Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:40, 2 September 2007

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Dokdo, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Misplaced Pages:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. Welcome!

Hello, Opp2, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  --Merovingian {T C @} 10:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages Guidelines

It would be greatly appreciated if you could read the Misplaced Pages guidelines. It makes things easier for both of us. If you have any questions, feel free to contact any user for help. --DandanxD 02:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your claims in Dokdo article

Hi, it looks like you're pretty well versed with Japanese claim of the islets. For your balance I suggest that you read the link , , or in general, . I also checked the link you referred many times . It's well written with lots of original documents. However, he just ignored every single Korean claim as groundless and no evidence. It's simply not true and his website is misleading. So for your balance, please take a look at the link above. I hope you would continue your discussion after the reading. Thanks, Ginnre 09:29, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

He is an object of the jeer in Japan. He did not tell even the story of International Law in yahoo. Do not put the dirty one. --Opp2 10:51, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

What an attitude! How does dirtiness or cleanliness have something to do with this discussion? Do you think you're clean enough to speak what you're saying? Then you have a serious problem that would disqualify you to discuss things here. Think why he is regarded as jeer in Japan. That's a problem of Japanese society, kind of いじめ, not allowing different voice, and it is not his problem. Do you understand?

Anyway, I don't care Half Moon's reputation in Japan. But those links are the only different voice in Japanese I can find. You need to know what both sides say before you speak in a public space such as here. At least Prof. Shin's interview is just an interpretation without his opinion so that has nothing to do with his reputation in Japan. Therefore, I strongly ask you again to read at least Prof. Shin's interview before you write again and again those tedius lawsuit-like things. Pay attention what words you use afterwards if you want to be regarded as a credible editor here. Ginnre 04:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

He has been defeated on the discussion of International Law. He only runs away from International Law now. His excuse is "Wolves' International Law. " Do not put the dirty one. --Opp2 07:45, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

You keep saying 'dirty'. That just erodes your credibility and sanity as an editor in WP. You may use the word 'dirty' in Japanese in Japanese sites in any sense you want to use it, but in english it is totally different. You'll get just ignored or laughed at. Watch out your expressions. This is final warning. Ginnre 05:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

半ケツなんか張り付けるな。何を言いたいのかさっぱりわからん。半ケツの捏造国際法でオナニーでもしておけ。--Opp2 05:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

How rude you are. It is not 半ケツ, but 半月. You don't get what I say? Dirtiness or cleanliness has nothing to do with all these discussions, OK? Tell me how clean you are first before you say 半月 is dirty. Can you do that? Ginnre 06:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

俺が要求しているのは、いつ、何によって日本が「無主地先占」といったかである。半ケツの妄想解釈は要求してない。関係ないものを張り付けるな。人に要求する前に関係のない妄想コンテンツを消せ。--Opp2 06:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Good, then my request is show me how clean you are before you keep saying about 無主地先占. If Half moon's interpetation is 妄想, why can't your claim be 妄想 as well? With your attitude, you won't get anything. Treat others with respect if you want be treated that way. Ginnre 06:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

It is being written that it 占有 in an original source. You deceive by unrelated material. And You should study "appeal to ignorance (probatio diabolica)". I give priority to facts more than respect. --Opp2 06:49, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

To begin with, you are not made even of the distinction between occupation(占領、占有) and occupation proprement dite(先占). Study International Law. --Opp2 06:15, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't care about what you say because your attitude is so arrogant. Ginnre 06:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you understand that you presented an unrelated source to the topic?--Opp2 06:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Therefore, present the material of Japanese Government that describes clearly, "無主地先占". It is an interpretation of neither 半ケツ nor the South Korea government. Do not put unrelated sight.--Opp2 06:34, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

My demand based on policy of Misplaced Pages is very simple and easy. It is being written "Japanese claims come from seventeenth century records, as well as a terra nullius incorporation in 1905." in a present article. When and in what did Japan say that? The format of the answer is as follows. Extra information is unnecessary. I verify it based on these three information.

