User talk:Backendgaming

RE Martin Shkreli categories

Why would you add categories based on future speculation to any article? Quis separabit? 19:38, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The categories that I added were corroborated by the article, not based on future speculation out of the ether. Backendgaming (talk) 09:58, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017

Information icon Please do not add or change content, as you did at Anime, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:59, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to add the sources now. I need some time. Thanks. Backendgaming (talk) 22:04, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Anime in hip hop. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been reverted.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continual disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. It's clearly not an WP:A1 speedy. It's also not an WP:A7 speedy. Both of these have been previously rejected. Stop adding them. I'm leaving the WP:G5 for an admin to evaluate, but I doubt that it will be successful since the now-blocked article creator was not the only editor to have contributes to this article. I suggest that you take this to AFD. Meters (talk) 04:22, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Check the [history] again. I already added my sources. Backendgaming (talk) 04:41, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This has nothing to do with the previous warning about your edits to Anime. I warned you for your disruptive repeated attempts to apply non-justified speedies to Anime in hip hop‎ Meters (talk) 04:45, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, the user is clearly a WP:SOCKPUPPET, user:I'm on day 4 ‎ has been blocked and the Anime in hip hop barely has any credible sourcing in addition to its lack of notability with regards to content. WP:G5 is clearly a constructive and legitimate reason to delete the Anime in hip hop article. Backendgaming (talk) 04:49, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It is very clearly not an A1 or an A7. Both of those have been rejected more than once. It debatable whether G5 is valid since other users have edited the article. The other main contributor may have been a sock, but we don't know that since he was never taken to AFD. You need to read the actual speedy description before you apply them, and stop attempting to reapply clearly non-valid requests. Meters (talk) 04:53, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Take it to AFD. I don't think this is a good article either, but repeatedly trying to speedy it as A1 is hopeless. Repeatedly attempting to speedy it as A7 is only slightly better. It only has to make a credible claim of significance (even if the claim is unsupported or even if not actually notable) to pass A7. G5 only applies if there have been no substantial edits by any editors other than the sock. Meters (talk) 05:02, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying text from other articles

You must always attribute it for copyright purposes. Normally the best way is in the edit summary, but in this case please post to the talk page listing the articles you copied from. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 12:06, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Got it.Backendgaming (talk) 23:02, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Information icon Hello, I'm 121.214.41.90. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Chinese people in Myanmar have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. If you do not stop, I will have no choice but to report you to the Wikipedia administrators for disruptive editing and breaking a fundamental Wikipedia rule. You have done this multiple times but this is officially your first warning. (121.214.41.90 (talk) 06:20, 20 September 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I checked the source. What page does it mention the Overseas Chinese in India and Sri Lanka, the Lahu and the Jingpo having anything to do with the Burmese Chinese? I couldn't find anything that ties to the article. How is it disruptive when the article doesn't even mention Lahu and the Jingpo minorities. The overwhelming majority of Burmese Chinese are Han as the book implies. Backendgaming (talk) 05:44, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Lahu and Jingpo? They aren't even listed there, so why are bringing it up? Page 207 and page 210 are two examples. (121.214.31.115 (talk) 13:54, 21 September 2017 (UTC))[reply]
Check the last few revision histories that you undid [1] and [2]. You clearly added Dai, Jingpo and Lahu, none of these minorities which have anything to do to with the subject of the article since the Burmese Chinese are mostly of Han Chinese descent as stated by the article here. Furthermore, this article talks about the business activities of Chinese people in MYANMAR/BURMA. The Routledge Chinese Diaspora source and the pages 207 and 210 you keep citing talks about the business and economic activities of Chinese people in Sri Lanka and India, to which the source makes no connection in relation the business activities of the Chinese in BURMA. This source is more appropriate for the articles and infoboxes Chinese people in Sri Lanka and Chinese people in India, not the current infobox to which you recently added your sources to. Backendgaming (talk) 20:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is right but if you look at my most recent revisions they aren't listed there. There is no point harking back to the past when it's got nothing to do with the present. No those pages do discuss it but I see your point. Okay then, I will remove it from the Burmese page but retain it on the Sri Lankan and Indian pages. (137.147.33.208 (talk) 23:50, 21 September 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Chinese inventions, self-published sources & due diligence

We have two lists of self-publishing companies. One is an article, List of self-publishing companies, the other in project space. Wikipedia:List of companies engaged in the self-publishing business. Lulu is one of the biggest. Createspace, authorhouse, Xlibris, the list is huge.

You also, where it isn't clearly an academic sources, should check the author. Lasater for instance, besides being self-published, writes about Alantis.

Due diligence means that you shouldn't stop when you find a source you like. I'm thinking here of balance scales, which are well known to any Egyptologist, in particular the weighing of the heart by Maat and are illustrated in Egyptian tombs. A quick search on balance scales would have told you that. Doug Weller talk 13:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you must know that from the article. But they aren't a Chinese invention, and even if the earliest excavated are from China, they don't belong in the list. Doug Weller talk 13:16, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Han Chinese, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bellow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:40, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm 1997kB. I noticed that you made a change to an article, East Asian people, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – 1997kB 05:26, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There were no sources in the article before I made my changes. I didn't vandalize it. Backendgaming (talk) 05:28, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Backendgaming: Hey, Thanks for replying, but you understood it wrong that I removed your edit calling them vandalism. These edits may be constructive but if you provide a source it will be good. – 1997kB 05:36, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just added some sources now. Backendgaming (talk) 05:46, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

East Asia (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Chinese civilization
Japanese people (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Korean

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Use of a white nationalist published book at Bamboo network

You've used at least one book published by Washington Summit Publishers. Are you aware of their nature? You might also want to read this. Doug Weller talk 12:35, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've read and have a PDF version of the book and it certainly contains an enormous amount of reliable sociological data that is consistent and congruent with the economic success of the Overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia with regards to the Bamboo network article. I have not seen any element of white nationalism as the book presents rational arguments based on logical data presented in an easily readable form that's hard to refute, though I see that the data extrapolated from the samples were rather sloppy without considering social and political implementations. The author Richard Lynn and the publisher Washington Summit Publishers seems controversial but it seems to act as a litmus test to the open-mindedness of advocates of political correctness as well as liberals who want to provocatively shut down any attempt to discredit any sort of compelling evidence that backs up a cogent argument by using terms such as white nationalism against observation-based logic that runs completely counter to the egalitarian narratives of liberal orthodoxy of the politically correct. Backendgaming (talk) 03:46, 19 October 2017 (UTC)o[reply]
It looks as though most editors at the WP:RSN discussion think otherwise and that we can’t use Lynn. Doug Weller talk 06:31, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If the administrators mandate that Lynn can't be used as a source, I'll take it off. 06:56, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Phone numbers in References.

I noticed that in both Israel and Education in Israel, you added references to the pew forums that included phone and fax contacts to Pew's DC offices (for example https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Israel&diff=prev&oldid=791074402 ) I don't believe that phone numbers are appropriate inside references. I intend to remove them and standardize the reference so it actually includes that the document is at the pew forum. Naraht (talk) 02:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Go ahead. I didn't add the numbers though. Some other editor who fixed my initial citation did. Backendgaming (talk) 06:17, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Trump fragrances for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Trump fragrances is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trump fragrances until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — JFG talk 16:40, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Hi. I see in a recent addition to List of Chinese inventions you included material copied from other Wikipedia articles. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. I've added the attribution for Stinky tofu as well as a couple other articles earlier in the month. Please make sure that you follow this legal requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:22, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. I'll be careful with the wording and copying. Backendgaming (talk) 11:12, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see you are still not adding the required attribution, as required under the terms of the CC-by-SA license. Please have a look at this edit summary as an example of how it is done. Please leave a message on my talk page if you still don't understand what to do or why we have to do it. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:31, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

December 2017

Information icon Hello, I'm 121.214.133.192. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Chinese people in Myanmar have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Please read the source.(121.214.133.192 (talk) 01:09, 3 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Stop reverting my edits and cease adding Burmese Indians to the Trade and industry section of the article. It contains no date and absolutely zero credible evidence that shows that Burmese Indians are the dominant group in the Burmese economy. I have already added a overwhelming number of established sources that signify that Chinese are the dominant group in the Burmese economy. Many Burmese Indians left Burma in the mid 20th century. Much of the economy is dominated by Chinese entrepreneurs. See the established Amy Chua source in the [3] for proof. Backendgaming (talk) 16:14, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Chinese people in Myanmar. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Did you read the source I provided? No you didn't. Read the entire thing because you should not be removing that information when the source clearly confirms that the Burmese Indians have significant control over the economy. Please do not remove because it's in the source. (101.160.140.114 (talk) 22:06, 3 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Secondly your decision to provide a source in this discussion is not helpful at all because the link you are providing me does not even work. How am I supposed to read it if I there is no link to the actual book? You need to provide quotes since your link does not work. Do you know how Wikipedia works? That is what you're supposed to do if any user disputes any information and the source is not available for direct consumption you need to provide quotes. (101.160.140.114 (talk) 22:16, 3 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]
No one is saying Chinese don't dominate it today, yes the Indians dominated it in the past before they left in huge numbers and vacated it for the Chinese, however they still hold a notable influence on part of it and that's why it was included. (101.160.140.114 (talk) 22:20, 3 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]
  • Ignore the messages above because I have a compromise posted below if you are interested.
I will suggest this as a compromise, since Indians don't dominate the economy completely like they did in the past, we can remove that from the Chinese people in Myanmar page but we also have to remove Economy of Singapore from the Economy of East Asia page. So I'll explain what it means, so the removal of "Burmese Indians" from the Chinese people in Myanmar page is because the page is about Burmese Chinese. The removal of "Economy of Singapore" from the Economy of East Asia is because it is a Southeast Asian country. It should also be removed because it was a group effort on the part of the Chinese, Malay and Indian Singaporeans who worked as part of the Pioneer Generation under the leadership of Lee Kuan Yew. That's a compromise I'm willing to put forward. I have worked with many users in the past and we always came to successful compromises when we had disputes. It's your call, if you don't want to accept it we can go to "Dispute Resolution" to solve this or if you have any suggestions we can look at that as well. (101.160.140.114 (talk) 00:20, 4 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I can see you have problems with me to the point that you will go out of your way to revert all my edits. Are you even aware of what edits you reverted on Afro-Asians? They're not disruptive. Stop holding a grudge and edit Wikipedia with care. You reverted my edits and reverted it back to an incorrect version which labelled "Afghanistan" as a state of India. How is that a fact? It's an error made by another user. Look at what you revert without blindly reverting everything because you dislike me. You can't edit Wikipedia properly when you're angry and I can see that you're angry. How ridiculous. (121.220.60.18 (talk) 23:35, 6 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]

According to page 35 of your source from the Indian government, it states clearly that the Chinese have far greater economic clout in the Burmese economy than the Indians in the yellow box I inscribed [4]. In addition, I have an excerpt found [5] from the book World on Fire by Amy Chua stating that hundreds of thousands of Burmese Indians fled in the sixties due to ethnic violence and that it explicitly [6] that Chinese are by far the ethnic group that is economically dominant. In addition, I suggest you add your source to Burmese Indians#Economic role to illustrate their role in the Burmese economy. The article clearly talks about the Chinese in Burma and emphasis should centralize on the economic role of the Chinese in the Burmese economy rather than the Indians. Backendgaming (talk) 01:46, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Backendgaming. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Economy of East Asia discussion

@Backendgaming: Let's just stick to the disputed page which is Economy of East Asia without starting a war because that's not exactly helpful. So why do you think Singapore should be included on the page? I don't think ethnicity is an appropriate reason for its inclusion because this is about the economy which has nothing to do with one's ethnicity. Is there a specific reason why it should be included? The only reason I can think of is because Singapore developed in a similar way to other East Asian economies, namely Taiwan, Hong Kong and South Korea. If that is the reason we should then add Four Asian Tigers to the "See also" section. I'm willing to start a discussion here without any anger, so let's get a consensus so we can solve it. We can compare and contrast our thoughts so we can achieve a consensus that pleases both parties. What do you think? (121.220.60.18 (talk) 00:02, 7 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]

@DOR (HK): I pinged you because I think we can all agree on the fact that we want a consensus on the issue. What are your reasons on including "Economy of Singapore" to the "see also" section of Economy of East Asia? I have stated a possible reason for its inclusion and a reason why it should not be included above, but we need to compare and contrast our reasons so we can achieve a consensus that is accepted by all parties. (121.220.60.18 (talk) 00:06, 7 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]
I have copied this discussion to the "Economy of East Asia" page because I realised that's where it really should be solved so add your reasons to that article's talk page. (121.220.60.18 (talk) 00:09, 7 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]
The entire Economy of East Asia article is a complete mess and needs to be re-written. I'll take off Economy of Singapore as you requested since it is geographically in Southeast Asia. Backendgaming (talk) 01:43, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Afro-Asians

@Backendgaming: I noticed you reverted this edit on Afro-Asians. May I ask why? I don't think it's inclusion is very good because it perpetuates a US-centric notion of the term. What I mean by that is that it perpetuates the idea that "Asian" only refers to East Asians and Southeast Asians. That's incorrect because in Asia (e.g Singapore, India, Malaysia, Nepal, South Korea etc.) the term, "Asian" is not only used to describe East Asians and Southeast Asians but also South Asians that do not have visible East or Southeast Asian features. The term "Asian" in the UK is also very different to the way it is used in the US as "Asian" in the UK refers to people who look stereotypically Indian, especially North Indian as a result the terms "Afro-Asian" or "Blasian" denotes those of mixed Black and South Asian descent only. Since this article is an international article, I think we should remove "(including people from South and Western Asia)" because it ignores the way the term is used in other parts of the world outside of North America and certain other Western countries. By including that term, it perpetuates an idea that only East Asians are the "real" Asians when in reality that is not true especially here in the Asia-Pacific region. So I believe that part should be removed, after all "Asian" in the dictionary refers to anybody from the continent of Asia and not just those of East Asian descent. (121.220.60.18 (talk) 03:54, 7 December 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Economy of East Asia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yamato (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:05, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the material you included in the above article appears to have been copied from the copyright web page http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1340&context=fss_papers. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:34, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright content from this source has also now been removed from the articles Chinese Filipino and Thai Chinese. Everything you add to Wikipedia needs to be written on your own words please. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:30, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Economy of East Asia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Asian Tigers (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:15, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Qin's campaign against the Yue tribes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Nanhai (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Academic pressure in Asian cultures has been nominated for discussion

Category:Academic pressure in Asian cultures, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:52, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

March 2018

Copyright problem icon Your addition to Tiger parenting has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND (Attribution, Non-Commercial, No Derivative Works) is not a compatible license. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:54, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem icon Additional copyvio was found from other sources. Please see the page history for a full list of urls that I found. This is your final warning. Further copyright violations will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:34, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Stop icon

Your recent editing history at Ethnic group shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Your edit made a major change in meaning but your edit summary suggested you were only fixing sources. You also managed to make the first and second sentences of the lead contradict each other. Doug Weller talk 12:17, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Misrepresentation of sources at Ethnic group and use of a source that says "The above text is excerpted from the Wikipedia article "Ethnic group" as well as using sources that specifically say

Of the five sources you used for "share a common genetic ancestral background or descent." one was used twice, others the relevant pages were missing, but one I could read and found it despite the missing title.[7] It very clearly does not back your statement, in fact it contradicts it. Your Science Daily source[8] clearly says it is copied from our article. That's two major problems between 4 sources, and of course I couldn't check the other two. Doug Weller talk 12:47, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted, as you did at Bamboo network. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:50, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While performing today's checks of your edits, I discovered

For these reasons, I have blocked your account, because in spite of repeated warnings including a final warning issued only two days ago, you continued to add copyright material to this wiki in violation of our copyright policy and copyright law. You cannot resume editing until you provide a clear statement that demonstrates that you have read and understand our copyright policy and intend to follow it in the future. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:30, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa:, I've just created a new talk section about what "Backendgaming" edited in the part Sinification and displacement of the article Baiyue [9]. But I've just realized that you've blocked this member.
Basically, I have checked all sources cited in the section Sinification and displacement, which was exclusively expanded by the member "Backendgaming" in the year of 2017 and the early 2018. I have found that sources cited for a couple of phrases are repeated. It looks as if there are a lot of sources cited for one single phrase, but two of these multiple sources cited for one single phrase are exactly the same. There are sources which do not specify page cited, such as The Penguin History of Modern Vietnam: A History, The Routledge Handbook of Archaeology and Globalization. Most of sources cited by Backendgaming are accessible via Google Books, but this member did not put link to the specific pages in Googlebooks.
...So on...and...so on...Please read further here [10]
And therefore, I'm going to edit and clean up this part Sinification and displacement, plus adding direct Googlebooks links to the sources cited.
I put this message here because this member probably won't see the new section I've added in Talk:Baiyue [11]. Putting this message here is to let this member know that I'm going to edit the part Sinification and displacement, in case that this member would revisit his/her own account. Gustmeister (talk) 16:59, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Businesspeople in advertising by nationality has been nominated for discussion

Category:Businesspeople in advertising by nationality, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 21:47, 8 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Czechoslovak inventions

A tag has been placed on Category:Czechoslovak inventions requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:23, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jordanian internet celebrities has been nominated for merging

Category:Jordanian internet celebrities has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:33, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Jewish Hungarian families has been nominated for renaming

Category:Jewish Hungarian families has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Rathfelder (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Medieval Egyptian rabbis

A tag has been placed on Category:Medieval Egyptian rabbis indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 03:35, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Stereotypes of East Asians has been nominated for renaming

Category:Stereotypes of East Asians has been nominated for renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Canadian social commentators has been nominated for deletion

Category:Canadian social commentators has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. - car chasm (talk) 15:59, 26 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Financial commentators by nationality has been nominated for merging

Category:Financial commentators by nationality has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 21:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]