Revision as of 18:45, 28 October 2008 editCaspian blue (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers35,434 editsm →You're trying to skipp out many procedures← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 10:01, 26 September 2024 edit undoFastilyBot (talk | contribs)Bots239,264 edits BOT: Some of your contributions may require attention | ||
(146 intermediate revisions by 48 users not shown) | |||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on {{#if:|]|my talk page}}, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome -->--] (]) 13:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC) | I hope you enjoy editing here and being a ]! Please ] your messages on ]s using four ]s (<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out ], ask me on {{#if:|]|my talk page}}, or ask your question on this page and then place <code><nowiki>{{helpme}}</nowiki></code> before the question. Again, welcome! <!-- Template:Welcome -->--] (]) 13:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC) | ||
:Welcome, Caspian blue. You are the first person on my page. And you gave me helpful message. Thank you! --] (]) |
:Welcome, Caspian blue. You are the first person on my page. And you gave me helpful message. Thank you! --] (]) 16:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
== |
== I love your userpage! == | ||
Sorry, I was getting tired of all those discussions where Japan is vilified in articles. ] (]) 02:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]{{#if:Empress Myeongseong|  according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the ]. If you continue, '''you may be ] from editing'''. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. If necessary, pursue ]. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr --> | |||
:Thank you, Chris. I understand this message is one of cheer. Thank you.--] (]) 03:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
===A plausibly calming thought?=== | |||
] You currently appear to be engaged in an ]{{#if:Kumdo|  according to the reverts you have made on ]}}. Note that the ] prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24 hour period. Additionally, users who perform a large number of reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring, even if they do not technically violate the ]. If you continue, '''you may be ] from editing'''. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a ] among editors. If necessary, pursue ]. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-3rr -->--] (]) 16:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
] | |||
The seasonal colors of autumn leaves -- perennially expected, but always a bit of a surprise .... | |||
] explains : "One thing about myself, I really don't like "orange color" which is the ] to blue." | |||
:Thank you for your advice, Caspian blue. But Kao no nai tsuki deleted non-disputed article in the lump, such as ''On December 28, some Korean Army and Palace Guard officers were sentenced to death for treason in superior court, then they were executed.'' and ''On October 10, 1895 King Gojong divested Queen Min of her peerage and busted to plebeian by his royal decree''.--] (]) 01:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC) | |||
Are you familiar with the Latin phrase, ] -- perennially expected, but always a bit of a surprise? --] (]) 19:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
== October 2008 == | |||
== Translation == | |||
] Please stop. If you continue to ] pages by deliberately introducing incorrect information, {{#if:Empress Myeongseong |as you did to ],}} you will be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. {{#if:Do not falsify the Korean history, besides, the Gojong Silok and Sunjong Silok and any royal court document written during the Japanese occupation are regarded "manipulated unreliable info" by scholars. If you keep continues, administrative intervention might be needed.|Do not falsify the Korean history, besides, the Gojong Silok and Sunjong Silok and any royal court document written during the Japanese occupation are regarded "manipulated unreliable info" by scholars. If you keep continues, administrative intervention might be needed.|}}<!-- Template:uw-error3 --> --] (]) 13:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you for your message. You felt concern for me. I add more reliable sources.--] (]) 10:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
Hi. I got your message on the article. I will look over it when I have time; it will probably be sometime this weekend. It's a pretty contentious topic but I'll do what I can. ] (]) 19:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
== Dishonesty == | |||
:Hi. Don't worry about it, it's not a really painful topic. I'm not the nationalistic type so it won't be a problem. What might be a problem is time -- right now I'm super busy because I'm applying for graduate schools. But if I have some free time somewhere I will take a look at it.] (]) 21:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
== Mediation == | |||
I'm Korean reader and you're being very funny about Korean ability. I checked the sources and you lied that the murder was Korean order. You're obviously somebody's sock per your knowledge of English Misplaced Pages and have been stalking me per your self evidence at Sennen goroshi's talk page. You also lied the sources written by Japanese order during the occupation period are "reliable". Those are regarded by scholars as "forged unreliable documents". That's why those sillok are not designated as ] and ]'s ] unlike other ]. Shame on you.--] (]) 14:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
] Here's hoping it helps your dispute. Best wishes, ]<sup>'']''</sup> 01:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
::I think some Korean and Japanese troops killed her, so I didn't delete Miura Goro. At the time, many foreigners encroached Korea. And some Koreans collaborated with foreigners for their expedient. The incident was occured by Koreans collaborated with Japanese and Japanese. I know Annals of Joseon Dynasty is not reliable sources in South Korea, but every document was same Official Gazette of Korea in this case. So I land Annals of Joseon Dynasty with Official Gazette of Korea in this article. and I think King didn't know Japanese criminals name, so he said criminals name only Koreans. I didn't lie.--] (]) 14:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::You forged that the order is from Jo Yeon-u. He was charged for the collaboration but the order. Besides, ] is regarded reliable sources in South Korea and in the world, except Gojong Sillok and Sunjong Sillok. Do not distort my commnet and you used the forged documents. You lie.--] (]) 14:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::I didn't forge. If you think the order was from Jo Yeon-u, you would improve the article. I wrote the article from the Official Gazette of Korea, so I didn't find Jo Yeon-u. And I'm sorry, I didn't know the Annals of Joseon Dynasty is regarded reliable sources in South Korea, except Gojong Sillok and Sunjong Sillok. Thank you for your information. Anyway, every article was same the Official Gazette of Korea in this case. Don't mind.--] (]) 15:36, 8 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::::You're making fun of me with my typo of Jo Hui-yeon. You inserted as if the order is from Jo. Did you even understand what am saying? Did you even read the sources? You attached ] to the article. Obvious, you're making inconsistent excuses for yourself. You said Annals of Joseon dynasty is not reliable sources. So funny. To improve the quality of the article, I should remove your forged info.--] (]) 16:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::::I'm sorry, now I understand what you mean, and I didn't fun of you with your typo of Jo Hui-yeon.--] (]) 16:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
== |
== MedCab == | ||
Hi. A MedCab case has been opened ], regarding ]. You have been named as a participant. Please visit the ] and indicate whether or not you will participate. Thank you. ]''' » ]] 23:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC) | |||
Hi Bukubku! | |||
==Comment== | |||
I see you're having a dispute with CaspianBlue over whether Jo Huiyeon ordered the assassination of ]. Would you mind quoting the passage in your sources that support this allegation? Sorry for the trouble. ] (]) 01:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
I invite no action or comment; but I wonder if it might be worthwhile for you to examine what I have posted as a "comment" at ]? Plausibly useful? --] (]) 20:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
::Thank you for your message, Kwamikagami. Jo Hui yeon was former Military Minister at that time. After the success of coup he became Military Minister again. But soon King refuged the Russian Legation. Then King said Jo Hui yeon was one of criminals. He was the highest rank person in the criminals. Japanese troops must have been under the order of Japanese high official in this case Miura Goro. Similarly, Korean troops must have been under the order of Korean high official. So I wrote former Military Minister of Korea Jo Hui yeon and Miura Goro ordered. If you feel not good. Shall I write the all person's name who King said the criminals or Shall I write Several Korean Officers? And I have a petition what discussions should be discussed in Talk:Empress Myeongseong. Some people didn't discuss in Talk:Empress Myeongseong, and they deleted the article without consensus.--] (]) 01:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Kenroku-en== | |||
