Hello, STRONGlk7, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Charcoal. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Orange Suede Sofa (talk) 07:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The ROKMC had fire exercise before the bombardment of Yeonpyeong, and used every shell during the exercise. Marines had to reload shells by hand from armory under heavy fire, which dramatically reduces the rate of fire. The source you used describes the rate of fire under specific condition not during an ideal situation. For comparison, if a fighter jet uses afterburner all the time in specific condition, should we record the range of the jet much shorter than known ideal specification? In addition, a soldier fires a M-16 rifle once every 5 seconds due to heavy fire, should the rate of fire of the M-16 be 12 rounds per minute? Kadrun (talk) 23:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please undo your recent edit to the article "crab". Your edit summary of "meaningless editing" is unclear, and cannot be true. Ther previous image was a far better illustration of a crab dish than the replacement you inserted, and that must be the overriding consideration when choosing images to appear in an encyclopaedia. --Stemonitis (talk) 07:20, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You said "Better to show a dish only containing crab". So I uploaded crab dishes.
Japanese people are eating a crab most in the world. Moreover, those dishes are rich in originality and variety (For example, here). They are important as culture of the crab dish. It is appropriate to show them as an image of the "crab dish". The photograph which you have presented is a very minor dish. STRONGlk7 (talk) 09:33, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the previous image, the crab dish was large enough to be recognisable. Your image shows some crockery in the distance, and provides very little information about their contents. Better a visible, but (allegedly) minor dish than an invisible one. --Stemonitis (talk) 10:03, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I said you "Do not write here. Write to the Talk of crab.", OK?
The full resolution of this image is 4,000 × 3,000 pixels. It is sufficient resolution.
And I showed that various kinds of crab dishes existed. The "premise" which you presented is a false charge.
Again,"Don't write here". STRONGlk7 (talk) 11:35, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have copied this discussion to Talk:Crab, and responded there. --Stemonitis (talk) 12:18, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made; that is to say, editors are not automatically "entitled" to three reverts.
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.Laser brain(talk) 14:55, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Why are you violating WP:SEEALSO by adding links to the IJN and aircraft carrier when they're already linked in the main body of the article? And what is the connection between the anime and Hosho? The article on the anime doesn't mention the carrier.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:58, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history at Odakyu 50000 series VSE shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. —Sladen (talk) 10:45, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
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) 16:55, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
An article that you have been involved in editing—Sekihan—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Pillisipuli (talk) 14:42, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
