User talk:Oda Mari

Aretha Franklin

You reverted an edit and attributed the origin to me. Why is that? Nasnema  Chat  06:07, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Attributed the origin to you? What do you mean by that? I don't understand you. You were nothing wrong. I just undo this addition by an IP per WP:PEACOCK. Oda Mari (talk) 17:52, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Air Defense Identification Zone Map

Hello. I've noticed you've changed the map for Air Defense Identification Zone (East China Sea). I feel the new image offers less relevant detail to the topic. What is the copyright problem you mentioned? Thanks. Ansett (talk) 09:49, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Please see File:Air Defense Identification Zones Map East China Sea.gif. It seems more information is needed. Sorry if I misunderstood something. Oda Mari (talk) 09:55, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Revert to Shiba Inu

Hello,

My addition to the "meme" part of the Shiba Inu page has more trivia, which CAN BE SOURCED back to Know Your Meme. It is NOT trivia, it is how the meme go its start. Leave the page alone, as I will keep reverting it back. Thank you. Hotelmason241 (talk) 19:52, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Keeping reverting is not constructive. Please ask for consensus on the article talk page first. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 09:45, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

About Joseon

Hello,

Before I carry on the passage, I reveal the fact that I am not fluent in English, and therefore was assisted by an Korean - English interpreter. I noticed that you have restored the term vassal state in the Joseon section because I deleted it beforehand, but actually, Joseon is no where close to Chinese vassal state. As written in the passage, Joseon was only nominally a vassal state of China, but it actually was a sole independent and sovereign nation. Take a look at the section of Grand Duchy of Lithuania. This country solely is a personal union of the Kingdom of Poland, but as I said before, Joseon is not a colony nor a vassal state of ancient China but an independent nation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JARA7979 (talk • contribs) 16:48, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi! Please read Article 1. If Joseon was an independent nation, there would not have been such an article in the treaty. Oda Mari (talk) 17:03, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

In eastnorth-asia internation relationshop a tribute mean kind of diplomatic protocol as toadyism, it not mean certainly toadysim is obedience or client country. that is giving tribute mean they firm up their diplomacy. The status by installation is samely meaningless, so it is bad to overinterpretation. at first, CHINA didn't make any equal relationship with other countries. except them, other countries is just a barbarian country that dedicate atribute. it is hared to understand nowadays, thoes days it is 'Order of EastNorth-asia". then it is natural thing but after modernization many people misunderstand. contents of simonoseki treaty just reconfirm the fact that vassal country as independant.--JARA7979 (talk) 03:02, 8 December 2013 (KTC)

I disagree with you. What do you explain these articles? Second Manchu invasion of Korea, Yeongeunmun, Samjeondo_Monument, ko:정축하성, and Flag of South Korea#History. What you've done seems to be whitewashing based on your personal opinion. If you want change the article, please use talk page with RS and ask for consensus. Oda Mari (talk) 08:54, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Japan–Portugal relations

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Japan%E2%80%93Portugal_relations
• I think I'm going to create the page Japan–Portugal relations, can I use the text from some sites (from Google?). Here on Wikipedia I found this so far: Nanban trade and List of Japanese words of Portuguese origin. --Rikichanny (talk) 09:32, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi! No, you cannot. We can get some information from other reliable sites, but text copy and paste from other sites would be copyright violation. This is the ja version of the article you want to create. If you understand ja, translate it. If you don't, you can ask for translation at Wikipedia:Translation or ask for help at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan. Unfortunately, I'm not good at ja-to-en translation, but I'm willing to help you and do what I can. These articles look helpful too. History of Roman Catholicism in Japan, Hidden Christians of Japan and Nippo Jisho. Happy editing! Oda Mari (talk) 10:50, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! I will create the page soon but at the beginning the page will look terrible, let's improve it slowly. Regards. --Rikichanny (talk) 13:54, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Goryo

Goryo was under Monogol domination for about 100 years out of a 500 year history, and even then, it was not under a direct Mongol rule unlike the Mongol Empire proper. Goryo kept its own King. By defining it as a "Client State of the Mongol Empire and later the Yuan Empire" immediately below its name, this feature gives the mistaken impression that Goryo was not an independent nation when it was in fact. This needs to be corrected. American history is about 400 years, of which 150 years were spent under British rule (this was a DIRECT rule). Do you think it would be fair to put a banner immediately below the name USA, "English colony for 150 years"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.137.227 (talk) 05:32, December 11, 2013

Joseon

I agree with the poster below. Joseon did indeed maintain a tributary relationship with Ming China, then with Qing China, and thus it would be technically accurate to call Joseon a client state of China for much of existence. However, that kind of a statement belongs in the text of the article, not at the top. To display that designation as a banner immediately below the name of the dynasty makes it THE defining feature of the dynasty, would be a serious distortion. Aside from the tributes (which was not in one direction but went both ways in the form of exchange of merchandise) and formalities (such as approval of coronation and of Crown Princes), the Joseon King ruled the country. Except for specific instances, the Chinese had minimal say in what went on in the country on a daily basis. From a practical perspective, entering the tributary system allowed Joseon to avoid damaging wars and concentrate on domestic issues. That it was a sensible strategy is demonstrated by the fact that Korean dynasties were far more stable than the Chinese dynasties.

I see that you are of Japanese nationality, and I request that you approach this without the bias you may have received from the Japanese school system. Japanese historians often disparage and belittle Joseon history, and I sense that you may be inclined to take a similar view. I ask that you achieve a balance: you want to convey the facts, but do not want to exaggerate and distort it, either. It is not whitewashing but striving for accuracy and fairness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.137.227 (talk) 06:14, December 11, 2013

Note to Oda Mari

You are calling my edits "vandalism", which I don't think is an appropriate choice of words if I am providing a legitimate reason for the edits. There are very few people active on the discussion boards on the articles that I edited. Your asking me to rely on a consensus of the discussion board would seem to appear as dismissing it based on your own prejudices. If you think that the points I raised above are not reasonable, please provide a rebuttal. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.174.137.227 (talk) 12:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I've told you to use talk page, but you didn't. That was why I thought your removal as vandalism. Please take a look at List of tributaries of Imperial China and the sources. As I told you before, please provide RS if you still think the sources on the list page are wrong. You talk a lot, but you never provide RS. What you say is your personal opinion. Oda Mari (talk) 15:17, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I do not think you have understood my point. This is NOT a dispute about facts, and as such sources are not relevant. I am NOT disputing the fact that Joseon (and sometimes Goryo) paid tribute to China. What I am disputing the APPROPRIATENESS of displaying this label PROMINENTLY at the top of the article. It belongs in the text somewhere, but not in a separate box containing only the most vital information. According to the link you provided, there are more than a dozen countries that paid tribute to China, including Japan, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Ryuku Kingdom. And yet Korea is the only one that is prominently labeled as being a tributary state of China. It is not mentioned on the webpages of any of the other tributary state. If being a tributary state of China is such an incredibly important characteristic that it needs to be displayed prominently at the top, then it should be uniformly applied to every country on that list. If not, it should be left out. I have visited this website on many occasions over the past 10 years, and this is the first time I have seen this. Please let me know if you agree with my point. Thanks.