:::When alleging that someone is guilty of a crime, it's best to have a source that actually says so. ''Assuming'' that the Korean troops "must have" been under the command of Jo, and further that therefore he "must have" given certain orders, is your own thesis. We need a source that names him and explicitly says that he did this. If there are no such sources, then the passage should be deleted. For example, we don't say that the Rape of Nanking was committed "under the orders of" Emperor Hirohito just because he was the man in charge. ] (]) 02:50, 9 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
] in winter.]] ] shrub which grows next to this ] marker in Kyoto is understood to have been scientifically categorized by ] (1743-1828), a Swedish naturalist.]] | |||
] -- I believe that the common ] in the center foreground of your '']'' winter photo at the left is the same plant as can be seen growing next to the Onin War marker pictured at the right. | |||
It is curious that ''Kenroku-en'' was named by ], who confronted many unanticipated challenges during his lifetime. I wonder if re-considering the classical dichotomies of Chinese and Japanese landscape architecture will help me in a process of re-examining my impressions of this quintessential ] bureaucrat? I wonder if a similar approach might assist you in re-evaluating how to participate more effectively in in Misplaced Pages? | |||
:::Thanks for being so cooperative, Bukubku. We don't always need to be so careful, but there are so many claims around for historical happenings that it can be a difficult subject. Accusations of criminality make it much more sensitive, especially in cases of international conflict, where "patriots" from both sides want their country to look good and the other to look bad. Passions run high for Israel, Kosovo, Kashmir, Ireland, the Opium War, Armenia, and dozens of other recent or current conflicts. In such cases, it's best to have an explicit, reliable, and verifiable source for every claim—not always an easy task. With the Israel-Palestinian conflict, I think it took a year of very passioned debate for a consensus to emerge. ] (]) 19:07, 9 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
If ''Kenroku-en'' was designed to embody spaciousness, seclusion, artifice, antiquity, waterways, and panoramas, does it necessarily follow that similar aspects can be adduced from ]? | |||
Rather than removing sourced content unilaterally, please discuss on the talk page first. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 16:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
Too often, I notice that Misplaced Pages appears to be moved by the kinds of disparate factors which are mentioned as explanations for length of the ]. | |||
== Vandalism and Personal attack warning == | |||
I plan to give these musings some thought during the remaining weeks of winter. | |||
] Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to ] Misplaced Pages, {{#if:Empress Myeongseong|as you did at ],}} you will be ] from editing. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism3 -->--] 00:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
In this or any other context, I suppose the lucky ] would have stumbled into ways to turn a profit. What do you think? My guess is that ]'s might be construed to suggest, "It is better not to reach than to go to far." -- ] (]) 20:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
] Please ] other editors{{#if:Empress Myeongseong|, which you did here: ]}}. If you continue, you '''will''' be ] from editing Misplaced Pages. {{#if:|{{{2}}}|}}<!-- Template:uw-npa3 -->--] 00:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
:Caspian, tell the reason of template and answer my question about your falesely citation source in "Korea under Japanese rule" write also Min as Queen. Don't template my page. Your template vandalise my talk page appearance. Calm down, please.--] (]) 00:59, 25 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::You make me a chuckle. You're not a regular but a (suspicious) newbie. So, the warning is very much reasonable and you falsely attack me. You earn the waring. If you call me "vandal", I will report you.--] 01:07, 25 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::Caspian, you insult me. Answer me When I chuckled you. Answer me When I falsely attacked you. and I call you Caspian. Tell me where you would report?--] (]) 01:16, 25 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::Please, you two. Neither of you type English fluently, and I think there's some serious miscommunication going on. Caspian, I know where you and I stand, but I also know you constructively contribute to Misplaced Pages, so I have to count on you to be the mature one here and deal with this appropriately. Taking it to ] is not the answer - if you can't work things out with Bukubku, then take your concerns to ]. ] | ] 01:24, 25 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::::The conversation moved to ] by Caspian. | |||
::In my writing, I've tried to be "diplomatic" ... but my best efforts have more often turned out to be merely obscure. Retired ] suggested that I was wise to keep my language "measured," but somehow vagueness was not necessary -- . Al that any of us can hope to do is to grow a little bit better ... and a little more "measured" .... Don't you agree? --] (]) 21:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
:I strongly encourage all editors on Japan-Korea articles to discuss issues calmly on talk pages not edit war. And stay civil and cease the personal attacks. <span style="font-family: verdana;"> — ] • ] • </span> 22:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::Rlevse, I strongly approve of your calm proposal. and Please keep in mind this.--] (]) 01:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
==Rude and/or vague== | |||
== What is your rationale for your blanking == | |||
This issue is outside the ambit of your ban. Will you give this some thought? | |||
From time to time, more than one editor has construed my words as "rude." Please review of the following and suggest a better way to avoid being perceived as unhelpfully rude. | |||
The article title is "Empress Myeongseong", so it should be consistent. Queen "Min" is the very rude style for King/Emperor's consort. The introduction should be a summary, but you put all spurious and unreliable gazette written under the Japanese control. The unreliable Gazette has its own section. You also intentionally made the image "red link". Besides, do not delete the properly cited "sources" which Sennen goroshi falsely labeled and you blanked out. Besides, sources there clearly say "the assassions holding swords and killed the empress are "Japanese". So the order of the country Japan and Korea should be kept as well as it is "alphabetical order" that you guys so favor.--] 23:34, 25 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
* ] | |||
:Caspian, talk in Talk:Empress Myeongseong, this is my page. this controversy is not only mine and yours, but also other people.--] (]) 01:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
* ] | |||
::You have a lot to learn about ] policy. Read it. What controversy? By whom? In this case, "dispute" is a correct term. You're responsible for your edit, so you are obliged to answer for the query. Stop making nonsense.--] 01:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
* ] | |||
:::Administrator kwami created new section on Talk:Empress Myeongseong, why you reluctant to talk in the page, me and one person getting in the controversy. Caspian, please join in. | |||
:::In "Korea under Japanese rule", I read your source but I don't believe it. 1500 Palace Guards run out on Queen, and they are safe. And also written the existance of much more Korean Army participant than Japanese with father of King (you disguising this). You want me to believe that most Korean dislike Queen, isn't it.--] (]) 02:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::You make me laugh again. So you're asserting that you're in academic with more notability than Prof. Park who was a retired prof of Korea-Russian relation and history department at ]? The source is "secondary source unlike your usage of biased and dubious primary source". Whether you don't believe it or not, my source is published in "reliable source" by the "reputable academic" who has studied and researched in the field over than 40 years. Your feeling has absolutely unrelated to the topic. If you can't stick to ], but relying on ] is a fast way of you digging your hole.--] 02:41, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::::Caspian, you insult me, again. I didn't make you laugh. Answer me When I made you laugh. | |||
:::::Answer me why you don't talk Talk:Empress Myeongseong(Administrator kwami created). | |||
:::::"Korea under Japanese rule", O.K. I think your this source is accetable, but your another source looks like citing from e-mail is not. And If you cite this source, I add father of King and Korean Army participants, and add 1500 Palace Guards run out on Queen, Russian Guards sabotaged, too. However it is only my opinion not other users.--] (]) 04:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
