Talk:Yonsei Severance Hospital

Neologism
This redirect is naught but a neologism contrived without any attempt to comply with minimal requirements of WP:V. --Tenmei (talk) 05:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Tenmei, please assume good faith which I have hardly seen from you. You're accusing me of making a hoax redirect with no ground. Have you ever visited to South Korea or even tried to know of Korean culture and society? Severance Hospital has been commonly called "Yonsei Hosipital" or "Yonsei Severance Hospital" if you can read Korean. Well, don't worry, sources will be coming.--Caspian blue
 * N0 -- the tactic of distraction is unavailing here.
 * FACT: WP:AGF is inapplicable to this short declarative sentence.
 * Making accusations of bad faith can be inflammatory and hence these accusations may be unhelpful in a dispute. It can be seen as a personal attack if bad faith motives are alleged without clear evidence that others' editing is actually in bad faith. The result is often accusations of bad faith on your part, which tends to create a nasty cycle.
 * FACT: The requirements of WP:V are minimal.
 * The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed.
 * FACT: Yonsei Severance Hospital lacks reference source support.
 * 1a. 6 November 2008 User:Caspian blue ... moved Yonsei to Yonsei (Japanese term): Making a dab page. This is NOT a well-known PRIMARY topic in English unlike "nisei" and "sansei" found in dictionaries and web search. diff
 * 1b. 01:47, 8 November 2008 User:Kusunose ... disambiguation page cleanup: rm, entry does not exist; rm entry about Korean honorific, a dic def; rm piping; rm entires with no links; single blue link per line diff
 * 2. 20:45, 6 November 2008 User:Caspian blue ... ←Redirected page to Severance Hospital diff
 * 1b. 01:47, 8 November 2008 User:Kusunose ... disambiguation page cleanup: rm, entry does not exist; rm entry about Korean honorific, a dic def; rm piping; rm entires with no links; single blue link per line diff
 * 2. 20:45, 6 November 2008 User:Caspian blue ... ←Redirected page to Severance Hospital diff


 * 3-a. 09:11, 10 November 2008 User:Tenmei ... tweak Severence Hospital diff
 * 3-b. 15:21, 10 November 2008 User:Caspian blue ... rv by Tenme ... the hosipital is a big hospital group, not just one building diff
 * 3-c. 04:52, 11 November 2008 User:Tenmei ... Undid revision 250881492 by Caspian blue ... edit does not comply with WP:V diff
 * 3-d. 04:59, 11 November 2008 User:Caspian blue ... rv by Tenmei ... clarification diff
 * FACT:Wikipedia does not currently have an encyclopedia article for Accusation
 * See Mens rea.

I took special note of your phrasing -- "hoax redirect" -- and it doubtless deserves further comment; indeed, the words are thought-provoking. At this point, however, I've invested quite enough time in edit history research and in creating a specific context which mitigates provocative rhetoric. --Tenmei (talk) 17:05, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
 * So you want be appreciated for your "unpaid" useless time and effort to organize it and search for the defaming phrase in Latin and to justify your unexplainable behaviors with the referring to the criminal law? That is not only personal attack but also makes you more "unique". I'm just gonna following some old maxim, so do not ever expect me to respond your predictable provocation. Your fondness of metaphor and poetry is also good one too. Best regards for you. I'm gonna write articles. :p--Caspian blue 17:53, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Three-revert rule
While the posting above was being drafted, Caspian blue crafted a "warning" which was posted on my talk page. I have twice tried unsucessfully to move that posting here where it can be assessed as an essential element in a changing context of escalating language.
 * 1. diff 17:36, 11 November 2008 User:Tenmei ... re-posting "Your absurd retailiation"
 * 2. diff 17:53, 11 November 2008 User:Caspian blue ...that warning does not belong here but your talk page. (how funny)
 * 3. diff 21:39, 11 November 2008 User:Tenmei ... Undid revision 251140515 by Caspian blue ...removing this relevant element of the on-going discussion is not reasonable
 * 4. diff 21:41, 11 November 2008 User: Caspian blue ... rvv by Tenmei ... As the author for the warning to you, I don't put up with your disruption here) (undo)

This pattern is too familiar. I've learned the hard way how it works:
 * A. Caspian blue makes extravagant claims on my Talk page, then removes his own words when I post them in a context where others will be able to assess them -- as I must -- in the sequenced, evolving and escalating context of serial edits.
 * B. Then, with Caspian blue's inflammatory postings excised from the thread, the indignant claim of personal abuse and shocked dignity becomes an emotionally urgent fulcrum/pivot-point in lieu of the much less emotionally-engaging paradigms of WP:V.

