Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 07:52, 9 December 2007

이 몸이 주거 가서 무어시 될고 하니

What would I be after death? I shall be a,

봉래산 제일봉에 낙락장송 되야 이셔
Tall and thick pine tree on top of Bongraesan,

백설이 만건곤할 제 독야청청 하리라.

Even if white snow covers all over the word, I shall be alone evergreen.

— Seong Sammun

User talk:Appletrees/Archive 1User talk:Appletrees/SP

Administrators' noticeboard/Tewfik's talk page

a couple of points,

1. I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say, I didn't threaten to edit-war with you, I just made it clear that although I will revert any edit (including yours) if I think I can improve the article by doing so, I will not insult or criticise you on a personal level, unless I am first insulted by you. That was supposed to be an olive-branch. It was not a threat of impending edit-wars, I was merely saying that even when we don't agree with each other's edits, we can deal with it without insulting each other and taking things personally.

2. Perhaps you should reconsider pushing so hard and complaining so much regarding the lack of action taken against me, I don't care so much if I am blocked, but it makes you seem more interested in retribution that solution - I have made it more than clear, that I wish for both of us to continue editing wikipedia in a more civil and productive manner, but this does not seem enough for you. Sennen goroshi 02:11, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Sennen goroshi owes me an apology.

Don't think things personally? I don't want to hear that you're consistently making excuses for yourself anymore. At least, your disruptive behaviors on my talk:Reverting it to make the mockery was not excusable at all. You think such vicious actions are reasonable, and fair? No. If you really tried to be a civil person, then make me believe you. I need your apology to me regarding you reverting my talk page and the others. --Appletrees 11:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, lets continue this discussion on your talk page, rather than dragging in a million and one people, who don't really care about our petty problems.

I will be brutally honest, I hope you are not offended by my honesty. I have no intention of apologising for my comments made towards you, I will apologise to admins, if I have broken a rule (the rules are their domain) I will apologise if I am a little unfriendly to someone who has done nothing to me, and I will apologise if I make a mistake.

I refuse to be dragged into a childish debate about who started what or which comment was the most offensive, I have too much respect for myself to do that - all I will say is that insults were given by both of us, and while I will offer/suggest some form of civility between us in the future, I will most certainly not be offering an apology to someone who has spent the best part of a week begging for me to be blocked and leaving messages with various users/admins in an attempt to get them on your side, purely to see me blocked. Neither will I offer an apology to someone who has been so indignant about my supposed insults, but has never once said anything about the insults they have given me. Unless you have something valid to say to me, I consider this whole incident to be finished, personally I shall celebrate with some icy-cold Asahi Super Dry and a smoke. See Yah Sennen goroshi 15:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

It's not done yet because of your very recent comments. Accroding to Anthony's response to my question, he said I can restart the report by myself. See YAh. --Appletrees 15:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Gansong Art Museum

I am not trying to criticise your English ability, however I didn't understand your edit summary on the Gansong Art Museum article, could you rephrase it for me please? If there is a valid reason for your revert, then I will of course revert back to your version, however at the moment I wasn't sure what you were trying to say. thanks Sennen goroshi 11:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I am sorry, I still don't agree with the wording of the article, I see you have cited your comments, but I think your source is biased. To me, plundered/smuggled are POV statements - smuggled in particular has certain specific meanings - I will not revert you edit right now, but I would appreciate it if you could find some more sources that stated exactly how they were taken out - if these sources show that they were actually smuggled, then fine, of course it can stay, but lets find out, before we get into another silly edit-war. Sennen goroshi 04:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I am still waiting for a response, regarding the Gansong Art Museum article, despite our petty quarrels, articles do not edit themselves - so please take a look and see if we can resolve our differences of opinion on this article.Sennen goroshi 18:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm waiting for a third person to comment on the issue. If you want to protest against my wording and the original sources, find any proof for it first. --Appletrees 18:04, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

yeah no problem

한국말하세요? Good friend100 21:23, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

