Misplaced Pages

User talk:Swatjester: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 15:12, 18 April 2008 editJoshuaZ (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers31,659 edits Chiropratric: new section← Previous edit Latest revision as of 17:43, 15 January 2025 edit undoSwatjester (talk | contribs)Administrators27,642 edits PLAAF involvement in Vietnam 
Line 1: Line 1:
Φ] Φ]

{{Contentious topics/aware|gg|blp|horn|gc|a-i}}

{{User:MiszaBot/config {{User:MiszaBot/config
|maxarchivesize = 100K |maxarchivesize = 100K
|counter = 15 |counter = 28
|algo = old(3d) |algo = old(3d)
|archive = User talk:Swatjester/archive%(counter)d |archive = User talk:Swatjester/archive%(counter)d
}}<div style="font-family:Georgia">
}}

== Just joking ==

Swatjest, I was just joking with you. Just thought the whole situation was funny.

== Happy First Day of Spring! ==

{{Template:First Day Of Spring}}

`
== Wikiproject Terrorism Newsletter ==

{{Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Terrorism/Newsletter/April08}}
] <sup>(]) </sup> 05:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

===Honey and Vinegar===
As per your comments on my Talk Page: I will state that while your comments regarding Misplaced Pages communications may have been intended as a sincere effort to maintain civility, it was nonetheless perceived as a "cut it out or I will personally block you from editing" threat. For my efforts in managing professional and vocational environments, I've always found that it easier to bring about desired results by using diplomatic language and a positive encouragement, rather than bluntly calling people to task (even if they are acting in a problematic manner). Thank you. ] (]) 14:19, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Is that you Dan? It's "Shadow" aka "Peregrine_Falcon" from WaW. <small>—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 15:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->


== What am I doing wrong? ==
== {{userlinks|almostcrazy}} ==


I edited the campaigns for the 509th Infantry. Why did you revert it? I put the source in “external links.” What part of this is incorrect? ] (]) 00:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
I'm not sure what to do about this account, which I noticed on RC patrol. One contrib: adding "almost" somewhere it plainly wasn't helpful. After my warning, no further contribs (unless there are some deleted ones). Did I nip in the bud a vandalism-only account, or did I just bite a newbie? I don't have enough experience of this to know what to do next, and I don't have the tools to do anything... other than refer it to an admin. <font color="006622">]</font><sup><small><b>]</b></small></sup> 17:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
:Two problems. First, external links is not where references go -- those should be properly formatted with <nowiki><ref></nowiki> tags in-line with the claim they are supporting. More importantly however, the website you were citing to does not satisfy Misplaced Pages's ] guidelines. This is frequently an issue when citing to unofficial unit association websites such as the one with the 509th -- they're often of dubious reliability and while they may be right (or may not be), we have no good way of verifying that information is accurate. ]] <small><sup>Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!</sup></small> 00:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


=== Reply ===
::Neither. You used a standard template to tell a new editor that their edit was reverted, gave them links to how to edit constructively, and invited them to talk to you if there were questions. I don't think you scared him off, nor do I think he was a vandal only account. Honestly, he probably made the one contrib, closed his browser and won't check it again for weeks (and may not ever check the user talk page). Don't kick yourself, you didn't do anything wrong.]] ] 07:13, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
:::Okay. Thanks for the perspective. <font color="006622">]</font><sup><small><b>]</b></small></sup> 15:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


Thank you for your response. As I said before, I am new to editing on Misplaced Pages and am still figuring some things out. I will keep these things in mind for the future. Sorry to have taken your time; I appreciate it. ] (]) 01:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
== PetraSchelm ==
:No worries. As a note, you don't need to make a new section when replying (though perhaps that's a setting you have configured if you're editing using your phone or using the visual editor). You can normally just reply below the line from the person you're talking to. Hope this helps. ]] <small><sup>Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!</sup></small> 02:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


I'm leaving Misplaced Pages for a few weeks as a result of PetraSchelm's methods -- see here, for example: ]. She has massively disrupted the entry, unilaterally. She mischaracterizes that page's history, and other editor's comments. She implies that anyone who disagrees with her is pro-pedophile and disruptive. She refuses to acknowledge genuine controversy (over the meaning of "pedophilia"). And ironically she now accuses others of "soapboxing".


