User talk:Masonfamily: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
m →Geisha: P.S. |
m →Geisha: fix |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
: Oh, sorry. but i can't understand why you delete sourced material. Please give me a reason that why you delete sourced material. if you disagree it, then you should add counterpart source.[[User:Masonfamily|Masonfamily]] ([[User talk:Masonfamily#top|talk]]) 06:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
: Oh, sorry. but i can't understand why you delete sourced material. Please give me a reason that why you delete sourced material. if you disagree it, then you should add counterpart source.[[User:Masonfamily|Masonfamily]] ([[User talk:Masonfamily#top|talk]]) 06:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
::It doesn't work that way. If someone is an unknown author/dismissed as talking trash by the academic majority, no one is going to bother to take the time to debunk the theory/view. [[User:John Smith's|John Smith's]] ([[User talk:John Smith's|talk]]) 08:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
::It doesn't work that way. If someone is an unknown author/dismissed as talking trash by the academic majority, no one is going to bother to take the time to debunk the theory/view. [[User:John Smith's|John Smith's]] ([[User talk:John Smith's|talk]]) 08:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
:::I've read your sources. Your edit was copy vio again from the first source text page |
:::I've read your sources. Your edit was copy vio again from the first source text page 3 line 7 and eight. And it was a description on [[oiran]]/tayu, not on geisha. The third source you provided says geisha are not prostitute. So please do not add the material again. And why did you remove [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Masonfamily&diff=248865031&oldid=248862168 this] before you answer my question? Now I explain my revert. Please explain your edit and answer my question. Thank you. [[User:Oda Mari|Oda Mari]] <small>([[User talk:Oda Mari|talk]])</small> 09:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
:::Please read [http://www.immortalgeisha.com/history_01.php this] and [http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/shizuka/maiko.htm this]. Thank you. [[User:Oda Mari|Oda Mari]] <small>([[User talk:Oda Mari|talk]])</small> 09:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
:::Please read [http://www.immortalgeisha.com/history_01.php this] and [http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/shizuka/maiko.htm this]. Thank you. [[User:Oda Mari|Oda Mari]] <small>([[User talk:Oda Mari|talk]])</small> 09:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 10:08, 7 November 2008
your edits
Your edits are usually POV, always poorly written and from strange sources if at all. Don't be surprised that so many other editors revert your edits. Blanking all your warnings doesn't lose that history, either. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 05:57, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Other editors asked you to discuss about your recent edits on the talk page. Ask for consensus before you change the article again. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 06:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry. but i can't understand why you delete sourced material. Please give me a reason that why you delete sourced material. if you disagree it, then you should add counterpart source.Masonfamily (talk) 06:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- It doesn't work that way. If someone is an unknown author/dismissed as talking trash by the academic majority, no one is going to bother to take the time to debunk the theory/view. John Smith's (talk) 08:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- I've read your sources. Your edit was copy vio again from the first source text page 3 line 7 and eight. And it was a description on oiran/tayu, not on geisha. The third source you provided says geisha are not prostitute. So please do not add the material again. And why did you remove this before you answer my question? Now I explain my revert. Please explain your edit and answer my question. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- Please read this and this. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- It doesn't work that way. If someone is an unknown author/dismissed as talking trash by the academic majority, no one is going to bother to take the time to debunk the theory/view. John Smith's (talk) 08:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
Hi again. Did you read the source carefully. It says '江戸時代になっても多くの人が肉を食べていた。' and 'しかし、現実には天明から嘉永にかけて、彦根城主から将軍へ、寒中見舞として牛肉の味噌漬が樽で献上されていたとの記録が残されている。' etc. BTW, I don't know who added but the source is not mine. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 06:15, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
- According to your addition, it looks like Japanese didn't eat meat at all before Meiji era. But it was not. So I just think it would be appropriate to mention about it precisely. I've got to go now and if you have any question, I cannot answer immediately. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 06:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC)