User talk:FedualJapan: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 06:24, 6 November 2021

Welcome!

Hello, FedualJapan, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!--MollyPollyRolly (talk) 05:43, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

November 2021

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did at Maya (given name), you may be blocked from editing. JesseRafe (talk) 14:33, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I believe you are talking about your self with disruptive editing by removing credible verifiable sources. None of that was my original research. Please look at what I posted. FedualJapan (talk) 14:59, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Again. https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/tv-shows/Sofia-the-First/Princess-Maya/

https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Mary-Long/. (Voice Actor for Maya in eps 103).

https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/tv-shows/Sailor-Moon-Super-S/. If you look will see the Maya from eps 142 as Mayako with a Japanese voice actor. Cloverway made it Maya where viz and Japanese sub is Mayako.

Below is pictures of all three Maya’s. The other two are screenshots of viz episode summaries containing Maya for eps 103 and Mayako for 142. I did have pictures from Sophia season one eps 8 saying Princess Maya is voiced by Mary long but the snapshot of a black screen. However, the link above on Princess Maya or this link on Olivia Grace, has a green check mark with Maya. Should suffice enough. https://www.behindthevoiceactors.com/Olivia-Grace/

https://ibb.co/WDnsYKW https://ibb.co/rFXzrWR https://ibb.co/RQ3YVN5 https://ibb.co/yWvwvS9 https://ibb.co/4M3XjNt

It is you who is in the wrong here. FedualJapan (talk) 15:01, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, either this article is wrong or you are telling me wrong. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Anime_and_manga/Online_reliable_sources

FedualJapan (talk) 16:13, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not an wp:RS so cannot be used to support claims in an article. Even if it was wp:v is clear, it would have to mention what you want to add. Your additions to Maya (given name)seemed to fall foul of both of these. You also need to read wp:brd and wp:consensus and make a case at the articles talk page as to why your additions were valid.Slatersteven (talk) 14:53, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Slatersteven: Thank you for the information. I will read them. I think Sophia the first is not flesh out because while their are some princesses and Princes mentioned but not all. Princess Maya appears over ten times over 4 seasons. The article may not include her because no one has added her. I am already asking if I can add her with reliable information. I have asked about the other two on the talk page. Thank you for the good faith.
@Slatersteven: I have been reading Wikipedia policies and rereading everything. I want to clarify I am using a wikipedia policy about the links I used and I have not used Wikipedia itself as a source. My problem is that I tried to talk to Jesse but if they handled it like MJL. There would be no issues. With Jesse I am fight it is not original research and those links by Wikipedia policies prove it is reliable and not original research. If Jesse talked to me this warning would not happen and the warning is about original research and I was not posting original research. It is just about challenging edits with Jesse, and especially after how MJL explain it, it is now less about challenging edits but more about what I posted was not original research. As for the challenging edits, I can make a strong case for Princess Maya. I am working on it.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to assume bad faith when dealing with other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, you may be blocked from editing. Assume that they are here to improve rather than harm Wikipedia. ——Serial 15:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry you feel that way but did you do that to me talking to User:MJL. My edits have been standing up for myself and I read a few pages before I wrote about that.
- Irrelevant, we have policies you are expected to obey. None of those involve standing up for yourself (and in fact that mentality may violate wp:battelgound). You need sources to back up any challenged edit, and if you are reverted you make a case at talk, you do not wp:editwar.Slatersteven (talk) 16:55, 5 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Slatersteven: I am sorry but his warning is nothing to do with any challenged edit. However, it does stem from that. And I was talking about going to the administrators notice board about how I was treated and stating the truth in how I was treated. Was that Wikipedia article I read wrong? I thought those were rightfully actions? I thought I was following the policy. I have every right to report how I was treated, right?
  - @Slatersteven: The links I posted are sources to verify it is not original research. Please see my other comment to you. I have been obeying the policies as best as I can or what I know of them. I think everyone needs to obey them. I am sorry there is more here than just a challenge edit and I was challenging it was not original research which my links proved that. However Serial’s comment is on when he has bad faith on me. If you go to that link you will see Serial claiming bad faith on me and saying I was trolling Drmies when I wasn’t. I said I wasn’t and “ If anything they trolled me. I was trying to have a real conversation while they only could personally attack me and bring in others to attack me which had no reason to be there.” And apologized for the lies. Serial then issued the warning. Since I was mirroring Serial’s and stating how I seen things they assumed more bad faith with me instead of good faith. Could you issue the same warning to them? I was not trolling as Serial claimed I was. What has happened especially with Drmies, it is just lack of communication, misunderstandings, and assumptions on both side that cause everything to escalated.

November 2021

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:09, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

FedualJapan (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I hope my messages were read, all I was trying to do prevent further damage and undo damage that was made. I was trying to clear up misunderstandings and saying this is just from lack of communication, misunderstandings, and assumptions on both side that cause everything to escalated. If someone talked to me like MLJ this would never had happened. I was just helping the situation. I was not causing any more issues just trying to have a real conversation. I am trying to be a good editor and a good person. The right to do is to say sorry and try to mend what has happened. May I be unblocked. This is the end of the situation for me not unless someone else writes me. As I have said 4 times this is from lack of communication, misunderstandings, and assumptions on both sides. That is all I was saying when I was blockedFedualJapan (talk) 01:25, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Only one unblock template at a time, please. You've already wasted too much of other's time in ANI, and a rambling unblock request doesn't convince me that you're not going to waste more of it. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:03, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I have read the disruptive editing page. I don’t see where having conversations on talk pages on how it was a misunderstanding, and from lack of communication is being disruptive. I was trying to mend the damage on Wikipedia in good faith. I was being civil and explaining and mending as any good person would. I was not being disruptive. Please can I be unblockedFedualJapan (talk) 01:47, 6 November 2021 (UTC).[reply]

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

FedualJapan (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I was explaining. How can I convince you I will do much best at being a good editor. I was blocked for clearing up misunderstandings and being civil.I will try not to talk up anyone’s else time on here. Can you unblock me or only block me for a few days. I didn’t mean to take up someone’s time. I will talk less to editors. I just cared.FedualJapan (talk) 02:12, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I was explaining. How can I convince you I will do much best at being a good editor. I was blocked for clearing up misunderstandings and being civil.I will try not to talk up anyone’s else time on here. Can you unblock me or only block me for a few days. I didn’t mean to take up someone’s time. I will talk less to editors. I just cared.[[User:FedualJapan|FedualJapan]] ([[User talk:FedualJapan#top|talk]]) 02:12, 6 November 2021 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I was explaining. How can I convince you I will do much best at being a good editor. I was blocked for clearing up misunderstandings and being civil.I will try not to talk up anyone’s else time on here. Can you unblock me or only block me for a few days. I didn’t mean to take up someone’s time. I will talk less to editors. I just cared.[[User:FedualJapan|FedualJapan]] ([[User talk:FedualJapan#top|talk]]) 02:12, 6 November 2021 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I was explaining. How can I convince you I will do much best at being a good editor. I was blocked for clearing up misunderstandings and being civil.I will try not to talk up anyone’s else time on here. Can you unblock me or only block me for a few days. I didn’t mean to take up someone’s time. I will talk less to editors. I just cared.[[User:FedualJapan|FedualJapan]] ([[User talk:FedualJapan#top|talk]]) 02:12, 6 November 2021 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

.

You are beeing tricked

Hi, FeudalJapan. You have been called a troll twice (once in a way that violates pretty much every point of WP:ESDONTS) and then accused of disruptive behaviour when you said that maybe, if at all, it was the other way around. The inappropriate edit summary was also presented as evidence of your wrongdoing and you were followed by several different editors, given contradictory explanations and baited by experienced editors to do something that may get you blocked; these are pretty blatant examples of blaming the victim and psychological manipulation and have been tolerated on wikipedia for years and you probably can't do much about it (I must also say that you didn't do much to keep the discussion in one place and relevant to the content, but experienced editors should know better and be able to give better advices; I don't see much hope for the originally proposed edits, but the way the matter was handled is just ridiculous). If you want to get unblocked this probably requires you admitting your faults and promising to never do it again in a self blaming tone that you will never hear from your aggressors. You seem to have gained the attention of some pretty nasty people, getting unblocked may give you the right to a fresh start, which can help for avoiding further harassment, but also requires staying clear of the old topics. I just want to remind you that being able to edit wikipedia is not worth loosing your psychological wellbeing and want you to consider your options carefully. Wikipedia is not a RS, single list may agree on some criteria for inclusion to avoid indiscriminate inclusions, including having a wikipedia article or beeing mentioned in them, these criteria are open to discussion, but trying to change them just for some particular addition isn't really productive as much as inventing them just to revert a new editor. Some experienced editor may give you a more accurate explanation, but I guess there are also some inconsistencies and wikilawyering going around. Good luck and don't let some internet bullies ruin your mood. Serial NPA violator (talk) 03:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for sharing. This means a lot to me. FedualJapan (talk) 06:24, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 03:22, 6 November 2021 edit Serial NPA violator (talk \| contribs) 2 edits →‎You are beeing tricked: new section ← Previous edit		Revision as of 06:24, 6 November 2021 edit undo FedualJapan (talk \| contribs) 149 edits No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Next edit →
Line 53:		Line 53:

