Let us make the wiki templates more about history, and avoid linking to any value-judging or politics (same for all other templates). --207.112.103.85 (talk) 00:28, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Now I see that the name "Mongolia" here is used in a rather confusing way considering its contents. Exactly what "Mongolia" refers to here, as a geographic region corresponding to the location of modern Mongolia (similar to Manchuria), Greater Mongolia (including both Inner and Outer Mongolia, and a part of Russia), the modern state of Mongolia, or regions ever ruled by Mongols (e.g. during 13th century)? There should be no nationalism here, but it seems that the usage here is indeed very problematic and should be somehow fixed. --207.112.45.35 (talk) 05:48, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Now I'm trying to make the pre-modern period a geographic concept (related to the region of Greater Mongolia). This should somehow help reduce confusions and nationalism (but not yet eliminate them, due to issues regarding Inner/Outer Mongolia etc). For other Mongol regimes (e.g. Golden Horde) there is already a History of the Mongols template. --173.206.164.63 (talk) 07:34, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Everyone is trying to act very good and trust each another, and Wikipedia should be a friendly place. Communication is supposed to be the means to get it to work better. Thanks. --216.254.206.54 (talk) 13:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
This is Wikipedia, not local (e.g. Mongol) wiki. Just see exactly who is the one to be careless in WP these years. Like everyone else I also have my own interests, besides maintaining the quality of (certain parts of) Wikipedia in spare time. Try to communicate directly whenever possible. but as proved no one may go everywhere and fix everyone's work, but should have good faith and care about his/her own work and help maintain the quality of Wikipedia. No communication, then no cooperation. --173.206.65.134 (talk) 14:49, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
What are you doing here again? I'm simply trying to fix your "mistakes" for article quality and convention etc. Do you want me to fix them then? Certainly I could standby and do other stuff instead, but since I do admit I had problems too (but certainly less than yours), I made some effort here. Actually I'm trying to focus on quality or help on fixing, but not that I should be the (only) one to fix them. You said "don't take it personally", but what are you doing here then? (BTW, you added a lot of Mongolian transcriptions, why can't I add a single other transcription? In fact it should be placed in front, but I did not. Are you trying to incorrectly guess others' intention again? Just see what you were doing these years. Also don't forget you are the one who made mistakes to others first,not the other way around. BTW: I was originally only interested in Yuan, not Northern Yuan; some Chinese wiki like Baidu Baike did extend Mongol Empire into Northern Yuan (until 1635, see e.g.here), but that's not the mainstream convention; in other words, there is no universal standard among Chinese; never think there is a single Chinese view; the view I was holding was similar to one of these views, but not exactly identical to any of them, as I was looking for other materials like seals etc [which are certainly unknown to most Chinese people]) Deleted due to not strictly on-topic. --Chinyin (talk) 16:52, 1 October 2011 (UTC)