User talk:Nihonjoe/Archive 28
Would you contribute your opinion?Hi, Nihonjoe -- would you comment on the new image just added by User:Beyond silence to the Manga page? There's a discussion on the manga talk page -- the last item at the moment. Thanks. Timothy Perper (talk) 22:24, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Why was Neoseeker Deleted?It was clearly within the WEB, as it is a website with massive forums. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Guticb (talk • contribs) 02:16, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to bother youI hate to bother you with this again, but Darin Fidika has began posting Japanese history articles again taking them from the Samurai archives, basically rewriting them with poor grammar and throwing in flashy bits of video game and anime inspired drivel - he is currently using this account: User:Exiled Ambition. Part of his agreement to get out of his justified permanent ban was to stay away from those article permanently. I have to protest this. I find this situation unacceptable. I appreciate your help in this matter. As you can well imagine, my patience with him was already utterly gone after 6 months of dealing with his mess, and I can imagine yours is as well. I look forward to a speedy resolution. Thanks. --Kuuzo (talk) 06:09, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
just a thoughtIf your real name is actually Joe, then your username would be even more clever. Pandacomics (talk) 15:55, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
heads upSee User talk:Mangojuice and Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Darin Fidika. Seems he might be back. Mangojuicetalk 16:25, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank youI wasn't sure if you were a pain, a butt-in-ski, or what but your addition of the cyber chocolate chip cookie on Mango's page made me literally laugh out loud and told me everything. You're a good person just looking to help! Thank you!! Stress free holidays to you too!! Thanks for the smiles!! CelticGreen (talk) 03:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Given the strong emphasis on verifiability, can you please explain to me why this was merged? Both the source article and the target article (and section) are unsourced. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 21:03, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you know what shiokombu is? It's mentioned in Red bean soup but isn't described. Badagnani (talk) 03:56, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Lum Invader Real World NotabilityFound this piece of info on the net http://www.arikah.com/encyclopedia/Lum after remembering having read about something about Lum and the Hanshin Tigers in the past. "From August 12 to September 15, 2003, pictures of Lum supporting the Hanshin Tigers (drawn by Takahashi herself) appeared in the magazine Daily Sports." I figure that since you have actually lived in Japan, you might have a better chance of verifying this in order to help produce real world notability for the Lum Invader article. Regards. Showers (talk) 05:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
HeyHey, Japanese boy. No synopses for the Branden Sanderson article. You understand that? They should be used only in their own articles. The article is being damaged because of folks like you. Do not revert me any more without acknowledging me? Get that in the thick skull of yours and sort yourself before editing. I don't come from nowhere to see some editor with milk on his mouth reverting me.
There is every reason to be rude. Every fucking reason. Because everybody is reverting everybody without the slightest acknowledgement. I saw nowhere that putting synopses is encouraged. Untill you put some validated rule by Wikipedia that putting synopses is encouraged - I won't tolerate it. Oh, and I don't care about you and your fucking accomplishements. To be bragging about it is stupid and immature. I let my edits speak for themeselves.
Uh-huh, I have read it, and there's nowhere written concerning synopses in authors' pages. So untill there is specifically written that synopses should be put on authors page, there won't be any. Thus, synopses will remain only on individual book's articles. Sorry for calling you Japanese. Frankly, I don't know what you are. Also, my snapping wasn't meant individually for you. Strong portion of the editors revert without acknowledgement.