NO, I don't think so -- not this time. In the American elections, Barack Obama occasionally cited a curious formulation -- something about how "it's possible to disagree without being disagreeable ...." In this instance, it would appear that Caspian blue's expressly "disagreeable" tactics and prose are designed to leverage WP:V out of the central position it ought to inhabit in any Wikipeida activity.

I'm informed by Wikipedia administrator User:Theresa Knott that the precise wiki-jargon/term for Caspian blue's revert rationale is "bull shit" -- see here.

Feigned indignation has grown stale. Smells bad. --Tenmei (talk) 05:35, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Your absurd retailiation

 * This posting was moved here from User talk:Tenmei.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. -Caspian blue 15:25, 11 November 2008 (UTC)


 * RESPONSE to "Your edits appear to constitute vandalism ..." NO. --Tenmei (talk) 05:35, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei is always Tenmei
So at this time, saying "Stop being disruptive,, the warning that I gave you belonged to your talk page." would be redundant per your usual disruptive behaviors. You just can't help yourself doing the same because "you're Tenmei". According to WP:TALK, talk page is to discuss pertaining matters, not to make WP:SOAPBOX as you always have feigned to forget and have caused more problems than original status. The "bogus 3RR report" includes your two edits. Besides, the comment by Theresa knott was in August at that time you were reported for your "personal attacking habit" after your irritated forum shopping were totally ignored by adminds except her. Sadly, several admins warned you to block for your disruption. I would say that I praise the sharp evaluation by admin LordAmeth who has closely watched you for a long time, which has always been proven so correct. "Tenmei easily tends to make personal attacks to people". So should I be watching such Tenmei's endless tedious show? Do entertain yourself forever with the Category:Logical fallacies where you spend "many time" digging to make yourself pedantic. (LOL) Best! --Caspian blue 06:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Tenmei's tagging
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yonsei_Severance_Hospital&diff=251109142&oldid=250097166

This is a REDIRECT page. Do you ever expect that I would ever read your "lengthy rambling" again? Instead of participating in the AFD discussion for Yonsei (fourth-generation Nikkei), you chose to pour your rants against me to the talk pages and put, , tags to this REDIRECT page? Unbelievable. If you put them to Severance Hospital, at least I could try to understand your world of mind, but your behavior are getting funnier ever. Do not repeat the old same song of yours. You seem to study advanced level of academic in North America (per your unique usage of English like words found in GRE, or GMAT preparation), but please behave like people with high education. So according to your logic, every redirect page should have citations on the page, that is good to know.--Caspian blue 17:31, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Unsourced material, original research, and synthesis
The contrived phrase "Yonsei Severance Hosptial" appears to be unsourced material. It is appropriate and reasonable that the phrase is tagged with the relevant templates which have been posted on the main redirect page. Moreover, this has been explained and amplified by appropriate comments already posted on this talk page -- see above.

This continuing objection concerns what seems to be nothing more than a curious neologism. To use a term Caspian blue made up, it seems to be, on the basis of available data, to be a "hoax redirect."

'''Summarizing the causes for dispute in words which are incorporated into the tag templates:
 * 1. The phrase "Yonsei Severance Hospital" needs credible citations for verification.
 * 2. The phrase "Yonsei Severance Hospital" is based entirely on original research or unverified claims.
 * 3. The phrase "Yonsei Severance Hospital" is based entirely on an unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not attributable to the original sources.'''

Unless The phrase "Yonsei Severance Hospital" is improved by adding references, (a) the justifiable attack on its veracity will remain unrelenting; and (b) the wiki-procedures now in place anticipate that unsourced material will be challenged and removed.

A plausible response would [have] be[en] for Caspian blue or anyone else to help improve this questioned redirect by proffering reliable references.In such circumstances, a mere "revert" without more will prove unsatisfactory.

Amongst the following reference source(s) posted at Severance Hospital, it is not possible to point out the specific passage(s) which support the neologism "Yonsei Severance Hospital"?
 * Official Website
 * Official Website
 * Official Website

The alternate name for this hospital will continue to be removed from the introductory sentence at Severance Hospital and the Yonsei Severance Hosptial redirect will be ultimately deleted unless something in some verifiable sources explicitly utilizes this unique, non-standard phrase -- see diff

In order to be both clear and non-confrontational, it may be helpful to emphasize by redundant repetition just one short restatement from WP:V:
 * The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth—that is, whether readers are able to check that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether we think it is true. Editors should provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, or the material may be removed.

