commons with Chinese Wikipedia"? It is not a matter of confusing, and it's not strange that Pages on Commons can be named after their counterpart on Wikipedia, they're Wiki sister projects for God's sake.
4. So what? Why should I know this? Does it means that categories can't be dealt with like this?
5. You misunderstood. Wikimedia.Commons doesn't have to be Chinese Wikipedia, and w:zh:Wikipedia:格式手册 is only one of many websites on the Internet to introduce proper usage on fullwidth forms. And there's no need for your useless suggestion, I've already been correcting every improper punctuation marks I see there, for many years.
6. Your so-called "ample" proof says "colloquialism" itself: "鐵路車站或簡稱鐵路站，口語慣稱火車站、車頭", right there on w:zh:鐵路車站. Besides, "火車" and "捷運" are indeed listed separately under their normal usage, such as the Holodict of the Ministry of Education (教育部臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典). It looks more like your personal opinion and analysis that "火車站" contains MRT stations.
7. The answer (about the usage of "火車站") is already shown in item 6 above.
8. Who misunderstood? Emergency services equipment is not an organization, because it is "the equipment owned by the organization". What you said didn't change the definition of emergency services at all.

And for those final questions, of course I've already fixed such category here (on 26 May), and I did it in order to show you the "proper way" to fix it (instead of the way how you've messed up the page, indiscriminately reverting anything that have nothing to do with the usage on buses and automobiles). Besides, if fixing at least one page (instead of not fixing any pages) can be described as "insisted on not fixing", then you can be described as "insisting on indiscriminate reverting", it was me who fixed such mistake you've made. What you must know is: don't blindly blame others for being unreasonable while being unreasonable yourself, and I hope you stop. The thing about Wikimedia.Commons and Chinese Wikipedia have been explained clearly above, use your "clever" brain to understand. Finally, I'm glad to see that you claim the discussion containing criticism like "your understanding of English may be insufficient to fully express" as a discussion without good faith, because this kind of criticism is actually quoted from what you've said weeks ago. Well done, mate, now your own words proves that you've started a discussion in a way without good faith.--Howard61313 (talk) 30 May 2018 (Wed) 18:09 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 21:11, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

1. That is not my personal opinion, that's me describing what have happened in the real world. There's no need for discussion there, because the categories named such way are already existing, and working well there.
2.  Done
3. No, I mean that both "交通" and "交通運輸" are better than the option in which "運輸" is used alone. Maybe "交通運輸" can be a better option to save time for deciding which to choose.
4. Maybe. What you have said about this does not persuade.
5. It is not important to you, and I didn't ask you to fix them in the first place, it was only a suggestion.
6. What are you talking about? I always agree that metro stations are railway stations. What I don't agree is that railway stations/train stations can be collectively translated into Chinese as "火車站", which is a colloquial word (its scope differs when being used by different people). Even the term "鐵路車站" is better then that, at least it contains THSR stations, sometimes MRT stations as well. Why do you choose an unclear option instead of a clear one?
7.  Done
8. Thank you, it proves what I've said: emergency services are organizations indeed.

Unlike you, I'm not a person who likes to report others. And you're blind indeed, the way I edit is not only the way of zh.wikipedia, and you blindly, unreasonably object to it upon seeing anything about zh.wikipedia is shown. By the way, it's funny seeing you blaming others on the ability to communicate in English. It's proved that your own ability to understand English is full of flaws, misinterpreting what I've said on this affair outrageously, wrongly translating "Why on earth should I know it?" into a ridiculous translation like "我為什麼要讓你知道", then distorting it as "guilty conscience" (心虛) on the false basis above. What's worse, it may not be the only flaw you've made. If the thing I've said can be distorted like this, how can I ever trust you? What's the use explaining to you if you don't even have the ability understand English or Chinese properly? Of course I would like to be confident in those people you've mentioned, too. I believe that they didn't messed up their own native language and other languages simultaneously like you! --Howard61313 (talk) 31 May 2018 (Thu) 04:08 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 05:13, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm grateful to your apology, which means that you still show some sense here. There is one question left: there are eight items, which one needs annotations? --Howard61313 (talk) 4 June 2018 (Mon) 01:48 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 02:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)