User talk:MSJapan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Inappropriate redirect suppressions[edit]

"Kohail brother murder case" to "Kohail murder case" (Kohail brother murder case / Kohail murder case) and "Research lodge" to "Research Lodge" (Research lodge / Research Lodge) (Special:log/MSJapan) don't appear to meet any of the criteria for redirect suppression or criteria for speedy deletion. Unless I'm missing something: the proper process would have been to list these longstanding titles at RfD, if deletion was desired, per the deletion policy. Pinging Nakon the administrator who granted you this permission for input.Godsy(TALKCONT) 03:18, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I've retired, but here's my rationale: the Kohail title was an unambiguous error; it's not grammatically correct, nor does it portray the situation accurately, nor is the case referred to as such in the news sources - two brothers were involved, neither of them was the victim. So I chose a related title that would at least get the search hit.
"Research Lodge" was moved without respect for its existence as a proper noun, which per WP naming conventions, should remain capitalized, as we did with Grand Lodge; so I moved it back in accordance with policy. Again, I've retired, so whether I have the permission or not is wholly irrelevant at this point, and it's not really going to matter to me if you move it back. MSJapan (talk) 03:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't think the first title was unambiguously created in error and therefore eligible for WP:CSD#G6/WP:PM/C#3, and your second justification gives no criteria for deletion or suppression. I have no problem with the moves themselves, rather with the suppression of the former titles, which should have became redirects in these cases. The two now deleted titles should be created as redirects. If you ever choose to return to editing, I believe further similar suppressions of that nature (i.e. unilateral deletions of longstanding titles that don't meet a deletion or suppression criteria) would be unacceptable, and likely result in revocation of the permission.Godsy(TALKCONT) 03:51, 14 June 2016 (UTC)


My response is on my talk page. HighInBC Need help? {{ping|HighInBC}} 00:27, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Books & Bytes - Issue 17[edit]

Wikipedia Library owl.svg The Wikipedia Library


Books & Bytes
Issue 17, April-May 2016
by The Interior, Ocaasi, UY Scuti, Sadads, and Nikkimaria

  • New donations this month - a German-language legal resource
  • Wikipedia referals to academic citations - news from CrossRef and WikiCite2016
  • New library stats, WikiCon news, a bot to reveal Open Access versions of citations, and more!

Read the full newsletter

The Interior via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

PROD, etc.[edit]

This seems misplaced. You may want to consider moving it (or removing it). There's not really anything we can do on that page to take action against someone's personal attacks or a particular user's behavior. "How many problematic actions..." sounds like an ANI thread rather than something actionable on the level of policy/guideline interpretation/wording.

In my unsolicited opinion, however, if there are continued issues with Kvng, it would be best to let someone else bring them back to ANI (or to wait a long while first). Two reasons: First, it would be easy to get the sense that you're in too deep at the moment, which takes away from any valid point you may have. Second, the diff from Kvng could be construed as a personal attack, but that sort of comment is made many times at AfD every day. Inappropriate? Yes, but probably not actionable by itself (and can't really be tacked onto another thread that was just closed without action). Plenty of other editors took notice of the issues and can bring Kvng back to ANI if need be.

So anyway, I'd consider either removing the comment at WT:PROD and/or replacing it with a specific question/proposal regarding wording or interpretation of that guideline, without focusing on Kvng. Or feel free to remove this potentially unwanted advice :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:10, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

@Rhododendrites: There have been several threads on PROD about Kvng's editing (which is more to what I was aiming at, not the ANI). Actionable or not, the editing behavior Kvng displayed is directly related to his function as a PROD patroller, and those folks at PROD need to be aware of what he's doing, because he's telling people he'll get better, he's learned, and he hasn't. So the AGF has to run out at some point.
If I had to venture a guess, the real problem is that Kvng is a staunch inclusionist to the point of wanting to keep everything, and since he knows he can keep anything that's prodded if he deprods, that's what he does, except he doesn't have the policy knowledge to back up the majority of what he's deprodding. That simply isn't a diligent PROD patroller, and it's not beneficial to the project.
All that being said, "Inclusionist", "Deletionist", whatever, doesn't matter - one can have whatever opinion one wants until they start ad hominem-ing people because of that stance. Want to keep every PROD, or delete every PROD? Then you need to be able to handle the fact that you might be wrong every once in a while, and one would have a much better rate if one was aware of the relevant criteria. Hell, I AfDed something because the rationale was "found on a map", and did it wrong because I simply wasn't aware of a policy. Now, rather than tell me to go screw because I was "wrong" and "don't ever nom anything ever again you rotten @#%^$^*$&&!!!!!!", an editor pointed me at the policy and told me to fix the nom so it complied with the policy. So I did.
Honestly? This is SiTrew all over again. An editor self-appoints to take on a task that they think no one else does, gets obsessed with getting it done, makes mistakes through lack of diligence, rationalizes the mistakes as a corollary to workload, and then starts having editor interaction problems as a result. It'll probably end up at ANI if it continues anyway, as that's what happened the last time. MSJapan (talk) 19:11, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Rhododendrites is right, MSJapan: you need to drop the stick and back away. You said, "the AGF has to run out at some point." The AGF of your actions will also run out soon. It already has with me; I believe you're too concerned about getting Kvng punished right now at the expense of other things, like improving the project. You're essentially forum-shopping at this point; you've taken it to several different venues in the past few days. The ANI and your message to HighInBC resulted in no sanctions and the PROD talk complaint isn't going to result in sanctions either. I've seen what you're doing play out before too, as both you and Kvng. Quite often, the result for people like you who forum-shop on the same issue is a) future things they post on noticeboards aren't taken seriously, or b) they get with a boomerang and get sanctions themselves. I think you're a worthy enough editor that I don't want that to happen to you.
He's also right about what to do next: wait about a month and see what he's done in that time. If he really is as bad as you think, you'll have enough new bad examples to justify the punishment you want. You have succeeded in getting more scrutiny of Kvng's edits, so it's fairly likely that, if there are MAJOR problems before the month, somebody will address them. pbp 21:58, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Kont Bank[edit]

Hi hi, I may be missing a trick here, but could you explain what about Kont Bank made it an attack page? I'm just not seeing it personally, thank you Face-smile.svg -- samtar talk or stalk 10:02, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

@Samtar: One's iffy, one's not. "Iranian entrepreneur Babak Zanjani, who has invested into several Tajik businesses, including a bank, an airline, a taxi service and a bus terminal that Tajik President Imomali Rahmon himself helped inaugurate in March 2013.[3]" - could imply foreign influence with government approval.
"The bank is under scrutiny by the US Treasury Service, as a possible money laundering entity which moves large sums of oil-related money on behalf the Iranian government.[3]" - basically a negative statement, and there are no positive statements made in the article.
Therefore, I think the article is aimed simply at pointing out what's "wrong" with the bank. I'd also note the same author said essentially the same thing about the Agroinvestbank article he created as well, that it was run by a foreigner and was being investigated. MSJapan (talk) 12:26, 20 June 2016 (UTC)


I'm going to revert your redirect of Bengay again but I will go ahead and nominate this for deletion so we can discuss its fate. WP:BRD doesn't seem to be working between the two of us. ~Kvng (talk) 16:40, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

No, the problem is that if you ask for a reason and don't like it, then you ignore it, and that's not how this works. Your version of "discussion" is "let me tell you why we should keep this, using reasoning that is not in line with policy" and that's it. When you think a radio station or a TV show should be kept because it's "national" and then the articles turn out to be hoaxes, that's a problem. When your keep rationale is to "avoid redlinks" while admitting the article fails GNG, that's a problem. The faults aren't those of other people in this case. MSJapan (talk) 16:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
OMG, you two, get a room! I've closed the AfD and you can discuss a merger elsewhere. pbp 18:59, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
I have already started a discussion on the Bengay talk page. MSJapan, if you still think redirecting or deleting that is a good idea, please post something specific to that there. ~Kvng (talk) 13:51, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Zadara Storage[edit]