:::::::You're changing the subject again with '''such threat'''. Where did I insult you? I honestly had a laugh because of your continued "funny" discussion. The e-mail source that I did not add to the article initially is actually from a very reputable academic of Korean history, ]. The source and my new source are almost holding a same content, but "written language" is different. I will add the falsification and coverups by the Japanese, all which are addressed in the source. Don't ever threat me again. You're already warned for your incivility by Rlevse.--12:06, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
::::::::your word "You make me laugh again.". OK, I don't say about your insult, this is petty thing.--] (]) 12:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
In an effort to be "diplomatic," I have more often achieved merely "vague" ... and I would appreciate comments about this problem as well. In order to "find my own voice," I obviously need to learn to avoid being perceived as rude and/or vague. | |||
== give me your opinion == | |||
Doesn't this represent an interesting change of focus -- not so much about what you may or may not have done wrong, but more to do with figuring out how to help someone else? --] (]) 18:20, 15 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
do you think the edits made by caspian blue were correct? | |||
==Asama== | |||
I would be interested in your opinion on the article | |||
Congratulations. Good step in a constructive direction. --] (]) 15:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks.--] (]) 11:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Hi! == | |||
http://en.wikipedia.org/Empress_Myeongseong | |||
Thank you for the recent comment. I'm doing fine now. Well, I am careless sometimes. That's my flaw. So the block was 仕方がない and that's all. Happy editing! ] <small>(])</small> 15:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC) | |||
] (]) 14:44, 26 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
== All caps == | |||
== You're trying to skipp out many procedures == | |||
Hi. I notice that in your last few posts at WP:AN, you've been repeating in all-caps, "NOT RACIST". All caps tends to be interpreted online as shouting... could you please stop shouting? If you wish for people to see your position as reasonable, then you do yourself a great disservice to appear so excitable. Settle down, stop repeating, "NOT RACIST", and make your points calmly, please. -]<sup>(])</sup> 00:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Let me tell you about ] process. ] is almost a last resolution method for a long-term dispute between editors. If all required DR method are failed, your suggestion would work such as 1) discuss on the article talk page or users' talk page 2) if the discussion is not successful, file for ] for specific question on disputed contents or seek a third opinion for a third party such as ]. 3) if all are failed, then ] would work because disputers would already acknowledge what opponents would think or claim. However, we have not even tried the No.1. Moreover, this dispute is neither held for long term, but also you have not even addressed what is your problem with the content that you labeled as "racist". You just kept removing contents you don't like. You have not opened any discussion for that at the talk page at all. That would be considered ] because "I said so". No logic found in your argument as well as disruptive. Rlevse and other admin may suggest you to take your concern to ] because they seemed to think that you tried above all methods before, however you did not do anything. | |||
:I'm sorry. I looks bad. You are right. Thank you.--] (]) 00:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
The article was written in 2006 and as far as I've known, at that time, "inline citation" was not strictly required. I also checked on the history of the article, that much of contents was written by {{User|Wikimachine}} and his last version is almost identical to the current version. Besides, the discrimination is well explained in his biography "Woongjin Great People #30 Woo Jang-Choon by Baek Sukgi. (C) Woongjin Publishing Co., Ltd. 1987" and . Racial discrimination is nothing new in Japan and well-known "fact". He was mistreated at that time, so what is a big deal to address the "fact"? You also tried to distort that the assassination by the Japanese mob was largely responsible for Woo Beom-jin or other collaborater. That is called "history revisionism". That is not quite "cute attempt". So open a discussion at the ] first.--] 18:43, 28 October 2008 (UTC) | |||
== AGF == | |||
I do not appreciate anyone touching others' comment without permission except special cases. I did not switch the order of your comment and mine at all if you check carefully the time stamp of mine. While I was writing the comment with an open tab, you inserted your comment. If I tried to switch it, there would be an edit conflict but I did not have that experience. You still seem not to assume good faith. Moreover, in the diff, you referred the stalking site to mock me in the public. That is my point with the diff. Best regards for your editing.--] 02:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Please, don't reverse turns. Time stamp is not changed by user, it is saving.--] (]) 10:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
::As I said, I did not revere the order. Please don't assume bad faith.--] 14:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
I hope someday ○○○ will have good faith. Please stop call others as racist without any ground. I don't like to involve with ○○○r any trouble. Please stay away from here. --] (]) 13:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
==Seeking help in presenting thoughts clearly== | |||
I write to ask for prospective help. In a sense, I'm only interested laying the foundation for the future. Perhaps this may be construed as taking steps to avert problems might be mitigated by a timely comment or suggestion ...? | |||
===ArbCom remedy=== | |||
Voting is underway at . In part because of , the was modified and "evidence in the case has expanded to include other disputes in which Tenmei has been involved." You will be surprised to learn that ] has anything at all to do with this so-called "evidence" at . I don't think this timeless prose is worth struggling to read, but I mention this to explain a bit more of the reasons why I'm reaching out to you specifically. | |||
ArbCom findings of fact included: | |||
* . "... many of Tenmei's talkpage posts and submissions during this arbitration case have been very difficult for other editors to understand, to the point that experienced participants in dispute resolution have had difficulty in following them, despite what we accept as Tenmei's good-faith best efforts to assist us in resolving the case." | |||
ArbCom remedies included: | |||
* : "Should Tenmei become involved in any further disputes with other editors, whether concerning the content of articles (beyond ordinary day-to-day editing issues) or more formal dispute resolution procedures, he shall seek the assistance of a volunteer mentor or adviser to work with him in maximizing the value of his presentation by assisting him with formulating it in a clear and civil fashion." | |||
* : "Editors who encounter difficulties in communicating with others on-wiki are advised to seek help from others in presenting their thoughts clearly, particularly when disputes arise or when dispute resolution is sought." | |||
It is clear that ArbCom anticipates future difficulties; and I guess I need to do the same. Arguably, my previous postings on your talk page are congruent with exactly the sort of thing ArbCom wants me to do in future; and I'm willing to invest in learning about how to disagree without being disagreeable. | |||
If you want to discuss this off-wiki, I'm working on figuring out how to set up an appropriate e-mail address. -- ] (]) 17:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
:I don't like person who backbiting behind my back. I don't meet the person. sorry.--] (]) 13:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Yamanote shitamachi == | |||
Hi, Ryulong. | |||
Why did you revert | |||
? I think the caption is not correct. Do you think correct? For example, headman of ] say appreciative statement about donation from Sumida ward citizens. The statement tile is I appreciate of shitamachi mind(下町の心意気に感謝します). So ] is shitamachi. The caption is not correct.--] (]) 14:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
] | |||
I think this file is not correct also. --] (]) 14:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Discuss this at ]. I have stated I will not be editing those pages again.—] (]) 14:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
Hi Bukubku. Come over to the talk page and discuss it there. It was ] who provided the image.] (]) 14:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Thank you, VsevolodKrolikov. You seem to read ja-Wiki. About this something is worng in en-Wiki.--] (]) 14:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Manchuria 1945 == | |||
Regarding excellent edit, you may also want to have a look at ]. Between the two articles, there is quite a bit of work still to be done. You may also want to look at the talk pages - viz: ] and ]. Cheers, ] (]) 16:13, 23 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
:Thank you, your advice let me edit the articles.--] (]) 09:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Yasukuni edits == | |||
Hey there, | |||
You make an interesting argument, but I don't think I'm completely convinced yet. Doing a quick search of "yasukuni shrine" and "kami" on google and google books brings up quite a bit of hits, and I know I have seen the enshrined referred to as "kami" in the past. Do you know what specific term is used most commonly in Japanese to refer to the enshrined? I can't tell if this is just difference in translation. Also, we might want to take this to ] to get some more opinions? --]<sup>]</sup> 13:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
:That's good idea. I ask ] people. Thank you.--] (]) 14:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC) | |||
:About the ], I don't think it should have its own "Section" when it is only 2 sentences long. There is no need for that. The exact same things are written in the paragraph above. The only reason the Yusukan has its own section is because it is has a lot of controversy surrounding it. --]<sup>]</sup> 18:34, 17 October 2009 (UTC) | |||
==Misstatement?== | |||
In the World War II article it says "The ] occupied ]." Should not that be the ROC? Thanks StevenWT | |||
:Thanks. I missed. You are right. ROC is correct.--] (]) 13:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
== French == | |||
French is an adjective, so you can't just have ''killed by French''. It has to be ''killed by French soldiers'' or ''killed by French people''. This occurs twice in edits. Does the Japanese source say which type of French people did the killing? ] (]) 20:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Thank you advise me. I replyed. See ].--] (]) 10:36, 12 June 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Battle of Shanghai, Air Operations== | |||
Sorry to be a pain, but I would like clarification on the Air Operations paragraph on the Battle of Shanghai page. The Republic of China Air Force is mentioned three times by name as leading bombing missions against targets around Shanghai. The third mission is said to be in retaliation for the second, but why would the ROCAF retaliate against their own operation? Also, did not the Japanese bomb Shanghai during this battle? I did not find mention of that in the article. That is why I believe the second mission was run by the Japanese Navy. I apologize if my information is incorrect, and I hope this clears up any misunderstanding about me vandalizing your page. I really enjoy World War II history, and I must say that your work on the Battle of Shanghai is superb. ] (]) 16:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
:Thanks your apology. Second Sino-Japan war is very difficult. The National Revolutionary Army was not National Army but Nationalist Party's Army like People's Liberation Army. And Shanghai International Settlement was legitimately under the foreign rules like Hong Kong. When the Battle of Shanghai occured there were tens thousands National Revolutionary Army troops, however Japanese marine had only thousands soldiers. So National Revolutionary Army attacked to get Shanghai International Settlement. I am not the pilot, so I dont know why they attacked civilians. I think the National Revolutionary Army of the time was no better than the Warlord. They ], ] and ]. It is difficult for us who live 21 century to understand the National Revolutionary Army at the time.--] (]) 13:56, 26 August 2010 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
Hi, now that you've made ] into a disambiguation page, could you help fix links to the dab per ]? ] with the popupFixDabs flag set to true is very helpful. Thanks, --]] 21:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC) | |||
== Requested semi-protection for the ] article == | |||
See talk page: ] <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 07:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> | |||
==Holocaust== | |||
You can easily see that you are making changes to the "Related links" section, and that section deals with warcrimes/genocides of other peoples/countries. Those links have nothing to do with the Jewish holocaust. Furthermore, please address this issue on the Holocaust talk page, not on a user talk page (including mine). I'm not the only person that undid your changes.] (]) 14:57, 7 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
:I replyed. There are no your reply.--] (]) 15:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
==blocked== | |||
{{unblock reviewed|1=I did not apply for my topic ban, but I applied this time block. Declined reason did not explain this time block and my above answers. There are no sufficient banned reason. No one replied my comment and this time edition. Please check my comment again. Comfort women is not the matter this time block, I wrote comfort women for explainning former block, that's all. I didn't violate Japan-Korea related issues in this time. Please see my above comments. Rlevse confused this time block and former topic ban.|decline= The topic ban is pretty unambigious, see . You don't choose your own bans. You were told to stop editing all Japan/Korea related topics, and you did not. I see no reason to unblock you. ]''''']''''' 03:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)}} | |||
+ | |||
*You are (deliberately?) not getting the point. You were blocked because you violated the terms of your topic ban. I understand that you are appealing the block and not the topic ban itself, that does not change the fact that you did violate the topic ban and are now blocked as a result. No amount of pleading in emails is going to change the facts of this case, and until you show that you have an understanding of why you were blocked and will not violate the topic ban in the future I see no reason to unblock you. ] (]) 19:34, 21 November 2009 (UTC) | |||
==] of ]== | |||
] | |||
The article ] has been ]  because of the following concern: | |||
:'''No reference sources or any indication of why this book title is at all notable.''' | |||
While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be ]. | |||
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the <code>{{tl|dated prod}}</code> notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing <code>{{tl|dated prod}}</code> will stop the ], but other ]es exist. The ] can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:PRODWarning --> --] (]) 10:06, 8 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
== October 2010 == | |||
] You currently appear to be engaged in an ''']'''  according to the reverts you have made on ]. Users who ] or refuse to ] with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the ] states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the ] to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains ] among editors. If unsuccessful then '''do not edit war even if you believe you are right'''. Post a request for help at an ] or seek ]. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary ]. If edit warring continues, '''you may be ] from editing''' without further notice. <!-- Template:uw-3rr --> '''<span style="font-family:Arial;">] <sub><small>]</small></sub></span>''' 17:25, 8 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
:You are edit-warring and accusing editors of racism: this is not acceptable. Further activity of this kind will result in a block. '''<span style="font-family:Arial;">] <sub><small>]</small></sub></span>''' 17:26, 8 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks your advice.--] (]) 17:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::Thank you for understanding my concerns about interactions with other editors. It appears that consensus ran against the inclusion of an undue weight of material on Imperial Japanese policies at ] - I am concerned that the same pattern of undue emphasis is repeating itself at ]. Your changes removed references to The Holocaust in favor of ], which is entirely inappropriate. Claiming that other editors must "seek consensus" to undo such a dramatic and ill-considered change is not credible. '''<span style="font-family:Arial;">] <sub><small>]</small></sub></span>''' 12:34, 1 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
::::Thanks coment. See the Revision history of Racism of Racism, Racial Equality Proposal had been writen on the page for a long time, however user IronMaidenRocks deleted without consensus. You should warn IronMaidenRocks.--] (]) 13:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::::No consensus is needed to remove such an obvious problem. You are implying equivalency of scale between a minor act of benevolence and wholesale genocide. You have been cautioned about this before, and you are transfering your behavior at ] to a new area, where it is even less relevant. '''<span style="font-family:Arial;">] <sub><small>]</small></sub></span>''' 13:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
