User talk:Saintjust

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Messages from indef. banned sockpuppets

[edit] 3RR

you've been reported for violation of WP:3RR. please undo your last revert. thank you. Appleby 21:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3rr warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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 three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rockgoals3 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Three revert rule

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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 three-revert rule. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Please do not repeatedly revert edits, but use the talk page to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. 774townsclear (talk) 02:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

You surely are knowledgeabe about the Wikipedia rules for such a new user. --Saintjust (talk) 03:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
new user or not. it is not important. you just PUSH POV Troll and i found it. 774townsclear (talk) 03:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
and do not delete this from article. a satirical drama. It often perfomed criticism toward noble person like Yangban. . 774townsclear (talk) 03:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
That it was a "criticism toward noble person like Yangban" is already incorporated into the article. Read it carefully. I'm not just reverting to my version. --Saintjust (talk) 03:08, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
I've closed the three-revert rule report as no violation, but I do want to caution you to avoid any kind of edit warring, regardless of whether you technically violate the three-revert rule or not. This is how I closed the report, if you're curious. Thanks. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 03:56, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your Miscellanea contents

[1] [2] You made this article in category of 'Term as Secretary-General'. You pick from 'Particularly critical news', mainly pick the criticism contents from source. and omitting other side of view.(POV) It is not important news. It seems like you want make Ban Ki-moon image as Nepotism person. This contents is not proper article for UN Secretary-General's role. This Trivia news not suitable in category of 'Term as Secretary-General'. This article could be integrating other, or remove soon. 774townsclear 23:55, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Before I Vote on 'Move Tsushima Islands' Issue

  • I would appreciate a rational explaination (after you read my Comments in the subject dispute Talk:Tsushima Islands), of the arguement or arguments you consider vital and germane to the discusion and vote. Frankly, MOST all of you are being silly over nothing of particular importance, since both names can be redirected into the one used. I have left a comment concerning my contribution to the article, which contribution — seems to have triggered the current edit and revision wars. For that I apologize, but see the Comments on the vote. I am also taking the liberty of putting the vote section AFTER the Comments about same.
  • Still, I have just spent over four hours of valuable spare time, and would welcome your thoughts after you read and understand the distinction I put forth between a governments termonology as a governing body and a geographical reference like an archepelego, which it certainly is.
  • More to the point, I'd like to see your defense regarding your favorite POV of what I had to say viz a viz the mergest attitude of the senior editors and administrators that frequent the Wikipedia:VfD discussions. To my recollection, I don't recollect any of you hotheads in this dispute ever spending anytime thereon, possibly excepting Mel Etitis, but rarely even then.
  • In any event, I'm neutral here, and have asked that the article be kept EDIT FREE for the next three days by placing The Inuse template into it — I'd copyedited over two and half hours before I suspended that effort the other night because this shameful fued was going on — proper English grammer does depend, unfortunately, on whether one uses the plural or the singular. I saved that on my hard drive, but I don't need to wade through yet another 70 edits to finish the job. As it is, this matter will probably double the time it takes for such a simple job.
  • If you are local to Japan, some history of the canals or Sea-channel is certainly germane to the ongoing discussion, moreover, any cogent arguement you condsider being particularly telling needs to be clearly repeated in the current on going comments if you want them counted on in the vote.
  • I will make sure this message goes to each contributor to the article the past month, so you are not being singled out. Now is the time to take a deep breath, for rational concise summaries, not all the arguing that is so wearisome in 66 printed pages - half a novelette, I'd guess! It's certainly a lot to ask your fellow editors to wade through on a minor issue.
  • I will also personally be making sure that at least a dozen other Administrators I'm acquainted with take a look at the debate after the time below. I will in fact ask for twenty commitments, so be clear and respectful of our time!!!
  • Thankyou for your time, attention, and good professional behaviour. I'll check the Talk state again no sooner than Monday around Noon (UTC), And ask the uninvolved others to do the same. PLEASE BE CONCISE. [[User:Fabartus| FrankB || TalktoMe]] 23:11, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: rv edit by Schildt.a

Oh, now I understand! Yeah, I'm sorry, my bad, I shouldn't have reverted those. A few of the bad reverts I did were still in effect; I removed those ja- links now. I hope it's OK now. Thanks for explaining it to me! Weregerbil 13:50, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Endroit/Chinese_Romanization

Hello. Please check out User:Endroit/Chinese_Romanization, and make additions/corrections where necessary. I am asking Yuje, Ran, Visviva, Nanshu, Babelfisch, Kusunose, and Saintjust to check and modify this Chinese Romanization proposal within the next 5 days.
After that we should move this Chinese Romanization page to a Project Page, and then request formal Mediation/Arbitration. I would like to nominate Yuje or Ran to be the leader for this project. Or I can be leader also. Please let me know what you think. Thanks.--Endroit 09:50, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I made one mistake. The text where you signed should have been "romanizations" instead of "characters".
So after correction, it is now:
"Please sign your name ..... if you support restoration of Chinese charactersromanizations."
(I'm sure you knew that already, but please verify to make sure you are comfortable with that). Thanks for signing.--Endroit 23:41, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gaijin

Please stop reverting the Gaijin article. Several users are trying very hard to reach consensus on the article's talk page. Reverting the main article without participating in the discussion is not helping at all. Exploding Boy 03:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

And furthermore, please do not use "rvv" in a summary unless you are reverting vandalism. A content dispute is never vandalism, and we admins hate seeing false positives. thank you. --Golbez 19:10, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Links to wikisource articles

Hi Saintjust. Thank you for your suggestions about how to links to wikisource. Regards,--Celldea 14:06, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Makoto Imaizumi.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Makoto Imaizumi.png. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 22:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No Personal Attacks

Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. Paul Cyr 18:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ijime

why don't you explain your just reason for deleting ijime article? if you're a Japanese national I'm 100% sure that you know how serious Ijime is in Japan, it is beyond what Westerners call 'bullying' I personally know a girl who killed herself after constant Ijime from her classmates. Before you go on to cowardly defend your thoughts by simply silencing others (by deleting articles that are against your thoughts), please think about the REALITY. 139.80.123.34 08:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Utter nonsense. Provide reliable sources to back it up; otherwise it can't stay. Read the Japanese article (ja:いじめ) for comparison if you really are Japanese. --Saintjust 08:42, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm writing on this English Wiki to help non-Japanese reader have better grasp of understanding Japanese Culture regardless of Negative or positive 139.80.123.34 08:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
I advised you to read the Japanese article to see how ridiculous your little essay is. And neither of the alleged sources that you just cited back up your edit. --Saintjust 08:48, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
There is no need, my 'little essay' happens to be a just little segment of much longer work that I've done while doing my research on Ijime - I will add more links and better sources later
You are nobody and Wikipedia is not a place to publish your essay unless it's thoroughly backed up by reliable sources. --Saintjust 08:56, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
it doesn't matter who I am, I'm just a humble Uni Student who wants to correct the fools that try to disguise their ugliness from the world (such as Ijime) I told you number of times that I will provide more links in the future, don't go on and delete the whole thing! its people like you that disgrace the whole of Japan...I bet you sing Gimigayo every morning 139.80.123.34 09:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Then come back and post that essay when you get all the sources ready. Until then it can't stay on Wikipedia. Wikipedia isn't your personal blog. --Saintjust 09:06, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Oi shinsengumi! I'm writing an article on Wiki, this place is not for my personal essays..I'm just writing an article, this is also not your personal space to force your rules on others; why don't you come up with valid sources saying Japan is not a collectivists society and rather, a individualists? I don't google 139.80.123.34 09:10, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
That's the rule of Wikipedia. Read WP:NOR and WP:V. BTW are you a different person form the one who posted this essay first? ("I am a Japanese and I agree with this article, I will soon provide more citations etc") And what the hell does "Oi shinsengumi" have to do with this? --Saintjust 09:16, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Shinsengumi is a famous group of ronin from Bakufu era...blind loyalty to Tenno and its motherland 139.80.123.34 09:23, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
A Korean kid from New Zealand lied about the sources of his bogus "essay" and identity. How typical. --Saintjust 09:28, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
you got New Zealand part right son, but a Korean kid? no no, this University network has literally thousands of users and possibly hundreds of Koreans too..you stalker that was possibly the lowest point of your sad life —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.80.123.34 (talk • contribs)
Like you are the first person to come up with that excuse on wikipedia. And you are agreeing with yourself. How much more pathetic can you be? You obviously has a nationalistic Korean agenda [3] and no interest in contributing to the development of free and npov encyclopaedia.
haha same old execuse from Pro-Imperialists...I'm under no illusion of trying to make Jews, Chinese and Koreans look good, those are the facts, they suffered under their oppressors, however Ijime topic has got nothing to do with other articles. Its an independent matter. Here in NZ, we only focus on facts, such as Ijime which does exist in Japan and it poses major threat to its People and society 139.80.123.34 10:05, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
You have provided no real sources that support your alleged "facts." Instead you provided as "sources" links to webpages that support none of your claims and that you obviously didn't refer to when you wrote your little essay. That means you lied. Your hateful propaganda campaign doesn't belong in Wikipedia. Do it on your own webpage. --Saintjust 10:17, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Just a couple of corrections to factual errors made above by user 139.80.123.34.