Hello! I reverted Zadara Storage back to the more cut down version I had a few weeks back, I don't mean to step on your toes, I just think it's still a bit too much BS with your cutdown version. Feel free to revert me if you think I'm wrong. Brandon (talk) 06:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

@Brandon: I can definitely see where there might be a WP:PROMO issue still outstanding, but I was erring on the side of the tech being important (which has admittedly not been shown). Therefore, I think the rv is fine. I hadn't realized the COI template had been removed, however, and there's been recent activity that still looks COI to me. I didn't dig into the history, because there was no template to clue me in to do so, but I will do that now, and probably go to COIN or ANI, depending on how bad it is, and if any prior admin action has occurred. MSJapan (talk) 06:12, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Masonic Honors[edit]

I wanted to list the abbreviations of Masonic titles used after names - which are in the style of honors like degrees, medals, and knighthoods. That's what was implied. The Savage Club's Masonic branch listed its founding members with such acronyms appended to their names and I wanted to list them for the edification of the readers of the article.Hotspur23 (talk)

@Hotspur23: - I see. There's only one slight error, though, and that is that those are there because they were appointed to those positions. The interesting thing is that the people themselves often don't use them in correspondence - other people tend to stick them on there. Therefore, you're kind of veering off slightly in the wrong direction, but not entirely. You make a good point regarding the initialisms, so I think what I'm going to do is revert it for the moment, find a source to add to the article explaining the usage, and add it to all of the offices to which it applies. MSJapan (talk) 18:15, 25 June 2016 (UTC)


House near the northern coast of Pulau Ubin, Singapore - 20050803.jpg

Hey MSJapan. You know, I respect most of your rationales at AfD. I am also usually in agreement with your views on notability. Which is why I feel saddened when I see stuff like this. If you don't mind, could you please retract/strike this (please remove the last 2 sentences at least). Sorry, for this. I understand that it is human to feel angry when there is disagreement. But it is best to reply based on guidelines/policies. I myself do not agree with many editors at AfD, but whenever I feel I am getting angry, I try to check myself and reply only about the facts. This is important. It is OK to have disagreements, but let's only use facts in a discussion, not an editor's behaviour.
The image on the right is one of my favourite places in Singapore, Pulau Ubin. I visit it whenever I am feeling stressed; it is one of the only rural places left in the concrete jungle of Singapore. When I walk through these sylvan paths, I forget everything that caused me to be angry. If I can't visit, I just open my photo album and look through the photos. I hope this photo makes you calm down as well.Face-smile.svg --Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:01, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I'll oblige because you asked. MSJapan (talk) 05:08, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! :) --Lemongirl942 (talk) 06:35, 26 June 2016 (UTC)


Maybe you should talk to the coordinator of the firearms project. You still never answered why you or your cohort listed it as terrorism.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 02:28, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mike Searson: - Not my job to do that. I personally could care less either wat, and I can't answer the question because I had nothing to do with it. However, it is easier to assume a conspiracy than an error, or maybe ask the person who did it? This is precisely my point - you don't agree with it, so it's an "obvious conspiracy" done on purpose, right, so rather than go ask, you'd rather be aggressive and make baseless accusations? MSJapan (talk) 02:34, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Just thought it was common courtesy for a nominator to notify projects within scope according to the talk page. I never suggested conspiracy, merely bias.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 02:40, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Your help desk question[edit]

You have a response.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 21:28, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Manufacturer's data = reliable source[edit]

Ask manufacturer and they will tell you that their product is the best. Is this a reliable source? Moreover, they won't tell you some information even they know it because of confidentiality or because it points to some flaws. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tests on rollers Espr14 (talk) 10:00, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

As the article has been deleted, I don't have the context to tell you exactly what it was I referring to, but technical test data is probably what I was talking about, not ad copy. A manufacturer cannot say, for example, that a vehicle can take 4 million pounds of pressure to the frame when it can only take 30 pounds, for example. MSJapan (talk) 18:07, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you![edit]

Original Barnstar Hires.png The Original Barnstar
Well you are very very wrong. I am not on the board of directors, neither am I an employee. Thank you for your concern though! Audreykono (talk) 19:48, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News[edit]

Guild of Copy Editors July 2016 News
Writing Magnifying.PNG

Copyeditors progress.png

Hello everyone, and welcome to the July 2016 GOCE newsletter.

June Blitz: this one-week copy-editing blitz ran from 12 through 18 June; the themes were video games and Asian geography. Of the 18 editors who signed up, 11 removed 47 articles from the backlog. Barnstars and rollover totals are located here. Thanks to all editors who took part.

Coordinator elections: The second tranche of Guild coordinators for 2016, who will serve a six-month term until 23:59 UTC on 31 December, have been elected. Jonesey95 remains as your drama-free Lead Coordinator, and Corinne and Tdslk are your new assistant coordinators. For her long service to the Guild, Miniapolis has been enrolled in the GOCE Hall of Fame. Thanks to everyone who voted in the election; our next scheduled one occurs in December 2016. All Wikipedia editors in good standing are eligible; self-nominations are welcome and encouraged.

July Drive: Our month-long July Copy Editing Backlog Elimination Drive is now underway. Our aim is to remove articles tagged for copy-edit in April, May and June 2015, and to complete all requests on the GOCE Requests page from June 2016. The drive ends at 23:59 on 31 July 2016 (UTC).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Corinne and Tdlsk.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:54, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Battle of the Nur Shams[edit]

Dear, why do you delete a page Battle of Nur Shams frequently

Because you violated copyright. This has been explained to you on your talk page. MSJapan (talk) 15:37, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestions on my project[edit]

Just come here to say Arigatōgozaimashita:) 525JCNJ (talk) 14:22, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

DZXL overzealous redirection[edit]

Hi there, I've noticed that you've redirect the article DZXL to its parent article. But I found out that it was too much overzealous for a redirection. The station itself was existed, and somehow if you keep searching for a most reliable sources, you may be understand. But I'm telling you, don't be too overzealous with your actions here as it may seem to me that you've only basing for some templates that was posted there. Sometimes, you have to find sources of your own. Don't be a biter here. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 22:29, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Well anyway, at some point, you're right. Maybe it will be more suitable to find secondary or tertiary sources for this, rather than their main website itself. But I want to tell you, unlike Japan, Philippine broadcasting is very PRIVATIVE and very CAUTIOUS when it comes to their network profile and history, so its not easy to find more sources for verification of its existense. I hope you won't mind, but let that page stayed that way for now, though I'm still not convinced that such existing radio stations here in PHL needs to redirect to its main station, just because it fails to search for more than trustable sources. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 04:25, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Anthem of East Turkestan[edit]

Could you please restore it into my user's space, I want to have a look what song this is. Could be notable anyway.--Antemister (talk) 11:47, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

KC holder articles[edit]

Since you initiated the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Walter Gerth, I'm letting you know that a discussion is taking place at Notability (People): Knight's Cross Holder Articles. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:14, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Suzuka Naval Arsenal for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Suzuka Naval Arsenal is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suzuka Naval Arsenal until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.


Hello, MSJapan. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Voceditenore (talk) 15:12, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

You forgot to notify...[edit]

Just a reminder, I think you forgot to notify the user you named at COIN. - Brianhe (talk) 11:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I didn't do so primarily because there's no apparent COI - there's really isn't a "discussion" either. MSJapan (talk) 17:58, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


Hey do you know how I can get non-copyrighted pictures? I guess a gallery is needed for this project, and it only allows me to upload my own work. I don't think I will call the company and ask them for pics. 525JCNJ (talk) 13:26, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Rude Sarcastic message[edit]

Your rude sarcastic message is not appreciated. Unless Wikipedia's moderators are all freemasons you will not succeed in your plot to censor the facts that i have contributed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:7D:CF6A:BC66:24C9:4A9E:5D71:AD59 (talk) 00:04, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Well, I guess all the moderators are Freemasons, and my plot was successful. Who knew? MSJapan (talk) 00:10, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm... must be a Cabal (or perhaps a Kabbalah). Blueboar (talk) 21:30, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
"Try our new Cabal soda! It's so refreshing, you too will say "Cabal...aaahh! If not, we know where you are...." MSJapan (talk) 21:37, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Eshal Fayyaz[edit]

Respected Sir, as I edited page of Eshal Fayyaz yesterday, but I think you didn't like the changes though I followed Wiki policies and the tone was neutral. You have nominated page earlier for deletion, so I think you are considering it a matter of your ego (Pardon me if I am wrong) and you reverted all the changes though they were all credible. You also mentioned on AfD page that references are blog based, Sir I request you to check again they are not blogs, either they are fashion websites, magazine websites or Pakistan TV industry websites. I am not attached to Eshal in any way neither monetarily nor in any other relation, being a Wikipedian and native here I know she has earned great popularity recently, though its her first debut in TV serials but She did lead role. So be kind try to verify and contribute positively. Though article was a mess but later as you cleaned it and I contributed it can be a good article and I promise to make more neutral contributions. She has been brand ambassador of many renowned brands here, great model and a new face in acting. Here are Wikipedia policy for nomination of Deletion you should go through it again.

So I believe this is not a hopeless case and we should give a chance to other native editors who know her well. Power Brings Responsibility, we should be optimistic and give a chance to others too.

No, you did not follow policies. You replaced material that was not written in an encyclopedic tone. You felt that a photo gallery with no text of Bina Sultan was an appropriate reference for Eshal Fayyaz. You apparently also felt that a source on Pakistan Fashion Week that did not mention Eshal Fayyaz was an appropriate source for Eshal Fayyaz. There's no "optimism" required. The quality of these sites is generally poor, and they all look like personal sites.
I have already explained to you that models are generally not notable. As a new actress with one acting credit to her name, she isn't notable as an actress, either. I have stated to you what the policies are. I have in fact looked at every source in the article, and they are by and large very poor sites. I tried to actually get more material out of one of the interviews, but there was nothing there. MSJapan (talk) 06:18, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Make it right, Deleting is not a good option

Sorry if I offend you, but don't make it an ego issue. The changes I made are legitimate, because I provided reference for each line I wrote. If you think that my tone was not right you can make it right being much senior to me I would be looking for help to improve it. Otherwise it would just like the situation of a painter who painted a painting and asked for mistakes and there were marks all over the painting, but when asked to correct the mistakes there was not a single mark. Criticism is easy, correction is difficult.

The Reader Ahmed (talk) 08:22, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Your sources are not WP:RS. The tone is not encyclopedic. The content is not appropriate. I'm telling you you are adding things that you should not be, and instead of accepting that, you're telling me it's an ego problem. The "problem" is that you absolutely want to keep this article. For someone without a vested interest, you shouldn't be this hardline about it. The article does not and will not meet the standards required. You either don't understand or simply don't want to listen; I don't know which it is, but another editor has even said that there is nothing sufficient. You're not doing anything to convince anyone otherwise. MSJapan (talk) 17:13, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 29[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Believer (Laura Dawn album), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Replacements (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) 09:39, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

User:Philipandrew2 Sockpuppet and his contribution Investigations[edit]

Listen, I do not usually agree with your methods when it comes to some article, but this time I'm going to obligue myself to ask you this, can you please recheck the contributions made by linked user on this message title on the Philippines article? He always asked on every message on the article referring to WP:STICKTOSOURCE, without any valid proofs of his contributions there. Secondly, creating another sock accounts just to award himself any barnstars without any good reason to do it so. And lastly, I think that some of the images he upload here in Wikipedia is like it is a DeviantArt or something. Please this time I'm begging you to participate with this concern. Thank ypu . Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 14:30, 31 July 2016 (UTC)

I also forgot to include this file he uploaded here in Wikipedia. It seems that this is also a Photoshop made image only, and I don't really see any educational value in this image. Hamham31Heke!KushKush! 01:02, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Removing large sections of referenced content from Form 1040[edit]

Warning icon Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Form 1040, you may be blocked from editing.

Please try to avoid WP:BATTLEGROUND[edit]

  • Your WP:BATTLEGROUND attitude is uncollegial.
  • Here, you attack me [1] over my attempt to treat a group of rampant sockpuppets supporting new article that grossly violates WP:PROMO. I personally do not believe that this project is helped by being rude to human beings whose first edits are PROMO. Note that I was NOT suggesting that the article be kept.
  • Here you attack me and make an unsupported accusation, where did I make a false assertion of fact on this page? Or bring this link to any purpose other than to assert existence of a forthcoming film during an AFD about a film director? [2].
  • Can we try to work in a mutually respectful manner to assess notability, even when we disagree?E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:17, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
@E.M.Gregory: The problem is that your positions are inconsistent, and they're based on whatever your opinion is, not sources, and you will never acknowledge that your position is incorrect. Let's illustrate:
As for the links you cite as "attacks", you cited a policy incorrectly in the Susman AfD, and also indicated that AUTHOR and DIRECTOR were different policies. That's not an opinion - I provided the text of the correctly cited policy, and AUTHOR and DIRECTOR are both the same policy. You haven't addressed a fundamental error in the argument, nor did you refute any of Lemongirl's points. Instead, you keep pasting in more trivial sources without addressing the fact that a) they're all from Susman's local area; b) they're all trivial mentions of Susman; and c) the sources are not addressing the argument for "a significant body of work." Two reviews or six, one play is one play. You are equating the fact that Susman is "doing something" with the fact that "Susman is notable for doing it." In other words, you're contrary to WP:ENN in addition to any other lack of meeting policies.
Your assertions above are flatly untrue.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:22, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Meanwhile, in the process of carrying on the Susman argument where he's notable despite trivial mentions, you said on the Lohani AfD that "quotations from significant media are important to establish notability." You did not show anything like that on Susman at all, but Susman has to be notable, and Lohani is not, based on effectively the same level of sourcing. Lohani's not notable, but the fact that you're focused more on socking shows me that because you're mad about the socking, Lohani's not notable - the lack of sourcing is secondary.
Nonsense.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:22, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Put simply, you have ulterior motives and biased editing. I think that's why you try to write articles on every single Israeli ever shot by a Palestinian; that's why you admitted you wrote Whitaker because you were mad about Whitaker's behavior. That's why you wrote IKEA stabbing because it was "Muslim terrorism" (which it was not), and you took one quote by a fringe politician and called it "a matter of national debate." Neither was true. Then we find out you were "in and out of Sweden" and "fascinated" by the subject. These revelations come months or years after the fact. In short, you had a bias before you ever started on those topics, and I think that's true of the majority of your contributions.
Nonsense on wheels, the fact that I am interested in and knowledgeable about a topic is hardly a bar to good editingE.M.Gregory (talk) 20:22, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
In a nutshell, you do not edit impartially in line with sources, but in line with your opinion, and you consistently hide that fact (until it comes out). Problem is, when you reveal the bias, the neutrality of the whole editing corpus is suspect (rather a lot like an academic who plagiarizes, oddly enough). In determining notability or the lack thereof, you consistently value your personal opinion of a subject far above what actual facts indicate about the subject, and minimize or ignore anything contrary to your already-established opinion. You have been doing this during your entire tenure here, and that is why people keep bringing you to ANI for the same things repeatedly. The only reason you're not banned is because people have gotten much more lenient over the years. When you start editing impartially yourself, and responding to claims with sources instead of ignoring them, then there might not be so much of an issue overall. MSJapan (talk) 20:15, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Utter, BATTLEGROUND rubbish. You have some sort of personal vendetta against me, which I have patiently and politely requested that your drop. I have grown an an editor in my year or so of active editing, and what I request here is that you stop attacking me.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:22, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
  • In particular, the allegation that I called the 2015 IKEA stabbing attack "Muslim terrorism" is typical of the accusation and baseless assertions you make about me; this one is downright slanderous.E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:36, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
You clearly don't want to listen to anybody, or else you'd have more to say than "nonsense", and I'm tired of listening to yours. All that "nonsense" I could go an find diffs for, so don't push me. The only way you've "grown as an editor" is to cause more problems with more people and then somehow not understand why there's an issue, because you can't possibly be wrong, can you? Anyhow, it's real simple: if you don't want to deal with me, stay off my talk page, stay off my contribs, and stay away from my AfDs. MSJapan (talk) 02:09, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you![edit]