::::::Why are you talking about the Holocaust? Now Racism. And ''such an obvious problem'' is your POV. Have you read the user Halaqah comment? Why do you restrict only the Holocaust and censor Civil rights movement and Racial Equality Proposal? The article Racism is not ''Genocide'' or ''Racism in Europe'' but Racism. --] (]) 13:52, 1 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::::::Because you've transferred a problematic pattern of editing from one article to another, and you are repeating the behavior that was rejected at the first place. Please deal with the issue at hand: you're placing undue weight on Japanese benevolence toward Jews across multiple articles. You've removed references to the Holocaust in favor of a Japanese proposal that, while laudable at the time, ultimately had no impactg, and are implying some form of equivalency between the murder of six million and the rescue of a couple thousand. It might be worth a mention, but not a digression. You must convince other editors that your changes are appropriate: I don't see that you've done so. Halaqah's comments don't appear to be related to your concerns. '''<span style="font-family:Arial;">] <sub><small>]</small></sub></span>''' 14:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
::::::::We got consensus Holocaust. This is Racism. What is the relation between Holocaust and Racial equality or Civil Rights Movement?--] (]) 14:37, 1 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
:::::::::You have not gained consensus at new venues, and you are consistently concerned about submerging discussion of the Holocaust behind mitigating acts by the Japanese across a series of articles. I ask that you review whether you are placing too much weight on these events, and whether making repeated reference across a series of articles is appropriate, overshadowing more important issues within those articles. Please review ], and, with repsect to the Racism article, please do not claim that a consensus exists yet. The Holocaust issue appears to be settled, but the way you went about that was not a good example of how to get something included. I suggest that you try a gentler, more persuasive approach. '''<span style="font-family:Arial;">] <sub><small>]</small></sub></span>''' 14:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
::::::::::Bukubku, you have made a lot of good contributions to articles about Japan. That's great! I wish, however, that you would refrain from making edits regarding the actions of Imperial Japan, for now. You obviously feel strongly about the issue, and it has caused minor problems in these two articles. --] (]) 18:55, 12 November 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Invite to WikiConference India 2011 == | |||
<div style="margin: 0.5em; border: 2px black solid; padding: 1em;background-color:#E3F0F4" > | |||
]<br/> | |||
{| style="border:1px black solid; padding:2em; border-collapse:collapse; width:100%;" | |||
|- | |||
! style="background-color:#FAFAFA; color:#1C2069; padding-left:2em; padding-top:.5em;" align=left |Hi {{BASEPAGENAME}}, | |||
<span class="plainlinks">The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011.<br> You can see our ], the and our .</span> | |||
But the activities start now with the ]. | |||
As you are part of ] community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for ]. | |||
We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011 | |||
|}</div> | |||
== WikiProject India Tag & Assess 2012 Contest == | |||
Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require ], that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it. | |||
As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a ] drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012. | |||
If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from ]. | |||
] will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so. | |||
You can sign up on the ]. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way. | |||
{{User0|ssriram_mt}} & {{User0|AshLin}} (Drive coordinators) | |||
<small> Delivered per on ]. 01:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC) </small> ]]] 01:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
== Template:JapanEmpireNavbox == | |||
A rather minor point, but regarding {{tl|JapanEmpireNavbox}}, in the ] by {{user|Bukubku}} the link to ] had been added. I am assuming, though I cannot be positive that you meant the ministry known in Japanese as ]. I am currently reworking this article, and discovered that "Ministry of Taxation" is not verifiable in any source I can find. The most common translation is "Ministry of Popular Affairs" so renamed accordingly in the template. The rename/move the article is pending.</br> | |||
Secondly, in the Meiji government, this government existed only briefly from Aug-Sep 1869, Aug 1870-Sep 1871. So it probably isn't noteworthy enough to be placed on a palette template like this. So I'm probably going to delete it altogether.--] (]) 03:37, 17 December 2013 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
Hi,<br> | |||
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current ]. The ] is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages ]. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose ], ], editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The ] describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to ] and submit your choices on ]. For the Election committee, ] (]) 13:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC) | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Mdann52@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User:Mdann52/list&oldid=692210171 --> | |||
==Asian 10,000 Challenge invite== | |||
Hi. The ] has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland ] and ]. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like ]. For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current ] which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --]<sup>]</sup><sub>]</sub> 01:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC) | |||
== ] == | |||
Hi. We're into the last five days of the ]. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale! | |||
<!-- Message sent by User:Ser Amantio di Nicolao@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=WiR_list_1&oldid=812113281 --> | |||
== ] of ] == | |||
] | |||
The article ] has been ] because of the following concern: | |||
<blockquote>'''Doesn't appear to be a real thing, article seems confused between the UN Trust Territory and several LoN Mandates. See talk.'''</blockquote> | |||
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be ]. | |||
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your ] or on ]. | |||
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{Tlc|proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the ], but other ]es exist. In particular, the ] process can result in deletion without discussion, and ] allows discussion to reach ] for deletion.<!-- Template:Proposed deletion notify --> | |||
'''<span style="color: red;">This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the ] of each individual page for details.</span>''' Thanks, ] (]) 10:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 10:01, 26 September 2024
Welcome!
Hello, Bukubku, 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
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}}
before the question. Again, welcome! --Caspian blue (talk) 13:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
- Welcome, Caspian blue. You are the first person on my page. And you gave me helpful message. Thank you! --Bukubku (talk) 16:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
I love your userpage!
Sorry, I was getting tired of all those discussions where Japan is vilified in articles. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 02:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you, Chris. I understand this message is one of cheer. Thank you.--Bukubku (talk) 03:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
A plausibly calming thought?
The seasonal colors of autumn leaves -- perennially expected, but always a bit of a surprise ....
Caspian blue explains here: "One thing about myself, I really don't like "orange color" which is the complementary color to blue."
Are you familiar with the Latin phrase, Caveat lector -- perennially expected, but always a bit of a surprise? --Tenmei (talk) 19:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Translation
Hi. I got your message on the article. I will look over it when I have time; it will probably be sometime this weekend. It's a pretty contentious topic but I'll do what I can. Konamaiki (talk) 19:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Hi. Don't worry about it, it's not a really painful topic. I'm not the nationalistic type so it won't be a problem. What might be a problem is time -- right now I'm super busy because I'm applying for graduate schools. But if I have some free time somewhere I will take a look at it.Konamaiki (talk) 21:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
Mediation
Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-11-06 Woo Jang-choon Here's hoping it helps your dispute. Best wishes, Durova 01:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
MedCab
Hi. A MedCab case has been opened here, regarding Woo Jang-choon. You have been named as a participant. Please visit the case page and indicate whether or not you will participate. Thank you. 23:03, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Comment
I invite no action or comment; but I wonder if it might be worthwhile for you to examine what I have posted as a "comment" at User talk:Tznkai#Note on the topic bans (Caspain Blue and Sennen goroshi)? Plausibly useful? --Tenmei (talk) 20:08, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Kenroku-en
Bukubku -- I believe that the common Nandina in the center foreground of your Kenroku-en winter photo at the left is the same plant as can be seen growing next to the Onin War marker pictured at the right.