  • "Shinsengumi" actually fought against those who were loyal to the emperor. Factual inaccuracies aside, calling someone a pro-imperialist simply because they disagree with your viewpoint is a logical fallacy through guilt by association.
  • The Japanese national anthem is actually called kimigayo in Japanese - "Gimigayo" is only a direct transcription of the Korean term 기미가요 . Phonemonkey 11:45, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "Biased and abusive"

I'm just curious where you see this? I go out of my way to be as fair and neutral as possible in all cases, so please point out where you believe I'm being biased and abusive. I'm certainly interested in anywhere I can improve. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:42, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attacks and misbehavior on the norimitsu onishi talk page

I see that you've already been warned for making personal attacks on other people by Paul Cyr. Continued misbehavior will result further action that may get you banned. Contributions and disagreements are welcome but you need to chill out.Melonbarmonster 07:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

That person I had quarrel with was a Korean pov-pushing vandal by the name of Applyby, who has already been banned from editing Wikipedia indefinitely. You should rather be worried about yourself. Also, stop creating a new section on top of the disc page just because you are not getting attention. You are supposed to add a new section at the bottom. And don't wikify words in section headings. That's against wikipedia style guideline. --Saintjust 05:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
No one's condoning Applyby's behavior and his supposed misbehavior doesn't excuse yours. You need to learn to disagree and resolve differences by sticking to the material without getting testy and offending people left and right.Melonbarmonster 07:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you.