	Hi, FeudalJapan. You have been called a troll twice (once in a way that violates pretty much every point of [[WP:ESDONTS]]) and then accused of disruptive behaviour when you said that maybe, if at all, it was the other way around. The inappropriate edit summary was also presented as evidence of your wrongdoing and you were followed by several different editors, given contradictory explanations and baited by experienced editors to do something that may get you blocked; these are pretty blatant examples of blaming the victim and psychological manipulation and have been tolerated on wikipedia for years and you probably can't do much about it (I must also say that you didn't do much to keep the discussion in one place and relevant to the content, but experienced editors should know better and be able to give better advices; I don't see much hope for the originally proposed edits, but the way the matter was handled is just ridiculous). If you want to get unblocked this probably requires you admitting your faults and promising to never do it again in a self blaming tone that you will never hear from your aggressors. You seem to have gained the attention of some pretty nasty people, getting unblocked may give you the right to a fresh start, which can help for avoiding further harassment, but also requires staying clear of the old topics. I just want to remind you that being able to edit wikipedia is not worth loosing your psychological wellbeing and want you to consider your options carefully. Wikipedia is not a RS, single list may agree on some criteria for inclusion to avoid indiscriminate inclusions, including having a wikipedia article or beeing mentioned in them, these criteria are open to discussion, but trying to change them just for some particular addition isn't really productive as much as inventing them just to revert a new editor. Some experienced editor may give you a more accurate explanation, but I guess there are also some inconsistencies and wikilawyering going around. Good luck and don't let some internet bullies ruin your mood. [[User:Serial NPA violator\|Serial NPA violator]] ([[User talk:Serial NPA violator\|talk]]) 03:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)		Hi, FeudalJapan. You have been called a troll twice (once in a way that violates pretty much every point of [[WP:ESDONTS]]) and then accused of disruptive behaviour when you said that maybe, if at all, it was the other way around. The inappropriate edit summary was also presented as evidence of your wrongdoing and you were followed by several different editors, given contradictory explanations and baited by experienced editors to do something that may get you blocked; these are pretty blatant examples of blaming the victim and psychological manipulation and have been tolerated on wikipedia for years and you probably can't do much about it (I must also say that you didn't do much to keep the discussion in one place and relevant to the content, but experienced editors should know better and be able to give better advices; I don't see much hope for the originally proposed edits, but the way the matter was handled is just ridiculous). If you want to get unblocked this probably requires you admitting your faults and promising to never do it again in a self blaming tone that you will never hear from your aggressors. You seem to have gained the attention of some pretty nasty people, getting unblocked may give you the right to a fresh start, which can help for avoiding further harassment, but also requires staying clear of the old topics. I just want to remind you that being able to edit wikipedia is not worth loosing your psychological wellbeing and want you to consider your options carefully. Wikipedia is not a RS, single list may agree on some criteria for inclusion to avoid indiscriminate inclusions, including having a wikipedia article or beeing mentioned in them, these criteria are open to discussion, but trying to change them just for some particular addition isn't really productive as much as inventing them just to revert a new editor. Some experienced editor may give you a more accurate explanation, but I guess there are also some inconsistencies and wikilawyering going around. Good luck and don't let some internet bullies ruin your mood. [[User:Serial NPA violator\|Serial NPA violator]] ([[User talk:Serial NPA violator\|talk]]) 03:22, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

			Thank you for sharing. This means a lot to me. [[User:FedualJapan\|FedualJapan]] ([[User talk:FedualJapan#top\|talk]]) 06:24, 6 November 2021 (UTC)