Mainichi Shimbun sourcingHi, Joe. Due to the nature of my regular editing area, I check the "Wai Wai" section of the Mainichi Shimbun almost every day. Sometimes I'm lucky and find an article on Nana Natsume or someone. Other times I find articles on Japanese pop culture that don't really interest me, but I add a link to the news item on our related articles anyway. I've always thought of providing sources, especially at un-sourced or poorly-sourced articles as a good deed, but it's often reverted by editors of the article. The latest instance was when I added Today's article on Airbots to the Aerialbots article. It was removed. Doesn't really bother me that the editors throw out good sourcing, but it is kind of irritating... Who's right/wrong here? Should I refrain from adding new items to articles that don't really interest me? Dekkappai (talk) 01:36, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Please respect hangon04:43, December 20, 2007 Nihonjoe (Talk | contribs | block) deleted "Omaliceo/Cuahutemoc Morfin" (content was: '{{db-bio}} {{hangon}} I will be adding more information. Cuahtemoc Morfin has been anything but insignificant with his presence in the city of Chicago. He has been in charge of many different movements involving immigration. Plus there ...') Why did you delete a harmless page from a user space when it had a {{hangon}} tag? — Sebastian 04:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC) Oops, I realized I forgot "User:". Sorry about that! — Sebastian 04:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
That's what I said: I forgot "User:". Add "Omaliceo/Cuahutemoc Morfin", and what do you get? My dear fellow administrator, I know we all make mistakes, and I just made one myself, but it seems you're being rash. Please take the time to understand what others are trying to say. Likewise, even though there may not be a rule to obey {{hangon}}, it is a very basic rule of respect and politeness to at least allow somebody to do prove notability before insisting on hitting the delete button
Sorry, I didn't mean that you are a mindless robot. I only wanted to appeal to you as a human being. Please, do show some respect to such requests, especially when the page is harmless, like the one you deleted. — Sebastian 06:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Who said "leave all harmless pages"? What I'm saying is - see the title of this section: "Please respect hangon". Please address that, and don't flee into distorting the request to the point of absurdity. So far, you have not provided a single reason for not respecting hangon. — Sebastian 07:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I agree, it does often happen that users don't follow up. Maybe then, the whole {{hangon}} concept is wrong? If you feel that way, you're free to bring it up at the appropriate place. But please don't let the the broken promises of some bad editors harden you so much as to punish those well-intended editors who really want to add more. As long as you keep doing that, it's not moot. — Sebastian 22:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, you're right about that. How long do you think would be appropriate to wait for that? BTW, one thing that bothers me is that you always have to check the history to find out when the db- or hangon tag was posted. What do you think: Maybe I should just go ahead and edit the templates to include a time stamp? — Sebastian 22:52, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh yes, the preloaded thing is a good idea, too. I've done that on {{Medcab-request}}. I'll try to do that in the next couple of days. As for the time, it could be even less, but I think 24 hours is perfect for a wiki that involves people from all time zones. I'm so glad our discussion ended with a constructive result, even though I ended up having to do all the work. ;-) — Sebastian 23:17, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Timestamp: I've been experimenting with templates, but unfortunately there seems to be no way to do get the correct time stamp unless the template is inserted with subst:, which is not what our speedy deletion templates recommend. For {{hangon}}, we could theoretically recommend using subst:, but there's downsides to that, too, and changing something so many people are used to is not practical. I was also thinking of putting a time stamp on the db-* templates, but that's even harder: Even with subst:, I wasn't able to get it to work if there are as many nested templates as we have, with db-* calling db-meta. Next, I was thinking of using the {{REVISIONTIMESTAMP}} magic word, but then I realized that we already have the timestamp at the bottom of each page. Therefore, would it be OK to just write "Administrators, before deleting, please check the time stamp and allow the editor 24 hours to dispute the speedy deletion. Preloaded discussion: When you wrote this, I first thought of the link I put in the medcab template that preloads a dedicated page (in that case the mediation case), but then I realized that that page is simply the article's talk page, and the link for that is already in the template. Maybe I misunderstood you; did you mean something else? — Sebastian 07:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
OK, I can add it. I think the better place would be the db- templates (db-meta, to be exact), because they are always there, as opposed to hangon. For the section preload, we could add http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title={{TALKPAGENAMEE}}&action=edit§ion=new, but that would always add a new section - not very helpful for checking if a user did reply. I couldn't find a way to add a certain section, or to check for its existence. Now I have a different idea: Who says it has to be on the talk page? Why can't we have the editor write the explanation in the hangon template? It already had a parameter for the reason - all we need is tell the editor to use it! — Sebastian 08:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC) PS: I'm going to bed now, and will continue tomorrow. — Sebastian 08:29, 23 December 2007 (UTC) Hi, could you restore this to my user space? Thanks, Tlogmer ( talk / contributions ) 05:11, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Why do you consider the IFC Engine Series SPAM? --Dustin Townsend (talk) 15:05, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks!For archiving! :) Maser (Talk!) 01:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
re: AFD comment errorMy apologies. I have no idea how that happened. I opened the page and added only the one line. I even previewed the edit before saving. I would have sworn that the comments you replaced were still there when I previewed the edit. I didn't even put my cursor on any other line... It's quite disturbing that I don't know how that edit happened. Thank you for catching and fixing it. Rossami (talk) 05:47, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Parkour in popular cultureHi, Nihonjoe. Regarding your closure of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parkour in popular culture, I'm a little perplexed at your reasoning. It seemed to me there was an obvious consensus that the article shouldn't be exist; the only disagreement was between merging (a limited merge in my case) and outright deletion (which only one person suggested anyway). Either way, only one or two people even suggested the article should continue to exist, and their arguments were spurious at best. I would like to ask you to take another look. Powers T 20:15, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Nihonjoe. Thanks for closing this AfD, it was the best option. I replied to LtPowers on User_talk:LtPowers#WP:AfD_is_not_a_vote. Cheers. Carlosguitar (ready and willing) 14:27, 24 December 2007 (UTC) An editor has asked for a deletion review of Parkour in popular culture. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Powers T 18:59, 1 January 2008 (UTC) The category box at the foot of this article identifies it as having inadequate reference sources. I can't figure out how to delete this mistake? Rather than contacting you for help, what could I have done differently to resolve this anomaly? --Ooperhoofd (talk) 18:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Daijō-kan categoryThe category box at the foot of this article identifies it as having inadequate reference sources. I can't figure out how to delete this mistake? Rather than contacting you for help, what could I have done differently to resolve this anomaly? --Ooperhoofd (talk) 18:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Can you please reply and ignore all the bickering below? Thank you. --NE2 06:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
SpotsWhy does Spots redirect to cannabis smoking? The section referred to doesn't exist, and to be honest if anyone talks about a 'spot', it's rather obvious what they mean! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 00:58, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Additional CJKV's, and more to comeHappy New Year, Nihonjoe! I created 7 more CJKV DAB's so far this year: 日本橋, 玄米茶, 中山, 蹴鞠, 餅, 酒, 神. Also, I'm going through a list of districts in Tokyo, and will be creating either a redirect or a Dab (like 日本橋) for each kanji. Can you please check if the new DAB's are in order, and fix them as you see fit? I want to make sure these all work together harmoniously within the frameworks of WP:JA. Thank you for your help. We have a new DAB guideline at WP:DAB#Disambiguation of CJKV character names. However, since we don't have a project page yet (for a task force), I'm keeping track of all DAB's I create (or find) at User:Endroit/Chinese characters. I'll be putting additional new ones there.--Endroit (talk) 21:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
YoumexYes, I did read the article before recommending it for speedy. I also just read it again, and it still reads like an advertisement, and it still doesn't say the company no longer exists. In fact, sentences like ("Youmex (ユーメックス株式会社, Yūmekkusu Kabushiki Kaisha?) is an anime production company") imply quite the opposite. Whether the company still exists is irrelevant to the speedy claim, though, which also applies to the animes themselves as products. Besides sounding like an ad, there is no evidence of notability and no reference for most of the movies. I have nominated it for AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Youmex. Superm401 - Talk 04:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC) AfD nomination of YoumexAn editor has nominated Youmex, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Youmex and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:44, 2 January 2008 (UTC) |
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia