User talk:Enkyo2/Hōji 宝治 1247

• "Building a taxonomy and nomenclature of collaborative writing to improve interdisciplinary research and practice" (abstract), The Journal of Business Communication. January 1, 2004.
• Wikipedia:Process is important

________________________________________

Replied on my talk page. cheers --Merbabu 02:39, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

OK - I'm happy for now to have the "History of Indonesia" template moved down (as you did - lol). Also, in the light of our discussion on my talk page about the VOC as an entity vs. History of Indonesia, the concept of an company info box is fine in principal - BUT, my concern is with the size of the box itself. But, I doubt I could get that changed. What are your thoughts? --Merbabu 03:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

No further constructive thoughts for now. But the inevitable exchange of views has now been placed on the table in a modest, neutral way. I'm prepared to sit back for a bit. Let's see what happens on the Talk page (and in the article) over the next day or so? --Ooperhoofd 03:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Chōshō

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Chōshō, and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Hōen. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

   --Ooperhoofd 23:36, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot 18:00, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes -- this is one of those instances in which the SearchBot was precisely correct -- and yet unhelpful. I'm in the process of creating templates for as yet "blank" Japanese era names or nengō. In other words,

• Yes -- I did copy the full text of Hōen (保延), which is the Japanese term for the years spanning 1135-1141 ....
• Yes, I did paste this data in the empty text box for Chōshō (長承), which is the nengō for the years spanning 1132-1135 ....
• Yes, I do plan on using the same copy-and-paste strategy many times in the future ....

I did post an "under construction tag" at the top of the page, but I now believe that I should have posted this warning on the blank page BEFORE adding any text whatsoever. Your SearchBot recognized that something was amiss -- no error on your part. But I wonder what I could have done differently? Any suggestions? --Ooperhoofd 18:17, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

The warning on the black page before the cut-and-paste would indeed have avoided the bot triggering. An alternative, if there are a large number of articles on nengō you intend to create like this, is to place you on the list of trusted users. さようなら. — Coren ^(talk) 20:22, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. While I do very much like the idea of being included amongst your list of "trusted users," I think I prefer to remain in jeopardy of your bot. It should be a simple matter for me to remember to put the under construction tag on a blank page -- and, if I forget, this becomes a good practice exercise. In future, my hope is that the accumulation of comparatively trivial details in the way I conventionally do things will produce a range of beneficial consequences: so -- if your bot does catch me in a silly oversight, so much the better .... Some things are perhaps best learned the hard way.

fr:Ères du Japon

À l'égard de votre « CorenSearchBot » à la version anglophone de Wikipédia: In this context, I dare to be BOLD in asking a corollary question about creating nengō in fr:Wikipédia? As it happens, I've not encountered anything like your specific bot in the francophone venue. Maybe it does not yet exist -- or maybe I've just been lucky? In any case, it makes sense for me to follow up briefly:

• Est-ce qu'on peut utilizer un truc comme « w:en:Template:Underconstruction » avec des nouvelles pages des nengō à la fr:Wikipédia?

• C'est à dire -- est-ce qu'il est vrai ou faux que « fr:Modèle:En cours » ≠ « w:en:Template:Underconstruction » ... ou bien, est-ce qu'il y a un meilleur?

--Ooperhoofd 13:31, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

(Not sure anymore which language you expect an answer in!) Bots tend to live in a specific language wiki; and mine lives only on the English Wikipedia at this time. The templates you show are not identical in function, but fundamentally equivalent. I would expect that fr:Modèle:En cours seems more appropriate for "major overhauls" of existing articles because of its specific wording. Maybe fr:Modèle:Pas fini is a closer analog, but its wording also implies modification of an existing article more than creation of a new one.

Off-hand, I don't see a better template on fr. I've got very little editing experience over there, though, so I'm probably not the best person to ask. — Coren ^(talk) 23:20, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me on this. --Ooperhoofd 23:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

French MOS-JA

Hi Ooperhoofd. An editor recently made comments about the French Wikipedia MOS-JA here: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)#The_French_MOS-JA. The discussion will presumably take place here: fr:Discussion_Aide:Transcription_du_japonais#The_switching_of_the_kanji. An a French editor often participating in Japanese related articles, I figured I would let you know. Feel free to participate in the discussion if you are interested. Regards, Bendono 14:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for bringing this "problem" to my attention. As it happens, this subject interests me a great deal -- and the timing is coincidentally appropriate because it follows-up a recent dinner party conversation which I've been mulling over.

