User talk:Nihonjoe/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archives: 1·2·3·4·5·6·7·8·9·10·11·12·13·14·15·16·17·18·19·20·21·22·23·24·25·26·27·28·29·30·31·32········

Contents

Recent Edits on Personal Pages

The self-described "intrusion" on those pages is totally pardoned.  :) I'm cool with fixing double redirects, so long as actual factual information isn't altered any (other than fixing outright errors), there's no harm. It's really a good heads-up for linking to the articles in question, so I actually owe you a thank you!

(Seriously, why would I get mad over fixing double redirects? No worries, no worries!)

Nice to see you, and cheers! -- Miwa 05:53, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem, glad I could help. (^_^) --日本穣 04:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Sources

Re: Editing of anime in international distribution#The original creators' thoughts
 I am the one who wrote that section of the article, including that part that I am assuming you think needs sources --- the part where it is said that most creators don't care about their anime being edited (the Miyazaki incident is well known and could easily be sourced). I am currently doing a school research paper in which I am opposed to anime editing, so original creators opposing anime editing would be good support, so I researched and researched and researched on the internet, in books, etc., and never found any case other than the Miyazaki one in which an original creator complained about their anime being edited. Is that not enough of a basis for writing that? I guess what I'm saying is, if a fact isn't found after tons of research, is it valid to say to say that that fact's not true? If not, give me one week to do more research, and, if after that, I haven't found a source, I will erase that part. If there is any other part of of the article that needs sources, please tell me. --User:Pitman6787 08:48, 5 March 2006 (UTC).

I modified that section of the article to disclude the part that you thought needed sources, as I wasn't able to find any. I didn't know whether or not I was allownd to take the "this section needs references..." disclaimer away, so I'll leave you to that. Oh, and I wanted your opinion on something, as I can tell that you are an expert and verteran of wikipedia. I put in an external link on the page to a list of some petitions that dealt with anime editing (like fans advocating uncut anime or parents wanting to ban anime, because editing it isn't enough; it was just a page that brought up the search results for "anime" on petitiononline.com, but MANY of them dealt with this issue; I thought it was important, because it showed how viewers feel about editing of anime), but someone erased it. What do you think of it? I might put it back in. One last thing: please look over the new list that I added on "The current state of editing in the international anime industry;" I did have sources, but please look over it anyway. --User:Pitman6787 04:51, 7 March 2006 (UTC).
Are those sources good enough? Can the disclaimer be taken away? And why did you move the Table of Contents to such an awkward place? -- User:Pitman6787 11:19, 8 March 2006 (UTC).
Why did you remove my references that YOU ASKED ME TO PUT IN, and was the "clean-up" disclaimer the result of one of my actions? I don't even know why I'm writing this, as you never even respond, a**hole. --User:Pitman6787 11:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC).
Please be civil when writing comments to other users. There is absolutely no reason for you to write what you wrote, especially since I just barely made the change. Just because you can edit a mile a minute doesn't mean that others do the same. Please also note that just because I don't respond immediately doesn't mean I'm not going to respond. Learn a little patience, please.
As for your comments, I removed a duplicate link and a reference to a Wikipedia article which was already linked to at least four times in that section alone. There was no need to include yet another link to the Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind, so I removed it. I also removed all the other duplicate links in that section.
Now, to answer all the questions you've asked:
You asked: I am currently doing a school research paper in which I am opposed to anime editing, so original creators opposing anime editing would be good support, so I researched and researched and researched on the internet, in books, etc., and never found any case other than the Miyazaki one in which an original creator complained about their anime being edited. Is that not enough of a basis for writing that? I guess what I'm saying is, if a fact isn't found after tons of research, is it valid to say to say that that fact's not true?
If you can't find information to back something up, you can not claim it is a fact here on Wikipedia. As we are writing an encyclopedia, we need to give sources for our information. If you can't provide them, you can't make claims about what people have said or done.
You asked: Oh, and I wanted your opinion on something, as I can tell that you are an expert and verteran of wikipedia. I put in an external link on the page to a list of some petitions that dealt with anime editing (like fans advocating uncut anime or parents wanting to ban anime, because editing it isn't enough; it was just a page that brought up the search results for "anime" on petitiononline.com, but MANY of them dealt with this issue; I thought it was important, because it showed how viewers feel about editing of anime), but someone erased it. What do you think of it? I might put it back in.
I'm not an expert or a veteran, but I appreciate the comments. I'm learning as I go. (^_^) Generally, lists of petitions are useful for anything. Those kinds of petitions are easy to fake and are not scientific in the least. Therefore, for an encyclopedia, they are preactically useless. I don't recommend adding it back to that article.
You asked: Are those sources good enough? Can the disclaimer be taken away? And why did you move the Table of Contents to such an awkward place?
One of the sources is good, but one of the others is basically a duplicate (refers to the main page of the Nausicaa section on Nausicaa.net) and the other refers to an article already linked to in the section. There is no need to link to it again. Yes, the disclaimer can be (and was) taken away. I agree the TOC looked awkward on the left, so I moved it to the right, which looks much nicer, IMHO. Placing the TOC there makes more effective use of the space. --日本穣 05:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Sorry. I guess I was a little impacient, but I wrongly assumed that were never going to respond. I'll just wait for your responses in the future. But, could you please explain to me why the article requires "cleanup?" And how can this banner be rightully removed? -- User:Pitman6787 03:37, 9 March 2006 (UTC).