It is curious that Kenroku-en was named by Matsudaira Sadanobu, who confronted many unanticipated challenges during his lifetime. I wonder if re-considering the classical dichotomies of Chinese and Japanese landscape architecture will help me in a process of re-examining my impressions of this quintessential bakufu bureaucrat? I wonder if a similar approach might assist you in re-evaluating how to participate more effectively in in Misplaced Pages?
If Kenroku-en was designed to embody spaciousness, seclusion, artifice, antiquity, waterways, and panoramas, does it necessarily follow that similar aspects can be adduced from Misplaced Pages?
Too often, I notice that Misplaced Pages appears to be moved by the kinds of disparate factors which are mentioned as explanations for length of the Onin War.
I plan to give these musings some thought during the remaining weeks of winter.
In this or any other context, I suppose the lucky Maeda would have stumbled into ways to turn a profit. What do you think? My guess is that Ieyasu's precepts might be construed to suggest, "It is better not to reach than to go to far." -- Tenmei (talk) 20:42, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
- In my writing, I've tried to be "diplomatic" ... but my best efforts have more often turned out to be merely obscure. Retired User:WJBscribe suggested that I was wise to keep my language "measured," but somehow vagueness was not necessary -- here. Al that any of us can hope to do is to grow a little bit better ... and a little more "measured" .... Don't you agree? --Tenmei (talk) 21:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Rude and/or vague
This issue is outside the ambit of your ban. Will you give this some thought?
From time to time, more than one editor has construed my words as "rude." Please review of the following and suggest a better way to avoid being perceived as unhelpfully rude.
In an effort to be "diplomatic," I have more often achieved merely "vague" ... and I would appreciate comments about this problem as well. In order to "find my own voice," I obviously need to learn to avoid being perceived as rude and/or vague.
Doesn't this represent an interesting change of focus -- not so much about what you may or may not have done wrong, but more to do with figuring out how to help someone else? --Tenmei (talk) 18:20, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Asama
Congratulations. Good step in a constructive direction. --Tenmei (talk) 15:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks.--Bukubku (talk) 11:13, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
Hi!
Thank you for the recent comment. I'm doing fine now. Well, I am careless sometimes. That's my flaw. So the block was 仕方がない and that's all. Happy editing! Oda Mari (talk) 15:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
All caps
Hi. I notice that in your last few posts at WP:AN, you've been repeating in all-caps, "NOT RACIST". All caps tends to be interpreted online as shouting... could you please stop shouting? If you wish for people to see your position as reasonable, then you do yourself a great disservice to appear so excitable. Settle down, stop repeating, "NOT RACIST", and make your points calmly, please. -GTBacchus 00:50, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- I'm sorry. I looks bad. You are right. Thank you.--Bukubku (talk) 00:53, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
AGF
I do not appreciate anyone touching others' comment without permission except special cases. I did not switch the order of your comment and mine at all if you check carefully the time stamp of mine. While I was writing the comment with an open tab, you inserted your comment. If I tried to switch it, there would be an edit conflict but I did not have that experience. You still seem not to assume good faith. Moreover, in the diff, you referred the stalking site to mock me in the public. That is my point with the diff. Best regards for your editing.--Caspian blue 02:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Please, don't reverse turns. Time stamp is not changed by user, it is saving.--Bukubku (talk) 10:26, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- As I said, I did not revere the order. Please don't assume bad faith.--Caspian blue 14:34, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I hope someday ○○○ will have good faith. Please stop call others as racist without any ground. I don't like to involve with ○○○r any trouble. Please stay away from here. --Bukubku (talk) 13:47, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Seeking help in presenting thoughts clearly
I write to ask for prospective help. In a sense, I'm only interested laying the foundation for the future. Perhaps this may be construed as taking steps to avert problems might be mitigated by a timely comment or suggestion ...?
ArbCom remedy
Voting is underway at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Tang Dynasty/Proposed decision. In part because of "Evidence presented by Caspian blue", the locus of dispute was modified and "evidence in the case has expanded to include other disputes in which Tenmei has been involved." You will be surprised to learn that Bukubku has anything at all to do with this so-called "evidence" at "Tenmei's wikihounding and trolling". I don't think this timeless prose is worth struggling to read, but I mention this to explain a bit more of the reasons why I'm reaching out to you specifically.
ArbCom findings of fact included:
- 3.2.2 Tenmei and dispute resolution. "... many of Tenmei's talkpage posts and submissions during this arbitration case have been very difficult for other editors to understand, to the point that experienced participants in dispute resolution have had difficulty in following them, despite what we accept as Tenmei's good-faith best efforts to assist us in resolving the case."
ArbCom remedies included:
- 3.3.2 Tenmei and dispute resolution: "Should Tenmei become involved in any further disputes with other editors, whether concerning the content of articles (beyond ordinary day-to-day editing issues) or more formal dispute resolution procedures, he shall seek the assistance of a volunteer mentor or adviser to work with him in maximizing the value of his presentation by assisting him with formulating it in a clear and civil fashion."
- 3.3.3 Editors advised: "Editors who encounter difficulties in communicating with others on-wiki are advised to seek help from others in presenting their thoughts clearly, particularly when disputes arise or when dispute resolution is sought."
It is clear that ArbCom anticipates future difficulties; and I guess I need to do the same. Arguably, my previous postings on your talk page are congruent with exactly the sort of thing ArbCom wants me to do in future; and I'm willing to invest in learning about how to disagree without being disagreeable.
If you want to discuss this off-wiki, I'm working on figuring out how to set up an appropriate e-mail address. -- Tenmei (talk) 17:21, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- I don't like person who backbiting behind my back. I don't meet the person. sorry.--Bukubku (talk) 13:52, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Yamanote shitamachi
Hi, Ryulong. Why did you revert ? I think the caption is not correct. Do you think correct? For example, headman of Sumida ward say appreciative statement about donation from Sumida ward citizens. The statement tile is I appreciate of shitamachi mind(下町の心意気に感謝します).Sumida ward gazette Feb 1,2007(Sumida ward official web site) So Sumida ward is shitamachi. The caption is not correct.--Bukubku (talk) 14:12, 15 June 2009 (UTC) File:Tokyo-Wards-Yamanote-Shitamachi.png I think this file is not correct also. --Bukubku (talk) 14:22, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Discuss this at Talk:Yamanote and Shitamachi. I have stated I will not be editing those pages again.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 14:25, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Bukubku. Come over to the talk page and discuss it there. It was Urashimataro who provided the image.VsevolodKrolikov (talk) 14:31, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you, VsevolodKrolikov. You seem to read ja-Wiki. About this something is worng in en-Wiki.--Bukubku (talk) 14:35, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
Manchuria 1945
Regarding this excellent edit, you may also want to have a look at Soviet-Japanese War (1945). Between the two articles, there is quite a bit of work still to be done. You may also want to look at the talk pages - viz: Talk:Soviet-Japanese War (1945) and Talk:Soviet invasion of Manchuria (1945). Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 16:13, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you, your advice let me edit the articles.--Bukubku (talk) 09:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Yasukuni edits
Hey there, You make an interesting argument, but I don't think I'm completely convinced yet. Doing a quick search of "yasukuni shrine" and "kami" on google and google books brings up quite a bit of hits, and I know I have seen the enshrined referred to as "kami" in the past. Do you know what specific term is used most commonly in Japanese to refer to the enshrined? I can't tell if this is just difference in translation. Also, we might want to take this to Misplaced Pages talk: WikiProject Japan to get some more opinions? --Torsodog 13:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- That's good idea. I ask Misplaced Pages talk: WikiProject Japan people. Thank you.--Bukubku (talk) 14:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
- About the Chinreisha, I don't think it should have its own "Section" when it is only 2 sentences long. There is no need for that. The exact same things are written in the paragraph above. The only reason the Yusukan has its own section is because it is has a lot of controversy surrounding it. --Torsodog 18:34, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Misstatement?