What you are doing in the discussion page are personal attacks such as "you are nobody" or "You should rather be worried about yourself," which implies legal actions. Please be polite and don't threat person of a nonsense accusation like "That person I had quarrel with was a Korean pov-pushing vandal by the name of Applyby, who has already been banned from editing Wikipedia indefinitely." Thanks. --Galaksiafervojo 06:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Oh you again.
  1. "You are nobody" is merely a factual statement as I clarified on the page. "Nobody" is someone who is "of no importance or influence" (American Heritage), which is the very definition of the kind of person not worth reference on Wikipedia per Wikipedia:No original research. It only suggests that your opinion doesn't count as far as it is not backed up by sources that are penned by another notable person and published in reputable medium, or as far as you are not someone authoritative yourself and have published your opinion in some reputable medium. That's just the very fundamental editing policy of Wikipedia. The word "nobody" does not have such a ridiculous meaning as "ningen no kasu (human scum)" like you accused. That's a creation of your own imagination that nobody else shares.
  2. I am not the one who threated with "further action that may get you banned" first. Nor was there any mention of legal sanction like you allege. Another creation of your imagination. BTW abusing npa temp is also a common form of vandalism.
  3. Melonbarmonster was referring to an earlier npa warning from Paul Cyr, so I clarified on what kind of person (Appleby) I allegedly had this problem with. Appleby was a Korean pov-pushing editor much like Melonbarmonster. You are Japanese and nothing like Appleby.
Stop being paranoid already. --Saintjust 06:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
No I was referring to your thinly veiled personal attacks and inflammatory behavior in the Onishi discussions page. It seems you've proven your proclivity toward these type of posts by personally attacking me with an insult. If you have any substantive disagreement with ANY of my past and future edits. PLEASE feel welcome to join in the discussions. I've peaceably resolved multiple disagreement regarding Korea/Japan issues and I've never been called a "Korean pov-pushing editor". Per wiki policy I'm asking you to remove this personal attack immediately.Melonbarmonster 07:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, me again:-) I don't like the phrase like 1, so please do not use it any more. There might be other guys who feel like my way, so I suggest you to stop using that phrase. I know it's aggressive because I got warned from a person face-to-face before. By the way, sorry about 3. It's my mistake. I just need a time to chill out.--Galaksiafervojo 06:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
That's simply what Wikipedia is about. If you got no source, your opinion doesn't count and insisting on it gets you nowhere. Wikipedia is different than your daily conversation. You don't discuss to see who is right on here. You only examine which piece of information is sufficiently backed up by reliable sources. --Saintjust 07:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
One more time me, again. Here's another guideline suggesting not to offend person. So, let me ask you once more, don't use that expression any more, even though you cannot find the connotation in the dictionary. Please. --Galaksiafervojo 08:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
p.s. The meaning "of no importance" looks as offensive as "a piece of crap (kasu or gomi in Japanese)." I think some feel in the same way at least the one I unintentionally used the phrase to. So please avoid it as much as possible. --Galaksiafervojo 09:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I've got American Heritage as a source. You've got nothing but an original research ("I think some feel in the same way at least the one I unintentionally used the phrase to"). If you don't like it, bring some better source to back up your case. I don't change the way I write just because some paranoid happens to find it "offensive" for a ridiculous reason like that. --Saintjust 13:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
That's not a "source". No one's here is confused or disagreeing on the the dictionary meaning of "nobody". The problem is your use of the the word in a phrase that's used almost exclusively as a pejorative. Dictionary definitions don't interpret meaning of context and popular use. No one who read your initial use of this phrase would've understood it as a mere statement of fact. Your use of the phrase "you are nobody" is inflammatory and insulting. You can give unconvincing excuses all you want but everyone sees it for what it is. Please show some good faith and stop, instead of turning every discussion into a pissing match. Melonbarmonster 07:54, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
That's a valid source, and my use of the word is perfectly fine. I always use this expression on Wikipedia in reference to WP:NOR /WP:V and the reference was obvious in the context when I used it on the disc page of onishi's article as well: "you are nobody and your opinion is not worth reference on Wikipedia without source unlike those Japanese conservative critics." This is a Wikipedia policy of which you seem to be ignorant. --Saintjust 13:53, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I explained WHY your dictionary def for "nobody" isn't a relevant source. You need to explain why it's not in response to my explanation instead of just repeating that it's a valid source. Everyone here knows that "nobody" means and whatnot... come on, show a little good faith here. Regardless of what your intentions were, the reality of the matter is that 2 editors are letting you know that the effect of your use of the phrase "you are nobody" is inappropriate. From this exchange with you and reading your exchanges with Galaksiafervojo, it's obvious that you use snide remarks and veiled insults habitually. If all your interested are winning arguments and egging people in a pissing match stick with public forums because that stuff is not helpful for editing wiki articles and against wiki policy. Just stop with the insults and oneliners, etc. and let's try to discuss these things in a mature and constructive manner. And speaking of wiki policy, you need to remove your personal attack against me above. You need to read Galaksiafervojo link to wiki policy on personal attacks because your labeling me as a POV editor is a clear violation of wiki's policy against personal attacks.Melonbarmonster 20:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
No, you haven't. You only keep insisting that my use of the word "nobody" is pejorative without explaining exactly how it is so in this particular context as I used it earlier. Like I have explained it again and again, I use the word only to tell that your opinion is not worth consideration unless you have reliable sources to back it up, or unless you are somebody authoritative yourself (i.e., not "nobody") and have published your opinion in some reputable medium, because Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia and not a personal blog hosting service. This is exactly what the Wikipedia policy WP:NOR says, and the dictionary definition of the word "nobody" fits it perfectly fine. If you are "somebody," provide the proof. If you've got souces, present them with citation. If you are nobody and/or got no souces, then you got no case and insisting your opinion is pointless. Simple as that. This context was obvious when I used the word on the disc page of Onishi article as well. As for labeling others as POV editors, that seems to be something that you are doing always. Speak for yourself. --Saintjust 00:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
First, you're backtracking from your earlier claims that your source for your dictionary definition for "nobody". I'm the one who pointed out that context of how that word is used is what's important which makes dictionary definitions pretty irrelevant. I'm glad that you agree.
As for your use of the phrase "you are nobody", that statement is used almost exclusively as a pejorative. That is its common usage and any native English speaker knows this. No one is questioning your intent. What Galaksiafervojo and I are telling you is that "you are nobody" is an inherently dismissive phrase that's used and taken by people as a pejorative.
But what's really at issue here is that you have been insulting Galaksiafervojo and I throughout this discussion with snide comments, insults and personal attacks. You do this chronically. Other people have warned you for this behavior as have I and Galaksiafervojo throughout this discussion.
As for my formal request for removal of you accusation, I've pointed out edits as being POV. That's not against wiki policy against personal attacks. Accusing someone of being an POV editor is a personal attack and is an illustrated example of a personal attack. I've never called you a bad editor, POV pushing editor, etc., which are clear examples of wiki policy violations. Galaksiafervojo linked the wiki policy on personal attacks. I suggest you read it. You need to remove this accusation above.Melonbarmonster 01:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
1. Again, you only keep insisting it's pejorative without explaining exactly how it is so in this particular context. Suggesting that the use of the word could be pejorative in some context is irrelevant. This is Wikpedia, and when used with clear reference to WP:NOR, the word means what I means beyond reasonable doubt. That you are ignorant of the policy and so couldn't take it as it is is your problem, not mine. 2. Yes, I have dealt with so many pov-pushing editors and this is nothing new. Many of them have already been baned from Wikipedia indefinitely for vandalism. 3. Since when do "edits" have "weakly disguised excuses and POV agenda" and make "self-serving POV guesses"? That's a very lame excuse. --Saintjust 01:48, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Give me a break. Here's the fact: "you are nobody" is an inflammatory and immature comment and NO ONE believes your ridiculous excuses and the burden of proof is on you. You want an explanation of why a pejorative is a pejorative while your reference to a dictionary definition of "nobody" doesn't prove anything besides its dictionary definition which is NOT in dispute. I've already explained to you multiple times as did Galaksiafervojo why "you are nobody" is inappropriate. Pejoratives develop out of popular usage but you're just not admitting to it for obvious, self-serving reasons.
And there is absolutely no reason why particular edits can't be "weakly disguised excuses and POV agenda", "POV guesses", etc.. That's why edits are reverted and bad edits repaired and wiki policy exists against such bad edits. Identifying these bad edits and repairing them is NOT against wiki policy.
Accusing someone of being a bad editor, POV-pushing editor, etc., however is AGAINST WIKI policy on personal attacks. Read it and give a reasoned response or remove your accusation.Melonbarmonster 04:08, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
The fact is that your "Everyone here is sick and tired of your weakly disguised excuses and POV agenda" is obviously pejorative whereas my "you are nobody and your opinion is not worth reference on Wikipedia without source unlike those Japanese conservative critics." isn't because mine is only a transliteration of what the wikipedia policy WP:NOR says. I have already provided a lengthy explanation on why my use of the word is not pejorative with reference to English dictionary as well as an important Wikipedia policy, whereas all you do is keep insisting my use of the word is pejorative and making lame excuses to defend your use of pejoratives while failing to provide any substantial sources to back up your accusation even after numerous requests to do so from me. And now you are demanding an apology from me for calling you a POV editor when you were the one to call me that first. What a joke. I don't know why I'm still bothering to respond to this pov-pushing troll. --Saintjust 05:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
You've just called me a pov-pushing troll which is yet another example of a personal attack according wiki policy. I'm asking you to remove this and your previous insult in good faith.Melonbarmonster 03:26, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
This is devolving into "He started it!", and I recommend that both of you back up and look at how you're making yourselves look bad. I (personally, without full context) think that Saintjust is more at fault here, but please, keep it civil? 24.205.34.217 02:41, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please try to keep cool guys :)

I'm not going to admonish either of you (ie, you or the reporter), but I've just popped accross from WP:PAIN to request that you both try to cool down your respective tones a little. It's the nature of disputes that things get heated, then they start getting incivil, then comes the ill beeling, etc, etc. Please simply consider hat can be said with incivility can also be said without it. If it's a harsh comment that may even have the possibility of offence, please consider that it may be incivil, and revise as appropriate Just hold for a few seconds before hitting the "Save Page" button :)

If these content issues continue to be a problem, please consider using dispute resolution. Thanks, and have a good day. Crimsone 04:01, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

It's rather amusing that the reporter Melonbarmonster himself appears to use expressions like "pov" and "agenda" a lot (he was the one who said "Everyone here is sick and tired of your weakly disguised excuses and POV agenda" to me first), and yet he gets madly upset right away once he gets called that. --Saintjust 04:29, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I guess you've abandoned all hopes of retaining any shred of decency or good-faith since you're freely lying now. LOL. Good job, you can go crawl back to your black van now. Melonbarmonster 19:51, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
  • You see guys - this is what I was trying to say (my above message was offered to you both). You are both engaged in dispute with each other, which is resulting in incivility at the moment, and incivility on one side isn't justification for it on the other. I'm not going to admonish either of you for it, but I do ask that you both realise that you can both do without it. What can be said with incivility can equally be said without it, and if you could just both tone it down a little, you may well find yourselves able to come to an understanding. Failing that, there are a number of dispute resolution avenues open to both of you. Please, please consider using them. Crimsone 19:58, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
My complaint was with the personal insults and not with any topical matter. If you read above, you'll see that Saintjust thinks telling other editors that "you are nobody" is acceptable behavior and this was the topic of disagreement not anything related to a wiki article. Please read the beginning of the section above, "Personal attacks and misbehavior on the norimitsu onishi talk page". Galaksiafervojo and I both started out civilly and would LOVE to keep it that way but we all have our limits when we're personally attacked. Thanks.Melonbarmonster 20:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
The "insults" (which have been thrown from both directions) are resulting from a dispute between the two of you. This is what is at the very root of the issue, and this is what needs to be resolved. If you wish to point out that Saintjust's behaviour is unacceptable, then I would have to point out that yours is equally so. As you just said - you both started out civilly. Yes we all have our limits, but those limits do not excuse reciprocal behaviour. If you wish to sort this complaint out, you are going to need to go about it the right way, which is to resolve the issues causeing this issue in the first place, for which we have the WP:DR page to help.
This is what I have said, and is all I am going to say. If my answer isn't one that's to your liking you can choose whether to follow the advice or not. I'm afraid that you won't get a different answer from me. Your options are to follow my advice, or to seek out advice from somebody else - possibly at WP:AN/I, or possibly at WP:PAIN. What's evident here is a strong case of WP:KETTLE, and if you truly push to see this user admonished officially, please realise that there is a possiblity that you will recieve a similar admonishment. Crimsone 21:44, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
It's unfortunate that you're not willing to hash through the details of what's transpired. In my opinion your precursory judgments only encourages WP:KETTLE even more. Thanks, but I'll just have to be more careful to not get baited by trolls in the future.Melonbarmonster 21:49, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unspecified source for Image:Japan-bio-stub.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Japan-bio-stub.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Angr 19:48, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Fixed now. --Saintjust 21:02, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Akita and Uriginal