In the course of a pleasant evening (lubricated by ample quantities of Côtes-du-Rhône), we were discussing the genesis and evolution of Wikipedia as a 21st century phenomenon. This became an opportunity for me to present a modest, tentative hypothesis about parallels in the etymological overview and participant-contribution structures of the 19th century Oxford English Dictionary. Like Wikipedia today, there were both scholarly and non-scholarly contributors to the OED-project; but unlike Wikipedia, the chief editor in Oxford assumed a much more intrusive role than our Wikipedia administrators are conventionally prone to do. The exchange of views over dinner was provocative. Since then, I've often returned to pondering this subject. As so often happens, I've become persuaded that my initial focus was a little off the mark.

A more meaningful array of questions flow from parsing the differences between the continuing OED-project and the irreproachable Académie française -- not so much in terms of the perennial unresolved questions about the disconnect in the francophone and anglophone world views, but more to do with the consequences elsewhere ... in Japanese, for example. From a tangential perspective, I'm wondering what Leopold Senghor (or fr:Léopold Sédar Senghor) might have contributed here, if he had been so inclined? As the first African to be elected "immortal" of the Académie, his unique perspective would have been somewhat difficult to ignore entirely. I can't guess what Senghor might have thought about kanji-reversal in a francophone venue (in fr:Wikipédia). I'm certain that he would have been unsurprised. Perhaps someone should invite comment from Senghor's successor in the Académie? [See ja:Wikipedia ...link to speech by Valéry Giscard d'Estaing (in French).]

For now, I'm more inclined simply to follow rather than lead, but I will attend closely as the serial commentary unfolds. Merci. --Ooperhoofd 16:41, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

How should I change my diction? I put words like "NOT" in uppercase so people do not miss the words when they read them. WhisperToMe 23:11, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Oh, no. You just don't get it.

Wrong question.

Your two sentences persuade me to invest no more time.

Maybe it will help if you invest some time listening to voices other than mine:

• 1993 Nobel Laureate Toni Morrison -- link to sound recording at NobelPrize.org
• 2005 Nobel Laureate Harold Pinter -- link to video recording at NobelPrize.org

In a way, this is generous. I have nothing better to offer. --Ooperhoofd 00:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Ooper, the discussion on EN should stop. I am continuing the discussion on FR. WhisperToMe 14:45, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Next time this happens, I would advise that when someone asks for your advice (Remember the "How should I change my diction? I put words like "NOT" in uppercase so people do not miss the words when they read them." ?), he or she is expecting an answer that will help him or her (Such as "Well, you should do X and Y, not Z). Instead I received:

"Oh, no. You just don't get it.

Wrong question.

Your two sentences persuade me to invest no more time."

I felt offended and insulted by those three lines. It felt like someone spat on my face.

It would have been more helpful and kinder if you said "Well, the diction is not the issue. X is the issue. To resolve this, do Y. Thank you."

The additional line asking me to watch the speeches by Morrison and Pinter felt cryptic because I am not familiar with the figures and because I already felt miffed by the first three lines. It is okay to mention Morrison and Pinter as long as you explain what I should get out of the messages so that I get the right idea. As in "If you watch speeches by Morrison and Pinter, you will realize that X is the case, so you should do Y."

WhisperToMe 16:16, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

By the way, the poetry about Nobunaga, Hideyoshi, and Ieyasu is very beautiful. Perhaps the inspirational quotes can go in your user page :) WhisperToMe 16:34, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

--Statements about consensus--

• 1. Ooper, dude, link to the actual discussion page and/or to a revision next time. Re-posting blocks of text clogs space.
• 2. Ooper, I wish to clarify the following statements about consensus:

• "We cannot technically MAKE the French change decisions (unless there is no blatant opposition, and I have not seen any yet!)"
• Are you familiar with this chart? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Consensus_new_and_old.svg
• The chart states that if Joe makes a policy change, and nobody opposes him, the policy change is in effect. It's that simple.

WhisperToMe 04:34, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Vandalism?

Emperor Juntoku

hello there Ooperhoofd, thank you for your message. Indeed if the Hyakunin Isshu states that this is an image of Juntoku tenno, I do not see why this image should not be used. I do not agree with the statement that this image is useless. Maybe what he means is that images of tennos were all estimates and no original existed until the advent of the Meiji era, but I think that is besides the point. Did you try talking to him, he is normally a very reasonable editor...

about the issue of the tomb, I am not sure myself. Of the very ancient emperors, most people are not even sure where they are buried or if there at all. However should the legend hold it that he is interred there, I think keeping that image as well is in order. sincerely Gryffindor 08:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Language order

You must forgive my ignorance in this matter, but I believe it is conforming to the local pronunciation of the language name, transliterated to the western alphabet. See Wikipedia:Language order poll foe some discussions. It is an WP:AWB feature, so if it is wrong, it will be widespread. Rich Farmbrough, 14:11 24 September 2007 (GMT).

This is grand. Sometimes it's so much better to be wrong, because sometimes it's the only way to learn. I never noticed this precise detail before, but I will pay closer attention in future. Thanks for the unexpected smile on my face just now. ---Ooperhoofd 14:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)