User talk:Yim Kai-mun

We are so pleased to have you join us. Your interests are particularly needed by our community now, as we'd appreciate having more writing on all the topics that you mention. Nancy Sculerati MD 08:59, 30 January 2007 (CST)

Romanization

Just out of curiousity: What romanization system for Chinese do you intend on using on Citizendium? I've been mixing them fairly loosely, trying to use the romanization for each term that I think is in use the most in English (Pinyin for some, Wade-Giles for others, etc.), but it'd be nice if all the pages on Chinese topics were consistant in this. Shanya Almafeta 09:09, 30 January 2007 (CST)

Re: Romanisation

First off, I'd be using UK spelling as that is what is used over here in Singapore. I am a purist where romanisation is concerned - it's either you use all Pinyin or all Wade-Giles. That is for Mandarin; Cantonese however is a different matter. As a native Cantonese I absolutely refuse to accept the accepted systems of romanisations such as Yale or Jyutping. Instead I romanise by ear and I think I do a fairly decent job as I am also an amateur translator. I think for Mandarin, we should set the standard of romanisation as Pinyin unless the Wade-Giles is still very much in use i.e. Chungking Express. Chungking would be Chongqing in Pinyin. For Cantonese...lol, I'm not sure CZ is ready for the Yim KM system yet!! Yim Kai-mun 23.16, 30 January 2007 (SGT)

Stem cell research

I have a million views on stem cells, and a million views on research, and you could multiply them out to get my views on stem cell research. If that's an interest of yours, why not start an article - and we'll all pitch in! Of course, that article will have to sympathetically include all significant views, but you personally, don't have to write them all. Best thing I think, with a subject that has a history of controversy (of course, most subjects do) is to also put a tentative plan for the article on the discussion page, and to be willing to discuss the text there. Regards, Nancy Nancy Sculerati MD 09:35, 30 January 2007 (CST)

reply from my page (copied)

My memory for the details fails me (like so much I once counted on!) - and so I will have to look it up. No, he was not, as per established sources (which I will find -give me a moment!)[or two]) the "inventor", what was called a microscope was around and used in the textile trade to examine cloth. He made some kind of revolutionary improvement to it- and used it to look at, more or less, everything. In November (I think) I worked on his biography as a CZ Live article. It's in there-along with the references. Nancy Sculerati MD 09:42, 30 January 2007 (CST)