네. 대신 영어를 잘 못해요. ^^ --Appletrees 21:24, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

White kimchi

Do we have an article on white kimchi or should this redirect? Koreans in the U.S. sometimes use the English term for this ("waito kimchi"). Badagnani 21:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Not yet. Waito kimchi is how Japanese calls the baek kimchi. -_-;; Why do we call the Korean national food as such the name? I'll make the article under baek kimchi and redirect white kimchi to it. --Appletrees 21:35, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I think you've made the article! Do you think the pronunciation "waito kimchi" merits mention? I didn't find a Japanese article for white kimchi, or even a Korean one, so I think we may have the first article on this subject. It's always nice when we beat the Korean Misplaced Pages to an article which they then have to translate from English into Korean for their own Misplaced Pages :) Badagnani 19:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Unless any related contents is added onto the article, mentioning "waito kimchi" seems useless. Like Japanese eat the kimchi a lot, or something like that. Actually, there are many good dictionary in Korean websites, and wikipedia is not popular web engine for Koreans in Korea (both nations). --Appletrees 20:04, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Kongbap

Thanks at Kongbap. I have requested permission for a very good photo from Misplaced Pages. 90 percent or more of the Flickr users who I've asked for photos have agreed to their use at Misplaced Pages. Badagnani 19:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Vandal 82.45.192.249

You wondered why 82.45.192.249 vandalized your talk page. The connection appears to be the article Coconut. He vandalized it after you edited it. I guess he didn't like your edit, so he vandalized both Coconut and your talk page. I have Coconut on my watchlist due to frequent vandalism, and I'll be keeping an eye on 82.45.192.249, too. Sbowers3 00:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind caring. I believe I could've met the anon somewhere, and he/she might've followed me. Because I didn't edit the coconut page except adding inter wiki, he/she can't feel unpleasant of my edit. Anyway, thank you again. --Appletrees 01:10, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Need your help

Need your help to add something about the Korean celebration at Death anniversary. We have nothing now. Badagnani (talk) 05:34, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

The name "death anniversary" is definitely the term used in English when translating from Vietnamese. Let me know if you find another article in English or Korean WP about this. Badagnani (talk) 05:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Are the Munmyo and Jongmyo jerye two of the eight? They're not done at night. Also, are there hanja for jerye? Badagnani (talk) 06:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

The special jerye is only for kings and queens or royal family. I only meant ordinary people nowadays. (well, jerye culure was actually for yanban). Of course there is hanja for jerye(祭禮).

So the eight jerye are ones just for ordinary people? Then how many are there for ancient/special people? This should all go into ancestor worship. Badagnani (talk) 06:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Notice on WP:CIVILITY

- Additions like that are unhelpful. It is important we remain calm and not comment on contributors themselves, but rather, we should comment on content. "It is too sad that your British agenda is always conflicting with others." - That was uncalled for. No matter what someone has done you do not have to retort and retaliate. It's just not worth it. Scarian 21:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I appreciate your seemingly meditating gesture but the civility issue is always Senne's favoring hot seat, not me. If you really don't know about the long history between us, don't child me like that. For his incivility, he was also frequently reported on the matter several times. If you were consistently insulted and attacted by someone out of nowhere with unexpected matters, you can't say like a sage. Btw, English is my second or third language, so I made the "glorifying errors" per Sennen and should've wrote down like "British English agenda". The English teacher, Sennen made series of mockeries of my English, so the conflicts on which English is suitable for the article can't be ignored. Regarding your false accusation, I said I've learned that from him. I feel everything have cause and effect thought.--Appletrees (talk) 22:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

"Regarding your false accusation..." - What accusation, friend? I made no accusations of any sort; I commented upon what I read. As to the said user whom you are having difficulty with: Make a report detailing evidence to an admin whom can provide a third opinion and settle the matter once and for all. No matter what has gone on between you and the other editor you can still ignore any uncivil comments from him. If he writes anything that you disagree with take it to a third (Uninvolved/unbias) contributor whom can possibly help ease the situation.

Oh, and one last note: "...don't child me like that." - Your use of imperatives is alarming. I suggest you calm your tone, please. Scarian 22:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, I felt a little annoyed by your usage of the terms like retortion and retaliation. I don't think the terms fit to my comment on his talk page. However, I take your advice in good faith. --Appletrees (talk) 22:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Appreciate for your recommendation

Hi Appletrees, I appreciate much for your recommendation left on my box. I think I just can't stand all those vile acts and express my feeling in a little crude way. I have been so surprised that there are so many twisted persons in this world after I participated in Misplaced Pages as a user. I believe you will clean up all those messed in Misplaced Pages as you have done so far. I will also do my part to make a better Misplaced Pages. 감사 합니다.Patriotmissile (talk) 16:02, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Sennen goroshi

Hi, I took a look at User:Sennen goroshi and his recent activity on Misplaced Pages. I agree with you, his edits tend to be inflammatory and often blatantly violate NPOV. I think the best course of action would be to pursue Misplaced Pages's normal WP:dispute resolution, or if you believe that he has been disruptive and that an administrative review could help, then you should indeed post your concerns at WP:ANI. TSO1D (talk) 01:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I know there is a lot of friction between myself and appletrees, this is certainly caused in part by my less than tactful editing style, i also think that over-reaction on the part of certain editors to my comments also plays a major part. A simple edit/revert/discuss would solve problems, but at the moment it is an edit/revert/revert/revert/3RR report/ani report/ situation. I will never react well to someone who makes 10 page pleas for me to be blocked for every single edit I make that he does not agree with. If someone does not agree with my edits, they are more than welcome to discuss it with me in a civil manner, I respond very well to civil discussion, I do not respond well to insulting rants on my talk page, accusing me of various things.Sennen goroshi (talk) 17:44, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

The civil manners of yours certainly include your mockeries on my English, intellect, education, and my real life? O, don't forget your death curse. Ha, you've never been near to civility. You never cease chasing me. You're erasing my notices in proper ways and civil advices on your talk page, you're just simply reverting all of them. That is not called 'civility'. Regarding the accusation, I got consistently smacked by you out of nowhere with a settled matter with somebody into an article in which you've never cared. Besides, why are still wikistalking me? As long as you're reverting my comments on your talk page and making the disruptive edits and insults, none believes you behave properly.

Besides, what is this, Sennen? --Appletrees (talk) 18:18, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

• Revision as of 2007-11-26T10:39:28 at User:Sennen goroshi

  ooops, it seems I made some kiddie on wikipedia cry. BS Sennen goroshi

what is that? well that edit was me removing comments that you made a long time ago, that I had placed on my user page. I thought that they might be seen to be mocking you, so I removed them and replaced them with a comment that does not refer to you. Would you prefer I kept the comments that were there previously? if you want those comments back, ask me and they are back. Sennen goroshi (talk) 18:29, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Of course, I acknowledge well about the "BS" and "kiddie cry" indicating another user, Patriotmissile offended by you, Sennen. I said your insults are not only toward me. So you're admitting that the past disputes placed on your user page in order to "mock me", huh. That is good to know. --Appletrees (talk) 18:35, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Please don't try to put words into my mouth, at no time did I say those comments were directed towards Patriotmissile, and since you have mentioned his name, I might as well state that those comments were nothing to do with Patriotmissile. Also I did not say that those comments were placed there in order to mock you, I said "they might be seen to be mocking you" which is very different. I don't mind you commenting on what I have said, but please don't try to assume what my intentions are, and don't twist my words. thanks Sennen goroshi (talk) 18:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't justify yourself anymore. So are you proud of putting "BS" on your page replacing with previous dispute with me? The expression was made right after you had conflicts with Patriotmissile. The "some kiddie" is so obvious, why you're denying it?