=== Reply and an edit ===
If you decide to block her again, I won't come to her defense. Thanks for reacting firmly to her previous unpleasant behavior. Subsequent events suggest to me that you were clearly right to do so. ] (]) 06:22, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


I want to start by saying I saw in your reply that I don't need to make a new section when replying but I’m not sure how to do that, so I just added a new topic. I edited the campaign participation credit for the 24th Infantry Division by adding the Central Pacific Campaign credit to the tree list. In the “references” I added to sources the link of where I got this information (https://www.armydivs.com/24th-infantry-division). Did I do this right or is there something else I need to do? ] (]) 04:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
::I don't know your situation, but I hope you come back when you feel ready. ]] ] 07:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
:Close, but not quite in the right place and a couple of mistakes. So first, you added the reference in the wrong location. , you added it directly to the end below the template for the references section. That makes sense from the perspective of a reader, but doesn't actually work -- what you actually needed to do is to add that reference in-line, directly after the thing you're citing. So in this case, that would be immediately after the words you added ""]"; that's where you'd want to add the reference. A properly formatted reference will automatically add itself to the right reference section and update it's number as needed, which is why we always put them in-line with the content it is supporting. Your addition wasn't formatted properly though, so it didn't automatically do that. One additional issue -- the link to ] goes to the wrong page -- that's a disambiguation page, not the specific page you wanted (which was probably ]. So what you'd have wanted to add would have been "<nowiki>*]<ref>https://www.armydivs.com/24th-infantry-division</ref></nowiki>", but change the words "Central Pacific" to whatever the correct name of the page you're linking to is. (There are fancier/better ways to format the reference but that's the simplest way that works). Hope that helps. Let me know if you need further assistance. ]] <small><sup>Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!</sup></small> 21:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)




== Using the word "Ignorant" == === Reply and Edit (Continued) ===


So I did add the correct link for “Central Pacific.” I redirected it from the region page to the “Attack on Pearl Harbor” page since the 24th first engaged the Japanese there. I thought “Central Europe” would just direct to the Attack on Pearl Harbor, so that’s the mistake I made there. Also, on another page for a British Army brigade it had “Monte Cassino” spelled incorrectly (as Monte Casino) so I corrected it. I don’t have to put a reference for that do I? Could you write a numbered list I could follow for the correct way to attach the reference? I really appreciate your help; thank you. ] (]) 02:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
As per your comments on my Talk Page: ] is, according to that page, an "essay" and "not a policy or guideline, and editors are not obliged to follow it." And using the word "ignorant" to in the course of a debate is designed strictly to demean other people. Please refrain from making comments that are not intended to encourage a positive discussion. Thank you. ] (]) 16:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
:For a misspelling/typo change, no that doesn't require a reference. You might start with this video from the Wikimedia foundation (it's short, 2 minutes) that walks you through how to cite a source. . (You can probably skip ahead to about halfway through, to the part at about 1:10 where they start talking about <nowiki>"<ref>"</nowiki> tags. The part before this is a one-time setup that's already been done for you on most articles already, it's the second half with the Ref tags that you have to do each time.)]] <small><sup>Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!</sup></small> 02:56, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
:This one may also be useful for helping with editing user talk page (which work the same way as article talk pages), though depending on what device you use to edit it may look somewhat different. . ]] <small><sup>Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!</sup></small> 02:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
== CS1 error on ] ==
] Hello, I'm ]. I have '''automatically detected''' that ] performed by you, on the page ], may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
* A ] error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ( | )
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a ], you can .
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->] (]) 01:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)


== Sat Jan 25: Misplaced Pages Day NYC 2025 ==
* As per your comments on my Talk Page: “So, if a person were to say something in a deletion debate that "black people are inferior" that would not be an ignorant statement? It does not mean that the person is ignorant, but their statement is ignorant.”


{|style="background: white; color: black; border:1px solid #6881b9; margin:0.5em; padding:0.5em;border-radius: 8px;"
The answer: A statement which is not supported by any reputable scientific facts (as in your hypothetical case, a declaration of one race’s inferiority to other races) would certainly be considered ignorant; in the case you cited, a stronger word would be justified. However, no one made such a statement and your example is completely irrelevant to the question at hand.
|-
!colspan=2 style="font-size:150%; padding: .4em;"|January 25: ]
|-
| style="padding-left: .6em;" |
]


You are invited to ''']''', hosted by ] at the ]'s central branch.
You used the word “ignorant” to challenge concerns of whether a particular medical professional possesses a specific level of notability within his field and, thus, would qualify for Misplaced Pages coverage. You asserted that opinions that differed from yours in regard to this issue are “ignorant.”


