User talk:Eddienahui

Welcome

Welcome to Wikipedia! Articles written by those fluent in foreign languages are lacking, and that contributes to Wikipedia's western-centrism; good on you for taking that on. I hope you can move on from (according to your user page) a negative view of Wikipedia and its community. I will warn you that your user page may seem a bit combative to other editors—better to start off on a more positive foot. Ovinus (talk) 03:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You seem nice.

Will note.

Thanks. Eddienahui (talk) 03:59, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And you seem genuine. Feel free to ping me (type {{Ping|Ovinus}}) or message me on my talk page, if you have questions or need advice. The people at the Wikipedia Teahouse are also generally helpful. Ovinus (talk) 04:01, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Nao Jinguuji has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Nao Jinguuji. Thanks! JBW (talk) 19:16, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noted for future reference. Eddienahui (talk) 03:51, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kagoshima Shrine

If you're still around: I found Kagoshima Shrine which was a recently cleaned up bad translation, and has a nice Japanese Wikipedia article. Would be an immensely useful one to translate. Cheers, Ovinus (talk) 00:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Will work on. Thanks. Eddienahui (talk) 00:56, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah shit, I should have looked more closely at the Japanese article. The history section has some uncited paragraphs. It should be okay if you just translate the cited facts, though. So, all of "祭神", the cited paragraphs in "歴史", and most of "境内" (it's okay if some of the list info there is uncited), and most of the rest? Sorry about my sloppiness; up to you. Ovinus (talk) 01:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look through. Don't know when can work on, but shouldn't be difficult.

Many thanks. Eddienahui (talk) 01:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Translated all the important bits. Other stuff doesn't matter. Just machine translate it or something. Eddienahui (talk) 03:53, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! Ovinus (talk) 04:50, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Mitsunobu Nakahara

Hello, Eddienahui,

Thank you for creating Mitsunobu Nakahara.

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

The citations also need to be translated so other editors can review them. The Shikoku News source has a dead link with no working archive.org link available. The book and study cited need page ranges.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Firefangledfeathers}}. Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 05:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Firefangledfeathers:

Understand.

Will get to later.

Eddienahui (talk) 05:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Pierre Ken

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Pierre Ken requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, a group of people, an individual animal, an organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content, or an organized event that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Reading Beans (talk) 07:55, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it's good enough for the Japanese wikipedia, it should be good enough for the English version of Wikipedia.

Unless it's a racism for it being deleted - which I would understand, given this website's horrible record for that kind of thing.

Anyway, I'm contesting it. Eddienahui (talk) 07:58, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pierre Ken moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Pierre Ken, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Bbb23 (talk) 13:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments on the Talk page and on your userpage are at best unconstructive. I strongly urge you to drop the stick. If you believe that the English Wikipedia is "anti-Asian", then perhaps you should not be editing here.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:09, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to ignore this because it's rude and unconstructive. Eddienahui (talk) 05:00, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Bbb23 (talk) 14:34, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently making disruptive edits.

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 ~~~~}}. Acroterion (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

lmao :Exactly. :You're not actually interested in reform. :You just want to feel powerful. :Enjoy your momentary high. :I'll be eating a hot pocket. :Eddienahui (talk) 17:01, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Tiderolls 17:33, 17 October 2022 (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.

Warning

The unblock template is no meant for polemics. If you continue to misuse the template your ability to edit this page will be removed. Tiderolls 17:33, 17 October 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

A warning after a permanent ban? (草) :Look, dude. :I'm perfectly happy doing: :the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or :the block is no longer necessary because you :understand what you have been blocked for, :will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and :will make useful contributions instead. :I'm perfectly happy keeping my opinions to myself (I'm not going to pretend like my opinion of this community hasn't changed for the worse). :But you don't want me to. :If you did, you would have warned me in the first place. :You're only giving me the option to reflect AFTER permanently blocking me. :Please be logical. :Or if you won't, just delete this account. :Thank you. Eddienahui (talk) 17:50, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

WP:GAB explains how to write an appropriate unblock request. You'll probably only get one more chance. And no, accounts can not be deleted. Yamla (talk) 18:19, 17 October 2022 (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.

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).

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

Request reason:

I will not "persistently make disruptive edits" anymore.

I understand my language hurt feelings.

I have absorbed this lesson and will be sure to remember it in the future.

I agree to follow the Wikipedia community customs.

Wikipedia is a community effort and we are all volunteers.

I will assume good faith from now on from all members of this community.

We should speak politely to each other.

If you would give me the opportunity to prove that I have absorbed this lesson, I would be very grateful to demonstrate.

If not, I will request that you retire this username, so that I at least can disappear.

Thank you and best regards,

Eddienahui (talk) 18:32, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The unblock request neither demonstrates an actual understanding of the severe incivility/personal attack/harassment behavior that led to the block (permanent link), nor does it credibly indicate that it won't happen again (you've made jokes about the volunteer nature of the community not being "anything that will contribute to the common and collective heritage of mankind", so your reference to the community effort is meaningless), nor does it provide examples for helpful contributions that are currently prevented by the block. There is thus no reason to lift it, but there are plenty of reasons not to do so. And as you have demonstrated that this won't change anytime soon, I'll revoke your access to this page. The community does not need to make amends for your incompatibility with it; please find a different community that is more open to your behavior. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:08, 17 October 2022 (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.

Your ability to edit this talk page has been revoked as an administrator has identified your talk page edits as inappropriate and/or disruptive.

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

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, you should read the guide to appealing blocks, then contact administrators by submitting a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System.
Please note that there could be appeals to the unblock ticket request system that have been declined leading to the post of this notice.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tam Chuc Pagoda (December 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Kvng was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Need another source like [1]. Tourist guides are of marginal reliability.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Tam Chuc Pagoda and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

~Kvng (talk) 19:22, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eddienahui! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! ~Kvng (talk) 19:22, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Nao Jinguuji

Hello, Eddienahui. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Nao Jinguuji, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:03, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Pierre Ken

Hello, Eddienahui. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Pierre Ken, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Shoujo Commando IZUMI

Hello, Eddienahui. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Shoujo Commando IZUMI, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Narumi Hidaka

Hello, Eddienahui. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Narumi Hidaka, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 07:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Nao Jinguuji

Hello, Eddienahui. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Nao Jinguuji".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Pierre Ken

Hello, Eddienahui. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Pierre Ken".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:23, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Shoujo Commando IZUMI

Hello, Eddienahui. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Shoujo Commando IZUMI".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:46, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Tam Chuc Pagoda

Hello, Eddienahui. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Tam Chuc Pagoda, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:07, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]