User talk:JArthur1984: Difference between revisions

:Thank you, and the same for you. I am the kind of person who is happy for all holiday greetings and wishes from all kinds of traditions, Merry Christmas. [[User:JArthur1984|JArthur1984]] ([[User talk:JArthur1984#top|talk]]) 17:10, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

:Thank you, and the same for you. I am the kind of person who is happy for all holiday greetings and wishes from all kinds of traditions, Merry Christmas. [[User:JArthur1984|JArthur1984]] ([[User talk:JArthur1984#top|talk]]) 17:10, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

== Qing vs. ROC, PRC,… ==

I noticed you kept reverting my edits when I only link the word “China” to [[Qing Dynasty]] or [[Republic of China (1912-1949)]] in the articles of Chinese leaders and politicians who were born before 1912 when ROC was established and 1949 when PRC was established. Can you explain and elaborate more on this? The current [[People’s Republic of China]] is not the same as [[Qing dynasty]] or Republic of China (1912-1949). Per actual history, China was not established until 1912 and it was referred to as the name of the respective dynasty back then. Also, Qing dynasty, ROC, and PRC have different forms of government.

Please consider other examples of timeline of different governments in [[Korean peninsula]] and [[Vietnam]], for examples:

* [[Korean peninsula]]: Joseon from 1392-1910, Korea under Japanese rule from 1910-1945, North/South Korea onward.

* [[Vietnam]]: [[French Indochina]] from the late 19th-century to 1945, North/South Vietnam from 1945-1975, and [[Vietnam]] onward from 1976.

[[User:RegularboyA|RegularboyA]] ([[User talk:RegularboyA|talk]]) 18:52, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Hello JArthur1984! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Hipal (talk) 19:36, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, Mx. Granger! I have seen your contributions in these areas as well and likewise appreciate them. JArthur1984 (talk) 14:44, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure, thank you for raising the issue. JArthur1984 (talk) 13:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

		The Chinese Barnstar
		I’m very lucky that I can contribute and learn while surrounded by editors like you. Thank you so much for your work on China-related topics, it’s a real inspiration for me.

Thank you for your kind words. I likewise appreciate and learn from your efforts. It has been a pleasure to see the quality of China-related topics improve over the last few years.

Thank you. I appreciate your efforts to improve the page as well! JArthur1984 (talk) 13:52, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve been reading up to flesh out Logic in China—and of course have very little just yet to show for it beyond my notes—but just wanted to say your constant iteration across many important articles helps me stop procrastinating on actually writing new content. Remsense ‥ 论 02:29, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that’s very kind.

And a good plan, to flesh out the Logic article.

I have become a believer in the philosophy: that I add a sentence here, three sentences there, maybe notice something to fix in adjacent paragraph, move on, return in the future. I also find that moving up and down the timeline of history, and moving horizontally across topics, helps keep me moving and enjoying the writing and editing. JArthur1984 (talk) 03:12, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Park Geun-hye#Presidential Numbering and User talk:Surtsicna#Numbers thing on SK presidents; would you be willing to host a discussion on this? I’m not interested in this topic at all, but have been seeing edit conflicts on this over the span of months and it’s still not resolved grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 03:21, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m familiar with the South Korean contexts, but not expert. So my knowledge is not perfect, but I don’t see these ordinals used to refer to South Korea presidents nor more broadly in the Asian contexts. Overall, we are also seeing some recent unexplained attempts to add ordinals to the articles for Chinese leaders, which is also not customary. JArthur1984 (talk) 15:18, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think don’t need to be expert to host discussion. Someone just needs to start an RFA. I’m not interested in the topic, but I am seeing people who have opinions on it edit and revert each other over and over for months. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 15:21, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve been noticing you made numerous great contributions using academic sources, so there’s a just-released book that might interest you. The Party’s Interests Come First by Joseph Torigian. It’s a biography of Xi Jinping’s father Xi Zhongxun. It seems like a well written book; might be a good source regarding the Mao era and the reform and opening up period. Keep up the good edits! The Account 2 (talk) 17:17, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you too!

The book is in my list because of the subject matter, although I’m not familiar with Torigian. JArthur1984 (talk) 22:47, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve been checking it up, and it seems pretty well written. Pretty long and very detailed. Lots of interesting content that can be incorporated to PRC history articles. The Account 2 (talk) 20:34, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, I am moving it up on my list now. JArthur1984 (talk) 00:31, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just wanted to say that I’m one of the academics you cite in your edits – I won’t say who precisely I am, but I am so grateful and honored that you choose to incorporate my work into your edits. Thank you! 218.250.120.230 (talk) 06:51, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words! JArthur1984 (talk) 01:47, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JArthur1984. Thank you for your work on White Terror (China). Another editor, SunDawn, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thank you for taking the time to create the article! Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ Contact me! 11:50, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

… for your edits to Louis Zhang Jiashu earlier this year. Seems like Mariani got a new book in 2025? It is commendable of you to keep the article up-to-date, especially for such a niche topic of Catholicism in China. I am 99.999% retired from Wikipedia at this point and it makes me happy to see efforts in this field is not dead. Thank you again. Cheers, —The Lonely Pather (talk) 22:09, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind compliment.

Yes, the Mariani book is an excellent read. I recommend it! I was aware of his earlier text but haven’t read it. JArthur1984 (talk) 23:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve been reading a book called China and Russia. You might be interested, it contains a lot of comprehensive info about how relations between the two nations developed. The Account 2 (talk) 09:52, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That does look like a good text. JArthur1984 (talk) 04:19, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I am constantly being told that my edits are unsourced. Except I cited top leading experts and attributed them. So thanks for minimally taking a look. It’s difficult to argue that my sources are supported when it seems others just aren’t interested in checking or confirming. I do try to edit in good faith but it seems you are the rare neutral editor willing to also check sources and confirm that I wasn’t trying to add disinfo but just what legal expertise says about the topic. So thank you for that. JaredMcKenzie (talk) 00:19, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In our China topics, additions are frequently subject to challenge. I have a concrete suggestion to make verifiability clear, it’s a practice I adopted for myself after having additions challenged unnecessarily during my early Wiki experience. Include a citation after every single sentence (not just the end of a paragraph or after a few of the sentences the citation supports). This is not required under the policies, but it increases clarity for editors who want to review the additions. It is also helpful in ensuring verifiable work in the future, for example if another editor edits a sentence sourced to a different text in the middle of a paragraph. JArthur1984 (talk) 15:23, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks bro but those allegations of Original research isn’t true. As actually I did provide citations carefully. At first, I put this citation – https://theconversation.com/explainer-the-complex-question-of-taiwanese-independence-188584 – that had a lot of quality info. Later this (opening paragraph plus chapter on lack of statehood)- https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e1362 This wiki article was a shameful imbalance as it has a chapter that only gives legal arguments for Taiwanese independence. But none of their cites even state or prove Taiwan is legally independent so it’s WP: SYNTH and I removed two.[1] [2] Simultaneously, I noticed there was zero arguments being given for why it isn’t legally independent as if none exists. That’s just wrong and embarrassing for wiki standards. So I added some.[3][4] I wrote something along the lines that ROC Constitution claim Taiwan as ‘being part of a greater China’ and avoids declaring complete separation, which shows Taiwan is not formally independent “from mainland China” under its own foundational law. As them the facts and as Oxford website (opening paragraph) and Ben Saul both showed, without a unequivocable declaration of separate legal status – it cannot be neither de Jure independent or legally a state (outside of China) under international law. I believe I did everything by the book on content policies and was only adding on what was blatantly missing. But was frustrated how biased editors would BS that my legal experts were incompetent or that they didn’t say this, but such arguing came across as “bludgeoning” and now probably looks like I be highly likely to be topic blocked very soon. But it bodes poorly on Wikipedia as you can change articles but you can’t change neither the Constitution[5] or actual reality. It’s just going to be confusing to some readers when you tell them that Taiwan is independent yet USA won’t support Taiwanese independence.[6] 😅 Anyways, thanks again and wish you luck on your editing. But I just think I lost my appetite to edit further. JaredMcKenzie (talk) 05:45, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don’t know if you celebrate but wanted to wish Merry Christmas to you. The Account 2 (talk) 11:37, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and the same for you. I am the kind of person who is happy for all holiday greetings and wishes from all kinds of traditions, Merry Christmas. JArthur1984 (talk) 17:10, 24 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you kept reverting my edits when I only link the word “China” to Qing Dynasty or Republic of China (1912-1949) in the articles of Chinese leaders and politicians who were born before 1912 when ROC was established and 1949 when PRC was established. Can you explain and elaborate more on this? The current People’s Republic of China is not the same as Qing dynasty or Republic of China (1912-1949). Per actual history, China was not established until 1912 and it was referred to as the name of the respective dynasty back then. Also, Qing dynasty, ROC, and PRC have different forms of government.

Please consider other examples of timeline of different governments in Korean peninsula and Vietnam, for examples:

• Korean peninsula: Joseon from 1392-1910, Korea under Japanese rule from 1910-1945, North/South Korea onward.
• Vietnam: French Indochina from the late 19th-century to 1945, North/South Vietnam from 1945-1975, and Vietnam onward from 1976.

RegularboyA (talk) 18:52, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]