User talk:Falsedef

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Mochi history 2 Nisei week 3 Japanese diaspora 4 Main page thanks 5 Thanks

[edit] Mochi history

I noticed your comment on the Talk:Ice cream page about the confusing history of mochi. Thanks for looking into that! Could you post citations for the various sources you've found; I (and others) would be curious and might be able to help examining them. Thanks! JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

/me bonk's self - I see you have already, in the sensible place (on the article on mochi ice cream). Sigh. I'll look at them there. You can ignore this message. JesseW, the juggling janitor 23:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nisei week

I think Nisei week should be updated appropriately.--Jjok 04:27, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm getting some photos, and will update the rest of the article accordingly. In the meantime, there's not much transient information that can be updated until late Spring.falsedef 07:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese diaspora

Insulting and accusing of racism people who disagree with your viewpoint (not to mention the authors of the 70% of books who use "Ethnic Japanese") isn't likely to make people of opposing viewpoints come around and accomplish the common goal of getting the page moved to a better name. cab 22:30, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not racism. I even linked to you what it is (ethnocentrism). Opposing words due to their foreignness when no appropriate term exists in English is an insult to other cultures. Trying to invent American English equivalents to foreign words is no less than the same insult. I'm pointing out that insult (calling me a race caller in return is just a circular battle).\

I'm not insulting those authors who use "ethnic Japanese" (unless they're editors opposing the move, which I doubt) -- where'd you get that idea? Those authors made a mistake, or were just relaxing their standards. However an encyclopedia should maintain its accuracy, not base its assumptions on ignorance or lack of context. falsedef 22:48, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think your comment was as incendiary cab has made it out to be, although it wasn't directed at me. I also didn't know that it had already generated controversy... but in fact, I came here to compliment you for being so kind as to remove it.

Personally, I often try to avoid editing articles in which I might make appeals to expert knowledge. I always think there is the possibility that I might be biased in editing them. However, I seem more and more likely to make those kinds of appeals in this case - both as a resident of Japan, and a degree holder in anthropology. I am trying to avoid it, but Doctor Sunshine seems very unwilling to compromise. I think that the most prudent course of action is for me to withdraw a bit. If there is anything in particular I can help with, let me know on my talk page. Dekimasu 06:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I believe expert input is needed to maintain informational standards of the encyclopedia. As long as people don't start taking expert knowledge as fact (rather than highly valued input), then expert input should certainly be as active as amateur input. Positive bias is a lot better than negative bias. falsedef 07:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

And it's hard when the person who is already making condescending comments refers you to "don't be a dick". I'm really surprised he moved the title back. Dekimasu 06:35, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Please forgive me for editing out part of your comment on my latest vote, which didn't make sense after I made my vote more enthusiastic. I think my vote now better describes the situation and I think clear and concise is the route to take here. The discussion is bogging us down. Dekimasu 15:02, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

You (Falsedef) seems to have forgotten that Wikipedia is about verifiability, not truth. Almost all sources use "ethnic Japanese" to mean "people of Japanese descent not living in Japan", hence "Japanese diaspora". Your redirects to "Japanese people" border on vandalism, possibly because your suggested move to "Nikkei" was not approved by concensus. In any case, this change against concensus needs to be discussed, but there doesn't seem to be an appropriate talk page. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I have proof, you do not. [1] Do not make changes until you have a reliable source to state the exclusion of Japanese citizens from the ethnic Japanese group. falsedef 01:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

You do not have proof. You have some evidence. Going to a disambig page. If you revert, it will be a violation of WP:3RR, so don't do it without discussion. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 02:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Discussion does not override verifiability. I have proof, you do not; simple as that. Get some reliable proof, and we can discuss. Without reliable proof, your edits are WITHOUT merit. falsedef 02:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Main page thanks

Thanks for correcting that, i was not meaning t cause offence to anyone and was meaning what you changed the title to Simply south 12:17, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks a lot for your expansion on the Chink article. It was very helpful and hopefully the article won't be deleted now. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 14:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)