Cup-o-coffee-simple.svg Thanks for your continued discussion. I will reply in a bit - I might be a few days. I appreciate your attention and am enjoying the conversation. I want to respect your time and plan for the most efficient resolution possible. Please let me know if at any point, you no longer enjoy the conversation. I would like to keep the situation fun and pleasant. Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 16:54, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Centre Point[edit]

Dear MS Japan,

Many thanks for reviewing the Centre Point wikipedia page. However, I was wondering if you could let me know if you can correct the remaining inaccuracies? For example, Centre Point is no longer an office building and is 34-storeys high, as mentioned in the references I have included on my request. Also, a number of the references I included mentioned a new square being built at the bottom of the tower so I was wondering if this could also be added? the text which mentions that a piazza is being demolished has no references and is incorrect. If I should include this on the talk page for Centre Point please let me know.

Many thanks Property 2016 Property2016 (talk) 14:19, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Rosary templates[edit]

Hi MSJapan, saw your request at WP:RMT about {{The rosary sidebar}}. FYI, the template {{The rosary}} is potentially worth discussion as well. I'm not an expert in the topic, but I'm inclined to believe that "Rosary" is typically capitalized. Just a friendly FYI. (The mover, it appears, has been sufficiently warned 2 months ago.) — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 00:01, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Andy M. Wang:: Thanks for the heads-up. There's a double-move on that second template, and maybe a split or a namespace switch or something. Can someone untangle this at all and just put them back where they were before Chicbyaccident moved them? MSJapan (talk) 00:13, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Wait, that navbox appears to have been "The Rosary". I think the rosary sidebar was moved several times to try to distinguish between the navbox. I also just realized you're a page mover. Technically, you're able to correct the page move by swapping Template:The rosary sidebar and Template:Rosary via WP:PMVR#rr (though it can be a tricky process the first time it's done). In this case, I'd probably leave the move to an admin (because I think it involves deleting some of the redirects resulting from the move. — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 00:56, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I could fix it, but you're correct as to why I asked for help - I don't know exactly what happened, and I really don't want to end up with a bigger mess. The navbox, however, is redundant to the sidebar (and on the same pages), so rather than move it back, I'll TfD it directly. MSJapan (talk) 01:09, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Still treating WP like a BATTLEGROUNND[edit]

  • deleting comments during AFD.[3].
  • followed by this: [4] petty BATTLEGROUND attack/. I am asking that you agf.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:25, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
Then a) don't edit other people's comments, and b) don't "wander" onto AfDs to offer "trivia." Don't hold me responsible for the consequences of your behavior. When you and don can also stop tag-team editing on my AfDs, maybe some AGF is there, but he had no keep rationale whatsoever, nor any justification to re-revert the edit, as he was told by someone else. You seem to think that whatever you do is fine, and then you cry that you're a victim. Stop creating a problem, and maybe you won't get one in return. MSJapan (talk) 19:54, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 14[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited To Mars By A-Bomb (film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jonathan Kydd (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) 09:16, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

POV Pushing and competence by an editor[edit]

Hey, do you mind if you could take a look at this edit. There is an editor who is constantly reverting the changes, refusing to properly discuss, competence issues and POV pushing. I'm interested to know if "Han Chinese" is the term used in US/Europe as well to refer to the ethnicity. My own education was in English and I have always heard "Han Chinese" as the ethnic term. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 13:44, 21 August 2016 (UTC)