The special focus this year will be the launch of our "400 Neighborhoods" campaign for the city's 400th anniversary and ].
However, no irrefutable facts have been presented (either by you or any other Misplaced Pages editor) to uphold your opinion as the be-all/end-all statement of fact. And you seem to forget that you are strictly stating an opinion, not a fact; the deletion article is an exchange of opinions to build a consensus on an article’s value, not a challenge to irrefutable facts about Dr. Klein's value to both his profession and this web site.


We'll also have ] and you're invited to sign up for one, though space is somewhat limited.
A friendly exchange would’ve found you stating that the rival view was “mistaken” or “off-base” – with those words, you would’ve acknowledged a disagreement, added your view that the rival opinion is lacking, and refrained from creating ill will with poisonous language – few linguists consider “ignorant” to be a positive word.


* Saturday, January 25, 2025
Opinions do not exist in their own space and energy – they are an extension of individual’s personality, mind and passion. In this case, they are an individual’s entry into what is supposed to be a mature conversation that will enrich the Misplaced Pages content base. You are not insulting an abstract concept; you are insulting a person by insulting how he thinks and how he expresses himself.
*:''12:00 pm – 5:00 pm''
*:], Grand Army Plaza
*:Afterparty: 6:00 pm – 9:00 pm (off-site venue, TBA)


|-
I would not be offended if someone said my opinions were "mistaken," but I take serious offense when someone says my opinions are "ignorant." Whether you intended to create ill will and intentionally demean a rival view is something I cannot determine. That you are deaf to the concerns raised by your choice of verbiage is something I cannot understand. ] (]) 17:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
|''All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the ].''


|}
:Apologies for butting in uninvited, but there seems to be a misunderstanding here. Calling someone "ignorant" does not imply an insult to "how he thinks or how he expresses himself"; it simply means that he ''does not know'' something. I'm taking this page off my watchlist now. <font color="006622">]</font><sup><small><b>]</b></small></sup> 17:58, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


<small>(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from ].)</small>


--] via ] (]) 17:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
* No apologies needed, S.S. -- but your definition of "ignorant" is wonky. Scope out this page: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ignorant -- the word goes somewhat beyond "does not know," and the negativity associated with it is not pleasant. ] (]) 18:40, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
<!-- Message sent by User:Pharos@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Meetup/NYC/Invite_list&oldid=1263682194 -->


== ''The Bugle'': Issue 225, January 2025 ==
In my field, ignorance is not treated with negative connotations, but rather is simply the lack of knowledge. My apologies if you take it to be negative, as that's not my intention. ]] ] 20:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


{| style="width: 100%;"
| valign="top" style="border: 1px gray solid; padding: 1em;" |
{|
| ]
| width="100%" valign="top" | <div style="text-align: center; color: darkslategray;">'''Your Military History Newsletter'''</div>
<div style="-moz-column-count:2; -webkit-column-count:2; column-count:2;">
* Project news: '']''
* Articles: '']''
* Book review: '']''
* Op-ed: '']''
</div>
|-
|}
|}
<div style="font-size: 85%; margin:0 auto; text-align:center;">
''The Bugle'' is published by the ]. To receive it on your talk page, please ] or sign up ].<br/>If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from ]. Your editors, ] (]) and ] (]) 07:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Ian Rose@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:The_ed17/sandbox3&oldid=1266423875 -->


== PLAAF involvement in Vietnam ==
...And since Eecoleetage deleted my comment off his talk page, I make free to repeat myself here (repetition being the mother of learning): Ignorance is lack of knowledge, not an insult. You seem, I am sorry to say, ignorant of the meaning of the word itself, Ecoleetage. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the dicdef(s). I myself am ignorant of many things, as is everyone - no one can know everything. ]<sup>]</sup> 21:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


I hope you’re well. I noticed that my recent edit on the PLAAF page was reverted, and I would like to kindly ask for a reconsideration. In my edit, I referenced the deployment of both PLAAF and PLAGF units, including anti-aircraft units, during the Vietnam War. This information is based on sources that highlight the significant involvement of Chinese forces in supporting North Vietnam during the conflict.
* In my field, the lack of knowledge is the opportunity to bring a new insight with a positive message. There are empowering ways of alerting people to their lack of knowledge, but that's another story. In any event, don't feel bad -- at least you didn't say I was "bitter"! ] (]) 21:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


I understand there may be concerns regarding the accuracy or the context of my addition, and I’d be happy to discuss it further or provide additional sources to clarify. I believe this aspect of the Vietnam War is an important part of the PLAAF’s history and would appreciate the opportunity to have the edit restored.
== ze blog ==


Thank you for your time and consideration.
cool...what did you mean by deeplink? ] (]) 02:38, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


Here is my current non English sources I found, is these source acceptable to re add it?:
::I was reading some other site, which linked to a second site, which linked to a third site, which linked to your blog. i.e. I didn't know about it and just stumbled across it, not through google. ]] ] 02:41, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
:::ahh...cool! glad to see that it's getting some exposure out there in the webbish wide world =) ] (]) 02:48, 18 April 2008 (UTC)


Source1:
== Chiropratric ==
https://news.ifeng.com/history/1/jishi/200811/1107_2663_867254.shtml
<br>
Source2:
http://hprc.cssn.cn/gsyj/wjs/gjyz/201606/P020180416372852730156.pdf
] (]) 09:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC) ] (]) 09:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC)


::Your source did not support the edits you were trying to make -- it made no mention of the PLAAF, it simply referenced "air defense units" without any indication of what branch they belonged to. That source also does not meet our standards for reliability -- it's simply an aggregator republishing content without endorsement of its accuracy, and the original source was not reliable. Neither of the two sources you've provided here are sufficient either -- the first is a highly biased opinion piece that makes grandiose claims while failing to state their methodology or evidence; the second is a student paper from the PLA's military academy. You need to find reliable, neutral, non-CCP sources for this claim. Additionally, it appears that you may be using LLM translation to help with your editing -- I strongly suggest avoiding using that in the article, as it's a very quick way to get blocked from editing. ]] <small><sup>Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!</sup></small> 16:50, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
I don't know if you noticed but you made after the page was protected. ] (]) 15:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
:::So does mean these policy may also applies at other language Misplaced Pages? Because about months ago ], as they said to my talk page at there. ] (]) 14:13, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
::::Every language Misplaced Pages makes their own policies, for the most part. Those may be identical, or may be different. ]] <small><sup>Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!</sup></small> 17:43, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 17:43, 15 January 2025

ΦGood Article

This user is aware of the designation of the following topics as contentious topics:
  • gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them
  • articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles
  • the Horn of Africa (defined as including Ethiopia, Somalia, Eritrea, Djibouti, and adjoining areas if involved in related disputes)
  • governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues
  • the Arab–Israeli conflict
They should not be given alerts for those areas.

What am I doing wrong?

I edited the campaigns for the 509th Infantry. Why did you revert it? I put the source in “external links.” What part of this is incorrect? 50.51.88.60 (talk) 00:15, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Two problems. First, external links is not where references go -- those should be properly formatted with <ref> tags in-line with the claim they are supporting. More importantly however, the website you were citing to does not satisfy Misplaced Pages's reliable source guidelines. This is frequently an issue when citing to unofficial unit association websites such as the one with the 509th -- they're often of dubious reliability and while they may be right (or may not be), we have no good way of verifying that information is accurate. SWATJester 00:40, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for your response. As I said before, I am new to editing on Misplaced Pages and am still figuring some things out. I will keep these things in mind for the future. Sorry to have taken your time; I appreciate it. 50.51.88.60 (talk) 01:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

No worries. As a note, you don't need to make a new section when replying (though perhaps that's a setting you have configured if you're editing using your phone or using the visual editor). You can normally just reply below the line from the person you're talking to. Hope this helps. SWATJester 02:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


Reply and an edit

I want to start by saying I saw in your reply that I don't need to make a new section when replying but I’m not sure how to do that, so I just added a new topic. I edited the campaign participation credit for the 24th Infantry Division by adding the Central Pacific Campaign credit to the tree list. In the “references” I added to sources the link of where I got this information (https://www.armydivs.com/24th-infantry-division). Did I do this right or is there something else I need to do? 50.51.88.60 (talk) 04:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Close, but not quite in the right place and a couple of mistakes. So first, you added the reference in the wrong location. As you can see here, you added it directly to the end below the template for the references section. That makes sense from the perspective of a reader, but doesn't actually work -- what you actually needed to do is to add that reference in-line, directly after the thing you're citing. So in this case, that would be immediately after the words you added ""Central Pacific"; that's where you'd want to add the reference. A properly formatted reference will automatically add itself to the right reference section and update it's number as needed, which is why we always put them in-line with the content it is supporting. Your addition wasn't formatted properly though, so it didn't automatically do that. One additional issue -- the link to Central Pacific goes to the wrong page -- that's a disambiguation page, not the specific page you wanted (which was probably Central Pacific Area. So what you'd have wanted to add would have been "*]<ref>https://www.armydivs.com/24th-infantry-division</ref>", but change the words "Central Pacific" to whatever the correct name of the page you're linking to is. (There are fancier/better ways to format the reference but that's the simplest way that works). Hope that helps. Let me know if you need further assistance. SWATJester 21:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)


