Hello, 青鬼よし, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! Oda Mari (talk) 18:18, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page
How you can help
Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

April 2008

Thank you for experimenting with the page Japan on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia.Canterbury Tail talk 18:34, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

narasu

Hello 青鬼よし. Thanks for the edits to Nara period. As I have those books, I cleaned some of the text and gave full bibliographic details. However, there are several issues:

It seems pointless to give the Nihon Shoki text twice from two books giving the same text. Should remove one.
The Man'yōshū poems are certainly valid for the verb narasu. However, the context is not about the geographical place Nara, so are of no real value to the article. I have added them to 平す where they are more appropriate. I suggest removing them from the article.
Citing the full 8th century text is of so limited value to most readers. I think it is better to just give the bibliographic info and let the scholars go to a library and look it up. Thus I would remove it, too.

Comments? Regards, Bendono (talk) 06:09, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to Japanese people appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 19:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Quote

That verbose comment you deleted was a quote " so you can't change it. Sorry buddy :)--4.23.83.100 (talk) 20:59, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

References

Hey bud you seem to be deleting references that you don't like. Please stop deleting references just because you don't like what it says. You have to be objective and NPOV. Thanks --71.231.32.133 (talk) 08:39, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mounted archery

Many thanks for your help. Your English is infinitely better than my Japanese! I hope that the section now conveys a correct meaning. Richard Keatinge (talk) 20:13, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Get approvals before editing

You have recently edited section of Baekje article, please note you must discuss it first at the talk page before editing it. Unless it's minor grammar or spelling corrections. If you going to use Nihon Shoeki as reference then provide the sources as well. Editing any article without approvals is not allowed in Wikipedia unless you are reputable scholars.--Korsentry 03:24, 8 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by KoreanSentry (talk • contribs)

There is no such rule. Stop wikilawyering. Anyone is free to edit. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 07:27, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

李博杰 is correct. Please do not tell people to not edit without approval as there is no such policy or guideline on WIkipedia except in cases of controversial edits. In such a case, it is suggested that you first discuss a controversial edit if you are aware it may be controversial. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:50, 13 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I wrote my opinion about Baekje in TalkPage. Please let me hear your opinion.--青鬼よし (talk) 14:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shōfuku-ji (Higashimurayama)

I have removed your latest edits of Shōfuku-ji (Higashimurayama). The English grammar was not clear and the reference to Korea was removed by you for an unspecified reason. If you wish to remove the Korean reference, please explain first in the talk page since a proper source was cited. Bryan MacKinnon (talk) 23:44, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that your comments on my talk page are appropriate for the main article itself. So I moved them to there. Plesae take a look the the discussion on Shōfuku-ji (Higashimurayama). Bryan MacKinnon (talk) 23:53, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Warning for your introducing deliberate factual error

Please do not introduce incorrect information into articles, as you did to List of banned films. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. If you believe the information you added was correct, please cite references or sources or discuss the changes on the article's talk page before making them again. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.Caspian blue 16:59, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your recent edit removed content from Japan–Korea disputes. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you.Caspian blue 16:39, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nov 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Your recent edit to Kofun has been reverted. Political pressure of current Korean government and archaeological development in Korea is totally irrelevant to the megalithic tombs or tumuli in Japan, constructed between early 3rd century and early 7th century, aka the Kofun. Please get the fact that Wikipedia is a dictionary, and requires neutral point of view to edit. Does your head understand the wikipedia rules? if not, please read the rules and write about the article, not about Korea.

Your entry about newly found keyhole tombs built around the 5th to the 6th century found in areas of ancient Gaya confederacy in South Korea,is very helpful, however if owners of the tomb is unknown and research is under progress, one should state that research is under progress, period. Neutral point of view is important. Writing that Korean and Japanese scholars being interested about the site is not helpful. Archaeologists are interested in it, i'm sure.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Reference to external material is always welcomed in wikipedia. However, it does not mean you can rip off the whole front page of NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC NEWS article. We call it fair use policy, aka reference, and if you want to write about the article, it must be in your own words. Copy and Paste is NOT called a reference, and wikipedia does not tolerate thief of copyrighted material. Please get this through your head. 431e5d45 (talk) 01:11, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

December 2009

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's no original research policy by adding your personal analysis or synthesis into articles, as you did to Korea under Japanese rule, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Caspian blue 14:11, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Japan–Korea disputes and Korea under Japanese rule. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. --Caspian blue 14:56, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another 3RR waring

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Kofun period. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. --Caspian blue 02:37, 24 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sock puppet

You have been blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. (blocked by –MuZemike 17:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC))[reply]
You may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but please read our guide to appealing blocks first.

{{unblock|Your reason here}} I am Wikipedia editor of an English version and a Japanese version. The label of SockPapet was pasted to me one month ago. I have never used SockPapet. I have never used it for an English version and the Japanese version Wikipedia. Could you explain the reason to judge him and me to be SOCKPAPET of Azukimonaka?　(Sorry, I cannot reply until Sunday next week because the university life is busy. ) --青鬼よし (talk) 08:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]