User talk:Sturmgewehr88

Please post new sections at the bottom of the page, and sign all posts to my Talk page. Any unsigned/misplaced posts may be ignored/reverted.

Thank you,

ミーラー強斗武 (talk)

Your submission at AfC Sturmgewehr88/Ozato Castle was accepted

Sturmgewehr88/Ozato Castle, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

The Ukulele Dude - Aggie80 (talk) 14:41, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 19

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ōzato Dynasty, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kingdom (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:36, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ryukyu WikiProject

Hi there. I'm afraid that there's no real need to produce an entirely separate WikiProject dedicated to coverage of the history of the Ryukyu Islands. However, I think it would probably be much better to turn it into a task force within WP:WikiProject Japan. You will probably get a lot more assistance by organizing things that way rather than starting up your own WikiProject, considering it does not appear that you have much experience on the project.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've seen a number of projects stagnate because they didn't have enough people in them. Ryulong, where would be a good place for his to-do page that had been in the project? — kwami (talk) 17:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm certain that if Sturmgewehr88 would leave a message at WT:JAPAN, editors there would gladly help in creating a new task force dedicated to coverage of the Ryukyu Islands.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:48, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I saw a need, and that is why I created the WikiProject. I'm trying to adequately cover the subject, and the WikiProject is where I can organize and coordinate (even if I'm alone). And while I may be alone, at least I'm making progress. I don't particularly care about anyone helping me, I'm just doing this for the greater good. I also don't appreciate how people have been more likely to hinder me than help in any way. If you honestly disagreed with my creation of the WikiProject, then you should have put it up for discussion, rather than deleting it and informing me of my "misdeeds". Sturmgewehr88 (talk) 19:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There may be a need but you cannot hope to get much done if you just do things on your own. I am sure that you can lead a task force within the Japan Wikiproject which will get things done better.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:31, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are right to a point. I could get a lot done on my own, but it would take more than a reasonable amount of time. I consider the Ryukyus to be a controversial topic, so I would prefer WikiProject Ryūkyū to be seperate from WikiProject Japan. It would be nice if others with a sincere interest would pitch in though. Sturmgewehr88 (talk) 22:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really controversial. I'm sure it would work better as a task force than an independent project. The islands are now part of Japan after all.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 22:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so how should I go about converting it into a taskforce? Sturmgewehr88 (talk) 23:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added a request here. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 16:20, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Ozato Castle Ruins.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Ozato Castle Ruins.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just point out that anyone can go to Nanjo and take a photo of the castle ruins today and upload a free version. There is no reason to post a photo someone else has taken.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 17:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well for one, I only had a need of a photo when I was on my way out of the country, and couldn't go take a picture myself, and two, it was the only photo I could find. The fact that there are so few photos of the castle should allow for the one I used to stay until another appears, but I doubt that will happen. Sturmgewehr88 (talk) 19:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fact is that anyone can still go to Nanjo and take a photo themselves. Wikipedia has strict rules on what can and cannot be uploaded and the mere fact that anyone can reproduce the photo if they have the time and exertion means that any non-free photos cannot be used unless there is some sort of copyright issue that would otherwise prevent free photograph creation.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 20:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Uni-Ufugusuku, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aji (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Uni-Ufugusuku

The article Uni-Ufugusuku has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Article is not substantially sourced; only source is some Blogspot posting

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. —Ryūlóng (琉竜) 04:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't actually cite the Blogspot post, but I added two references to the article and removed both of the banners. Feel free to double-check them. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 04:56, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Ishikawa, Okinawa may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

[[File:Ishikawa Powerplant Weekend Night.jpg|thumb|Ishikawa Powerplant seen from Ishikawa Beach.]]}

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:24, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User WikiProject Ryukyu

You should move

{{userbox
| border-c = black
| id       = [[Image:Flag of Ryukyu.svg|50px|]]
| id-c     = white
| info     = This user is a member of <br>'''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject Ryūkyū|WikiProject Ryūkyū]]'''.
| info-c   = white
| usercategory  = WikiProject Ryūkyū participants
| nocat = {{{nocat|}}}
}}<noinclude>
[[Category:WikiProject Ryūkyū]]
[[Category:WikiProject user templates|Ryūkyū]]
</noinclude>

to Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan/Ryukyu task force/userbox; Once you do that, that entire code on you userpage can be replaced by {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan/Ryukyu task force/userbox}}

As your user page is not a user template, I'm going to remove that from your page because it is incorrect categorization. (as you already appear in Category:WikiProject Ryūkyū participants, a subcategory of Category:WikiProject Ryūkyū, I'm going to remove that from your userpage as overcategorziation. The userbox template you used will automatically categorize your userpage into Category:WikiProject Ryūkyū participants obviating the need to categorize into Category:WikiProject Ryūkyū.

Cheers.

-- 70.50.148.248 (talk) 06:35, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I moved it to the page, and I'll add it to a participants page once I've created one. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 07:17, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Created WP Ryukyu/Participants and put the userbox template there. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 08:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for February 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Shō Taikyū (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Aji

Uruma, Okinawa (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Aji

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:05, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Dwy

I've dealt with WP:NOTHERE issues before by taking them to WP:ANI in the past, but unfortunately this dispute will look like a content dispute to anyone who's not dilligent enough to read the 10,000's of words of discussion that have already been posted. (This happened when I brought Dwy's even more blatantly politically-motivated co-warrior Juzumaru there in December.) Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard is unfortunately where disputes go to not get resolved (check the archives: they have a 5%~10% success rate). Given that all three of us have noted Dwy's disruption, though, ANI might be the right answer -- do you want to do the honours or shall I? Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 07:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well with your meticulous attention to detail, and the fact that he's been like this before I got involved, you should report him to ANI. I'll inform User:Shii and anyone else that would want him dealt with. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 15:41, 3 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Politically-motivated disruption on Talk:Yamanoue no Okura

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 23:28, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised that this war still continues. Could you explain what is the problem? [1] I can provide sources from Japan's national library. --Juzumaru (talk) 14:26, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sturmgewehr, I expected you to contribute to the ANI discussion (it's a bit dry at the moment, as I expected), but when you logged in all you did was defend Dwy's latest bit of nitpicking on the article talk page... Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 23:34, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry Hijiri, but I didn't know what to say at ANI; I'm waiting for someone else to comment I suppose. I wasn't defending Dwy (I don't like that he made the Western year an aside), but I do think that it was a decent addition to the article, although needing rearranging. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 00:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw that you already changed the article, and I thank you again. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 00:41, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More "secret code that those other idiots can't read" from Dwy

Sturmgewehr, I'm not sure how your Japanese is, or if you even noticed Dwy's latest piece of commentary on this dispute. He was responding on his talk page to a disruptive SPA who has been told numerous times by at least three users (Epicgenius [2] Ross Hill [3] and myself[4]) to just edit Japanese Wikipedia instead because machine-translated text doesn't help when engaging other users of English Wikipedia in political debates -- and political debates is all said user has done (literally every single one of his 700+ edits have been about geopolitical disputes between Japan and South Korean; look at the guy's talk page -- until two months ago all it was was other users pointing out problems with his edits and getting completely ignored). Anyway, since I'm sure your Japanese is good enough to wade through it yourself, I'm primarily posting my translation here for the record. His use of both of our signatures instead of our actual usernames may have caused you to miss the choice words he had for you in particular.

Juzumaru, it seems you don't particularly mind the article stating "descended from Emperor Kōshō + the Baekje origin theory", but it doesn't sit well with me personally, and so I am arguing the following points.

The historical existence of the eight legendary emperors is itself questionable, and "said to be descendant of Emperor Kōshō" is essentially a tradition, with scholars not actually arguing that "the Yamanoue clan were (really) descendants of Emperor Kōshō". Unless we specifically state by whom (and/or where) the phrase "descended Emperor Kōshō" there is a risk that the reader will draw the wrong conclusion. We need to make it clear that "descended from Emperor Kōshō" is a tradition based on the Shinsen Shōjiroku.
The Baekje origin theory was the subject of a heated debate, but the fact is that "scholars of Japanese literature propped up the Baekje origin theory, and it was rejected by historians". [I'm using Dwy's preferred terminology here because it's a quotation of what he thinks the article should say. "Historians" should, however, be glossed as "political historians", and "scholars of Japanese literature" as "literary historians".] To write as though it was a debate between "descended from Emperor Kōshō" and "Baekje origin theory" (something that fool Sturmgewehr88 honestly seems to believe) is just wrong. If we're going to cite the Baekje origin theory then we need to also balance that with "this theory is not supported by historians" and give an accurate summary of the debate between scholars.
Hijiri88 analyzed the articles in 15 encyclopedias, but on examination the number that only said "he was an immigrant" or that named Baekje specifically was small. There was only one that said "common ancestry with Kakinomoto no Hitomaro". On the other hand, even though there are encyclopedias that specify that there are live arguments being made [I could translate this as "were arguments made", which would be more factually correct, but would not match what Dwy seems to believe.] by scholars against both the Baekje origin theory and the Shinsen Shōjiroku, my attempts to decribe this in the article have been reverted. No matter what I can't wrap my head around what the hell kind of criteria are being used to determine what goes in and what gets kept out. Shouldn't we just be adding everything that has a decent source behind it?

I personally think I'm just having a valid discussion, but my opponents continue to make wild accusations like "It's obvious you have a political agenda!!"[This is how Dwy represents my style of rhetoric, but you can ctrl+f Talk:Yamanoue no Okura and Talk:Yamanoue no Okura/Archive 1: you will find me using it three times back in early January in a friendly or satyrical manner, Sturmgewehr88 using it once against me and once against Dwy, and Dwy using it twice against me.] Since my opponents are not making sensible arguments, there's really nothing to worry about, and I don't think you digging up documents for me will help all that much. --Dwy (talk) 16:06, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Just as I thought, my opponents have a ridiculous way of attacking me, so it's probably better that you just be quiet and keep watch from the sidelines. --Dwy (talk) 18:09, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Cheers!

Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that I already outlined the criteria: try to match as closely as possible the neautrally-worded encyclopedia articles I dug up earlier. The current wording is virtually a direct translation of Nakanishi's article in Epoca, although it is also backed up by Keene and Itō. The Wikipedia article itself under my wording does not "only say that he was an immigrant", nor is it likely to confuse readers. Dwy is ignoring all of our comments so he can keep propping up straw man arguments like this. I wonder what his next argument will be if I actually edit the article to add mention of the Shinsen Shōjiroku: will he do another complete 180 and demand that all reference to both the Shinsen Shōjiroku and Emperor Kōshō be removed? Will he just say "Nakanishi is the foremost scholar in this field and he says that Okura was a vassal of the Awata clan, so that's all we should say"? We'll see, anyway, because I actually don't have a problem with mentioning the Shinsen Shōjiroku. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 03:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't even aware of this. Just wow. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 04:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I should probably disclose that "that fool Sturmgewehr88" was my interpretation of "ミーラー強斗武さんなんか". I think it's a fair interpretation and it's Dwy's responsibility to explain why he chose to mark your name with nanka. But I don't mean to mislead you or anyone else. 182.249.47.167 (talk) 08:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC) (Hjr88)[reply]

It's fine. I'm surprised he used my name instead of my username though. ミーラー強斗武 (talk) 15:16, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 182.249.241.40 (talk) 05:03, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]