User talk:Reikasama

August 2011

When adding links to material on external sites, as you did to Talk:Kodomo no Jikan, please ensure that the external site is not violating the creator's copyright. Linking to websites that display copyrighted works is acceptable as long as the website's operator has created or licensed the work. Knowingly directing others to a site that violates copyright may be considered contributory infringement. This is particularly relevant when linking to sites such as YouTube, where due care should be taken to avoid linking to material that violates its creator's copyright. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe the linked site is not violating copyright with respect to the material, then you should do one of the following:

If the linked site is the copyright holder, leave a message explaining the details on the article Talk page;
If a note on the linked site credibly claims permission to host the material, or a note on the copyright holder's site grants such permission, leave a note on the article Talk page with a link to where we can find that note;
If you are the copyright holder or the external site administrator, adjust the linked site to indicate permission as above and leave a note on the article Talk page;

If the material is available on a different site that satisfies one of the above conditions, link to that site instead. —Farix (t | c) 14:30, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Reikasama refusing to WP:GETTHEPOINT about unreliable sources. Thank you. —Farix (t | c) 21:57, 28 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:16, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits seem to have the appearance of edit warring. Users are expected to collaborate and discuss with others and avoid editing disruptively.

Please be particularly aware, the three-revert rule states that:

Making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period is almost always grounds for an immediate block.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss the changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.216.103.181 (talk) 18:49, 29 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding AN/I

Regarding this: You are wrong, and that was also explained to you. Not reliable does not mean wrong or false. I strongly suggest that you do not remove the references. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 14:12, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't do anything, but you can keep the page locked if you are so afraid. Reikasama (talk) 15:39, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not afraid. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 07:21, 31 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Threading in comments

Hi. You should not do this. Your conversation belongs after others comments, not in the middle of them. This helps clarify sequence to other readers. In those situations where you must do it, there are protocols to help. See WP:TPO.

In terms of being "involved", what you need to read is this: WP:INVOLVED. Not being involved does not mean that I am uninformed; in fact, it is required that I remain uninvolved to judge the conversation. Perhaps this is another difficulty in language. :) --User:Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:05, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

September 2011

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. This relates to your edit here Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:16, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I already apologize in the admin noticeboard, i can do it again if necessary but tell this guy stop assoulting me with arrogant manners since he stated that he never follow the matter to begin with. Reikasama (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cameron Scott didn't say anything like that. Nobody in the discussion at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard said anything like that. If you make accusations like this, you will get into trouble. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 22:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts about loan words

I realized that one of the problems you're having, I think, has to do with your understanding of loan words--that is, words brought from one language into another; loan words brought from English into Japanese are called 和製英語. You seem particularly concerned that English writers are misusing the word lolicon, because they're not using it according to the actual Japanese meaning. Well, a better way of putting it is that lolicon actually doesn't mean the same thing as ロリコン.

See, the thing is, when words are moved between languages, sometimes they keep the same meaning, and sometimes they're different. For example, Japanese construction companies often use the word リフォーム, which comes from the English word, "reform". The thing is, リフォーム doesn't meaning anything even similar to "reform". A better translation for "reform" is usually something like 正す (that is, to correct/improve bad behavior) or 改革 (when a government or company makes major changes in the way it operates to improve life/business). But Japanese companies use リフォーム to mean "taking an old house/building, breaking it down, and then rebuilding it to make it new and better". The correct English word for リフォーム is actually "remodel" or "rennovate". However, even though the Japanese companies are using the 和製英語 differently than the original English word, that doesn't mean they're using it incorrectly. On jp.wiki, it would be perfectly acceptable to use リフォーム in Japanese articles, and English writer would not be allowed to go there and say "No, that's not what リフォーム really means!"

The exact same situation happens here with ロリコン/lolicon. The English word has come to have a slightly different, though related, meaning to the original Japanese. It is definitely the case that in the US, lolicon is a genre of a manga/anime; as such, using the term that way in en.wiki is correct.

I hope this helps; I'm only a beginning level Japanese speaker, so I apologize if I haven't explained this as well as I could. I can tell that you really are trying to help on the manga articles that got you in trouble on ANI, but you're struggling to deal with both language issues and Wikipedia's rules about sources. If you relax, assume other people really are editing in good faith, ask questions, don't attack other editors, etc., I think you really can contribute successfully here. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:50, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Infact i suggest to merge 2 topics in the article to make better evidence that the word has 2 different meanings. Apart this i disagree that a foreigner country should use a different meaning, the meaning is only 1, the word is born in Japan and should use according to the mother language where it came from. Make zero sence that in Usa it have a different meaning, in Europe another and in Japan another. Imo. Reikasama (talk) 20:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that you can't stop words taking on a life of their own when they cross from one culture to another. Take balti - in Hindi it means 'bucket' or 'pail', in England it refers to a specific type of spicy food. Or kedgeree, another Hindi word, this time food for poor people, made from rice and lentils cooked together. Over the years in England it has become the word for a fancy breakfast served in the houses of the rich, made of rice cooked with smoked fish and hardboiled eggs. Elen of the Roads (talk) 21:38, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reikasama, are you saying that リフォーム is used incorrectly in Japanese? What about マナーアップ、which is clearly derived from English but makes absolutely no sense, grammatically or logically? What about スマート? In English (American at least), "smart" stopped meaning "stylish, attractive" about 100 years ago; now "smart" in English only means "intelligent"; but in Japanese it still retains the old meaning? Should Japanese people stop using the word that way? Of course not--the word is now a part of Japanese, and it would be wrong for an English speaker to say "Hey, you can't change that words meaning!" As Elen said, when words change from one language to the other, they often change meanings. Words even change meanings within the same language, over time. In English, lolicon means something different from ロリコン. That's just reality, and since this is English Wikipedia, we will use the English meaning. Qwyrxian (talk) 01:46, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

When a word make no sense from a language to another you use synonims or a more long explanation, like Wasshoi, you can't translate it directly but you use "summer festival". In this specific case the meaning is completely different and make zero sence, lolicon define a behaviour in Japan of someone in real life as someone aroused by little girls. This is the only meaning. But in west is a genre of anime and manga? Is misleading. So i suggest to specify this difference more, that is more a meme then the true meaning. Is how i think should be, same for hentai and ecchi. Reikasama (talk) 09:37, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, you're missing the point. The "true" meaning of ロリコン in Japan is whatever you said it was. The "true" meaning of lolicon in the west is a genre of anime and manga featuring underage girls with sexual element. The word is used in the west to distinguish a specific product of the film and comic industry that is different from the hardcore 'kiddie porn' genres. It's the word we use to describe it. The meaning of a word is its meaning in actual use - it's no good saying that it doesn't actually mean X when everyone uses it to mean X. You can certainly say "in Japan means Y" but you have to also recognise "in Engish, means X" Elen of the Roads (talk) 11:29, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I recognize only the true meaning not a meaning that don't belong to this word invented in the west. I prefer use [loli manga] or [loli anime] when people referring to a show that feature lolis as main character because is the correct category. I still see the lolicon tag as a offensive terminology applied to anime and manga because of the original meaning. This is my opinion and i will never change idea, i will change only IF in Japan is considered a genre too but is not the case. On the other hand i know that people use this meaning in the west and i can't do anything about it, but for this reason i consider my proposal still valid, to differentiate the two usage more clearly from east to west. Reikasama (talk) 12:23, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Differentiating is a good thing. The term originated in Japan, and highlighting that it is used differently in the west to the way it is used in Japan is part of its history. However, where there are sources as to how a word is used in the west, you have to accept that this usage is as 'true' in Wikipedia terms as the Japanese usage is. Referring to the Japanese version as 'true' will likely cause trouble, as will changing categorisation to match the Japanese equivalent when speaking of the western product. Elen of the Roads (talk) 13:16, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Only here but i can't accept this meaning as absolute truth elsewhere, infact i consider true only the original meaning. But i get your point, still i don't do anything to edit the page, i leave this task to you or someone with better english because mine is far from perfect to do a proper explanation on the matter. I will do something only in case nobody will do. Reikasama (talk) 14:54, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]