1.DATE:(ex.December 26, 2006)

2.METHOD:(ex.letter to the South Korea government)

3.PUBLISHER:(ex.Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs)

It is not "occupation(占領、占有)" but "occupation proprement dite(無主地先占)". It isnot an interpretation by 半ケツ and Korea.Do not deceive unrelated material. --Opp2 06:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

interruption

Curiousity... Sorry if I interrupted the topic... How long have you been working with Dokdo? Did anything improve since the beginning of your contributions? What is your goal? Honestly, I don't care about the amount of time people spend to improve things in Misplaced Pages. However, you haven't improve a thing. I would not be writing this message if you are just making friendly or casual conversations. Please tell me, I don't understand your obsession with this article. Don't get me wrong; it is good to keep talking and making comments on particular articles that interest you. Let me put it this way, don't spend all of your time working on one article without making any improvements. --Kingj123 23:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Isn't the exclusion of the lie an improvement for you? Isn't even if it is a fact, it improvement? Is the reason inconvenient for Korea? I give priority to facts more than the lie and the artificial friendship. My purpose is a separation of the record and the interpretation and the insistence. As for the interpretation and the insistence, the two countries should be equal. Do you think that this is equal?

• Blue character(2,825 words):Insistence of Korea and KoreaPOV interpretation
• Red character(500 words):Insistence of Japan and JapanPOV interpretation

In addition, an inconvenient record for the insistence of South Korea has been deleted. If the fact is excluded by the violence of the number, it is useless. The fact doesn't disappear. The edit wars will continue as long as this is not improved. And, the Korean will try to maintain the lie and Korea POV article by the violence of the number. If you do not have knowledge, you should not spend your time for the dokdo article.--User: Opp2 03:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

First, I am not spending my time as much as you do on Dokdo article. Second, when I mean by "goal," I am talking about the exactly straightforward goal. Once, you mentioned about terra nullius and then all of the sudden you are talking of bamboo island... What is solved? Plus, there are some verbal assaults going on. The way you said that Korea will maintain the lie, becomes vague and too sketchy. Explain to me every single quotation from the article that "you think it is the lie" and why they are lie, and why they were by Koreans. --User:Kingj123 15:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

You can freely spend your time. However, it is useless your time if you want to insist without knowledge. I am only giving the time of the rebuttal about terra nullius. I did not start the topic about bamboo island. I do not permit provocation based on ignorance. Only, you cannot concrete rebuttal be done. It cannot be assumed the verbal assault. It is your ignorance. It is translated that it is not in an original source, and fabricates not saying. These are lies. I correct Koreans that it is KOREA POV people. Your comment doesn't have a concrete thing. This is useless time. --Opp2 18:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I can prove many shameful verbal assaults you have intentionally posted on the talk page that has nothing to do with the language barriers, it is not an assumption, and it is not a misunderstanding. You also have nothing to test my knowledge through Misplaced Pages.

I am just commenting that we should have complete beginning, middle and end in a rebuttal. I want things solved, not the other way around, and it saves a lot of time. Honestly, this is a concrete and approperiate comment from my POV.--User:Kingj123 22:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Warning : Do Not Remove other edits without discussion

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from an article. Please be careful not to remove content from Misplaced Pages without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

As your editing behaviour gets more and more rampant, (for example, ) I put a warning on your talk page. It is well known that the Japanese Scholars accede to the fact that, up to 1880, Ullungdo had been called Takeshima and Tokdo, Matsushima, by Japanese. Please read the article or you can find ample documents regarding this fact in Japanese. Ginnre 06:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Please advise to yourself.--Opp2 06:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Warning : Please be civil

Could I suggest that mundane editorial disagreements are most likely to resolve quickly and productively when editors observe the following:

• Remain polite per WP:Civility.
• Solicit feedback and ask questions.
• Keep the discussion focused. Concentrate on a small set of related matters and resolve them to the satisfaction of all parties.
• Focus on the subject rather than on the personalities of the editors.

Thanks!

per your blunt reply, I put another warning. Ginnre 06:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The relevant guidelines and policies on Misplaced Pages are verifiability and reliable sources. No one could present verifiability and reliable source about this description "and are referred to as that by the Korean government which has exercised sovereignty over Dokdo (Seok-do) since 1900 by the promulgation of Imperial Ordinance No.41 and the appointment of the country magistrate." Thanks!--Opp2 06:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I made a new part in TALK PAGE of Dokdo article for you.--Opp2 07:10, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Warning : Please have a good faith

Misplaced Pages guidelines dictate that you assume good faith in dealing with other editors. Please stop being uncivil to your fellow editors, and assume that they are here to improve Misplaced Pages. Thank you.

per your increasing problemtic reasoning or wording like your racist comment below;

'This your claim is not only you but also a typical insistence of Korean and the deception method.' Ginnre 18:16, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Warning : Personal attack

Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

per 'As for your insistence, concreteness, accuracy, and logic are always insufficient.' Ginnre 00:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Misplaced Pages:Requests for mediation/Dokdo. For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to open new mediation cases. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Contributing to Misplaced Pages

If your sole purpose here is to simply revert the Dokdo article to a more pro-Japan status, I don't see how you're contributing to Misplaced Pages. Please think about how you can improve articles rather than promote your own political agenda in a single one. Your opinion can be appreciated and I am sure if you decide to stay and help, you can play a positive role. Thank you.--Sir Edgar 00:14, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Your user page

I'm responding to the first piece of text on your user page, "I am not good at English. Please point it out when the mistake is found in the grammar etc."

If you wish to make it grammatically correct, it should read, "My English is very poor. Please point out any mistakes in my grammar you find."

I hope this helps you. Mkdw 10:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your help.--Opp2 15:20, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

petition

{http://www.petitiononline.com/comfortw/petition.html} please sign the online petition to the Japanese government, regarding the comfort women issue. thanks. Odst 08:03, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Re. Dokdo

Hello Opp2. Thank you for contacting me and for providing links for those pertinent documents. I am still analyzing the situation regarding this page move after your comment and Lactose's. At the moment, I seem to reject your rethoric. This is about a Misplaced Pages article, you appear to greatly exaggerate its impact when you state that my criteria is "very dangerous for the peace of the world". Misplaced Pages does not abid by the United Nations or its decisions, rather by consensus which often (but not always) coincides with U.N. decisions. See Taiwan ROC for instance. If we were to stick to the U.N.'s positions then one would read there that Taiwan is a province of the People's Republic of China, not a country. As for the control of the island, I'm just stating a fact, not implying by any means that that's the way it should be for one country to attain control of land and have such control thereby recognized as effective and legitimate (compare with Perejil). Now, when I close discussions on Misplaced Pages, I look for consensus. Didn't find it there, and no consensus defaults to no move. I'm still reviewing this tough closure though. Regards, Húsönd 00:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I understand your concerns and once again thank you for the trouble of providing pertinent information for this issue. International law hasn't to interfere with encyclopedic content contained on Misplaced Pages. I'd like to stress that Misplaced Pages is not a political entity. You may well report that Korea's occupation of the rocks is illegal (and I agree), but when it comes to NPOV on Misplaced Pages let's not mix things. The article doesn't say that the rocks belong to Korea (that yes, would be blatant POV), it simply has a title that corresponds to a widely used term for the rocks (and which just happens to be the one used by the current occupier). It's no big deal really. In my view, it does not bring any recognition of Korean sovereignty over the rocks. I suggest a new discussion/move proposal to take place in the near future. Regards, Húsönd 02:40, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I have reviewed my closure of the move proposal and decided to overturn and move to Liancourt Rocks. Thank you for your input. Best regards, Húsönd 17:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

no personal attacks

Please read the policy document Misplaced Pages:no personal attacks and guidelines Misplaced Pages:civil and Misplaced Pages:Etiquette and consider if you should change "toadface" to "Clownface" for you last posing to Talk:Liancourt Rocks --Philip Baird Shearer 09:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

?

What the hell were you doing at the liancourt rocks talk page? talking with yourself??? Odst 23:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

You should say to Clownface--Opp2 02:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

o, i see. Odst 01:37, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration

You're one of the parties for this arbitration case that I'm filing. The link to the arbitration is at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Current_requests. (Wikimachine 03:40, 2 September 2007 (UTC))