User talk:JArthur1984

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] Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

		The Chinese Barnstar
		For your recent contributions to a variety of articles about China's economy and recent economic history. Thanks for making Wikipedia's coverage more detailed and informative! —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:14, 26 August 2023 (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]

		The Original Barnstar
		For your timely and helpful edits on the lead section of Cultural Revolution, thank you so much! Zinderboff(talk) 13:30, 26 February 2024 (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.

		The Chinese Barnstar
		I was going to thank you long ago, but thank you for removing WP:CRYSTALBALL and speculation on the article about the Social Credit System!. Félix An (talk) 07:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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]

The consensus for at least several years has been to simply state "China" in the infobox on these biography pages rather than specify what the sovereignty was in the infobox. Elaboration about the sovereign can be done as needed in the article body. And so my suggestion is for you to begin a Talk topic on the relevant article page or pages. Perhaps there is enough interest to reevaluate the consensus. Individual editors' perspectives may vary based on different ideas of historical/civilizational/national ideas of China or Chinese-ness. For example, during the Qing dynasty, it was still "China." A talk topic will help build consensus that can then be made consistent across the great many pages where this question of infobox applies. JArthur1984 (talk) 23:22, 27 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Project 596, a link pointing to the disambiguation page The East Is Red was added.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 19:55, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I just undid your revisions on four pages related to Falungong. I can tell you put in a lot of work to go through everything in as much detail as you did, but I have strong objections to the book you used as your primary reference. Yanfei Sun, by her position at a Chinese institution, cannot be considered a reliable source on this topic. Refer to Wikipedia:Academic freedom and Wikipedia for some guidelines on how to address academic work from institutions that lack academic freedom. Mainly though, I think this falls under WP:COISOURCE because the Chinese government controls and funds Zhejiang University, where the author is based, she is restricted in her ability to report on the topic independently. If you want to pursue this further, please take it to the reliable source noticeboard. Also, rushing through a flurry of edits that sweep across so many topics makes it difficult to have a nuanced discussion on each topic. Even your edits that didn't specifically rely on this source had other issues, and there were too many to address individually. If you want to discuss this action, please bring it to the relevant talk pages. —Zujine|talk 17:18, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree with your guilty-by-association argument, despite any trace of guilt. The book has not been criticized for bias or inaccuracy. The scholarship of Yanfei Sun has not been called into question. The book itself was published by the University of Chicago Press, not by Chinese presses. If there were serious problems with her scholarship, her peers would be describing them, which has not happened. And I note that you restored[7] the primary source faluninfo.net which leads me to believe that you are fine with this particular "obvious conflict of interest". Binksternet (talk) 18:37, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply] Let's please move this discussion to a relevant talk page. I will start a topic on the Falun Gong page. Also, I did not restore any particular source. Rather, I reverted a whole collection of edits that I found fundamentally problematic. —Zujine|talk 21:50, 14 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]