Misplaced Pages

User:Hijiri88/Old sandbox

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< User:Hijiri88

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hijiri88 (talk | contribs) at 07:36, 4 May 2015. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 07:36, 4 May 2015 by Hijiri88 (talk | contribs)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

The Japan-Korea war of the sockpuppets mystery deepens with yet another mysterious anti-Japanese POV-pusher emerging after long lying dormant, to revert to a version of the Korean influence on Japanese culture article from months before he/she ever edited it -- under the present username, anyway...

Potential anti-Korean POV-pushing SPAs?

Apparent pro-Korean (anti-Japanese) POV-pushing SPAs

  • Koryosaram (talk · contribs)
  • Nippononna (talk · contribs)
  • Keepfix (talk · contribs)
  • Consoleman (talk · contribs)
  • Globalscene (talk · contribs): Violently anti-Japanese POV-pushing fringe theorist. Originator of the WP:FRINGE, WP:SYNTH WP:POVFORK article Korean influence on Japanese culture
  • JARA7979 (talk · contribs)
  • Samuel Hwang (talk · contribs)Hwang&l=1000: Early edits to Hwang (Korean surname) imply "Samuel Hwang" is his real name, which by extension implies he has not violated WP:SOCK, but his other edits imply a strong anti-Japanese bias ("The Japanese were guilty of engaging in a massive conspiracy against our country"...).
  • Historiographer (talk · contribs): Like an "anti-Juzumaru" apparently possessed of a powerful nationalist agenda and an ability to avoid being silenced for an extended period. I don't know yet whether or not he has engaged in sockpuppetry, but it certainly seems possible.
  • 捏造撃破戦線 (talk · contribs): Obvious sockpuppet of someone (probably Historiographer (talk · contribs)). Appearing suddenly and joining Historiographer's edit war with Juzumaru. I can't tell if the number itself is anti-Japanese or pro-Korean or anything, but the username implies ... something ... probably ...
  • Jagello (talk · contribs): Super-suspicious account that appeared suddenly, after a 19 month absence, immediately after the closing of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Korean influence on Japanese culture despite never having edited the page before or posting on the AFD itself. Restored a version of the article that had not been up since roughly 8 months before the AFD. This implies the user has in fact edited the page in the past but decided to log in under a different account as an "impartial observer". Given the age, this is probably the sockmaster rather than the sockpuppet, but I wonder who the puppet is...
  • KoreanSentry (talk · contribs): Okay, to be fair this is probably not the same person as Jagello given what looks like a relative lack of shared interests, but this edit is even more suspicious than any of Jagello's. Another point of note is that their username implies some connection with a certain external site that Korean nationalists seem to be using to discuss their edits to articles on Korean relations with Japan and China on English Misplaced Pages.
  • TH1980 (talk · contribs): Possibly not so much "pro-Korean" as anti-Japanese. Edited in infrequent spurts over a three-year period before suddenly showing up and reverting my previous edits to the Korean influence on Japanese culture article (specifically regarding 口訣⇔片仮名（漢文訓読？） connections and the 憶良渡来人論) in a manner similar to Jagello and KoreanSentry above, despite having never shown any interest in it before. Possibly someone's sock account. Other recent, dubious edits include adding a deeply suspect anecdote about Akira Kurosawa (a Japanese filmmaker of 武家 heritage) bent the knee and handed over a treasured family heirloom (or a or a cheap mass-produced 新軍刀 inaccurately dubbed a "samurai sword") to his American superior John Sturges, and citing a combination of his/her own dubious sense of what is "notable" and a source written several years after both men were dead by a minor film critic probably too young to have heard the story directly from Sturges and too monolingual to have heard it from Kurosawa.

???

Users who appear to have the right idea