Using Show preview button

Sorry. I know. I just have a problem of reading over something, then finding one thing to fix, then reading over it again, then finding another thing to fix, etc. I'll try better in the future. --User:Pitman6787 09:44, 5 March 2006 (UTC).

Thanks. --日本穣 02:47, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Japanese Macrons Mediation

Hi, I've been assigned to be the mediator for the Japanese Macrons case. Discussion will be carried out on the Talk page of the case request. I will have some preliminary questions up soon, I am looking forward to working with everyone to get this resolved. Thank you, pschemp | talk 16:21, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Help on a case

Hey! Do you mind if you help me change the naming orders on this page: Sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway - A user named Exploding Boy wants it to be in the Japanese order and has refused to discuss it with me further. WhisperToMe 18:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Seems to have taken care of itself as the last discussion with Exploding Boy was six months ago. I did include a link to the MOS-JA for reference, though. --日本穣 05:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

In use tag

I removed the tag because it was not being used for its intended purpose. The in use tag is to be used to warn other users that another user is currently editing the page and that others should be courteous and not edit until the tag is removed. The tag as it is now, warning others that the article is "in use" for a few days scares off new users who will probably not bother to edit because the message says it is being edited. Pepsidrinka 03:02, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

This is still improper. It gives the impression that one must go to the talk page and edit, and that goes against the concept of WP:BOLD. Pepsidrinka 03:18, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Translation Request

Hallo, can you please translate me this Japanese text into English. Thank you very much: Minasan wa honto no honto no Kanazawa Yuichiro shiranai.Aitsu wo shoushiki ni kaze naito —This unsigned comment was added by 89.54.201.108 (talk • contribs) .

"You guys really don't know anything about Kanazawa Yuichiro." is the first sentence. I'd have to see the actual Japanese for the rest. --日本穣 17:06, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Torii photo

Hi Nihonjoe, Please take a look at Image:Miyajima-Torii-Modified.jpg. It's your torii photo with modifications. If you like it, it's yours to keep. Fg2 02:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Thanks. (^_^) --日本穣 02:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Template

I don't know what it's supposed to do, but before I fiddled with it it just displayed the message "Japan To-do:" and nothing else. Now it does that again. Ashibaka tock 21:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

On the lower right side of the box is a [Show] link. If you click it, the list will expand. Otherwise, it will remain hidden. --日本穣 22:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Oh, is that what's supposed to be there? The [Show] link didn't... show... for me. I'm using Cologne Blue. Ashibaka tock 23:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm...not sure why. That kind of thing should show up no matter which skin you're using. --日本穣 23:56, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey Nihon, how are you? Do you have any idea why the talk page template, Template:WikiProject Japan stops TOCs from showing? It's only different from Template:WikiProject Anime and manga because of the extra To Do list include. Do you think this somehow breaks the TOC? My theory is that the wiki software thinks there is only one section on the page, the WP:J To Do section and therefore doesn't display it. --Squilibob 05:40, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it's because there's a NOTOC inside parrt of the template. Let me play with it a bit. --日本穣 05:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Okay, the NOTOC is removed, so everything should be fine now. --日本穣 05:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
Well the TOC is appearing, but now it is in the hidden part of the template instead of on the actual page of any of the talk pages that include it. (I'm guessing that a __TOC__ tag would fix it.) --Squilibob 07:43, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
That's likely. Feel free to use one of my floating TOC templates: {{TOC float left}} or {{TOC float right}}. This page uses one of them. --日本穣 07:45, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce

The articleShamrock (comics) has been added to your desk. It is an occidental comic book character (DC comics) instead of Anime but no one has listed an expertise in comics. Please look at it and work on it, pass it or let me know and I'll reassign it. Thank you. RJFJR 05:27, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Joined

Thanks for the invitation; I've now added my name. Fg2 07:26, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Not the Domon Ken Award

OOPS! Many thanks for the fix. (As for the kanji problem that I was aware of, I've already asked.) -- Hoary 08:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikiproject Japan

Hi, I joined the project; thanks for the invite. I was wondering, what's the difference between the Wikiproject and the Japan-related topics notice board? Dforest 05:02, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

The WikiProject is just formalizing some of what the notice board was doing, making things easier to find and more familiar to those who've worked on other WikiProjects. --日本穣 05:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
So will it supercede the notice board? It seems like there would be a lot of overlap between them. Dforest 05:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
No, I don't think so. I think the notice board should continue to function as just that: a place for announcements and sharing of information. The project page is more for those actively working to improve articles and structure on the site. --日本穣 06:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Nihonjoe, thanks for voicing interest in WikiProject Trains in Japan! I'm currently looking around for more supporters, so if you know anyone who might be interested, please inform them about the Project. Once again, thank you! - Tangotango 06:57, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I hope we can find more interested people. - Tangotango 07:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
We now have 5 people interested in the project, and I've created the project page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains in Japan, shortcut WP:TJ. For now the page is a bit disorganized, but I hope we can improve that soon. Well, hope to see you on the project page! (Please add your name to the Participants list). Cheers, Tangotango 02:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Rodovid.org

Hi, I found you from the category of Wikipedian genealogists. I wonder if you have heard of/been involved in any of the previous attempts at starting a genealogy wiki under the foundation. Seeing as you were in the category, I thought you may be interested in the new project proposal, Rodovid. This project is currently running at rodovid.org. I would greatly appreciate it if you could visit the site and give me your opinion of it. Any input at all will be useful. Thanks. --Bjwebb (talk) 10:35, 26 March 2006 (UTC)