User talk:Nihonjoe/Archive 16

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

→

Archive 20

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 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73

Dewdney Trail vs The Dewdney Trail

You reverted my changes here, which were meant to correct the titling problem of "The Dewdney Trail", which should ONLY be "Dewdney Trail"; see Okanagan Trail, Douglas Road, Cariboo Road, Oregon Trail, and so on; NONE needing the definite article in their titles; Dewdney Trail was linked all over the place (because that's what I was intending on calling it once I created it - I didn't realize that "The Dewdney Trail" existed because a search for "Dewdney Trail" wouldn't find it because it's missing the "the". Please re-revert my changes, as they were appropriate and meant to bring the article in conformtiy with Wikipedia article-naming guidelines, and also because "The Dewdney Trail" was an orphan; "Dewdney Trail" is the correct title.Skookum1 20:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Thing is, you moved the article using cut-and-paste rather than the proper procedure, as I explained on the talk page for the article. I'll be happy to move it correct way, however, and have now done so. Please let me know if you have any questions. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 20:43, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Didn't know it made that much difference....better watch it when I do similar things in future, then; we'd un-knotted some complicated merge/non-merge issues to do with Squamish Nation]]'s various aboriginal-language-titled spin-offs that way, or tried to, although it wasn't so much redirects that were relocated as article contents that got "re-geared". Seemed simple enough here to just move the contents...oh well, live and wiki-learn.....Skookum1 20:53, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi

Sorry for not responding, I'm new at this so I really need some help making my brother's favorite wrestler Nate Webb's page. And I don't know how to cite. Can you help me with the rest of it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Extreme Enigma (talk • contribs).

Sure. I'll post comments on the talk page. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 22:36, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

And I won't delete what you put unless it is negative or unneccessary. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Extreme Enigma (talk • contribs).

That's the problem. What you consider "negative or unnecessary" may not agree with what others on Wikipedia think. The whole point is to get an article which is neutral and reliably sourced so it is verifiable. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 22:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia says that Nate Webb's home page is a spam, but that is where some of my information is from —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Extreme Enigma (talk • contribs).

I also have never had a problem with this before, because before I had a username, I was the one that wrote the J.C Bailey page, other than the guy who created the article. He created it and only had a finishing move and an infobox, so I did the rest of it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Extreme Enigma (talk • contribs).

Will you please help me make the rest of my article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Extreme Enigma (talk • contribs).

I don't know much about pro wrestling, so I recommend popping over to Wikipedia:WikiProject Professional wrestling and asking for help on their talk page. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 00:21, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

alright thank you for the help —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Extreme Enigma (talk • contribs).

Template:Talkheader

Just a note to let you know I reverted the changes you made to this template. See Template talk:Talkheader for ongoing discussions. Thanks, AuburnPilot^talk 23:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

That's fine. No one other than ReyBrujo bothered making comments there until after the change was made, though. I've had comments go unanswered for a very long time there (if they were answered at all). ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 23:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Grammar & wording

Hi Nihonjoe, why should I not engage in edit wars over grammar & wording? I assume that you've read over the entire discussion. P.S. Actually, specifying where I made mistakes would be better. I'm ready to defend my positions. (Wikimachine 01:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC))

The edit warring is over content, with various editors adding material, and other reverting it, over and over. I was just giving a friendly warning that it wouldn't be tolerated as there has been enough battling over nothing in relation to Japanese articles. The edit warring on that particular article is fairly mild in comparison to some others, but it's still happening. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:29, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh. It may look like an edit war, but really it's a continuous wave of reverts and edits by anonymous and registered users. Some editors have already clarified that changes that are seen as controversial by other editors can be protested, but done with the article in the form prior to that edit. (Wikimachine 02:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC))

"...really it's a continuous wave of reverts and edits by anonymous and registered users." An edit war by any other name. Really, though, please do your best to be a calming influence on all the editors there, and try to get them to discuss things and find consensus rather than constantly reverting each other. Thanks! ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 03:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Removal of Deletion tag

I have removed those tags because, there was no consensus or debate and the time period allocated had passed without any resolutioin. I therefore removed the tag however I heft the comment at the bottom saying there had not been any consensus

thanks anf if you still think I am incorrect I wish to apologise symode09 04:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The tags should only be removed once the debate has officially been closed by an admin. Apology accepted. (^_^) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 04:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Old Aquinians Hockey Club

Smbarnzy removed your merge tag from this article. I endorse this. See my explanation on the talk page. Hesperian 11:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I've modified the wording. I think it's still important to link to the old AfD, but the new wording should help clarify any confusion. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:49, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion highly appreciated

I hope you're doing well. A category I started (Category:Series broadcast by Animax), related to Animax, Category:Series broadcast by Animax (which was created in order to improve and expand on the article overall), was recently brought into discussion for deletion by a user. If you're interested, I would really appreciate hearing your opinion on the matter. Since it is a category, I wasn't sure whether or not it should be added to the Japan-related deletions article. Take care (^_^)! Ganryuu (talk) 01:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I've commented there. The category would be part of the Anime WikiProject. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the response. By the way, I really liked the High School! Kimengumi article, as it is really quite nice and refreshing reading and learning about such classic anime series. I was also quite interested in asking you, which anime series did you discover or enjoy during your time in Japan, like Dokkiri Doctor? Dokkiri Doctor was really quite a nice and funny series, which I personally really liked. Ganryuu (talk) 08:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Mamapoyo is one I discoverd and really enjoyed. Another is Tokimeki Tonight. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 18:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 20:50, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Please let me know if you have any questions. I'll be happy to help out where I can. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 16:39, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Using English

Hello - I'm contacting you because of your statement regarding using English instead of foreign terms in articles. A few are trying to "Anglicise" French terms in Wiki articles according to the correct dictionary definitions but there is some resistance (eg/: "Région => Region"; "Département => Departement"). Your input would be appreciated here page. Thankyou. --Bob 16:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

The discussion you linked to is closed. Is there another one that you wanted me to see? ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 18:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Lower down on the same page, eg Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_France#Dictionary_definitions --Bob 19:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that using "département" in the instance described there (to describe regions in France) is acceptable and does not go against WP:MOS guidelines. In fact, I think it would assist in disambiguating the term. That's my two francs worth. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 19:46, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA! It succeeded, and I now have The Tools – which I'm planning to use as wisely as I possibly can. I hope I will be worth your confidence. Thanks again! :-) –mysid☎ 21:03, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Please let me know if you have any questions. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 22:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

RE

Note: This section is discussing Tokyo Mew Mew.

I'll try to..Its just that its this sole person is deleteing the "reborn" section. It is annoys me badly. If it was more than one person, I wouldn't be annoyed. But I'll try my hardest to remain civil. "THROUGH FIRE, JUSTICE IS SERVED!" 02:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Just adopt the Nike slogan: Just do it. (^_^) ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

We just got tired from trying to keep this section in the articles. I personally don't know what else to do. We've provided two different Japanese sources, one of wich shows this word translated as "reborn", yet some people still refuse to accept it. Even if we leave the incorrect translation in the articles themselves, what's wrong with adding a note about this word being mistranslated? But no, this note gets deleted, too. What we write is nowhere the original research: we've provided sources, we've shown how the words are written in the original manga, what's the difference between "ribbon" and "reborn" - why delete this explanation from the articles? It's been proven two times, and any person who really knows Japanese can prove it, too. What's wrong with adding this info?

Yume no Kishi

Unless you can find another reliable source or two discussing this translation error, the whole ribbon/reborn discussion can't be in the article anyway as it would violate the no original research policy. Do you have sources where this is being discussed? ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 16:31, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

That is a problem.

You see, I was the first person to notice this mistake! I just happened to know a little Japanese, so it was easy for me to see that the word was mistranslated.

The said word is written in the manga as リボーン, which translates to "reborn", not "ribbon". I know this because this word was also used in the "Sailor Moon", in the attack incantation "Death Reborn Revolution". In case of "Sailor Moon" this same word was proved to be "reborn", not "ribbon". On some sites, like DIES GAUDII, there are articles that explain this mistranslation in "Sailor Moon". We have found some manga pictures that show this word written as リボーン, we compare it to the word "ribbon" that is shown written in the anime opening as リボン. The original "Katekyo Hitman Reborn!" manga specifically shows the katakana リボーン associated with the word "Reborn" written in English.

In case of "Tokyo Mew Mew", no, it hasn't been said anywhere else, but that's because nobody noticed it before. I'm on the verge of emailing the owner of DIES GAUDII to ask for explanation that'll specifically refer to "Tokyo Mew Mew", for the mistake is really stupid. Yes, I couldn't believe at first that this word was mistranslated everywhere: in the manga, fansubs, on webpages. Speaking of the manga, Tokyopop is known for making stupid translation errors, so I don't really understand why people have so much problem with admitting that this is a mistake. They keep on saying that the word wasn't translated this way anywhere besides Wikipedia, we keep on saying that it just can't be translated any other way, showing them pictures and stuff.

I don't know what to do with this mistranslation. I said - if anything, I'll ask somebody for help, I'll ask somebody who wrote about this word in Sailor Saturn's attack (and it's also sometimes mistranslated as "ribbon") to mention the same error in "Tokyo Mew Mew" or something. But still, the way these people who defend the mistranslated version react on our comment is... We at least tried to provide some sources, we inserted pictures, we mentioned Saturn's attack - look at that section where we tried to explain it; they're only shouting that "reborn" shouldn't be used because it hasn't-ever-been-translated-this-way/doesn't-make-sense/etc. That's their POV. They say that we don't know any Japanese, they call our explanation "garbage", and they can't provide any real proof that our version is incorrect.

I know you'll probably say that we can't provide reliable sources and everything, but can you at least stop these people from writing stupid comments and spreading misinformation? Some of them tried to search for help on "Tokyo Mew Mew" forums - they don't even mention our explanation, they just say something about "two Wikipedians that say everybody is wrong". Yes.

This thing is just... sad.

Yume no Kishi 19:15, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

You don't need to make your argument to me as I agree with you. However, unless you can find reliable sources which discuss this error, you can not include it in the article as it would be original research. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 21:45, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, we're currently trying to find people who can write something about this thing. Maybe we'll place that "citation needed" thing in the articles, until we find some reliable info?

By the way - what sources can be count as reliable? Yes, I have read about this on the Help page. However, I can say one thing about "Tokyo Mew Mew" sources.

Newtype, Protoculture Addicts, and other industry magazines would be reliable sources. So would sites like Anime News Network. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 20:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Tokyopop's manga translation can hardly be count as a reliable source, because Tokyopop is known for making stupid translation errors. The "ribbon/reborn" mistake is not the only mistake made by their translators, but this one is probably the stupidest.

Same problem is with the anime. The series never got an "official" subbed or uncut dubbed version, so all we have is fansubs, and these fansubs also can't be count as a reliable source, for they also contain many other mistakes.

Also, speaking of the Mews' attacks, the translations of them actually contain much more mistakes then just this one. The "two-words-fusion" puns were almost always omitted, and Tokyopop once even managed to skip one of the syllables in Zakuro's attack. So, "reborn" is not the only mistranslated word there.

As I said numerous times on discussion pages for TMM articles, leaving the word translated as "ribbon" can cause even much confusion, as this translation conflicts with translation of the same word in other sources (e.g. Katekyo Hitman Reborn! manga). This was the reason for inserting these explanations in the articles. The same word translated two different ways in one encyclopedia looks rather stupid. Or at least we thought so...

What we got for doing this is constant arguing with fans who don't believe us. I now think that even if we remove this section until we find a source, these people will continue writing in the articles this stupid stuff about "somebody who tried to prove that this translation is wrong even though it has been used for years". That's why I ask you to take care of these articles, because we're already tired from removing these stupid comments. No wonder that Angelofdeath275 got so angry that she started to write such edit summaries...

The information that we've collected may be helpful, too. (BTW, is it really "original research", or it may be count as "source-based"? I mean, in case of "Sailor Moon" it was just the same mistake as in "Tokyo Mew Mew", and I believe that these explanations for "Sailor Moon" (http://antares7.absoludicrous.net/drr/r-r.html) can be applied to other mangas, too, since the mistranslation is the same.) Where can we place it so that people would be able to see it, if not in the articles themselves? Not all Wikipedia visitors read discussion pages, that is a problem. Maybe after reading this section someone would be able to provide normal explanation with more sources cited. Most people don't even know about this thing. (On most Tokyo Mew Mew forums our explanation will get just the same treatment as here - i.e. will be called "garbage".)

Leaving the section in articles and placing some "original research warning" or whatever it is called would work. If we just remove this info, people who tried to justify the incorrect translation will probably start to mock us (there is one particular person who certainly will do it), and it will result either in complete vandalizing our user talk pages or filling them with comments much worse than those that were before.

P.S. Sorry for the extremely long message.

Yume no Kishi

Please make your arguments on the article talk page, not here. As I indicated above, I agree with you. There's no reason to keep trying to convince me. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 20:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. I'll just say that making arguments there doesn't help anymore, because there are people who usually delete stuff without even reading the talk pages - another reason for our wish to insert this info in the articles themselves. The talk page for the main Tokyo Mew Mew article has all our arguments, but the person who was getting on our nerves obviously hasn't read this stuff, as he/she was posting objections on the talk page for another article. We can copy it to other talk pages, but believe me, it wouldn't help.

Moreover, I believe they don't even read our explanations in the articles...

See, just now the whole translation errors section got deleted by somebody again, and they called it "pointless"...

please... Just go see the discussion for Ichigo's article, and you'll understand why we got so angry...

Yume no Kishi

Just read their arguments... they decided to begin the greatest edit war in Wikipedia's history. I'll probably stop it, if they weren't adding these stupid comments...

Yume no Kishi

In other words, I agree to stop reverting their changes until we find a source if no stupid stuff will be added (e.g. "'reborn' doesn't sound right"). These comments weren't there before our editing, and they only make the articles look stupid.

Yume no Kishi

If you're going to just add that "original research" thing, then this stuff is in all TMM articles.

Yume no Kishi

Yomari

Hi, I noticed an article you deleted, yomari, was quickly recreated. Is this a copy of the deleted article, or new content? Thanks, delldot | talk 07:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Nope, not even close to the same content. Thanks for the notice, though. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 08:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for taking the time to review my contributions and contribute to my RfA. I withdrew when it became clear that the uphill climb had crossed the snowball threshold, but I appreciate your feedback and the process gave me some good ideas for other ways I can be contributing to Wikipedia. I'll work on the areas that came up in the discussion, and try again after I've gained wider experience. -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:27, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I think you'll make a great candidate once the necessary experience is there. I look forward to seeing you at RfA again in a few months. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 16:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:ANI

Responded there, but in a nutshell -- the issue is that I KNOW the sources he attempts to bring, and they do not substantiate his claim. Secondly, the second paragraph is pure OR without any sources at all. -- Avi 18:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

--Yannismarou 20:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

As you set out for Ithaka, hope the voyage is long Knowledge is your destiny, but don't ever hurry the journey May there be many summer mornings when With what pleasure and joy, you come into harbors seen for the first time Don't expect Ithaka to make you rich. Ithaka gave you the marvelous journey And, if I, one of your fellow-travellers, can offer something To make this journey of yours even more fascinating and enjoyable This is my assistance with anything I can help.

No problem. Please let me know if I can help you out in any way. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:36, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The Updater thanks you

Hello Nihonjoe, The Updater has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

thanks for fixing up the link in the tri-nations article. i attempted to try it myself but got a bit messed up.

The Updater 02:25 (UTC), 24 January, 2007

Which link? ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:29, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Aha. No problem. Also, I think you're looking for this page. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

thx. The Updater

What gives you the right?

Why do you keep on deleting Dispochem article? don't you realize its a progressive business? we are doing an article ABOUT the company and we are not advertising! Msr enigma 14:16, 24 January 2007

I assume you're talking about Dispochem Manufacturing, Inc. The article was a blatant advertisement. Additionally, there was nothing in the article that made the claim of notability. If you believe the article was deleted in error five times for the same reason (and only once by me), feel free to start a discussion on the Deletion review page. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

AFD

When speedy deleting an article listed at AFD, please remember to close the AFD with the rationale. It has been done for you at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fort (Malvern, Pennsylvania). Regards, Navou ^banter 13:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of that. It must have somehow been overlooked as I generally do close them in these cases. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 16:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

UFO Casebook

...Did the UFO Casebook article go through a AFD ? Appreciate your assisstance, patience in this matter. Martial Law 20:53, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

No, it was speedy deleted as non-notable (CSD A7). ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 22:01, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Can you reinstate the article, and allow it to go through the AFD process ? Martial Law 03:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Please take your request to Deletion review so they can decide whether or not it should be undeleted. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 18:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Why did you delete my page?

Nihonjoe, why did you delete my page? I warned anyone that if someone deletes my pages I'll add bad comments to there talks, didn't you read my comment at the beginning of my page? I'm editing it back and if its deleted again I'll get angry, besides my granny died so you shouldn't be deleting my pages because I am sad. {{Lyle123 19:38, 24 January 2007 (UTC)}}

Which page are you talking about? Please note that no one owns any pages here, so there are no pages which are yours on Wikipedia. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 19:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Aha, you're talking about A Car's Film, right? It was deleted because it was nonsense, as indicated by your comments on the page ("I know it's not real", etc.) and this message on your talk page. Please do not continue to add nonsense like this to Wikipedia as it is considered vandalism. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 20:04, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

But how am I going to make a page like this instead of entering in Help:starting a new page, most people say to do it in the sandbox. {Lyle123 20:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)}

Why do you want to create a page for a film which doesn't exist? ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 20:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, because it is fun and cool. When I discovered Wikipedia I thought hey mabye I can create any article I want. {{Lyle123 20:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)}}

Well, creating an article just because it would be fun and cool will almost always get the article deleted. If you aren't sure what you should write about, try visiting Wikipedia:Contributing to Wikipedia for ideas on what you can do. Once you know what you're going to do, visit Wikipedia:Article development for tips and ideas on making a good article. Hope that helps. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 20:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Page Deletion Enquiry

Hi just wondering why the page on the band 21 DEMANDS was deleted, we couldn't see any valid reason for this if you could get back to me it would be much appreciated. Otherwise what should we write to make the article not be deleted the next time?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Counie (talk • contribs).

The 21 Demands article was deleted because it did not claim or meet notability requirements. Additionally, the article didn't meet the guidelines found on WP:MUSIC, so if it wasn't speedily deleted, it would have been deleted at some point anyway. I recommend reading Wikipedia:Your first article, Wikipedia:Article development, and Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles as they will help you write better articles more likely to be kept. Please also make note of the Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines page as all articles must meet the various requirements listed there. Please let me know if you have any questions, and good luck! ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 23:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC)