| Revision as of 07:13, 16 December 2010 editHojuhanguk (talk | contribs)129 edits Deleted post~~~~← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:14, 16 December 2010 edit undoEnkyo2 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers58,409 edits →Revert: constructive engagement with implied criticism? tweaking?Next edit → | ||
| Line 197: | Line 197: | ||
| Please take a look at these ] at ]: | Please take a look at these ] at ]: | ||
| *A 21:29, 15 December 2010 Tenmei |
*A 21:29, 15 December 2010 ] (78,360 bytes) (''→Japan: new section'') | ||
| *B 21:36, 15 December 2010 Tenmei |
*B 21:36, 15 December 2010 ] (78,630 bytes) (''→Japan: tweaking'') | ||
| *C 01:35, 16 December 2010 Tenmei |
*C 01:35, 16 December 2010 ] (80,379 bytes) (''→Japan: explaining revert of Historiographer's disputed edit'') | ||
| If my words are not clear, please point out the parts which need further explaining. I will try to rewrite using different words. --] (]) 01:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC) | If my words are not clear, please point out the parts which need further explaining. I will try to rewrite using different words. --] (]) 01:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :IMO, my edits do respond in part to suggestions implied by your edit summaries and : | |||
| * 14:16, 20 August 2010 ] (22,012 bytes) (''It is unusually overemphasized about Korea''.) | |||
| * 02:09, 21 August 2010 ] (22,012 bytes) (''If you want to emphasize tributary action of Korea, You should applyed the fair criteria to other states''.) | |||
| * IMO, this demonstrates a kind of constructive engagement with your implied criticism. --] (]) 17:14, 16 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 17:14, 16 December 2010
| Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. Start a new talk topic. |
 Archives |
|---|
AfD nomination of List of battles by casualties
An article that you have been involved in editing, List of battles by casualties, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of battles by casualties. Thank you.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Rubikonchik (talk) 11:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIII (July 2010)
|
|
|
July's contest results, the latest awards to our members, plus an interview with Parsecboy |
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. | |
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:29, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Korean nationalism
Hey Historiographer, I just wanted to comment on my edit from Korean nationalism. I can completely understand why you would be concerned about using a Youtube link as a source, and I agree with you that we should avoid doing that. I wanted to apologize, because I reverted you when I should not have (I misunderstood the diffs). Therefore, I have restored your edit, along with your section titles and your re-organization. Please accept my apology and I have self-reverted my edit :-)
-- Joren (talk) 05:08, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Of course, I completely understand your position. Your version is the best way currently. Thank you for your effort, mr. Joren.--Historiographer (talk) 13:29, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- As a Korean, some minority of Koreans adhering ultranationalism are killing themselves. Then again, I personally believe that Goguryeo is culturally pre-Islamic nomadic Persian. Kinda depressing to see the multitude of disputes in world history. Komitsuki (talk) 20:18, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
- Ok. I re-added the Korean nationalism#Pure blood theory and the Korean nationalism#Reconstructed history sections, but I tried to go through it and remove the unsourced claims as well as the claims that were being supported by the wrong sources. I'm still worried about the historical reconstruction section; I removed the stuff about Chinese characters and fantasy claims because they didn't seem notable and did seem like POV, and the sources were a blog, a Youtube posting, and a newsgroup posting. After I got finished going through it, we only have one source for the entire section. Anyway, please see Talk:Korean nationalism for details. If you have any concerns about the remaining sections, please discuss on the talk page and make suggestions for how we can make it better. Thank you,
- -- Joren (talk) 07:27, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Requested move
Historiographer -- You may not have noticed that I relisted the projected move of Eulsa Treaty at WP:Requested moves#Current discussions/August 31. It is only prudent for me to alert all contributors in our discussion about changing the name of this article.
Please consider Talk:Eulsa Treaty#Relisting at WP:Requested moves.
On one hand, this can be construed as an unnecessary delay. On the other hand, this ensures the possibility of wider community input which may bring out any points-of-view which remain unstated or glossed over. --Tenmei (talk) 17:23, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
Mediation
I sought assistance here — Misplaced Pages:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2010-10-04/Eulsa Treaty. I do not know what happens next. --Tenmei (talk) 21:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
- Summarizing the so-called discussion which began at Talk:Eulsa Treaty in early August here:
- A. In an attempt to help us start discussion, options were proposed here and refined here.
- Leave it at its current name?
- To Japan-Korea Protectorate Treaty?
- To Japan-Korea Treaty of 1905?
- To 1905 Protectorate Treaty?
- Or what?; see the second paragraph of page Eulsa Treaty.
- A. In an attempt to help us start discussion, options were proposed here and refined here.
- In the many weeks of so-called discussion thread development, those opposing the move have either been unwilling or unable to present refutation or counterargument; and therefore, I propose we delay no longer.
In other words, I suggest that there is a consensus to act now on the basis of the Lexis-Nexis search outcome. The time has come for this article to be renamed Japan-Korea Treaty of 1905. --Tenmei (talk) 19:38, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LIV (August 2010)
|
|
A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles, including a new featured sound |
Our newest A-class medal recipients and this August's top contestants |
|
|
To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC) | |
The Milhist election has started!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.
With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team, Roger Davies 19:07, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
History of Korea template
Please discuss before making changes to the History of Korea template. The discussion page lists many good reasons against your version. Your only comment for reverting back to the incorrect version is because you "don't think so" and because the other editors are IP editors, which is an ad hominem attack. Please be civil. Thank you. 99.88.103.225 (talk) 13:04, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
- Do you think this shapes that is not like your own standard are fair?--Historiographer (talk) 04:17, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)
|
The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals |
|
|
|
|
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:29, 21 October 2010 (UTC) | |
Unequal treaties
Please consider Talk:Unequal Treaty#Japan-Korea relations in 1904-1905. --Tenmei (talk) 21:15, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010
|
November 2010
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Misplaced Pages's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Tsushima Island, you may be blocked from editing. Oda Mari (talk) 17:11, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- It was just only once. Why are you picking on me? That incident also occured in southern Korea, not just Japan. If you put it that way, it is you that are in the disruptive editing based on Japanese view, isn’t it? Do it properly in everything instead of nitpick.--Historiographer (talk) 00:54, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
- As far as I remember, it was not me who added the Japanese name to the article. Even if it was me, it would have been impossible for me to provide the Korean name as I do not understand Korean language. You should have left the Japanese name as it was and simply added the Korean name to the article. You've been here for long enough to know this kind of edit is inappropriate, haven't you? Please do not repeat the same mistake. I don't think you are a careless editor. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 04:42, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
- Okay, I agree with it in a degree. Thank you for your advice.--Historiographer (talk) 00:39, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- As far as I remember, it was not me who added the Japanese name to the article. Even if it was me, it would have been impossible for me to provide the Korean name as I do not understand Korean language. You should have left the Japanese name as it was and simply added the Korean name to the article. You've been here for long enough to know this kind of edit is inappropriate, haven't you? Please do not repeat the same mistake. I don't think you are a careless editor. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 04:42, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Gook
Hi. I reverted your edits in the Anti-Korean sentiment article. I actually don't understand why did you removed the other references of the word "gook" in various dictionaries. It's all sourced, so where is the problem, then? ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 02:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- Umm... It is too much excessive explanations, and these contents was originally included in Anti-Japanese sentiment. Thus, I decide that removing these sections are better than moving to original article. Finally, I also don't understand why did you moved these references of the word "gook" in Anti-Korean sentiment.--Historiographer (talk) 03:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
- Why? What a strange question. The gook text in Anti-Japanese sentiment is simply copypasted from the Anti-korean sentiment article so it belongs to the latter. I won't revert your second edit because I myself find these citations of the dictionaries very confusing; the term "gook" is often associated with koreans. Sincerely, ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 16:51, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010
|
Hello
My knowledge of ancient Korean history is weak so I was hoping you could verify the new edits in the Goguryeo page? I'm not very sure about some of the info. Thank you! --KaraKamilia (talk) 15:46, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
- Someone edits this article before I'm connecting into the Misplaced Pages. Current revision absolutely nothing wrong. Thanks--Historiographer (talk) 00:51, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Revert
Please note that I've reverted a small edit here. My explanation for this and other edits can be found on the article's talk page.
Please take a look at these diffs at Talk:List of tributaries of Imperial China:
- A diff 21:29, 15 December 2010 Tenmei (78,360 bytes) (→Japan: new section)
- B diff 21:36, 15 December 2010 Tenmei (78,630 bytes) (→Japan: tweaking)
- C diff 01:35, 16 December 2010 Tenmei (80,379 bytes) (→Japan: explaining revert of Historiographer's disputed edit)
If my words are not clear, please point out the parts which need further explaining. I will try to rewrite using different words. --Tenmei (talk) 01:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
- diff 14:16, 20 August 2010 Historiographer (22,012 bytes) (It is unusually overemphasized about Korea.)
- diff 02:09, 21 August 2010 Historiographer (22,012 bytes) (If you want to emphasize tributary action of Korea, You should applyed the fair criteria to other states.)
- IMO, this demonstrates a kind of constructive engagement with your implied criticism. --Tenmei (talk) 17:14, 16 December 2010 (UTC)