Somebody you know, is preparing a report on your disruptive behaviors. When the time comes, just plead against it for your sake in "civil" manner. Besides, why are you putting all these on my talk page as consistently reverting my civil comments on your talk page? If you really wanted to deal with or comprise any edit conflicts, then you need to accept other's opinion regardless of the past. I only see your contradiction in your wordings. Again, it is my last advice to you, don't wikistalk me any more.--Appletrees (talk) 18:59, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Why do you think that "some kiddie" is patriotmissile? I think you have issues regarding dealing with me, I have tried to be civil in the past, but all you do is complain, I have made it clear that if you want to discuss things in a civil manner, then I am more than willing to listen, but when I offer things like that you demand that I apologise to you, I think instead of whining about me, you should start editing some articles, for the last 4 hours all I have done is waste my time dealing with this crap. Either ignore me or discuss my edits in a constructive manner. thanks Sennen goroshi (talk) 19:24, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Still, the opportunity is wide open for you to apologize to me for your disruptive behaviors and vandalism. I would not forget your disruptions and slurs unless you apologize to me. Besides, your wikistaking is the civil and constructive manners to deal with conflicts? You have me waste my time so much(days, weeks) to deal with your POV and incivility issues. Just 4 hours, how precious. --Appletrees (talk) 19:32, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for making your intentions so crystal clear. You do not want a civil relationship with me, you do not want constructive edits, you are unwilling to behave towards me in a non-disruptive manner until I have apologised. Now it makes sense, all the times I have attempted to solve problems with you, the main issue was not my intent to edit in a civil manner, the problem was that you wanted me to apologise. That will not happen, until such time as I see your apology. I am of course willing to put all of this behind me and try to work constructively with you on articles, and discuss any differences we have, rather than having petty disputes. But I am very happy that you finally came out in the open, and revealed exactly what you are so annoyed about. Thanks Sennen goroshi (talk) 19:50, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Sennen goroshi, it is so interesting that the words you are making is actually applicable to you directly once you change the nominative from others to yourself. Let's figure it out the situation in a rational way as you said. I think you may know what kinda intention you have inside of yourself. See U soon.Patriotmissile (talk) 23:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

What another false accusation you're making as you always do to me. It is so crystal clear that you're lying this time again, and you've never behaved civil as many people point out to you. And you never wish a civil relationship with me or other Korean editors Your consistent wikistalking is just one of evidence to describe your obvious misconduct. Everything has cause and effect. Without any reflection and suitable apology to the people horribly offended by your disruptive insults, there is no peace and construction. Why do you stick to commit the act?It is so natural for people to get annoyed by stalking and shadowing edits like you do to me. --Appletrees (talk) 20:03, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for notice, Appletrees. I think about the identities of Sennen goroshi and Jjk82 you provided to me, it might be right. However, as you know, we can't believe the words from themselves. I will try to figure this out without emotional uphealing as you recommended. Thank you.Patriotmissile (talk) 23:16, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

ANI report

while you are free to add whatever comments you wish to the ANI report, please do not put your comments in the middle of mine. Add them after my comments, if that is OK, I had to remove all your comments from the middle of my text, chotto taihen desu.Sennen goroshi (talk) 17:13, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Muk

Do you know why someone is adding that muk is a food of Japanese origin? Although it is possible that some Korean foods have a Japanese origin (and some Japanese foods have a Korean origin), this wouldn't be one of the first foods that would come to mind. Badagnani (talk) 17:37, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't believed biji and Muk is originated in Japan at all. The person made the category is very notorious for putting controversial or false information to Korean related articles. The anons of Tokyo are the same guy to make the cat. He was once blocked for such behaviors by User:Deiz. I think I have to ask him to see his frequent watchlist subject behaving how. As you saw, the category was wrongly tagged on Soju. The soju was originated in Persia and was transmitted via Mongol to China and Korean then Japan received the skill very last. If the person claims that the originality of the food, it should be addressed like "Origin in China or "Origin in Persia". --Appletrees (talk) 17:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Links