Perhaps this becomes a very simple matter, easily resolved? If not, why not? --Tenmei (talk) 04:12, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Caspian blue -- The following source citations adequately address the reasonable questions I have asked ad nauseum without an answer before this:


 * In response, you will note that I have stricken the words which presented a question which has now been answered. One sentence has not been stricken; and I repeat it now for redundant clarity: A plausible response would [have] be[en] for Caspian blue or anyone else to help improve this questioned redirect by proffering reliable references. --Tenmei (talk) 05:14, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Let's end this
, the tagging with, , to the REDIRECT page is nothing but trolling. I really have been fed up with your way of speaking: constant personal attacks, rambling and which are totally unhelpful to develop the argument on "our topic" and needless to say, being disruptive. Why are you so obsessive at this redirect to the hospital? Why are you not pulling anything from Yonsei Medical Journal? Read the edit summaries of the article. Enjoy your show.--Caspian blue 04:52, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * When I wrote it, I was really upset at you. You seem to receive high education with at least master or Ph.D or in the candidate per your language in English. But please do not make discussion pages filled with irrelevant matters. I get that you're a sensitive man and not happy about the AFD nom and others just like people when to face their favorite articles up for AFDs. But I am afraid of talking with you anything because of these. I will try not to get involved with anything that you care. Regards--Caspian blue 05:33, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Caspian blue -- Responding seriatiim to what you have posted above:
 * 1. I have now taken the time to enlarge my vocabulary with the concept of what constitutes a wiki-troll. The text is multi-layered; and it will take some time to digrest it fully. I will give this subject further thought, but at first blush, two idiomatic retorts seem reasonable and plausibly constructive:
 * (a) If the cap fits, wear it? NO.
 * (b) If the shoe fits, wear it? NO.
 * 2. As for the implication that the following are "trolling":
 * (a) Needs additional citations for verification-template? NO.
 * (b) May contain original research or unverified claims-template? NO.
 * (c) May contain unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not attributable to the original sources-template NO.
 * I've invested a more-than-reasonable amount of time in trying to find a credible example of what appears to be a made-up term -- "Yonsei Severance Hospital" -- and I wrongly tried to proffer an olive branch when you seemed to be moving in the right direction with "Yonsei University Severence Hospital"; but all for naught. That won't happen again.  The fact that it is so difficult for me to find this explicit phrase adds undeniable support to an implied assessment of original research or an idiosyncratic synethesis, etc.  In this context, when you mention trolls, the connections seem to be too tenuous and the term becomes merely tendentious.  Not good.  NO.
 * 3. As for "fed up" ..., I could say the same about your postings, but this is not a phrase which leaps easily to my mind. It's just not one of the coventional phrases I find useful, and so I don't much use it.  NO.
 * 4. As for "constant personal attacks," well -- that ship has sailed ....  NO.
 * 5. As for "rambling," I suspect that's just a term you've picked up as a way of devaluing a logic pattern you don't want to parse; but it is likely pointless for me to address it other than to acknowleged that you've identified something to complain about without the burden of specificity. NO.
 * 6. As for "disruptive," I guess that's just another term you've used because it fits into a stream of thought ...? NO.
 * In sum, NO is my seriatim reply to what was, for you, a moderate-toned spew of invective -- see diff. --Tenmei (talk) 16:40, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Moving along, as for the misconception that Yonsei is a topic with interests me ... NO.
 * My resistance to the phoney AfD focused on "yonsei" ... no, my stalwart objections to that steam-roller gambit are based in entirely other areas which appear to be outside the range of your personal oscillating radar scope ..., and I see no point in delving into this subject any further beyond making as clear as I can that this was not, is not, and will not be amongst my "favorite" articles.  NO -- wrong syllogistic assumptions -- see diff.
 * As for trying not to get involved with anything that I care about ... again, NO. There are articles in which we will have no alternative but working together constructively, reasonably, collectively as colleagues.
 * Consider this: I'm the one who is risk-averse. I'm the one who avoids confrontation. --Tenmei (talk) 17:14, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm the one who avoids confrontation. Your last sentence just makes me "blink" my eyes several times to see if I mislead the highly likely "joke". You love never-ending dramas and do whatever for your fondness.--Caspian blue 17:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 * No -- not a constructive response. Try again.  Try to make a constructive, conciliatory, reasonable, forward-looking reply which anticipates a future in which confrontational displays are unnecessary. --Tenmei (talk) 18:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Raising the level of dispute
Caspian blue -- My interest here is in raising the level of dispute; and that means wiki-QUALITY = WP:V Neither the quality of Wikipedia articles nor the level of dispute is enhanced by innuendo, not by derision, not by attempting to be offensive, confrontational, inflammatory, provocative ... and your recent edits give me cause to worry that somehow I might have failed inform you in terms that are clear, plain, unambiguous? --Tenmei (talk) 15:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)