I only quoted what is written in the history section of the dogs article, which when reviewing the afd I read a number of articles from linked from Uriginal to see what reference thay had to the term, this just stood out as contradictory to the Uriginal articles claim. I was trying to assess how much weight should be given to the various arguments. Gnangarra 15:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removal of new addition to "Further Reading"

There is no reason to remove Kolsto (2007) Rethinking Yasukuni: From Secular Politics to Religious Sacrifice. It is just as informative as Sturgeon's Master Thesis. Kolsto's thesis is based on an anthropological fieldwork in Yasukuni in the autumn of 2006; there is no reason to argue that is does not contribute to "Further Reading" about Yasukuni as well as Sturgeon or Nelson's work. For example, it gives an exemplary overview of the academic literature on the subject. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TTwist (talk • contribs).

It's not a matter of whether it's "informative" or not. As far as it has not been published by any reliable publication (academic journal, etc.) yet, it's against the NOR policy and so doesn't merit citation. --Saintjust 19:18, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
I understand. I do, however, disagree. Firstly, Kolsto (2007) can be found on the University of Bergen website: https://bora.uib.no/bitstream/1956/2273/1/Masterthesis_Kolstø.pdf . The version I tried link to, in the best interest of those interested in Yasukuni, is an extended version with some more information. The fact that there is a University label on its front cover signals that it has been done through the University system. Most Universities are, as you know, also publishers. Secondly, Sturgeon's thesis is "published" on dissertation.com, a site on which it is largely up to the author himself to put out his thesis and get money for it. In fact, it is not comparable to the processing of a scientific journal at all. Thus, I don't share your view that dissertation.com is "a reliable publication (academic journal, etc.)". But that may just be me. I don't want to be quarrelsome here, but there should be some consistency if one removes a mayor anthropological thesis and let another, quite "thinner", survey remain just because the first hasn't been released through an American online store, and the latter one has. All that being said, I think the easy way out here is to register Kolsto (2007) with dissertation.com. Which I will do, and then reapply for linkage, however unnecessary and ritualistic it may feel. --Yanemiro 22:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gaijin

Thank you! I wasn't going to get into an edit war over that nonsense. J Readings 10:24, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please criticize.

Wikipedia talk:Requests for mediation/Eugenics in Showa Japan 必要な情報と不必要な情報を書き出しました。確認をお願いします。--Azukimonaka (talk) 18:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

It voted. I think that I should unite this article with Eugenics. --Azukimonaka (talk) 05:36, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yeongeunmun Gate

Hello Saintjust. How do you do? I have reverted the Yeongeunmun Gate, because recently 2 anons's edits are similar to in-def blocked POV-pushing troll's.123 I hope that you will understand my editing... Thanks. --Nightshadow28 (talk) 15:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 3RR

Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing at The Rape of Nanking (book). If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions in a content dispute 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 three-revert rule. Rather than reverting, discuss disputed changes on the talk page. The revision you want is not going to be implemented by edit warring. Thank you. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:29, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Archiving of Rape of Nanking GAR discussion

So, you are involved in a content dispute and then seek to get the article delisted because of it? That seems sort of self-serving, does it not? The problem was that the discussion was NOT productive at all. Rather than being a place for a reasoned, consensus building discussion by uninvolved editors, it was a rehashing of the SAME arguements by the SAME two editors as was going on at the talk page. There was no place for any discussion of the GA status, since the content dispute is still on going. I would prefer to see the content dispute solved BEFORE any further discussion of the GA status is taken up. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 07:06, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Look at it this way: The very manner of the nomination at GAR leaves the other editors in an untenable position. When you bring an article to GAR that you are involved in a content dispute over, what you are in essence saying is "My opponent has made the article worse. What do you all think???" If people say delist, it is an "endorsement by proxy" of YOUR version of the article, and GAR is not what that is about. The manner of the discussion made it impossible for any uninvolved editor to remain uninvolved in their assessment of the article; by taking a stand on this particular GAR they would be in essence taking a stand on which of two competing versions of the article is "better". GAR should NOT be the place to do that. At RFC, you can request that other people look at the article, and decide which version is better. But not at GAR. So yes, while technically, the article is unstable, delisting is not an appropriate action at this time, because of what I outlined above.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 16:39, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Try it another way. The conjunction against promoting articles to the GA list that are unstable is based on the idea that articles in "transition" should not have their status evaluated one way or the other until they are "stable". While it would be inappropriate to add an article to the GA list that was the subject of an ongoing edit war, it would be inappropriate to remove one from the list for the SAME REASON; that is people cannot judge the status of an article if the article is changing every five minutes. So the issue for me is not that the article should be delisted because it is unstable; its that it should not have its status CHANGED because it is unstable. This is not an endorsement of the GA status at this time; its simply a pragmatic recognition that it cannot be judged one way or the other while it is unstable, and we should wait until a stable version is established before anyone makes any decision on its status. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:23, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
So which is it? First you say "For the purpose of GA disqualification, only the recognition of the content dispute suffices. There is no need to endorse one version over the other. An article being unstable and the content of a version of an article being N/POV are two different things" Where you mean that you wish the article to be delisted for instability issues, and then when you say "It doesn't apply to the NPOV dispute. Even if the article doesn't change day by day, that the neutrality of the content is being disputed still remains." Implying the article is stable. So which is it? Is the article instable or stable??? Don't answer that. The fact still remains that the discussion at GAR was unproductive. Three editors refused to comment on the GA status until the content review is resolved, and EVERY other comment was by you or the person who you are in dispute with. So what we have is three people who endorsed my action (to archive without comment) and then the rest of the discussion was the content dispute itself. It was going nowhere, and stood no chance of building consensus at GAR for any real action.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 03:29, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Everything you say is 100% true. It does not correct the problem that the GAR discussion was not going anywhere. It wasn't about delisting. It was a spillover of the original content dispute. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 03:49, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please give the opinion

The relation between imperial household and Baekjae of Japan is being discussed. I hope for your opinion. [4]--Princesunta (talk) 10:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ninja_ichikawa_raizo.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Ninja_ichikawa_raizo.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Project FMF (talk) 23:52, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese Music Charts

Hi, I'm just writing to you to request your help and assistance in referencing the Japanese Music Charts. Through out alot of popular english songs I have viewed I have noticed that they have been noted as performing well in Japan and have also read that the Japanese music market it very big. But in saying this every song I have seen has not got a Japanese chart position in the charts box. So if you are into music and willing to try and provide information on the Japanese Music Charts it would be greatly appreciated so then wikipedia users can start adding the Japanese chart positions into the chart boxes for popular songs. TeePee-20.7 (talk) 17:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)