Please provide me links showing this altering of comments, thanks. It does seem as if the instant call for the complete blanking of the section (which even most "pro-Korean" editors are not asking for--even Melonbarmonster prefers leaving in at least a discussion of bosintang) may give a clue to the editor's motivations. Badagnani (talk) 18:24, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I found it. It seems, before this editor's newfound interest in Korean cuisine, that he edited primarily articles about American-style fast food. I think another editor may have emailed him off-line to ask him to begin hammering at Korean cuisine, or, if not, it was his inability to force through consensus regarding moving the photo, then he retaliated by reporting the entire article to "the parents." As is typical with such editors, his inability to resist using profanity (and insistence on blanking an entire section, very much against consensus) shows his intemperate nature. Badagnani (talk) 18:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Huh, they are not honest, and are they ninja? What are they doing in the middle of bush or in the past threads? What a tactic they're making. Graping my tail of coat seems to ignite the flame. --Appletrees (talk) 21:22, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Ownership

Re your edit here may I suggest you read WP:OWN you don't own the report you made on ANI and you can't stop other editors contributing to it. May I also suggest you show more caution with the tone of your edits - the above edit could be interpreted as a threat. Kelpin (talk) 10:28, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Did he edit comments that you had made? Did he move text you had put there? I can't see any evidence of that so fail to see how he distorted the report? He was expressing his opinions on there which he is as entitled to do as you are (regardless of who started the report). Kelpin (talk) 10:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not acting in bad faith, I was trying to offer you useful advice to help you improve your contributions. If you think I am acting in bad faith then add my name to your ANI (or start a new one), if you don't then please withdraw the comment. Kelpin (talk) 11:10, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Jerem43

What can I say? his suggestions that we all get banned is not constructive, apart from the alleged vandal, we have all made good edits in the past and to give permanent blocks is just stupid. I doubt I will agree with you all of the time, when it comes to Korean/Japanese articles, but I would never support a permanent block for you, goodfriend or melonbarmonster.Sennen goroshi (talk) 14:12, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

jJk might well deserve a ban, it depends on his edit history I guess. I have not seen his complete edit history. My opinion is that if an editor makes an ID, and then uses it for a single topic or group of topics just to make problems, they have no place in wikipedia. If an editor has made some decent edits and is not on wikipedia for a single purpose, then if they are making problems, they should improve themselves. It is easy to see a 100% troublemaker, they usually stick to a small group of topics, and don't ever make a constructive edit. None of the people Jerem suggested to be banned are 100% troublemakers. Oh well, I don't think the admins will block anyone permanently over this, at least I hope not. Sennen goroshi (talk) 14:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Ancient Korean recipes

What kind of people? People interested in the deep history and precious things of Korean culture? I just read the Korean royal cuisine article and it is fascinating--so many dishes I've never seen at any Korean restaurant in my life. Badagnani (talk) 10:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Of course not you, you know what I mean. Yes, there are so many dishes that I also never have eaten in my life. The precious cultural properties could be almost disappeared as a series of misfortunes occurred in Korea. But the dishes are also not quite familiar to Koreans because of their expensive price and formality. Many ui-gwe(의궤) hold the detail information regarding Korean royal court cuisine, and I should create the article for starter. Anyway, you give a light of hope. Thanks--Appletrees (talk) 10:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Request for arbitration

A request for arbitration has been placed at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration#Korean cuisine. The arbitration involves not only the issues with Korean cuisine but the issues with editing the article South Korea and the civility of multiple editors.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 07:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Deodeok and seogi

Hi, I think we need articles about deodeok (Codonopsis lanceolata) and seogi beoseos (a kind of edible lichen). Do you have any sources about them? Accurate information is very hard to find about these special Korean vegetarian foods. Badagnani (talk) 08:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

See Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Korea/Cuisine. Badagnani (talk) 08:30, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Life
		I, Lenticel, award User:Appletrees the Barnstar of Life for his work on Korean-related topics--Lenticel 14:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You seem to be a prolific editor and I think it is high time that you get a barnstar--Lenticel 14:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

hope

There seems to be some hope that you and I can both edit a Korea related article without any major issues, while I imagine we will have different opinions about articles in the future, I hope we can reach agreement in a civil manner. Lets hope there are no major problems in the future, so we can get on with editing, rather than complaining and spending lots of time on ANI reports. Maybe if some editors see you and I behaving in a civil manner, they will try to do the same. Thanks Sennen goroshi 15:17, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh well, at this time you and I are facing the "common friend", who gives a "surprising present" to the editors engaging in the articles. Aside from the matter, I could've left my opinion about my past experiences with you on the RFC reported by User:Good friend100. But I'm very tired of consuming my time to deal with that kind of things. I have not even submitted my opinion to RFA yet. Unless the "privileged person" exaggerates "my contribution" to the article, I hadn't even care much about the dog meat section.

Anyway, as long as you remain civil and stick to original references when you add contents onto Korean related articles, I wouldn't have any bad image against you. You're getting my credit a bit after the special person filed the retaliated report and you behaved civil. However, you may have to deal with many Korean editors due to your past edits. That is just up to you. Good luck. --Appletrees 04:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks. I did not want to rebuke the banned user, at edit summary. --Nightshadow28 (talk) 17:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Would you mind...

Would you mind justifying why exactly you reverted

• here (10:58, 7 December 2007)
• here (10:43, 7 December 2007)

Thanks. Please answer here, saves the back-and-forth. -- Fullstop (talk) 11:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Will you be replying any time soon? Thanks. -- Fullstop (talk) 14:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Nagak photo

Great job with the nagak photo. Do you think you could crop it so the instrument players are bigger in the photo? Badagnani (talk) 19:51, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I will crop the image, but it has just the 800 pixel width. And check the page Talk:Nabal--Appletrees 19:57, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Blocked

I have blocked both you and Opp2 for 24h each because of the renewed revert-warring on Liancourt Rocks. Please review the warning I placed on the article talk page the other day. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand why you're blocking me. I only revert twice his non-consensus edits. You didn't even warn me about the matter. I strictly followed the rule on the talk page written. Your blocking is unreasonable and random. --Appletrees (talk) 23:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Caspian blue (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=This blocking is the admins' misunderstanding. I strictly followed the new rule written on the ] and the main dispute occurred between ] and ], not me. Please see the history of the article ].  |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=This blocking is the admins' misunderstanding. I strictly followed the new rule written on the ] and the main dispute occurred between ] and ], not me. Please see the history of the article ].  |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=This blocking is the admins' misunderstanding. I strictly followed the new rule written on the ] and the main dispute occurred between ] and ], not me. Please see the history of the article ].  |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

.

I am going to let FutPerf know you are contested the block. Due to the nature of the article and the rampant edit warring there, I am willing to let him handle this. -- lucasbfr 00:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I paste the same email contents sending to the admin,Fut.Perf..

I ask you to lift my block. You obviously mistook me with User:Clownface. If you closely look into both history of the article and talk page Liancourt Rocks, I barely participated in the article.

I reverted the article twice in total because the Opp2 consistently inserted paragraphs without any consensus received. That is a controversial and not really relevant to the article. The new rule says if editor who wishes to insert controversial contents, gathering consensus from editors is mandentory. My second revert is toward anon, not Opp2!!! The new anon reverted from the last revision to Opp2's edition. The anon didn't leave any note in the summary field. Therefore, I made it back to the last revision and even gave an advice regarding the new rule to the anon.

• 2007-12-08T08:03:58
• 2007-12-08T12:53:12

And on the talk page, I left only 3 short comment within 2 days after Opp2 brought up and inserted the irrelevant San Francisco Treaty!. This block is an obvious mistake.

