User talk:Masonfamily

your edits

Your edits are usually POV, always poorly written and from strange sources if at all. Don't be surprised that so many other editors revert your edits. Blanking all your warnings doesn't lose that history, either. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 05:57, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Geisha

Other editors asked you to discuss about your recent edits on the talk page. Ask for consensus before you change the article again. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 06:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry. but i can't understand why you delete sourced material. Please give me a reason that why you delete sourced material. if you disagree it, then you should add counterpart source.Masonfamily (talk) 06:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't work that way. If someone is an unknown author/dismissed as talking trash by the academic majority, no one is going to bother to take the time to debunk the theory/view. John Smith's (talk) 08:30, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've read your sources. Your edit was copy vio again from the first source text page 3 line 7 and 8. And it was a description on oiran/tayu, not on geisha. The third source you provided says geisha are not prostitute. So please do not add the material again. And why did you remove this before you answer my question? Now I explain my revert. Please explain your edit and answer my question. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:34, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read this and this. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:49, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yakiniku

Hi again. Did you read the source carefully. It says '江戸時代になっても多くの人が肉を食べていた。' and 'しかし、現実には天明から嘉永にかけて、彦根城主から将軍へ、寒中見舞として牛肉の味噌漬が樽で献上されていたとの記録が残されている。' etc. BTW, I don't know who added but the source is not mine. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 06:15, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to your addition, it looks like Japanese didn't eat meat at all before Meiji era. But it was not. So I just think it would be appropriate to mention about it precisely. I've got to go now and if you have any question, I cannot answer immediately. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 06:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read these. [1], [2]. [3], ja:牛肉 and ja:ももんじ屋. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 09:41, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but I reverted your edit. Please add an accurate information. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 19:24, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Wikistalking"

I disagree with most of your edits so I revert them. I have an interest in Japanese and other East Asian pages. If, for example, you go and edit articles on Barrack Obama, burgers or Swedish history I will have no reason to take an interest in your work. John Smith's (talk) 19:17, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3RR reported

Right, you've reverted for the fourth time after methodically removing your warnings (and you did revert three times before), so I've reported you on those three articles. John Smith's (talk) 21:41, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User notice: temporary 3RR block

Regarding reversions[4] made on November 7 2008 to Yamato period

You have been blocked from editing for a short time in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violating the three-revert rule. Please be more careful to discuss controversial changes or seek dispute resolution rather than engaging in an edit war. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

The duration of the block is 7 * 24 hours. You get a long block in view of your previous block history and your deliberate pork pies [5] William M. Connolley (talk) 21:50, 7 November 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

Technically it is not violate 3rr rule. I did not "revert" it.

Decline reason:

Your reason, and your edit summaries, make it clear that you understood you were edit-warring and were trying to avoid a block based on a 'technicality.' Now you know: Do not edit-war. — FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 21:57, 7 November 2008 (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.

Request for move of Empress Myeongseong

Hello, Masonfamily. I come here to inform you a request for move to the article of Empress Myeongseong to Queen Min by an user named Sennen goroshi (talk · contribs). The pertinent discussion has been open at Talk:Empress Myeongseong#Requested move. Since you seem to be interested in editing the article, your input would be appreciated on this. Thanks.--Caspian blue 00:53, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]