In the World War II article it says "The People's Republic of China occupied Taiwan." Should not that be the ROC? Thanks StevenWT
- Thanks. I missed. You are right. ROC is correct.--Bukubku (talk) 13:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
French
French is an adjective, so you can't just have killed by French. It has to be killed by French soldiers or killed by French people. This occurs twice in these edits. Does the Japanese source say which type of French people did the killing? Stephen B Streater (talk) 20:47, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you advise me. I replyed. See Talk:Japanese holdout.--Bukubku (talk) 10:36, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
Battle of Shanghai, Air Operations
Sorry to be a pain, but I would like clarification on the Air Operations paragraph on the Battle of Shanghai page. The Republic of China Air Force is mentioned three times by name as leading bombing missions against targets around Shanghai. The third mission is said to be in retaliation for the second, but why would the ROCAF retaliate against their own operation? Also, did not the Japanese bomb Shanghai during this battle? I did not find mention of that in the article. That is why I believe the second mission was run by the Japanese Navy. I apologize if my information is incorrect, and I hope this clears up any misunderstanding about me vandalizing your page. I really enjoy World War II history, and I must say that your work on the Battle of Shanghai is superb. Hydrobrain (talk) 16:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks your apology. Second Sino-Japan war is very difficult. The National Revolutionary Army was not National Army but Nationalist Party's Army like People's Liberation Army. And Shanghai International Settlement was legitimately under the foreign rules like Hong Kong. When the Battle of Shanghai occured there were tens thousands National Revolutionary Army troops, however Japanese marine had only thousands soldiers. So National Revolutionary Army attacked to get Shanghai International Settlement. I am not the pilot, so I dont know why they attacked civilians. I think the National Revolutionary Army of the time was no better than the Warlord. They destroyed Yellow River bank, fired Changsha and killed Taiwanese civilians. It is difficult for us who live 21 century to understand the National Revolutionary Army at the time.--Bukubku (talk) 13:56, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Tokkō
Hi, now that you've made Tokkō into a disambiguation page, could you help fix links to the dab per WP:FIXDABLINKS? Navigation popups with the popupFixDabs flag set to true is very helpful. Thanks, --JaGa 21:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Requested semi-protection for the Subhas Chandra Bose article
See talk page: Talk:Subhas_Chandra_Bose#Haphazard editing and Protection —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.225.203.17 (talk) 07:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Holocaust
You can easily see that you are making changes to the "Related links" section, and that section deals with warcrimes/genocides of other peoples/countries. Those links have nothing to do with the Jewish holocaust. Furthermore, please address this issue on the Holocaust talk page, not on a user talk page (including mine). I'm not the only person that undid your changes.Jimhoward72 (talk) 14:57, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
- I replyed. There are no your reply.--Bukubku (talk) 15:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
blocked
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).Bukubku (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I did not apply for my topic ban, but I applied this time block. Declined reason did not explain this time block and my above answers. There are no sufficient banned reason. No one replied my comment and this time edition. Please check my comment again. Comfort women is not the matter this time block, I wrote comfort women for explainning former block, that's all. I didn't violate Japan-Korea related issues in this time. Please see my above comments. Rlevse confused this time block and former topic ban.
Decline reason:
The topic ban is pretty unambigious, see . You don't choose your own bans. You were told to stop editing all Japan/Korea related topics, and you did not. I see no reason to unblock you. Jayron32 03:44, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
+
- You are (deliberately?) not getting the point. You were blocked because you violated the terms of your topic ban. I understand that you are appealing the block and not the topic ban itself, that does not change the fact that you did violate the topic ban and are now blocked as a result. No amount of pleading in emails is going to change the facts of this case, and until you show that you have an understanding of why you were blocked and will not violate the topic ban in the future I see no reason to unblock you. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:34, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Yasukuni (book)
The article Yasukuni (book) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- No reference sources or any indication of why this book title is at all notable.