• 2007-12-06T10:40:50
• 2007-12-08T07:44:17
• 2007-12-08T08:00:21

Opp2 failed to give a reasonable rationale to several people, especially User:Clownface. They are main disputers on the San Fransisco Peace Treaty. It is so odd that you didn't block Clownface to have reverted Opp2's edits twice . If this block is reasonable enough, why 219.66.44.232 (leaving no comment on the summary field), User:Forestfarmer, User:John Nevard, and several IP users did not get block? They reverted more than mine. They disputed more than my engagement. I don't get this blocking by you. Please examine closely and then give me an reasonable reason. Thanks. --Appletrees (talk) 00:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I have sent a message to User:Future Perfect at Sunrise in regards to your block. I have yet to receive word back, but I do not see evidence of you violating 3RR. I also sent you an e-mail response. Useight (talk) 01:46, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

User:Future Perfect at Sunrise didn't block me for 3RR rule, but according to the admin's comment above, "I made dispute with Opp2"., which is just wrong. If you see the talk page of Liancourt rocks, I left very short comments to uncivil anon and Opp2. The dispute mainly were made by User:Opp2 and User:Clownface. And the most reverting editor is User:Forestfarmer. I only followed the new rule like this , but why do I need to be blocked for the disruption? I don't understand User:Future Perfect at Sunrise's intention.--Appletrees (talk) 01:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, according to the block log, the reason was "edit-warring on Liancourt Rocks", which sounds like 3RR to me. Unfortunately, Future Perfect at Sunrise went offline immediately after blocking you and Opp2 and I don't want to engage in Wheel Warring by unblocking you myself. If you like, I can bring this up on the admin noticeboard. Useight (talk) 02:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Could you bring this to the noticeboard? If so, I really appreciate your effort.

I was dumbfounded by the unexpected and unreasonable block. I've acknowledged that the article is very controversial and many editors engaging in the article have undergone several RFA several times. And the admin, Fut. sun has keeping eye on the article because of the past history. I only tried to keep the new rule set up by arbitration administrators. User Opp2 inserted irrelevant information to the article, so several user objected to his edits. But I only left very short comment 3 times on the talk page regarding especially civility. The two reverts of mine is just results keeping the new rule. I don't get why I'm being blocked instead of main disputers. Anyway, I really appreciated your care again.--Appletrees (talk) 02:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll mention this on the noticeboard for you, no problem. I was once blocked by mistake, so I know how frustrating it can be to be editing along and then, all of a sudden, blocked. If you want to be entertained while you wait, you can read about it at User talk:Useight#Block. Useight (talk) 02:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I right now read RyanGerbil10's comment at the ANI. I don't get why I'm being falsely called a frequent Japan/Korea edit warrior from RyanGerbil10. I've not violated anything, but reported unsolved files twice at the ANI. I'm poor at English and not know much of wikirule, therefore if the Korean related articles were distorted by people with bad faith, editors would condone it keeping which is called "peace". If some with good English has accused something falsely, then I have to put up with the false blame? Very good.

I believe the blocking is an obvious mistake of the Futer perfect sunrise. I did follow the new rule concisely. If the admin disliked any disputes occurring on the article, he should've blocked all of the editors who firstly inserted the unaccepted arguments and previously made editwarrings with others. But he picked the wrong person because I didn't fight with Opp2. The anon violated the new rule, so I notified the anon of it. And then the result is this? The comment of RyanGerbil10 is, I believe a false blame and not from a good faith. If anyone closely look at the history of the article and talk page, I believe you will change your thought. --Appletrees (talk) 04:05, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello, sorry everybody I couldn't respond earlier (it was actually late at night in my part of the world and I went to bed, even admins do that from time to time.) - I won't raise objections if some other admin wants to lift this block, but as far as I'm concerned I'm afraid the block stands, on the basis of Talk:Liancourt Rocks#New rules of conduct (and its specification, the 1rv/24h rule imposed by Moreschi). You made two reverts within a few hours, both continuing an ongoing, fast-paced edit war. Your argument that the other person's edits were against the rules and had failed to find consensus just doesn't cut it - the only way to stop an edit war is for both sides to cease their reverts.

Where you may be right is that I may have missed one or two others who were also revert-warring. I'll have another look at the situation now.

Fut.Perf. ☼ 07:52, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

• Requests for unblock