Reply and Edit (Continued)

So I did add the correct link for “Central Pacific.” I redirected it from the region page to the “Attack on Pearl Harbor” page since the 24th first engaged the Japanese there. I thought “Central Europe” would just direct to the Attack on Pearl Harbor, so that’s the mistake I made there. Also, on another page for a British Army brigade it had “Monte Cassino” spelled incorrectly (as Monte Casino) so I corrected it. I don’t have to put a reference for that do I? Could you write a numbered list I could follow for the correct way to attach the reference? I really appreciate your help; thank you. 50.51.88.60 (talk) 02:47, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

For a misspelling/typo change, no that doesn't require a reference. You might start with this video from the Wikimedia foundation (it's short, 2 minutes) that walks you through how to cite a source. Youtube link. (You can probably skip ahead to about halfway through, to the part at about 1:10 where they start talking about "<ref>" tags. The part before this is a one-time setup that's already been done for you on most articles already, it's the second half with the Ref tags that you have to do each time.)SWATJester 02:56, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
This one may also be useful for helping with editing user talk page (which work the same way as article talk pages), though depending on what device you use to edit it may look somewhat different. Youtube link. SWATJester 02:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

CS1 error on Intelligence Support Activity

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Intelligence Support Activity, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

  • A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 01:10, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Sat Jan 25: Misplaced Pages Day NYC 2025

January 25: Misplaced Pages Day
Brooklyn Central Library

You are invited to Misplaced Pages Day 2025, hosted by Wikimedia NYC at the Brooklyn Public Library's central branch.

The special focus this year will be the launch of our "400 Neighborhoods" campaign for the city's 400th anniversary and WikiProject New York City/400 Task Force.

We'll also have a lightning talks session and you're invited to sign up for one, though space is somewhat limited.

  • Saturday, January 25, 2025
    12:00 pm – 5:00 pm
    Brooklyn Central Library, Grand Army Plaza
    Afterparty: 6:00 pm – 9:00 pm (off-site venue, TBA)
All attendees at Wikimedia NYC events are subject to the Wikimedia NYC Code of Conduct.

(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue 225, January 2025

Full front page of The Bugle Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:17, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

PLAAF involvement in Vietnam

I hope you’re well. I noticed that my recent edit on the PLAAF page was reverted, and I would like to kindly ask for a reconsideration. In my edit, I referenced the deployment of both PLAAF and PLAGF units, including anti-aircraft units, during the Vietnam War. This information is based on sources that highlight the significant involvement of Chinese forces in supporting North Vietnam during the conflict.

I understand there may be concerns regarding the accuracy or the context of my addition, and I’d be happy to discuss it further or provide additional sources to clarify. I believe this aspect of the Vietnam War is an important part of the PLAAF’s history and would appreciate the opportunity to have the edit restored.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Here is my current non English sources I found, is these source acceptable to re add it?:

Source1: https://news.ifeng.com/history/1/jishi/200811/1107_2663_867254.shtml
Source2: http://hprc.cssn.cn/gsyj/wjs/gjyz/201606/P020180416372852730156.pdf

AussieSurplus1510 (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC) AussieSurplus1510 (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Your source did not support the edits you were trying to make -- it made no mention of the PLAAF, it simply referenced "air defense units" without any indication of what branch they belonged to. That source also does not meet our standards for reliability -- it's simply an aggregator republishing content without endorsement of its accuracy, and the original source was not reliable. Neither of the two sources you've provided here are sufficient either -- the first is a highly biased opinion piece that makes grandiose claims while failing to state their methodology or evidence; the second is a student paper from the PLA's military academy. You need to find reliable, neutral, non-CCP sources for this claim. Additionally, it appears that you may be using LLM translation to help with your editing -- I strongly suggest avoiding using that in the article, as it's a very quick way to get blocked from editing. SWATJester 16:50, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
So does mean these policy may also applies at other language Misplaced Pages? Because about months ago I was being reported by someone and got blocked on Japanese Misplaced Pages for one week because I used machine translation and LLM, as they said to my talk page at there. AussieSurplus1510 (talk) 14:13, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Every language Misplaced Pages makes their own policies, for the most part. Those may be identical, or may be different. SWATJester 17:43, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
User talk:Swatjester: Difference between revisions Add topic