While all contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --DAJF (talk) 10:06, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
October 2010
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on The Holocaust. Users who edit disruptively or refuse to collaborate with others may be blocked if they continue. In particular the three-revert rule states that making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block. If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the talk page to discuss controversial changes. Work towards wording and content that gains consensus among editors. If unsuccessful then do not edit war even if you believe you are right. Post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If edit warring continues, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Acroterion (talk) 17:25, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
- You are edit-warring and accusing editors of racism: this is not acceptable. Further activity of this kind will result in a block. Acroterion (talk) 17:26, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks your advice.--Bukubku (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for understanding my concerns about interactions with other editors. It appears that consensus ran against the inclusion of an undue weight of material on Imperial Japanese policies at The Holocaust - I am concerned that the same pattern of undue emphasis is repeating itself at Racism. Your changes removed references to The Holocaust in favor of Racial Equality Proposal, 1919, which is entirely inappropriate. Claiming that other editors must "seek consensus" to undo such a dramatic and ill-considered change is not credible. Acroterion (talk) 12:34, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks coment. See the Revision history of Racism of Racism, Racial Equality Proposal had been writen on the page for a long time, however user IronMaidenRocks deleted without consensus. You should warn IronMaidenRocks.--Bukubku (talk) 13:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- No consensus is needed to remove such an obvious problem. You are implying equivalency of scale between a minor act of benevolence and wholesale genocide. You have been cautioned about this before, and you are transfering your behavior at The Holocaust to a new area, where it is even less relevant. Acroterion (talk) 13:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- Why are you talking about the Holocaust? Now Racism. And such an obvious problem is your POV. Have you read the user Halaqah comment? Why do you restrict only the Holocaust and censor Civil rights movement and Racial Equality Proposal? The article Racism is not Genocide or Racism in Europe but Racism. --Bukubku (talk) 13:52, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- Because you've transferred a problematic pattern of editing from one article to another, and you are repeating the behavior that was rejected at the first place. Please deal with the issue at hand: you're placing undue weight on Japanese benevolence toward Jews across multiple articles. You've removed references to the Holocaust in favor of a Japanese proposal that, while laudable at the time, ultimately had no impactg, and are implying some form of equivalency between the murder of six million and the rescue of a couple thousand. It might be worth a mention, but not a digression. You must convince other editors that your changes are appropriate: I don't see that you've done so. Halaqah's comments don't appear to be related to your concerns. Acroterion (talk) 14:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- We got consensus Holocaust. This is Racism. What is the relation between Holocaust and Racial equality or Civil Rights Movement?--Bukubku (talk) 14:37, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- You have not gained consensus at new venues, and you are consistently concerned about submerging discussion of the Holocaust behind mitigating acts by the Japanese across a series of articles. I ask that you review whether you are placing too much weight on these events, and whether making repeated reference across a series of articles is appropriate, overshadowing more important issues within those articles. Please review WP:UNDUE, and, with repsect to the Racism article, please do not claim that a consensus exists yet. The Holocaust issue appears to be settled, but the way you went about that was not a good example of how to get something included. I suggest that you try a gentler, more persuasive approach. Acroterion (talk) 14:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- Bukubku, you have made a lot of good contributions to articles about Japan. That's great! I wish, however, that you would refrain from making edits regarding the actions of Imperial Japan, for now. You obviously feel strongly about the issue, and it has caused minor problems in these two articles. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 18:55, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
- You have not gained consensus at new venues, and you are consistently concerned about submerging discussion of the Holocaust behind mitigating acts by the Japanese across a series of articles. I ask that you review whether you are placing too much weight on these events, and whether making repeated reference across a series of articles is appropriate, overshadowing more important issues within those articles. Please review WP:UNDUE, and, with repsect to the Racism article, please do not claim that a consensus exists yet. The Holocaust issue appears to be settled, but the way you went about that was not a good example of how to get something included. I suggest that you try a gentler, more persuasive approach. Acroterion (talk) 14:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- We got consensus Holocaust. This is Racism. What is the relation between Holocaust and Racial equality or Civil Rights Movement?--Bukubku (talk) 14:37, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- Because you've transferred a problematic pattern of editing from one article to another, and you are repeating the behavior that was rejected at the first place. Please deal with the issue at hand: you're placing undue weight on Japanese benevolence toward Jews across multiple articles. You've removed references to the Holocaust in favor of a Japanese proposal that, while laudable at the time, ultimately had no impactg, and are implying some form of equivalency between the murder of six million and the rescue of a couple thousand. It might be worth a mention, but not a digression. You must convince other editors that your changes are appropriate: I don't see that you've done so. Halaqah's comments don't appear to be related to your concerns. Acroterion (talk) 14:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- Why are you talking about the Holocaust? Now Racism. And such an obvious problem is your POV. Have you read the user Halaqah comment? Why do you restrict only the Holocaust and censor Civil rights movement and Racial Equality Proposal? The article Racism is not Genocide or Racism in Europe but Racism. --Bukubku (talk) 13:52, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- No consensus is needed to remove such an obvious problem. You are implying equivalency of scale between a minor act of benevolence and wholesale genocide. You have been cautioned about this before, and you are transfering your behavior at The Holocaust to a new area, where it is even less relevant. Acroterion (talk) 13:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks coment. See the Revision history of Racism of Racism, Racial Equality Proposal had been writen on the page for a long time, however user IronMaidenRocks deleted without consensus. You should warn IronMaidenRocks.--Bukubku (talk) 13:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for understanding my concerns about interactions with other editors. It appears that consensus ran against the inclusion of an undue weight of material on Imperial Japanese policies at The Holocaust - I am concerned that the same pattern of undue emphasis is repeating itself at Racism. Your changes removed references to The Holocaust in favor of Racial Equality Proposal, 1919, which is entirely inappropriate. Claiming that other editors must "seek consensus" to undo such a dramatic and ill-considered change is not credible. Acroterion (talk) 12:34, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks your advice.--Bukubku (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Invite to WikiConference India 2011
Hi Bukubku,
The First WikiConference India is being organized in Mumbai and will take place on 18-20 November 2011. But the activities start now with the 100 day long WikiOutreach. As you are part of WikiProject India community we invite you to be there for conference and share your experience. Thank you for your contributions. We look forward to see you at Mumbai on 18-20 November 2011 |
---|
WikiProject India Tag & Assess 2012 Contest
Hello friends, we are a number of editors from WikiProject India have got together to assess the many thousands of articles under the stewardship of the project, and we'd love to have you, a fellow member, join us. These articles require assessment, that is, the addition of a WikiProject template to the talk page of an article, assessing it for quality and importance and adding a few extra parameters to it.
As of March 11, 2012, 07:00 UTC, WikiProject India has 95,998 articles under its stewardship. Of these 13,980 articles are completely unassessed (both for class and importance) and another 42,415 articles are unassessed for importance only. Accordingly, a Tag & Assess 2012 drive-cum-contest has begun from March 01, 2012 to last till May 31, 2012.
If you are new to assessment, you can learn the minimum about how to evaluate from Part One of the Assessment Guide. Part Two of the Guide will help you learn to employ the full functionality of the talk page template, should you choose to do so.
You can sign up on the Tag & Assess page. There are a number of awards to be given in recognition of your efforts. Come & join us to take part in this exciting new venture. You'll learn more about India in this way.
ssriram_mt (talk) & AshLin (talk) (Drive coordinators)
Delivered per request on Misplaced Pages:Bot requests. 01:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC) The Helpful Bot 01:10, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Template:JapanEmpireNavbox
A rather minor point, but regarding {{JapanEmpireNavbox}}, in the edit on 08:59, 18 September 2010 by Bukubku (talk · contribs) the link to Ministry of Taxation had been added. I am assuming, though I cannot be positive that you meant the ministry known in Japanese as Minbu-shō. I am currently reworking this article, and discovered that "Ministry of Taxation" is not verifiable in any source I can find. The most common translation is "Ministry of Popular Affairs" so renamed accordingly in the template. The rename/move the article is pending.
Secondly, in the Meiji government, this government existed only briefly from Aug-Sep 1869, Aug 1870-Sep 1871. So it probably isn't noteworthy enough to be placed on a palette template like this. So I'm probably going to delete it altogether.--Kiyoweap (talk) 03:37, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Misplaced Pages arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:53, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Asian 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Misplaced Pages:The 10,000 Challenge and Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like Misplaced Pages:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoLo dicono a Signa. 01:25, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Women in Red World Contest
Hi. We're into the last five days of the Women in Red World Contest. There's a new bonus prize of $200 worth of books of your choice to win for creating the most new women biographies between 0:00 on the 26th and 23:59 on 30th November. If you've been contributing to the contest, thank you for your support, we've produced over 2000 articles. If you haven't contributed yet, we would appreciate you taking the time to add entries to our articles achievements list by the end of the month. Thank you, and if participating, good luck with the finale!
Proposed deletion of League of Nations Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands
The article League of Nations Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Doesn't appear to be a real thing, article seems confused between the UN Trust Territory and several LoN Mandates. See talk.
While all constructive contributions to Misplaced Pages are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}}
notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}}
will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.
This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)